Descartes, Plato, Marx

Descartes’ Focus on the Existence of God

Descartes focused on the idea of the existence of God and how certain of his traits might have come only from him. He contended that God had to exist and that he didn’t come from himself but might have come from somewhere else. The main contention is that, had God not already been, Descartes would not have been able to develop his nature, which encompassed both the characteristics and the concept of God. He was highlighting the individual who was inside him by using the concept of God. The demonstration of the idea of God has not been done, and faith dictates that followers must believe for it is impossible for God to be conceived of. The potential reality was not sufficient to be associated with his ideas of objective reality. Having an actual perfection was impossible for he was a finite being. Descartes also pointed out that it was impossible several partial causes of his existence. This is associated with the idea of unity that he raised in the arguments. In his idea of God, unity was perceived as a major perfection that could only be attributed to a unified being.

Descartes Utilization of the Principle of Sufficient Reason

Descartes utilized the principle of sufficient reason in his reasoning for the need of a formal cause. In this concept, everything in the world has either a cause or a reason and that something cannot come from nothingness. For this reason, the cause of something has an equal or more perfection and reality as its effect. However, the conception of the infinity concept seems to be limited and fails to necessitate a reality that is formal and infinite in the actual sense.

Answer to section 2A

According to Marx, the first form of alienation is the one touching on the estrangement of workers from their work products. Private ownership has resulted in the division of society into two classes of property owners and the workers. Workers are subjected to sufferings which alienate them from the world. The estrangement is mostly associated with the production of goods to the outside world that they do not belong. The workers, therefore, make products that they cannot possess. In the second form of alienation, workers are estranged from the production activity. Workers carry out duties that they are not supposed to perform just for their survival. Working, therefore, draws motivation from outside factors instead of it being intrinsic. This is an apt indicator of the loss of the sense of self.

Marx also pointed out that there is a third form of alienation where a worker is alienated from the human identity. The execution of tasks in the working environment is supposed to trigger a sense of importance or purpose in the life of a human being. The core identity of workers is centered on the satisfaction of producing good finished products from organic matter. Workers can, therefore, be considered as a reflection of what they are transforming from nature into useful products through the practical activities. The private form of ownership has however estranged the workers from this form of identity and hence the purpose as human beings. The last form of alienation brought out in the works of Marx is that of man to man estrangement. The person who finally owns the product in a capitalist setting is deemed as being hostile or alien. These ’aliens’ are favored by the system of private ownership within capitalism and have the right to appropriate the products are for their enrichment. This happens at the expense of the workers’ wholeness and identity as human beings.

Answer to section 3B

Lugones linked colonialism with sex and gender. Her ideas mainly aimed at refuting the existing views on how colonialism affected sex and gender, something she termed as the Modern-colonial Gender System. Lugones further pointed out that the interrelationship of these concepts is a function of global boundaries and the Eurocentric understanding of the idea of gender. The colonial modernity was anchored on a form of dichotomous hierarchy that existed between the humans and the non-humans. This is what Lugones termed as the colonial difference. In an attempt to subdue the colonized, the hierarchy tactic was employed in America and among the Caribbean. Colonizers also created a binary form of division separating the women and the men. Civilized men and women did not encompass those from the indigenous people and the Africans who were considered as non-humans.

Femininity was considered as a failed concept of the time having failed to neutralize masculinity in a bid to achieve human status. Instead, it resulted in sexual passivity and gender dimorphism which made the colonized look like non-humans. The Modern-colonial gender system made the colonized look as if they deserve the labor exploitation and oppression. Lugones argued that sexual fears were instilled by the colonizers to view the indigenous people as being abnormal and hermaphrodites. Through the emphasis of the idea that men are the decision-makers, male chauvinism was underscored and hence the encouragement of a gender-structured society. Women are thus made subordinate beings who are supposed to be led by their male counterparts. It is thus clear that the construction of gender and sex organization and their relationship with colonialism has continually been shaped by feminism. These are the ideas that made Lugones arrive at a conclusion that there is the need to focus on racialized forms of gender violence to come up with a more realistic approach to face these problems.

Answer to section 4B

In his outstanding piece, Discourse on Colonialism, Aime Cesaire brought out a very heavy yet warranted form of criticism directed towards the Europeans. This was particularly on the oppressive classes and the section of leaders who were supporting the existence of this system. Despite being more tuned to address the issue of colonialism, Discourse on Colonialism looked at the racial struggles that continue to be witnessed up to date as well as the concept of capitalism. These three concepts are intricately intertwined. Cesaire associated Western civilization with the exploitation of the non-Europeans in aspects such as labor and resources. Colonialism and slavery were meant to achieve the imperialistic and capitalist goals for the Europeans. Through the observation of the enslaved and the colonized, Cesaire also contrasted their present and past experiences, thus arriving at the conclusion that Negritude was an integral part of the Marxism reformation.

