Rebuttal
What we see in the world is what there is. My opponent asks, "Does it matter whether or not there is an absolute truth or merely our subjective opinion?" and though he says that subjectivity is what we're forced into, he is obviously not taking the question as seriously as he needs to take it if he is serious in contemplating the nature of optimism and pessimism.
My opponent is right about one thing. Pessimism- as I will explain it, not as my opponent maligns it- is Romantic at heart. We know the power of the individual, and the power that comes with knowing that there is complete truth, a real and powerful entity that is real beyond bounds. This is the power that comes up against the forces of darkness in the world, the power that is strong against the bonds of evil.
My opponent, who calls himself an optimist, cannot object if I use his 'optimistic' definition of pessimism- that it is looking at the universe for all of the negative. But then he goes on to say that this makes one alone in such a universe. But a person does not stand apart from the universe- not only does he create the universe he percieves, he is part of it and is it. And since it is true that man cannot see himself in the negative, that man is always the protagonist of his life story, that such a pessimist cannot exist. There is always something that is good in the world, and that opens us up to positive thoughts.
Real pessimism has always been more like realism, or like anti-optimism, as they are wont to flip the universe into seeing things that are not really there: they become like Pangloss, blind to what is real and only allowing for the good. Optimists are trapped by their sense of mulitlateralism, that all philosophies and schools, when fully understood, cannot help but be good. What they don't realize is that it is stupid to think in that way: there is no sum of anything- all of these things can only be taken as they are, and placed against the absolute and complete definition of good and evil.
The pessimist is not trapped. By not insisting on any subjective stance, they realize the differences in ideas are real differences in ideas and not simply manifestations of some Neo-Platonic god.
We thus escape from infinite infinite universes of ideas and can realize the truth! My opponent cannot deny it- he said we cannot escape from our minds, and he is right, but people see the absolute in different orders, not a different translation of the divine.
As such, our minds can only go so far as the divine, and all that we do, all our actions, depend on it! Such freedom it is, that he does not recognize, to cast away false freedom of choosing your own path rather than do what is written on the divine script!
Truly yours,
The Anti-Optimist
Note
There is a certain division that certain persons make between differing personalities in this world. These are called, on the one hand,
optimists, and on the other hand,
pessimists. The power inherent in these terms is the manner in which they sway opinion or our view of the world; this power is treacherous, for even if I were to give a definition of one the reader could easily verify on which side of the breach we lie. For example, if I were to say that pessimism was looking at the world in a negative sense, the implication is that I am an optimist, because to be negative is to be in the wrong, and we can never truly admit that we are in the wrong- we all believe to have right thought. But were we to say that pessimism is the art of revealing bravely all of the wrongs in the world, then we would be seen as a pessimist, for there it is the world that is in the wrong rather than we. Whatsoever way it is taken, those are the accepted definitions of the art or philosophy of pessimism, and whatsoever view one takes the opposite will be the meaning of optimism.
There is a certain sense, or air, of the Romantic about the pessimist, as he sees himself. As we said, the pessimist sees bravely (in himself- his self description) the wrongs in the world, it's lack of order. Such a man is driven by himself, and himself alone, because it is quite clear that if there is an evil world there is nothing that he can be sure of being good but himself.
The optimist is driven instead by hope. He has a sense, not of the Romantic, but of connection to the universe. If
he is good, and the
universe is good, then there is a commonality between the two, and even if those who adhere to solipsism are right, the optimistic ones are not alone in their minds.
The nature of the world is here at stake- we must be inquiring on its wholesomeness or its corruptness. But a question arises first: can we talk about the world
in itself? That is, can we talk about the world objectively? Or, is it that we can only see the world through ourselves? Is there a
truth in the absolute sense, that we can know?
Such an argument has been consistent since the ancients. But whether or not there is a
truth, is it not so that we cannot escape ourselves to see it? We only see what we see, whether it is absolute truth or not. And the nature of the universe as subjective (that is, as we see it) is phenomena
in context. How do I mean?
There is a certain lady of our acquaintance whom dislikes the nature, the commonplace, physical nature, of the Catholic Church of which she is a member of the parish. She complains of the heat, of the strong scent of the scenser, and other such maladies. But these entities or phenomena, which may certainly be unpleasant to the body, when taken in a certain context, cannot help but be edifying. These are the symbols of the Divine! Of what use are they but to be a stimulus to be thoughtful about the Greatness of the universe? In other matters this is also true. It is not the phenomena which is good or bad, but the context; and that is but a matter of the reason of the mind. Those who are optimists, choose to be optimists, not because the world is actually better, but because we like it better that way.
Sincerely,
The Optimist
Back to School part 2
So, I finally have some sort of a break after finishing what is really my first day of classes that stretched over two calendar days. Now I have taken all of my classes at least once, and have sort of an idea of what to expect. Here's a rundown:
MWF
10:00 A.M.- Statistics. AAAAAGHH!!!! WHAT KIND OF SICK PERSON PUTS TOGETHER THIS CLASS!?! AAAGH!! The teacher is boring, the book is easy and boring, and my classmates are not the sharpest tacks in the box. Not a pretty sight to wake up to, even with a fresh cappucino.
11:oo A.M. Hon. English. I don't know quite what to think. The teacher seems good, the material is excellent (except for
Candide, again...but we're also doing Dostoevski again so it's not all bad) and my classmates are obviously well informed. But it's an English class when I'm supposed to be done with English...
gogo ju ni ji desu. Japanese. Well, I hope it will be better this time around since I seem to be the only one who practiced over the break. Still, it's Japanese, so I expect a lot of practicing with not a lot of results.
1:10 P.M. New Testament: Synoptic Gospels. This one should be excellent. I know the stuff, my classmates know the stuff (it's another honors class) and it's interesting material. The textbook is boring, but the teacher is very good, and I'm interested in the directions he's going to take.
2:10 P.M. Calculus II. This is going to be an interesting class because I know the material (We're learning how to integrate!) but it's been a year and a half since I've taken any math. The hardest part is going to be catching up to the point where the class is at, but I anticipate it getting easier after that.
T/Th
9:30 A.M. History 101. Along with Japanese lab on Thursday and another Calculus class on Tuesday, the only other class I have these days is History 101. The good news is that it is taught by a Jesuit, so you know the teaching is going to be top notch. He's also quite funny. The down side is that I'm taking History 101. It's going to be a struggle between the quality of the lectures and the fact that I learned all of this stuff in elementary school. I anticipate major boredom.
Well, now you know kind of where I'm at. I'm off to go study...something.
Right Back to School
Some of you may be wondering whether or not I was ever going to post again. No need to worry. I'm now back in Spokane, connected again to high speed internet, and my posts will go on. More info as it comes.
