The Stranger Blog Post #2

"So close to death, Maman must have felt free then and ready to live it all again. Nobody, nobody had the right to cry over her. And I felt ready to live it all again too" (122). I felt confuse but I somehow understand him when he said that. I wonder if Meursault is saying that because when Maman's life is going to be renew, we shouldn't cry for her death. Or when I imagined a funeral, people cried because the person had passed away. However, are the people crying because of the person's death or is it because they are going to feel lonely or...both?

Having Meursaults opinion imprinted on my mind, I can't help but question if I would be like Meursault when someone dear, like his Maman pass away. Rather than thinking sadly for the person's death, I would feel happier that the person are going to live in a new life. I think the quote is ironic that: death = new life+happy. I can see how it connects to Meursault's life because he is going to be executed, but thinking back about all these things that had happened, he would be free of it once he's gone from the world. Though I see it as sadness, but being free is better than being stuck in a life in jail. However, would the new life be better or worse? I think all of us thought about it, what if we have a different life, how would that be? We hope that it would be better than the life we have but we are also scared that the new life would be worse.

From the quote, I think Meursault is looking forward to his new life like how his Maman would feel. Like mother like son? What I'm confuse at it is why does Meursault say that "nobody, nobody has the right to cry over her"? I wonder if it is only you that can cry over your life. Others may cry but they may not be crying what you are crying about. What is the "right" that Meursault is talking about and what would happen if we do have the right? Even though I finish reading the book, it still seems very confusing of what Meursault is trying to convey in his last chapter. It feels as if death is when all the feelings inside oneself comes out and then by the end, the feelings of calm and/or happiness would take over because all the bad feelings have been shouted out. Then we would start thinking about life after death. I think its interesting and after reading the Stranger, I keep thinking what would happen after my death. Will my soul be born again? Like a phoenix who resurrects itself or only darkness awaits similar to my body being buried under the soil, sleeping forever... Hmmm... I wonder if I should anticipate it or that it is a depressing idea to think about.

Who is this guy? [The Stranger by Albert Camus]

I don't know how I think about Meursault. I believe he is human but his personality confuses me. One thing that I think I realize is that he seems to be hiding his feelings somewhere inside of him. He doesn't show his emotions in the book, even though we are inside his mind or that Albert Camus was writing his character that is out of our predictions. He is one of the rare characters that I have seen that doesn't give much emotions on the outside. When Raymond and he was together and Raymond asked him what he think about the girl cheating on him but Meursault responded, "I said I didn't think anything but that it was interesting" (32). When he said that quote, I thought I can connect to him because when people tell me things that they had experience and I didn't, I can't really think about it as much as I would if I did experience it. Then I would say to them, "ah, I see" or "interesting" like Meursault did and after saying that, somehow, I wouldn't ask pass anymore. This made me connect to Banach of why we can't feel each others feelings as much as we thought we would; how we are all alone and can only feel our own feelings and not the others. Though I would still think it is interesting when they tell me what they want to tell me because if I feel that my mind is blank; not really thinking about what they are saying; all I would be coming up was, "sure, very interesting".

In chapter 1, where he was describing all the details - the trip to the home where Maman was, then having to see the friends of Maman to come in the vigil, seeing them cried and wishing they be quiet, then having to walk to the church, I thought he was rather interesting but also a bit heartless even though his mother died. The details that he wrote like this quote: "the sticky black of the tar, the dull black of all the clothes, and the shiny black of the hearse. All of it - the sun, the smell of leather and horse dung from the hearse, the smell of varnish and incense and my fatigue after a night without sleep - was making it hard for me to see or think straight" (17). When I read it again, even though he said his fatigue is making him hard to see or think straight, he was able to provide so many details of what's going on as well as throughout the whole chapter. However, he does not mention all the things that I would have predict he would be doing if he wasn't a character like that such as mourning for his mother, thinking about memories about his mother; doing some kind of action and thinking that makes us feel sad for him rather than having me thought of him as a detached person plus 95% heartless. I also see that he never talked about his mother much though technically, I thought he should have been. He seems to be ignoring about the actual important thing (his mother being dead); doesn't seem to care as much as he thought he is and is focusing on details of other things around him. Overall, I'm trying to convey that Meursault is a character that don't like focusing on the main/big event that is happening in the chapter but is looking around for the less noticeable things.

Meursault, a detached character seems to come back when people asked him about his mothers death or telling him that they are sorry for her death. In chapter 5, when Salamano had lost his dog, then had a talk with Meursault and at the end of that, "He said he supposed I must be very sad since Maman died, and I didn't say anything" (45). My big question: Why isn't he saying anything? That gets me stuck and frustrated because I don't think I have an answer/prediction of what he would say. Before, he would keep telling people that it isn't his fault but now he is keeping quiet. And I wonder if Albert Camus is trying to tell us to insert our own answer into his place. I'm thinking about it now but nothing is coming up; feels as if my mind is like a blank sheet of paper. Now that I think about it, I think Meursault is a whiteness person. White symbolizes pure, innocent, and I would add: random into it as well because to be a person that symbolizes white, we might not get what that person thinks most of the time. Because nobody is completely white or completely black; that might be why its hard to understand or connect to him. Meursault doesn't think about much things as I am perceiving him in the chapters I have read and the way he answers to the questions like when Marie ask him if he wants to marry her, he responded, "I said it didn't mean any difference to me and that we could if she wanted to" (41). In one way I think he believes nothing is worth the thinking, so he replied in a way to Marie that marriage is nothing, which is sad. But on the other hand, I wonder if he does actually care since he said, "we could if she wanted to", which made me thought that he is caring for Marie's feelings. It sounded as if he actually loves her (a bit or more). I think a lot of his replies, his thinkings are interpret to both ways as I just did, which adds to the confusion more. Just what do Albert Camus want us to do and think by reading Meursault's life?

I don't think Meursault is a jerk or else it wouldn't be this confusing reading about his decisions. I think the meaning behind his decisions are being twisted around because there are always the two fundamental answers, the yes side or the no side. Like how we are as well; sometimes we make a decision that we're not sure of and that can be interpret differently by what others think of. Though I think Meursault's decisions are harder to interpret. In the book, he doesn't express his feelings much but more around what's around him (showing his observing skills), which made me wonder if decisions are hard for him to do. I think words are hard to be said out when it comes to our feelings. There are a lot of times when words can't come out as easily as I would imagine. People would ask me "what's wrong?" (I don't like that question, but I don't know why) when they see that I have not a happy face. Then I think about if I should tell them, or would they understand. So if I did want to explain it, words wouldn't come out because I don't know how to express it and I would say, "whatever, not going to explain it" in my mind. Which ended as I would shook my head and said, "nothing". If The Strangers was made into a film, I wonder how they would do Meursault's expressions because I think expressions are one thing that I think we can't hide well when its taken by surprise.

