Showing posts with label philosophy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label philosophy. Show all posts

Tuesday, July 05, 2022

You Who? Why You Matter and How to Deal With It by Rachel Jankovic

You Who? Why You Matter & How to Deal With It
Rachel Jankovic
Published 2019
⭐⭐⭐⭐

Rachel Jankovic states the goal of this book is to "encourage and equip believing women to see their identity in Christ as the most essential part of them, and to see all the ways that will work its way out in their lives, manifesting itself as strength, dignity, and clarity of purpose." Right away she opens the conversation about our obsession with identity and how we easily believe the foolish watered down philosophy of the self. Satan (IMO) wants people to replace God with this worldly philosophy.

Philosophy: Life's Questions

Man has asked the same questions about himself forever: Who am I? What am I for? How did I get here? What is the essential me? etc. Man wants to know HIS meaning in life. 

Traditional philosophy argues that our minds make us human. But without God, might we be just animals? Some philosophers believe that our lives are worthless because we are the result of chance (there is no God); but that does not solve the desire for meaning of the self.

Now keep in mind two philosophies: good ol' nihilism, which states that all existence is devoid of meaning and nothing matters anyway, and existentialism, which is related to nihilism, but is associated mostly with action or doing.

Existentialism: You Make Your Own Meaning

Jean-Paul Sartre gave the definition for existentialism, which reiterated is: 
You don't mean anything, objectively. You exist as a person before you mean anything. Existence comes before you have any essence or value at all. Essence is something that only happens through your own action, when you develop an essence. [Essentially], You make your own meaning.

Sartre believed his teaching to be the only means for hope. Sartre replaced God with a man-made remedy for hopelessness: You can be anything you want; you are what you make yourself; your story is yours to create; only you can make it happen. Sartre refuted that even proof of God existing cannot save man from himself; you still have to do something to save yourself from despair, hopelessness, etc.

Jankovic argued that Christians should naturally reject existentialism because "it is built on the absence of objective meaning, absence of God the Father, and absence of any intention or purpose for humanity that exists outside of each of us individually." 

Sartre's ideas came directly from his own "private brain" for his own "private purposes," and his ideas became influential the whole world over. Basically Sartre put himself in the place of God and he told man how to live, and like obedient subjects of authority, the world listened and obeyed. Basically he said: There is no God, but I am going to act like God and tell you how to live.

Another philosopher, Abraham Maslow, developed the hierarchy of needs based on humanism and existentialism that focuses on self-actualization, the all-important what it means to be human: your essential SELF.


As humans achieve a level, starting at the bottom, they move up to the next level. You can only have a sense of self-worth or high self-esteem before you reach the "holy grail" of self-actualization. From the pinnacle of SA, you will know who you are and your place in the world. This is man's goal of feeling "right" in the world. Christians should recognize that this is not a biblical concept. 

Under this philosophy, people look at others as a means to help them become the best version of themSELVES -- because others exist to help YOU fulfill YOUR needs. Again, Christians should recognize that this is not a biblical concept at all. 

Conflicts with Worldly Philosophy

Many of us have grown up with the Sartre-Maslow philosophy of how to become what you are and what makes you you. It is part of the self-help movement that we use to be our best selves. We are working toward becoming us, and we are told our lives make up the story of who we are with a beginning, a middle, and an ending. We want to admire and flatter ourselves with the story of ourselves. 

But when the story of ourselves - our degrees, careers, cars, hobbies, pleasures, social media, etc. -- becomes everything we are, this is a problem, not a solution. If our essence (our self-developed story) gives us value as humans, what happens when we change (because we do change!)? What about those who do not have the ability to direct their own lives, like those with handicaps or mental incapacitation, or dependent people? Remember Sartre: "Without action, we have no essence. Mere existence does not imply the presence of a true self."

If it is the will and action of the individual that makes us what we are, how could someone without a will or the ability for action matter as a human?

[This also made me think: What if you are unable, by something out of your control, to be who you desire to be? Is your life then a failure? I think this is a very real issue for people, which only leads to more hopelessness.] 

When you remove Creator God from "the story," you remove our true human value. If there is no Creator, then it is easy to question the value of personhood. Regarding today's culture, I found this line relevant: "People are looking for their own human value in a society that they believe is denying them the opportunity." That just adds another level of hopelessness to the fight. 

