Disability Visibility CH.1 Final Report Blogpost

Mason Lanza

Professor Oliver

Section 10

12/9/23

Disability Visibility Chapter One 

Disability Visibility is a collection of personal essays written by people with disabilities. While these stories encompass a wide range of experiences, each essay shares the need to recognize the minority of people dealing with disabilities. In its entirety, the book argues that people with disabilities need to be seen. It is a plea for empathy. 

Chapter one focuses on the counterproductive nature of utilitarianism in response to this plea. Championed by Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, and now carried on through Peter Singer, utilitarianism is not inherently destructive. Its premise is that the most ethical decision is the one that derives the greatest satisfaction (or utility). The welfare of the majority is paramount, and its supporters argue for increased awareness for the happiness of others.  On its surface, this is logical and even empathetic. However, utilitarianism can be weaponized as a means to oppress the needs of the minority. Chapter one of the book, taken directly from Harriet Johnson’s essay Unspeakable Conversations, illustrates this point. 

Harriet Johnson was a lawyer and disability rights activist. In her debate with Peter Singer in 2001, Singer defended his utilitarian views: “[Singer] spins out his bone-chilling argument for letting parents kill disabled babies [after birth] and replacing them with nondisabled babies who have a greater chance at happiness. It is all about allowing as many individuals as possible to fulfill as many of their preferences as possible.” Herein lies the issue of utilitarianism. It is not, in fact, a careful consideration of ethics. It dismisses the idea that others' happiness is subjective and unquantifiable. It is, instead, a cost-benefit analysis. It only asks the questions “Who benefits? Who is harmed? If both occur, does the benefit outweigh the harm?” Take the illustration of euthanizing newborns. Singer outright dismisses the idea that killing disabled newborns affects their happiness. He believes that those with disabilities are inherently “worse off.” From here, his assumption is that the presence of a disability will invariably predict a poor quality of life. So, the cost of euthanization is low. But, he would argue, the hassle that euthanization saves parents, caretakers, and loved ones is immense. The benefit is immense. Through this cold, cost-benefit analysis, utilitarianism can promote the oppression of any minority, not just disabled people. Especially when the market is “structured by prejudice,” as Johnson notes.

To better understand how prejudice shapes our ethics, it’s worth revisiting John Rawls and the Veil of Ignorance. This concept simply suggests that our circumstances shape our biases. So, the best way to make informed ethical decisions and decide how society should operate is to imagine that we sit behind a veil of ignorance that precludes us from knowing who we are. By being stripped of our circumstances, we would arrive at more egalitarian ethics and our prejudices may not exist. Unfortunately, because we do not sit behind a veil of ignorance, our beliefs most closely align with the circumstances we inhabit. Take the example of Peter Singer and engage in the thought experiment that John Rawls proposed. 

Let’s assume Peter Singer sits behind the veil. For the sake of argument, let’s also assume that Singer’s ethics have been implemented and it is now legal to euthanize children born with a disability. The likelihood of this is roughly 8%. As Peter Singer sits behind the veil, he does not yet know whether he will be born with or without a disability. He ponders whether he can safely rely on his 92% chance of being born unhindered by disability. But there is an 8% chance that his life will be over before he even leaves his seat behind the veil. And so upon second thought, as Singer is tasked with considering how society should operate, will Singer now rebuke the claim that he once made, that euthanizing disabled children is justifiable? Maybe he wouldn’t. But I think he would. Should he be born with a disability and allowed to survive, Singer’s ethics would almost certainly change. When we stop to consider, independent of our circumstances, the impact of our beliefs, we should have pause. This pause is the gateway to empathy. Our empathy is accessed by looking opposite ourselves. It is accessed by contemplating what might be instead of what is. What might it be like to have a disability? What might it be like to be a different race? What might it be like to be a different sex? Empathy cripples power structures, it rebukes discrimination, and it draws us closer to egalitarianism. 

If we sat behind the Veil of Ignorance and were forced to admit that we know nothing about who we are and who we might be, what power structures would exist? Would racism? Would patriarchy? Would complementarianism? I’m inclined to believe that they would not. Because unlike utilitarianism, egalitarianism forces us to reckon with the experiences of others. It urges us, just as Harriet Johnson and her fellow authors urge us, to see.

