Metaphysical Musings

Freedom

2009-01-20T16:47:00.010-05:00

Are Liberty and Freedom synonymous? Liberty by necessity includes freedom; but freedom is not solely defined as liberty. I have been thinking about freedom in regards to our recent topics on love and marriage and was planning to cover this as a philosophical topic after the "Love and Sacrifice" post; but thought I would discuss it today.

First, what is Liberty? Most generally defined: The condition of being free from restriction or control.

What then is Freedom? Philosophically speaking, it would be defined: the power to exercise choice and make decisions without constraint from within or without; autonomy; self-determination.

From Webster's Dictionary: "Liberty & Freedom, these words, though often interchanged, are distinct in some of their applications. Liberty has reference to previous restraint; freedom, to the simple, unrepressed exercise of our powers."

A slave may not have his liberty, but he still is free to act or not act; he has freedom over his interior, his thoughts, his desires, even though he may be physically bound. Liberty necessitates freedom, but we can be free without liberty.

Freedom {as the power to exercise choice} is tied to our intelligence and as such is solely a characteristic of man. As human beings, we can choose to act or not act; however this usually means that we have been presented with the option and that we understand the implications/consequences our actions will bring.

EG: Little Adam was given a baseball for his birthday. He was told to not throw the ball in the house, but to go outdoors to play with his new gift. Adam went outside for a while to play but it was so hot he decided to return indoors. Still wanting to play with his ball, he begins to toss it around the living room. *CRASH* Mom's favorite vase falls to the floor and breaks. Adam chose to throw the ball in the house and as such consequences followed. Now, Adam is without a baseball.

Adam could have chosen to not throw the ball in the house, but he decided he would go against his parents' wishes and do it anyway. Adam knew that he was not supposed to. In order to make a choice and exercise our free will, we must understand the consequences of said action.

How would this story change if Adam were only a three year old? What if he is eighteen? Obviously, a three year old cannot possibly understand the full extent of his actions, but an eighteen year old can.

Ultimately, our free will and our intelligence lead us to desire and appreciate our liberty. Freedom {as the exercise of choice} does bear with it a responsibility; a responsibility to the good and to the truth.

What do you think?

Love & Marriage

2009-01-09T16:52:00.004-05:00

No. 3 and the consideration of the subject of marriage have lead me to additional musings that may be our subject for a little while. One of my favorite books is "Love and Responsibility" by Karol Wojtyla. It is a philosophical consideration of the subject of love, freedom and the human person. It was the basis for several papers I decided to write in college and has been the ember which ignited a passion in me. So much so, I have considered continuing my studies in Marriage and Family Life.

Anyway, enough about that. Let's take a step back before we continue on. Let's jump back to before the "I Do's" and try to understand why it is that people get married to begin with. With a study of that all too famous four-letter word, L-O-V-E.

What is love? Probably one of the more common of the basic, human philosophical questions that gets asked today. Although it is usually predicated by the question, "Am I in love?” From young and old alike, the query is posed. If you look up Love on dictionary.com, you will find a whole smattering of romantic sentimentalism. Now, truth be told, I am a hopeless romantic and such would be the definition if you ask anyone who knows me. However, I prefer a stronger, deeper and classical answer to this age old question as most simply defined: to will the good of the beloved for his own sake.

Now, my readers, you may be thinking... that doesn't sound particularly romantic. Where are all the hearts, candles and sentimentality? Well it just takes a little deciphering. It did for me when I had just heard it for the first time.

Think back to that first love, that first declaration. When you heard someone {not related to you} declare their love to you. Or if it has not happened yet, hang on, you still should be able to understand the following example.

It is a starry night in mid-summer. The moon is coloring the world in warm hues, and you look at each other. You have anticipated this moment for a while. And all of a sudden your beloved looks in your eyes and says "I love you." You just gaze back, trying to let it sink in. Knowing that the declaration has been made is glorious. Now your beloved continues, "I love you because of the moonbeams, the scent in the summer air, the mist in the water and the fireflies darting about. This is why I love you."

