Organizing principals are used to contextualize and understand experiences. The products of an organizing principal include, but are not limited to, our perception of character traits, passions and emotions. The products of an organizing principal can not be used to undermine it because they are dependent and inextricable from the organizing principal; often they functioning to validate it because the experiences are organizing according to the same ideas and thus agree thematically across perceptions. However, the foundations of an organizing principal are ideas. In Charlotte Lennox’s novel, The Female Quixote, Arabella uses ideas from antique romance novels as the foundation for her organizing principals. The doctor’s “cure” is successful because it acknowledges the products of Arabella’s organizing principals as existing separately and functioning differently in her from the organizing principal and ideas which are its foundations. The doctor identifies Arabella’s organizing principal as existing separately from her by personifying it as a subject capable of actions and feelings. The doctor acknowledges a difference between the functions of the products and foundation of her organizing principal because he engages them differently; validating and avoiding challenging the products, carefully monitoring her emotions to retract or redirect the intentions of his words when she perceives these to be in question, while still framing the debate to challenging the foundation, her ideas.
1. Attempts first to understand and validate Arabella's emotions
2. Specifically addresses Arabella's as having "Imaginings"
3. Does not proceeds to engage in challenging her when
-intrinsic values of morality (virtue, judgement) become subject of question (374)
-passions or desire become subject of question (370)
4. Backtracks/Retracts/becomes submissive
-when she perceives judgement of her passions
-when she perceives judgement of her
5. Specifically frames question to address causal relation between actions or "reason".
6. Contrast with Mr. Glansville: eventually commits to organizing principal because unable to separate emotions from causal relation between actions
7. Contrast with Mrs. Glansville: doesn't succumb to organizing principal but unwilling to mindfully navigate Arabella's emotions to refocus questions on causal relation between actions.
Conclusion: Passions/emotions/morality function in a realm separate from reason, though they are effected by it and thought/ideas can be manipulated separately.
Monday, October 21, 2013
Monday, October 14, 2013
Tristram Shandy and Jonathan Swift
How is our attention maintained by movement and misfortune?
My Tristram's misfortunes came nine months before ever he came into the world.
-Laurence Sterne Pg. 11 (Chp. 3)
Sweepings from Butchers Stalls, Dung, Guts and Blood,
Drown'd Puppies, stinking Sprats, all drench'd in Mud,
Dead Cats and Turnep- Tops come tumbling down the
Flood.
-Jonathan Swift, A Description of a City Shower
It both pieces, A Description of a City Shower and Tristram Shandy, the author continuously moves us from one misfortune/horror to another. Swift not only uses strong verbs (ie. drench'd, tumbling), but also words that are the noun (ie. sweepings) or adjective (drown'd) forms of verbs to sustain a sense of movement throughout the piece. This movement is not random, it takes us from one visceral image to another, the butcher stalls, the guts and blood. Somehow, these two things together function very well to sustain our attention, or at least mine. I see a similar pattern in Tristram Shandy, while perhaps not as horrifying (yet). In this story, we are continuously transported forward and backward in time. The story's progress is not chronological, but rather motivated by movement from one misfortunes to another. This concept draws to mind a neuroscience concept. The tectal system in the brain functions to draw our attention to movements of visual stimuli, there are structures called the superior colliculus mediate this function. Perhaps the method of attention focusing used by these authors draws it's ability from the connection between movement and attention present in other sensory systems.
My Tristram's misfortunes came nine months before ever he came into the world.
-Laurence Sterne Pg. 11 (Chp. 3)
Sweepings from Butchers Stalls, Dung, Guts and Blood,
Drown'd Puppies, stinking Sprats, all drench'd in Mud,
Dead Cats and Turnep- Tops come tumbling down the
Flood.
