Freud Response

Jeremy Kimmelstiel

In analyzing Freud’s work it is most common to explain his approach to psychology. While his writings have been considered groundbreaking because of his unique understanding of the human psyche it was not this that caught my eye in “Three Case Histories”. However, Freud’s ability to capture the reader in the story showed that he was indeed a master of psychology but also had immense lingual prowess.

Freud explains that language is one key factor in the psychoanalysis process. To explain this to the reader he uses case histories. This means the reader has the chance to sit in the seat of a psychologist, immerse him or herself in the story and examine the words of the patient. Without making clear his observations Freud allows the reader into the mind of both the patient and doctor.

While introducing his case histories Freud actually explains that he is attempting to give the reader an opportunity at analyzing particular stories. To contain the wherewithal to abstain from giving up the results of his investigations, Freud shows off his often unnoticed talent for writing.

Melding writing with psychology is something Freud did often, but is actually something that is present in all works of both fiction and non-fiction, admittedly, to a lesser degree. However, authors work diligently in sequencing words in a way that best touches upon emotions. Freud explains the idea of perception; it is perception-of-self that is the driving commonality between the cases. In fact, it is this perception that the author is trying to mold with his or her own words. A good book will make the reader feel like a part of the world, like they are sitting in the seat of the psychologist and analyzing what the characters are feeling.

Interestingly, “Three Case Histories” explains the idea of the reader perceiving an important role in the progression of a story. While doing so, Freud actually confirms his initiative by placing the reader in this exact position. Ultimately, Freud’s “Three Case Histories” was an analytical approach, unwrapping the ways in which words can capture the reader. Writing, as described by Freud, should take into account the ways in which the reader will perceive the material and how this perception will affect the reader. In doing so, the reader can create strong connections to the written works.

Yoong Min Kim 07/01/11
Prof. Rowan G. Tepper
Coli211Z

Freud Response
As we all know, Freud is very famous psychologist in the history of the world by far now. He loved to maintain and study on especially psychosexuality and eroticism related to people in mentally. Throughout of reading his book, Three cases history, of course, got my attention and interesting with cases of Rat man, Wolf man, and wife of god.
Case of Rat man could be simplified as two things; consciousness and unconsciousness. All human being have experienced with these things before, and they are so significant that makes your characteristic, trait, and personality; Consciousness and unconsciousness somehow interacts and influence us. For instance, I am not good listener. I used to be so distracted and do something else such as touching the phone, glancing around when my friends talk to me about their love stuffs no matter how serious they were. I consciously feel that I don’t want to hear uninterested things so that unconsciously do something else to appeal that I am not interested in. My friends don’t want to feel talking to me about their relationships in love.
The case of Wife of God could happen to most of human being. How pathetic it sounds if I live in lie or fictional life. However, all we have experienced this. For example, my friend had believed about his real identity. I mean, he strongly insisted that he was adopted in which he was an infant. He tried to find any evidences by searching on internet, asking around city hall and near adoption centers. However, it came out nothing. He was truly son of his present parents. I want to inform that this example is one of severe cases. There are such as belief in ghost, abduction by aliens, and being able to fly. In these days, we can reach to media that shows variety of fiction things; we can be affected unconsciously.
The last case is Wolf man. This case is how unwanted sexual experiences affect in your dream. This young guy had a dream of white wolf. He had been suffered to sleep in entire of his life since he had seen his parents having sex. All we do have scary dreams at least once in our lives; In fact, we were terrified of it. However, we forget about the dream after the moment we woke up and little later. Freud pointed that having fear dream is indicating something you were shocked at, sexuality stuffs, in which you were awake. For example, I saw an article about a woman had been sexual abused by her father. She always has a nightmare of being chasing by bunch of bees; it is mentally illness that a particular subject keeps showing up in your scary dream every time you think of what you saw from his parents.

Three case history response

Jennifer Abbate

Freud Response

Case History of the “Wolf Man”

The “Rat Man” better known as a military officer suffers from a couple of psychoanalytical issues, but I want to focus on the obsessive behavior. As Freud explains on page 29, “Obsessional ideas have an appearance of being either without motive or without meaning, just likes dreams do.” This caught my attention when he further explained the thoughts of suicidal impulses. Freud explains that these thoughts are just unconscious feelings that an individual struggles to cope with. For example, when the soldier’s young lady whom he is attracted to leaves him he struggles with rage, disappointment, jealousy, sadness, and guilt, which Freud easily analyzes in his studies. Freud argues, “ All of the products of his illness depended on a certain circumstance which at the time dominated his relations to his lady” (33). This explains his obsessional reactions through out his life.

This story of the “Rat Man” explains how we begin to interpret ourselves consciously and unconsciously. The world in which we live in as an individual and the experiences we are raised in completely shape our personality and obsessions that later develop in life. Experiences an individual encounters can change their whole life experience. For example, as a young child I went to Disney World and went on a ride that had to do with aliens taking over the world. As a young child I did not understand how this alien could possibly run around and swallow small animals (at the time I didn’t understand it was a high tech robot). I was always oddly fascinated in aliens because I did not understand nor even know if I believed in a life outside of human form, but at the same time I was terrified of them. Although my experience was not where as dramatically threatening to my state of mind as the “Rat Man” I still have random dreams about the experience.

The only thing I really don’t understand that Freud is well known for and constantly brings up is the sexual erotism associated with almost every experience explained. I have read previous Freudian interpretations and analysis, but I still don’t see the connection as he attempts to explain in many of his stories. In all I believe that experiences faced in our life, especially our childhood, have a tendency to be implanted in our unconsciousness, which helps define who we are as individuals and further explains our choices we as individuals make and do in this world.

Response Paper: Georges Bataille

Response Paper: Georges Bataille
As a Catholic, it is true that I did not feel very fascinate as I read the book. However, interestingly, this story was very addictive as a normal reader. The general storyline is exciting; furthermore, it reflects the dark sexual desire and instinct of human being through the main character, Charles. It looks fictional, but it eventually infers a real human life.
As I read the story, I felt like I am reading a written pornography. However, an interesting point of this pornography is that it does not directly appeal readers with dynamic or sexual expressions to describe bodies. Each word description of scenes was more likely to astonish and shock readers with psychological imagination. The writer’s way to describe leads readers to deeper level of mental orgasm by leading to a prohibited sexual affair, which is an ultimate sin, between characters. Breaking morality possibly has two results to the human; the human either feels guilty or feels an absolute amusement. In the case of this book, the writer means to show the fact that physical satisfaction is not the only way to fulfill human’s sexual desire.
The literature also provided me to think about a true form of enjoyment and desire humans look for during their entire lives. I thought economic success is the most important for human desires because it fulfills many other desires at once: physical happiness, psychological arrogance by standing upon people, or satisfaction. However, this literature shows that nothing could be stronger than the real instinct of human: sexual satisfaction. Furthermore, what humans really desire in sexual ways is never be clean. It should hurt others or even require deeper darkness of morality. Is it really worthy to be satisfied then? This is the question right after I finished the story.
Bataille points our darker sides of human’s morality through his literature. from Blumenberg’s book, I felt that real true form of happiness is intentionally ignored and hidden from us. It could be true, but the reason was not clear to me. Through Bataille, I found the reason. The reason is that our morality that is formed by our surrounding society could be defending ourselves from the evil and dark sides of us instinctively. We, ourselves are not willing to be evil.