Life is Hard, Chapter 3: Grief

The Complex Landscape of Grief: Navigating the Emotional Terrain

           Leon Bouldin

Dr. Phil Oliver

PHIL 1030-013

12/8/2023

Grief, a multifaceted and complex emotion, transcends simple sorrow, encompassing a spectrum of feelings such as anger, guilt, fear, and even fleeting moments of lightness. This emotional turbulence defies static characterization, manifesting differently over time. Tig Notaro's comedic response to tragedy serves as a poignant example of grief's dynamic nature. Kieran Setiya  tells us that three distinct types of grief emerge: "relational grief," marking fractured relationships; grief for the harm befalling the departed; and grief for the sheer loss of life. Each form entails unique pain, offering diverse insights into the nature of love.

The passage explores grief's intricacies through fragmentary, nonlinear narratives, such as Annie Ernaux's account of her mother's Alzheimer's and B. S. Johnson's experimental novel, "The Unfortunates." It delves into the historical rivalry among ancient Greek and Roman philosophical schools, united in their disdain for grief as a problem to be solved. Stoicism's detachment, while appealing, raises questions about its efficacy from meaningful connections.

Grief's distinctions are crucial, ranging from relational grief, abandonment, to non-relational grief for strangers. The passage challenges the notion that grief is self-indulgent, asserting that it is a testament to enduring love rather than weakness. Distinctions between completed and archived relationships underline the continued force of the deceased in the lives of the bereaved. Ultimately, grieving well involves acknowledging the changed nature of relationships, finding a delicate balance between honoring the past and engaging with the present.

The loss of a loved one can profoundly disrupt the core of one's being, leaving an indelible impact on both mental and physical well-being. In the throes of grief, the mind becomes consumed with a relentless stream of thoughts, memories, and vivid images of the departed. Accepting the irrevocable finality of the loss becomes a formidable challenge, and the journey through grief is marked by fluctuating emotions, as waves of profound sadness and an overwhelming yearning for the presence of the departed become recurrent companions. The experience of grief extends beyond an emotional toll, encompassing a profound reshaping of one's perception of reality and the intricate interplay between mind and body.

The Stoic philosophy, exemplified by Epicurus, suggests that understanding the perishable nature of what we love can help mitigate grief. However, the author critiques Stoicism, arguing that its indifference to what cannot be changed distances individuals from what truly matters and that the pain of grief is inseparable from love.

Coping with Grief isn't easy by any standards. Harvard on Febuary 15, 2021 posted an article here on coping with its effects. The study led by Dr. Bui and by the American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine, revealed that an eight-week mind-body program is effective in reducing stress among older adults coping with the loss of a spouse. Engaging in yoga, tai chi, or qigong is recommended, as these mind-body activities not only induce relaxation but also counteract stress and anxiety on a molecular level. Establishing good sleep hygiene, such as maintaining regular sleep hours and avoiding caffeine and alcohol before bedtime, is crucial for restful sleep amid emotional exhaustion. Incorporating physical activity, like a daily walk, aids in alleviating depression and sorrow linked to grief. Lastly, maintaining connections with the social circle, despite the initial pain, is crucial for combating feelings of isolation, with Dr. Bui recommending regular gatherings or communication to receive support from family, friends, or neighbors.

The passage concludes by discussing the importance of grieving well and distinguishing between relational and non-relational grief. It rejects the notion that grief is self-indulgent, emphasizing that grieving is a token of persisting love. The chapter acknowledges the continued presence of the deceased in the lives of the lost and explores the complexity of maintaining a relationship with the dead while still engaging with the living world.

SSHM Chapter 4: Consciousness and Transcendence

 

Consciousness and Transcendence 

David Lagunas 

Professor Oliver

PHIL 1030 Section #13

December 8, 2023

                      

“Yesterday is history, Tomorrow is a mystery, but Today is a gift. That is why it is called the present.”  - Master Oogway (Kung Fu Panda)

William James was on a quest. His life had begun to be filled with sorrow and tragedy. His father Henry James had passed. The flower of Herman, James’ young son, had been plucked prematurely, passing away from pneumonia. William questioned if life could truly be bearable. In order to figure this out, he wanted to know whether or not consciousness would allow him to “transcend” the boundaries of human finitude.  

Stream of Consciousness 

Upon embarking on this journey to study and understand consciousness, James very quickly learned just how incomprehensible it truly was. The objectivity of science could never effectively be used to examine something as subjective as the human mind. The human mind wasn’t just some frog. You couldn’t just put it on a table, cut it up, and then gain a full understanding of its inner workings. William James thought this method would sacrifice and overlook the most crucial part: The Stream of Consciousness. 

I’m going to be honest, I struggled to understand the concept of The Stream of Consciousness. Everyone’s thoughts are all uniquely personal? Seems almost obvious to me. But thoughts being seamless and always in a state of motion? That’s where I struggled to fully comprehend this idea. It wasn’t until I did some more research that the concept became more clear to me. I looked into the use of The Stream of Consciousness as a narrative tool to help convey the narrator’s thoughts. 

