Three Problems with Naturalism

          One problem with a naturalistic explanation for life is how they explain the origins of matter/living organisms. Naturalists say that the first living matter was made out of non-living matter. How could that even be possible? You cannot take a pen and turn it into a living thing. How then could non-living matter create living matter?

          Another problem is evolution. According to evolution, living organisms are slowly, over billions of years, developing by means of mutations and natural selection. However, if living organisms are slowly developing, then how did the cell ever come into being? Cells are the basic unit of life and make up living organisms. Even though the cell is extremely small, is it also very complex. The best way to think of a cell is to think of it as a machine. It needs to have all the parts in order to function. If any of the parts are missing, the cell cannot function and will die. That is why evolution cannot work. If all living matter develops over time, then the cell could not have been made. Besides, if the cell cannot function without all its working parts, then it would have been killed off by natural selection (survival of the fittest), something naturalists also believe in. If the cell was killed off, then there could be no living matter.

          A third problem is how naturalists explain the idea of some kind of designer that made all life. They say it all began by random chance and that to get to the stage of life we have today was also random chance. Naturalists also say that there is no proof of a designer that created life. But yet we have things like DNA, which are so complex and very precise. Besides, it is easier to believe that there is a designer who created the first living organism, than to believe life came into existence by some complete random chance.

          Those are just some of the problems with naturalism. Naturalists do not have any real proof to support their claims on things like the origin of life, evolution, or even that there is no intelligent designer. Hopefully naturalisms unconvincing answers within the scientific realm will cause others to question their theories as well.

Proposal

             For my "positivity project" I plan on writing notes of encouragement to the people in my neighborhood. I know how much words of encouragement help me when I am feeling sad and I hope to do the same for my neighbors. In order to do this I will need some markers, maybe some glitter, and either pieces of paper or note cards. After writing these notes I plan on putting them on the doors of the houses. I do not really ever get a chance to talk to any of my neighbors and hopefully this will open up an opportunity to speak to one of them. Hopefully by doing this I can bring something nice into their day. A plan on doing this either Sunday afternoon or Monday.

Sarah, Entry # 9:

            I do not think that the dreams people had really affected them. One reason is that we never see the dreams that people have. When people slept it was only so that the play could continue. If people had not randomly fallen asleep then the juice would not have been put into their eyes. Even when characters thought they had had a dream they did not change anything about themselves at all.

            As for which character I thought I was most like; I do not really see any similarities between any of them and myself. I admire Hermia the most out of all the characters. She does not give up until the can be with the one she loves. Also, she does not let her father or Demetrius get in her way. She fights for what she believes is right and does not let others influence her decisions. For example, when she tells her father in the first act of the play that she will not marry Demetrius, she states: “I do entreat your grace to pardon me./I know not by what power I am made bold,/Nor how it may concern my modesty/In such a presence here to plead my thoughts”(Scene 1, Lines 58-61). She knows that she is not being very respectful to her father by doing this but she feels that it is the right thing to do and that he is being unfair. That is why I like her best, and why I want to have some of her characteristics.

            Hermia’s standard of purity is however not very surprising for this period of time. Back then people had higher standards when it came to purity unlike today. There are a fare amount of people with high purity standards in this day and age, but there are also many people who simply do not really care. As for Lysander’s apologizing, I think that he probably realized what he said had upset Hermia so in order that she not get angry at him he just said that he did not mean it that way. As for relationships as a whole in that day and time; they were probably a lot less casual then by today’s standards. Back then marriages were arranged; as indicated in the first act of the play when Hermia’s father wanted her to marry Demetrius. It was probably not very common for two people to just fall in love and get married. That is why it is such a big deal when Hermia and Lysander run away together when Hermia’s father will not let her marry Lysander.  What would you say is the most important theme of A Midsummer Night’s Dream? Does this theme apply to modern times in any way? Which scene was your favorites of the play and why?

Sarah, Entry #7:

                        I think Shakespeare set the most magical scenes in the forest for a reason. In many different stories and plays the forest is often seen as the place where magical things happen. They can be seen as something harmless like fairies or other mystical creatures or dark things like witches or the devil. Obviously Shakespeare was not trying to go for the dark magic affect. That is why I think he set the play in the forest instead of a castle or a mountain peak. To me, when I think of castles I imagine a royal battle and not fairies or other magic creatures. As for a mountain peak, I think that this also does not really tend to display as magical of an affect as the forest.