The Abortion Argument

How do we determine who matters and who does not when values clash? A woman creating her own self finds her fertility to be an obstacle in her path toward self-actualization, threatening her potential. You can see how pregnancy is a problem, and why a baby growing in her womb who cannot speak for itself, and in essence is not fully a self, does not take precedence over the pregnant woman who has achieved more of the levels on her way to self-actualization. She must be in charge of her destiny! This is why abortion and birth control (I added) are the means to get woman on the same level of freedom and opportunity as men (and higher)!

This is also why the abortion movement has been able to be honest about their mission. It used to be ignorance, but today they admit it is not a clump of cells. There is no shame in murdering a baby in the womb even up to birth because the highest cause for self-determination, absolute perfection, and ultimate self has been so elevated above life itself. Women must have freedom if they are going to be the author of their lives, and they must have ultimate control. Human babies do not have essence because they have never exercised their own will; therefore, they cannot be compared to their mother. The baby is not a person because it is not in the process of writing its own story.

Pushing the Boundaries of Culture

When people who come from nothing are writing their own stories, then it follows that there are no boundaries. It's one for himself and everyone else better get out of the way. People who believe the philosophy of self-creation must prove themselves. This leads to rebellion: rebellion of culture and rebelliousness towards God. 

The issue for Christians is that we value life from conception as a unique life made in the image of God, regardless of its abilities. It does not need to do anything to have value. Its value is based in what God did by creating it and giving it life. For Christians, life should be protected at all stages and circumstances. To the world, only those exerting their own will have value and should be protected. That is why the culture does not have conflict with abortion, sexual experimentation, or even sex changes for children because it is recognized as pursuing one's will over his life in pursuit of his own story. Anything goes.

This is also why it feels and looks like HATE when Christians do not affirm the lifestyle choices of each self. It feels like direct unfair criticism of a unique story of self. It is an offense to disbelieve him. How dare you deny his truth? Yet, Christians know they are a small character in the greater story written by the Creator. "You cannot, as a character, outwrite the Author of you."

Christians Struggling With Identity Issues

The self-created you and the God-created you do not go together. If you are trying to recreate yourself, you will never be at peace. We cannot be a little of ourselves and mostly of God or a little of God and mostly ourselves. We must be all of God's. We cannot think that we can remake ourselves and He is going to approve. 

Hard Truths

Jesus is our only hope. "There is nothing special about us if it is not resurrected in Him." Our selfishness, lust, self-centeredness, envy, greed, obsessions, guilt are dead in Christ. We cannot make them look good on social media. Our liberty in Christ is that we can let them go and submit to Him. You are not the author of your own identity; but rather, you live in Him and He in you.

What is Our Purpose?

We were created to be bigger than ourselves! We were created to be worshippers. Humans like worship, do we not? "The Westminster Confession of Faith states that the chief end of man was to glorify God and enjoy Him forever." Live to the glory of God in everything you do. Life is not about us, but the glory of God. We can never fill the empty selfish desire to reach absolute self-actualization and glorify ourselves. If you want to know yourself, know God. He knows you. Live for Him and you will be living toward your full potential. 

It's About His Story

God's story about Creation is not finished. Our story begins with "In the beginning, God...," and the story of God and His people continues to this day. All of your life yesterday, today, and tomorrow - all of your great and small actions, housework, dinner decisions, conflicts at work, relationship issues - is all part of the story that is being told. And the end of the story is your eternal life (which actually does not seem like an end because it is eternal).

When Christians work on thier "own story," they should do so in obedience to God by way of sacrifice and faithfulness to Him. We become part of God's purpose as we submit to Him and He shapes us into something greater. Jankovic writes about planting flags, which is being intentional about what you do to the glory of God. Your work becomes an offering to God's glory. Even small things will be made great, as long as they are done to the glory of God. "The obedience of contentment and gratitude will not stay small."

So Why do Christians Struggle With Their Purpose?

When trials arise, as they will and do, faith is shaken, and Christians wonder how God could have made us for disappointments that oppose our wishes, abilities, or interests. We believe lies that God made us for more and better purposes. We struggle with rejoicing in our circumstances. However, in hindsight, we see, when we obey and submit, how God works through our trials. Then we pass on our glory to Him.

