{"id":59,"date":"2021-11-15T21:54:32","date_gmt":"2021-11-15T21:54:32","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/pressbooks.dbq.edu\/bigquestions\/?post_type=chapter&p=59"},"modified":"2024-08-17T16:19:44","modified_gmt":"2024-08-17T16:19:44","slug":"water","status":"publish","type":"chapter","link":"http:\/\/pressbooks.dbq.edu\/bigquestions\/chapter\/water\/","title":{"rendered":"Water"},"content":{"raw":"

The Fourteenth Chapter,<\/strong><\/p>\r\n

in which you ask yourself<\/strong><\/p>\r\n

What should I do?\u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\r\n\r\n

\"\"<\/h3>\r\n

Preparation<\/h3>\r\n

Required Reading: Baillie, \"We all know that we will die, so why do we struggle to believe it?<\/a>\" (Aeon<\/em>)<\/span><\/p>\r\n

Optional Reading: Kaag, \"The greatest use of life<\/a>\" (Aeon<\/em>)<\/span><\/p>\r\n

Writing:<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

    \r\n \t
  1. Baille talks about the \"outside\" versus the \"inside\" views. He also talks about \"existential shock.\"\u00a0 What does he mean by these three terms? Answer with paraphrase, not quotation.<\/span><\/li>\r\n \t
  2. An argument is a\u00a0thesis <\/i>supported by one or more reasons. <\/i>What is Baillie's thesis? What reason(s) does he provide in support of his thesis? Paraphrase or quote briefly.<\/span><\/li>\r\n \t
  3. What is your immediate reaction to Baillie's argument? Agreement, disagreement, or something else?<\/span><\/li>\r\n \t
  4. Respond to the following question by writing at least one paragraph:\u00a0Should you spend more time thinking about your own death, or is that counterproductive to the pursuit of happiness and\/or freedom?\u00a0<\/em><\/span><\/li>\r\n<\/ol>\r\n\r\n
    \r\n\r\n

    Introduction<\/h3>\r\n

    \u201cIt is unimaginably hard to do this.\u201d That\u2019s what the author of this last reading says. It\u2019s unimaginably hard to do what you\u2019ve been trying to do here: to think about your thoughts, to engage with the thoughts of others, and to do it all in that special posture of the mind where you\u2019re trying hard to get it right but staying relaxed about getting it wrong, and where you can\u2019t even be sure that it matters<\/i> whether you do this \u201cunimaginably hard thing.\u201d (After all, you might be happier if you just accepted life under the rules of Normal World, where the steak is delicious even if it\u2019s not real.) <\/span><\/p>\r\n

    Of course it\u2019s not \u201cunimaginably hard\u201d to read this book, to do these assignments, to complete this course. That\u2019s just a Normal World challenge. That\u2019s just philosophy as an academic exercise. Easier for some, harder for others. The real difficulty is to do philosophy as a way of life \u2014 <\/i>\u201cday in and day out.\u201d To do philosophy outside the classroom, inside the real world (but the classroom is part of the real world: don\u2019t forget that!). <\/span><\/p>\r\n

    And you know what? The people who are really good at doing their homework are sometimes really bad at living philosophically. And the people who are not so good at doing their homework often have the more philosophical attitude. <\/span><\/p>\r\n

    David Foster Wallace \u2014 the author you\u2019re about to read \u2014 was extremely good at doing his homework. He was an extremely good philosopher. But really he was an essayist and a novelist. He liked stories better than arguments. Stories of lives, where people make choices, and do or don\u2019t take responsibility for them; lives where people are thinking, or not thinking, paying attention or not paying attention; lives where people are more or less awake<\/i>. But this piece isn\u2019t a story, or an essay really. It\u2019s a commencement speech. He\u2019s talking to people who are finishing up their college degree. And what he\u2019s talking about is \u2014 his words \u2014 \u201cthe real, no bullshit-value of your liberal arts education.\u201d The point of it all. And you\u2019ll see that the point of it all, in his view, is just to learn how to live like this \u2014 to live in this way that\u2019s \u201cunimaginably hard.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\r\n

