Seminar Paper: Chapter 1 of Socrates Caf� Many people today are living �unconsciously�, they work, they study, they play. Without knowing the meaning of their live, they don�t even know what they want. The reason behind this, as I observed, is that many society has its own sets of customs and tradition in life. Everyone has their duty in their different stages of life. In a traditional American family, a father has to work; a mother has to manage the housework and the kids. The boy has to study. It is this customs that one has to follow in order to be accepted in the society. I think it�s an �in-group� behavior. Since man cannot live alone, one has to obtain their identity security and a sense of in-group membership by following the rituals of a group. However, sometimes we know ritual too well that that we become unconscious on what we are doing. We may forget what the real reason behind practicing this custom was. Socrates Caf� Although this �extraordinary� way of asking question has actually been practiced by many people, no matter consciously or unconsciously, alone or with others, in schools, in courts, in meetings, or even in a conversation with some elder people. Normally people are unlikely to have Socrates caf� themselves. It is Because of their busy schedule in life, they don�t bother to ask such philosophical questions when they have so many immediate jobs to finish which are, more important than sitting down and get their mind busy and may not even come out with a solution. Not until they have some impact or change in their life, will this kind of philosophy of asking question likely to be stimulated. For example, when one�s saw his grandparents past away, they may ask question such as �what is death?�, �Why will people die?� It is this change in one�s life that leads to the so call �Socratic� way of questioning. And I think what Phillips is trying to introduce is that we should practice this Socratic way of thinking even when we don�t have this �impact� in life. Therefore we would be more conscious in our life. Furthermore it could also provide us better ways in solving problems when we actually came across the problem. INSANITY It�s really difficult to define what insane is. The more I read I realize nowadays people�s views are very much �controlled� by media. We get the information on what �normal� should be and never think deeply on an issue, we simply accept all the information we get from people all around us (of course I�m saying most people). We cannot deny that in every country every law, its aim was to create a unite society. To achieve this, it is always easy to �limit� the thoughts of people. Even in the United States, where there is freedom of speech. We can�t deny that the educational systems and the society is some how limiting one�s thought or trying to lead people to think in a certain way. For instance, the way to test IQ leads us to think people with high IQ index are smart. The SAT test limits people to study certain material. It is the psychiatrist who quantifies to judge how �normal� a person is. We may be thought as �insane� if we practice too abnormally. For instance, if there is another man saying that he is Jesus and he can save everyone�s life, will u believe him? Many people today who are trying to practice what Jesus did 2000 years ago were categorized as �criminal�, they are categorized as people who are trying to destroy the unity of society. However some people who act outrageously may thought to be hero today. For example, some pop singers are acting very abnormally too. They introduced many now ways of playing music. Their activities do everyday is absolutely abnormal. However, they are admired by many followers. In the art and music field, it is even more difficult to discuss what insane is. Many music pieces are thought to be great after the composer has die. The society doesn�t accept some kind of music sometimes. Therefore I think insanity is really controlled by time. If you introduce an idea at the right time, you are thought as a �great� person. Just like fashion! Sane and insane is really inches away. |
| Seminar Paper: Chapter 2 of Socrates Caf� �Where am I?� January 13, 2002 Is there a limit of inquiry? It seems that there isn�t. It seems that the exploration of knowledge is vital to the human society. Today, many researches are being done. It did changed human society. Our lives are pretty different from the people 2000 years ago. We can travel across country in sonic speed, we can post our views on the internet in seconds, we can have even make a copy of ourselves and replace our organ when we get old. But is this really good for human society? Is having more convenient transportation, having a healthier life and having accessible in any information good? Is it necessary? In every research and every inquiry, there are harms and benefits to the human and nature. The fact is that researches nowadays seem to produce more harms than benefits. The research of nuclear produced many deaths of human beings. The research of electricity seems of provide us more convenient life, but it also alters the nature of human being. In the past, human tends to sleep at night, but electricity provides light source at night