Humans (Hw #3)

While reading Banach's "The Ethics of Absolute Freedom", I eventually became confused with the whole concept. Yet for some reason a couple of parts has led me to look at Humans and their nature, especially when he brings up "bad faith" where we define ourselfs as unable to do something, for example, "I'll never get an A, I'm just not smart enough." Though I might not reference dirrectly from the text, this whole idea came up as I read.

To tell you the turth, this really isn't the first time this comes up. I've said it before. It went something like "Humans are stubborn, that's the good thing about us. Usually you'd tell a person who is stubborn, 'why are you so stubborn?' But the thing about humans is that we are always in persue of something. No matter how hard the challenge, how hard it seems, humans never give up until we've found the answer." I'm not expecting this to be solid as there are some questionable acts such as Homocide then Suicide. Even I told myself that everyone and everything has some turths and lies about the world, no one is 100% a knight nor 100% a knave.

And for some apparent reason, I keep on getting all rattled up as I try to specifically explain human stubborness. Some forms you may be familar with would include Fortitude, Courege and Self Sacrifice. In such cases where these feelings range strong, humans may be able to break the physical limitation, but only by a little bit. One story I heard one day was that a car fell on a boy's dad and the boy somhow managed to life the car. Usually the boy would not have had the strenght to actually lift the car, but the boy was determined and eventually did it.

Now yes I'm sounding fictional here. I can't show any proof on how this is ture. But there are other examples besides feeling. Even today, we're always searching for answers, as humans, we'll presue it to the very end. Banach is no exception. He is trying to define absolute freedom. What stands in the way is that we all disagree with him somehow. However, Banach will continue to argue with us until he is proven wrong or we are proven wrong. When that happens, the losing side joins with the winning side and together they persue the correct answer. And even with the answer, more questions come up. Heck we may even to a point where we can answer if there's a creator.

HW #2: Comments

Kind of late but copy and paste dosen't seem to work for me. I can copy but attempting to paste just shows blankness. Just here to say that I commented on Brandon's and Sandy's HW #1s.

Response to Banach's ideas

The main thing that comes to mind while reading Banach's ideas on reality somewhat resembles Plato's allegory of the cave. For those who don't know, Plato's allegory of the cave shows a group of cavemen chained to the wall. All they can see is a shadow against the wall(they don't know it's actually a shadow of another object) and they percieve that as reality. One day, one of the cavemen somehow becomes free and begins to make his way through the cave. He comes to learn that the shadow is really just a shadow of another object. The Caveman continue until he finally sees the exit and comes to see the real world. After exploring he returns to tell his fellow cavemen. However since his fellow cavemen are still stuck to the wall, they become hostile towards him because the chained cavemen still believe that the shadow is reality and that the unchained caveman is crazy.

To connect it back to Banach's ideas, it appears as if he's saying that we're dependent on our senses to make sense of the world, basically, our reality. However when everyone's form of reality is challenged, we'd think that person is crazy and doesn't know what they're talking about according to Plato's allegory of the cave. In a sense, this occurs all the time and often the cause of conflict. And since we're an a species with a great mind(or so it seems), the human race's perception of the world varies from person to person with a few similarities between groups of individuals. But do to the effects as shown as Plato's allegory of the cave, various ideas can almost never be agreed on. But perhaps if all our ideas would become one then we might have a closer definition of our world.

Perhaps we can relate back to chemical structure. You can draw a chemical structure various ways on a piece of paper. However our world exists to us in the third dimension so the true visual of the chemical structure is mearly a mix of all of those. Like a the problems with the chemical structure, reality is actually a mix of everyone's and everything perception of it. In other words, everyone and everything has some truth in their perceptions of reality but at the same time there's also some lie.