In class, we recently read The Book by Alan Watts, which serves to clear the misunderstandings of the human identity. He is distinguished as a famous British writer and speaker, who focuses on the interpretation of Eastern philosophy for his Western spectators. Additionally, we watched the movie, Mindwalk, directed by Bernt Amadeus Capra. His brother, Fritjof Capra, is known to be a renowned Austrian physicist who conducted research on the system’s theory, which contributed to the overall screenplay. In this film, the political and social problems that conflict with science are presented. Both works are similar in that they assert the concept of interconnectedness and dependency, which most individuals tend to ignore, bring forth the negative …show more content…
Hence, it is a fact that we are part of “one inseparable web of relationships.” This explains why the systems theory is about seeing concepts as a whole through interconnectedness and interdependence, not only one piece. In regards to this, John enforces that “No man is an island, entire of itself. Every man is a piece of the continent.” Such a concept is resembled if we observe a tree 's relationship to the whole entire forest. As for dependency, it is acknowledged that a particle cannot exist without space around it. This is quite similar to how is there isn’t on without an off or an up without a down. Likewise, in The Book, it is explored that one’s self doesn’t reside alone, but is involved with “the whole surge of energy which ranges from the galaxies to the nuclear fields in [the] body (15).” Nevertheless, it is asserted that the human mind wants to ignore the simple factor of interdependence among all things and events because we from the beginning of time have been taught to focus upon only ourselves. In Mindwalk, it is upheld that “The individual in the human body was supposed to feel small...dwarfed, denied all independent existence (47) .” Every being is known to be an expression of the work of nature, simply a special action of the whole entire universe. Yet, we feel that we are different from nature and have the means to conquer it. We come out of this world not out of it, which is quite similar to the leaves branching from a tree. Therefore, “As the ocean “waves”, the universe “peoples (13) .’” However, individuals hardly realize this let alone experience it. Unfortunately, “Even those who know it to be true in theory do not sense or feel it, but continue to be aware of themselves as isolated "egos" inside bags of skin (13).” Throughout The Book, it is constantly restated that we want to
In order to demonstrate the detrimental impact of societal institutions such as the mental hospital and the federal government on their subordinates, Ken Kesey captures the patients’ endeavor to become whole again as they temporarily escape the Combine’s clutches within his novel One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest. At the beginning of Part 3, it appears Nurse Ratchet’s regime is nearly toppled and that the machinery has lost its control. In fact, McMurphy even draws “[laughs] out of some Acute who’d been scared to grin since he was twelve” and forms a basketball team for the inmates (175). Moreover, Chief Bromden speaks for the first time in years and achieves an erection after his pivotal conversation. Clearly, Kesey indicates the decline of the matriarchy and as a result, portrays the patients as regaining their masculinity.
Both texts share the common theme of influential
In both dystopian novels they prove their points on how their society is different in relationship but the same in the concept of equality. Both are different by relationship but the same in equality and each society discovers the way of individualism. In our future everyone should believe individualism will be applied to our daily lives and the government will remove
These novels can be analyzed using the Marxist lens, since both works deal with commodification,
Equality was a creator his mind had driven him to science he had his own mind, his own strength, and his own courage he was independent, he was brighter than the rest. Standing alone in a modern world ruled by the suppressed government he faced the world alone. In a world where being intellectual was a severe sin he possessed gifts unlike no other that were despised by the government: intellectual and psychological strength. In a world where free will was not allowed and any form of diversity was punished by the authorities. Here we find Equality on a path of self-discovery and independence.
Karen Armstrong and Robert Thurman wrote their essays, “Homo religiosus” and “Wisdom”, respectively, describing two words, “being” and “void”. These words, although have opposite meanings, describe the same spiritual experience that come about through different means. By definition, “being” is a kind of fullness or completeness of existence and “void” is emptiness or a negation of existence. Armstrong believes that “being” is the equivalent of the Buddhist’s “Nirvana” while Thurman believes that “void” is the equivalent of the Buddhist’s “Nirvana”. Although these terms seem to be opposite in the literal sense of defining them, they lead to the same outcome: not being at the center of one’s own universe.
Our personal identities are established by our connections with these physical environments, which reveal both who we are as individuals and how we interact with various aspects of the physical world. This has repercussions for our personal choices and how we view our moral responsibilities to the world. That brings the question "How do we relate to the world around us?” up for discussion. Many diverse philosophers, including
Though the content might be different, the theme of these two pieces of literature are the same. The theme being that change does not come without sacrifice.
Conclusion: The mind is substantively different from the body and indeed matter in general. Because in this conception the mind is substantively distinct from the body it becomes plausible for us to doubt the intuitive connection between mind and body. Indeed there are many aspects of the external world that do not appear to have minds and yet appear none the less real in spite of this for example mountains, sticks or lamps, given this we can begin to rationalize that perhaps minds can exist without bodies, and we only lack the capacity to perceive them.
Both works examine the importance of power
The themes of both books are both knowledge is power. Both of the settings are around the same time period and they are dystopias. Finally, the characters of the two stories are both lifeless wives and the main characters are against the society. This shows how the two stories are similar by themes, settings, and
Thus, the Other and oneself “must learn to find the communication of consciousnesses in a single world [..] gathered together in a single world in which we all participate as anonymous subjects of perception” (Merleau-Ponty, 2013, pp 369). Meaning that one 's experience of the Other s intrinsically related to the Individual 's own experience and existence. Moreover, for Merleau-Ponty, there are three main characteristics which demonstrate the relation between the Individual and the
Both pieces of literature have messages of enlightenment, but each piece focuses on a specific
Firstly, it is like-minded with knowledge of humans and brains. Secondly, it accounts for the close relation we think there is between mind and body. When we talk about how a person thinks or believes, we are talking about how a human behaves. Thirdly, it is a monistic theory removing mental substance, which makes it an acceptable theory for materialists.
In his philosophical thesis, of the ‘Mind-Body dualism’ Rene Descartes argues that the mind and the body are really distinct, one of the most deepest and long lasting legacies. Perhaps the strongest argument that Descartes gives for his claim is that the non extended thinking thing like the Mind cannot exist without the extended non thinking thing like the Body. Since they both are substances, and are completely different from each other. This paper will present his thesis in detail and also how his claim is critiqued by two of his successors concluding with a personal stand.