-Jonathan Swift, A Description of a City Shower
It both pieces, A Description of a City Shower and Tristram Shandy, the author continuously moves us from one misfortune/horror to another. Swift not only uses strong verbs (ie. drench'd, tumbling), but also words that are the noun (ie. sweepings) or adjective (drown'd) forms of verbs to sustain a sense of movement throughout the piece. This movement is not random, it takes us from one visceral image to another, the butcher stalls, the guts and blood. Somehow, these two things together function very well to sustain our attention, or at least mine. I see a similar pattern in Tristram Shandy, while perhaps not as horrifying (yet). In this story, we are continuously transported forward and backward in time. The story's progress is not chronological, but rather motivated by movement from one misfortunes to another. This concept draws to mind a neuroscience concept. The tectal system in the brain functions to draw our attention to movements of visual stimuli, there are structures called the superior colliculus mediate this function. Perhaps the method of attention focusing used by these authors draws it's ability from the connection between movement and attention present in other sensory systems.
Tuesday, October 8, 2013
Johnson and Lennox
Is Johnson's description of the effect reading novels produces in the individual similar to the function of monomania or delusion? Is this interpretation of Johnson's quote supported in The Female Quixote?
But if the power of example is so great, as to take possession of the memory by a kind of violence, and produce effects almost without the intervention of the will, care ought to be taken that, when the choice is unrestrained, the best examples only should be exhibited; and that which is likely to operate so strongly, should not be mischievous or uncertain in its effects.
-Johnson
...her imagination, always prepossessed with the same fantastic Ideas, made her stumble upon another Mistake, equally absurd and ridiculous.
-Lennox Pg. 21
The Oxford English Dictionary contains two distinct descriptions of monomania: a form of mental illness characterized by a single pattern of repetitive and intrusive thoughts or actions and an exaggerated or fanatical enthusiasm for or devotion to one subject; an obsession, craze. The first description matches closely with our clinical description of obsession whereas the latter is more aligned to our colloquial usage of the word obsession. Both clinical and colloquial obsession augment the affects of individuals. In clinical obsession, the individual experiences a great amount of anxiety, whereas in fanatical obsession the obsession has a myriad of positive effects on the affect of the individual. While the individual may be conscious of an obsession, they often have little control over the effect it elicits in them. They perceive the effects of the obsession as personal, and do not expect others to share their experience. The description of delusion in the OED states that it is anything that deceives the mind with a false impression; a deception; a fixed false opinion or belief with regard to objective things. Delusions augment the perceptions of the individual. Furthermore, by definition, the individual has neither control nor awareness of the effect the delusion. The perceptive lens caused by a delusion are not experienced as unique to themselves, rather they expect others to share their experience.
Johnson's specific phrase, "as to take possession of the the memory by a kind of violence" suggests that the specific function of the novels on readers is some augmentation of their perception, rather than their affect. The phrase "prepossessed with the same fantastic Ideas" suggests also that it is Arabella's perceptions that are being augmented by her delusion. The interpretation of Johnson's quote to mean that reading functions somewhat similarly to delusion is supported by the selected quote from Lennox.
But if the power of example is so great, as to take possession of the memory by a kind of violence, and produce effects almost without the intervention of the will, care ought to be taken that, when the choice is unrestrained, the best examples only should be exhibited; and that which is likely to operate so strongly, should not be mischievous or uncertain in its effects.
-Johnson
...her imagination, always prepossessed with the same fantastic Ideas, made her stumble upon another Mistake, equally absurd and ridiculous.
-Lennox Pg. 21
The Oxford English Dictionary contains two distinct descriptions of monomania: a form of mental illness characterized by a single pattern of repetitive and intrusive thoughts or actions and an exaggerated or fanatical enthusiasm for or devotion to one subject; an obsession, craze. The first description matches closely with our clinical description of obsession whereas the latter is more aligned to our colloquial usage of the word obsession. Both clinical and colloquial obsession augment the affects of individuals. In clinical obsession, the individual experiences a great amount of anxiety, whereas in fanatical obsession the obsession has a myriad of positive effects on the affect of the individual. While the individual may be conscious of an obsession, they often have little control over the effect it elicits in them. They perceive the effects of the obsession as personal, and do not expect others to share their experience. The description of delusion in the OED states that it is anything that deceives the mind with a false impression; a deception; a fixed false opinion or belief with regard to objective things. Delusions augment the perceptions of the individual. Furthermore, by definition, the individual has neither control nor awareness of the effect the delusion. The perceptive lens caused by a delusion are not experienced as unique to themselves, rather they expect others to share their experience.