Jesus is more than we ever wanted, but when we look elsewhere for satisfaction, we are seeking something that satisfies for a term, if at all. We want to know that our lives matter, that someone loves and cares immensely for us, that we are truly known. But does not Christ already satisfy all of those desires by dying for us first on the cross before we even knew Him and while we were still in our sins? Does He not already know everything about us? Does He not know every little trouble, conflict, anxiety, sorrow of our lives? 

We want to drink hesitantly from a sippy cup of comfort while God offers us the opportunity to stand under a Niagra Falls of glory.

We have eternal forgiveness, and we seek cheap validation. We have an omnipotent, omnipresent, and eternal God, and we just wish someone knew what we were going through. 

Think of it: "God intentionally created YOU out of nothing without help from anything or anyone else." Under that understanding, "you are meaningful." You belong to and are accountable to the Creator. Compare that with the world's idea that you were a "wild accident" now tasked with being your best YOU, if you want to matter in this world. You only have to answer to yourself (or are accountable to the mob, in my opinion. Good luck with that). Until then, you are meaningless. 

The world is wrong. 

Believe in Yourself?

Self-worship and identity are lies. The brainwashed world repeats the lies, and people adopt it as truth. The lie replaced the truth of total belief, hope, and trust in God, causing the world's identity crisis, sending billions out to find their self-worth. It is a never ending cycle.

Meanwhile, we change constantly because we grow and mature, but our God does not change. He is the same yesterday, today, and forever. He is fixed and never goes through a midlife crisis. Christians are not shaken by change because they are steadfast in Christ.

Obedience and Sacrifice in Christ

Jankovic says obedience is what transforms us; acting on what we read in Scripture changes our knowledge of self. She says there are things God gives to us -- personalities, pleasures, weaknesses -- that we can sacrifice to God, to lay down, to give up, ways to obey. This obedience transforms you. 

Jankovic also describes Christians as STAFF. We are workers for the Kingdom and we should be about His business. We are heirs to the King, but we are not princesses demanding to get everything we want. "We are called to imitate the King and the selfless work He accomplished for us." We are called to even turn trials and suffering into blessings for others. (So much for the idea that others are for our betterment.) 

One great suggestion is to read Christian biographies or memoirs to see how they lived because we can learn about ourselves and how to live. It is like finding out about your descendents. 

Another suggestion is for Christians to stop thinking of their feelings as insights. "Our feelings are something that need to be managed." It is part of God's commandment to practice self-control. Our feelings lie to us and they are not to be trusted. They distract us and lead us astray. Again, give your emotions to God and ask Him to lead and show you how to live your emotional life and obey Him. 

Body Image

I think we women are more apt to struggle with body image than men. Either we worry too much about our bodies or we worship our bodies. Again, we don't need to love ourselves; we need to love our Maker. God made our bodies and we should be grateful. We do not need to make ourselves into the image of the woman on the magazine cover, but we do need to faithfully reflect our Creator, and that includes being grateful for our bodies as they are. 

And it is not enough to look at Christ. He is not in the distance or part of the scenery. We reflect His glory like the moon reflects the sun's glorious light. 

Sin 

"Sin diminishes and destroys the self, worshipping and serving the creature instead of the Creator. Self-worship is self-destruction. It cuts us off from the source of ourselves -- the Creator. Fallen man wants to reject the truth and do the opposite, which is to glorify self -- not God." 

The Choice is Ours 

Think of the future: "do you want to be in your self-made costume in Hell or your true self, made in Christ and in Heaven?" You can't keep being "true to yourself." I bet the cycle is exhausting. But you can be true to Christ and set free of the burden of constantly improving yourself. 

For Christians, we must feed daily on the Word of God without excuses of distractions, weakness, and lies. Reading your Bible is obedience and through obedience your faith will grow and you will become the best you in Him.

This is the work He has for us: that we speak His language here, live His story here, be thoroughly, completely, obediently His people here, and go about our daily lives planting flags for our homeland, claiming all the territories that we encounter here for His kingdom. We claim all of Christ for all of life, forever. 

The more we worship Him, the more we know Him; the more we know Him, the more we will know ourselves. 

