sloppyd

So,

History repeats itself. I kickstart myself back into Livejournal mode, and then fall out of it for 2-3 weeks. I would promise that it won't happen again, but I don't think I can guarantee that given the way the semester's shaping up.

This term I'm taking five classes - Psychology Honors, Greek Philosophy, Independent Study in philosophy in Existentialism, Evolutionary Psychology, and History and Systems of Psychology. Not really sure what to make of them, though. I have to start writing my thesis, quick, and now it looks like I might have the possibility of running more subjects on a modified design of what I did last fall. We'll see how that goes, I guess, right now I just need to get words down on paper. History and Systems sounds cool on paper - the textbook is basically a composite of the key figures in philosophy and psychology, from Aristotle down through Descartes, the British empiricists, the romantics and existentialists, to introspectionist and behaviorists and postmodernists like Wittgenstein... but the teaching style is so bland. Straight textbook approach. Maybe I should just read the textbook on the side and drop the class while I have a chance. The stark contrast to that is Evolutionary Psych with Prof. Kirkpatrick, who by all accounts and from my current limited experience is a really cool guy. He even has a fellowship next year to the UC-Santa Barbara (I actually visited there two summers ago while looking for the Campus Point surf spot during my one-shot surfing lessons), which has the Center for Evolutionary Psychology and is described by Kirkpatrick as the 'mecca' for this psychological paradigm. He pointed out that this would be a good way for graduating seniors to cap off their experience as psychology majors, because it tends to undermine all traditional paradigmatic approaches to the discipline; and in that respect maybe it's a good contrast to have History and Systems, which takes the traditional line.

But damn, did I spend the most harrowing time trying to decide between this class and another in the same time slot. An irrational, painful amount of time that I can't fully account for in retrospect. There was this other class, see, a 400-level Philosophy seminar hosted by Prof. Davies called Naturalistic Inquiry, and as he described to me, the topic included how psychology, sociology, and neurology could contribute to our understanding of the human condition. Which naturally, as a Psych-Philosophy double concentrator attracted me. Not only that, but the interdisciplinary approach is this professor's specialty, and after consulting my Philosophy major advisor and the person with whom i worked on the Chappell Fellowship (also interdisciplinary between the same two disciplines) last summer, she too advised me to take it. Only problem being that both classes are in the same time slot. I thought for a while that maybe I could audit (for a nice little $540 fee) Ev-Psych in spring of 2007 were it being offered, but unfortunately I soon learned of Kirkpatrick being on the west coast at that point. So I chose Ev-Psych, and hopefully it'll turn out for the best. I might still read the course readings for the seminar on my own time - they include Dan Wegner's "the Illusion of Conscious Will", a book about how unconscious automatic cognitive processing plays a role in conceptions of free will (basically, we have none even though it seems like we do); and Rob Richards' "The Romantic Conception of Life", which talks about how Darwinian evolutionary theory is grounded in German romanticism's views of the self. Plus, I do have the added bonus of taking Ev-Psych with Lauren (we're also in History and Systems together) and battling for custody of the books we're sharing. Good times.

My bookshelf is fucking full. Don't even have room for Daniel Dennett's book "Darwin's Dangerous Idea", which I'm reading as the source of my term paper for Ev-Psych (it's nearly 600 pages long so I figured to get a head start), a book which draws out the philosophical implications of Darwinian thought, which on Dennett's view hasn't been fully confronted, as a way of framing meanings of life, by even those who are proponents of evolutionary theory. He does support Darwin, but I'm curious about what all he'll bring to the table. If you've never read Dennett, that guy's the man. Go to Google.com and type in "Dennett + Self as center of narrative gravity", and I'm pretty sure you'll come across an article I read for my Philosophy and Human Nature seminar two falls ago, an article which I found stunningly original and compelling.