Freud Response

Nikki Abesamis
June 23, 2011
Freud Response

I am a Psychology/HDEV double major, so needless to say I have learned of Freud’s theories in many of my classes and was looking forward to reading this book. When his five stages of psychosexual development first came out, Freud received a lot of criticism due to the fact that many people found it hard to believe that the way we developed could be related to anything sexual. As expected, I found a lot of what he said to be very intriguing yet I also found myself disagreeing with the way he related many things back to infantile sex, especially in the first case. However, by reading the case histories I was able to make some connections to the way we as humans interpret the world and how we ourselves fit into what we contribute to the world. 

In the beginning Freud says that it is easier to learn more about a patient through his/her secrets than small facts about him/her. I agree with this statement, in that we really can learn more about a person by delving into their intimate thoughts. Freud views the mind using an iceberg analogy. Our conscious thoughts are just the tip of the iceberg and our unconscious thoughts are the rest of the iceberg; underneath the “tip”, our unconscious reveals so much more about who we are and why we make the decisions we make. For example, on page 13 Freud says his patient breaks into a story, and creates a “defensive measure, which he was obliged to adopt in order to prevent the fantasy from being fulfilled.” I agree with Freud’s theories on defense mechanisms, which are brought upon by the unconscious in order to deal with our realities. Defense mechanisms are probably used more often than we realize. For example, even something as small as taking your anger out on somebody who does not deserve it is an example of a defense mechanism, particularly displacement. The way we interpret it, however, is by justifying that we are right and we do not believe we are using any defense mechanisms. I now realize I experienced this just the other day. It was late at night and I wanted Five Guys, so I went over there yet they were closed. I used a defense mechanism by saying, “Well, I didn’t really want a burger anyway and I have food at home” (this one is rationalization). Defense mechanisms can oftentimes have the potential to be legitimate excuses, yet they are usually just created by our unconscious to make us feel better. This relates to “idea versus wish or fear”: what you think is an idea you suppress/don’t realize it’s a wish or fear (another possible defense mechanism), and his patient is seen making this mistake.

On page 91-92 Dr. Weber is quoted with what I thought to be very interesting in relation to this particular assignment prompt: “The culminating point of the patient’s delusional system is his belief that he has a mission to redeem the world, and to restore mankind to their lost state of bliss. He was called to this task, so he asserts, by direct inspiration from God…”. We were asked to view how we interpret ourselves in relation to what we do in this world, and personally, I would have to say this is how I view myself: Although I am not very religious and do not feel “directly inspired from God”, I make my decisions and I have my beliefs based on internal motivation. I, like this patient, feel that I do have a mission to complete in the world, and I do set goals for myself to help mankind in some way, even if it’s by small actions such as volunteering at a hospital or raising money through charities. Although we are not all “delusional” and we were never Freud’s patients, I think we can still find ourselves having some things in common with the patients in this book. We may all interpret the world around us differently, but deep down I think we as humans all use defense mechanisms daily and we all feel we have set our own “missions” for ourselves.

Freud Response

SaeRom Sung
Professor Rowan Tepper
Coli 221Z Summer
6/26/11

Freud Response

The most well-known psychologist, Sigmund Freud, uses the case study genre to present his theory of reading and interpreting the complex language of the unconscious through the book, ‘Three case Histories’. Freud gives three cases for the readers; the Rat Man, the Wolf Man, and the wife of god case. First case, the Rat Man, has obsessions, which seems to be from his child memory. The second case, the Wolf Man, is about a Russian person who had a dream about white wolves when he was a kid. Third case is about Dr. Schreber, who suffered from mental disease, thinking god is going to change him to a woman.

I want to concentrate on the Rat Man and the Wolf Man case. As the Rat man’s case history begins with detailed accounts of the first seven sessions in the Rat Man’s treatment. Freud introduces analytic sections of the patient’s obsessional ideas such as the cause of Rat Man’s illness, the father complex, and solution to the illness. The Wolf Man case is more a common case we can experience in our lives or lives around us. The fear that he faced in his dream affected his whole life. Both cases’ patients have some bad memories from their childhoods. Because of their memories, they tend to be obsessional in certain things. Eventually, these illnesses took and controlled their lives. Fictional ideas can be very dangerous for certain people. As I mentioned earlier, these ideas can be easily in around our lives. For example, today’s media has been a big influence of today’s people. It seems like television shows and movies are trying to get more viewers by exposing sexual and violent contents. People that mature enough to know that these contents are just fictional will be fine because they will not confuse the reality and fictional contents from the media. However, for the kids, they have a higher chance to mix up the reality and fictional ideas. Unfortunately, the mix-up might take and control the kids’ lives.

I think the lesson is very obvious in the book. We cannot let the fictional ideas take over our lives. To do so, as the grown-ups, we have to have responsibility to protect the immature people from being exposed fictional ideas until they are old enough to understand. Another lesson is that it is important for any people to release their stress to prevent the fictional ideas to take over the lives. The life is short, and we cannot let the fictional ideas to take the advantage of our lives.

Freud the Rat Man

The way we interpret the world and ourselves is reflected in what we do in this world. Sigmund Freud’s Three Case Histories, topic of the obsession neurosis, or the rat man is a great example of a situation that can cause a person to act differently. Freud develops techniques of interpreting the rat man by using patient’s stories and explanation. An obsessed person interprets the world differently than a non obsessed person.

Obsession is an idea or thought that continually preoccupies or intrudes on a person's mind. In the case the patient is presented with obsessive thoughts and behaviors that Freud felt would compel the patient to carry out. Freud theorized that these obsessive ideas and similar thoughts were produced by conflicts consisting of the combination of loving and aggressive impulses relating to the people concerned.

People have obsessions with love and fear but always living in fear will drive a person crazy. Always worrying about the deaths of loved ones would haunt just about anyone. In the case of the rat man he was obsessed with the cruel method the military used for torture. The method included rats that are trapped and the only escape is to borrow through a person’s anus. The rat man would obsess about the torture happening to his father or fiancé. A person’s fear controls the view of the world and can change what they do in this world.

I believe that people have a natural instinct of fear. Evolutionarily people have fears for spiders due to the poisonous factors. The people who didn’t have the fear died from the spider bite and the people who did have the fear survived. Fear is only natural but obsessions leads to irrationality. A person with obsession interprets the world and themselves differently and acts differently in the world.

Freud Assigment

Peter Martin

Frued

6/26/2011

The “Three Case Histories” book by Sigmund Freud points out three cases in which each character has certain issues that cause them to act differently than normal. The first case that is brought up is that of the Rat Man. The Rat Man has obsessions and behaviors that change the way one would normally act out of fear that something bad would happen to his father and fiancée. This is just one example of a problem many people have, that people can become so over obsessed with something that begins to control the way they think, act, and live. In the case of the Rat Man, it is the fear that is based off a story he once heard, about rats burrowing into ones anus. The Rat Man has an irrational fear that this will happen to his fiancée or dead father. I believe that people have fears similar to that of the Rat Man cause them to act differently so that they can protect against these fears so they do not come true.

The second case mentioned is that of Dr. Schreber, a man who suffered from mental illness where he eventually came to think that God was turning him from a man to a woman. These delusions are not uncommon among people, even those that are seemingly sane. People begin to believe that fictional things are the truth and it affects the way they live. For example, there are people who religiously follow a band and their music and it gets to the point where it is a cult following and they let it rule their life. These people will think that the band is telling them to do things, and almost worship them as though they are a God. This is also true with movies, and television shows, among many other things.

