Sense of Self

In life images are all around us. Everywhere we look; magazines, TV, movies, billboards, the internet, we are bombarded with images, images that try to tell us how to look, act, and feel. These images portray what the companies who put them out believe is perfection. This “perfection” however, is for most, an unattainable goal. When people see the images of perfection that are thrown at us every day they begin to think that the way they are is not good enough; so they buy products the supposedly will make them “perfect” only to find out that there is a different aspect of themselves that can be better. No matter how much they do to achieve the image of perfection there will always be a new image just down the road that they don’t fit and must try to achieve.
One perfect example of perfection that everyone has at one time or another experienced can be found in the simple childhood fairytale of Cinderella. Everyone knows the story but how often do we look at some of the subtle messages it sends to young impressionable minds when they first hear it. Both stepsisters for example, are described as having “beautiful and fair features” even though they are wicked at heart. When the king holds a festival to find his son a wife he asks that all the “beautiful young girls” attend. What about the girls who aren’t “beautiful”? Are they not worthy of being princesses because they don’t look as pretty as the others? This sends a terrible message to kids at a young age that above all else in life you must be “beautiful”; if you are not then you are not as good as everyone else.
While most of the images we see each day are marketing images that do nothing but destroy our sense of self, I do believe that there are images in our lives that do the opposite. Parents and role models are excellent images that show those who look up to them how to act and teach them that what really matters is what is inside a person.
While writing this blog, I couldn’t help but notice an image I see every day; the famous picture of Muhammad Ali standing over Sonny Liston after knocking him out in the first minuet of the first round of a fight that sits above my computer. This image doesn’t make me feel like I must be a famous athlete or be in incredible shape to feel worth in my life but instead reminds me that by accepting myself for who I am and by working hard I can accomplish anything I set my mind to.

Different groups of people can have a big impact on the way on I speak. When I am with friends and people my age my vocabulary generally includes many slang terms and informal language. I also find that when I converse with my friends anything that anyone says is turned into a joke of some type. Not only do I use different words among my friends but my tone, pitch, and mannerisms change. I find that I speak louder and with more a little more energy. Around most adults and people in authoritative positions I find that my manner of speaking is much more reserved. I don’t say any slang terms and find that I tend to be more reserved. I only say I speak like this around most adults because there are a few adults and parents whom I have know for a very long time and who I feel comfortable enough with to speak to like a close friend. These adults are few though and I don’t use quite the same language as I do with my close friends. I believe that one of the main reasons I speak differently around different groups of people is because I am a little shy when I first meet someone and am therefore somewhat reserved. After I get to know a person though, and become more comfortable with them I loosen up and my speech relaxes.
Though I do speak differently when I am among different groups of people I do not believe that one of the ways I speak is more genuinely me than the other. I feel instead that certain aspects of my personality are exhibited by my speech and mannerisms depending on the situation I am in. I believe that there are always times when people are not completely sincere in the way they speak and present themselves to others and I am no exception but I do believe that this does not occur frequently.

Thinking of a person’s unusual behavior as an illness or as possession by a spiritual being have been effective metaphors in their respective times. The possession metaphor which was most widely used in times before much was known about illness and disease and when churches dominated everyday life. This metaphor though, implies that the person who exhibits unusual behavior can blame know one other than themselves for their strange behavior. Because the Church was so involved in people’s lives they thought that the only explanation for odd behavior could be that an individual lived their life in a sinful way or neglected God in their life and that their strange actions are nothing more than God’s punishment. Following this belief, a possessed person should then be able to get better by praying for forgiveness and abandoning their sinful ways.
The illness metaphor, on the other hand, implies that people are not responsible for their actions. Strange behavior is caused by some type of sickness or mental disorder and the only way to get better is through medical treatment. While praying and generally believing that they will get better may help affected individuals recover, it does not guarantee a return to normal mental health.

These two metaphors do have consequences for inflicted individuals. Under the illness metaphor a person is treated with more kindness and sympathy because others see the condition as something nothing can be done about. If they do recover then those around them are happy because they overcame the disease. Under the possession metaphor however, we may not feel as sorry for troubled persons because they brought their strange behavior on themselves. Those close to the possessed person might want them to get well but if they don’t it is only because they don’t pray enough of stop their sinful ways.

I believe that Ian Hacking would agree with the writer of “A True and Most Dreadful Discourse”. As Hacking explains, most people who suffer multiple personality disorders were sexually abused as young children. He further explains that linking the problem, multiple personalities, to the cause, sexual abuse, has also given people a way to invent themselves, “I am pursuing a far more profound concern, namely, the way in which the very idea of the cause was forged. Once we have that idea, we have a very powerful tool for making up people, or, indeed, for making up ourselves”. If people are able to invent themselves or perhaps other personalities for themselves then the illness metaphor cannot be correct. Something is not a disease if the person suffering from it created it in the first place.

