A Twist In The Tale: April 2017

Faith - A Reliable Way of Knowing?

11:15

Faith can be defined as having complete confidence and trust in a person or phenomena. This is a way of knowing unique to individuals as it is based solely on their personal experiences in life. Something else that has been commonly observed is the lack of evidence that is presented with faith. On the surface level, we may deem it irrational or unreliable based on the current knowledge of faith that we have. If we cannot prove that something is true, how can we believe in it? How are we able to put our blind faith into instances that have no feasible explanations. Furthermore, for some people, their faith ; no matter religious or non religious is all they have. They often use this as a crutch to move forward. Unfortunately, the problem with this is that faith can indeed cloud your ability to think in an unbiased manner. When there is no room left for reason, faith becomes an unreliable way of knowing. It implies hoping for something without evidence. Knowledge, is more or less based on facts and truths that can be proved. Also, having faith in something that clearly contradicts proven facts can only lead to ignorance and denial. This is a clear hindrance in the acquisition of knowledge. On the other hand, the pursuit of knowledge without faith may lead to dead ends. Not believing in something, or rather hoping in it may curb you from working at the best of your abilities ; but at the same time leaving all to faith can be a dangerous decision. Hence the validity of faith as a reliable way of knowing is questionable.

Firstly, let us look at it through the perspective of religious knowledge systems. Religion as a whole is completely based on the notion of faith itself. Religions cannot be kept alive for generations and generations if there is a lack of a consistent practice that includes a faithful devotion to one's creator, but isn't this exactly what we have previously questioned? If religion is an occurrence that feeds off of believers who trust the unproved , isn't it supposed to be considered illogical and groundless?Should religion be taken seriously? Of course it does. Based on the teachings that one receives, religion plays an avid role in distinguishing between what is right and wrong as well as in instilling core values that are to be carried along for a lifetime. That is why it is important to study religion, so if the world was void of a concept of faith, there would be no religion. It is important to note though that faith in itself is not the same as religion. In fact, faith can be in anything, not just religion. But religious knowledge systems are successful in giving us an insight into human mindsets.

Now looking at it from the point of Natural Sciences, which is heavily dependent on physical proof and evidence, one might say that faith has nothing to do with it. But a scientist must have faith in his methods and faith in his ideas for there to be progress. This concept is almost like a double edged sword. Too little faith, you have a pessimistic outlook on life and believe in less than you ought to. Too much and then you cloud you clear think and often become ignorant. The sciences are heavily dependent on reason and proof and this is obtainable with faith as well. Some scientists are religious because thy say that religion is some way or the other is helpful in piecing together questions that we might have about the universe and its existence.

A real life situation that includes both the natural sciences and religious knowledge systems is the relationship that the Jehovah's Witness has with blood transfusions. A blood transfusion in life or death situations can be of tremendous help and can ultimately save a persons life. Jehovah's Witness believes that their faith is of higher power than using blood to treat diseases. From a scientific point of view, there is little possibility that a body is able to sustain itself without a blood transfusion when it is desperately required. If someone dies, we question faith as a reliable way of knowing and we also question its ethical nature.

Therefore, because of the lack of proper proof, I would say that faith is not the most reliable way of knowing in comparison to others.

Art and its Value

11:14

What is art and what is its value?

Ultimately, art is a matter of subjectivity. But at the same time, some things are more suitably associated with the prescribed idea of what art is supposed to be, than others. I would explain to a Martian that art is a universally accepted concept that consists of creating something that provokes a reaction, whether it may be a physical one or a change on an outlook of a concept. Art is created by those who have a particular intention in mind. It could be a question to society, or even a movement that they want to bring to light. It must have a reason for existing in the world. Secondly, there must be some technically thought out aspect of the entire thing, meaning even if it is not "beautiful" it must be created the way it is for a reason. Thirdly, it must invoke a reaction from those who are to come in contact with it. On the other hand, non-art would be something purely functional with minimal aesthetic value. What is art and not art is deeply affected by the way in which we look at them. If we view something out of our everyday lives as art, then we push ourselves to find things of deeper interest than what we just see on the surface.

The idea of aesthetic pleasure is clearly evident in human psyche. We have an intense and natural urge to look at things that are pleasing to the eye. The arts indeed, definitely have value as they are often original ideas that stem from deep thought and contemplation about certain ideas that people want to bring up and more fine than not, make people want to actually look. Art is valuable in ways other than monetarily. It provides both the artists and the spectator a new outlook on a subject.

What is bad art?

One would argue that deciding what bad art is a matter of taste and subjectivity. But one must also consider that art that is frequently duplicated and that is unoriginal that brings nothing new to the realm of knowledge can be considered as bad art. Bad art has uninteresting, repetitive content that serves no real purpose. Bad art is also that with extremely limited technical skill along with its weak and sometimes nonexistent intentions. What is bad art can be decided by trying to understand what good art it. Good art prompts queries and thoughts whereas bad art makes no effect on absolutely anyone who comes into contact with it. It is merely existing without a purpose.