Through Cesaire’s arguments, Nazism emanated from a boomerang effect. Colonization was meant to decivilize the colonizers which can be attributed to the start of racial hatred. This hatred saw the violation of treaties and the propagation of lies. The lies fueled a racial pride that was a poison that spread all over Europe, ultimately triggering savagery. The colonizers, therefore, encouraged Nazism through means such as shutting their eyes on evident social ills. From this point of view, Nazism was cultivated by colonialism until it reached a point of being a form of segregation directed towards non-Europeans. Cesaire also saw Nazism as an offshoot of capitalism, which was a concept supported by the bourgeois as brought out in the Marxist theory. It is, therefore, clear that each of the three concepts is related, with one triggering the other. The order followed was colonialism, which sparked capitalism, an ideology that culminated into Nazism, with the end evidently justifying the means. The relationship is not casual but very profound, with each being a stepping stone to the other, something that made Nazism be embraced in the initial stages by the colonizers before turning against it. This was mainly as a result of mounting international pressure to eliminate such mundane cultures that had permeated into the social fabric.

Answer to Question 5

Based on my experiences, beliefs, and views, this sentence is of the most significance that I can associate with from Socrates’ work, Symposium.

“So such a man or anyone else who has a desire desires what is not at hand and not present, what he does not have, and what he is not, and that of which he is in need; for such are the objects of desire and love” (Socrates pp. 42-43)

From this sentence, Socrates was deconstructing the speech given by Agathon through questioning. The idea of love being beautiful and always good is refuted here. What makes love not good is the constant desire for things. The conception of love is supposed to be based on the lover’s image rather than that of the beloved. A profound analysis of this proposition further makes a breakaway from the arguments that were propounded by Diotima. It is difficult for human beings to be contented with what they have, for they are constantly driven by their desires and the need to accumulate more than what is owned. If love is clean and a thing to desire, one would not be bothering with what is not at hand. This brings a sense of completion to a person. Human beings should always understand that nobody will be fully contented with what is at heart. This is a human proposition that is inherent and applies to all human beings.

The desire to achieve more in life has brought about dissatisfaction, as people continue to compare their possessions and properties with those of others. The dissatisfaction triggers hatred and a condition that is difficult to reverse. People are thus warned to stay away from desires as much as possible in order to live a happy life. The rationality given to us in choosing what is good and bad should always guide us and classify “desires” as an enemy of love. A feeling of inadequacy triggered by desires proves one is not in possession of what might bring about complete satisfaction and completeness. Whenever we desire something that is already possessed, like health, an effort is directed towards continuing to have that thing in the future and not at the present time.

In my life, desires have made my life a tight race for achieving more than what I already have. This desire has made me fail to appreciate the achievements I make in my day-to-day activities. Instead, I always feel inadequate, having failed to achieve everything I desire within the shortest time possible. Besides, I have failed to stop from time to time and look at the achievements I have made over the years. Counting on such successes is a way of telling oneself that although not everything was achieved, there is something to be proud of. For love to be cultivated or nurtured in a human being, it is paramount that desires should be eliminated. At one point in my life, I had a lover, but due to the great desire to achieve what I did not possess, I lost everything. I had failed to appreciate the one I had and instead chose to focus on how I could achieve more, thus ending up with nothing at hand. The blame for this lost game all goes to my inherent desire as a human being, just like Plato pointed out.

In another instance, I had failed to appreciate the achievements I had made in academics and always felt inadequate and having achieved little for my studies. From Socrates’ point of view, I was focusing more on what is in need. I had, therefore, failed to find love in what I had been doing through relentless efforts to maintain my good grades. However, I came to realize that there is a section of learners who could hardly get the grade I was failing to appreciate. This was a valuable lesson, for I learned to appreciate what is at hand rather than being driven by the desire to achieve what is unachievable or worth having at a later stage in life. As much one might have bigger pictures of what they may want to be in life, the picture should not be too big to alienate one from enjoying the happiness in life. This one sentence in Symposium was well thought out and is obviously a source of a cure, not only for me but also for those who have failed to understand the meaning of life through the confusion that is always triggered by the feeling of being inadequate.

While I consider being healthy as a big thing in life, health at the current time seems to be of lesser significance to me as compared to the future. This goes in line with Socrates’ observation that desires are neither driven by what is at hand nor the present status or achievements. Most of the time, I find myself concerned about my health security over the years to come and contribute to health insurances. However, I fail to appreciate the fact that being healthy should be an incremental process through which I should be keen on what boosts my health and keeps away diseases at the current time. Socrates’ ideas were, therefore, anchored on the truth in depicting the real patterns of human behavior, not only during the classical era but also thousands of years to come. Our desires will, therefore, continue to separate us from enjoying the current achievements and joyful moments.

Work Cited

Plato, Seth Benardete, and Allan Bloom. Plato’s Symposium. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001. Print.