Even though I said that Meursault is a character that is confusing, I think it is confusing because Albert Camus is trying to mix all the personalities/beliefs/ideas/and all the "etc/stuff" that we are rather ignorant about; or more that we don't think we are doing it. And since he is an existentialist, I thought he wrote Meursault like that because there are rare people like him, that we rarely interact with (I guess the ignorant part) and I feel that Meursault is a part of Albert Camus. He is the observer of the world but he doesn't seem to comment on it, and goes with the flow in some ways; sometimes just agrees like becoming friends with his neighbors that doesn't have friends. And by thinking he is the observer, I think it makes more sense that he is a stranger to us because we're the subject that he is experimenting on. I may get some of what he is thinking but I don't think I can understand his ways of thinking or how Albert Camus is creating this character until I read more. Or maybe I would not get it even if I read the whole book.

Signs off... o.O

Do we Live in a world that is Meaningful and makes Sense?

I don’t think that we live in a complete meaningful life or that life makes complete sense. That’s why; I think everybody is waiting for that moment(s) to happen, where life becomes momentous and enjoyable.

I am not exactly sure what a meaningful life is because the word “meaningful” is a very strong emotional and high value word. I feel that we place our life as high value because it is the only life we would have (unless there are truths about reincarnation) so we need to ask ourselves why are we living the life we are born to live in? A lot of the times, we tell ourselves that we are normal, like anyone else but we also tell ourselves that we are different from each other. Similar to what Bernard said that “Everything is the same, even if it’s different” (I heart Huckabees). He used the blanket to show that no matter where, who, what we are, we are all the same. However, we are all different because we all look different, in one way or another, which doesn’t make sense. Once we see that the tiny things, we start to notice its difference but once we enlarge the view, it all looks the same. The answers that we found, seems to cause us to ask more questions but also trying to find deeper answers. It is like those philosophers that asks questions after questions because there are always something questionable to the answers.

I think a meaningful life is to become your true self. A self that you are happy with; and not a self that makes you wonder whether what you are doing is right and you happy with the decisions. Even though life has regrets and mistakes, you choose it for yourself (if you are in your true self), which would make your life more meaningful. Decisions are a freedom that you have, that you need to protect to be honest with yourself. I think it’s meaningful that one should be honest with one’s life or else that person is only living in a despair world. A despair world because it would be a life of lies; and on top of that, you are lying to yourself, cutting out the truths and honesty within yourself. You only have one life so why should you lie to yourself? Like Dawn from I heart Huckabees , she finally found her true self which is to stop being a model and starts wearing a bonnet. She doesn’t mind what others are saying and believes what she wants to believe. I think that everybody should do what they believe in that makes themselves true to themselves.

Life doesn’t make complete sense just like ghosts, paranormal and Gods don’t make sense. It’s what we believe in, or the logic (for science) that helps us make sense of what we’re dealing with. I think one point that we need to live in a meaningful life is to believe ourselves because without believing, I don’t think anyone can find anything they can enjoy well. They like it because they believe it like I believe anime can teach us many lessons depending on the genre as well as books. Books are wonderful resources where we get a lot of our history from and the knowledge that other people put in, with their beliefs that get us to change how we think and our future. They think its right because they believe it. They think it is right not to kill a person or that they think that path is cool to follow. They have their own mind to choose that they think is right for them; or what they believe is the road for them to follow. There are other things that are different than the one they had pick but they believe that there are other things existing there. For example, I believe in ghosts, magic and the fantasy genre but others might not like it or not believe in it. But as long as I “believe” in it, that I love it, then I don’t think others opinions matter as much as my own. Connecting back to Banach, he said we put others opinions/expectations before our own, which I think made us lose some of the true self. Therefore, I think its best to think about our own beliefs/opinions before thinking about others.

I think by believing, meaningful events would start to happen and if they believe in the meaningfulness in the events, it would begin to make sense. Like how I think life doesn’t make sense, which is right, that life doesn’t make sense. So…I’m waiting for something to happen (not sure what, which and I wonder everyday) that makes life more fun and interesting.

Personal Manifesto [Final Draft]

WHAM! You just killed someone and blood trickles down on your face. You got extremely scared, thinking that the police and everybody are coming at your direction. The police are raising their guns at you and the people are murmuring at you and staring down at you. BUT! No one came… Shock surges through you as you laugh out loud. You feel freedom bursting through your heart and the happiness of killing that person for whatever your reasons you have.

Believe it or not, that whole imagination scene is WRONG! We are not as free as what the above situation sounds even though it’s a crazy situation. All of us share restrictions that don’t allow us to do what we want such as flying. This connects with our free will in what we want to do. By free will, we have our own thoughts; our own opinions meaning these opinions can make someone happy or hurt them. Like the people who are watching you, staring down at you after you killed someone. They think it is immoral of what you did and that you are not apart of us, the side that is the “good side”.

This subjectivity that the mankind has influence each others causes each other for most of the time to rethink twice. We follow our own opinions, we follow our own ideas but are we actually doing that? Banach said that we must take “obligations we have to other people” because we are taking on “the responsibility of choosing for all men”. We have to think about the “freedom for all men”. We are not alone in this even if we can not figure out each others thoughts completely but because we are living with each other, we need to prioritize others thoughts before our own.

Essence precedes “bad faith”. I think this “bad faith” that we created of these negativity from our emotions and thoughts get piled up, would make us weaken. With this pessimistic energy around us, we start to “deceive ourselves and act as if we weren’t free” and we are determine by “the expectations of other people”. Expectation is a large responsibility and whether we want it or not, it is always there. We have the choice of completing but sometimes by not completing a task, it makes ourselves feel less accomplished and make our negativity bar go up. I believe we make ourselves think that way as well as others influences that create a huge hold up in our lives.

On the other hand, I believe that you should just believe in yourself, as other people say it as well. “I am free to do whatever I choose” as Banach said. We can wheel ourselves in and make our own material even if the “raw materials” are already “determined”. We can control our own self and make that force go away. We are more than what we think and what others tell us. However, I truly believe that you have to believe what you think you want to believe before having others to influence you on your believe. Your essence comes before others but your actions and decisions can come after others influences or expectations on you.

Banach says we can control what we can view on the objects but there are also forces that make us against what we can do. So does that mean we have control such as when we want to kill someone but also that there are some forces/reasons are pushing them against their will, to make them commit a crime? Most of the crime, I believe there are reasons behind it but it might not that we can control or know what's the reason. Our desires, our troubles, our passion to do something push us to the edge of the cliff but are we able to control those feelings when it is very strong? I think yes, but also maybe, because even if we keep up a front, the feelings inside us bubble up, wanting to let it go. Like an explosion that we cannot keep it in for long or else we'll break.