Johnson's specific phrase, "as to take possession of the the memory by a kind of violence" suggests that the specific function of the novels on readers is some augmentation of their perception, rather than their affect. The phrase "prepossessed with the same fantastic Ideas" suggests also that it is Arabella's perceptions that are being augmented by her delusion. The interpretation of Johnson's quote to mean that reading functions somewhat similarly to delusion is supported by the selected quote from Lennox.
Monday, September 30, 2013
Monomania and The Female Don Quixote
"How is our diagnosis of others as monomaniacal dependent on the degree to which their organizing principle challenges our personal reality?"
What else lurks behind these solipsistic modes of existence? What explain the common need to hide behind a system or an ideology?
-Pg. 5
My monomaniacs are all melancholics who can only abide the world if it is ruled by an all-consuming, highly abstract and exalted set of principals.
-Pg. 3
While investigating different manifestations of monomania, I discovered that each one of its enactments is part of an abstract, autonomous desire to reorganize the world according to a long-lost model of wholeness.
-Pg 3
First, I would like to challenge the validity of this authors representation of monomania because a number of sweeping generalizations and assertions (from an individual outside observer onto a group) are made without sufficient textual support aside from the arbitrarily sprinkled references to archaic practically obsolete psychological literature (ex. Freud). This representation is derisive, othering, mindlessly supportive of the status quo and blind to not only the experience of monomania but also the notion that these "pathological, perverse, or poorly disguised maneuvers" are variations of intrinsic human processes that allow us to organize and understand our individual and deeply personal experiences.
[On Piet Mondrian's art] ...he chose to strike out against the real with the absolutism of his vertical and horizontal lines. But the real always ended up resurfacing: despite the grids that framed Mondrian's monochromatic tones with ever increasing urgency, despite the "hairshirts and self-chastisements. . . the arbitrary merely form[ed] again."
-Pg. 1
In the ensuing manifestations of the idée fixe (agorophobia, misanthropy, art as substitute for life, hypochondria), the world falls into place because it seems guided by a divine plan, a firm an meaningful teleology. Freud explains these types of rituals in "Obsessive Actions and Religious Practices," in which he finds the latter to be "full of significant and symbolic meaning," he sees the former, divorced from tradition and thoroughly independent from the way society is run, as "the half-comic, half-tragic travesty of a private religion."
-Pg. 3
Mondrian's explanation of his art, quote taken from a letter:
I construct lines and color combinations on a flat surface, in order to express general beauty with the utmost awareness. Nature (or, that which I see) inspires me, puts me, as with any painter, in an emotional state so that an urge comes about to make something, but I want to come as close as possible to the truth and abstract everything from that, until I reach the foundation (still just an external foundation!) of things… I believe it is possible that, through horizontal and vertical lines constructed with awareness, but not with calculation, led by high intuition, and brought to harmony and rhythm, these basic forms of beauty, supplemented if necessary by other direct lines or curves, can become a work of art, as strong as it is true.
Mondrian's art has symbolic meaning to him, it is highly intuitive however this author represents it as arbitrary as if fact. Why do we prioritize the interpretation of the observer? Why is the private religion chastised but the traditional sanctified? The private religion is based on a reality which the outsider does not share or understand thus they label it as arbitrary, but does that really make it so? If so, how many people have to share a belief before is stops being arbitrary?
Let us compare Mondrian's art to Einstein's theory of relativity. Would we label Einstein as a monomaniac? He devoted his entire life to developing a theory of the universe as ruled by an all-consuming, highly abstract and exalted set of principals. E=mc^2 This theory literally states that energy is the same as mass, the speed of light functions as a constant. Is he not a monomaniac because his unifying principal is true, or rather that we all believe it to be true? I venture to argue that most people's belief in this theory does not stem from their ability to reiterate the proof that allowed Einstein to arrive at this conclusion. Thus, our belief in this theorem to be true is at least in part due to our indoctrination into scientific materialism. If Mondrian's philosophy of art became foundational for some reason and we all could see what he saw, would he still be a monomaniac?