This short excerpt from James Royce’s Ulysses does a great job at showing the Stream of Consciousness. In this section, the narrator recounts being proposed to. If you take a minute to actually read it, you’ll quickly realize how much disarray this short paragraph is in. It is a jumbled mess. It is overloaded with thoughts and never even uses a period to separate them. The narrator struggles to fully articulate a single thought. It is as if the character was given a pencil and told to write whatever they thought of for a minute straight without stopping. But that is the point! Even if the excerpt can be difficult to understand at first, it tells us so much more than if the author simply wrote in a clear and straightforward manner. This shows just how excited and in love the narrator truly is. I’m sure we can all relate to feeling like our mind is going 100 miles per hour, struggling to hold onto one thought and fully dive into it. That is the Stream of Consciousness. A river that never stops flowing. A mind that never stops thinking. 

Take Notice 

William James believes we hold ourselves back by what we do and don’t notice. He claims we fail to be aware of “the different way in which the same things look and sound and smell at different distances and under different circumstances”. I can admit there have been times in my life where I felt I have gone into “auto-pilot mode.” I would simply live each day as “just another day.” I began to assume things would remain the same as they had the previous day. Although this can be a form of comfort for some, William James argues this is not the most productive mindset. In living under the expectation that things will remain stagnant, we close off the beauty of possibility. 

 

This single panel is one that I frequently think about ever since I first read it and felt that it strongly relates to what William James is saying. This page comes from Takehiko Inoue’s Vagabond. This series is a fictional account of the famous Japanese swordsman and philosopher Musashi Miyamoto, following his journey to become stronger and learn what true strength even is. In this panel, Musashi’s friend and mentor, Takuan, utters this short yet powerful quote: “Preoccupied with a single leaf, you won’t see the tree. Preoccupied with a single tree, you’ll miss the entire forest.” Personally, this quote has had a strong impact on how I live. In life, it is very easy to become hyper focused on what is right in front of you. It is commonly a goal or belief of yours that is the center of your focus. Unfortunately, by making one thing the focal point of your, is that you end up closing off everything else around you. This is no true way to live your life. If you seclude yourself from the chance to experience all the possibilities and variety in the world, how will you ever begin to fully comprehend it? Try to open your eyes and truly take in what life has to offer. Open yourself up to change, different perspectives, and a growing understanding of the world will open up in return. We must break out of the restricted circle that William James himself claims we entrap ourselves in.

The Witness 

In life, there’s nothing quite as valuable as the present moments.  As John Kaag writes in Sick Souls, Healthy Minds, “They are precious because they pass away so quickly.” As a result, we sometimes have to say goodbye to things and people before we would have liked. It is a tragic feeling to have to continue on living without loved ones that had always been there. William James himself had to experience this multiple times with the death of his son and father. Ralph Emerson describes this feeling in his 1844 essay Experience, where he writes about the “evanescence and lubricity of all objects, which lets them slip through our fingers then when we clutch hardest.” 

It is after experiencing death after death when William James very briefly conceived the term, “The Witness.” By being a witness, you take on a unique role. You are not an active participant, nor are you a bystander. You remain in the middle, “detached yet involved, engaged in a purposeless purpose: to carefully testify to the unfolding of things as one sees them,” as John Kaag describes. During my research, I found that the concept of being a witness is prevalent in various religions, including Hinduism and Buddhism. In Ram Dass’ Polishing the Mirror: How to Live From Your Spiritual Heart, he claims that the witness is actually on another level of our consciousness. He believes that “The witness coexists alongside your normal consciousness as another layer of awareness, as the part of you that is awakening.” It is simply up to us to nurture this awareness. 

How do we actually go about becoming the witness? According to Dr. David R. Hawkins, it is a fairly simple process. We must simply let go of any narcissistic and self-indulgent thinking. He believes we must get rid of the thinking that there’s an “I” causing things. Hawkins claims there are no causes in the world, only consequences. Through developing a profound level you will be able to see that you’re not the cause of anything. Only once we’ve gone through these efforts will we be able to witness the “unfoldment of creation.”

Afterthoughts

Overall, if there’s one thing I took away from reading this about reading chapter four of Sick Souls, Healthy Minds, it was to notice. Take the time to truly appreciate the world around you. Next time you’re out and about, take five minutes of your time to sit down and take a good look at your surroundings. Next time you say goodbye to loved ones, make sure to let them know how much they mean to you. Don’t treat tomorrow as “just another day.” I came across this video on social media about "The art of noticing," that I feel perfectly encapsulates this. I think that if you really take the time, you’ll find there is so much freedom and possibility in the world, and that itself is where the beauty is. 