The case of the Wolf Man is about a Russian man who had a dream about white wolves with the tails of a fox being outside of his window as a young boy. This dream scared him, he was eventually able to go back to sleep, but the dream affected him for the rest of his life. This fear of wolves is an example of any number of common fears that some people will develop in life that grow and affect their life in a very impactful way. While Sergei Pankejeff feared wolves on the outside, this is traced back to the dream, which is most likely a metaphor for when he saw his parents having sex. Though this is definitely an uncomfortable subject, seeing the act of ones parents having sex can cause very serious mental issues. Although it is not a life or death subject, it can affect how a person develops mentally, and sexually.

These three cases are all related to sex, even though the Rat Man and the Wolf Man have obsessions and fears about their respective animals, they are still related to sexual encounters or experiences. Though all of these stories are related to sex, their “lessons” can be applied almost universally, having an obsession or fear can alter the way one views the world. Many people have similar obsessions and fears, and they let them control their lives. If there is one lesson to be learned from Freud’s book, it is to not let things like this control the way you think act and live.

Freud Response

Brad Levine

Three Case Histories Response

I’ve been in school long enough and taken enough classes to know the basics of Sigmund Freud, his philosophies and, most importantly, his influence on a number of psychological fields. Three Case Histories is the first work of his I ever fully read and while I found it interesting, it seemed to confirm my original suspicions about how I would react to a full study of his. Despite the fact that Dr. Freud was obviously extremely intelligent, I did not really agree with just about everything he said.

On page 205, he says “It is just as impossible for me to argue with workers in the field of psychology or of the neuroses who do not recognize the postulates of psychoanalysis and who look upon its results as artifacts. “ During his time and to this very day, Freud has always had his critics who try to refute his theories. He was a progressive who interpreted the world very differently from his contemporaries, but he didn’t take the criticism and back down. Freud had his own interpretation of the world and was going to believe that he was right no matter what anyone else said. Even with all the criticisms, Freud has become synonymous with psychology and has become a historical figure in his own right.

Nothing in life is going to be universally accepted, but through Freud himself, and not necessarily his work, I have thought about how I fit in the grand scheme of life. Everyone’s interpretation of the world is going to be different, so there’s no point in trying to change our beliefs to better fit the overall feelings of society. I will never agree with Dr. Freud no matter how many academics say that he’s a genius and his word should be taken as undoubtedly correct. Every person has the right to do and think whatever he or she wants, and it is up to that person to have confidence in what they do and be ready to defend themselves and their work, as Freud did. There’s no point in doing anything, unless we truly believe that what we are doing is worthwhile and we’re doing the best work possible. I will never agree with Freud, but he obviously truly believed in his theories and thought he could change the way people think about psychology (which he did).

It is up to the individual to find meaning in life based on personal experiences and opinions. Although everyone is entitled to their opinions, if someone feels strongly about something, they should try to fight any critics. I will never agree with Freud, but while his opinions might have seemed strange (and to some they still do), he stuck with it his entire career.

Freud Response

Nathaniel Haggard
COLI 211Z
Freud Response
Due: 6/24/2011

How we interpret the world and ourselves has a great effect on how we live our lives and what we do with our lives. The Freud book illustrates how certain thoughts, fascinations, fears, and compulsions can cause us to alter from the “norm”. This book highlights three cases; that of the wolf man, rat man, and the wife of god. In each case, the disorder causes the individual to have problems living and dealing with every day occurrences. This brings to question; does our self-image effect how we live our life? Can fear and stress interrupt our lives? Can fictional thoughts or ideas control our lives?
The simple answer is yes. Self-image is very important and can dictate how successful or happy you are. Having a positive self-image generally makes you happy and creates an aura of positivity around you. But having a negative self-image generally leads to negative aura’s and to others thinking less of you. Even things such as body language that are tied to self-image play a vital role in how other perceives you. And, in many cases, how others perceive you have a direct connection to success and how we live our lives. As seen with the rat man, negative self-image can have drastic effects on day to day life and how life is lived.
The next point brought up relates to fear. Fear can literally paralyze and freeze your life. As seen with the wolf man, having a fear can ruin you, especially if it is a fear that has been growing for most your life. A great example of this is seen with many shut-ins. Being afraid of simple things like wolves, grass, etc. can make you forget to enjoy and live your life. Fear and life controlling fear is a major problem for many people.
Just like fear, fictional ideas can be life controlling. An example that comes to mind is with video games and movies. Some people watch so many movies and play video games so much that they begin to dream that they are part of the stories. This can eventually lead to a life dedicated to the story. People forget their families, friends, and work. It has gotten bad enough that support groups have begun to pop up all around the world.
In conclusion, how you perceive the world is a very complicated and important idea. Having a clear head and remembering to live life may be one of the most important things you can do. Avoiding letting fear, stress, fictional ideas, and negative self-image control your every movement is one way to live a successful, fulfilling life. As seen with the Freud book, letting these outside stressors become an integral part of your life can be life ending.

Jamie Hall

COLI 211

Professor Rowan Tepper

Response #3

Happiness is an idea and feeling that is difficult to define, identify, and understand. Prior to reading Blumenberg I thought that it was an

idea that was easy to pin down. Unfortunately, that is not so.

What I got from the reading was that Blumenberg believes that there is no exact definition or source of happiness, and

what it is changes from person to person. I believe that this ties a lot into what Blumenberg speaks about, in that

most things are not static, and are instead always changing.

The idea that “If Care Is Objective, Happiness Must Be Subjective”, sums up this section perfectly. My happiness is subjective to

various things, and those things are not necessarily what may make someone else happy. I may be happy one day, but that feeling

is subjective to other events and occurences that I encounter in that same day. I can be happy in the morning because I had a great breakfast, yet

that happiness could be gone by the afternoon if I find that I haven't done well on an exam.

An idea that really stood out to me was the prohibition of happiness. I feel that as humans, we prohibit ourselves from being happy often

if what makes us happy does not conform to the standard idea of what happiness should be. Blumenberg clearly feels that there is no standard

of happiness, yet in a sense I disagree because I feel that we are often inundated with ideas of what is and what is not supposed to make us happy.

Puppies rolling in grass is supposed to make us happy, but lions chasing down gazelles shouldn't, and while neither of these things make every single

person happy or unhappy, if we do not appear to conform to what is supposed to make us happy, we know that we will be marginalized, and looked

at as the "other". This idea leads into a whole lot of other larger ones, such as why we feel the need to conform so strongly that we would

prohibit ourselves from happiness.

I greatly preferred this reading to our previous book because it generated in me a greater desire to really think about what Blumenberg is implying.

Beyond just what he is saying, it made me really think about what happiness is, something that most people probably wouldn't think about on a daily basis,

and that made me happy.

Blumenberg 2

The second section I chose came from Blumenberg’s section entitled “Fundamental Differences”. In this portion of the book Blumenberg attempts to describe the role of the human conscious within a world of independently acting variables. In other words, he describes a world in which intricate mechanisms work together to provide everyday necessities that for the most part go unnoticed. One specific example of these ideas is his explanation of standing upright. The simplicity perceived by the human mind of such a task is inherently unbelievable as the act itself requires so much detail and so much synchrony.