I do not mean to argue monomania does not exist, however I take affront to the derisive tone the author uses to discuss it the use of abstract artists as exemplars. Perhaps art, especially abstract art, is more than merely the byproduct of "a sterile laboratory" which allows the artist to simultaneously inflict and lick their own wounds. Perhaps, one of the functions of art is to expand that which can be seen, that which is experienced, by creating a new system of organization.
What else lurks behind these solipsistic modes of existence? What explain the common need to hide behind a system or an ideology?
-Pg. 5
My monomaniacs are all melancholics who can only abide the world if it is ruled by an all-consuming, highly abstract and exalted set of principals.
-Pg. 3
While investigating different manifestations of monomania, I discovered that each one of its enactments is part of an abstract, autonomous desire to reorganize the world according to a long-lost model of wholeness.
-Pg 3
First, I would like to challenge the validity of this authors representation of monomania because a number of sweeping generalizations and assertions (from an individual outside observer onto a group) are made without sufficient textual support aside from the arbitrarily sprinkled references to archaic practically obsolete psychological literature (ex. Freud). This representation is derisive, othering, mindlessly supportive of the status quo and blind to not only the experience of monomania but also the notion that these "pathological, perverse, or poorly disguised maneuvers" are variations of intrinsic human processes that allow us to organize and understand our individual and deeply personal experiences.
[On Piet Mondrian's art] ...he chose to strike out against the real with the absolutism of his vertical and horizontal lines. But the real always ended up resurfacing: despite the grids that framed Mondrian's monochromatic tones with ever increasing urgency, despite the "hairshirts and self-chastisements. . . the arbitrary merely form[ed] again."
-Pg. 1
In the ensuing manifestations of the idée fixe (agorophobia, misanthropy, art as substitute for life, hypochondria), the world falls into place because it seems guided by a divine plan, a firm an meaningful teleology. Freud explains these types of rituals in "Obsessive Actions and Religious Practices," in which he finds the latter to be "full of significant and symbolic meaning," he sees the former, divorced from tradition and thoroughly independent from the way society is run, as "the half-comic, half-tragic travesty of a private religion."
-Pg. 3
Mondrian's explanation of his art, quote taken from a letter:
I construct lines and color combinations on a flat surface, in order to express general beauty with the utmost awareness. Nature (or, that which I see) inspires me, puts me, as with any painter, in an emotional state so that an urge comes about to make something, but I want to come as close as possible to the truth and abstract everything from that, until I reach the foundation (still just an external foundation!) of things… I believe it is possible that, through horizontal and vertical lines constructed with awareness, but not with calculation, led by high intuition, and brought to harmony and rhythm, these basic forms of beauty, supplemented if necessary by other direct lines or curves, can become a work of art, as strong as it is true.
Mondrian's art has symbolic meaning to him, it is highly intuitive however this author represents it as arbitrary as if fact. Why do we prioritize the interpretation of the observer? Why is the private religion chastised but the traditional sanctified? The private religion is based on a reality which the outsider does not share or understand thus they label it as arbitrary, but does that really make it so? If so, how many people have to share a belief before is stops being arbitrary?
Let us compare Mondrian's art to Einstein's theory of relativity. Would we label Einstein as a monomaniac? He devoted his entire life to developing a theory of the universe as ruled by an all-consuming, highly abstract and exalted set of principals. E=mc^2 This theory literally states that energy is the same as mass, the speed of light functions as a constant. Is he not a monomaniac because his unifying principal is true, or rather that we all believe it to be true? I venture to argue that most people's belief in this theory does not stem from their ability to reiterate the proof that allowed Einstein to arrive at this conclusion. Thus, our belief in this theorem to be true is at least in part due to our indoctrination into scientific materialism. If Mondrian's philosophy of art became foundational for some reason and we all could see what he saw, would he still be a monomaniac?
I do not mean to argue monomania does not exist, however I take affront to the derisive tone the author uses to discuss it the use of abstract artists as exemplars. Perhaps art, especially abstract art, is more than merely the byproduct of "a sterile laboratory" which allows the artist to simultaneously inflict and lick their own wounds. Perhaps, one of the functions of art is to expand that which can be seen, that which is experienced, by creating a new system of organization.
Monday, September 23, 2013
In Fantomina, as curiosity transitions from a psychological process to a mental state the characteristic becomes indivisible from the character results in a loss of agency.