If you were that person standing there, listening to this, what would you be thinking? Most likely, you would be thinking, "How does that have anything to do with me? If those are the things that are making you love me, than anyone could be standing here and you could love anyone." And you would be right to think that!

But, if your beloved continued his declaration as, "I love you because you are you, your beauty, your charm, your positive outlook and caring nature, the joy you bring to my life, and the way you understand me." Now, you would be thinking, "This person is truly declaring their love to me, how shall I respond?" And obviously if you love them too, you declare it right back.

What is the difference between the two? The first example, love is declared due to outside circumstances. Things that can change and have no relation to the beloved. In the second example the lover loves the beloved for who they are as a person, not because the moon is shining. But because they have experienced the other as a true good (1). Karol Wojtyla in "Love and Responsibility" says that 'the human person is a good toward which the only proper response is love.'

Back to the definition of love. If you experience the beloved as truly unique, one whom you love, what would you desire to give them? You would want them to have every good thing, right? You would want their happiness, and not only would you wish this for them, but even strive to attain it, right? Now enter the candles and teddy bears; the bestowal of gifts and surprises, to show that you think of that person when you are not together and that you want them to know how much you care. So, this definition not only allows for the sentimental expressions of love, but also a deepening of affection into a lifelong commitment to strive to love the other, no matter the cost.

Up next, love & sacrifice.

Footnotes:
(1) Aristotle distinguished between intrinsic and extrinsic goods. Intrinsic goods are those valued for themselves alone such as health and happiness. Extrinsic or instrumental goods are desirable for the sake of something else, such as money or tools.

Musings on Marriage

2009-01-08T09:22:00.001-05:00

I saw a couple of headlines recently that with the drop in the economy, there is also a drop in the divorce rate. I was thinking about it this morning and was curious as to why. Obviously during a recession, jobs are uncertain and money is tight. So, here are some of my musings on the causal relation between divorce and recession:

1) Money is tight and there isn't the extra cashflow for legal and attorney fees, etc.

2) If you get divorced, one or both spouses will get displaced. This means money for moving, security deposits or an additional mortgage, additional furnishings, etc. Setting up another home as we all know is expensive. And who during this time would like to take on another housing payment?

3) A more optimistic thought would be that with money tight and so much uncertainty, a couple bands together (maybe even without knowing it) and works harder to pay bills and stay afloat. So they are focusing on something other than "Am I Happy?" and are throwing their extra energy into providing for each other and children. This then gives a sense of accomplishment, or at least a goal to work towards and therefore the constant questioning of whether or not "I am happy" is put-off.

No. 3 as the most optimistic of the bunch would lead to an additional question... would the couples who were considering divorce but didn't due to economic reasons, do they just get divorced when the economy stabilizes? I venture to think that some do. But maybe some work through it. Maybe they realized the strength that they have as a couple and as individuals and decided that they could make it work?

More tomorrow.

The Gimme-Now Culture

2008-12-18T14:30:00.000-05:00

It is just so apparently clear to me after reading several news feeds over the past few days of how obsessed we are as a culture with instant gratification. Now I know this is not a new concept {at least maybe not to most of my readers}. But it goes way beyond the faster, newer, cooler techno-gadgets and gizmos. It is how generations are being "wired". Whatever happened to saving to buy what you want? Now it’s plastic to the rescue. Or waiting until marriage? No need, that's an "archaic" rule-based-system. Or wait your turn. Why should I, I am more important then that woman behind me. Or, the good will conquer in the end {add the old saying; good things come to those who wait}. Well, who said anything about evil or good? That's some kind of moral-mumbo-jumbo. Everyone knows that it’s all relative.

But how is it that one day, not so long ago, morality was not relative, people believed in good and evil and a being greater than themselves. But who is right, our forefathers or us? Are we more "enlightened" then they were?

