To what extent, if any, does the existence of death give meaning to life? How would you feel about yourself and others if you learned that you would die tomorrow?
Death gives a lot of meaning to life. Almost everyone wants to leave some sort of mark on this Earth before they leave; how they go about doing that varies greatly however. But knowing that one day you will die leaves you knowing that you only have a limited time to accomplish what you are striving to achieve. Since you die, you have to get to work to achieve what you want to achieve fairly early. Death does not wait around for anybody, so it's either get busy living or get busy dying. I do not know what death has in store for me, so I only have eighty or so years to become what I want people to remember me as. If I were to die tomorrow, I can honestly say I would be ashamed. I didn't spend enough time on task, I spent most of it being a sloth. I understand that I've only had 18 1/2 years here so far, but I haven't reached my full potential. I'm pretty sure I'll still be alive tomorrow, however, so I have time to turn things around before I die. I need to seize more opportunities, be more kind, etc. There's no better way to evaluate who you are and what you want to do than by looking at death.
Friday, May 6, 2016
1984 Pt. 3 Blog 2
Is a totalitarian society with no crime or poverty better than a free society plagued with crime and poverty? Why?
A free society is better, because then there is at least a slight possibility that one can change his situation through hard work and escape his poverty and crime stricken area. In a totalitarian society, you have no choice. If the government wants you to be poor, you'll be poor. There is most likely very little crime due to fear of the punishment one could receive, so at least one would not have to worry about crime affecting them. But if one looks at the living conditions of totalitarian societies in the past and even now, the living conditions are still better. In 1984, their conditions were horrible. Bombs were dropping, they didn't have enough food, they were always being watched, etc. Trying to better yourself is seen as an act of treason against the leader because you feel as though the leader is not providing enough for you, which to them is an insane thought. If you're free you can always find an escape.
A free society is better, because then there is at least a slight possibility that one can change his situation through hard work and escape his poverty and crime stricken area. In a totalitarian society, you have no choice. If the government wants you to be poor, you'll be poor. There is most likely very little crime due to fear of the punishment one could receive, so at least one would not have to worry about crime affecting them. But if one looks at the living conditions of totalitarian societies in the past and even now, the living conditions are still better. In 1984, their conditions were horrible. Bombs were dropping, they didn't have enough food, they were always being watched, etc. Trying to better yourself is seen as an act of treason against the leader because you feel as though the leader is not providing enough for you, which to them is an insane thought. If you're free you can always find an escape.
1984 Pt.3 Blog 1
Peter Jennings said, "Whoever controls the media, controls reality." Do I agree? Is media manipulative?
I agree with this statement for sure. Nobody tends to question the information that they are getting if they believe that they are receiving it from a reliable source. I know I do not. If someone turns on the news, depending on the station, they will receive two completely different stories about the same incident. They tend to listen to the one that they will most likely agree with it to make themselves feel better since sometimes the real truth hurts. Reality is a matter of perspective in most cases. Also the person relaying the information also has to be questioned. A high profile person can spout off their ridiculous views on Twitter, but since they have such a grip on the media, people will believe them.
I agree with this statement for sure. Nobody tends to question the information that they are getting if they believe that they are receiving it from a reliable source. I know I do not. If someone turns on the news, depending on the station, they will receive two completely different stories about the same incident. They tend to listen to the one that they will most likely agree with it to make themselves feel better since sometimes the real truth hurts. Reality is a matter of perspective in most cases. Also the person relaying the information also has to be questioned. A high profile person can spout off their ridiculous views on Twitter, but since they have such a grip on the media, people will believe them.
Monday, May 2, 2016
1984 Pt. 2 Blog 3
Henry Kissinger wrote, "History is the memory of states." Is history changeable, existing independently of human memory or human records, or can history be rewritten using different records and points of view?
History can most certainly be rewritten. There are so many examples of this in history. Last week, my younger cousin had to dress up as one of his heroes and tell that hero's life story. My younger cousin happens to be Native American, and he very innocently picked Christopher Columbus as his hero. He was never taught that Christopher Columbus is directly responsible for the murder of thousands of Native Americans. All that was ever taught to my cousin is that Columbus "discovered" America, when he was not even the first European here, anyway. What I am getting at is whoever controls the present (the Europeans), controls the past. The Italians and Spanish did not want their cash cow to receive a bad name/reputation, so they just started lying and said that he was a hero. So yes, history is never set in stone and can always be changed by whoever has the power at the time.
History can most certainly be rewritten. There are so many examples of this in history. Last week, my younger cousin had to dress up as one of his heroes and tell that hero's life story. My younger cousin happens to be Native American, and he very innocently picked Christopher Columbus as his hero. He was never taught that Christopher Columbus is directly responsible for the murder of thousands of Native Americans. All that was ever taught to my cousin is that Columbus "discovered" America, when he was not even the first European here, anyway. What I am getting at is whoever controls the present (the Europeans), controls the past. The Italians and Spanish did not want their cash cow to receive a bad name/reputation, so they just started lying and said that he was a hero. So yes, history is never set in stone and can always be changed by whoever has the power at the time.