Introduction: open with description of “genius” as exemplar of this transition in modern day usage.
One: explain criteria for curiosity as a psychological process and evidence of this criteria met in text.
Two: explain criteria for curiosity as a mental state and evidence of this criteria met in text.
Three: outline the young lady’s expression of curiosity. Show in text evidence that in her curiosity transitions in it’s expression, from psychological process to mental state, specifically how divisible the characteristic is from the charter. Show how this process can be imposed externally.
Four: outline Beauplasir’s expression of curiosity and provide examples of it’s stagnant dynamic.
Four: contrast Beauplasir’s loss of agency in the end, or lack thereof, against the young lady’s loss of agency, against the young lady’s agency in the beginning.
Conclusion: reiterate the idea that when a characteristic transitions from a psychological process to a mental state, the character becomes indivisible from the characteristic and experiences a loss of agency.
Introduction: open with description of “genius” as exemplar of this transition in modern day usage.
One: explain criteria for curiosity as a psychological process and evidence of this criteria met in text.
Two: explain criteria for curiosity as a mental state and evidence of this criteria met in text.
Three: outline the young lady’s expression of curiosity. Show in text evidence that in her curiosity transitions in it’s expression, from psychological process to mental state, specifically how divisible the characteristic is from the charter. Show how this process can be imposed externally.
Four: outline Beauplasir’s expression of curiosity and provide examples of it’s stagnant dynamic.
Four: contrast Beauplasir’s loss of agency in the end, or lack thereof, against the young lady’s loss of agency, against the young lady’s agency in the beginning.
Conclusion: reiterate the idea that when a characteristic transitions from a psychological process to a mental state, the character becomes indivisible from the characteristic and experiences a loss of agency.
Monday, September 16, 2013
Fantomania and Inspecing and Spectating: Monsters, Rarities, and Investigations
In Fantomania, does Haywood portray sexual inquiry as an impertinent disruption of the status quo or an opportunity for licensed transgression?
“She could not forbear laughing heartily to think of the Tricks she has play’d him, and applauding her own Strength of Genius, and Force of Resolution, which by such unthought-of Ways could triumph over her lover’s Inconsistency...”
-Pg 283 Fantomania
“By analyzing the prose fictions by Aphra Behn, Delariviere Manly and Eliza Haywood… this chapter shows that early modern literature shifts from portraying sexual inquiry as an impertinent disruption of the status quo to providing it as an opportunity for licensed transgression.”
-Pg 21 Inspecting and Spectating: Monsters, Rarities, and Investigations
At first reading the second quote I was perplexed. What does it mean to use curiosity as a “opportunity for licensed transgression”? I certainly did not finish Fantomania and feel that curiosity was being condoned to any degree, it did not allow the lady to conquer her lover nor lead her to anything but ruin. Honestly, I immediately thought of the scene in Mean Girls where a teacher was giving a sexual education lesson and stated, “Don’t have sex or you will get pregnant and die.” It seemed like a similar message was being related in this text, “Don’t be curious or you will get pregnant and be sent to a nunnery.”
Throughout Fantomania curiosity very much retains it’s early connotations. It was used to explore knowledge which one really had no business exploring eg. the experiences of a prostitute. It was not a disciplined practice rather the whims of young girl. The individual who was curious was not a highly respected member of society nor a scholar. Interestingly, we see curiosity conceptualized as both lust and greed.
The lust which Beausplaisir experiences is heavily dependent on the novelty, the uncovering of that which was unseen, it was curiosity as lust. After this curiosity was satiated it abated.However, the curiosity in the Young Lady functions more according to curiosity as greed, as she goes to greater and greater lengths to satiate it.
I was taken back by the ending and immediately presumed the author meant only to equate curiosity with a failed attempt to challenge the status quo. However, I suppose this ending may have been used because of societal restraints on how Haywood could explicitly portray female sexuality. Haywood tacitly implies throughout the bulk of the story that curiosity could be used to gain control over men and even over love itself, as illustrated in the first quote. Curiosity allowed the Young Girl to become an agent in her own sexuality, rather than an object as was the norm during the time. The Young Lady manipulates Beausplaisir's curiosity, successfully for a period of time, to make the man fulfill her wishes. Haywood did use curiosity as an opportunity for licensed transgression but it was insinuated in a subtle insidious way. It's as if she means the exact opposite of what she is saying explicitly, like the box office ticket seller telling their friend, "You should not sneak into the theater through the back door that employees leave unlocked to take smoke breaks." This text is a unique example of a literary snap shot taken mid stride during the transition between conceptions and perceptions of curiosity.