Now, imagine yourself being in a crowded area. I mean extremely crowded, with so many people. However, they are in their own world, in their own mind. You might think that at least some people are talking about with each other but in this crowded area, they are with themselves. You are standing in this crowd where none of them notice you and the people would walk around you to walk to where they are heading. You notice them but they don’t notice you. What emotions would you feel? You would feel alone, confuse because you have no one to interact with. You have nothing that can entertain you and you look around, seeing the people walking by themselves. What can you do to get their attention?

These imaginations that I am telling you imagine in your mind, are you freely doing this? Are you imagining them to understand what I am trying to say? It is the same for me; I am creating these imaginations for the readers to create an understanding of what I want to shout out. I am writing this blog post, for someone to read it and try to understand what I am trying to say.

Now, getting back, this feeling of loneliness and the confusion makes you lose your control of thoughts. Your essence, your thinking would change because your view is different. By being in a crowd, you are traveling through a maze where you need to find the right way to leave this confusion. Don’t you feel that way when once you get to an open area, your heart feels more relax than being a constricted area? I feel that a lot of the times because you want to get to where you are but you can’t. There are so many people crowding around you, invading your space. I feel, as my heart would go mad, having my space of freedom to move around getting restricted. We want to be alone a lot of the times but then your feelings would change and you would feel lonely. Our feelings go back and forth just like our happiness and freedom. This confusion, this essence of ours that makes the confusion is so confusing that we might not even get what we want to know.

We ask each other about a lot of things. We share this knowledge and experiences of ours and teach the others about it. We share our secrets with others and hope that they would understand. Then there is the problem where our communication wouldn’t connect and problems start. However, because of the problems I believe we develop this massive knowledge for the mankind to receive other learning and experiences. I believe that we have our own experiences and answers but we can have similarities with other people that allowed us to converse and feel that we are not alone. Unlike what Banach said that we are “unable to feel anything but our own feelings and experiences”, I think we have these feelings and experiences because it is passed down through the evolution of mankind.

I believe that happiness is a silent word and freedom is an undefined idea. We feel happiness because we feel happiness. Just that simple. That’s why, why think about something that might ruin our mood of happiness? And then there's freedom; how much quantity of freedom do we think we have that makes our answers different from each other? We can have freedom that is as small as having a lollipop to as big as criminal justice, the laws and wars.

Unlike what I have said, I agree with Banach that a lot of the times we can’t feel what others are feeling. What we feel is ours alone because every feeling that came from the situation/scenario that we are in always has something different in it. But as I said, feelings can be similar and doesn’t have to be the same.

I think a lot of the times, what Banach states at the end of the third lecture that "real happiness...cannot be taken away by the external forces beyond their control." Such as the small things like eating the food we like, that we feel satisfied, that we have to say "how delicious" that we think this is happiness. I believe that there is real happiness when one feels it and I don't expect that we need to explain to anyone when we feel that real happiness. It is because if we start explaining it, they would ask questions, then we would have to explain more. The more I think about how to answer their questions, the more I thought that that can ruin the real happiness that I just feel because I want to continue feeling this "real happiness”.

However, I think happiness can also be shared such as winning a prize as a group. The whole group would be shouting for joy. As well as having given a birth; the grandparents would be excited getting a grandchild and the parents would be so glad of having a baby in their life. I would be so happy once an exciting anime series came out and a manga that has beautiful drawings plus the whole book is anticipating. Then by sharing that happiness with another person, I am introducing them to a part of my world. In a lot of the anime series, the main hero/heroine would say, “I’m going to protect everyone”, “They are important to me”, “They make me happy and I would like to make them happy”. Happiness is silent word that can be shared just by using body movements and the will or something in our mind that makes the happiness happens.

For freedom, I believe there is and I believe there isn’t. As I stated before, freedom is an undefined idea and what each person thinks about freedom, the quantity of freedom, and the stories are different. Plus, there are a lot of types of freedom that we are thinking that differs from each other. I believe to gain freedom, such as overcoming a fear, we need to go through a force, whether it is tiny or huge that would come to bother us. It is telling us that if you want to get what you want, you must overcome moi. We all need to think of a way to cross out these obstacles, and then we would feel that we become stronger and our freedom would extend more.

As for the crime situation, I think we all have reasons behind our actions and even if we don’t, I believe that it is because we can’t understand them. It is wrong to kill someone but it depends on how that someone had treated the murderer. Even though we call them victims, are some of them victims, victims or are some of the murderers the one who are the victims? The murderers’ freedom is always less than the victims because they are the one that committed the “bad faith”. Then we must take “responsibility” of the actions we took and are blamed by the others who also made these bad faiths into reality.

Freedom, I believe, is something that cannot be just there for you easily but you have to earn it. Also for the others who are connected to you, part of what they earn, the freedom, will also go to you and part of yours will go to them. Such as, you are in this world because your parents “earned” you to come into this world. There! That is the start of your freedom, the starting line where you need to start running to go through this period of your life. You start school but it is because of your parents’ knowledge, they got you in, they “earned” the funds, and most importantly, they wish for you to get an education. So in the school you are attending, if you want, you would “earn” to get a good grade for your parents to see it, so they can be happy. If you have a path that you choose that you want to go in, you need to “earn” what you need to to get that onto that path and beyond. Freedom is not easy to collect but it is easy with your own determination and with the others around you. Therefore, I believe that freedom is happiness and happiness is freedom because we have to feel one of the other first to get the other to become complete.

Rather or not I am an existentialist or an individualist, I don't think that matters. "Existentialist" and "individualist" are titles that we categorize ourselves in. This whole manifesto that I am writing is a personal part of what I am thinking about the mankind. We might be alone but by bickering or sharing or spreading each others ideals, feeling our pressure and their pressure at the same atmosphere, all of our other things grow.

I believe that by not feeling lonely or secluding yourself but go the way you believe is right (whether you want to choose to have the expectations or not); you would be able to access to more freedom and happiness. Each person’s happiness and freedom are connected with other people. Once you find those people that are “destined” or “fated” to meet you, then they come to support you, and giving you the feelings that you need to fill the void in your heart, I believe you will feel better. Then there will be so many experiences you will get with the people you are connected by invisible strings.

So, do you feel alone now?

How about your freedom?

Your happiness? Ah, but don't answer me. Like I already said, happiness is a silent word.