LH Chapter 5 Injustice Final Report Blogpost

 Jeremy Johnson

Professor Oliver

PHIL 1030 Section 11

8 December 2023

LH Chapter 5 Injustice Final Report Blogpost

    In chapter 5 of Life Is Hard by Kieran Setiya, he discusses the issue of injustice and how we can take steps to solving relevant injustices we face in our world today. The chapter begins with Kieran describing a night when he is scrolling on his phone in the year of 2020. On his phone, he is flooded rapidly with devastating news stories including topics such as police brutality, political gridlock, and natural disasters. These are all examples of real injustices that we faced in the midst of the Covid-19 pandemic. Kieran describes this never-ending series of horrible news as "doomscrolling," and feels helpless to change the problems we face. I can relate to his feelings in a sense that it does seem improbable to make a significant difference by yourself on certain world-wide issues.

    When we choose to take action against unjust principles, these actions may bring consequences in the future. An example of this would be the Black Lives Matter protests that arose in 2020 that resulted in the deaths of many innocent Americans. Kieran proposed a question asked by the famous philosopher, Plato, which was "Why concern oneself with justice when solidarity brings pain?" He answered this question by saying, "We care about justice, or pretend to care, only because we are afraid of being caught." I believe this quote can be interpreted best by asking yourself this question: If I don't stand up or participate in this injustice, will I be frowned upon by others? I think to most, the opinion of what others think and how they will respond goes into consideration far more than the unjust cause someone is choosing to fight for. This article dives in deeper on how social influence and the dynamics of our society play a role in how we construct opinions and hold values on controversial topics.

    When it comes time to take action to injustices, we must find a starting point. Kieran believes in order to understand unjust issues we face; we must learn and find ways to bring about change to them. Since our world is not a replica of Plato's Utopia, we must accept the obstacles in our society for what they are instead of wishing things could be different. Another aspect of bringing change is remembering that change comes in a series of steps. We may not see that change in a year, ten years, or even our lifetime, but contributing little efforts at a time will eventually add up and make the world a better place for future generations. Setiya said himself, "There is value in a single step toward justice, and one step leads to another."

    I thought this image was a good representation for what steps to solving injustices may look like. When considering the long list of unjust topics in the world today, change is not something that can take place over night. Take climate change for example, that is an issue we are taking action towards now in the present but is a process that will take generations to resolve. This picture shows that process as it depicts the numerous amounts of steps you must take to reach success. I also feel that getting over the initial step of debating to take action and simply just choosing to take action is the hardest part in the process of making a change. This image portrays that claim as "Step 1" is the largest step in the photo.

    So, what can we take away from chapter 5 of Life Is Hard? Well for starters, we can all agree that injustices are an unfortunate part of our world today. No matter how relevant one issue may be in a given day, injustices are much bigger problems and are matters that take time, effort, and collaboration to bring necessary change to society. The best way to tackle these problems is to look at the bigger picture and realize the series of strides you take to bring change will only add up as time passes. We must also realize that failure is an aspect that should be accepted when it comes to solving unjust problems. It is simply not realistic to never fail in any aspect of life in general, so when it comes to coming up short in terms of bringing change, it is something that needs to be understood. I will leave you with a quote by Martin Luther King Jr. in the image below, that truly illustrates the whole idea of how coming together and taking steps towards injustices can make all the difference.

 

    

     

        

 SSHM chapter 5, Truth and Consequences 

Jude Dewald

Chapter 5 of Sick Souls, Healthy Minds is the continuation of the unfolding of William James’ pragmatic sense by author John Kaag. While I may occasionally loathe the wordiness and writing style of Kaag, I can say that his understanding of James and how pragmatism came into being is vivacious. Kaag highlights early implications of this philosophy on James in the earlier sections of the book, and chooses quite importantly to use the label of pragmatism until chapter 5. But why avoid the label of the philosophy you explain? Why speak more to the individual than his thought forms?    

Kaag echoes the importance that James presented, imagining philosophy in terms of one’s own existence rather than looking at it through the personal or historical perspective it came from. While these are important to understanding how the philosophy came about, I am more inclined to believe philosophy’s use is in its application. William James definitely would have agreed, as practical philosophy was the name of his game. This idea gets under your skin, and holds you accountable. Kaag understands this function of James’ philosophy incredibly well, giving a treatise not only for mere mental understanding but for real use. Chapter 5 explains, “James warns his reader how simple, yet how deleterious, it is to divorce philosophy from the realities of life.” 