that we could practice activates that we can do at day. Our habits were being mess up since then. How many overnight shifts do you have every year? If we don�t have electricity, we don�t have to work as much as we can today. This is against the nature. The research of dames seems can prevent flooding, but how many lands are being covered before this prevention and be done? This is against the nature. The research of genetics seems to provide more food and can solve the world�s hunger, but in the same time it will also increases the world populations. We will than needs more and more food and consumes more lands and natural resources. This is against the nature. The research of plastics seems to provide many convenient to our daily lives, but how many fishes and birds were being killed every year by the water pollutions and acid rains that are due to the disposal of plastic? This is against the nature. We can�t deny that every research will some how harm the nature. But human are selfish. Many of the research today are not for the purpose to pursuit knowledge; it�s for the purpose of their own good. -------MONEY$$. As in the seminar mentioned, Most of the researches today are being funded by government and organization. There must be some kind of benefits to the organization in order for some research to begin. How many researches today are for the own purpose of solely seeking knowledge? I believe there are very little. A very famous Chinese philosopher Chong zhi proposed that human should be compromise with the nature, since he thinks that human and nature is an equilibrium. The nature has its time and rules, and we should never produce some �ideas� that destroy the cycle of nature and rules. For instance, he thought that human shouldn�t make cars, since car speed up the work. Therefore we�ll literally use more natural resources. And most importantly he thinks that we shouldn�t seek knowledge. Since knowledge will change a person, people just tend to misuse the knowledge that they gain to do something that harms others. This idea seems very true. In every research today, as mentioned, it seems that we are destroying the equilibrium of the world. It seems that the pursuit of knowledge is pushing the human species to extinct. Just simply look at the problems that we have nowadays. Pollutions, Global Warming, floods, droughts, extinctions of species, Energy crisis��., every time when some new knowledge were being discovered, some others things in the world must suffer. Many inventions have produces more and more waste that the world could accept. How many knowledge are being used correctly? How many knowledge are not harmful to the human and the nature? The nature is our HOME and we shouldn�t destroy it. Seeking knowledge to make a �perfect� world in the way we want won�t work, since we are controlled by the rules of the nature. The resources of nature are constant, there is limit of it. Therefore, as our home, we should respect and follows the rules of the nature and not do harms to it. We should not do inquiry that are harmful to the nature. |
| Seminar Paper 3 �Whom do you need?� February 13th, 2002 Friends: I�ve never thought of the definition of friends. My mother only told me what friends are not. She said friends will not let you down, friends will not give you trouble, friends will not betray you, and friends will not only be with you when you are happy. In Western culture, it is very easy for ones to become friends. Even they met the person once; they will think that they are their friends. Besides, family members could be friends. The father is like friends to the children. They have many kinds of friends: Friends could be their Business partners, teachers, colleagues, and even their husband or wife. However, in Eastern Culture, there are many constrain which people are unable to become friends. This is due to the hierarchy systems it has. In Eastern Culture, the father is the head of the family, he has all the power. Everyone in the family must obey him. Due to this hierarchy system, many people could not be friends. For example, the daughter of an executive could not be the friends of the son of a driver. However, to find a good friend, it require a lot of luck, it�s not easy. It requires a match between two human beings. Both have to be willing to share their secrets, both have to be willing to provide help when one of them is in trouble, both of them have to be willing to comfort each other when they have trouble. To be good friends, both must go through some very unforgettable experience together. Like two soldiers who have saved each other�s lives. For me, I found my good friends when I was in Grade 11, because my friends and I have gone through a very important public exam together. Once we have known that both of us could continue studying grade 12 in Hong Kong, we were very delighted and we became closer friends. Many people think that friends should have many things in common. However, I think that this is not true. Friends could have many things in contradictions. They could exchange their different ideas base upon these contradictions. They could affect each others and find out a better way to see things. Therefore, a friend is all about