Personal Manifesto [Edited Draft]

WHAM! You just killed someone and blood trickles down on your face. You got extremely scared, thinking that the police and everybody are coming at your direction. The police are raising their guns at you and the people are murmuring at you and staring down at you. BUT! No one came… Shock surges through you as you laugh out loud. You feel freedom bursting through your heart and the happiness of killing that person for whatever your reasons you have.

Believe it or not, that whole imagination scene is WRONG! We are not as free as what the above situation sounds even though it’s a crazy situation. All of us share restrictions that doesn’t allow us to do what we want such as flying. This connects with our free will in what we want to do. By free will, we have our own thoughts; our own opinions meaning these opinions can make someone happy or hurt them. Like the people who are watching you, staring down at you after you killed someone. They think it is immoral of what you did and that you are not apart of us, the side that is the “good side”.

This subjectivity that the mankind has influence each others causes each other for most of the time to rethink twice. We follow our own opinions, we follow our own ideas but are we actually doing that? Banach said that we must take “obligations we have to other people” because we are taking on “the responsibility of choosing for all men”. We have to think about the “freedom for all men”. We are not alone in this even if we can not figure out each others thoughts completely but because we are living with each other, we need to prioritize others thoughts before our own.

Essence precedes “bad faith”. I think this “bad faith” that we created of these negativity from our emotions and thoughts get piled up, would make us weaken. With this pessimistic energy around us, we start to “deceive ourselves and act as if we weren’t free” and we are determine by “the expectations of other people”. Expectation is a large responsibility and whether we want it or not, it is always there. We have the choice of completing but sometimes by not completing a task, it makes ourselves feel less accomplished and make our negativity bar go up. I believe we make ourselves think that way as well as others influences that create a huge hold up in our lives.

On the other hand, I believe that you should just believe in yourself, as other people say it as well. “I am free to do whatever I choose” as Banach said. We can wheel ourselves in and make our own material even if the “raw materials” are already “determined”. We can control our own self and make that force go away. We are more than what we think and what others tell us. However, I truly believe that you have to believe what you think you want to believe before having others to influence you on your believe. Your essence comes before others but your actions and decisions can come after others influences or expectations on you.

Banach says we can control what we can view on the objects but there are also forces that make us against what we can do. So does that mean we have control such as when we want to kill someone but also that there are some forces/reasons are pushing them against their will, to make them commit a crime? Most of the crime, I believe there are reasons behind it but it might not that we can control or know what's the reason. Our desires, our troubles, our passion to do something push us to the edge of the cliff but are we able to control those feelings when it is very strong? I think yes, but also maybe, because even if we keep up a front, the feelings inside us bubble up, wanting to let it go. Like an explosion that we cannot keep it in for long or else we'll break.

Now, imagine yourself being in a crowded area. I mean extremely crowded, with so many people. However, they are in their own world, in their own mind. You might think that at least some people are talking about with each other but in this crowded area, they are with themselves. You are standing in this crowd where none of them notice you and the people would walk around you to walk to where they are heading. You notice them but they don’t notice you. What emotions would you feel? You would feel alone, confuse because you have no one to interact with. You have nothing that can entertain you and you look around, seeing the people walking by themselves. What can you do to get their attention?

These imaginations that I am telling you imagine in your mind, are you freely doing this? Are you imagining them to understand what I am trying to say? It is the same for me, I am creating these imaginations for the readers to create a understanding of what I want to shout out. I am writing this blog post, for someone to read it and try to understand what I am trying to say.

Now, getting back, this feeling of loneliness and the confusion makes you lose your control of thoughts. Your essence, your thinking would change because your view is different. By being in a crowd, you are traveling through a maze where you need to find the right way to leave this confusion. Don’t you feel that way when once you get to an open area, your heart feels more relax than being a constricted area? I feel that a lot of the times because you want to get to where you are but you can’t. There are so many people crowding around you, invading your space. I feel, as my heart would go mad, having my space of freedom to move around getting restricted. We want to be alone a lot of the times but then your feelings would change and you would feel lonely. Our feelings go back and forth just like our happiness and freedom. This confusion, this essence of ours that makes the confusion is so confusing that we might not even get what we want to know.

We ask each other about a lot of things. We share this knowledge and experiences of ours and teach the others about it. We share our secrets with others and hope that they would understand. Then there is the problem where our communication wouldn’t connect and problems start. However, because of the problems I believe we develop this massive knowledge for the mankind to receive other learning and experiences. I believe that we have our own experiences and answers but we can have similarities with other people that allowed us to converse and feel that we are not alone. Unlike what Banach said that we are “unable to feel anything but our own feelings and experiences”, I think we have these feelings and experiences because it is passed down through the evolution of mankind.

I believe that happiness is a silent word and freedom is an undefined idea. We feel happiness because we feel happiness. Just that simple. That’s why, why think about something that might ruin our mood of happiness? And then there's freedom; how much quantity of freedom do we think we have that makes our answers different from each other? We can have freedom that is as small as having a lollipop to as big as criminal justice, the laws and wars.

Unlike what I have said, I agree with Banach that a lot of the times we can’t feel what others are feeling. What we feel is ours alone because every feeling that came from the situation/scenario that we are in always has something different in it. But as I said, feelings can be similar and doesn’t have to be the same.

I think a lot of the times, what Banach states at the end of the third lecture that "real happiness...cannot be taken away by the external forces beyond their control." Such as the small things like eating the food we like, that we feel satisfied, that we have to say "how delicious" that we think this is happiness. I believe that there is real happiness when one feels it and I don't expect that we need to explain to anyone when we feel that real happiness. It is because if we start explaining it, they would ask questions, then we would have to explain more. The more I think about it, the more I thought, that can ruin the real happiness that I just feel because I want to continue feeling this "real happiness”.

However, I think happiness can be shared such as winning a prize as a group. The whole group would be shouting for joy. Having given a birth; the grandparents would be excited getting a grandchild, and the parents would be so glad of having a baby in their life. I would be so happy once an exciting anime series came out and a manga that has beautiful drawings and the whole book is exciting. Then sharing that happiness with another person and introducing them to a part of my world. For example, in a lot of the anime series, the main character would say, “I’m going to protect everyone”, “They are important to me”, “They make me happy and I would like to make them happy”. Happiness is silent word that can be shared just by using body movements and the will or something in our mind that makes the happiness happens.

For freedom, I believe there is and I believe there isn’t. As I stated before, freedom is an undefined idea and what each person thinks about freedom, the quantity of freedom, and the stories are different. Plus, there are a lot of types of freedom that we are thinking and are different. I believe to gain freedom, such as overcoming a fear, we need to go through a force, whether it is tiny or huge that would come to bother us. It is telling us that if you want to get what you want, you must over moi. We all need to think of a way to cross out these obstacles, and then we would feel that we become stronger and our freedom would extend more.