1984 Pt. 2 Blog 2
Would you rather live in a totalitarian government that ensures everyone's life will be peaceful and free from crime and inequality, or under a democratic government whose freedoms may encourage violence, inequality, and crime?
I would rather continue to live in a democracy such as the one in which I live now. While being guaranteed safety would be nice, life would become so boring. If I do not like a situation, I have the power to change that in a democracy. Also, competition and the quest for bettering one's self is what makes the journey of life so fun. If you are the same as everyone else, that is boring. I enjoy uniqueness and individuality, so I would not want a dictator telling me what to do and watching my every move. I'll rather run the risk of having crimes committed towards me than being boxed in like a zoo animal for my whole life. The goods of a democracy and free life outweigh the risks that are associated with them.
I would rather continue to live in a democracy such as the one in which I live now. While being guaranteed safety would be nice, life would become so boring. If I do not like a situation, I have the power to change that in a democracy. Also, competition and the quest for bettering one's self is what makes the journey of life so fun. If you are the same as everyone else, that is boring. I enjoy uniqueness and individuality, so I would not want a dictator telling me what to do and watching my every move. I'll rather run the risk of having crimes committed towards me than being boxed in like a zoo animal for my whole life. The goods of a democracy and free life outweigh the risks that are associated with them.
1984 Pt. 2 Blog 1
Is Thoughtcrime present in today's society? Do people get in trouble for thoughtcrime today?
The answer to this would be a combination of both yes and no. No in the fact that I could log into Twitter right now and call President Obama whatever I please and nothing bad would happen to me. However, it is a crime in some instances. There is not really any clear list of thoughtcrimes in 1984, it is up to the interpretation of the Party on what a thoughtcrime is. Winston plotting to overthrow Big Brother and parading around with Julia are both examples of his thoughtcrime. Working in Minitru gives him many other opportunities, though. If he attempted to expose wrongdoings of the Party, that would probably be considered thoughtcrime and he would be killed. So is thoughtcrime an actual crime in the US today? Yes. in 2013 Edward Snowden exposed the NSA for spying on American citizens. He had to flee to Russia to avoid being put on trial for treason by the US government, a crime punishable by death, just like in Oceania in 1984.
The answer to this would be a combination of both yes and no. No in the fact that I could log into Twitter right now and call President Obama whatever I please and nothing bad would happen to me. However, it is a crime in some instances. There is not really any clear list of thoughtcrimes in 1984, it is up to the interpretation of the Party on what a thoughtcrime is. Winston plotting to overthrow Big Brother and parading around with Julia are both examples of his thoughtcrime. Working in Minitru gives him many other opportunities, though. If he attempted to expose wrongdoings of the Party, that would probably be considered thoughtcrime and he would be killed. So is thoughtcrime an actual crime in the US today? Yes. in 2013 Edward Snowden exposed the NSA for spying on American citizens. He had to flee to Russia to avoid being put on trial for treason by the US government, a crime punishable by death, just like in Oceania in 1984.
Monday, April 18, 2016
1984 part 1 blog 3
Is Winston sane or insane?
Insanity is defined as a state of craziness or madness. Albert Einstein defined insanity as, "doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." As we read 1984, most of us would agree with Winston's ideas and argue that he is just trying to do good for the country and is definitely in his right mind. However, the society in which he lives would classify him as insane because nobody in their right mind would dare challenge the authority of Big Brother. So while we agree with him, Oceania would classify him as insane and immediately have him vaporized. This is because different societies have different norms and views on what is okay, and views on what is not okay. Winston is definitely not okay, for he is attempting to betray Big Brother, whom everybody adores, or at least acts like they do. Also, if one were to listen to Albert Einsten, he is most certainly insane. He knows that people have tried to overthrow Big Brother before, all of them unsuccessfully. It would be insane to think that he would make any difference. The problem is too great for him to tackle, yet he tries. So while I believe Winston's intentions are good and agree with him, I would have to say that he is indeed insane by Oceania standards.
Insanity is defined as a state of craziness or madness. Albert Einstein defined insanity as, "doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." As we read 1984, most of us would agree with Winston's ideas and argue that he is just trying to do good for the country and is definitely in his right mind. However, the society in which he lives would classify him as insane because nobody in their right mind would dare challenge the authority of Big Brother. So while we agree with him, Oceania would classify him as insane and immediately have him vaporized. This is because different societies have different norms and views on what is okay, and views on what is not okay. Winston is definitely not okay, for he is attempting to betray Big Brother, whom everybody adores, or at least acts like they do. Also, if one were to listen to Albert Einsten, he is most certainly insane. He knows that people have tried to overthrow Big Brother before, all of them unsuccessfully. It would be insane to think that he would make any difference. The problem is too great for him to tackle, yet he tries. So while I believe Winston's intentions are good and agree with him, I would have to say that he is indeed insane by Oceania standards.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)