The principle behind Blumenberg’s thoughts is something that has long been described in those who meditate and practice yoga. However, in meditation the focus falls on the individual’s breath. It is said that if you can block all thoughts from your mind and concentrate completely on the act of breathing, you will promote better health as well as, self reflect immensely. Nonetheless, this is a hard task. Breathing has become so mindless that it is almost impossible to breakdown the complexities of it. It is not uncommon for an individual to go several days without truly focusing on the actual act of breathing. How can it be possible that something so vital to survival can go completely overlooked? This is the real question Blumenberg wishes to address. He explains that the human conscious takes an interesting perspective on the world, choosing to ignore many important details.

This mental detachment plays a role in literature. Authors choose to use words to touch upon these intricacies. By doing so, the reader is forced to examine ideas and actions not often analyzed. Metaphorically speaking, a body of words, works much like meditation’s focus on breathing. The words tend to illicit emotional responses, opening up a thought process for notions often overlooked due to their commonness. Ultimately, literature, in a Blumenberg-ian world is a tool to break down the everyday simplicities and expose their importance to the human conscious.

Blumenberg response2

Yoong Min Kim 6/16/11

Coli211Z

Rowan G. Tepper

Blumenberg Response2

Throughout reading the Hans Blumenberg, I just started becoming his fan. I was so impressed and got inspiration of further more knowledge on viewing the world and people differently by reading Something like a world order, and enemies. I loved another section, If care is objective, happiness must be subjective. Nobody on earth has ability to define the meaning of the happiness. It is because we have and feel different happiness from different subjects. For instance, I would be having huge happiness from getting grade A of the course. However, I can’t assure that everyone would not be having the same amount of happiness as mine.

The author, Blumenberg, mentioned that we don’t have to find the true happiness because it is not out there and won’t be found out because there is no exact and certain happiness. If there were certainly particular happiness, we will definitely not be happy in which we should be happy at least. For example, people will not be joyful all together when they are gathered because they have certain happiness on their own subjects only. It is impossibly giving us happy just hanging out. I want my own happiness from my own subject!

When you think you are happy in the moment, which is happiness. It is never coming when you look for. It just comes in which you naturally feel it. In these days, people mostly think that money is the one source bringing our happiness. However, as Blumenberg said, nobody knows about the true happiness. Some riches might feel happy and some don’t. Even poor people feel the same way we do when they do. This section was the greatest one I read because It just made me think several times about the true happiness. What it came out? Nothing.

Blumenberg Response 2

Nikki Abesamis

The next section I chose to talk about was in Dasein’s Care, specifically “Taking Care of Happiness” and “If Care Is Objective, Happiness Must Be Subjective”.

In “Taking Caring of Happiness” he makes a point that the relationship between medicine and morality has remained vague, and this is still true today. Here at Binghamton there is even a course taught on medical ethics. Blumenberg says that the only “bond” between the two is in the idea that happiness lies in a “secure existence”. If a guarantee of happiness is only reachable by the morale par provision then the chances of the morale definitive are bad. I’m not 100 percent sure what this statement means, but then Blumenberg says that the world costs time, and the lack of time is what turns people into despisers of morality.

I found this metaphor about time and morality to be very interesting. In order to do things your own way in life, one may feel the need to do things at their own pace. Often when people do not have the time, they will take shortcuts, cheat, or deceive for their own benefit. An example could be something as small as a student cheating during a test because he/she did not have the time to study enough for it. This can also lead to a person creating a defense mechanism or an excuse (like “Well everyone cheats anyway…” or “My professor won’t even care or find out…”).

Sometimes doing things your way ultimately means going against your owl morals, or going against a written code of conduct. It can also be looked at in another way. For example, in keeping with the medical ethics theme, let’s say a doctor with less experience may require a doctor of higher authority to be there to make certain calls or perform certain tasks. The doctor with less experience may face a situation with a patient where there is not enough time to wait for someone else to come and may treat the patient by his or herself. This does not necessarily mean they compromised their morals, but they may have done something that should not have been allowed. I think this is a metaphor that could be applied to many different situations in real life and can be looked at in many different ways. 

In the following passage entitled “If Care Is Objective, Happiness Must Be Subjective” Blumenberg says that we do not know the true meaning or definition of the word “happiness” but that each person tries in his or her own way to achieve it. I thought it was kind of ironic that this passage followed “Taking Care of Happiness”, because in “Taking Care of Happiness” he states that the bond between medicine and morality is that happiness lies in a secure existence. This makes me wonder what his personal definition of “happiness” even is. He says that we deal with the prohibition of happiness and the decree of happiness. When I first read about the prohibition of happiness I disagreed, because initially it did not make sense. Why would someone willingly forbid himself or herself of being happy? However, after thinking about it more and relating it to real-life situations, I realized that Blumenberg’s point is not entirely incorrect. For example, a good friend of mine refuses to date anyone who is not Jewish, because he fears he will disappoint his strict Jewish parents if he dates someone “different”. In my eyes he is potentially forbidding himself of happiness because of these limitations.

Although we really do not know what happiness contains, I do agree with him that happiness is subjective and depends on a person’s own thoughts and feelings.

Blumenberg Response 2 - The Last of All Cult Victims: Boredom

Brad Levine

Care Crosses the River Response 2

Right away, the passage The Last of All Cult Victims: Boredom caught my attention because of the title alone. At first read, I wasn’t too sure that I understood what Blumenberg was trying to say and the choice of words, especially the constant idea of cult, seemed somewhat random and out of place. As I continued to examine this passage, I realized that the first sentence, “As soon as entire nations are ‘educated’ and their great possessions are presented to them in cult forms, boredom becomes rampant-and with it the duty to endure the boredom,” is something that is undoubtedly true. As life goes on, things can get boring and with every new experience there’s a period of excitement followed by the time when that experience becomes mundane and normal.

To me, Blumenberg is saying that boredom doesn’t have to be a bad thing. Boredom, in an extreme way, is the catalyst for new ideas and progress in all aspects of life because if everything were to stay exciting there would be no need for anything to get any better. Blumenberg says that boredom is really just society’s hunger for more than what we have or what we understand.

When Blumenberg refers to a “cult” I took it to mean any group that has gotten bored with something and might be looking for the next exciting improvement. Anyone can be part of a cult, but throughout time there have been more powerful cults than others. Everything in life was somehow formed by one cult or another from the world of politics and business to art and language. When a powerful enough cult gets bored, it could mean big changes on society. The world needs cults and boredom for things to get accomplished, both positive and negative. Boredom truly is the last of the cult victims because, in a way, it isn’t a victim at all. Boredom is never going to go away, it may temporarily disappear, but it’s always there, and, when enough people feel bored, the cult, whether small, large, informal or powerful, will step out to cure the boredom of societal hunger.

Overall, I felt Care Crosses the River was a difficult read because there were so many sections that I could not relate to or understand. The sections I did understand were interesting, but the amount of allusions that he makes added to the difficulty.

Rescue Without Sinking

Peter Martin

Care Crosses the River-2

6/18/11

The second passage that really caught my eye was a short one. It is called “Rescue Without Sinking” in the section What Is Perhaps Lost. At first, I looked at it and it talks about how there are a lot of people in life who think that their meaning in life is rescuing others, so they make others believe that they are lost.

My immediate reaction was the obvious, religion. Clearly religion gets pretty deep into the rescue without sinking waters. Then I thought about it a little more charities, news, and more. I realized that most everyone is involved in something where they “rescue” those who may not be in need of rescuing. Yes, there are obviously exceptions to this, there are some who really don’t know that they need to be rescued, but why not keep it that way. Sometimes being rescued just brings further complications into your life.