* * *

If you would like more ideas from the book, here is the author discussing the issue at hand:

The Abolition of Man by C. S. Lewis

The Abolition of Man
C. S. Lewis
Published 1943
⭐⭐⭐

I gave Abolition of Man only three stars because it was so difficult to understand and not enjoyable to read. Obviously, I would need to read this multiple times for better comprehension.

Interestingly, it was rather relevant to today. It was a critique of Lewis' philosophy of the demise of modern Western culture.

Part I was "Men Without Chests" and dealt with the present. 

Lewis argued that an elementary English textbook used at school was doing a great disservice to the young people who were reading it. The textbook taught that value judgments were subjective. For one, this argument had nothing to do with English grammar or literature. In the other, Lewis claimed that longstanding traditional moralities about right and wrong, which he referred to as the Tao, were black and white and there was no room to change this thinking. But the writers of this English textbook had a progressive agenda, and they wanted to remove all sentiments from the act of thinking. Their agenda was creating conflict between the Tao and this new philosophy.

Part II is "The Way" and dealt with the past. 

In this section, Lewis expounded on universal traditions (the Tao), also known as the doctrine of objective values in which certain attributes are true and others are false. This alternative value system was trying to debunk the current value system for using a value system in the first place, and in the process they debunked themselves. The textbook (or authors of the textbook) saw man as more of an instinctual animal. These ideas provided excuses for man to avoid personal obligations by having instincts instead of doing what he ought to do, otherwise known as ethics.

Part III is "The Abolition of Man' and deals with the future.

Lewis foresaw a master and slave future, in which someone (like the authors of the textbook, or what he called the conditioners) controlled the environment, man's genetic constitution, and his emotional makeup through high tech biological and psychological manipulation. The conditioners reject the Tao and decide what man will be. They will program man's emotional behavior. People will be pre-filled with propaganda, as traditional moral restraints will be gone, and finally the mastery over nature will transfer into a mastery of a few (conditioners / global tyranny) over the many (conditioned).

And this was Lewis' warning to man about his fate if these "textbooks" continued in school: the future of man will be "men without chests" -- without conscience, without souls. Not men, but artefacts. The masses will be enslaved by nature and ruled by those above humanity, who seek the abolition of man. 

* * *

Regretfully, Lewis' critique about man's future was spot on. 

Tuesday, October 02, 2018

City of God by Augustine


City of God

Augustine

Published 426 AD

Christian Philosophy

The Well-Educated Mind History

⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ / 5


It has been a few months since I completed Part II of City of God, but I will do my best to review. 


For starters...I read this book right out of its cover.


Second, at some point I jotted this little note on the title page, in case I forgot what I thought about it:

This is such good stuff. I can read Augustine without too much question of doubt, if any. This is super interesting. 

Next, Part II deals mostly with theology. I especially appreciated how Augustine retold the Ancient stories, as they occurred along side the stories of the Bible -- kind of like chronological crosscut of Egyptian/Assyrian/Greek/Roman and Bible history. I always tried to formulate these events in my mind, and here Augustine made it simple. 


For example, some chapters include: "The arrival of Aeneas in Italy at the time when Labdon was judge over the Hebrews" and "Rome's foundation coincides with the end of the Assyrian kingdom, and with the reign of Hezekiah in Judah."


Some of the topics in Part II cover Creation and how sin entered the world, the Trinity, the nature of angels (good and bad), the creation of man, his soul, the fall of man, death, and God's spirit. 


Around Book XV, Augustine introduces the "two lines of descent of the human race, advancing from the start towards different ends": Cain, who founded a city on earth, belonged to the city of man, and Abel, who was a pilgrim, belonged to the City of God, which is in heaven and produces its citizens here on earth, "brought forth by grace." Christ's Church is the City of God.


One fascinating note: there is a chapter on how Noah's ark is a symbol of Christ and the Church. In my notes I added: "Where does Augustine get this from?" (It's not like he had access to Google or Siri.) 


For many books and chapters, Augustine takes his readers through the genealogy of the biblical people, from Adam and all the way to Jesus, while marking their paths to the city of man or the City of God. Then toward the end of Part II, Augustine covers Revelation and the Last Days. 


And because it is Augustine, he has no reservation refuting those ideas which he disagrees, such as those who claim the sacraments save you from eternal punishment, that the guilty will be spared through the intercession of the saints, that only Catholics are saved, that punishment will last forever, or that good works will save us. And there are many more.