    Kaag uses this book to show the reader how James, through experimentation and

observation of afterthoughts, came about Truth. To James, Truth was like a map. It corresponds to the terrain, but is not a 1-1 perfect representation. He also paints the idea that while objective truth is possible, it is better suited to our interests to be involved with subjective truth. This does not, and I cannot stress this enough, mean that pragmatism is relativism. That is a gross misrepresentation as it does not account for the correspondence to reality that James spent his late years defending. Subjective Truth is not a creation of “facts” for one to believe, but rather one’s story about the facts of life. An important aspect of this Truth is that it is an aspect of our ideas, not something separate from them. Kaag quotes James, “Truth happens to an idea. It becomes true, is made true by events…”

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/240801911298437327/

    What can we learn from James? Humility, honesty, and reason. His truths were effective for him, but also came from a rich understanding of the human position. He advocated for the sanctity of personal freedom, respect and reverence for individuality, and attentiveness to experiential reality. What is the human condition then what we give our attention to?

    Chapter 5 of Sick Souls, Healthy Minds portrays the essence of pragmatism in its largest and smallest form, the search for truth. James made way through his life seeking this, and laid the groundwork towards experiential and personal truth. His philosophy is widely regarded as one of the very few true American philosophies, holding up a “for the people” narrative. Chapter 5 shows that James’ philosophy is so greatly interconnected with daily experience, and a widely eclectic source of personal endowment. This subjectivity is not in ignorance of objectivity, but in harmony with it. The chapter also shows that the acceptance of the consequences of this search are the foreground for its further unfoldment, inside ourselves and in our communities. It highlights James’ zest for the small answers in the big questions, and the big answers in the small ones. This source of individual experiential involvement, for James, brings about the healthy mind so as to cure the sick soul. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkDPPjhUiXg

Life Is Hard Chapter 3: Grief

            Samuel Bean

Professor Oliver

PHIL 1030-011

12/8/2023

    

                                How to Grieve Beneficially                                 

Grief is a tricky subject to talk about since not one person’s ideas about grief are the same. Through much research and deliberation however, there are some things that we as humans can do to help us cope with loss. With loss, we will experience a variety of emotions including anger, guilt, fear and sorrow. As George A. Bonanno said, these emotions do not come in stages as many people are led to believe. Instead they come in waves and should be thought of more like an oscillation since it is repetitive. In the book “Life is Hard” it states, “As time passes, grief alters not because the reasons for it change, but because grieving is something we do, in time, as part of human life. It’s not an emotional state but an emotional process.” This further reinstates the idea that grief comes in waves and the longer we deal with it, the better equipped we are to handle these feelings in the future. 

In order to help mediate the negative feelings of grief, Epictetus said you need to change your mindframe about it. He believed that if we knew what it meant that what we love is perishable, then we could effectively outsmart grief. We should not get turned around and worked up over things in which we cannot change and have no control over; such as death or another person’s actions. Instead we should only focus on things which we can change and detach from everything else. Everything in your life, apart from you, is temporary: People, objects, feelings, and even ideas. If we can wrap our heads around this concept sufficiently, grief becomes exceedingly easier to handle. A stoicism proposal states that we can either hold our desires close and change the world to meet them or change our desires to match the world as it’s going to be. And as it turns out, we cannot always change the world to our liking, so that ultimately leaves us with one choice; to change your desires as the world changes and “go with the flow.” 

With loss, the ultimate goal is to grieve well, not to extinguish grief. In the past 30 years, psychologists have provided studies on how being forced to debrief a traumatic event directly after it happened has negative effects on mental and physical health which can last for many years. Grief takes time and if we don’t allow ourselves time to process what happened, then it can eat us up and cause detrimental problems later on in life. As the book “Life is Hard” states, “to find a way through grief is to sustain a relationship on new terms.” Everyone will eventually learn their own way to cope and work through grief. And in doing this, we are able to find comfort in the memories associated with the person lost. 