Metaphors in Action: Assignment 3

I do believe that Bush’s way of thinking of the human mind did stimulate new technological advances. Bush describes the mind as a web. Doug Engelbart took this web metaphor and applied it to his invention of the desktop and mouse. Engelbart turned the computer into a web like the mind and his inventions were a way to navigate around the web.
There are many differences between thinking of the human mind as a web and as a storage room. The storage room metaphor makes the mind seem like a very non-interactive entity. Impressions are made on human’s senses and our brain perceives these impressions in certain ways. These perceptions are then tucked away in our brains until they are needed again. If they are not needed, they simply waist away until they are completely forgotten. What the storage room metaphor hides and what the web metaphor highlights is the interactive ability of the human mind. The mind, when it perceives things may store them for future use but it also takes what it perceives and then connects these new perceptions to old ones to create more new ideas and perceptions.
I do believe that by switching from talking about “sense impressions” to “sense data” we have switched from thinking about minds as printing presses to thinking about minds as computers. The implications of this switch are that human’s minds become interactive. Before, humans simply store information and perceptions that they receive in their memories until they are needed in the future. Once this switch is made though, the mind becomes something that can sort through the ideas that are stored in our brains and pair them with other ideas and perceptions in order to make sense of everything that humans keep in their mind. As Bush explains, the mind “operates by association. With one item in its grasp, it snaps instantly to the next that is suggested by the association of thoughts, in accordance with some intricate web of trails carried by the cells of the brain.”
In “How the Human Mind Works” there are a number of metaphors for the mind including the mind is a washing machine and moods are scratched music. These metaphors do not have consequences for actions. This section also offers the metaphor that hysteria is an illness and is caused by some traumatic event. The only way to cure this illness is to take people suffering from hysteria back to the mental state they were in when the tragic event happened and try to correct the problem that occurred then. This metaphor could suggest that people are not responsible for they things they do in hysterical states.

When President Carter applied the drug metaphor to the energy crisis he only provided the nation with a plan to temporarily relieve the energy crisis instead of fixing the problem. Carter’s plan was to secure more of what Amory Lovins called “hard energy” resources. These resources, while beneficial at first, would soon run out and America would again need to conduct another “war” to secure more resources. The way to fix the energy crisis according to Lovins is to use energy that is renewable and not harmful to our earth.
Applying the war metaphor to America’s drug problem does not offer a way to deal with that problem. The effects of describing America’s drug problem with such a metaphor are much like those when the metaphor was applied to the energy crisis. Under the war metaphor the solution to America’s drug problem is to simply throw drug abusers in prison as a punishment for their crime. While in prison, users receive no rehabilitation or treatment and in turn no cure for their problems. The methods of a war on drugs traps drug abusers in a cycle of use, prison time, more use, and more prison time. Throwing drug abusers in jails and prisons is the drug problem’s “hard” solution. California’s Proposition 36 and similar programs are the problem’s “soft” solution and are not part of a “war” on drugs but an attempt to fix the problem. Prop. 36 actually tries to help drug abusers get better, stop their addictions, and return them to the families who love and need them.

Assignment 2

Anger is a common human emotion. While most try to avoid becoming angry, it is inevitable that this feeling sometimes creeps into our thoughts and actions. When speaking about anger a common metaphor used is that of anger being the same as dynamite or explosion. This metaphor casts anger as a feeling that is sudden, strong, and harmful. When a bomb explodes, there is much damage to anything that is close to the bomb. Similarly when anger strikes those near it or who it is directed at suffer emotional or even physical damage quickly. The metaphor of anger being equal to an explosion highlights how anger can be quick and devastating but does not last long. When looked at in this way, anger happens quickly and once it is expressed it subsides. A perfect example of anger coming in quick short bursts is when watching a sporting event. If the team you support performs poorly or there is a bad call made, you get angry immediately after the play but soon calm down as the game continues. This metaphor also suggests that whenever one feels anger, it must be expressed outwardly.
The explosion metaphor of anger does not however highlight how anger can sometimes build up inside of a person. Small things that bother people and occur frequently can little by little build up anger inside of a person. Such things could take days, months, even years before one is truly angered by them. This metaphor for anger also hides the fact that anger does not necessarily have to be expressed. In many cases people may be angry at a situation yet keep their feelings to themselves.
In Blake’s poem “A Poison Tree” anger is a plant or tree like the title suggests that grows inside of him. The less attention that is paid to the anger, the stronger it becomes. This metaphor highlights how anger, when we let keep it to ourselves strengthens and grows until we can no longer contain it. When we finally do let it go, it can have dangerous repercussions. This metaphor for anger can be used in common language. One might say “he grew angry” or “the anger swelled up inside of them”.

Assignment 1

Socrates believes that writing hurts humans by making them dependant on written words to remember things. The written words will serve as their memory. This will cause humans to be “hearers of many things and will have learned nothing”. Jack Goody does not agree with Socrates views about writing. Goody believes that is a technology that helps people gain more knowledge. Goody believes that writing “permits the accumulation of knowledge in a way that is inconceivable in a society where virtually everything has to be stored in the human memory” (Goody 141).
If you see writing as a technology then you would have to redefine the word technology as anything that advances the quality or standard of life for societies as well as individuals. I would agree that the definition of technology should be expanded to include writing and other forms of thinking.