Of course, I struggled with the chapters on examples of miracles. I still do not know what to say about people being healed with "saint's oil." 


Finally, the last thing I will mention is in chapter six in Book XXII: "The Romans made Romulus a god because they loved him; the Church loved Christ because it believed him to be God." Augustine explains

Christ is the founder of the eternal Heavenly City, that City's belief in Christ as God does not arise from her foundation by him; the truth is that her foundation arises from her belief in Christ as God. Rome worshipped her founder as a god after she had been built and dedicated; but this Heavenly Jerusalem put Christ as the foundation of her faith, so that she might be built and dedicated. 


As massive as this read is, its ending was anti-climatic; then again, it was not meant to be a novel, but a series of short essays or writings on related ideas and topics. The short chapters were perfect for reading a little bit every day. 


IS THIS BOOK FOR YOU?


Since City of God is 1000 pages long, it is not easily committed to; however, as I said, the short chapters make it manageable. It is for readers who LOVE ancient history, theology, philosophy, and mythology. Augustine is a great writer, and his arguments are enjoyable. He is plain and literal and even a little snarky at times.


While I will probably never read it again, I am definitely grateful to have read it this once. It was worth it.



Wednesday, August 22, 2018

The True End of Civil Government by John Locke

The True End of Civil Government

John Locke 

Published 1689

English Political Essay

The Well-Educated Mind Histories

⭐⭐⭐



This is like an assignment I loathe to complete, for this book has been sitting on my bookcase too long, waiting for me to be done with it; and I am not done with a book until I have written a narration about it.  


It is not a bad essay, nor is it a boring waste of time. The problem is, it did not excite me, impress upon me, or stir my heart.


So, first let me tell what is is: The True End of Civil Government is an essay written by John Locke, an English philosopher of the Enlightenment, on the workings of civil and political society based on natural rights, decided by the people, i.e. democracy. 


To make this painless and quick, I will share some my sensible marginal notes and favorite quotes by Locke to give you an idea what this was like: 


On the State of Nature


God did not make us to be beasts.

The State of Nature has a Law of Nature to govern it, which obliges everyone: And Reason, which is that Law, teaches all Mankind, who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his Life, Health, Liberty, or Possession. 


On the Death Penalty 


...every Man in the State of Nature, has a Power to kill a Murderer, both to deter others from doing the like Injury, which no Reparation can compensate, by the Example of the punishment that attends it from every body, and also to secure Men from the attempts of a Criminal.  


On the State of War


He who attempts to get another Man into his Absolute Power does thereby put himself in a State of War with him. To be free from this force is the only security of my Preservation. 


On Slavery


This is a State of War between conqueror and captive, where there is no compact (agreement).


What we work with our hands is rightly ours. (This is how man came to obtain property.) But there is a limit to property.


God gave the World to Men in Common; but since he gave it them for their benefit, and the greatest Conveniencies of Life they were capable to draw from it, it cannot be supposed he meant it should always remain common and uncultivated. he gave it to the use of the Industrious and Rational (and Labour was to be his Title to it); not to the Fancy or Covetousness of the Quarrelsom and Contentious.


On Labor


Land not used is a waste. Labor puts the greatest value on land. Labor gives right of property (ownership). But it is foolish to take more than one needs (hoarding). 


The invention of money enlarged a man's possessions.


On Freedom

...the end of Law is not to abolish or restrain, but to preserve and enlarge Freedom: For in all the states of created beings capable of Laws, where there is no Law, there is no Freedom. For Liberty is to be free from restraint and violence from others which cannot be, where there is no Law.

On Self Government and Civil Society


Self-government occurs when young person demonstrates REASON.


While the father is the first authority to children, the mother has parental power, too. Children are under her care and provision, and owe her obedience. The first duty as parents is education. 


The man and his wife make up the first society or conjugal society, made under a "voluntary Compact between Man and Woman. It is for Communion and right in one anothers Bodies, as is necessary to its chief End, Procreation; yet it draws with it mutual Support, and Assistance, and a Communion of Interest...to unite Care and Affections...of offspring." 


The second society, or master and servant, make up political society. 


An absolute monarchy is inconsistent with civil society. 