    Lots of things he talks about here should be familiar to you already. The idea of escaping normal world, getting out of your cave. The idea of aiming for freedom, or happiness, or both, and trying to understand what those words mean. The idea of freely choosing, and being responsible for your choices. The idea of paying attention. The problem of putting others in boxes, of being put in boxes, of how to get out of that cycle. The idea of slowing down your thinking, opening up the space between stimulus and response. It\u2019s all here. Think of this piece as a conclusion, a capstone, a summary of the whole semester \u2014 and as an introduction to whatever comes next for you.<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n\r\n[embed]https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/embed\/PhhC_N6Bm_s[\/embed]\r\n

    Discussion<\/b><\/span><\/h3>\r\n

    What matters most is what\u2019s hardest to see. That\u2019s the point of the fish story \u2014 and the cave story, and the matrix story, and pretty much everything you\u2019ve read and talked about so far. What matters most is what\u2019s hardest to see. The water you swim in. The judgments you make in that split-second between the stimulus and the response. The assumptions behind your answers to the Big Questions. The shadows on your cave wall, box you\u2019ve been put in, the slander that keeps you there. The ways you\u2019ve been \u201cnurtured,\u201d disguised as your \u201cnature,\u201d to make you think you have no choice. The very things you want, the ideas you have about what will make you happy. All things that are hard to see. But not just to \u201csee,\u201d like it\u2019s a one-time thing. Things that are hard to keep<\/i> seeing, hard to keep in mind<\/i> as you go about your day in Normal World. Maybe two young fish have some moment of insight. Philosophy can give you those kinds of moments. But then they probably go on swimming and forget about it. Insights are actually pretty easy to come by. There are lots of insights in this book. But a way of life informed by insight? A way of life in which you wake up every day and work hard to see<\/i> what\u2019s right in front of you, to keep it in your field of vision? That\u2019s hard. Unimaginably hard. <\/span><\/p>\r\n

    Learning how to \u201cthink differently,\u201d how to do philosophy \u2014 Wallace says it\u2019s not about \u201cvirtue.\u201d What he means is, it\u2019s not about checking a box that makes you look<\/i> like a good person, a happy person, a free person. That\u2019s easy. (It\u2019s also a matter of putting yourself<\/i> in a box!) You can\u2019t just accept the right argument, hold the right beliefs, follow the right rules, and voila<\/i>, you\u2019re thinking differently. If you do that \u2014 if you think philosophy is just about finding the Correct Answer and then accepting it \u2014 well then you\u2019re not thinking differently at all, and you\u2019re not doing philosophy. No: learning how to think differently is hard work. Forever. For the rest of your life. <\/span><\/p>\r\n

    This kind of hard work isn\u2019t really \u201cintellectual,\u201d at least not if you use the term like it\u2019s usually used. Weird to say, in a philosophy class, isn\u2019t it? It\u2019s not really about logic; it\u2019s not really about reading a lot of hard books; it\u2019s not about big words and technical terms and complicated ideas. It\u2019s hard work; it\u2019s not homework. Wallace says it\u2019s actually just about paying attention<\/i>. Philosophy can help you do that; it can \u201cwake you up\u201d with questions that shake your assumptions. But actually paying attention \u2014 well, lots of people who have never read any philosophy, or taken a philosophy course, or been to college at all, pay closer attention to the world than lots of professional philosophers and college graduates. <\/span><\/p>\r\n

    Paying attention is about choosing <\/i>what you think about. If you don\u2019t make a choice<\/i> about which \u201cfeatures of the situation\u201d to see, then your assumptions will kick in, you\u2019ll make your judgment without noticing you did it, and you will react to situations in a way that seems \u201cnatural\u201d to you, or in the way that seems \u201cmoral\u201d to you \u2014 as if you don\u2019t have a choice, but are just \u201cdoing what\u2019s right.\u201d <\/span><\/p>\r\n

    Paying attention is about choosing what you think about. Questions about assumptions can make you think about different things: it can make you see different things. And often the reason you never thought about those things before, the reason you didn\u2019t see them, is because you didn\u2019t want to. <\/span><\/p>\r\n