compromise, and the willing the share. Old: Old seems to be very a negative word. We don�t want to be called old. However, when we were a child, we always wanted to get old. How old is too old? How old is enough? I think old have two categories: mentally old and physically old. One could be very old physically, but mentally as a young as a child. We cannot help to stop getting old physically, however, we could mentally. I always hear my mother told me that I must get old, because I was playing like a child, I think like a child, which is good I think. It�s hard to be old, we have many responsibility. However, the fact is, we must get old. We must have our independent minds and being able to judge. A child has a very clear judgment on what�s right and what�s wrong. However, when we grow older, we begin to struggle when we made decision. We begin to know look at things at different point of views. When we get older, we become very concrete in our beliefs. We become unlikely to change our opinion and require everyone to have the same views as us. This is too old. Therefore, we should get the balance on what is old. Most ideally, I want to be old but not old, young but not young. |
| Seminar Paper Chapter 4 of Socrates Caf� �What�s it all about?� February 25, 2002 Phillips quoted a woman�s point of view to the world. What said: �We are all island, in a sense�each studies his island of knowledge and has very little concern for the island of knowledge that concern the others�(174). This seems quite true, we all have different interest. We all practice what we most interested. We don�t really care about what others are doing outside of our island. I collect stamps; you enjoy hiking; he likes car; she likes cooking. We all have something that we are good at. However, is it really true that we don�t care things outside of our island? In order to live in a society, we have to cooperate. We have different kinds of jobs, and each job needs a certain level of skills to be competence in the job. Therefore humans developed different schools to provide different jobs in the society. In this system seems really good, because we know who to go to when we have problems in certain kind. For example, we go to the doctor when we are sick, we call the police when there is a crime. Everyone is specialized in something so that everyone can work on the things that they are good at. They can research new things faster. However, we are living in planet earth. The earth is a whole. It is a whole chain, every aspects is linked to each and other. Therefore we cannot just study one kind of its aspect; if so, we will be in deep trouble�like we are today. The problem we are facing now is that we are studying each kinds of �islands� too specifically. For example, we separate science into Physics, Biology and Chemistry; however, these three subjects work as a whole. The world functions as a whole. Today, we are unintentionally harming the world. Our research in certain kinds seems to help the world, but we are actually destroying the nature�Nuclear energy, GM food, Petroleum oil, CFCs.... We have such a great intention to improve the world, but we did it in a wrong way. To resolve this problem, we have to care things outside our island. We have to study things in broader perspectives. This is what our nature has been doing for millions of years. Therefore, we have to develop things as a whole. This could avoid damaging certain areas of studies. For example, when we want to resolve the worlds hunger, we have to consider whether it is right to supply more food or should we reduce the population. Then, we need to consider how we should control our population and what long term effects does it have on a country. The woman thinks in the Socratic Caf� think that �[our] island constantly intersects and overlaps.� But I think we should only have one island, so that we won�t contradict each other in our studies. Why what? Why not why? We cannot keep asking why in a question. Do we need to know why? Why can�t we live an unexamined life? Why do we need to have goals in our live? Why can�t we just be like an animal and die without knowing they were dead? ...Hmm, it really gave me a great thought. We naturally want to seek knowledge around us. When we were small, we know like to ask our parents why. We are curious in everything. It is because by asking question, we can acquire security in our surroundings. We know more about things around ourselves so that we will feel safe; but other than that, what good does asking question do? Do we need to �reveal more of ourselves and the world�? Why can�t we live a concise? (Oh dear, I realized I really can�t answer this question!) I have just demonstrated why we can�t ask why; because we really can�t answer it! Asking what is much easier. There is a definite answer. But in some times of our lives, we must ask why�When we have encountered a tragedy, we ask why; when we see something unfair, we ask why; when we have past away, we ask why. We cannot seek answers by ourselves; this is why humans have religion. Every religion has a common pursuit�to answer what cannot be answered, to comfort, and to make peace. But still, religion cannot objectively answer our question. Why? |