So many of the modern "philosophers" would say yes. We have been loosed from the shackles of rigidity and objective truth. We are now free. Free from what, or to do what? The answer follows: "Whatever you want. Just be a good person." To which the response would be, "Whatever I want? Oh, my goodness... that is fabulous! No restrictions. I am going to go and do just that. But you mentioned that I should be good. I thought you said there is no such thing. What does that mean?" "Well, you know, just don't kill anyone." "But isn't that a restriction, I thought you said we were free?" "We are." "Then I'm confused."

Might I posit, at the risk of sounding slightly-looney to the contemporary culture, that our forefathers actually had it right? There is objective truth, good and evil and no matter how much one may like to deny it, a Supreme Being who is the reason we {and this whole world} are even here.

Stay tuned for the coming posts... as I will try to illumine some of the major defects in the new millennial "thinking".

Christmas and Relationships

2008-12-09T15:51:00.005-05:00

While sitting at dinner on Sunday evening, my sister, husband and I were perusing the newspaper. Not a typical occurence, but I like to flip through and see if there are good recipes or sales. This past Sunday's paper boasted that they knew what gifts to get your "sweetie". Always up for unique ideas, we started reading. They had 12 ideas, none of them all to unique: watch, cashmere sweater, bracelets, cufflinks, books, blah, blah. In addition to this, there was an article that caught our eye, entitled "Holiday Gift Guide: You like her, she likes you, and that gift better be good". Read here.
Now, what caught my attention, other than it being rather poorly written, was the sheer ridiculousness of it. While I realize that it might be tricky to navigate the waters of what to get your significant other, especially in the beginning phases of the relationship... but I have always been of the opinion that gifts a) come from the heart; b) convey that the other person is treasured; c) are not given to entice a gift in return.
To sum up the article, I feel this line is a true zinger: "I had a really hard time thinking about gift ideas for him. That's when I kind of had to start brainstorming and listening to what he was saying." So, only at Christmas is it important to listen to the man you are dating or married to? Otherwise he is merely around for convenience? The article gets much worse. One man is interviewed, gives his name and confesses that he is casually dating two women, and is not sure if he will get gifts, but might just keep " 'a neutral emergency gift' on hand in case one of them gifts him and he needs to reciprocate." Really? He wrote this in the paper? I am guessing that he is currently not dating anyone and won't need to worry about that "emergency" gift; as I am guessing those women read the article.
As I sat in disbelief as I continued to read, it started to hit me, no wonder our culture is plagued with divorce, affairs, etc. Think about it, if one cannot manage to give a Christmas gift (or birthday gift for that matter) sincerely and honestly, how can one manage to give themself sincerely and honestly? Something to think about and consider...

The Human Experience

2008-12-04T09:11:00.003-05:00

On Tuesday night, I had the fortunate experience to watch "The Human
Experience". A movie about two brothers and their friends, who live in a "half-way" house in Brooklyn... and who travel the world in search of the meaning of life. It was one of the most moving films I have ever seen. It brilliantly answered the fundamental questions of human existence: who am I, how did I get here, why am I here, what is the meaning of life, is there anything after this life? These questions are not answered in the expected "documentary" manner; but rather are answered through the movie which evokes a simple experience common to us all - the experience of human life. This film took an in-depth look at our humanity and the human spirit, through the lens of hope and what was produced was a not only an amazingly influential film but also a wake-up call. A call to realize the sanctity of every life... because each life is an irreplaceable and unrepeatable occurence.
I highly recommend seeing this movie. It is only showing in select theatres right now, but they are hoping for wider distribution. For more informtion, check out their website here.

In light of yesterday...

2008-11-05T15:38:00.003-05:00

Although, this blog is particularly devoted to the study of Philosophy and Metaphysics, I felt the need to post something truly hopeful. With the election results still ringing in the ears and hearts of Americans, there was a providential message in the daily readings of the Catholic Mass today.

