John Setnicar

Per. 7

Meaning In Life

It is very easy for us to become wrapped up in our daily routines.  In a sense some of us live like Sisyphus, because we may be slave to our monotonous schedules.  It is true that no one is subject to the fate quite like this mythical character, in that he cannot escape the prison that the Gods put him in, but many people may find that they are doing the same things every day at a dead end job.  In addition, this could be especially true for students, because we go to school every day, in the same classrooms, with the same people, with the same teachers, with no hope of change, or at least for the time being.  I think that when we find ourselves in ruts like these, like Sisyphus, we need to find happiness in the smaller things. 

I believe that when we are in school bored out of our minds there are definitely still moments of happiness in the day to look forward to.  For me pre-calculus and AP Environmental Science are the least compelling classes of the day and they are my first classes.  I feel that once they end, I have finished rolling Sisyphus’s boulder up the hill and at this point I can watch it roll down as my schedule improves from there.   Granted I am still bor ed, but the anxious await for eighth period lunch is enough to give me strength to get through the day.  I usually eat the same meal every day, but I usually look forward to the social gathering more so than satiating my hunger. 

Thus, in conclusion anyone’s day or life can seem very boring, but it is how we perceive our existence and what we make of it that truly matters.  Mersault’s life does not seem appealing to me, but so far I do not detect any indication that he is unhappy so who am I to judge?  Sisyphus’s is doomed to a world of an eternal routine, but even  he can find happiness in certain moments.  If he of all people can try to make the best of his situation ,than so can we.

Does the Punishment Fit the Crime?

            This is an interesting question when it pertains to the life of Candide, because it is difficult to dub any of his actions as crimes.  When he steals a kiss from Cunegonda he is banished from the “best of a all worlds” in the castle.  In my opinion it does not seem fair that he had to experience a life of misery just for kissing the baron’s daughter.  After all, it was Cunegonda who initiated the romance.  Throughout the novel, it is evident that his punishments come as a result of his ignorance.  He had no idea that he would appear like a deserter in the military for taking a walk and he was certainly not aware of the fundamental ideals of the officers of the Inquisition.  For simply “listening with an air of approval” to Pangloss’ statement that everything is for the best, he is flogged several times.

            It may be more difficult to defend his actions in chapter nine, but I believe that if I were in his position I would have done the same.  The woman he loved had been conscribed to a life as a sex slave for the Grand Inquisitor and Don Issachar.  The Jewish merchant would have killed Candide if he had not stabbed him and the Grand Inquisitor would likely have had him burned alive.  Thus he was acting to protect himself and to save Cunegonda so I do not believe these were crimes at all.  The killing of the Reverend Father on the other hand may not have been justified, because he appeared like a more decent fellow than Don Issachar and the Grand Inquisitor.  It is true that noble lineage may have meant too much to the colonel especially as a Jesuit priest, but as Cunegonda’s brother, he would have protected her and made sure that she never ended up as a sex slave again.  I think that Candide killed the Reverend Father out of his own pride, because he did feel worthy to marry Cunegonda.  It was less about protecting his physical self so therefore I do think his punishment fit the crime in this case.

            In the case with the monkeys Candide obviously thought he was saving the women, but the monkeys turned out to be their lovers.  It is evident that Candide meant to do good, but because he is ignorant to the ways of this society he learns that he is mistaken.  Although this was a mistake, it seems that the tragedy could have been avoided if he had thought before he acted.  He has developed an instinct to kill when ever he feels that he or others are in danger, without really evaluating the situation.  This may not have been a crime, but I do think he is at fault for causing uproar among the natives.  In addition I think this rash style of thinking will continue to backfire against him throughout the rest of the book.

             

John Setnicar

Per. 7

How Do We Know What We Know?

            The above question is very legitimate.  At first glance it may seem like a fairly easy question to answer, because we think that we simply need to cite textbooks, internet sites, or even teachers to validate our beliefs.  But the truth is that we cannot truly know something unless it is philosophically or scientifically proven or in some cases we prove it ourselves.  For example, in the time of Galileo every person “knew” that the earth was the center of the universe.  It was a very important teaching of the church and everyone was taught this as a child.  Everyone accepted this as fact, because it came from the highest authority.  Throughout history, the Catholic Church has been able to manipulate people into accepting their beliefs as superior.  The purchase of indulgences is another example, because the consumers of these documents were sure that they would literally buy their time out of purgatory.  Many did not think to question the reasoning behind it.  In other words, it did not occur to them that this was just a simple ploy to raise revenue, perhaps out of fear, but mostly out of blind ignorance. ‘

            Throughout history scientific evidence has been necessary to explain natural occurrences in our environment.  Philosophical reasoning has been used differently in that it has been used to refute or support moral ideologies.  Slavery had existed in North America for hundreds of years and there were several justifications for the institution.  Religion was used once more by some to support their reasoning as there are some passages in the Bible that support slavery.  Some plantation owners said they had an obligation to keep blacks as slaves, because they were the inferior race and needed to be looked after by their white masters.  An early form of Social Darwinism was used as well to dehumanize blacks to show white superiority.  It is very alarming that this was such a great part of our history, because there certainly were abolitionist supporters at the very beginning that slavery was instituted.  Maybe many southern-Democrats were able to convince themselves that it was a moral virtue, because it was so vital to the southern economy. 

            Another utilization of philosophical reasoning is the Holocaust.  In a time of horrible economic crisis, Hitler promised to heal all the woes of the German people and for this reason, many refused to question his anti-Semitic views.  They saw that he was bringing their country out of a depression and once again making it a dominant power.  Once again there were definitely some people who questioned his elitist speech, but like in Galileo’s time, they were either too afraid to speak or they adored Hitler so much that they were willing to go along with almost anything he said.

            In today’s world many of us still accept many beliefs and theories as facts, which history has shown can be quite dangerous.  If we accept everything in our textbooks, it limits creativity and ingenuity that may slow down scientific inventions or progress.  On the other hand there are still people that believe that their religion or their political candidate can do no wrong.  As a result, today gays and lesbians are among some of the people that are oppressed by the Catholic Church and there are still many corrupt dictators in the world today.  Philosophers like Socrates developed his teaching method so that we could find the truth ourselves rather than to follow others blindly.