Enlightened Enlightenment

I believe in Enlightenment because I believe rational thoughts drive the humanity as a whole forward. Imagine living without computers, electricity, and science in general. Life will be reverted to its primal state and humans will be no different than animals. All these inventions are possible because of rationality and a strong emphasis on science for the last couple hundred years. Furthermore, I think rationality is important because it helps us avoid confusion is our life. While some may ask, “What is the meaning of life?” This is certainly a valid question, and I question this myself sometimes, too. Yet, no one can answer this question will full certainty. Therefore, I argue that, although it is interesting to fathom the answer to the question, it is ultimately impractical. Instead, we should focus on definitive questions such as: “How can we make and our life better?”, “How can we make the most of our life?”, etc. However, I also realize that life without Romanticist beliefs can be unbearable. We would be no different than robots that follow a set of predefined rules. A society without Romanticist elements, such as emotions, aesthetics, relationships, etc, has the full potential to become dystopian. In such a society, empathy, warmth, and genuineness are replaced by self-serving desires, coldness, and calculations. In short, it would not be a nice place to live in. Therefore, I believe extremity on both ends of the spectrum can be catastrophic, and it is certainly beneficial to strike for a balance of the two ideologies.

After learning about the Enlightenment and Romanticism, I gained a broader view of how Western politics and government are structured, in particular the US Government. Growing up in a very different culture (although a similar form a government), I was never taught the reason for the particular structure of the government that we used in our country, let along read the foundational writings of the philosophers that influenced and sprouted these thoughts. Therefore, it is certainly thought-provoking for me to read the works of Locke, Rousseau, Kant, etc. Following their reasoning, I saw different viewpoints of state of nature, natural rights, and ideal society. I realized many of these thoughts can be traced to the modern democratic society that most of us live in. For instance, Locke proposed the idea of fundamental human rights, which is practically embedded in most people’s minds these days and Kant develops an ethical system that emphasizes reason and rational agency, which is reflected in the jurisdiction system of contemporary western societies.

In summary, the main takeaway from this class, for me, was that following any principles to the extreme can be dangerous. In the Sorrows of Young Werther, we saw extreme devotion to romanticism can lead to a volatile mental state, like Werther and in Rousseau’s Discourse on Inequality, the author showed how reasoning leads to unnecessary social constraints, misery, and injustice. Thus, I believe modesty is the only way to ensure our physical and mental welfare.

Are Math and Art Mutually Exclusive?

“Euler’s Identity is the most beautiful math equation!”

– literally every single math professor

EULER’S IDENTITY

Euler’s identity is often regarded as “the most beautiful math equation” because of its foundational role in mathematics. It relates to many aspects of math, such as trigonometry, imaginary numbers, natural logs, etc. In a very simple and concise equation, Euler’s identity ties together many different mathematical concepts. Each one of the symbols and numbers represents a fundamental idea in math. For instance, ‘0’ is a unique and only number that represents Null or None out of all the different mathematical expressions. ‘1’ is precisely the complete opposite of 0, and all numbers is a summation of ones. ‘e’ is a unique constant that often describes many natural phenomenons. ‘i’ is the definition and stem of imaginary/complex numbers, an entirely different system of irrational numbers. ‘pi’ is the constant that is almost guaranteed to appear when dealing with rotations and waves, such as circles, spheres, traveling waves. Euler’s Identity, outside of its theoretical significance, also is a useful tool in many different disciplines; It is useful in electrical engineering, quantum physics, multivariable calculus, physics, etc.

Nonetheless, it is interesting how one equation can be used to describe many things in nature. Many different theories, disciplines, and reasoning all somehow lead to this one equation. Aesthetics is defined as “a set of principles concerned with the nature and appreciation of beauty, especially in art.” Euler’s Identity, despite its somewhat confusing mathematical representation, might be an indication that the creation of our world isn’t entirely based on chance. Perhaps, this is the beauty of math; It connects our fragmented knowledge into a cohesive understanding. Perhaps, math is just another tool for us to realize the beauty and order of nature. On this note, maybe math isn’t so different from art. This sparks a series of questions: What makes math and art different and similar? Does math has its limits? What is the end goal of scientific studies? Is it be possible that there is an unknown principle law, analogous to Euler’s Identity in math, that governs our life?

Clunky Trainers Bad

Walking around campus during rush hours, you will notice a wide range of people wearing a variety of outfits. Recently, I’ve begun to notice the existence of Clunky Trainers, often by the distinctive thud of the heavy shoe sole hitting the pavement. Being somewhat of a fashion expert myself with a very diverse selection of sweatshirts and sweatpants in my closet, I can’t help but imagine the different styles that I can potentially pair with the Clunky Trainers. To my dismay, I couldn’t find any. In fact, I cannot imagine myself wearing a pair. However, the high-frequency of sightings of these clunky trainers, made me hesitant to speak up. I was afraid of getting prosecuted by the clunky trainer gang being criticized for my radical views. A few days later, I noticed a sign in front of the Dr.Sesus library (shown in picture). I was surprised that someone shared my views, but I was more so amazed by his/her bravery for standing up against the unyielding fashion trend. I questioned maybe I should join their good cause.

*The writing above is a dramatization of certain actual events. Some of the events have been changed for dramatic and comedic purposes.

Thankfully, in modern society, we do not have to live in constant fear of saying something wrong. The First Amendment of the US Consitution protected our freedom of speech/expression.

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”

–– The US Constitution, Bill of Rights, Amendment I

The First Amendment implied that Congress should not limit people’s freedom of speech, press, and assembly. This is a fundamental right that we often overlooked. We are lucky we live in a society/country where this is defined as a fundamental right. Putting up a poster and wearing clunky trainers are both forms of expressing themselves. Neither of those actions should be punished if the legal system is just. We can express our dislike or criticism of the different fashion, like the character(s) in the story, yet we should do no harm to opposers. This also connects well with Rousseau’s state of nature or Locke’s fundamental human rights. It is certainly interesting how the majority, including many great philosophers, seem to agree on the fundamental right of the freedom of speech, if not freedom in general. However, debates often arise in what constitutes freedom? To what extent should we have an extent? How can we balance freedom and the general welfare? How should we be defining harm? physical harm is obvious, but what about psychological harm? Are there moral cases where freedom should be limited or even, taken away? Is freedom absolute or situational, if so, how do we come to a consensus on different scenarios?

One of the many brave protests against clunky trainers on Library walk

HI

Hello everyone! My name is Cheng-Yu Chiang, but please call me Ben. I am a second-year Electrical Engineering major. I enjoy music, fitness, sports, video games, etc. My favorite book in HUM so far is probably Niccolo Machiavelli’s The Prince or Thomas More’s Utopia because of their political influence and ideas. Link to my personal website

Here’s a great song for you if you want something different to listen to. It reminds me of home 😉