Philosophers Through the Ages

There are a wide variety of intriguing belief systems and philosophies within Sophie’s World, but several of them in particular stuck with me. The philosophies of Democritus, Descartes, Kant, and Freud were understandable, and I found them to be accurate and to go along with what I already believe in. There were a couple others, such as Plato and Berkeley, that I did not agree with. Regardless, I have found that after reading about each philosopher’s theories, I can either agree with them, or at least see where they are coming from in the case of most of them.

I was able to agree easily with Democritus, mostly because I know that what he hypothesized has been found to be true, for the most part. However, there were some facets of information about the earth that Democritus believed that I do not believe are true. A couple of these are the facts that Democritus was sure that atoms were indivisible and eternal. Modern science has determined that atoms are capable of being divided and God created the earth at some point, so the atoms that everything is made of couldn’t have existed before the earth was created. Not taking these differences into account, I do agree with Democritus that the world is made up of tiny particles of matter called atoms.

Descartes is an entirely different case than Democritus for me, mostly because I only agree with his very main goal, not necessarily what he believed was true about the world. Descartes’ thought about creating a new philosophical system that combined everything which had been learned in philosophy to date was fantastic, in my opinion. I also agree with Descartes that God exists, but after this point I do not agree with his points as much, if at all. It it hard for me to think that nothing in my environment is totally real, and I am just dreaming. Still, Descartes definitely had a brilliant idea when he wanted to create a system combining the theories created by philosophers before him.

Kant’s ideas about philosophy itself, not what he thought should be done with it, made sense to me. The idea that everyone may perceive the world differently seems very likely because, in my opinion, if we all perceived the world in the same way, we would all think very similarly, and there would not be much originality in the world. Freud also had an interesting thought about how humans act and make decisions. It seems practical to think that we make our decisions, at least some of them, based on what we feel or desire in our subconscious rather than by reasoning.

Plato and Berkeley each had ideas that I just could not agree with, mostly because they are simply so far out from what I envision reality to be. Plato’s thoughts about the world of ideas seem irrational to me, being as how God only created one world. I agreed with a few other aspects of Plato’s beliefs, but not his main focus. Berkeley also had very different ideas, in my opinion. As I mentioned earlier, I find it hard to think that reality is nothing but a different type of dream state, so I strongly disagreed with Berkeley.

After pondering everything that I have felt and believed to be true throughout all of Sophie’s World, I think that I probably reside in the middle of the rabbit’s fur. It has been somewhat of a struggle to open my mind to the different views of the philosophers, but I was able to, for most of them. I hope that I can continue to be aware of the world and keep asking insightful questions, just like Sophie learned to.

Unnecessarily Anxious

There are many situations in my life that I feel I am not capable of looking at clearly, and it was nice to see a clear example of that in Sophie’s World, with the red-tinted glasses experiment. The experiment was basically conducted to show Sophie what it is like to see the world from a different perspective, and give her a better understanding of Kant’s theory that there are certain conditions that prevent humans from experiencing the world clearly. There are many factors that I can think of in my own life that cause me to be incapable of perceiving my environment clearly, but one stands out above the others. My anxiety disorder often causes me to view situations differently, and then have highly escalated reactions in response.

Most students might procrastinate doing a certain difficult assignment, and just remember with annoyance that they still have to do it. For me, this is not the case. When I attempt to wait on doing an assignment for any period of time, I begin to think that I won’t be able to complete it in time and I cannot think of anything other than getting that assignment done, partly due to the huge knot in my stomach that tightens every time I think of a stressful assignment. In most cases, this can be helpful because I am pushed to do the assignment as soon as I can and then I don’t have to worry about it anymore. Unfortunately, it does not work so well when I find out that a friend is ahead of me on a project or has totally completed it before me. I become so anxious about getting to the point that they are, or farther, that I have difficulty focusing on anything else. If I think about how I feel logically, I know that feeling that way is totally irrational because I have plenty of time to complete the project if I continue on my own schedule. Regardless of this, I will normally continue to think about someone else being ahead of me, which could also be partly due to my competitiveness, until I give in and just finish the project, or do a colossal amount of it at once.

And of course, this anxiety spreads to situations outside of school as well. If I simply go to the movies with friends and I think that they talk to each other more than they do to me, I start believing that they don’t like me, or I have done something wrong to make them not want to talk to me. Once again, I know in my head that this feeling is totally ridiculous most often, but I cannot make it go away for a few day or sometimes until the next time that I can see those same friends again.

There are some small aspects of my anxiety that I am beginning to be capable of ignoring, so I hope 

that eventually I will be able to feel normally about most situations that currently stress me out. Until then, I 

will keep trying to know rationally how I should feel and hopefully stick to that feeling instead of seeing

things differently than almost everyone else.

Merging Christianity With Ancient Philosophy

When St. Augustine and Aquinas made it clear that it was okay to reason and believe in the theories of ancient Greek philosophers, while still being a Christian, it changed the lives of many individuals living during the Middle Ages. People’s knowledge that they could believe in what Plato and Aristotle had theorized, while still maintaining their belief in God, basically answered the main medieval philosophical question.

St. Augustine thought he was a totally Christian man, yet he wanted to practice using reason. I believe it is for this reason that he merged Platonic philosophy with Christian views, in order to maintain his faith, but learn about the world in whatever way he pleased. Had the Christian or Platonic views on how the world was created been different, it is still likely that St. Augustine would have found a way to allow them both to be true, in my opinion. I also believe that St. Thomas Aquinas christianized Aristotle for the same reason, simply to still be a devout Christian without giving up his philosophical views.