Throughout my reading of this chapter, many questions about grief in my own life began to arise. Personally, I have only lost a couple people in my life to death. While my young age had a major part to do with it, I got over these losses very quickly in relation to the people around me. As I grow older, most of the grief I experience comes from relationships with other people, however I seem to work through these pretty easily too without many problems. While this may seem like I figured out how to grieve well, one question always seems to make me question myself. Does grieving someone quickly mean you didn’t love them as much as you thought you did? My answer to this question would be no because with time, people learn to grieve more appropriately and should be able to grieve quicker than others based on sheer experience, no matter how much you love that person. With this being said, ever since I was kid I’ve been able to grieve quickly so I’m not really sure how to interpret this question. Furthermore, whenever I look back on past relationships I tend not to have an overwhelming amount of love for that person anymore, or at least not like I once had. So, in relation to myself, the answer to this question is a yes, grieving quickly means you didn’t love that person as much as you thought you did. However, if we are speaking on a more general note, I don’t think my personal experience should sway my opinion, so my answer is no. Sometimes some things are easier to grieve than others but that doesn’t necessarily give any insight to the one grieving, only to the relationship between them and the person being grieved. 

Below I have attached a link to an interesting study which goes in depth about what happens inside your brain when you grieve along with why it takes time for you to heal. 

How grief and loss affect your brain, and why it takes time to adapt : Shots - Health News : NPR

Life is Hard Chapter 4: Failure

 Amanda Burbage

Prof. Oliver

PHIL 1030 Section #10

December 8, 2023

"The Foundational Myth of Failure..."

    "is that it's our own fault," writes social historian Joe Moran. He goes on to explain that because control is never absolute, we cannot blame ourselves completely for our perceived failures. Furthermore, if we frame our lives around what we are least proud of, we are accepting a lower quality life than the one we can have if we look at our experiences as a whole. It all comes down to how we narrate our lives.

Don't Treat Your Life as a Project to Complete    

    Kieran Setiya transitions from the writings of Joe Moran to explaining the tendency some people have to view their lives as a linear narrative. This idea that our lives are a story "heading for a climax that it may or may not reach" is extremely problematic, because it sets people up for failure, raising the concerns: what if you never reach your peak? What if you peak too soon? What happens after you peak?

    Life doesn't just stop after you reach your goals, but if your entire life has been building up for that one moment, you might be left feeling empty afterwards. How do you go on when your reason for existing has already been fulfilled? Setiya advises against this kind of mindset because our lives are complicated and not easily defined. It would be impossible to accurately express your story in a linear narrative style. People aren't meant to have one singular purpose in life and then die immediately after meeting it; once you reach a goal, make a new one. And you don't have to have just one at a time, be ambitious, have a catalog, a bucket-list of things to do with your life. There's a difference between having lofty goals and making them your reason for existing. Cultivate a healthy relationship with your aspirations so if you achieve something, you aren't left floundering, and if you don't achieve it, you aren't left hopeless. 

making it up the hill once doesn't have to be the end of the journey...

https://existentialcomics.com/comic/29

Life Crises and The Fear of Falling Short

    The term "mid-life crisis" is prominent in our culture because of this idea that we all have one purpose for existing. Setiya talks about his own experience here, and how it was his life's goal to get his PhD and become a successful published author. After he did all these things, he was left feeling empty, with no idea of what he was supposed to do. Crises like these are so common because of people treating their lives as something to achieve. However, it's shifting from a phenomenon that plagues middle-aged people to something that occurs in people of all ages, especially young adults. 

    The symptoms of a quarter-life crisis are identical to that of a mid-life crisis, but the cause is entirely different. Instead of taking place after goals are met, teenagers and young adults are paralyzed by their newfound freedom, terrified to misstep. The pressure to succeed and the knowledge that, due to social media, almost everything you do has the chance to reach millions, is growing at an alarming rate, affecting people who are just barely adults and about to start their lives. Fearing judgement for being behind the curve and worrying about being publicly denounced for failing, these youngsters are wary of new experiences that might taint their narrative. The popular idea that young adulthood is the best time to be alive does not help matters. 

    In order to get over these kinds of crises, reframing is crucial. Maybe we can't change our circumstances, but we can change how we look at it. You're not on the cusp of failure because you're trying out something new, you're on the brink of discovery. Becoming an adult doesn't have to be as daunting as people make it out to be. And completing things is a good thing because now you can move on to something new. In the words of Garcia Marquez, "Life is nothing if not a continuous succession of opportunities to survive." Hopefully the goal is to live well rather than merely survive. Again, it's all in how you perceive it.

For more on quarter-life crises, watch: 

Failure as an Event, Not an Identity

    In the mid-1800s, the midst of industrialization, America was in the process of becoming the powerhouse that it is today. Capitalism and the individualistic mindset so characteristic of Western countries made the United States susceptible to the idea that success or failure in the free market should be attributed to the person, not their circumstances. Anyone can make it big, so if you're struggling, it's entirely your fault. Luck is out of the equation; it's hard work that yields success. 