Aesthetic judgements are subjective because often, an opinion is not shared by all. Although it is argued that there are certain judgement standards, we must understand that we will never be able to fully understand the reasoning behind which one finds something attractive or appealing. Similarly, aesthetic judgement is unique to everyone assessing or observing the art, individually. Therefore, these judgements are more often than not, a reflection of ones personal preferences.

The Sciences and The Arts?

The similarities between the sciences and the arts is the fact that both these areas of knowing are ultimately trying to decode and make sense of the world in their own ways, by finding patterns. Also, both these filed require a great deal of imagination. Some of the greatest innovations in the sciences had to start from an idea that someone imagined. They are seen to be poles apart mainly because of their ways of knowing. The arts rely on imagination, whereas the sciences rely on proof and reason. Furthermore, it is said the arts have been invented over time whilst the sciences have been discovered. The sciences is just bringing to light something that has already been around, undiscovered. Hence, the arts have experienced imagination and creativity in every aspect where as the sciences greatly deepened on the inventions and discoveries before them.

"Tracey Emin: My Bed" - This work of art was bought by Charles Saatchi for 150 000 UK pounds = 12,297,020 Indian Rupee. Is this art? Should taxpayers money be used to buy an art piece like this for a museum? Again, this is dependant on the intentions of the artist and more importantly, the cultural context of the installation. Maybe, this piece was created at a certain time period for a specific reason. For example, to comment on the way in which women were stereotypically labelled to be "obedient" and "gentle" or in a time where women who drank and had frequent sexual interactions were deemed less worthy than those who did not, because there was such a thing as a stereotypically categorised "respectable woman". The unkempt bed could be a symbol for the most authentic form of the person Emin was. These are all possible interpretations of a universally interpretable piece of art. It is possible that people may claim that anyone could have exhibited the same work, including themselves, But the fact is that nobody else did it. Since Emin was the first to do so, she is successful in making a statement. Yes, I do think that taxpayers money should be used to buy this artwork for a museum because it has done what no one else dared to do or thought of doing. It makes a statement and makes people stop and actually think a bout the piece as a whole. It provokes some sort of reaction from the spectator and therefore could be beneficial in some sort of way.

Standards of Beauty

I think the standards of beauty value from culture to culture because growing up surrounded by specific ideals affects the way in which we see the world. Our minds adapt to the socially prescribed ideas of beauty based on what we see around us. What is seen as attractive in one culture may not be in the other. It is a matter of exposure to the subject.

Ultimately, art is art. It makes little sense to some and is everything to others. Its beauty is in its ambiguity.

Ethical Dilemmas

11:01

Are you an ethical person? How is your perception of the world, and your position in it, affected by ethical considerations?

I believe that there are certain universal values that govern the actions of this world. These moral principles are worldly truths that have existed, without being questioned. For example, we can agree that murder is an unethical act. Similarly, we can agree that being honest is ethical. But for both these situations, we often question their morality based on the context they are presented in. Although I still believe that taking the life of another human being, regardless of the context, is a morally wrong act, I feel like telling a lie when absolutely required, in context is not as unethical as the former. On the other hand, moral principals do in fact have its disagreements. Even if I strongly feel that any kind of “killing” is wrong, people from other cultures may beg to differ because they may have been practicing rituals that involves the involuntary death of individuals sacredly. An example would be honour killings where often a member of the family is killed as a sacrifice because they have been thought to bring great shame and dishonour on the family. For them, their culture allows this ritual. From what I have been taught, this is an unjust sacrificial process and is not justified in any way at all. This provokes the question, who am I to say that their culture is unethical? But how have I come to these conclusions? How have I been able to differentiate between what is supposedly ethical and unethical.

I can assume that my ethical beliefs come from moral relativism, or the “belief that our values are determined by the society and culture we live in.” ( Lagemaat, “Moral Relativism”) My sense of morality comes from what I have been told is right and wrong growing up by the people who surround me. For the most part, the values and morals have been shared among the vast majority of these people with little objection and have therefore left me with no reason to doubt them. Some of these values include being honest and being good to others. On a larger scale, my intuition has been the source of reason, but at the same time, its accuracy is questionable. This innate feeling is the primary cause for most decisions and has often guided me between what is right and wrong. Are humans born with this innate knowledge? It is possible, but we are also affected by what we see when we are still in the early months of development. I grew up in a household where being kind to one another was practiced regularly and since I grew up witnessing these acts, I was conditioned to act similarly. But in contrast, if someone grows up watching treachery, lies and death with a lack of guilt that accompanies it, they may begin to believe that that is the ultimate way to live.