“She could not forbear laughing heartily to think of the Tricks she has play’d him, and applauding her own Strength of Genius, and Force of Resolution, which by such unthought-of Ways could triumph over her lover’s Inconsistency...”
-Pg 283 Fantomania
“By analyzing the prose fictions by Aphra Behn, Delariviere Manly and Eliza Haywood… this chapter shows that early modern literature shifts from portraying sexual inquiry as an impertinent disruption of the status quo to providing it as an opportunity for licensed transgression.”
-Pg 21 Inspecting and Spectating: Monsters, Rarities, and Investigations
At first reading the second quote I was perplexed. What does it mean to use curiosity as a “opportunity for licensed transgression”? I certainly did not finish Fantomania and feel that curiosity was being condoned to any degree, it did not allow the lady to conquer her lover nor lead her to anything but ruin. Honestly, I immediately thought of the scene in Mean Girls where a teacher was giving a sexual education lesson and stated, “Don’t have sex or you will get pregnant and die.” It seemed like a similar message was being related in this text, “Don’t be curious or you will get pregnant and be sent to a nunnery.”
Throughout Fantomania curiosity very much retains it’s early connotations. It was used to explore knowledge which one really had no business exploring eg. the experiences of a prostitute. It was not a disciplined practice rather the whims of young girl. The individual who was curious was not a highly respected member of society nor a scholar. Interestingly, we see curiosity conceptualized as both lust and greed.
The lust which Beausplaisir experiences is heavily dependent on the novelty, the uncovering of that which was unseen, it was curiosity as lust. After this curiosity was satiated it abated.However, the curiosity in the Young Lady functions more according to curiosity as greed, as she goes to greater and greater lengths to satiate it.
I was taken back by the ending and immediately presumed the author meant only to equate curiosity with a failed attempt to challenge the status quo. However, I suppose this ending may have been used because of societal restraints on how Haywood could explicitly portray female sexuality. Haywood tacitly implies throughout the bulk of the story that curiosity could be used to gain control over men and even over love itself, as illustrated in the first quote. Curiosity allowed the Young Girl to become an agent in her own sexuality, rather than an object as was the norm during the time. The Young Lady manipulates Beausplaisir's curiosity, successfully for a period of time, to make the man fulfill her wishes. Haywood did use curiosity as an opportunity for licensed transgression but it was insinuated in a subtle insidious way. It's as if she means the exact opposite of what she is saying explicitly, like the box office ticket seller telling their friend, "You should not sneak into the theater through the back door that employees leave unlocked to take smoke breaks." This text is a unique example of a literary snap shot taken mid stride during the transition between conceptions and perceptions of curiosity.
Monday, September 9, 2013
Crusoe and The New Science
Are Crusoe’s perceptions of events twisted by the “Idols” Bacon mentions in his essay The New Science and does the character’s insight into these idols allow him to correct for their influence on his understanding of the event as Bacon asserts it can?
I was exceedingly surpriz’d with the Print of a Man’s naked Foot on the Shore… I came Home to my Fortification, not feeling, as we say, the Ground I went on, but terrify’d to the last Degree...mistaking every Bush and Tree and fancying every Stump at Distance to be a Man… I fancy’d it must be the Devil; and Reason joyn’d in with me upon this Supposition.
Robinson Crusoe Pg. 112
Oh what ridiculous Resolution Men take, when possess’d with Fear! It deprives them of the Use of those Means which Reason offers for their Relief.
Robinson Crusoe Pg. 115
The idols and false notions which are now in possession of the human understanding, and have taken deep root therein, not only so beset men’s minds that truth can hardly find entrance, but even after entrance obtained, they will again in the very insaturation of the sciences meet and trouble us, unless men being forewarned of the danger fortify themselves as far as may be against their assaults.
