"Paradigm Shift" December Blog

Over the years ive lost the idealistic view that history progresses toward a universal goal, that there is a plan for humanity. As a student of history i have known little else but war and competition. It seemed  that peace might flourish in a corner of the world, but eventually plague, war, or disasters push it into chaos (chaos theory). But recently, i have noticed slivers of light across the great chasm of history, maybe even hope. I learned of a civilization in the Indus Valley, one extremly advanced for its time. What was earthshattering is that close examination revealed that of the 1500 sites discovered, hardly any weapons were discovered, and most surprisingly none had any evidence of warfare. If true this would shatter my previous views of humanity. For years i believed that humans could only have peace through fear, and conflict was just in our nature. But to discover that Humans were able to live in peace, does that mean that our history full of war has just been a mistake? Can i still believe that only conflict drives innovation, when this obviously advanced civilization could do so without war? In most of the cities, the largest building was not a political office for a king, or a temple for the priests, but a massive bathhouse for the common people. When i look back to the Existential theory, that men cant change, i just keep thinking back to this peace. Could the existance of this near utopia be humanitys saving grace, that we can change?


Now actually on topic the article raised a very interesting point that although some cultures find a tradition "normal" americans will always see it as proof of their own moral superiority, but every tradition has a very logical explanation. For example, in arab countries woman are forced to where veils and remain secluded from society. This practice is considered backward by western standards, and even i have gripes with the practice (they could be wasting valuable brainpower!). But to those live with the practice this seclusion of woman is not only a way of life,but to them morally important. To them to cover woman is not only a sign of great respect, but to let woman be judged for their character, not for their looks (parallels to feminism anyone?). The awakening showed that american society was just as repressive toward woman, and from an islamic point of view the real scandal is the use of woman as sexual symbols in commerce (bin laden went so far as to cite this as a reason for the 9/11 attacks). From my point of view both sides are completly right, but "right" has always been a relative thing. Only compromise of both cultures can resolve issues, as i have with my own culture. I am a citizen of the world, and to me my nation is anywhere where justice thrives.

*(november blog ) The Quest for normalcy

I have always been an avid reader, and personally the heroes of the stories themselves have fascinated me. However, ive noticed that no matter how powerful or godlike these characters become, their only use is to sacrifice themselves to destroys anything else fantastic. Beowulf for example was nearly a hero incarnate, but in the end his death and defeat of Grendal, his mother, and the dragon left the world in a status quo, something that really bugs me. In shakesperean stories there is no victory of good either, In hamlet the story ends with the whole ruling family dead, almost as a "washing of the sins". In Romeo and juliet the deaths of both end in peace between the montagues and capulets, again a status quo. All of the greek heroes lived and died to make "modern greece" possible. heroes have begun to seem like pawns, thrown away by society to achieve a state of normalcy, and anything fantastic dies with the hero. With this in mind what do all heroes accomplish really? Is normalcy really preferable to the exciting or fantastic?

A Denial of Fate

After the in class discussion of the idea of fate I've been puzzled at how much the concept vexes me, despite the fact that it is a subject that i often ponder (why do you think i'm quiet, because i'm shy*sarcasm). The idea of fate at one point in my life once comforted me, but as i got older i created a my own odd philosophy. Despite being  a Christian i share none of the fanciful ideas of my fellow believers, that God holds physical sway on this world. I believe that although God created this world, he is merely the Arbiter of it. He stands over this world, basically an ant farm, as he battles against the sum of mans internal evil, known by most as Satan, but who i believe is just the manifestation of our own evil. The world is merely a set of equations made by him, everything, including the earthquakes ,weather, and now even our deaths can be predicted(we have a genetic timer of how long we live or what diseases we get)  . Humanity's own nature has made our history as violent, as brutal as it has been, there is no plan. In a sense, this world is Purgatory. But don't fear my fateful reader, not all is doom and gloom! By their being no plan their is always hope that man, just as we created Time itself, can create a paradise of understanding, and that we are NOT destined to continue on as we do. A God separated from mans world is the only God that can be one filled with Love. He could have made Humankind a bunch of puppets, with no will. Instead, like any parent, He gave  us Will, the most beautiful of gift, to  make our own decisions and carve out our own place in this transient world. A God with miracles would be an unfair one, if he chose some over others. As humans we seem to be interlopers in this world. Since a child i have always felt that we don't belong, unlike other animals that populate our earth.  We have placed a mark on this planet, as none have done before. In a world of equations as i envisioned, i like to believe that we live outside it, like dust floating inside a clock, free, but pushed along the waves of eternity. I say to hell with fate, and to hell with humility. This world is ours for a short time, in the meantime we should not bear the brunt of the world quietly, but fight against it and reach for a future of peace that maybe, just maybe , be just within our reach.

The "New" kind of Hero

During my reading of Beowulf i found the story to be bland and, well, boring. Gone was the humaness of greek stories, with heroes with complex personalities and personality defects, as well as storylines that seem more realistic(i.e Good men are antagonists or the Heroes dont live happily ever after"). Beowulf as a character is bland and except for his action is never personally described. There is no character growth at all. What i found interesting is that  Beowulf marks the starting point in which Europeon heroes became more and more Grecian. As the time went on the heroes became more and more "human" but remained perfectly moral, like King Arthur. Eventually the trend continued up until the present. Today mainstream society seeks heroes that are flawed, often tragically or that are anti heroes-the "badasses" like the action movies of the 80's in which the "hero" would fight evil, but for their own selfish purposes( the Terminator protecting John Conner because of his programming). there has also been a trend toward giving former weaklings like Peter Parker in SpiderMan and giving him superpowers. Unlike Beowulf the hero is not born a hero and is often humble, whereas beowulf is prideful and confident.