Skip to main content

My last blog post... as a non philosopher




Like the image above, I have started thinking, questioning, wondering, desiring to dig deeper, desiring to not just understand, but comprehend. This is the reason for my writing today. I have decided to take my first philosophy course in college. Where will this road less traveled take me? 

What I know is that I can already feel that my life will start to have meaning. Not that I don't find meaning in my current life. So far, my faith has tremendously helped me define who I am, something that has led me to live with joy. 

The journey to discover myself as a spiritual being has invited me to find my first vocation, the vocation to life. We take for granted that we are alive, that we exist. When was the last time you felt awed by the realization you are alive? Admiration has been replaced by the monotonous rhythm of our daily life, greatly corrupted by the shining screens all over our faces everywhere we go. 


I see philosophy as an invitation to examine life. Personally, I see this examination of life as a manifestation of one’s conviction that your mind is not limited to what is immediate to our eyes. Thus, why philosophy is appealing to me. Consider this post as my last post as a non-philosopher. I am now embarking myself in journey where I can live life in slow motion. 

Comments

  1. Anne-Marie SchultzJanuary 11, 2017 at 5:52 PM

    I like that idea a vocation to life. You are a good writer. I also agree that philosophy is an invitation to examine.

    ReplyDelete
  2. UnknownJanuary 13, 2017 at 1:25 PM

    This is a good, convicting reminder! I like your contrast between the monotony of busyness and mindfulness. I'm reading through Mark right now and I think this is what Jesus is referring to when he tells us to "have salt in yourselves [as in the salt of the earth]." (Mk. 9:50)

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Xenophanes a Reformer?

As we progress on our studies of the Presocratics, I am starting to see a deviation from the traditional thinking of the greeks. Homer presents us with gods who are human like and to some extent mundane, that do the same things as humans. I have a feeling that the Milesians' quest for an arche  based on matter, physical things that are unique and "pure" like the water, air, and infinity, reflects the search for an origin different than the Homeric gods. An origin that is different from the human nature, savage and mundane. According to A Presocratic Reader , Xenophanes rejected the Homeric Olympian gods. Although the book suggests that it is unclear if he agreed on one god or a god superior to all gods, he is the first philosopher to suggest a non-anthropomorfic god. A god that is unique for itself. Was he inspired by Anaximander's principle of the apeiron, that which is the boundless and mystical? I feel the he was indeed, because Anaximander's principle is the...
1 comment
Read more

What we value, truth or knowledge?

Last time I ended class with this thought: Xenophanes changed the Homeric views on god. It helps us question if religions define god for what it truly is. With the progression of their theories, I see the Milesians and Xenophanes and think that maybe the mind needs to be constantly evolving to get closer to the truth. Reading Pythagoras made me think about the relationship between truth and knowledge. Curd shows us a fragment were Plato makes a parallel between Homer and Pythagoras. They look alike in the fact that they both had people that followed them. The major distinction is Pythagoras striving for knowledge, his followers the mathematikoi and akousmatikoi both looking to gain knowledge in what they each venerated, while Homer convinced his followers by   his stories that reflected some of the truth about their society.   Curd mentions this fragment “Much learning does not teach insight. Otherwise it would have taught Hesiod and Pythagoras and moreover Xenphane...
2 comments
Read more

Aristotle- The Politics Book 1

The Politics is a book dedicated to concepts of state, political communities. Aristotle starts his writing by defining state as a community of communities. All communities  aim for a good. The state is the largest community and embraces the rest. Because of this relationship, it aims at a deeper and larger good. Aristotle debunks the qualifications and conceptions people have for rulers of a certain community (king, statesman, householder, master). The mistake he identifies is people differentiating between rulers by the number of their subjects. Aristotle suggests politics should not be viewed this way but rather as a compound composed of elements. This statement sets the tone for book 1. His mission now is to reveal these elements.  According to Aristotle, looking at the origin will reveal "the clearest view" of the essence of a state. Family is first elements identified. Family is the union of people, starting with that of man and woman, who need each...
Post a Comment
Read more