As for the crime situation, I think we all have reasons behind our actions and even if we don’t, I believe that it is because we can’t understand them. It is wrong to kill someone but it depends on how that someone had treated the murderer. Even though we call them victims, are some of them victims, victims or are some of the murderers the one who are the victims? The murderers’ freedom are always less than the victims because they are the one that committed the “bad faith”. Then we must take “responsibility” of the actions we took and are blamed by the others who also made these bad faith into reality.

Rather or not I am an existentialist or an individualist, I don't think that matters. "Existentialist" and "individualist" are names to categorize ourselves in. This whole manifesto that I am writing is a personal part of what I am thinking about the mankind. We might be alone but by bickering with each others ideals, feeling our pressure and their pressure, all of our other things grow.

I believe that by not feeling lonely or secluding yourself but go the way you believe is right (whether you want to choose it with the expectations or not); you would access to more freedom and happiness. Each person’s happiness and freedom are connected with other people. Once you find those people that are “destined” or “fated” to meet you, then they come to support you, and giving you the feelings that you need to fill the void in your heart, I believe you will feel better. Then there will be so many experiences you will get with the people you are connected by invisible strings.

So, do you feel alone now?

How about your freedom?

Your happiness? Ah, but don't answer me. Like I already said, happiness is a silent word.

Personal Manifesto [First Draft]

WHAM! You just killed someone and blood trickles down on your face. You got extremely scared, thinking that the police and everybody are coming at your direction. The police are raising their guns at you and the people are murmuring at you and staring down at you. BUT! No one came… Shock surges through you as you laugh out loud. You feel freedom bursting through your heart and the happiness of killing that person for whatever your reasons you have.

Believe it or not, that whole imagination scene is WRONG! We are not as free as what that situation sounds even though it’s a crazy situation. All of us share restrictions that don’t allow us to do what we want such as flying. This connects with our free will in what we want to do. By free will, we have our own thoughts; our own opinions meaning these opinions can make someone happy or hurt them. Such as the people who are watching you, staring down at you after you killed someone. They think it is immoral of what you did and that you are not apart of us, the side that is the “good side”.

This subjectivity that the mankind has influences each others actions and causes us most of the time to rethink twice. We follow our own opinions, we follow our own ideas but are we actually doing that? Banach said that we must take “obligations we have to other people” because we are taking on “the responsibility of choosing for all men”. We have to think about the “freedom for all men”. We are not alone in this even if we can not figure out each others thoughts completely but because we are living with each other, we need to prioritize others thoughts before our own.

Essence precedes “bad faith”. I think this “bad faith” that we created of these negativity from our emotions and thoughts get piled up, would make us weaken. With this pessimistic energy around us, we start to “deceive ourselves and act as if we weren’t free” and we are determine by “the expectations of other people”. Expectation is a large responsibility and whether we want it or not, it is always there. We have the choice of completing but that makes ourselves feel less accomplished and makes the negativity go up. I believe we make ourselves think that way as well as others influences that create a huge hold up in our lives.

On the other hand, I believe that you should just believe in yourself, as other people say it as well. “I am free to do whatever I choose” as Banach said. We can wheel ourselves in and make our own material even if the “raw materials” are already “determined”. We can control our own self and make that force go away. We are more than what we think and what others tell us. However, I truly believe that you have to believe what you think you want to believe before having others to influence you on your believe. Your essence comes before others but your actions and decisions can come after others influences or expectations on you.

Banach says we can control what we can view on the objects but there are also forces that make us against what we can do. So does that mean we have control such as when we want to kill someone but also that there are some forces/reasons are pushing them against their will, to make them commit a crime? Most of the crime, I believe there are reasons behind it but it might not that we can control or know what's the reason. Our desires, our troubles, our passion to do something push us to the edge of the cliff but are we able to control those feelings when it is very strong? I think yes, but also maybe, because even if we keep up a front, the feelings inside us bubble up, wanting to let it go. Like an explosion that we cannot keep it in for long or else we'll break.

Now, imagine yourself being in a crowded area. I mean extremely crowded, with so many people. However, they are in their own world, in their own mind. You might think that at least some people are talking about with each other but in this crowded area, they are with themselves. You are standing in this crowd where none of them notice you and the people would walk around you to walk to where they are heading. You notice them but they don’t notice you. What emotions would you feel? You would feel alone, confuse because you have no one to interact with. You have nothing that can entertain you and you look around, seeing the people walking by themselves. What can you do to get their attention?

This feeling of loneliness and the confusion makes you lose your control of thoughts. Your essence, your thinking would change because your view is different. By being in a crowd, you are traveling through a maze where you need to find the right way to leave this confusion. Don’t you feel that way when once you get to an open area, your heart feels more relax than being a constricted area? I feel that a lot of the times because you want to get to where you are but you can’t. There are so many people crowding around you, invading your space. I feel, as my heart would go mad, having my space of freedom to move around getting restricted. We want to be alone a lot of the times but then your feelings would change and you would feel lonely. Our feelings go back and forth just like our happiness and freedom. This confusion, this essence of ours that makes the confusion is so confusing that we might not even get what we want to know.

We ask each other about a lot of things. We share this knowledge and experiences of ours and teach the others about it. We share our secrets with others and hope that they would understand. Then there is the problem where our communication wouldn’t connect and problems start. However, because of the problems I believe we develop this massive knowledge for the mankind to receive other learning and experiences. I believe that we have our own experiences and answers but we can have similarities with other people that allowed us to converse and feel that we are not alone. Unlike what Banach said that we are “unable to feel anything but our own feelings and experiences”, I think we have these feelings and experiences because it is passed down through the evolution of mankind.

I believe that happiness is a silent word and freedom is an undefined idea. We feel happiness because we feel happiness. Just that simple. That’s why, why think about something that might ruin our mood of happiness? And then there's freedom; how much quantity of freedom do we think we have that makes our answers different from each other? We can have freedom that is as small as having a lollipop to as big as criminal justice, the laws and wars.

Unlike what I have said, I agree with Banach that a lot of the times we can’t feel what others are feeling. What we feel is ours alone because every feeling that came from the situation/scenario that we are in always has something different in it. But as I said, feelings can be similar and doesn’t have to be the same.

I think a lot of the times, what Banach states at the end of the third lecture that "real happiness...cannot be taken away by the external forces beyond their control." Such as the small things like eating the food we like, that we feel satisfied, that we have to say "how delicious" that we think this is happiness. I believe that there is real happiness when one feels it and I don't expect that we need to explain to anyone when we feel that real happiness. It is because if we start explaining it, they would ask questions, then we would have to explain more. The more I think about it, the more I thought, that can ruin the real happiness that I just feel because I want to continue feeling this "real happiness”.