    The Israeli Novelist Amos Oz tells a story that makes this point pretty clearly. In Israel, where the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians is very fraught, everyone has an opinion. And apparently cab drivers will share their opinions pretty freely. One day, Oz was riding in a taxi with a fellow novelist<\/a> when the cab driver announced that the solution to the conflict was just to kill all the Palestinians.<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

    \r\n

    \"How would you propose doing that,\" asked the novelist.<\/span><\/p>\r\n

    \"We just kill them,\" said the cab driver.<\/span><\/p>\r\n

    \"Get more specific,\" said the novelist. \"Are you proposing that doctors kill them by injection, that soldiers shoot them .... What do you propose.\"<\/span><\/p>\r\n

    The cab driver was silent for a time, reports Oz, considering this question. Finally, he said, \"We'll all have to kill a few.\"<\/span><\/p>\r\n

    \"Okay,\" continued the novelist. \"Let's say that you are assigned a block in Haifa,\" a mixed city with Jews and Arabs. \"You go door-to-door, asking people whether they are Jews or Arabs. If they are Arab you kill them. Then, as you walking away from your assigned block, you hear a baby crying from the third floor. Do you go upstairs and kill the baby?\"<\/span><\/p>\r\n

    The cab driver was silent for quite some time, pondering this question. Finally, he told the novelist, \"You, sir, are a cruel man.\"<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n

    Why was the novelist \u201ccruel\u201d? Because he made the taxi driver see<\/i>. His questions showed him a whole bunch of other \u201cfeatures of the situation\u201d that he didn\u2019t want to see. The novelist didn\u2019t make an argument. He just made the driver pay attention. That\u2019s what philosophy at the root<\/i> really does. It makes us pay attention. <\/span><\/p>\r\n

    Now for Wallace, it\u2019s not so much about whether one choice or another is the correct choice \u2014 although there are better and worse choices, as the story about the taxi driver seems to show. It\u2019s more about being aware: about being \u201cawake,\u201d like Thoreau talked about. It\u2019s about making<\/i> a choice, consciously, taking responsibility for your choice, realizing that even when you think you are just \u201creacting naturally,\u201d you are always<\/i> choosing, deep down, and that you just prefer to forget that you are choosing, because then you don\u2019t have to take responsibility for it, and you don\u2019t have to do the hard work of choosing. You can pretend that \u201cthe choice is made for you.\u201d You can pretend that there\u2019s a Correct Answer to the trolley problem, or to the Palestinian Problem, and that when you pull the lever, you\u2019re not really acting \u201cfreely,\u201d you\u2019re just following the rules that some philosopher set up for you. You\u2019d rather pretend, because it\u2019s easier that way. It feels . . . happier. But Wallace wants you to be free. Not happy. <\/span><\/p>\r\n

    Still, Wallace is really clear that just because you are free too choose, doesn\u2019t mean you are free to decide what will happen to you as a result of your choice. The work of your life, the work of a philosophical life, is to see that you are free<\/i>, to stop pretending otherwise, to keep you freedom in the front of your mind, to keep paying attention to what\u2019s right in front of you. But once you see that you are free to choose, you also see that all your choosing is a matter of \u201cworshiping,\u201d as he puts it. You\u2019re always choosing for the sake of<\/i> something. Whatever that is, is what you worship. <\/span><\/p>\r\n

    So you can choose what to worship; but you can\u2019t choose whether<\/i> to worship. And that means your choices can be better and worse. Because some of the things it\u2019s possible to worship will \u201ceat you alive,\u201d while others will nourish you, and help you to live a rich, fully life. Think of Simone Weil; you can choose to study for the sake of learning itself, and that helps you to live well; but you can also choose to study for the sake of grades, or jobs, or whatever. And those external incentives, those carrots and sticks \u2014 those are the kinds of things that eat you alive, if you worship them. <\/span><\/p>\r\n