Without getting into the touchy subjects I mentioned above, there were a few things that crossed my mind about “being rescued.” The first thing to pop out was salesmen. Then I narrowed it down. What have we been sold that we use every day, that “rescued” us. Cell phones. Not just any cell phones, but smartphones. I know that there is some statistic out there about the number of people with smartphones, but they have become more and more common. If you asked someone 10 years ago, do you want a device that you can put into your pocket that will make it possible for any person to reach you at any time of day, not just by phone call, but e-mail too? I would have said when I’m done with work for the day, I want to just go home and forget about it. No, not anymore. Yes, smartphones can be useful, but the more I think about it, we got “rescued” by smartphones. If I never knew they existed, and no one had ever shown me, I would be happy to know that I have a while to respond to e-mails, because no one knows when I’m going to be near a computer. When you walk into a wireless phone store today, the very first thing they do, is show you to the smartphones. They sell you on all the things they can do, and how you won’t be able to live without one, but in reality, they are just selling you something that is going to make your life not only more complicated, but cost you more money.

The world is full of people who try to rescue you. Sometimes, this is not always a bad thing. Many times, though, people are trying to rescue you just to they can feel better about themselves. People will continue to be rescued from things that they don’t need rescuing from, the key is to be able to spot it, and know when you don’t need to be rescued.

Remnants of the Unattainable

Some people love what they can’t have or what is unattainable and are bored of what they have or the attainable. Coming from a business standpoint people are always wanting what is new, the best and people are willing to pay large amounts for new technology or what is unattainable. This passage reflects on topics that are considered unattainable such as mercy, space, time, past and what happens when it is attainable.

Mercy is compassionate treatment of or attitude towards an offender. Mercy is rare the logical way of thinking is taking revenge or getting even with an offender. Mercy cannot be attained by effort. Everything depends on the eternal and the unattainable will be bestowing mercy. There is nothing gained when bestowing mercy.

Space and time are the modern dimensions of the unattainable but when there are historical events such as landing on the moon space is no longer unattainable. Landing on the moon has already taken place so it is attainable and undesirable. Another example is the past which is considered unattainable. There is no way to turn back the time so people can use art to portray the past. People have to be able to identify and connect to the art.

This analysis touched upon many topics but what stuck out to me was the idea of wanting what you don’t have. The unattainable that would like to share its preciousness with everyone that swings up or bends down to the obligatory attainable, can only register the following with reluctance or malice. What is attainable is no longer interesting the value on a rare or extinct animal is greater because it is unattainable.

human consciousness

Response Number 2

My first passage I decided to write about was from “Something Like a World Order”, which discussed human consciousness of power, culture, and a sense of life. The section on “Fundamental Differences” relate to the discussion on human consciousness because Blumenburg explores the idea of foundation, reason, and building sites where he connects this to actual physical things such as the earth or soil.

The passage “Standing and Consistency” really caught my attention because it brings so much attention to standing, which is an act many adults never consciously think about. Blumenberg points out, “Standing on the ground is an activity, one that determines watchfulness and attention” (Blumenburg 71). How many times a day do you think about the act of standing let alone holding yourself upright in line at a store or a more complicated task like jumping at a concert? Another interesting argument was there is only one ground and only in agriculture do people talk about different types of ground. This is where I really related the two passages to human consciousness. If human consciousness realizes there is only one ground, meaning worldly definition of the ground we stand on, does human consciousness recognize you, me, your best friend, etc. as individuals? Human beings are defined by scientific data as to what makes up our existence, but human consciousness picks apart humanity by dividing people into tiny sub cultural categories. Getting back to Blumenburg argument, “The planet only bestows and has only one ground” but this made me wonder out of 6.5 billion people in the world, what makes you as an individual unique or are we really all the same, according to science and genetic makeup?

Response on Blumenberg 2

SaeRom Sung
Coli 221Z – Summer ‘11
Professor Rowan Tepper
6/16/11

Second passage I decided to write about is ‘Cursing the Sea’. The passage is about blaming others for a cause. The blame starts from a shaped woman to all the way to the Earth. I thought the passage’s message and its moral lesson was very obvious. But, I had to think about myself in terms of how I tend to refuse to take the responsibility of many things.

After reading the passage, I had to think about what to relate in the reality to the passage. There were two thoughts that came to my mind. Obviously, the first thought was me. There was an incident where I got into a fight with one of my closest friends. The incident was about missing mp3 player. I blamed her for losing my mp3 and she blamed me for losing it. Now that I think of it, it was a stupid fight because it’s just a little mp3. If I did not blame on her in first place, we would not have gotten that far with the fight. Second thought that came to my mind was the government people. I am not a political person, so I do not want to go too details on it. It looks like government people do not want to take the responsibility on the things they might have mistaken. For example, Rep. Anthony Weiner did blame the young girls for the sexual chats and picture sharings. He even blamed his name for the cause by saying everyone makes things up because of his name. At the end, he did admit that it was his fault, and he ended up resigning from his job. It is very obvious that he made a mistake, but he started to blame on others for what he did. I think if he admitted his wrongdoing in the first place, then things might have been better for him in terms of his relationship with his supporters. It is pretty clear that Mr. Weiner will not have any supporters for awhile.

To sum up, when I take a look at historical great leaders, they were all responsible for their actions. The passage delivers an obvious moral message that people should learn how to be responsible, not passing blame. I think we all have to think about our actions first before blaming others.

Blumenberg Response 2

Minwoo Choi
Graduate School & Job Applications: Style & Praxis
Rowan G. Tepper
June 17 2011
Response Paper 2: Hans Blumenberg
In the first part of the book, Blumenberg describes the economic rule that our world is following now. The rest of the book contains very interesting concepts of human lives. However, personally, it was very interesting to read when the meaning of happiness is described in the last section of the book.
It is lucky that nobody knows what the true happiness is. This is what Blumenberg said. Since there is no such form to define happiness, there are many different types of happiness that humans are looking for. Some people want to achieve the best economic profits for their economic success, some people go to work and make money to feel the happiness from their family, and some others meditate or perform their own ritual to look for their spiritual success to maximize their happiness. It is very interesting concept of humanity for me because I also think that human beings should not find their happiness until the end of their life no matter what types of happiness they are willing to achieve.
As Blumenberg briefly mentions in the book, people should not find the true happiness they are looking for. If there is a certain ultimate happiness that all the human beings feel the same, the world would become a chaotic hell for them. They all would fight and compete for one goal that will send them to sudden boredom. However, ironically, most of us look for our happiness through our entire life with pathetic competitions and many of us do not find the perfect answer for it. Then what is the happiness for you? I think that the process to look for the true happiness is the real happiness.
The word boredom that the writer constantly mentions through the last section contains more than a word, but the deeper level of humanity. Even though humans do their best to gain their best happiness, I think that humans keep themselves blind from the true happiness. The facts determine happiness keep changing as our world is transforming because people want different factors to feel happiness. What the majority of population wants becomes the happiness for the entire population. Likewise, the true happiness that do not have specific form is not formed because of ourselves.
In conclusion, if people forms the real happiness for themselves, they will face the real boredom which is the ultimate reason to give up their lives. It might be a blessing from the god to let us keep missing the true form of happiness unintentionally. If the real happiness should be hidden from us, the process of seeking happiness would be our actual happiness.