    This view is extremely problematic, to say the least, and it sets the precedent that labeling people as "failures" is good motivation to get them to work even harder to succeed. Setiya mentions that the internalized belief that working hard will lead to eventual success is linked to higher suicide rates. People will always choose success rather than failure, and so insinuating that people who are struggling are allergic to hard work is ludicrous. Rather than be perceived as a lazy pig, some people would rather give up on life entirely, unable to accept their struggle as society's failure. 

    Economic failures due to inequality is a difficult topic because of how little control people have over it. There's not much you can do to "get over it," and changing your mindset doesn't change the amount in your bank account. At the very least, we can unsubscribe from this notion that being poor makes you a failure of a person and being rich means that you are a success. Failure and success are not nouns, they are not things that people can be. They are simply states of being, which can change at any time.

What Would Henry David Thoreau Think?

    Famous transcendentalist and author, Thoreau was an avid advocate for stepping away from society in favor of returning to nature. Following his philosophy doesn't have to mean living in a secluded cabin and eating berries all day, despite his chosen lifestyle. It's more about the idea that you are free to make your own decisions on how to live your life, and if you want to live authentically, you can't let the chance pass you by. Thoreau despised those who lived unintentionally, blindly following the dictates of the government and the people under it. As long as you live deliberately, you cannot be a failure. 

    We cannot control everything, a fact that Thoreau acknowledged. But we must control what we can (how we live our life within the constraints of what we have no control over). Not being able to control what you were born into, such as an impoverished family, doesn't automatically make you a failure. Thoreau thought living an immaterial life was preferable, in fact, and money means little when you're surrounded by the trees, but perhaps that wouldn't be ideal for you. So you must find a way to adapt to whatever situation you find yourself in, or try to change it if you desire, and do your best to be true to yourself, as "there is nothing impressive about living a life you do not like if you do not have to" (from the video linked above). As long as you accept what you are doing, the eyes of society matter little.

   

     In this Garfield comic strip from 1990, Jon implies that society makes him feel like a failure because he's never achieved anything, at least in its eyes. While his interests may be obscure and not accepted by anyone else in the world, he is content to collect lint despite what other people think of him. Jon is the epitome of authentic living in this regard.

    Joe Moran said that "Life can't really succeed or fail at all; it can only be lived." And isn't that exactly what Jon Arbuckle is doing?

Survivalism: To Do or To Die

Martha Felts

Professor Oliver

PHIL 1030

07 December 2023

Survivalism: To Do or To Die

Kurt Anderson, the author of Fantasyland: How America Went Haywire, discusses survivalism in chapter 36 “Anything Goes Unless It Picks My Pocket or Break My Leg.” Survivalists (also known as preppers) are people who are convinced there is going to be a complete breakdown of the U.S. economy and the government. They believe that with enough preparation and supplies, they would be capable of surviving in rural, off-the-grid, isolation. Most survivalists are typically right-wing and anti-government. Kurt Anderson believes that survivalists are essentially living in a full-time fantasy game and that they are highly invested in the rationality of their scenarios because they obsess over every riot, war, and epidemic.


Throughout this chapter, Kurt Anderson mocks survivalists and labels them as “wacky and sad.” He admits that their lifestyle and “fantasyland” don't “pick his pocket or break his leg” and they have the right to live in a bunker with a decade's worth of twenty-serving cans of teriyaki rice and beef. Still, he also has the right to disapprove of this lifestyle and any other lifestyle of the belief that he wants. Although Mr. Anderson believes that survivalists have a right to live any way they want he disagrees that we should not simply leave them alone and let them be because “there are consequences in the real world” and “delusional ideas and magical thinking flood from the private sphere into the public and they affect everyone.”

While reading this chapter I began to question Kurt Anderson’s opinion and logic surrounding survivalism. I began asking myself are survivalists as loony as Kurt Anderson makes them seem? In my opinion, everyone should essentially be preparing for some sort of natural or social disaster. I think the most recent epidemic with the Coronavirus (also known as COVID-19) showed us that we should at least have an extra pack of toilet paper and water bottles stocked away for emergency shutdowns. Here is a link to an article written by J Oliver Conroy which discusses the ridicule that preppers faced before the pandemic and how the Coronavirus may have proved that more people need to be preparing for the worst. He writes that the coronavirus caused many Non-preppers to have been “caught in a rain shower without an umbrella.” and that he has “ come to respect the preppers’ ethos of survival and preparedness.” https://www.theguardian.com/global/2020/apr/30/preppers-survivalists-disasters-lessons

I also began to question if Kurt Anderson is right and that we need to stand up to people (like survivalists) who are not living in a “socially acceptable” way because their actions might affect us either physically or financially. Here is the answer that I came up with: while survivalists are not ghastly affecting our pockets and legs some delusional ideas do. According to Mr. Anderson as alternative medicine is being mainstreamed millions of people are being cheated and getting sick. While this does not affect our legs or our pockets initially it will result in our pockets being picked when these people are admitted to an actual hospital with actual doctors who are being paid through insurance and the government. While I do not agree with Mr. Anderson’s idea that survivalists need to be dealt with I think that if we applied this philosophy to other groups such as Anti Vaxxers then America would not have to worry about another pandemic.




