Announcements

Due Monday October 12 at 9am

For this exercise, you will turn in a well formulated thesis  based on your brainstorming exercise.

Evaluate your thesis to make sure it:

  1. Your thesis should make an arguable claim. [Meaning: Make sure your thesis statement is not just an announcement of a subject or theme or a general evaluative statement (i.e. This text is a good example of Rousseau.)]

2. It should give me a sense of a roadmap of the argument.

3.  It should be specific in its scope (i.e.  you’re not writing about all of education).

4.  It should answer the question/follow the assignment.  The paper for this assignment is to put one of the theory texts and literary texts in conversation with each other.  This means you should essentially be able to answer two questions with your thesis:  How does some aspect of X person’s theory help us read or think through some part of Y person’s literature? AND  vise versa How does some part of Y person’s literature speak back to some aspect of X person’s theory?Go back to your brainstorming activity.

5. Your thesis statement should be grammatically correct.

6. It should identify specific parts of the theory text and the literary texts you’re focusing on.

 

 

Announcements

Thesis (in class exercise)

Books vs Experience

Our philosophy of education and school privileges ______________ over blank _____________ because________________________________.

  1. Your group should come up with a thesis that can address the blanks in the above statement.
  2. Your thesis statement should be supported by evidence from the readings we have read thus far.
  3. Remember you are expressing your group’s thesis.  You are not expressing the thesis of any author.  You are not telling me what Descartes will say.
  4. However you may use Descartes or Emerson or Shelly as offering good examples, theories, or points of logic.
  5. Hint: a good use of the texts will be comparatively.  If you see a logic unfolding across, or something that they all overlook, it will help you to build a case.
Peer Response Post

“Time shall teach him, that the scholar loses no hour which the man lives”

This is a response to Ariane’s post.

I agree with your understanding of Emerson’s speech, “The Ameerican Scholar.” I believe he tried to convey that a scholar is not someone who sits and reads books but rather goes out into the world and experiences. A scholar is a scholar because he uses the foresight and ability to create rather than just dream. He talks about an “active soul” saying that every man is entitled to it and that this gives the individual the ability to see the truth.

As you mentioned, books are still a positive. They offer knowledge on many things such as history and the past.

I believe the reason why Emerson strays away from books in his speech is because he mentions that a genius is one who looks to the future and creates his own experiences to learn from, thus discrediting books about the past. Thinkers create the future instead of analyzing the past.

Action is the source of all creation. One cannot see truth without action since they don’t have experiences to reflect upon. They cannot be men without action. This is why one needs to learn from experience according to Emerson, which is also stressed by Rousseau as you have nicely mentioned. This is why books are simply not enough.

Last thought- “Life is our dictionary. Years are well spent in country labors; in town, — in the insight into trades and manufactures; in frank intercourse with many men and women; in science; in art; to the one end of mastering in all their facts a language by which to illustrate and embody our perceptions. I learn immediately from any speaker how much he has already lived, through the poverty or the splendor of his speech. Life lies behind us as the quarry from whence we get tiles and copestones for the masonry of to-day. This is the way to learn grammar. Colleges and books only copy the language which the field and the work-yard made..” This quote bothered me for hours. What does it mean life is our dictionary? And now I finally understand it. I believe this isn’t literal, that books aren’t a source of definition and clarity. But rather I think what he means here is that life and its experiences through ones actions are a better means of education and growth than those of a book. A book cannot dictate or define what happened in a moment in time better than one who witnessed it first hand. Therefore, life is a dictionary and each person has their own. The more you have in your dictionary the wiser you are and the knowledge in ones dictionary is a result of ones actions.

Peer Response Post

Peer response

This is a response to Mohammed Uddin’s post, Emerson’s Views.

Emerson spends two paragraphs talking about the influence of nature on teaching a scholar.

I can see how Emerson’s evaluation on nature mirror Rousseau’s. Rousseau believes that a child should follow the natural pattern of learning. Emerson considers nature one of the most influential forms of teaching.

In addition, I also find the connection between Emerson and Locke like you mentioned. Emerson says “Every day, men and women, conversing, beholding and beholden. The scholar is he of all men whom this spectacle most engages” (par. 8). The role nature plays here is the same as Locke’s concept that all ideas come from sensation and reflection.

Emerson continues, “But what is classification but the perceiving that these objects are not chaotic, and are not foreign, but have a law which is also a law of the human mind?” (par.8). He views that human mind is the opposite of chaotic, infinite and foreign. Instead, we analyze facts and classify them into categories to see similarities and differences. I find this resonates with Descartes’ theory of deductive reasoning. Descartes believes that “by commencing with objects the simplest and easiest to know, I might ascend by little and little, and, as it were, step by step, to the knowledge of the more complex;” (pt.2, par.9). He suggests that knowledge is built on a simple and sturdy foundation.