    The thing is, Normal World \u2014 the cave you live in \u2014 doesn\u2019t care if you \u201clife well.\u201d Normal World wants you to live for the sake of the grades and the jobs. Normal World is a system of incentives; it doesn\u2019t work if people don\u2019t worship the incentives. It doesn\u2019t work if people embrace their freedom to choose<\/i> what they think about, because that means people might not think about the carrots and sticks. It doesn\u2019t work if people build up their ability to see the hidden features of the situation that make the whole situation what it is \u2014 the child in the basement, the \u201cnurture\u201d disguised as \u201cnature,\u201d the manufactured desires disguised as instincts, all the rules that people confuse with \u201cthe way things have to be.\u201d Things could be different<\/i>. We are free to choose, individually and by working together. We can be \u201cco-workers in the kingdom of culture.\u201d <\/span><\/p>\r\n

    Normal World does<\/i> work if you confuse getting free from Normal World \u2014 where you aren\u2019t even aware of the water, aren\u2019t even aware that you\u2019re in a cave, in a prison \u2014 with getting the freedom to do whatever you want, like the shepherd with the ring. That kind of freedom is part<\/i> of Normal World, part of the cave itself. That\u2019s why Wallace doesn\u2019t stop with the idea of \u201cchoosing what you think about,\u201d as if the pure freedom to choose is enough. If all you\u2019ve got is pure freedom to choose (\u201ca world without boundaries, without rules and controls\u201d), then you\u2019re free to jump off a building. That\u2019s a\u00a0 <\/span>delusion. This is why the part about \u201cworshiping\u201d is so important. You\u2019re not free to not worship. You\u2019re always worshiping something. <\/span><\/p>\r\n

    Philosophy doesn\u2019t free you from the need to \u201cworship.\u201d It frees you from the illusions that keep you from seeing what <\/i>you\u2019re worshiping, that keep you from seeing what else you might worship, and that keep you from choosing that \u201csomething else.\u201d That something else that might actually bring real<\/i> happiness.<\/span><\/p>\r\n

    Real happiness \u2014 whatever that is. Real freedom \u2014 whatever that is. (You must define your terms. You must change your life.) That\u2019s what you\u2019re after, as you wander around this Unknown City. That\u2019s what you\u2019re \u201cwalking away\u201d toward. That\u2019s what \u201cdoing philosophy\u201d \u2014 as opposed to learning some philosophical terms, solving some logic problems, reading some books \u2014 is really about. <\/span><\/p>\r\n

    And that\u2019s what\u2019s \u201cunimaginably hard\u201d to do. So here is the kicker, the thing that will drive that point home. This work, the work of paying attention, of choosing what to think about, is so hard to do that even the best fail. Even the ones most committed to the philosophical life get tired and drop out. <\/span><\/p>\r\n

    Remember what Wallace said, about the mind being a wonderful servant but a terrible master? About how suicides often shoot themselves in the head, because they\u2019re trying to kill the terrible master? <\/span><\/p>\r\n

    Do you know what happened to David Foster Wallace<\/a>? <\/span><\/p>\r\n

    So yeah: this is really hard work. Unimaginably hard work. <\/span><\/p>\r\n

    Ready?<\/span><\/p>\r\nBut wait. Read this poem first. Again.<\/span>\r\n

    \r\n

    The Road goes ever on and on,<\/i><\/span><\/p>\r\n

    Down from the door where it began.<\/i><\/span><\/p>\r\n

    Now far ahead the Road has gone,<\/i><\/span><\/p>\r\n

    And I must follow, if I can,<\/i><\/span><\/p>\r\n

    Pursuing it with eager feet,<\/i><\/span><\/p>\r\n

    Until it joins some larger way<\/i><\/span><\/p>\r\n

    Where many paths and errands meet.<\/i><\/span><\/p>\r\n

    And whither then? I cannot say.<\/i><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n

    \r\n\r\n

    Reflection<\/h3>\r\n
      \r\n \t
    1. Connect at least three ideas from \"This is Water\" to at least three other texts. Choose any idea except \"water,\" which serves as the example -\"water\" obviously connects to \"cave\" and \"matrix.\" Write one paragraph for each idea. Write at least 250 words.<\/li>\r\n \t
    2. Follow the link at the end of the chapter and explain here what happened to David Foster Wallace. How did you react to learning this about him?<\/li>\r\n<\/ol>","rendered":"

