I definitely understand why Enlightenment has hook, it’s logic and reason. However, Romanticism is more about inspiration and acting upon a whim. Sometimes, that trait is necessary and why I can agree with it. There are many times that logic and reason should hold priority within our decision; however our emotions get the better of us. Sometimes, that is for the better. It’s hard to come up with some excuse or a concrete reason as to why emotions are better; however, they are absolutely necessary. Romanticism’s focus on the emotions gives life color and value and highlights humanity.
Learning about both topics hasn’t changed my view on society or Western culture much. However, they both have given me different lenses to look through when an event occurs. Both are fair and just in their own respects.
The most interesting takeaway, in my honest opinion, was actually the class itself. The people that made up the class all had different perspectives on topics and were all just in their own sense. They brought up many points on many topics that were fair and offered me another outlook instead of my own views. In one sentence, it’s that humans are resourceful and truly are individuals.
This is a scene from a web-comic called Fisheye Placebo by Yuumei. It takes the perspective of a photojournalist in a country with high censorship. To be found with the camera means certain death, and thus the photographer must remain in the shadows without interfering even for the morally “right” reasons. This scene blends dull and warm colors together to highlight this clash. We can make out the faces of some of the figures in this scene. Sensually, we can only see what the photographer sees. Intellectually, we feel distraught at the injustice of the situation; we feel sympathy for the family but understand the plight of the photographer: their neutrality.
The picture I decided to choose, is a logo of a well-known and used application. In this day and age, we are widely connected in the world by technology and other media. One thing that’s common today are chat rooms on the Internet like Omegle or Discord. In these areas, no one knows exactly who anyone could be: anonymity is valued. Over there freedom of speech is allowed and cannot be stopped (of course there are still some rules). This ties in well with Kant’s value of free will and speech. Through the Internet, people are given the option to be able to create a new type of personality that differs from their in real life characteristics. Anonymity gives people the freedom to express their ideas without fear of backlash.
Kant brings about the topic of “moral law.” He reasons that the morality of an action is good based on its intrinsic values; those actions cannot have any root in anything evil. For a long time, politicians have given many promises and cannot come through with all of them. It is honestly tough, as there are many checks and balances as to what a single politician can do. Would those promises violate Kant’s moral law? It’s also a matter of perspective as to what is evil and just.
This site tracks the promises of recent and current presidents. Many presidents fail to uphold their promises and even try to stall for more time. This “problem” has been going on for a long time. It’s understandable why they do so: to get more possible voters and pander to their emotional side. Would Kant’s perspective affect future votes and indirectly those promises?
I’m Theodore Sacamay but I go by Toby and am a second year student. I am currently majoring in Human Biology. I was born and raised my entire life here in the city of San Diego; however, my parents are both Filipino. I love playing video games, doing art, and listening to all kinds of music (mostly EDM or rap). My favorite book of the HUM series was probably The Odyssey, I had some exposure to it already from High School and liked reading about the Greeks again.