Darwin - Why is it so confusing?!

So. while I was reading Darwin, I began to realize that time seemed to slow down at an incredible rate...i realized, however, why this is so...the material is so dense and full of fact and theory and calculation that it takes much much much longer to read. Skipping one sentence can disrupt your entire interpretation of his theories and observations.

Example - "But this is a very false view: we forget that each species, een where it most abounds, is constantly suffering enormous destruction at some period of its life, from enemies or from competitors for the same place and food; and if these enemies or competitors be in the least degree favoured by any slight change of climate, they will increase in numbers, and, as each area is already fully stocked with inhabitants, the other species will decrease."

That is almost impossible to read quickly. This book forces you to go through it word by word, sentence by sentence. There is no opportunity for scanning, skipping, skimming, or speed-reading.

Perhaps this is why Darwin is so intimidating. That, and his knowledge of the world and the workings of humans, animals, ecosystems, and life itself is so vast and great, that it makes me feel a little lame and kind of pointless when I read it. But maybe by reading this, my knowledge will be increased so that I could at least have an intelligent conversation with him. Were he still alive.

Opportunity Cost and Plato

As I was searching through my books for quotes for my essay...I came upon this:

"Do you not think, he said that in general such a man's concern is not with the body but that, as far as he can, he turns away from the body towards the soul?"

For some reason, opportunity cost just jumped into my mind. Opportunity cost is what we've been learning about in Econ these past few weeks - it's the value of what you give up in order to do something else. it's basically the next best thing that you could have had if you hadn't chosen what you chose.

if that makes any sense at all.

it just popped into my head. not sure why. but it did.

The Socratic Method

The Socratic method is a way of teaching via questioning. What we were discussing in class today really helped me to understand this reading.

In order to be able to ask questions about a particular subject, one must have previously established assumptions of that subject.

On page 31 is an example of how Socrates makes his arguments. "Which does the soul resemble?..."

But I don't think that assumptions are the right way of going about trying to learn or teach anyone.

I suppose that Socrates is trying to make sense of his assumptions and thoughts by talking them through. And that he has already thought about these subjects. He's a pretty old man...he's had plenty of time to figure things out. Perhaps his conversations are a way of showing what he has accomplished through out his life. He says in Trial and Death that he has not accomplished much of the things that "normal" men have. But he must have accomplished something.

I can't remember the exact quote...but to paraphrase...Socrates says that he doesn't have any money..etc...he is poor and without luxuries.

Perhaps Socrates' arguments are a way to show off - they are something he is proud of...

Learning - Questions

I think that Socrates has a plan...that he guides his audience to HIS conclusions. The questions that he asks prompt his audience to feel like they are coming up with their own conclusions, when really, they are being led to Socrates' interpretations/conclusions.

Then again. I associate learning with questioning. And who is doing all the questioning ? Socrates. Is he learning? Or is he teaching?

I don't have a definite quote for this particular blog...choose any page in which Socrates attempts to have a "discussion." I put this in quotations because the conversations between Socrates and his audience are not really true discussions. A true discussion must include various opinions. In each conversation there is only one opinion - that of Socrates.

Pages 28 to 30 illustrate what I'm trying to say.

Socrates - What is he trying to say?

As I go back through the dialogue trying to make sense of what Socrates is trying to get across to the men of Athens...I am sort of getting around to it...Sort of.

I think that Socrates is trying to show his humility, but it seems to come across as rather abrupt and sarcastic.

"I am wiser than this man; it is likely that neither of us knows anything worthwhile, but he thinks he knows something when he does not, whereas when I do not know, neither do I think I know; so I am likely to be wiser than he to this small extent, that I do not think I know what I do not know." pg 25 between letter d and e

I think that Socrates is trying to humble himself and attempt to get the court to understand that he does not pretend to know something that he really doesn't know. Unfortunately for Socrates, he sounds a little pompous and self-congratulatory when he says this. He sets himself above the men who pretend to know things that they are really ignorant about - saying that he is wiser than them...but not by much - "to this small extent".

The Trial and Death of Socrates - 1

The first chapter of Plato was extremely confusing.

It seemed to me like Euthyphro and Socrates were constantly going around and around in circles. Poor Euthyphro. He seemed like he was really backed into a corner. I feel like Socrates was taunting him; making him feel like he really didn't have any answers; slowly chipping away at poor Euthyphro's self-confidence right before his big trial.

One of the quotes that I have chosen to blog about is this:
"Is the pious being loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it s being loved by the gods?" - Socrates, page 11

From page 11 to page 13...boggles my mind. I can understand how Euthyphro would just agree and accept what Socrates says...Socrates is extremely convoluted and confusing. I don't like Socrates very much. He seems too sure of himself; too confident that he has the correct answer.

Although, I agree that inquiry is the key to learning - that questions help you understand and comprehend. I feel like maybe Socrates already has his answer in mind...that he is trying to draw the same answer out of Euthyphro by asking leading questions. Perhaps the confusing questions are meant to be so...so that Socrates can assert his superior knowledge and demean Euthyphro.

White Castle 1

I can't decide whether or not I like this book. It's intriguing, perplexing, challenging etc...a puzzle to solve. But I don't know if I would have continued reading the book if I had not had to for this class. It is confusing to the point that the plot is compromised.

However, the end...the puzzle is left unsolved and the resolution, or lack of resolution, is weirdly satisfying. It leaves you with questions. A wide range of really deep and intense questions...depending upon how you interpret the story and it's plot and characters.

And, in order to really connect with a story, you have to connect with the characters. There are no precise, unique, definite characters in this novel. As the story progresses, the characters get increasingly more vague and blurry. What traits had made them distinguishable are lost as the you get closer to the end.