The first reading was taken from the Letter of Paul to the Philipians (2:12-18)
"My beloved, obedient as you have always been, not only when I am present but all the more now when I am absent, work out your salvation with fear and trembling. For God is the one who, for his good purpose, works in you both to desire and to work. Do everything without grumbling or questioning, that you may be blameless and innocent, children of God without blemish in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation, among whom you shine like lights in the world, as you hold on to the word of life, so that my boast for the day of Christ may be that I did not run in vain or labor in vain. But, even if I am poured out as a libation upon the sacrificial service of your faith, I rejoice and share my joy with all of you. In the same way you also should rejoice and share your joy with me."

The Responsorial Psalm was from Psalm 127: "The LORD is my light and my salvation; whom should I fear? The LORD is my life’s refuge; of whom should I be afraid? "

The Gospel was taken from Luke (14:25-33)
"Great crowds were traveling with Jesus,
and he turned and addressed them,
“If anyone comes to me without hating his father and mother,
wife and children, brothers and sisters,
and even his own life,
he cannot be my disciple.
Whoever does not carry his own cross and come after me
cannot be my disciple.
Which of you wishing to construct a tower
does not first sit down and calculate the cost
to see if there is enough for its completion?
Otherwise, after laying the foundation
and finding himself unable to finish the work
the onlookers should laugh at him and say,
‘This one began to build but did not have the resources to finish.’
Or what king marching into battle would not first sit down
and decide whether with ten thousand troops
he can successfully oppose another king
advancing upon him with twenty thousand troops?
But if not, while he is still far away,
he will send a delegation to ask for peace terms.
In the same way,
everyone of you who does not renounce all his possessions
cannot be my disciple.”

The Breakdown:
As St. Paul says: in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation, hold on to the Word of LIFE! We are not citizens of this Earth but citizens of the true Kingdom, the one that has no end. As long as you cling to what is truly important, which is the True Messiah, there is nothing to fear.

Is it a coincidence that these are the readings today, I think not!

John Paul II said it throughout his papacy and I feel that it should again be the battlecry: Be Not Afraid! Go out and proclaim the Truth from the Rooftops!

The Truth is Black and White

2008-11-02T20:45:00.005-05:00

My father found these on YouTube and found it thought provoking and rather comical... read it. And take a stand for the Truth.

For a Special Friend

2008-10-28T12:42:00.003-04:00

I would like to take this opportunity to wish a beloved friend a very Happy Birthday. I know that this will come across her Google Reader and I wanted to shower her with Birthday wishes. I cannot walk into her office with a bouquet of flowers, or bring her a Starbucks Passion tea, go out all dressed up with her on a Progressive dinner around our favorite town... but I can send her my thoughts and prayers in thanksgiving for one of my dearest friends. She has been there at some of my worst moments and saw me through, she was my cheerleader when it seemed like there was nothing to cheer about; she is a constant in my life and it seems so surreal that we have only known each other for two years, it seems as though we have always been friends. But even though we have not always been friends, I know that we always will be.

This dear friend is for you.

Single Issue Voting...

2008-10-27T16:03:00.000-04:00

As I mentioned yesterday, I have been thinking a lot about the comments like "you cannot be a single issue voter" or "everything needs to be weighed, not just one issue". Well, I would agree with this if all things were equal but they aren't.

Lesson: Objective Truth and Hierarchy of Goods

What is Truth? How do we know it? Truth is that which corresponds to reality. But what is objective truth?

Objective Truth means that a specific truth remains true everywhere, independently of human thought or feelings. For instance, it is true always and everywhere that '2 plus 2 equals 4'. No matter where you decide to practice your arithmetic {be it in the classroom or Mars}, you will always get 4. But what else can fall into this category of Objective Truth? Here in America, the land of subjective rationalism, it may be hard to swallow that there are Truths that exist independently of our "feelings", thoughts or the American consensus. More on this to follow in the coming posts.