Close Reading Post, Uncategorized

“good finger, a neck, a stomach” (Close Reading Post)

For Mary Shelley, the monstrous would be defined as something that is out of the ordinary, or out of place. Frankenstein, was a man that was made of dead flesh and rotting bones. Compared to a normal human being, the monster in Frankenstein was a beast of nature stronger in size and bigger than the average man. Here a monster is considered that which is different from the rest. This monster did not fit into this society which had a heavy reliance on physique rather than intellect (which could indirectly represent Mary Shelley in a society where a woman with her ideas would be consider out of place).

In “The American Scholar,” the speaker would consider a monster, he who cannot  do more than one task. For the speaker,  a MAN is he who can do every occupation : “Man is not a farmer, or a professor, or an engineer, but he is all. Man is priest, and scholar, and statesman, and producer, and soldier.” I believe the speaker is trying to say that anyone who believes that he can only do one task, or one role in society is a monster because in his eyes we essentially become objects or as he explains it:

” The state of society is one in which the members have suffered amputation from the trunk, and strut about so many walking monsters, — a good finger, a neck, a stomach, an elbow, but never a man.Man is thus metamorphosed into a thing,…”

What these both scholars have in common is that they believe in the idea that man is the ideal form,  For example, in Frankenstein, the monster is seen as monstrous because if he were compared physically to a human he would be seen as different. Similarly, the speaker in “The American Scholar” believes a monster is when man is metamorphosed into a thing, an object. In both of these examples, the scholars are choosing to portray a human being with a different physical form.

From these different descriptions, we can conclude that in the early 19th century philosophers believed the ideal Man was he who could think for himself and see beyond and be “Man Thinking.” I take this as meaning that he cannot be limited to as what his thoughts may be.  And yet, from Mary Shelley’s writings, we can infer that the idea of someone or something being monstrous was met if you did not fit into society. For example, Mary Shelley was a well educated women who spoke freely about what she believed; because of this it is possible that she may have been seen as abnormal or maybe even monstrous just because she was in a different category from which women were intended to be in at the time.

Free post

A never ending circle

Emerson had some very interesting ideas. There were a few that stood out. I analyzed them as to what I thought Emerson meant.

“Every day,the sun; and, after sunset, night and her stars. Ever the winds blow; ever the grass grows. Everyday, men and women conversing, beholding and beholden. The scholar is he of all men whom this spectacle most engages. He must settle his value in his mind. What is nature to him? There is never a beginning, there is never an end, to the inexplicable continuity of this web of god, but always circular power returning into itself.”(pg1)

I found this quote to be very true. Different things happen everyday. The wind blows and pushes the hat off your head. There is something beyond us. It’s all a spectacle, “life is a play and we are all just characters in it”. (Shakespeare)  He is saying that everything just continues, it’s infinite.  All living things are born to die to be born again. We are the universe experiencing itself.  Man himself is nature so he has to think about his place in nature. Just how nature grows, man grows as well.  Man will forever be growing.

“The next great influence into the spirit of the scholar,is, the mind of the past,…The scholar of the first age received into him the world around… gave it the new arrangement of his own mind, and uttered it again. It came into him, life; it went out from him truth. It came to him, short-lived actions; it went out from him, immortal thoughts…It now endures, it now flies, it now inspires.” (pg3)

Therefore stuff that has been said before, that they read and learned is influencing their own way of thinking. You know what has influenced by how important it seems to be to that person. Mary Shelley read a poem before she wrote Frankenstein. “Alone- alone-all-all-alone. Upon the wide , wide sea – And god will not take pity on My soul in agony!” (Frankenstein,  xiii) It made quite an impression on her that it stuck while writing Frankenstein.  With all the incidents in her life she was able to relate to the poem. She came to know it and then believe it. It’s how she truly felt because most of her books were about loneliness. People have beliefs because of their experiences. So whatever happens to them it shapes and molds their opinions to become their truth. Everyone has their own truths and inspirations.

Uncategorized, Weekly Post Check-In

Man vs. Monster

1 Comment

It seems that Emerson’s idea of the perfect man is someone who is well rounded, and not limited to any specific function within society.  He complains that, “the state of society is one in which the members have suffered amputation from the trunk” and seems to be highlighting how men are divided by occupation. This heavily reflects Descartes’ views on education, and the necessity of making sure people are educated outside of what is immediately accessible to them.  He is critical of close mindedness, and praises travel, experience, and the “book of the world”.  Descartes criticizes the thoughts of “those whose experience has been limited to their own country” (Part I), and in Emerson’s case, he criticizes the thoughts of men who are limited by their occupation or bureaucratic duties. Rousseau also talks about how vital a balanced education is, and how one form of schooling is useless without some contribution from another (the school of nature, man, etc). Again, this can be linked to Emerson and his perception of the “incomplete man”.