                        I also think that Helena and Demetrius are in some ways similar characters. They both are rejected by the people they love and in the end they both end up falling in love (with one another). It also makes sense that Bottom and the fairies are opposites. He is rather bossy and they are for the most part servants.

                        As for when Snout thought the lion would scare the women; this was probably because back then women where seen as weak. During this time in history women tended to be seen as rather defenseless people. That is most likely why he said this. I do not think that the costumes would have been very scary. After all, this is a play and costumes in plays do not tend to be overly scary. It just seems that they did not want to scare the women because they thought of them as being rather frail. For example, in Act 3, Scene 1, Bottom says: “Masters, you ought to consider with yourself, to bring in (God/ shield us!) a lion among ladies is a most dreadful thing; for there/is not a more fearful wildfowl than your lion living” (Lines 23-25). What do you think? Could he have said this for another reason? Something else that I was wondering about was that after Bottom woke up from his dream, he had just thought of everything as having been just a dream. Do you think that the reason this experience did not really change Bottom for the better is because he thought it was all just a dream and that he had nothing to worry about? I also wanted to know which character was your favorite in A Midsummer Night’s Dream?

Sarah, Entry # 5:

            When they wake up after Puck put the juice into their eyes Demetrius proclaims that now he loves Helena. I think that this may have just been one of those things that Shakespeare put in the play as a way to resolve the play. It may not have been the most logical idea for him to just randomly fall in love with her but it helped to end the play. As Demetrius says “my love to Hermia, /Melted as the snow/… And all the faith, the virtue of my heart, /The object and the pleasure of mind eye, / Is only Helena” (Act 4, Scene 1, Lines 162-163 and 166-167). It looks like Demetrius just randomly changed his mind to love Helena instead of Hermia. This may have something to do with the reoccurring magic throughout the play. After all, somehow he just feels in love with her as if by magic. As for his attitude in the play in the beginning he really does seem to love Hermia. He chases after her when he finds out she ran away with Lysander. Then later the juice causes him to fall in love with Helena. One character which is not really in the play that much is Theseus. Why do you think that Shakespeare did this?

            As for the fairies in the play; I think that they were not super important characters in the play. They never had their own act and whenever they are in the play they are always doing something for someone else. For example, they followed Titania around and the only reason that they were there was to help her and Bottom. I think that they were there to add yet another element of magic to the play. The fairies are magical creatures which the audience would have found very entertaining. Other than that, I think that Shakespeare did not really have any specific reasons for including the fairies in the play. Do you have a different idea about the fairies? Also, are there any characters in the play that you think are either extremely like one another or that are complete opposites?

           

Black, White, and Gray

          In the world that we live in today everything is not always black and white. There are circumstances when we see things as being completely bad or completely good. However, there are times when something can be good for some people but bad for others. Also, there may be times when the true answer is not always clear. Certain decisions are hard to decide when something is right or wrong.  This tends to cause tension between people when they disagree as to whether something is right or wrong. For example, in one of my classes at school many people believe that it is alright to cheat. However other students as well as myself do not agree with this. We think that it is unfair for students to do this, let alone get away with it. I also find that I have problems when it comes to deciding what is right and what is wrong. It is not always super clear as to what the right decision is. When these areas of gray appear I tend to either ask a trusted friend or family member for advice. If this does not help me at all then usually I will go to God for help in prayer.

Sarah, Entry # 3:

            I think that the magic throughout the play was a necessity. When Shakespeare wrote this play he wanted the audience to be entertained. Besides, without the magic I would have found the play rather boring. The people who watched the play then would have most likely wanted to see a play which entertained them and had some mystery to it rather than one which was overly predictable. Also, people like happy endings. If I was to see a play or movie where there is not a happy ending, most likely I would not like the movie a all and would probably not want to ever watch it again. If this play were to take place from our modern day point of view, I think it might not be as popular. For example, Lysander and Hermia would have not had to deal with Hermia being in an arranged marriage. They would have just fallen in love and even if her parents disagreed, they would have just not cared. Also, when it comes to magic in plays or movies that we watch today unless it’s about medieval times it’s rather strange. To us it just seams strange if a man with a donkey head were to fall in love with a fairy. It only makes sense to us if it takes place in a medieval setting. One character who was mixed into the love relationships throughout the play was Helena. In the beginning no one really loved her. Then when someone says they love her she just thinks it’s a joke. Why do you think she thought they were joking? After all, shouldn’t she be happy? But at the end of the play she and Demetrius were in love. Why do you think he changed his mind? Why didn’t he just continue to go after Hermia?