      The Fourteenth Chapter,<\/strong><\/p>\n

      in which you ask yourself<\/strong><\/p>\n

      What should I do?\u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

      \"\"<\/h3>\n

      Preparation<\/h3>\n

      Required Reading: Baillie, “We all know that we will die, so why do we struggle to believe it?<\/a>” (Aeon<\/em>)<\/span><\/p>\n

      Optional Reading: Kaag, “The greatest use of life<\/a>” (Aeon<\/em>)<\/span><\/p>\n

      Writing:<\/span><\/p>\n

        \n
      1. Baille talks about the “outside” versus the “inside” views. He also talks about “existential shock.”\u00a0 What does he mean by these three terms? Answer with paraphrase, not quotation.<\/span><\/li>\n
      2. An argument is a\u00a0thesis <\/i>supported by one or more reasons. <\/i>What is Baillie’s thesis? What reason(s) does he provide in support of his thesis? Paraphrase or quote briefly.<\/span><\/li>\n
      3. What is your immediate reaction to Baillie’s argument? Agreement, disagreement, or something else?<\/span><\/li>\n
      4. Respond to the following question by writing at least one paragraph:\u00a0Should you spend more time thinking about your own death, or is that counterproductive to the pursuit of happiness and\/or freedom?\u00a0<\/em><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
        \n

        Introduction<\/h3>\n

        \u201cIt is unimaginably hard to do this.\u201d That\u2019s what the author of this last reading says. It\u2019s unimaginably hard to do what you\u2019ve been trying to do here: to think about your thoughts, to engage with the thoughts of others, and to do it all in that special posture of the mind where you\u2019re trying hard to get it right but staying relaxed about getting it wrong, and where you can\u2019t even be sure that it matters<\/i> whether you do this \u201cunimaginably hard thing.\u201d (After all, you might be happier if you just accepted life under the rules of Normal World, where the steak is delicious even if it\u2019s not real.) <\/span><\/p>\n

        Of course it\u2019s not \u201cunimaginably hard\u201d to read this book, to do these assignments, to complete this course. That\u2019s just a Normal World challenge. That\u2019s just philosophy as an academic exercise. Easier for some, harder for others. The real difficulty is to do philosophy as a way of life \u2014 <\/i>\u201cday in and day out.\u201d To do philosophy outside the classroom, inside the real world (but the classroom is part of the real world: don\u2019t forget that!). <\/span><\/p>\n

        And you know what? The people who are really good at doing their homework are sometimes really bad at living philosophically. And the people who are not so good at doing their homework often have the more philosophical attitude. <\/span><\/p>\n

        David Foster Wallace \u2014 the author you\u2019re about to read \u2014 was extremely good at doing his homework. He was an extremely good philosopher. But really he was an essayist and a novelist. He liked stories better than arguments. Stories of lives, where people make choices, and do or don\u2019t take responsibility for them; lives where people are thinking, or not thinking, paying attention or not paying attention; lives where people are more or less awake<\/i>. But this piece isn\u2019t a story, or an essay really. It\u2019s a commencement speech. He\u2019s talking to people who are finishing up their college degree. And what he\u2019s talking about is \u2014 his words \u2014 \u201cthe real, no bullshit-value of your liberal arts education.\u201d The point of it all. And you\u2019ll see that the point of it all, in his view, is just to learn how to live like this \u2014 to live in this way that\u2019s \u201cunimaginably hard.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

        Lots of things he talks about here should be familiar to you already. The idea of escaping normal world, getting out of your cave. The idea of aiming for freedom, or happiness, or both, and trying to understand what those words mean. The idea of freely choosing, and being responsible for your choices. The idea of paying attention. The problem of putting others in boxes, of being put in boxes, of how to get out of that cycle. The idea of slowing down your thinking, opening up the space between stimulus and response. It\u2019s all here. Think of this piece as a conclusion, a capstone, a summary of the whole semester \u2014 and as an introduction to whatever comes next for you.<\/span><\/p>\n

         <\/p>\n