Hierarchy of Goods:
Hierarchy {defined by dictionary.com} is any system of persons or things ranked one above another. Though this may be another unpopular concept, it is an important one when discussing "single issue voting". In some way or another, everything has a value - whether it be monetary, aesthetic, or intrinsic. Because of this value, in some way everything fits into a Hierarchy of Goods. Let's try an exercise. Rank in Hierarchical order from 1 to 5 {with 5 being the greatest} the following items:
Your Mother
Tupperware
Your Puppy Fido
Your favorite CD
Love

Unless you have a strange obsession with Tupperware I am guessing that did not even make it past 3 on your list. Why was that easy? Why? Because each of these items have value but their values are not all equal.

So, if there is objective truth (certain things are non-negotiable no matter if you are a republican, democrat, libertarian or just a regular John Smith) and there is a Hierarchy of goods, that would make certain items or proposals on a ballot more important than others, say for instance Life vs. money. What would you vote to protect to save?

Breaking News: Bishops speak out

2008-10-21T17:23:00.002-04:00

I was writing a post today regarding "single issue voting" after reading a critical post from a friend of mine on the matter. But before I could get it finished, this came across my desk from a fellow Blogger: "Legal Protection for Unborn, Support for Mothers Both Needed, Say Cardinal Rigali and Bishop Murphy"

The Bishops have issued a statement {full text here} which I think would be good for conversation (which will have to happen tomorrow as I am pressed for time).

As the article states, the Bishops issued "the joint statement in response to arguments that the Church should accept the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision on abortion as a "permanent fixture of constitutional law"... At the same time the two bishops also responded to those who argue that the Church's efforts against abortion should focus solely on restoring recognition for unborn children's human rights and that proposals to provide social and economic support for pregnant women distract from that effort."

My two favorite quotes from the statement follow:

"The law is a teacher, and Roe taught many women, physicians and others that abortion is an acceptable answer to a wide range of problems."

"Providing support for pregnant women so they choose to have their babies is a necessary but not sufficient response to abortion. Similarly, reversal of Roe is a necessary but not sufficient condition for restoring an order of justice in our society's treatment of defenseless human life," they said.

Get a full treatment of this and why it is great news here.

More on this tomorrow.

Hope

2008-10-20T10:28:00.005-04:00

Many of you may have seen this Obama ad {although the real one has the word Hope - I could not bring myself to post the real one}... I first saw this a couple of weeks ago, but recently have been seeing more and more of them. However, one of my neighbors just added it to the back of her car and as I was driving away this morning, I had to comment...

As a philosophy major, senior year brought with it a thesis requirement. I decided to delve into the subject of Hope as I set out to prove that there was in fact a human virtue of hope. I used "Man's Search for Meaning" by Viktor Frankl as my main source.

Dictionary.com gives one definition of hope: a person on whom one's expectations are centered. In my study Hope can be better defined as the movement of the appetite towards a future good, which though hard to attain is possible of attainment.

In either definition, one could see why the Obama campaign would want to use this as their "slogan". However, if one looks at his campaign and the "rights" he stands for, what future good are we to expect if he were to be our President? In combing through his website one can find catchy little sayings, like "I want to campaign the same way I govern, which is to respond directly and forcefully with the truth,"~ Barack Obama.

Truth, corresponds to reality. How can a man who does not want to respect the lives of unborn children promise to govern with truth or use hope as his endorsement? What higher good will this country ever attain if we continue to kill its future citizens? It seems to me that we should be asking Obama what are his first principles when it comes to governing. It seems to me that based on what he keeps talking about - the Economy seems to be one of them. Economy which by its very nature will constantly ebb and flo {isn't that part of econ101?}... so instead of a higher good {LIFE, liberty and the pursuit of happiness}, we have money?

American Papist has a good conclusion as well as an additional article. Read it here.

Bottom line: I disagree that the Obama campaign is "powered by hope" but is definitely powered by his first principle, money.