            As for Bottom having his head changed into a donkey’s head; I am not so sure if it really affected him that much. Before he was transformed he thought that he knew everything about what to do with the play. Also, once his head was changed and Titania felt in love with him he did not really seem to change at all. He seemed to rather enjoy the fact that the Queen loved him even though he had a donkey head. Even with the donkeys head on he seems rather bossy. For example, when he tells the other fairies “get your weapons/in your hand, and kill me a red-hipped humble-bee on the top of/a thistle; and, good Mousieur, bring me the honey-bag” (Act 4, Scene 1, Line 10-13). Even with the head of a donkey Bottom still seems to be bossy. One element of the play which Shakespeare continuously brought up was that everyone kept going to sleep. Do you think that there was any real significance of everyone falling asleep throughout the play? Why do you think Shakespeare decided to go about it this way?

Sarah, Entry #1:

            Throughout A Midsummer Night’s Dream, love is one of the main themes. I thought that it was interesting how throughout the play couples were continuously falling in love, whether by force or not, and that others were finding ways of force for someone to fall in love with them. I thought that this was interesting how Shakespeare included so many different forms of how someone could come to love another person; whether it be by force or not. He did not just stay with the original idea of love; when two people see one another and automatically fall in love. One aspect of the relationships throughout the play noticed was that none of them seemed to be very consistent or lasting. It may have been that Shakespeare himself for shadowed this idea in the beginning of the play when Lysander said “The course of love never did run smooth” (Act 1, scene 1, line 134). It is true that only at the end of the play that any of the characters’ relationships actually seen to work well. How do you think the relationships throughout the play evolved? Which relationship did you think was the most interesting?

            One of the characters that I thought was most interesting was Puck. He seems to be the one always causing trouble throughout the play, whether he wants to or not. Some of the things he did were by accident, like putting the love potion in the wrong peoples’ eyes. However in the end he managed to put things right again; “The man shall have his mare again, and all shall be well” (Act3, scene 2, line 463). On the other hand, he does turn Bottom’s head into a donkey’s head.  So, Puck can be caring, on the other hand he can also be sometimes cruel. However, by the end of the play Puck does seem to have become a nicer person (or fairy). What do you think about Puck’s actions throughout the play?

INFJ

I took the personality test and found out that I am an INFJ. I am slightly introverted with 22%, slightly intuitive with 12%, moderately feeling with 38%, and moderately judging with 33%. I agreed with allot of the results from the test. I do care about others and enjoy helping them. Also, I tend to share my feeling with only my family or a very close friend. I enjoyed seeing what famous people share the same characteristics as me. People like Nicole Kidman, Martin Luther King, Jr., and Mother Teresa were on the list. I was also really interested by the career results from my test. It said that careers like education, law, and even counseling would best fit my personality. I would have never guessed! It was really fun to get to see what my personality is and what types of jobs would work for me.

Research Paper: Paragraphs 1 and 2

In his book, Mere Christianity, C. S. Lewis stated that: “human beings, all over the earth, have this curious idea that they ought to behave in a certain way, and cannot get rid of it” (8). He said this as a way to describe what he calls the “Moral Law”. Throughout Mere Christianity, C. S. Lewis discuses what he believes to be a law of morals, which he claims all humans know about. This “Moral Law” would be any time in life when we question ourselves as to whether something is right or wrong.

So, the “Moral Law” is supposedly what we base most of our decisions on. It is a conscience which lets us know what is right and what is wrong. C. S. Lewis would also add that behind this law “you find out more about God” (29). We in some way, every day, must answer to this law based off of our actions. However, is this idea of a “Moral Law” correct? For all we know C. S. Lewis could be leading us down the completely wrong path. So, is there in fact, a universally held “Moral Law” that all humans sense, or is this idea just something C. S. Lewis made-up?

Test Blog

My pug Minnie.

My first blog post. Here is a picture of my pug Minnie from when I went camping this summer.