However, I think happiness can be shared such as winning a prize as a group. The whole group would be shouting for joy. Having given a birth; the grandparents would be excited getting a grandchild, and the parents would be so glad of having a baby in their life. I would be so happy once an exciting anime series came out and a manga that has beautiful drawings and the whole book is exciting. Then sharing that happiness with another person and introducing them to a part of my world. For example, in a lot of the anime series, the main character would say, “I’m going to protect everyone”, “They are important to me”, “They make me happy and I would like to make them happy”. Happiness is silent word that can be shared just by using body movements and the will or something in our mind that makes the happiness happens.

For freedom, I believe there is and I believe there isn’t. As I stated before, freedom is an undefined idea and what each person thinks about freedom, the quantity of freedom, and the stories are different. Plus, there are a lot of types of freedom that we are thinking and are different. I believe to gain freedom, such as overcoming a fear, we need to go through a force, whether it is tiny or huge that would come to bother us. It is telling us that if you want to get what you want, you must over moi. We all need to think of a way to cross out these obstacles, and then we would feel that we become stronger and our freedom would extend more.

As for the crime situation, I think we all have reasons behind our actions and even if we don’t, I believe that it is because we can’t understand them. It is wrong to kill someone but it depends on how that someone had treated the murderer. Even though we call them victims, are some of them victims, victims or are some of the murderers the one who are the victims? The murderers’ freedom are always less than the victims because they are the one that committed the “bad faith”. Then we must take “responsibility” of the actions we took and are blamed by the others who also made these bad faith into reality.

Connecting most of this, I believe that by not feeling lonely or secluding yourself but be more open and go the way you believe is right (whether you want to choose it with the expectations or not); you would access to more freedom and happiness. Each person’s happiness and freedom are connected with other people. Once you find those people that are “destined” or “fated” to meet you, then to support you, giving you the feelings to fill the void in your heart. Then there will be so many experiences you will get with the people you are connected by invisible strings.

Commenting on Others Blogs

Kate:
Hey Kate,
Absolutely agree with: "I believe we ourselves are the only ones who can stop ourselves from being free" because like Banach said, we can't be force if we said we don't want to (unless we might get kill by it or... o.o).

Same as you, I am also confuse with why he started out saying we are alone but then said that "our actions have consequences and that we should choose according to that reasoned outcome". That means because the consequences connects with others meaning we have to look out for others if we don't act rightly and that means that we are not becoming an absolute individual but having to think about others future before our decision.

I can connect how we have to find meaning in life or else we become a soulless doll just born on Earth to become a lifeless object (added to the population). As well as that we have to find value by "our own struggle" and "achieving our definition ourselves" because once we find those answers, even if it small, we have more energy to push us to live on and those values that are pushing us "cannot be taken away from us". Another point that I agree is "where we cannot control how we are made but the decision of how we shape ourselves is still up to us to decide" because its like saying existence precede essence and then essence precede existence, plus freedom. We choose what we want a lot of the times even though there are "certain rules and guidelines".

There's not any I can see that you need to explain. I understand what you are saying and agree with them. ^-^

I think it is valuable to think about others and then including yourself as both in the number one rather than having separately because we are all thinking about others before having any actions taken.

Very intriguing to have read your post. Hope to read more next time.
Ciaossu~ ^o~

Maggie:
Hi Maggie,

Your post was very interesting and you gave a bunch of examples to support what you are saying. Your examples such as Christmas was very funny; the words "Bamboozlers and Dingdangers". As well as the images you created was helpful (like the painter).

I believe your points were that we are happy because we influenced, "motivated" by "physical object(s)". You cannot find happiness just within yourself but there are other things that would make you happy by seeing it or experiencing it. Then you also talk about how we are not as free as it sounds. You said, "Basically, we are physically restricted but we are free mentally" was for me, a very agreeable point and that telling us we are "slave of someone, or we a slave of expectations" was a good...point.

I agree how everybody has to use everybody to achieve something of their own or for the society. And our own happiness can be in there as well like the holidays, we make decorations and sell the lovely stuff to make others happy when looking at it. Like anime and manga makes me extremely happy xD. I don't think it is only in within that you find happiness but like you said, we have something that we found that makes us happy.

Yes, I agree with Carrie, that I don't see where you need to develop or add ideas. Your ideas are "insightful" and made me think about the objects that makes us happy that we are free to think what we want in the inside because no one is going to object it. It is our opinions and whether they like it or not, it's not their business. It is our choice to pick the opinions (you know, like those people who are afraid of their own opinions so they chose with the big crowd, or the scary crowd o.o). Additionally, the "slave" point was new to me and thank you for sharing that out. It made me think a lot too ^-^.

Always glad to read your thoughtful post. Hope to read more next time~.
Ciaossu~ ^-~

Banach's Response III & IV (Blog post #3)

What is happiness? and Are we free?

I think happiness is not something that needs to be explain because we are have different opinions, or more like, we are have different kind of scenario/imagination/image or what happiness is like. Like Banach said, we can't feel what others feel, we can only feel what we feel that is ours alone (okay, not really Banach said, I'm connecting to myself).

I don't think we are completely free because what our minds think such as wings, we cannot have them but an alternative. It is not exactly as we wanted but we created like that. Then because our essence for opinions are so strong that such as becoming a murderer is horrible and being in a different race (in the past) and different gender preference affects the society hugely. They want a "normal society", they don't want anything that goes against something (such as the bible) and that balance with the bad is not fun. We have so many things restricting us that we can only feel what we can feel (freely) in that little space of mind (that society thinks its good). However, however, there are people that fights against it. =D (way to go you guys!)

When Sarte said that we should think of Sisyphus as happy because in a way, it was his choice that he would roll the stone up the hill and the rest of the myth. But is he really happy because if he did defy the Gods, wouldn't he be killed rather than get a harsher punishment? If he did defy the God and won, what would he get in the end? Happiness? Isn't it because of the way we think, or what the creator of the human have given us this brain that help us think about the two sides, the good and bad of things before we actually do something serious like defying the God?

How are we able to get values from the inside, "The Existentialist's secret of happiness" when we don't know our values if all the external values are taken away? We are develop/learn from the external values then that we get our internal values. Isn't it? How are we able to determine our internal values, then the happiness when we don't know what we are?

