contextualising thought

Thought never happens in a vacuum. Descartes wrote the famous phrase "cogito ergo sum" or, "I think therefore I am." Am what? Descartes was child of France, a polymath whose contributions to geometry (cartesian coordinate system) are better known than his philosophy, which was influential. Many significant philosophers are trained in other things, generally physical sciences. The most influential philosopher of science, Galileo, also invented the modern telescope and is primarily known as a hugely influential astronomer. This starts to get circular, the scientist inspired to write about science. The issue is, Galileo never could have produced his philosophy without first being trained as a scientist. At the very least, the discipline of thought learned in astronomy allowed him to write as beautifully as he did. To return to the universal, even the most supposedly objective thoughts arise out of the experiences of the thinker.
      But thought, as particular as it is in some respects, can still be universal. Recently I've been reading the works of Kant and Hegel, as I prepare to write an article on the philosophy of knowledge. Both of these men have been dead for many years. They never saw things like cellphones and the internet, all our modern devices that make the communication of information so rapid and so shallow. The context has changed. Yet I still found myself nodding in agreement as I went through Kant's passages on the categories of understanding. Knowledge is always individual, but that does not mean we cannot learn from each other.

film vs prose

I had an interesting conversation with a professor today about the Godfather, both novel and film. Most people haven't read the novel, which is no great loss. it's a thoroughly mediocre potboiler kind of thing. what I find more interesting is the larger question, of which of the two media is more effective. Personally, I love both. I read more or less constantly, and have for probably fifteen years. I also see at least one movie a week, and have studied film fairly extensively. Part of this interest came out of my parents telling me that novels tend to be much better than the films adapted from them.
      Often, this is correct. Original works tend to be superior to the derivative. There are exceptions, of course. Mystic River, which Clint Eastwood adapted into an extraordinary film, comes out of a well written but not especially distinguished Dennis Lehane thriller. What people fail to understand in most cases is that the weakness of the derivation process obscures the fact that books and films really are different media, with different strengths.
      Reading doesn't make a lot of sense as a human activity. Our brains are are not wired to make anything in particular out of black marks on white paper. Seeing, the act of interpreting visual data, is wired into our brains at a very basic, primitive level. At the first motion picture show in Germany, audience members screamed at flinched at the image of a train hurtling towards them. Remember, this was early twentieth century, and the picture wouldn't have been convincing. That visual stimulus accessed the audience's primitive brain. There are some film makers, like Eastwood, Scorsese, James Cameron and Christopher Nolan, who still know how to create that effect. I love books and the act of reading, but I'll be the first to admit that books don't hit me the same way.

sports excellence

I love sports, always have and always will. I started wrestling at age nine, and continued ever since, with about a year break when I shredded my shoulder a while back. Yesterday, one of the youngest kids on the wrestling team i volunteer coach, which is a mix of middle-school and high-school, was almost in tears because of the allegations that lance armstrong used steroids. The father of the boy is a professional cyclist, and armstrong is a family acquaintance. I've heard the argument that sports serve society by providing examples of excellence. To a certain extent, this is true. We all know about Armstrong surviving cancer, and about Bernard Hopkins leaving a Philadelphia jail to become one of the best boxers ever. What we need to remember is that these people do what they do for money.
      I'm not saying that athletes are bad people. I just think it's strange that they become so widely celebrated for being good at their jobs. By all means, draw inspiration from sports, but let's save our reverence for the people who truly deserve it.

 after the tragedy in arizona, we saw all kinds of responses from all kinds of people. Personally, I think that's as it should be. we live in a country with the right of free speech, and anyone who doesn't care enough to weigh in on an issue might as well give up the right to vote. what I object to is taking an event like the shootings in Tucson, and attempting to spin them for a political agenda. I'm deliberately not using names, as i think that would just lead to bickering.
   innocent people lost their lives, and there are some who have attempted to gain from that event. political maneuvering, like free speech, is a part of our national identity. that's simply part of the way democracy functions.   let's just remember that there is a time for politics, and a time for simply grieving.

kids online

My cousin is at trinity college in hartford, ct. yesterday she and about a hundred of her classmates were forced to sit through a seminar on finding jobs in the current market. don't get me wrong, I applaud the school for having the program. one of the final presenters was a so-called young entrepreneur. he goes by @kidcriticusa on twitter. he happens to be thirteen. again, i don't have a thing against this kid. my cousin emailed me a video of his talk and, from what i saw, he is both very smart and completely dedicated. also incredibly mature for someone that age. but he still had no business talking to a bunch of college kids about the job market. 

       parents- look up a recent article in the wallstreet journal titled "why chinese mothers are superior." if you happen to have a smart, unusually mature child, then i congratulate you. encourage their ambitions, tell them how proud you are, give them every opportunity to succeed. what I find absurd is when a child is pushed by blind parents into something they are simply not ready for. this particular kid is going to turn out well, i don't doubt that. but let's not pretend that a thirteen year old with solid computer skills is suited to be an "social media consultant," as he is apparently introduced. 

I can't tell if I hate the internet. It changes. So many opinions, all floating around in pixelland. And yes, they really are like a$$holes. So I'm not sure if adding mine to the pool is good, or a sign i need the men in white coats. We'll see. I'm going to give this a try for a couple months, and figure it out then.
    A little about me- I'm 22, and a junior at college in new england.  I read a lot, watch lots of movies. Part of this is academic, since I'm an english major. Which might be another mark against my sanity. Basically, I'm an academic/athlete/musician/aspiring writer, and I'm going to post about all of it.
P.S. if you see something you like, please comment.