These revelations were highly significant for all Christians that were interested in philosophy, or were purposefully ignoring philosophy in order to maintain their faith. Had Aquinas and St. Augustine believed that you could only believe in either the theories of the ancient Greek philosophers or God, all of history could have been changed. The philosophical theories of Plato and Aristotle could have simply been forgotten in history because all of the Christian population could not have agreed with or tried to understand their views on philosophy.

Fortunately, since Augustine and Aquinas felt the way they did about the two beliefs coming together, the theories of Aristotle and Plato have been carried with Christianity into the present. People can ponder and discuss the theories to this day, and decide what side to agree with on certain issues, if St. Aquinas or St. Augustine never found a suitable answer as to how both sides could be possible.

Conclusively, since St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas were able to tie together the belief in Christianity and the theories of Plato and Aristotle, everything about the two ancient Greek philosophers can still be studied today. Who knows, had all of the Christian population not been able to learn about their philosophical theories, anything else the two of them thought might not have still been around to study today either. Regardless, I believe that St. Augustine and Thomas Aquinas had a positive effect on the philosophical and Christian worlds.

The Role of Females in Philosophy

Aristotle was an ingenious ancient philosopher, who had many ideas about life that are still looked upon with respect today. I thought that his views on ethics were very relatable and could agree with them rather easily. However, I found Aristotle's views on women to be highly unrealistic. His take on the role of women was probably looked at a bit more open-mindedly during his time, because there had not been as much progress in the medical field and what exactly a woman's role is in that context. In my opinion, if Aristotle had known that a woman was in no way an "unfinished man", he might have viewed women differently all around. Had Aristotle spent more time around women, or if women had played a higher role in society during his time, I think his take on them might have changed after having seen that they are men's equals.
Plato, like Aristotle, was a great ancient Greek philosopher, but the two men had highly contrasting opinions on many philosophical issues. For example, he believed in a world of ideas that existed along with the material world, while Aristotle did not believe that a world of ideas actually existed. Their views on women differentiated from each other greatly as well. Plato believed that women could be just as capable as men in a position of authority, but he thought this was only true if they were not responsible for raising children or keeping a house, or any other typical duties associated with women. I find Plato's views on women more acceptable than Aristotle's by far, though it seems to me that a woman would not need to be totally separated from child rearing to be just as capable of reasoning as a man.
One statement of Plato's that I agree most with is,"A state that does not educate women is like a man that only trains his right arm." In my opinion, this quote shows very clearly that Plato saw women as men's equals, unlike Aristotle. Plato seems to have tried to allow women to lead lives equal to those that men could lead, and even if he didn't totally make this happen, he at least built a foundation for women to have full rights later in time.
Throughout the entire novel, almost all characters of authority were male, which I believe was in part due to how the world has always been, with men being in roles of power, and also may be due in part to any bias of the author, Jostein Gaarder, being as how he is a male as well. In the past, women probably did not have to courage to aim for a powerful role in society because of their predetermined status and fear of the reactions to their boldness. Also, throughout most of ancient and recent history, women were not allowed to have important roles in society or would be disrespected if they did, had they been bold enough to try for a position of power or honor within their society.
Overall, the different philosophers have had varying opinions about what women's role in life should be, some with positive attitudes towards women and others with negative attitudes. Regardless, for many centuries, most women did not have important roles in society, which means that even if there were many female philosophers, they were not taken seriously and, hence, not mentioned in Sophie's World.

From the Beginning of Time

There have been theories since the beginning of time about how the world came to be and who people are or what they are meant to do. I find it hard to agree with any one philosopher's opinion on how the world came to be because, given the times that they lived in, each of their reasoning methods makes sense. I am going to attempt to answer in my own words how the world came to be and who I believe that I am, but there are a multitude of other answers that could be given to both of these questions because everyone has their own opinion about these things and there is no right or wrong.

            To begin with, my name is Samantha Peak, and I have lived in Evansville, Indiana my entire life. I am very focused on school and maintaining good grades, but I love to spend time with my friends when I have the chance. When I am around my friends, I can be outgoing, but if I am placed in a situation that I've never experienced before, I tend to become very introverted. Normally, I try to be understanding and treat everyone with the same respect that I would like to be treated with. These qualities make me who I am, even though sometimes I think it would be better if I could change some of them.

            It is very difficult to try and sum up all of who I am, or who anyone is, with words. A person is more than just a description because everything that they do adds to their character and a few hundred, or even a thousand, words will never be able to catch up with everything that a person is doing. I feel that I'm not exactly a whole person yet because I still have so many important decisions to make, such as what type of job I want or where I want to live after I move out, that could totally alter how my life will turn out. A career in the medical field interests me greatly, but even that doesn't narrow down my options much. Choosing a college ties in to choosing a career path and where I want to live, and I haven't even made this decision yet. Considering all of this, I guess currently I believe that I am a flexible person that could turn out in a variety of different ways, but I hope that when I am done changing I will still be caring, understanding, and independent.

            Answering where the world is from is another thing entirely from simply trying to say who I am. I definitely believe that God created the world in the beginning, but this leads me to ask the question,"Where did God come from?" It seems unfathomable to me that anyone or anything could have simply always existed, but I also don't see how God could have just come to be one day. I guess this is a question that I can only partially answer as of right now, because I'm not entirely sure what I believe about how God came to be and I believe the world was created after God existed.

            Deciding who I am and where I believe the world comes from is very tricky. Currently, I do not think that I can completely answer either of these questions, but I hope that eventually I will gain enough understanding of the world to be able to answer them more thoroughly.