I think a lot of the times, what Banach said at the end was true, that "real happiness...cannot be taken away by the external forces beyond their control." Such as the small things like eating the food we like, that we feel satisfied, that we have to say "how delicious" that we think this is happiness. I believe that there is real happiness when one feels it and I don't expect that we need to explain to anyone when we feel that real happiness. It is because if we start explaining it, they would ask questions, then we would have to explain more. The more I think about it, the more I thought, this would ruin the real happiness that I just feel because I want to continue feeling this "real happiness". So why explain something so complicated? (I think all things are complicated) And just feel it the way you are feeling it? (sounds a bit weird, *laughs*...)

"Forces beyond their control" are a funny phrase, because in order to become not beyond their control, we have to think about our essence, pull those triggers out, and then wala~ build something that we can fight that beyond control. However, a lot of the times we thought about how we can't get wings, we can't fly but we have an airplane, but we can't get our own airplane, we're not rich enough. Now thats complicated if you use it on other objects as well. Our essence has made us think about a lot of the fantasy things and something "unreachable", beyond what we are thinking. We have such a big imagination but we cannot use them because there is also science, the things on this Earth, what we can create from it that can make that "unreachable" reachable.

After responding to all that, almost every time we think about something, there is always a force, tiny or huge that would bother us, telling us before you want to get what you want, you must overcome moi.

In part 4, Banach said that we have to consider "freedom for all men", which I agree because that's teamwork. Unlike what I said in the beginning that even though we cannot feel what others are exactly feeling, we are able to have similarities. (Ah, nice English vocabularies that we have for every single little thing). We must think about others before we think it is right which I mean for the big issues. Even if we do stand in one side, it is always the "majority" that stands the winning position. I think it is so hard to think about freedom that what's the point of talking about it when our lives are so short? We're dead before we can find it out, others would know but the dead people wouldn't. (Or if you believe in ghosts and spirits and talk to them then yea *-*)

In conclusion (ahem), I think happiness is a silent word and freedom is a crazy idea.

Thanks for reading ^-^~ moi post~

Comment on Blog Partners #2

Maggie:

Hey Maggiey (xD),

I liked how you started talking about how we choose what we think then end up talking about stereotypes.

I thought the major points in your post was about how things need to appear, and us as well but more importantly the things needed to exist before we can come up with the essence. Then you talk about how we get to choose how we live but then we are also affected by the outside influences. o.O

I can agree with what you quoted from Mara's about how we are the ones to choose to do this thing but somehow we ended up blaming on the action or others. Like if I did something that happened the way I don't want, I would blame it on others. (lol, serious I do blame on others xD).

I thought you could have develop the last paragraph more because when I finished reading it, I thought it was like a cliffhanger <(o.o)>. And then your second to last paragraph, when it said, "ean tto", not sure what it is but I thought it was "mean to".

I do think I am influence by the outside but I don't really think I can become an absolute individual even if I am alone. It would be a blank mind that I would have even though Banach is saying that we should sort of have that. What I mean is that I don't think I would be able to think anything because even with the mental tv images it would still be outside influences. But right now, I don't really think about anything when people say anything, just think that that's their opinions, so accept their opinion like that. (Hmm, not sure what I'm saying but I think that's it xD).

Always love to read your posts (even though it is only 2 right now). But in the future too, ^-^ I would love to read more of your posts and your wonderful examples with it. (>'o'<)

Vincent:

I like how you starte with "where in life do we find our existence" and the "invisible strings" was a good metaphor.
You are saying that we have no freedom. That we are controlled by others as well in how we live our life. I agree with what you are saying that we are controlled by other forces but I think we still have freedom in the small tiny matters.
I can see how Banach has been repeating a lot of his points and some of them that are general points that can be put as lies.
I think you could have explain about identifying ourselves since we all have natural essence in us because I didn't really understand that. I think you should elaborate on the "all points of freedom" are restricted and why does our freedom is not the question to be asking about? Why can't we ask about freedom?
Vincent you could have written a lot more than you think you could. So stop being lazy and go write more. Develop your ideas more and hope you get your good typing hands back. See you on your next post~

HW 3 Blog Post #2 Banach's Lecture Continued

Essence precedes Existence
Essence precedes "bad faith"?
We avoid "bad faith" because we want to be seen as "good" people?
But does that make the bad people, bad people just because their morals and thinking are different from the people who thinks that they are "good"?
I'm confuse how morals fit to the human kind or what is "good" and what is "bad".

I asked myself a lot of the times, people who do crimes does the crimes because they had reasons, right? Or maybe not, such as mental problems or agressive personality. As for the reasons, if it is because their thinking is different from the others, why must we think of them as bad? If I think it is bad to kill someone but they think they should kill that victim because that victim is worse (in morals?) than the killer, what would you think? Or maybe that the killer killed the victim because of different reasons? Do we have the right to tell someone something when we didn't experience it ourselves but watched others did it and put that as our "bad" event/experience for our knowledge, telling us we shouldn't do that?

I don't know... Banach says that we are attempting to "deceive ourselves and act as if we weren't free" but there are so many types of people, is he saying all of them are deceiving themselves. But he also asks, "What does this freedom consist of?" Does that mean he's deceiving himself with his thinking of freedom? If a person says they are good and never does anything that is considered "bad", then are they deceiving themselves, telling themselves, they cannot be a bad person. Are they forcing in their mind (even though they don't know they are doing that) that they don't want to be a bad person. Is that there freedom? A person that wants to be a good person and not a bad person but in such a way that that person tells himself/herself that its against the moral (not all 100% moral).
However, didn't we created this morals? So, does that mean, like what Banach said, we are deceiving ourselves but also because of these morals we've created, we have to take "responsibility" by following it. "The secret of human flourishing and of moral action lies in avoiding bad faith" so we are creating these "bad faiths" in order for us to avoid it. Ironic or weird isn't it?

Banach says we can control what we can view on the objects but there are also forces that make us against what we can do. So does that mean we have control such as when we want to kill someone but also that there are some forces/reasons are pushing them against their will, to make them commit a crime? Most of the crime, I believe there was are reasons behind it but it might not that we can control or know what's the reason. Our desires, our troubles, our passion to do something pushes us to the edge of the cliff but are we able to control those feelings when it is very strong? I think yes, but also maybe, because even if we keep up a front, the feelings inside us bubbles up, wanting to let it go. Like an explosion that we cannot keep it in for long or else we'll break.

Succumbing to our inner self without fighting it, is that freedom or is fighting with our inner self, making the inner self loses freedom? Or do our mind produces different opinions to give the being a chance to choose which decision to go forth with? Then what would it mean with the other opinions, would someone else takes it, someone in somewhere? Is the decision that we really choose what we really think? The freedom to think and choose, are we influence by ourself because we think that that is right or is it influence by the expectations the others have that we think we see?

If we say that everybody has freedom then what they think freedom is... is it base on one view? or....