Blumenberg Response 1

Minwoo Choi
Graduate School & Job Applications: Style & Praxis
Rowan G. Tepper
June 16 2011
Response Paper 1: Hans Blumenberg
Through this book, Blumenberg tries to show and describe many aspects of human lives such as thoughts, ego, or the rules of the world. The similarity of what he wants to describe in words is that they are difficult to express only in words. He shows what he believes and finds through metaphors that are common in our lives.
In the first part of the book, Blumenberg offers shipwreck cases. The interesting point of his metaphors is that they could be translated in many different ways. Personally, the most brilliant concept in his metaphor is the relationship between the wind and the waves on the ocean. Although it should not be concentrated too much in reality, they could best be seen as the relationship between our world and money.
Our world is running by us, all the living creatures, which is described as a shipwreck. However, as it is written, the shipwreck is mainly depends on the waves which is caused by winds. The winds symbolize the basic economy, which is money. Many people in the world believe that money do not determine the level of happiness for human beings, no matter how much money is offered to each. Ironically, if the world is viewed in the broader perspective, it is easily assumed that money itself determines the meaning of our lives; furthermore, it controls the entire world. Whosever got the most money is considered as the best leader, and most of greatest respectful people can easily gain money if they decided to collect. Money determines human values.
It is true that Blumenberg is one of the greatest writers and philosophers. Even though he writes many precious books, the most valuable point of his writings is that he tries to include all the basic and common rules that human beings are tended to follow. Blumenberg’s works is not only limited to the literature, but also to the law of our lives. That is the most critical characteristic of his writings.

The Metaphor Detour

In the section entitled “Something Like A World Order” Blumenberg speaks of detours. Detours can be defined as a diversion around a planned route that may be prohibited for one reason or another. This idea has very profound implications in the literary world, specifically in regard to metaphors. This literary tool uses tangible or well known examples to explain the unknown. Like a detour on the road a metaphor takes the reader from point A to point B in a roundabout, yet nonetheless, defined manner.

However, what exactly is the important relationship between metaphors and reality? In doing some research on the internet I found countless articles describing the way in which movies are used as metaphors for our lives. Citing movies like “The Matrix” in which many believe, metaphorically speaking, describes the simplicity of our world. As if to say we are programmed into “the system” and churn out predictable results. On the other hand, when analyzing this film I find the metaphor to portray not the straightforward route, rather a Blumneberg detour. Sure the movie can depict life as merely a computer simulation, but it also has characters entering new realms, discovering new things and encountering new situations. This “computer simulation” is in fact the literary tool used to travel on the road less followed, the detour, the path around the most common way to the destination.

What makes this tool so profound is its ability to provide relief to the complexities we happen upon. A metaphor is never the direct way to move towards an objective. Conversely, it takes the reader on a roundabout journey to provide a more eye-opening experience. In essence, the metaphor is used not only to progress towards a target but to additionally add meaning to the expedition that brought you there. As if to say getting from point A to point B in life cannot be defined by the simplest route, instead it requires time off the beaten path, in the unknown, detouring.

Reponse on Blumenberg

SaeRom Sung

Coli 221Z – Summer ‘11

Professor Rowan Tepper

6/15/11

I enjoyed reading Blumenberg’s work more than the first book we had to read. As I read through the whole book, this book did come to me in many different ways. Especially, after reading the first passage ‘Enemies’ caught my attention the more than other passage of the book. The passage was about two people, who hate each other so much, on a boat. One of them chooses to stand on the stern and the other chooses to stand on the bow. As soon as the boat starts sinking, the person on the stern finds out that the boat is sinking from the bow. Although, the person on the stern will die eventually, but he also knows that his enemy will sink and die first, he feels happiness.

I felt like the whole situation of this passage can be related to the war. The stern and bow of the boat can be the metaphors for war between two enemies. In this passage, the stern is safer than the bow, but we all know how it is going to end. In war, we all know someone is going to be in a safer and winning position than the other side. For example, in the Cold War, we all can assume that the United States had a better position in terms of allies and the supports from other nations. On the other side, the Soviet Union did have a power to go against the U.S., but a fewer allies and supports from surrounding nations. During the Cold War, we had to face two brutal wars, Korean and Vietnam War. We lost many soldiers and love ones during these wars. At the end, the Soviet Union did fall down, and it seems like we have the win against the communist nations. But, we have to think about the lives we lost during the wars. Just like the passage by Blumenberg, one side will be happy over the other side, but we lost so many that neither side is really the winner of the war.

I think human tends to put themselves in better position by comparing others’ situations. The point is very clear in Blumenberg’s ‘Enemies’. One side will have the winning, but at the end there really is no winner. But, people want the better position over the others. I think it goes the same for the war. It may look like one side has more advantages over the other, but at the end, there is no winner in war.

The Deadly Calm of the Sea

Hans Blumenberg’s Care Crosses the River is an interesting piece that is composed of short meditation or what I believe are analyses of different topics forming around metaphors, fiction, gestures, truth and reality. There are a few pieces that I thought were interesting but one that has already been touched upon in another blog was Enemies. Often times we find ourselves being okay with punishment as long as the enemy gets it worse. Blumenberg makes us look deep and I like that about his work. The passage that also caught my interest was The Deadly Calm of the Sea.

In the title The Deadly Calm of the Sea we can already tell that there is a relation to life and death. If the sea is calm it is deadly and the lack of wind is what causes the sea to be calm. This passage is about a man by the name of Thomas Mann who took Hedwig Fischers daughter out to sea in a heavy fisherman boat. They had found the sea to be very calm and they could not row the boat. The father paced at shore and when they had returned they were celebrated like they had escaped mortal danger. The mortal danger is the lack of wind. In this instance it was the danger but looking at in two other ways may mean more than just the wind.

The calm of the sea can be looked at in two other aspects one “a lack of wind had once been a metaphor for subduing setting the passions and thus, a metaphor for the ideal life calmed by reason (25)”. Two “a powerful wind had to blow in the sails if the ship is to be able to hold its direction towards a goal that is in the distance but determinable (25)”. So without a powerful wind then life will not be able to keep focused on a goal, but with too much wind the passions will run wild and the ideal life will not be calmed by reason.

In conclusion the calm wind can be a metaphor for how a person lives their life. If the wind is too calm then they do not have direction but with a powerful wind there is direction. A person like a ship without direction could be dangerous.I believe that there has to be a drive in able to reach a goal. Maybe that drive can be thought of as the wind.

Blumenberg.

Blumenberg- Care Crosses the River

Throughout of reading the book of Blumenberg’s Care Crosses the River has me realized the concept of what the real and natural world is. First time of reading this book, it was little complicated to get to the point. There were in the book interesting sections such as enemies, however I loved Something Like a World Order the most out of those sections. The author, Blumenberg, points out that reality always connects to the truth from our consciousness. The world we live in is so random that give us different or similar experiences. In addition, using metaphor is significant so that we can compare our experiences because it is in relation to reality and the truth. From comparing our experiences, we could affirm our specificities and traits, in other words, we know the difference from each other.

Another section I enjoyed to read is enemies. There were two men hating each other on the ship. One was settled on the stern, and the other one was on the bow. When the ship was getting to sink, one settled on the stern was happy and could able to enjoy the moment by scoffing other about he would die later. It came to me first with little confusion to relate this to metaphor. However, I finally figured out how the author used metaphor in this situation if I wasn’t wrong. Human tends to have more happiness and satisfaction on better circumstances by comparing others. In other words, if I make 100 dollars more in a week but more working days from part-time job than my acquaintance, I would not only be proud of myself but also show off to them. However, it apparently is the same by third people’s view. I mean, we make the similar amount of money from similar job, but I make myself more proud by comparing other who has less ability. Blumenberg points out that one would rather realize how much suffering he’s been through to get better than being proud by comparing other one.