Greek Philosophy should be an interesting class, if mainly to get some in-depth reading of Plato and Aristotle. I've always had this unexpressed interest in Greek and Roman thought and civilization, if only because the only history classes I could get as a freshman were Greek and Roman Civ. But hell, as a philosophy major about to graduate I feel I ought to at least say I know a bit about Plato and Aristotle, the prototypical philosophers if there are any at all. The Independent Study in Existentialism is a mixed bag so far. I have so many different texts lined up: Nietzsche's "Thus Spake Zarathustra" (his definitive philosophical statement, according to many), Martin Buber's "I and Thou" (establishing the primacy of dialogic relationship between two people, although he presents it in a religious framework), Albert Camus's "Myth of Sisyphus" (absurdity and the 'problem of suicide'), Iris Murdoch's compilation "Existentialists and Mystics" (which includes a lengthy selection about existentialist literature), Merleau-Ponty's "THe World of Perception" (talks about the body and perception, or something or other), a few anthologies of existentialist writing, including Walter Kaufmann's "Existentialism from Dostoevsky to Sartre", Sartre's "Nausea", "Transcendence of the Ego", and of course "Being and Nothingess", plus a commentary to help out with that. Hey, I even had one of those "Introducing" guidebooks to Heidegger, the SparkNotes for the college level. Yesterday I picked up the psychoanalyst Erich Fromm's "Escape from Freedom", the book which while not being explicitly existentialist (although not many of these people are, despite the imposition of the moniker), talks about how fear of free choice leads people to accept authoritarianism (and this was written in 1941, so it was quite relevant.) And to start things off, I read Dostoevsky's "Notes from Underground", which Kauffman described as the best overture to existentialist thought. It's only 100-some pages, but damn, is it dense, and damn, does it present a life that is incisive, thought-provoking, and decrepid all at once. What a brilliant writer, now if only I ever get time to read "Brothers karamazov" or "Demons". But yeah, I'll keep plugging away at the Existentialist readings, which should darken my mindset even beyond its normal shade once all is said and done. Next task is William Barrett's "Irrational Man", one of the definitive statements on existentialism; and while I realize that Professor Harris has a lot of other time committments this semester, hopefully we can meet up and actually exchange ideas.

That's the one thing I think I might miss this semester. The exchange of ideas, which especially emerges in a seminar setting. This being the first semester (discounting Exeter in the spring) where I haven't had a seminar (at least, since spring of my sophomore year), it is kind of a startling change. Having classes where I'm only talked at, and not directly response for interacting in kind, almost seems a step backward. Granted, Kirkpatrick, Lemos, and eventually Harris will want open discussion, but it's just not the same. You gotta have that guillotine of a participation grade hanging over your head. But whatever -- what's done is done, and there's no use stressing about it now, I'm coming to learn. I always could drop History and Systems and see if any philosophy professor would be interested in doing another independent study - but not only is it probably too late, but I do need to consider that a thesis takes a fuckton of time to write.

Hmm... I would, inspired by Notes from Underground, go into a little diatribe about how it seems that all I do in these blog posts is to consciously construct a self-image, and how there might be some value to that, but I'm getting tired, and I have to get up early tomorrow so Frieden can talk to me about the mind-body problem. It's funny how many times, in that class, I've already had third-person experiences of the kind where I say "hmm, I can almost see myself sitting here, bored. This is what a bored college student is, ladies and gentlemen. Right here, sitting here, uninspired but unable to let go of the ideas in a book he finds so fascinating." But if Schopenhauer's right and boredom really is one of the two great evils of the species then maybe I should just swig my damn Listerine and call it a night.

Cheers.

So,

It's back to blogging, after a half-year hiatus. What I took as self-absorption, well maybe it actually had therapeutic value...? Strange how that happens. Sometimes I feel like this past year has been a marathon, and only now am I able to relax and enjoy life for what it is. Granted, that's an exaggeration, but I cast everything in epic terms, so don't mind that. Maybe that's why it feels like this time a year ago was just here -- when the snow was falling, when Lauren and I celebrated in Fredericksburg last New Year's Eve, and when my life seemed a whirlwind. Then it was England, and Europe, and the Chappell Fellowship, and a hectic fall semester where my lust for knowledge drove me to take an inordinate amount of unnecessary coursework just because it interested me. Now I stand on a precipice of sorts, facing my last semester at William and Mary, unsure of what I know, who I am, and what exactly I'm doing with myself.

Dramatic enough? Good. I'm not wholly unsure what I'm doing with myself, there's no doubt about that. My life is a lot more certain than it would be were it not for a few things - knowing that I'm taking a year off before entering graduate school, to make money and get practical experience, and then entering grad school with Lauren somewhere or other. Getting an apartment with her. And getting our PhDs and getting a well-paying job not long before I turn 30. I can't begin to say how excited I am by the prospects of that. Maybe it's the vagueness of the filling in of the details that concerns me.