Essence produces more essence produces more bad faith produces more questions and what happens in the end?
The Answers?

Comments on Mr. Choi and Yazmin

Mr. Choi:

Hey Mr. Choi,
I liked how you talk about how if we want to achieve absolute individualism that we need to seclude ourselves from the world and interact with no one.

You're talking about about what absolute individualism, and connecting to what Banach say that we are all alone in this world. However, we cannot really do that because we have to learn from others, adapting their ideas as well. However, however, you also say that by just being within ourselves, not interacting with other, we can see, "observe" the world and not thinking about what others think.

I can see how your idea connects to how we think of ourselves, that we have to adapt to others' ideas and knowledge for us to learn further more, like in class, we have to participate. Then we think about it and puts that information inside our head to fill up the space of knowledge. And that we have to "interpret" as what we think, making that our opinions, or like you said, trying to understand them.

I think you can expand with the first paragraph, how there are no "absolute individualism" and how we learn from others can help us also make our own individuality.

Your post made me think about how in my own life, to learn, I need to look at others to know what I need to do to do this or that. But also in a way, as I have these knowledge and experiences in my head, I can make my own opinions that don't have to be same as others. We can make our individual, that we don't necessary have to be the same as others. However, I wonder, if we don't interact with others, I don't think there would be room for all of us human to be placed separately in this earth that we cannot meet with another person no matter how much we travel. *laughs*

Your ideas on the isolation was really good, and I agree with you on the whole. It was great reading your post. Hope to read your next one!~
^-^~

Yazmin:

I like how you started out of thinking whether you are talking to your friend and that "you are DEAD WRONG" about having the same feelings as the other person. Also about the truly alone if we build a wall was a great imagery talking about Banach's statements.

I think I can understand that the arguments you are trying to build is that there is no absolute individualism and that we are possibly alone, in our own world and that the others can't feel what you feel completely because situations can be the same but there has to be something different that makes the feelings different.

I think that how everybody's feelings are different even though they said, "I understand what you are going through" that sort of conversation because even though we are human, we share different experiences, not necessarily that much difference but that we are able to sometimes get what others are talking about but a percentage of it, we cannot actually be 100% the same with others. Like your example with your friend, friends confront each other with their feelings to want to share/ or to be able to share the same feelings but are unable to completely. Also whether or not we are really here, or talking to someone, are we here just to talk to someone, to learn about things or like what you said in the last paragraph, whether we can experience the same thing as others. Whether we are just by ourselves, that we will fade away to our own seclusion, and forget the others?.....

I think you develop more on the absolute individualism or how you can have individualism even if you are interacting with others. Or whether have a wall, separating yourselves from others but still walking among them can achieve individualism.

This help me thought about, do we even need to be an absolute individual. Is there a point to it? whether we find our own individuality? If we isolate ourselves, what can we learn, because we are stuck in one place, we cannot observe as well as we can. And then starts to have imaginations that thinking that might be the answer, even though it might not be if it is objectively then what would they do? Because they would have no one to talk to. (Ah, I'm getting confuse~~...)

Reading your post made me laugh and I can agree with what your ideas are. Thanks for posting, hope to look forward to your next post!~
^-^~

HW #1 ASSIGNMENT: Response to Part I of Banach Lecture

What do you think Banach means when he says we are "absolute individuals?" Do you agree with him, why or why not? Evidence?

I think Banach means when he says we are "absolute individuals" is that we are extremely ourselves, without the influence of others or listening to others experience and putting it as "might" be our own experience if we do go through that experience. We tell each other that we are ourselves but actually we have to learn from others, reading books and etc. that help give us knowledge. Maybe an "absolute individual" is almost like a baby that doesn't know anything but having his five senses to help him explore before listening or knowing what this is called or not. Or maybe a surrounding just you, only you on this Earth, without any other humans that are there to talk to you, giving you all these ideas but rather having yourself to go and find those ideas.

I am in the middle of agreeing him and disagreeing with him. He started saying that "each of us is alone in the world" and that is sort of correct because we have to learn the knowledge ourselves in the beginning but as we grow up, we have to start learning from others. We might be alone when learning it but a lot of the times, we have others that are here learning together like school and learning from the teachers. Then he says that "Only we feel our pains, our pleasures, our hopes, and our fears immediately, subjectively, from the inside." It's true that we only feel the pain and all the feelings ourselves but that is because there are different types/kinds of pains, pleasures, hopes and fears. Its true also that even if we tell to the others, they might not be able to feel the same but at least they know about it and interpret in their brain how the feelings/experiences might actually happens. This part of the paragraph, I thought it was interesting because if we listen to others experience, we are being sucked in and filled their experience in a slot in our brain that doesn't have it. This affect our "absolute individualism" because we are not ourselves, the individuality that we suppose to have if we are to fill in with other people knowledge and influence and experiences will be gone.

For example, because of all the trends in this world and that people, in their brain says "You should get this, this is popular" or in other lines or wanting to get the product affects who you really are. Of course, you don't have to be totally different from everyone because that is rather crazy, but that is what I think Banach is talking about for "absolute individuals". By getting that product, there are others that have gotten it, but does that make you not who you really are? I say that is that is not true, that even if you get the same item or some same personality, you are still yourself. Just because people say you are copying the others, they have copy themselves as well because we are need the same things but just in different style that we like. That's why I disagree with Banach when he says, "No one else can feel what we feel, and we cannot feel what is going on in any one else's mind" because looking at it differently, such as the clothing and the needs, we do, can, feel what others are feeling if both of the opinions are the same. If it is about feelings, it can also be the same as well such as pain, though all the situations are different, it can still be the same.

Again when Banach was say was in the last paragraph, "Thus, to be an absolute individual is to be trapped within ourselves, unable to perceive or contact anything but the images on our mental tv screen, and to be imperceptible ourselves to anyone outside of us"; I agree that to be an absolute individual is to be within ourselves, and unable to perceive or contact anything because being unable to contact with anything means pureness and to be within ourselves is to think more deeply about ourselves even though there are no one there to help them. However I do not understand how an absolute individual would have a television there to tell that individual about the images on the tv screen. If there are images in the tv screen that means he/she will learn about the outside world; what I mean that outside of themselves, outside of the "dark room", the space they are in to think about within themselves and the absolute individual.

So whether I can agree with Banach is still confusing because a lot of what he saying is right but right to the point that the individual have to be in one view (not too sure about the word). Since we human have thoughts and we have to interact in people in some place, some time, not even if we want to because we have to that makes me unable to decide if I agree with what Banach is saying. But if we actually do have absolute individual possible then it would be rare and surprising that also makes me laugh because of the pureness and that absolute individual would give out, maybe not how Banach say but something along his lines.