For he that thinks absolute Power purifies Mens Bloods, and corrects the baseness of Human Nature, need read but the History of this, or any other Age to be convinced of the contrary (AMEN).


Of Democracy


When any number of Men have so consented to make one Community or Government, they are thereby presently incorporated, and make one Body Politick, wherein the Majority have a Right to act and conclude the rest. 


All men are born subject to Father or Prince, "and is therefore under the perpetual tye of Subjection and Allegiance."


Why Would Men Part with His Freedom? (Good question)

...the Enjoyment of it is very uncertain, and constantly exposed to the Invasion of others. For all being Kings as much as he, every Man his Equal,...the enjoyment of the property he has in this state is very unsafe. This makes him willing to quit this Condition, which is full of fears and continual dangers...he...is willing to joyn in Society with others who are already united...for the mutual Preservation of their Lives, Liberties, and Estates (Property). 


Short answer: safety and security or protection.


On Government and Executive Powers


The end of Government being the preservation of all, as much as may be, even the guilty are to be spared, where it can prove no prejudice to the innocent. 


...therefore there is a latitude left to the Executive power, to do many things of choice, which the Laws do not prescribe. (You can say that again.)


On Powers


Paternal Power is first, where parents govern children for their own good, until they come to reason, which is the ability to self-govern. Political power is second, where man relinquishes his state of nature to society and to government, in which society trusts, to be done for their good and preservation of their property. 


Dissolution of Governments


Governments may be overturned from without and within. Sometimes an executive power neglects and abandons his charge, reducing all to Anarchy. But beware of foreign powers and oppression because they are slavery in disguise. The people "not only have a Right to get out of it but to prevent it."


On Judges


God in Heaven is Judge: He alone, 'tis true, is Judge of the Right. But every Man is Judge for himself, as in all other Cases, so in this, whether another hath put himself into a State of War with him, and whether he should appeal to the Supreme Judge...


IS THIS BOOK FOR YOU


Surely, if you are interested in political science, history, government, and philosophy, especially regarding Western Civilization, this will be right up your alley. Locke recaps and reiterates quiet often, building his argument upon basic ideas of man and human nature and expanding into complex ideas of society and government. It was educational, but not necessarily riveting stuff. 


Friday, December 08, 2017

The Brothers Karamazov by Fyodor Dostoevsky


The Brothers Karamazov
Fyodor Dostoevsky
Published 1880
Russian Novel
⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ 


The Brothers Karamazov was a very important book that covered four of my reading challenges.  It was a highly anticipated read, and I did not take the commitment lightly.  Now that I am done, I am rather speechless -- in part because I still do not know how to write something worthy enough, but also because I am really too distracted to sit down and think about it clearly.  This is our last week of summer vacation, and we have big plans each day; but once school begins, any time to think about this book will be farther from realization than it is now.  I must have closure as soon as possible.


The Brothers Karamazov is serious reading.  I gave it up half way through until someone suggested that I read it one chapter per week.  I slowly returned to it.  It went smoothly until I came to the major event of the story, and then I could not put it down.  It moved rapidly; it was intense and wonderful.  It was well worth the struggle.


Russian authors, or at least those whom I have already read, often fascinate me because they are so similar in their story telling processes, demonstrating a theme of loyalty and admiration of their country, even if there is some disagreement on the author's part. These authors manipulate characters to represent philosophies, societies, and cultures, and my point is that Dostoevsky is no exception. If you have not read Brothers Karamazov and plan to one day, be prepared for much Russian nationalism or patriotism and philosophy.  Also, there is a heavy religious tone or theme, with references to Scripture and many questions about God and morality.  Oh, and lots of exploration of psychology, justice, and many other ideas, too.


Another major issue is the particulars of family.  Three young men grew up under a tyrannical father, without a mother's love and nurture, and now you understand why children benefit from loving, attentive, patient, and mentally stable fathers and mothers who raise them.  In other words, crappy childhoods may produce messed up adults.  It happens. 


And then there is the family character as a whole symbolizing Russia, examining how outside conflicting forces and environments affect each man differently, causing the reader to consider how foreign influences may have altered the Russia people, society, government, and culture.  It is all very intriguing and perfect for a year long study one of these days.  Or maybe in another life.