It seems that a common link among many 19th century writers is this almost post renaissance evaluation of man, and the idea of the perfect human. The century was soaked in fascinations with eugenics, race, and classification of individuals, whilst also having a idealistic grand view of mankind, promoting the ability of all men to be able to achieve and obtain happiness. Among the philosophers whose works we’ve been reading and discussing, it seems the perfect man is free-thinking, not limited by the thoughts and opinions of others, and separate from “the herd” (Emerson).

Free post

Ralph

1 Comment

 

The relationship between books and school for Ralph Emerson is interesting because he does have respect for books and the knowledge that can be attained from it through study.  But he is  against relying on books, specifically religious doctrines. He during his speech at Harvard university spoke on the idea of nature and the importance of humans to directly interact with it, not live based on only christian doctrines, that he felt was traditional and a limited way of using our mind. Descartes journey was similar to Ralph Emerson story because both did get educated, Descartes went to high level of school and Ralph was in a ministry in Boston, both got there educations but left to go in search for there own truth, both had a internal quest to find answers there educational systems did not provide for them.  There was a natural desire for truth which ties in Rousseau story of Emilie  because he does believe books or education is important but it has to be introduced only when the child is able to take in information critically with no ones influence on them.  Both touch on the idea of thinking for ones self or free thinking and coming to knowledge through your own trial and error which ties in John Locke idea that we learn trough our own experiences and associations with them.

 

 

 

Close Reading Post, Weekly Post-Check-In #3

Reading ≠ Learning

1 Comment

Books are the learning from the past to prevent mistakes. On the other hand, books can prevent you from thinking individually and exploring new thought. According to “The American Scholar”, Emerson thinks that “books are the best type of the influence of the past, and perhaps we shall get at the truth, — learn the amount of this influence more conveniently, — by considering their value alone” (Emerson 10). Emerson means that books are great instrument to study to past; however, when artists create literature, they inevitably put in their opinion or personal thought biased by the social standard of the time. That is, if ten writers write about a same subject, there will be ten different version of the same topic. Emerson later emphasizes that “neither can any artist entirely exclude the conventional, the local, the perishable from his book, or write a book of pure thought” (Emerson 12). He points out that no writer can completely be objective to the topic when he is writing because it is too difficult to set aside his opinion or judgement entirely. However, when you read too much of what other people think in the past, you restrict yourself from thinking outside of the box because there is a standard or an assumption of what is wrong or right based on the learning of the past. However, if reading is done correctly; that is, to consume only its value, can be beneficial and indispensable. For example, in the text, Emerson states that “history and exact science he must learn by laborious reading” (Emerson 20). He points out that certain kind of certain kind of knowledge must be attain from reading. Emerson also claims that school is essential only if it give us opportunities to create our own thought, and not to foster memorization of the plain text. An independent mind can read critically to pick up the learning message without unconscious biases, thus to create individual understandings.

Emerson’s idea of how people shouldn’t overly rely on what people have to say in the books (books as the reflection of the society at the time) is a reflection of Descartes’s philosophy. Descartes believes books and school creates “doubts and errors” because he realizes books and school cannot take him any further in his education career. Emerson, like Descartes, also thinks that education is not a blind belief of tradition, texts, and authorities. Emerson claims that “[Colleges] can only highly serve us, when they aim not to drill, but to create” (Emerson 20). In Emerson’s point of view, school is a place to create new thinking. On the same hand, Emerson’s philosophy remarks Rousseau’s idea in a similar way. Rousseau believes books are less of a factor when raising his pupil. He points out in his book that “they [books] only teach us to talk about thing we know nothing about”(Rousseau, 20). Rousseau believes nature is more essential to the development of man than the education on paper. In addition, both Emerson and Locke believe that school and books can be a tool for education but they aren’t the only way. Education is based on experience from reflection and sensation. People learn from their experience, what they see and what they do. Likewise, Emerson has similar thought that  “thinking is the function. Living is the functionary”(Emerson 28). For him, thinking is education, education is life.

 

Peer Response Post

Peer Response

1 Comment

This is my response to Jessica Lin’s post.

I agree with the fact that society in general puts a lot of emphasis on the reliance of facts, theories, and history that have come to shape the modern world rather than observing nature. As such we do indeed live in a world wherein most people tend to base factuality on books and primary sources of information instead of looking at the bigger picture, which is for all of us to think and decide on things for ourselves. To exemplify this, I believe Jessica’s quote from “The American Scholar” by Ralph Waldo Emerson was spot on where she states, “The hour is too precious to be wasted in other men’s transcripts of their readings” (5). The significance of this quote is the fact that it indicates the importance of formulating one’s own ideas and opinions rather than just naively taking into account what a person said or stated. As such, the very essence of our thoughts should in fact be in nature and that books should be utilized to just inspire us, not control us

A Blogs@Baruch site