Squeezing orange juice from a rock?

2008-10-15T14:33:00.010-04:00

As the Presidential Election draws very near, stem cell research is the daily buzzword in the media. Everyone bantering back and forth: "he" is for it, "she" isn't, "he" only supports some types of research, etc. It goes on and on. I decided to do some research on the topic {moving beyond what I studied in college}, because there were some questions that came to my mind. When federal funding of stem cell research is discussed, how much money are we talking about? What sort of benefits are we seeing from stem cell research? What about embryonic stem cell research - have there been any benefits from the research thus far? But I wanted real answers, not what the media is telling us.

Here are some of my findings: "Adult stem cells, such as blood-forming stem cells in bone marrow (called hematopoietic stem cells, or HSCs), are currently the only type of stem cell commonly used to treat human diseases."

The Numbers : $641 million is the amount to be spent by the National Institute of Health {NIH} on all stem cell research in FY2007 . New York State alone plans to spend $600 million on stem cell research. Read the report for more details on much goes into this.

My conclusion {of sorts}:

Why are we spending so much on embryonic stem cell research if little to no progress is being made? The moral issues that envelop this topic will be covered later; however if we know that adult stem cells are actually able to treat human diseases why not focus our attention on this. In that equation, the embryos would be left alone {therefore negating any bio-ethical debate regarding this} and we would still be able to treat diseases {which makes everyone happy}. It seems to me that in this quest to research how we can benefit from embryonic stem cells we are trying to squeeze orange juice from rocks... when we have an orange grove at our disposal. Why? Doesn't this seem a little nuts?

Additional thought: I am newly married and my husband and I are trying to set a household budget. As we are just starting out, we do not have a lot of money and life as we know it is expensive. So, we are trying to cut and save wherever possible. If we really are in such an economic crisis, wouldn't it be a wise decision to save a couple extra {million} bucks and cut back on research that isn't going anywhere?

definition of terms

2008-10-14T14:11:00.005-04:00

When studying, it was drilled into the minds of my classmates and me, when you began a paper, you were to lay the terms upon which your argument would develop.

Thus, as we are at the beginnning, it would be wise to lay the framework from which we will continue our discussions.

We shall proceed on the basis that there is objective truth and man is a composite being made up of both a physical nature and a spiritual nature which informs the physical material. {if you are reading this and disagree with either point, stay tuned, there is evidence that shall be used to explain}

We shall also return to the roots of philosophy using as our foundation the three classic laws which are attributed to Aristotle and informed the scholastic tradition.

1) The Law of Identity which states that an object is the same as itself: A ≡ A.

2) The Principle of Non-Contradiction: contradictory statements cannot both at the same time be true, e.g.: "A is B and A is not B" are mutually exclusive.

3) Law of Excluded Middle: Everything must either be or not be.
We will use the following example: Sophia is married. The law of excluded middle would hold that either Sophia is married or Socrates is not married is true by virtue of its form alone. That is, the "middle" position, that Sophia is neither married nor unmarried, is excluded by logic, and therefore either the first possibility (Sophia is married) or its negation (Sophia is not married) must be true.

Additional favored principles:
4) Nemo dat quod non habet: Nothing can give that which it does not have.

5) Principle of Sufficient Reason: For everything that is, there is a reason why it should be as it is rather than otherwise.

More time shall be spent developing all of these themes as this blog is developed.

Metaphysics 101

2008-10-14T13:55:00.000-04:00

As the first post to this blog, it would seem obvious to lay the framework, the why, the reason, for which this blog was made.

It has been a desire of mine for quite some time to have a space to put my passion for truth and wisdom and the study thereof into words. A creative outlet and also an educational space.

Why meta101? For a very simple reason. If every single man and woman were to take a basic metaphysics course that presented the basic human questions while imparting both answers and basic philosophical principles to these questions, the world would be a much different place. If you don't believe me, keep reading.