So, yes, this is superb reading, but it is also a serious commitment.  It took me months and months to read and almost half as long to blog about.  I could not put it off any longer, hence the unpretentious, inept post about this very complex story.  But yay! It is done.  


Tuesday, August 23, 2016

Doctor Zhivago by Boris Pasternak



Doctor Zhivago     

Boris Pasternak     

Published 1957

Russian Novel

⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐


I was intimidated to write about Doctor Zhivago; hence, I had been avoiding it like my nine-year old avoids brushing his teeth before bedtime.  It has been weeks since I finished this book and put it down to rest. What am I supposed to say, except that I embrace this book as one of my more memorable reads this year, and maybe since I started reading classics four years ago.  Its emotion is magnified because I recently finished Solzhenitsyn's Gulagwhich covers similar time periods and political and social themes of Soviet Russia.


This was a typical Russian literature experience for me, like with Dostoyevsky and Tolstoy.  The characters and their names were many, the themes were profound, and the human relationships intertwined and complicated.  I completely loved it overall, though sometimes I was clueless about the Russian history.  That's ok.  Some day I will be abreast of Russian history.


Since I watched the 2002 film version of Zhivago before I read the book, I knew about the adultery within the story, which perplexed me.  Our main character, Yuri Zhivago, is supposed to our hero. He says and thinks almost all the right things, yet his adultery is unacceptable.  It was difficult to rectify that conflict.  I even felt stronger about it while reading the book than I did watching the movie.  How can this man be so corrupt in his marriage, and yet have admirable views about life, liberty, freedom, individuality, and art?  How can he seek what is good and commit was is so wrong at the same time? He is almost incredible.  I suppose that is what makes him a tragic hero.


People who can say that have never understood a thing about life - they have never felt its breath, its heartbeat - however much they have seen or done.  They look on it as a lump of raw material that needs to be processed by them, to be ennobled by their touch. But life is never a material, a substance to be molded.  If you want to know life is the principle of self-renewal, it is constantly renewing and remaking and changing and transfiguring itself, it is infinitely beyond your or my obtuse theories about it.Adultery aside, Pasternak shares insightful ideas through his characters' words.  On life:


. . . about Russian society and Marxism:


I don't know a movement more self-centered and further removed from the facts than Marxism.  Everyone is worried only about proving himself in practical matters, and as for the men in power, they are so anxious to establish the myth of their infallibility that they do their utmost to ignore the truth.  


All customs and traditions, all our way of life, everything to do with home and order, has crumbled into dust in the general upheaval and reorganization of society.  The whole human way of life has been destroyed and ruined.  All that's left is the naked human soul stripped to the last shred, for which nothing has changed because it was always cold and shivering and reaching out to its nearest neighbor, as cold and lonely as itself.  


. . . untruth came down on our land of Russia. The main misfortune, the root of all the evil to come, was the loss of confidence in the value of one's own opinion.  People imagined that it was out of date to follow their own moral sense, that they must all sing in chorus, and live by other people's notions, notions that were being crammed down everybody's throat.


. . . on art:


. . . art always serves beauty, and beauty is delight in form, and form is the key to organic life, since no living thing can exist without it, so that every work of art, including tragedy, expresses the joy of existence.


. . . the "love" of Yuri and Lara (these two were made for each other):

Oh, what a love it was, utterly free, unique, like nothing else on earth!  Their thoughts were like other people's songs.


They loved each other, not driven by necessity, by the "blaze of passion" often falsely ascribed to love.  They loved each other because everything around them willed it, the trees and the clouds and the sky over their heads and the earth under their feet.  


And that is just a raindrop in a deluge of ideas throughout the book.


The writing (translation by Max Hayward and Manya Harari) was perfect.   I loved it so much, even though it was tragic and left me shaking my head.  What people under duress will write!  Pasternak even rejected his 1958 Nobel Prize, due to threat of deportation by the Soviet government; meanwhile, Solzhenitsyn rebuked his fellow writer for declining the award.  But like Solzhenitsyn, Pasternak had a great love for Russia and, even with all its faults, couldn't bear to leave it.  (I don't blame him.) Later, in 1989, Pasternak's son accepted the Nobel Prize on behalf of his father, as they had not removed his name from their records. 