Furthermore, deciding whether or not I am an ethical person also stems from the motives for my actions. Do I do what I do in order to achieve the hidden benefits it probably supplies? The Self interest theory is one that claims that all our actions regardless of how altruistic they may be are done in order to be able to receive the benefits they provide, whether we are aware of it or not. (Lagemaat, “Self Interest Theory”) If I decide to give a beggar on the street some money, I may feel like doing it because I have been taught to give. But it also gives me an underlying feeling of satisfaction and makes me feel good about myself, meaning I still want something for myself and I am not able to plainly just give. I seek to reap the benefits. Now, when we look at Kant’s approach to ethics it is stated that if an action can be consistently generalised, one can decide if it is their duty or not. I strongly believe that cheating on tests in unethical. By cheating, it puts those who worked hard at a disadvantage and hence is morally discouraged. But what if everyone in a classroom began to cheat on the test? If everyone is doing it, does it make it okay for me to do it as well? If a large number of people are doing the similar action, is it ethical for me to follow? In alignment with Kant’s approach, it is not my duty to follow their lead because it will ultimately cause chaos and disruption. But in this case, if I were to decide that I do not wish to cheat, but my egoism tells me to report this behaviour to the teacher, it goes against the theory of utilitarianism. Utilitarianism states that ultimately ethics should be thought to be a tool to maximise happiness. (Lagemaat, “Utilitarianism”) Therefore since I report this case to the teacher, my actions may be seen as unethical because I have caused a large group of people to be upset, which goes against the goal of utilitarianism. But their actions have also gone against instinctive moral obligations.

To conclude, what may be ethical to one person, may not be to another. It is dependent on the perception of ones surroundings and the shared knowledge that they are the recipients of. I think that I am an ethical person given the surroundings I have been brought up in because I adhere to what is universally considered to be a set of moral values that humans are advised to follow. Experiences have taught me right from wrong and my set of ethical beliefs will most probably differ from person to person.

Works Cited

Lagemaat, Richard van de. Theory of Knowledge for the IB Diploma. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 2014. Print.

If Only

10:41

The door was firmly shut; I never liked it that way. I preferred it to be open, because I had nothing to hide. I twisted the handle and gently pushed it. There it was, the place that was witness to most of my joys, sorrows and stupidity. My room.

The room was dark because the curtains were closed. I didn’t like that either. I walked over to the window and opened the blinds allowing light to flood in. it looked so much better. I placed my fingers on the plain white walls, thinking of all the fond memories I had made in that very room. The bed was smoothened out at all the edges and looked as if it had never been used. I walked over, sat down and took a deep breath. The room looked untouched. Across from my bed was the table which held my laptop, a few books and some random knick-knacks.

To my left, on the wall hung my dream board. I walked over to it, feeling guilty as I got closer. I hung up all the things I wanted to achieve in my life on that board. All the goals, dreams, places I wanted to visit, little notes that I had made to help me get to where I wanted to be in life hung on that little board. I never took those goals seriously, as I peered at the many slips of paper and magazine cut outs, at that moment I wished that I had taken them seriously. It was too late now anyway.

I turned my face away from the wall and walked to the other side towards my table. My laptop was positioned at the edge of my desk. I fired it up and noticed that there were a few tabs open. The first one was where my music was playing from. Thankfully, it wasn’t Justin Bieber. I smiled, remembering how I never used to listen to his music and anything else could easily satisfy me. I clicked on the next tab and a website about Bullying and Depression popped up. I looked intently at the screen, but I just couldn't remember why I was on that site. I glanced away from the device and noticed a few decorated note books lying close by. I picked one up and noticed that the cover read

“Insecurity kills all things beautiful”

That was my favorite book, I used to pen down all my thoughts and ideas even if they were pointless. I thought that they would come in handy somewhere along the road. I never got the chance to use it. I dropped the book onto the table and shut my eyes tight. I didn't want to remember. I couldn't handle it. I clenched my fists, took a deep breath and opened my eyes again.

I walked away from the desk towards my bedside table. I saw a hint of blue peeking out through the contents of a worn basket. I pulled it out and saw that it was a roll of painters tape. I had always wanted to paint the walls in my room. I wanted vibrant sea foam green. I never got around to doing it until…

I had the sudden urge to look underneath my bed. I lifted the thin bed sheet and looked underneath. I saw a small little jar and reached for it. I picked it up, it felt cool in my palm. I got back onto my feet and sat down on my bed. The jar had a year scribbled onto it using permanent marker. It read “2013”. I unscrewed the lid out of curiosity and emptied it out. Only a few strips of paper fell out of the jar. Figures, I wasn’t having a good year anyway. The jar was supposed to be filled to the brim with the good memories I had.

I looked around the room once again; there was nothing more I wanted to see. I glanced at my bed, the plain white walls and my desk wishing that it could all just go back to the way it once was. I was slightly startled when I saw the door knob turn, I moved away as I saw a woman enter the room. Her face was pale and her eyes looked sunken. She looked tired, as if she had been crying. As if she couldn’t take it anymore. She walked around my room and sat down on my bed. She rubbed her palms on the sheets and I noticed that a single tear rolled down her cheek. She quickly stood up and began towards the door. As she stepped out of the room, she took one last look behind her, and on her face was something both peculiar and beautiful. It was a smile. She looked straight at me and sighed. There was something strange about the way she was looking at me, she was looking past me..through me. I wanted to say something but I just couldn’t find the right words. She wiped her tears and walked away. My mother walked away.

If only I was alive.

Faith - A Reliable Way of Knowing?

Art and its Value

Ethical Dilemmas

If Only

About me

Total Pageviews

Follow Me

Popular Posts

Blog Archive