Attached here is an interesting and in-depth documentary by National Geographic that dives into the lives of 3 doomsday preppers and discloses the practices and beliefs of many survivalists. https://youtu.be/FHMW37ixwFI?si=wgR5sD0VY9X3Mrxi

If you want feedback on your final report blogpost draft...

 you need to push PUBLISH.

If you did not deliver your final report presentation...

and we've not already agreed to let your final report grade ride entirely on the blog post, email me ASAP. 

phil.oliver@mtsu.edu

WGU pp. 193-234

Allie Autry

Section 13

    

    On a very basic level, in her book, “Why Grow Up?” Susan Nieman says that becoming a grown-up is a continual process rather than the arrival at a destination. She explains that you have to come to terms with the fact that the “is” of life often doesn’t match the “ought” of life. In today’s age, many people make growing up look and sound like a bad thing. In my own life, each time I would hit a new milestone, I was always told to enjoy what I had while it lasted because it wouldn’t last long and that whatever came next was going to be even harder. For example, when I got to high school, I was told to make the most of it because I would soon be graduating and consequently facing student loans and debt. When I graduated high school, I was told to enjoy college because as soon as I graduated, I would be entering the “real world” which would be full of bills and uncertainty. No one made it sound like getting older was actually a good thing. When we are young, we want to be older. When we are older, we want to be younger.  So, what makes someone grown up?  

            In trying to answer this question, Susan Neiman wrote on page 196 of her book, “It may even be misleading to think of the process as growing up, a metaphor that begins from the physical growth of childhood but encourages us to think of life as a path leading steadily towards the top of a great peak until we disappear into the clouds or slide down the other side, depending on our religious affiliation, or lack thereof. But the path isn’t steady. You reach a peak that turns out to be a foothill, steel yourself quickly to go down for a spell to walk the plateau, and until you can begin to ascend again to the top of what you’re sure is now the real peak at last.” 

            I found a post on the Columbia University website that said growing up can be thought of as a spectrum. The feeling of moving from childhood into adulthood can take many forms and can even change for an individual throughout their lifespan.

            There is a phrase I hear and I’m sure all of you have heard it too that life is a journey. An important thing to me in that is that we don’t say life is the journey. Life is what you decide to make it. You are a product of your actions and your thoughts, and you can become whatever you believe you can be as long as you put in the work. We encounter many obstacles and changes along the way that we never would have thought would happen. For instance, how many of you have changed your major or are still undecided? Studies show that between 50 and 75% of all undergraduate students change majors at least one time before earning a degree. I am one of these and a few of you are too. In my own haste to grow up, I was rushing from one thing to the next just trying to get a job that would earn me money so that I would have what I thought would be a good life. It wasn’t until I slowed down that I realized that wasn’t what I actually wanted or what would make me happy. Since we are always growing and changing, can we ever really be grown up? Who actually determines what “grown up” is? Most of us never achieve that, in our own opinion, so who are we basing that standard on? There is no rule that says you have to do x, y, and z to be grown up; it is totally up to your opinions. The laws in most states have set the legal age to define someone as an adult at 18, which would imply we are grown up. However, you can drive a car at the age of 16, join the military at age 17, but can’t legally drink alcohol until the age of 21.  So, it would seem that even the laws of our country cannot define what age someone is considered to be grown up.  You don’t have to say what it was, but how many of you have you ever done something silly and/or childish since reaching the age of 18?  Do those acts make you not grown up or are they just part of the process of growing up? Isn’t “Growing Up” merely part of the course of life?

            I’ve asked people of various ages if they feel that they are grown up. From 30 to 88 years old, no one said yes. Unless you give up on life, you aren’t done learning and growing as a person. But I would even counteract that to say that if you decide to give up, that’s an immature thing which would not give you the status of being grown up. To close, I’d like to say that I don’t think it is possible for anyone to be truly grown up, but you can strive to grow and be the best version of yourself, which will end with you feeling as if you have grown up during your journey of life, whether anyone else thinks so or not.