Blumenberg Response 1

I enjoyed Blumenberg’s book more than our first assignment, as I thought it was easier to follow and a lot of lines and thoughts stood out to me more while reading this. What Blumenberg really made me realize is that simple (or even complex) metaphors can express a person’s emotions in a way that stating something in plain text cannot. Sometimes I even found them easier to understand than stating something plainly. Blumenberg states on page 76 “…metaphors, however, remain informative by displacements and disfigurations that can still be added to them and that let the force of a particular individual be grasped…”. This sentence summarized what I mostly took away from reading this book. 

In “The Suspicion of Meaningless” under What is Perhaps Lost he says, “only by naming signs of deficiency does one think to know what linguistic expressions containing the element ‘meaning’ signify, as if nothing were more understandable”. He also says here that trying to provide meaning to something could produce problems, but metaphors make a lot of meanings “graspable”. I appreciated the way Blumenberg explained this.

This section relates to another section of the book later on. In “Names Prescribe Burdens and Losses” also under What is Perhaps Lost, Blumenberg says that placing names on things really affect how someone feels. For example, no one really knows what the meaning of the word “stress” is. I thought this was interesting, as it can sometimes be true. People will place blame elsewhere because they feel so “stressed out” due to life’s many responsibilities, but is it the work that makes us stressed or is it out fault for not being able to handle it properly? He then goes on to say that a researcher found stress to be nothing more than “the bundle of stimuli and demands that keep life going” and “refusing this bundle produces a generation of lethargic moochers on other generations”. I’m not sure if this description would necessarily classify as a “metaphor” but I still felt he made a good point in talking about his feelings on the word stress.

He then goes on to say a similar thing about the terms “frustration” and “midlife crisis”. Because someone gives a title to how he/she is feeling, they use it as justification to react in certain, maybe sometimes negative, ways.  Reading this particular passage in the book related to something else I just learned in the human development course I am currently taking. I learned that the word “frustration” is not literally translated in all languages. This was brought up in some discussions we had last week when talking about literature and truth. However, although it does not literally translate in other languages, it does not mean that people in other cultures do not feel this emotion. Because we, as English speakers, are able to place words to certain emotions it sometimes takes a psychological turn and makes us feel a certain way only because we think we do. (I’m not entirely sure if what I’m saying makes sense, because I’m having trouble trying to word it.)

This thought of mine relates to what we are currently discussing because although metaphors are used to emphasize a person’s point or thought, in my opinion they are not always truly reflective of life and reality due to a person placing “names” and falsely judging their own feelings. There could also be a discrepancy between feelings and words based on whether something is “meaningless” compared to if it’s given a name. If you can give something a name or title, it does not require much thought or comprehension afterwards. In this sense, names and metaphors help us understand things better in a way that does not require a lot of thinking all of the time.  

Blumenberg Response 1 - Something Like a World Order

Brad Levine

Care Crosses the River Response 1

The back of Hans Blumenberg’s Care Crosses the River describes the work as a, “collection of short meditations on various topics.” At first glance, it seems to be just a totally random assortment of overly intellectual and difficult to understand philosophical anecdotes (if that’s the correct word). However, upon further review, the book is still very complicated, but, when a particular section catches the reader’s interest, it isn’t as random. Personally, some of the sections, especially the one relating to maritime emergencies, did not make any sense to me and did not hold my interest. It wasn’t until the section about world order that I started to understand what Blumenberg might have been trying to say.

The section Something Like a World Order got me thinking about what a world order actually is. Naturally, my mind went right to the term “new world order” which, to me, implies radical changes of dictator-like proportions. After reading, I started to rethink my original definition and saw that there might not be such thing as a world order and the idea of world order is just another way to think about everyday life and the progress that goes along with it. I first thought about this when reading King Pyrrhus-Life as a Detour. On page 97 it talks about King Pyrrhus and his desire to conquer the world before he retires. Blumenberg wonders why Pyrrhus would want to do that since, “The extreme case of conquering the world seems to be a useless detour, a foolish way to attain with the greatest of difficulties something a king could have more easily than all others without this effort.” This quote made me think about the nature of life especially when it comes to wealth. A person with nothing will take all the detours they can to get money or power, but a person who has will skip the detours and go as far as they have to in order to keep and expand upon their wealth and power. So this need for a world order is not necessarily a need for something new, but a need for those in power to stay in power.

Also, the story about King Pyrrhus brought the idea of technological progress to mind. Like King Pyrrhus, we as a culture can’t seem to get enough even as the technology and scientific accomplishment continues to grow exponentially. This section Visibility also gave me this idea by talking about the world outside the Earth. To me this means that society always wants to go above and beyond what we understand in order to feel accomplished even if it means going beyond the bounds of the planet both figuratively and literally. There is so much out there and no matter what, we are always going to ask for more. Every time there is some kind of new technological or scientific breakthrough it, in a way, leads to a new world order because things are never the same and it’s only a matter of time until we as a culture look for the next big advancement. So while Blumenberg was looking for something like a world order, all he had to do was look at life to see the truth about what is a world order every day.

Enemies

Peter Martin

Blumenberg 1

6/14/11

The first passage that caught my attention in Blumenberg’s book was “Enemies.” There are two sailors on a boat, and since they hate each other so much, one stands on the stern. The other sees him there and chooses to stand on the bow. When the ship is sinking, the man on the stern asks which end will sink first. When he hears that it is the bow, despite certain death, he feels happiness knowing that his enemy will die first.

In this situation, the stern of the ship is a metaphor for being in a better or safer position than your enemy. I feel that the entire situation described by the men on the ship happens in life quite a lot. If you are in any sort of situation where you and an enemy of yours is, you are likely to put yourself in a position where no matter what happens, you will have a better outcome. This may mean that nothing bad happens, but you will leave knowing that if something had, you would have been better off. This feeling alone makes one feel superior to his enemy, even though there was no life or death outcome.

Blumenberg brings up the point that the man on the bow, and how, though all we can do is guess, he feels that the man on the stern is feeling worse than him, knowing that death is coming, but he has to wait it out longer. I think that once Blumenberg brought this up, it was to show that no one wants to be seen as losing in a situation. While yes, being the man on the bow, knowing you will die first is bad, he must think that it is worse to have to wait for death.

I think that despite the fact that the majority of the time we are not in life or death situations with our enemies, we like knowing that if anything were to happen in a situation, we would fare better than our enemy. Yes, the man on the bow will die first. But, the man on the stern will have to suffer for a longer time knowing that death will happen. While the idea of two men who each hate the other are on the two ends of a boat that is sinking is a bit unrealistic, it is not a stretch to say that people often think about how they can end up in a better situation than their enemy.

Detours

Nathaniel Haggard
Blumenberg Response 2
Due: 6/18/2011

The second passage I picked was named “Detours”. This is another passage that really stood out. The idea that detours are not just an inconvenience caused by road problems, but a representation of each individual life, every fiction, and every story is a fantastic idea.

The shortest route, one route, represented usually by an interstate, can also be a representation of a world without culture, ideas, and individuals. It would be a world of robots. Each following the most logical, fast path; a world without any thought outside of optimization and efficiency.