Portable Enlightenment Reader Pg. 41
When Crusoe comes upon the imprint of a foot, his understanding of the event is entirely twisted by the fear he experiences. His perception of the cause of the footprint is wildly illogical and even his perception of physical objects around him seems to be highly perturbed. He concludes the maker of the footprint to be the devil himself and is able to support this assertion with reason.
Crusoe’s perceptions and resulting assertions seem to follow the model that Bacon categorized when he described the four “Idols” which can take possession of the human understanding. According to his distinctions I believe Bacon would categorize the “Idol” in this case as The Idol of the Cave, or the idols of the individual man. It asserts the ways in which the each man’s individual mind can color and refract experiences.
Bacon takes a second step though and asserts further that by understanding the ways our own individual minds can refract and bend experiences, we can accommodate and correct for our perceptions. However, the process which Bacon describes for adjusting for our individual bias to come closer to the truth is not actualized by Crusoe. We notice that at an early point Crusoe acknowledges his faculties for reason were highly influenced by his fear. His preceding actions and thoughts continue to revolve around the acknowledged flawed belief. It wasn’t until Crusoe essentially rested and exausted his mind of worry naturally that he was able to come to a more plausible conclusion concerning the cause of the foot imprint.
This brings us to question the second assertion that Bacon makes. Specifically, does the acknowledgment of our biases actually allow us to correct for their effect on our perception and reason? If novels can be used to come to some understanding of the experiences people faced during an era of time, we may be able to draw evidence from this piece that Bacon’s second second assertion does not hold true. During the 18th century, it seems to have required more to uncolor perceptions from their biases than mere acknowledgement of said biases.
I was exceedingly surpriz’d with the Print of a Man’s naked Foot on the Shore… I came Home to my Fortification, not feeling, as we say, the Ground I went on, but terrify’d to the last Degree...mistaking every Bush and Tree and fancying every Stump at Distance to be a Man… I fancy’d it must be the Devil; and Reason joyn’d in with me upon this Supposition.
Robinson Crusoe Pg. 112
Oh what ridiculous Resolution Men take, when possess’d with Fear! It deprives them of the Use of those Means which Reason offers for their Relief.
Robinson Crusoe Pg. 115
The idols and false notions which are now in possession of the human understanding, and have taken deep root therein, not only so beset men’s minds that truth can hardly find entrance, but even after entrance obtained, they will again in the very insaturation of the sciences meet and trouble us, unless men being forewarned of the danger fortify themselves as far as may be against their assaults.
Portable Enlightenment Reader Pg. 41
When Crusoe comes upon the imprint of a foot, his understanding of the event is entirely twisted by the fear he experiences. His perception of the cause of the footprint is wildly illogical and even his perception of physical objects around him seems to be highly perturbed. He concludes the maker of the footprint to be the devil himself and is able to support this assertion with reason.
Crusoe’s perceptions and resulting assertions seem to follow the model that Bacon categorized when he described the four “Idols” which can take possession of the human understanding. According to his distinctions I believe Bacon would categorize the “Idol” in this case as The Idol of the Cave, or the idols of the individual man. It asserts the ways in which the each man’s individual mind can color and refract experiences.
Bacon takes a second step though and asserts further that by understanding the ways our own individual minds can refract and bend experiences, we can accommodate and correct for our perceptions. However, the process which Bacon describes for adjusting for our individual bias to come closer to the truth is not actualized by Crusoe. We notice that at an early point Crusoe acknowledges his faculties for reason were highly influenced by his fear. His preceding actions and thoughts continue to revolve around the acknowledged flawed belief. It wasn’t until Crusoe essentially rested and exausted his mind of worry naturally that he was able to come to a more plausible conclusion concerning the cause of the foot imprint.
This brings us to question the second assertion that Bacon makes. Specifically, does the acknowledgment of our biases actually allow us to correct for their effect on our perception and reason? If novels can be used to come to some understanding of the experiences people faced during an era of time, we may be able to draw evidence from this piece that Bacon’s second second assertion does not hold true. During the 18th century, it seems to have required more to uncolor perceptions from their biases than mere acknowledgement of said biases.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)