Friday, December 26, 2014

Meditations on the First Philosophy by René Descartes


Meditations 

René Descartes 
Published 1641

French Philosophy

The Well-Educated Mind Biographies

⭐⭐


Meditations, by René Descartes, was published in 1641.  It is not an autobiography in the usual sense, but it is an examination of one's life based on the ability to contemplate about one's own existence.  Hence: I think, therefore I exist.  You know that.


I was so excited to dig into this work simply because of my meager knowledge of Descartes from a philosophy class I had taken in college.  Philosophy is interesting to me, but given that this was not a typical autobiography, and that Descartes wrote about thinking about thinking (no, that was not a typo), this book quickly became mind boggling, and I lost interest. 


If I had to take a test on this book, I would fail.   Oh, I underlined and circled frequently and starred my favorite quotes, but if I had to recall points or give a thorough synopsis, I have not much.  So this is not a review or opinion of the actual work, but simply my lame leftover response of having gone through this book several weeks ago.  




If I learned anything, Descartes was obsessed with truth and the human mind but insecure about his inability to determine what was absolute.  In order to prove truth, he presented six meditations, which were situations and ideas to consider.  Then he delved into serious doubts and discussion to prove each situation, like he was playing devil's advocate with himself.  He also answered objections about these ideas.


In the end, he concluded that he is a thinking thing, and because he can think, he must exist.  He proved that the mind and body are separate entities.  Feelings and emotions are not as reliable; only judgments made using the intellect are certain.  And if I understand correctly, God is perfect, but man is imperfect; therefore, God exists because imperfect man could not conceive a perfect entity in his mind, and a perfect God would not deceive man of His existence.  Did you get that?  




Let me finally add that when I came to a stopping place in my reading and then picked the book up again a few days later to continue, I found that I had finished Meditations and did not have to continue anymore.  I had not realized that I had come to the end.  Happy dance.  I was very grateful to not have to read anymore about thinking.  My brain hurt.  

Monday, October 13, 2014

The Complete Essays by Michael de Montaigne


The Complete Essays

Michel de Montaigne  

Published 1877

French Philosophy

The Well-Educated Mind Biographies

⭐⭐


Uh, what do I say about this one?  It is the third biography on TWEM list.  It does not read like a typical biography because it is actually a sizable collection of opinions and contemplations by Michel de Montaigne covering various topics concerning life and the world and everything in between.


Did I mention it was a sizable collection?


Thankfully, Susan Wise Bauer (The Well-Educated Mind) provides a suggested list of essays to read, which, according to Goodreads, amounts to 19.0% of the total 1283 pages.  In the beginning, I was motivated to read additional essays of my choice, but that did not happen.  I was grateful to get through the suggested essays.  They were not bad or horrible; I just found myself longing for a good story in story format with a happy ending.  This was not that kind of book.


In any case, I did pick up some great quotes and remarks, and I did a lot of circling and underlining and drawing little stars and making little comments within the margins.  Of the essays I read, the most marked up were: "On Sadness," "Our emotions get carried away beyond us," "To philosophize is to learn how to die," and "On the inconsistency of our actions."


The most commented on was "On educating children."  I think I went back and forth between agreeing and disagreeing with the author.  Montaigne includes this comment:

For those who want to learn, the obstacle can often be the authority of those who teach.

Our souls are moved only at second-hand, being shackled and constrained to what is desired by someone else's ideas; they are captives, enslaved to the authority of what they have been taught.  We have been so subjected to leading-reins that we take no free steps on our own.  Our drive to be free has been quenched. 

And I wondered if the author would be a fan of child-directed education.  Probably.


One of my favorite quotes was this one:

Truth for us nowadays is not what is, but what others can be brought to accept.

But the OMG moment came from "On virtue."  At the tale end of the essay, Montaigne says this:

The Assassins, who are a people dependent on Phoenicia, are considered by the Mahometans to be sovereignly devout and pure in morals.  They hold that the surest way to merit paradise is to kill someone of an opposing religion.  They therefore show contempt for all personal danger and are often to be found singly or in pairs, carrying out such profitable executions at the cost of their certain death, appearing before an enemy in the midst of his troops to 'assassinate' him-

Montaigne wrote his Essays between 1570 - 1592, but that little bit could have been written for our own times. Eerie.  Just saying.


This title counts towards TWEM Biographies and The Classics Club.