But a detour, usually an annoyance, is what occurs when you stray from the shortest route. Detours usually take you on a road you had not been, through a town that is quaint and off of the beaten path. Detours are representations of everything that is wonderful; every emotion, culture, and idea. Every person creates their own detour. In this way, every person gains their own experience but not everyone has the same experience. In this way, the individual and cultural identity is created.

Obviously, the idea of detours is not all good. There are disadvantages to having different experiences and opinions. This is why war and fighting happen. Different experiences and different views cause us all to be differently experienced and to have different opinions. Although this can be a great thing, this idea can also be very bad. As seen with every war, different ideas and cultures can cause untold death and destruction.

In conclusion, detours are what make life interesting and valuable. It is what separates us from robots and makes us human. I had never thought of detours quite like this before, but it is very accurate and intriguing.

Blumenberg and the Nazi Party

Nathaniel Haggard
Blumenberg Response 1
Due: 6/18/2011

This book has many great discussions and responses to different historical metaphors, anecdotes, and gestures. After reading quite a few of them, one still stood out and spoke to me; for whatever reason I was able to relate to the first passage of the book.
The first passage discusses the idea of passing down the blame. The man curses the ocean and the ocean curses the wind. In turn, the wind would curse the earth etc. It seems the moral of the story is that you should not curse that which harmed you because it may not be of their doing. This moral lesson seems right. But, when thought about, there are examples in history where this applies that may shed another light on this moral “lesson”.
The Nazi Party fits this example perfectly. The top leaders of the Nazi Party ordered for the complete annihilation of different races, those with disabilities, and those who were different. In this case, the leaders acted as the Wind. But the people who actually executed the orders, the Armies and servants of the Nazi Party, acted as the ocean. Even at their trials, their defense was that they were forced to by their leaders. Just as the ocean cursed the wind, the soldiers cursed their leaders.
So the question comes, is the wind or the ocean to blame? In my opinion, both are to blame. Just because you are forced to do something does not mean you are immune from consequence. You still have a mind and free will. There is ALWAYS a choice. In that way, the ocean and soldiers are to blame.
In conclusion, I do not think the moral here is to not judge your aggressors. In fact, I think the moral is directed at the aggressors. It illustrates how ridiculous passing the blame is. Even when forced to do something, you must take responsibility for your actions. Don’t act as the ocean.

"Something Like a World Order

Today, in order for something to be accepted as a reality, American society requires a “clear visibility” or an explanation of experienced truth. In Blumberg’s section “Something Like a World Order”, he argues human consciousness and visibility connects reality and life to truth. Therefore, the use of metaphor is important because comparing things that humans have not experience helps and enables humans to interpret all different types of interpretations of life in philosophical, scientific, or historical experiences/events. According to Blumberg, metaphors allow for “detours” to occur, which is important for the reality of existence. For example, culture consists in detours, “Finding and cultivating culture, describing culture, and recommending culture is what gives it the function of humanizing life” (Blumberg 96). Cultural detours define new inventions, new beginnings, and new life. Through this, the world is able to gain meaning and record these “described detours” in a form of literature, such as memoirs and biographies that now become interpreted into historical and humanistic realism.

The use of metaphors in relation to life and reality gave humanity its character throughout evolution and time. For example, Schopenhauer explains the solar system as an unconscious space of mass nothingness. However, metaphoric language created interpretation to truth and explanations to interpret the meaning of life’s evolution. I agree that metaphoric language is used to explain conditions that deviate from human reality. Metaphors aid human minds to adapt to conditions that might stray away from questionable realities. The interpretation of language gives existence to things that lack subject. As Blumberg argues, “Humans are creatures in need of consolation” (Blumberg 106). Without ideas that control and preserve humanity and its reality, how can anyone interpret questions related to existence or life?

Response

The Instant of my death

Through out of reading the book of My Instant Death/Demeure by Maurice Blanchot & Jacques Derrida, It was little hard for me to get the concept of the book. However, I couldn’t give up on reading continuously to get what the writer points out. At the first time I saw the title of the book, I thought that the author used a word of death as physically ends; however, the author described the word as not only physical death but also emotional one. Emotional one could be more comprehended in philosophic idea.

It is hard for everyone to compare a book to another book, or criticize others based on your own thought. What can be fiction or non-fiction? I want to share my idea of them as long as I understood the book. Fiction is what we can make or create. We create everything imaginably as we want. But this might contains our knowledge or literatures. In compare, non-fiction is more like based on our experiences, truth and“testimony”; the author stated in the book that there is no testimony that does not structurally imply in itself the possibility of fiction.

Fiction as Truth

Part 1: Fiction and Truth
When I first read “The Instant of my Death” I missed the relationship of the narrative to the topic at hand. It wasn’t until I read Derrida’s analysis of Blanchot’s piece that I realized that there were many aspects of Blanchot’s writing that could be interpreted as fiction, or possibly a veiled truth. Derrida eases us in by discussing the concept of mistranslations. He then discusses, in detail, the approach that should be used to distinguish a narrative or a testimony from fact or fiction. He begins by starting with the title and proceeds to analyze the first segment of Blanchot’s writing. For example, he states that allusion to “total insofar as fragmentary death” indicates that we are “in literature” and signals it is a testimony of sorts (45). He continues on, paragraph by paragraph, tackling each line and explaining the implications of the wording in regards to the “truth vs. fiction” agenda. Derrida’s analysis really helped me to understand Blanchot’s narrative and many of his seemingly contradictory lines. It seemed as though his “autobiography” was laced with a lot of fiction, and had a hidden agenda of cloaking the truth with a work of fiction. It also seemed as though there were two primary approaches that Derrida was taking in his analysis of Blanchot’s work. One was simply looking at grammar and sentence structure or word arrangement. For example, on pg 53 he quotes Blanchot and follows up by saying “self-reference of the ‘I’…the narrator is engaging in an act of memory” (pg 53). He explains that by changing from first to third person, there is a different interpretation because of the division of the subject. The other approach is looking at somewhat contradictory or nonsensical statements, and analyzing them so that they do make sense (if we accept a portion of it as truth and a portion as fiction.) An example of this is on pg 47 with the discussion of the “impossible necessary death” and “unexperienced experience,” as well as pg 96 when he discusses Blanchot’s final line “I am alive. No you are dead.”

Part 2: What I got out of the reading
I felt that Derrida spent a lot of time training us to distinguish truth from fiction. This is especially evident in the “I am speaking French” segment and his general analysis of Blanchot, where he analyzes the possibilities of the narrative being a testimonial. However, the overall mindset, to me, seems to be that literature can be both truth and fiction; it just depends on the reader’s take of whether it is false or can be accepted as truth.

When I first started reading this book, I thought Derrida was simply discussing the effects of mistranslation. Derrida begins his account by discussing how the word “Dichtung” can easily be mistranslated into fiction, or perhaps another word. It initially almost seemed like a critique of translations, until we reach the discussion of “passion” where he provides 7 different versions of what passion implies. He concludes by saying “literature depends on reading and the right conferred on it by an experience of reading” (29). It almost seems as though what we understand or accept from reading is a result of our own experiences. And our experiences determine our ability, not just to distinguish fact from truth, but to also accept this division within all works. After Derrida’s discussion, I felt like the overall lesson of the book is that there are different implications to each phrase and statement. It is up to the reader to select the correct implication and determine fiction from truth.