On to brighter topics. I have two jobs over break, just trying to make a small profit. I'm working at the College Bookstore, although most of my time there working this break is over, and as an "extreme shelver" at Swem. The Swem job pretty much takes up the last 2 weeks of break, so I'll only be working at B&N a little bit. Once I finish restoring my iPod - yes, I finally had problems with mine - I'll be able to listen to it while I shelve. What fun this might be. Aside from working, I've spent my time working on my Psych honors thesis, which if you've inconsiderately forgotten involves the relationship between nonverbal facial affect recognition and measures of schizotypy (a latent predisposition to schizophrenic experiences, including magical thinking.) Just been re-reading some of my original sources, and the plan for the final 2 weeks of break is to write up at least part, if not (hopefully) all of the introduction section of the thesis. This is what the Chappell Fellowship trained me for, so we'll see how that goes. I'm actually kind of disappointed in my Honors subject, to be honest, especially because according to my Honors advisor, Dr. Shean, a Psych thesis doesn't necessarily require the amount of depth of other disciplines, say Philosophy. While that's slightly disappointing, maybe that's good in my case, because after all, I almost regret over-investing so much time in one subject area at the expense of others. I'd love to take Psychology History and Systems this spring, because it's essentially a "Philosophy of Psychology" course, but to avoid the kind of hectic schedule I dealt with this fall (because of my greed in taking too many classes) I should only take 4 classes to leave time to comfortably write the thesis. Oh well.

I've also done a little pleasure reading, although that was mostly at the very beginning of break. In my Philosophy and Lit class two of our assigned texts were Four Tragedies of Shakespeare (Macbeth, Othello, Hamlet, King Lear), plus A.C. Bradley's series of lectures on Shakespearean tragedy (and those four tragedies of his in particular.) We never got around to Othello, so I started with that and the Bradley commentary. Good stuff, oh yes. Read a few pieces on practical reason, by Iris Murdoch and Martha Nussbaum. Nussbaum's focus was quite interesting - basically, what if we could systematize all our preferences in such a way that we never were subject to the kind of contingencies that our desires nevertheless subject us to? In other words, our personal attachments leave us vulnerable, because such attachments are always open to contingent loss. She looked at Plato's dialogue "Protagoras" and examined how in the dialogue, Socrates argues that to avoid the dangers of contingent loss we must view all objects of value as commensurate on a single dimension, such as pleasure. If all things are of the same kind, and it's just a matter of quantity, then weighty decisions become a mere matter of weighing to see which choice tips the scale accordingly. But Nussbaum points out, where does that leave society, if such a maxim is universalized across the board? The true passion would be taken out of experience, and all that would be left (if this line is taken to its logical extreme) is a cold, calculative human nature. Nussbaum doesn't exactly clarify whether this latter point is one Plato intended to make, as a criticism of his mentor Socrates. After reading this, I picked up Nietzsche's "Birth of Tragedy", which deals with almost the same issue. For Nietzsche, Greek tragedy (as an art form, i.e. Sophocles, Aeschylus, Euripides) represents the passionate wellspring of man, as refracted through symbolism; it represents a strength of human nature to transfigure the tragic nature of human experience into such a compelling art form. He thought that the Socratic, scientific systematization of practical reason marks a deficiency in the human condition. Having read Schopenhauer's World as Will and Idea earlier this semester for my Philosophy and Lit term paper, this stands in strong opposition to resignationism -- we should passionately embrace experience, in recognition of the potential catastrophe holding such values contains.

Oh man, philosophy gets me off. Anyway, to real life. You know what I haven't done in long enough? Picked up a guitar and played it. I discovered the Doves' debut album, "Lost Souls", during my Britain-themed radio show this fall, and one of the best songs on there is "Sea Song", with this haunting opening acoustic melody. It's been too long since I've gotten lost while playing guitar, and it's an indescribable feeling that I'm sure Nietzsche in all his musings would appreciate. I'll have to play more when I have more free time this spring.

That should be all for now. I would tell you about how I'm stocking up for my "interim year pleasure reading library", which as of now includes work by George Santayana, William James (his "Principles of Psychology") David Hume, Carl Jung, Adam Smith, among others. Leave it to me to think up a "Scottish philosophy" reading program that includes Hume's Treatise of Human Nature, plus his Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding and Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals, plus Smith's THeory of Moral Sentiments. Part of that is because I missed the two seminars that were offered while I was studying abroad spring of 2005 - Great Philosophers:Hume, and Empathy Claims of Morality (which included Hume and Smith as reading). I know, I know, I'm a dork. At least I'm ok with that. I might even, should I have the money and flexibility with my time, audit a few classes in that interim year, which might include Philosophy of Mind (if it's offered), 17th & 18th Century Philosophy, and History and Systems of Psychology (if it's offered again, and if I don't just read Lauren's textbook when she's done with it.)

Really, I should stop. Happy New Year, everybody.