Tuesday, December 15, 2009

Here it is, you asked for my religion so...


Once I was thinking that if I would like to know the religion of some one I need to ask for the religion of his/her family. Normally the students respond ‘I do not believe in religion or I am atheist.’ It is interesting how people change their conception of religion once they come here.
For example, I remember that at the beginning of my first year I was reading a lot about existentialism, even in Spanish I was reading Albert Camus (who declares himself no existentialistic). I started to think that there was as a kind of conspiracy among the UWC colleges to make us lost our religion….
It is very easy to find reasons and explain the existence of God. For example, something that we are not able to explain we can just say that it is God’s creation or God’s will. However, it is very difficult to explain that God does not exist. Because this will lead us to more and more question that are very difficult to explain trough reasonable explanations. For instance, I proudly declare my self as a hypocritical Christian because I follow my religion only when it is convenient for me to do it.    And I think that is what happens with almost every one. We are not able to find an answer for every thing and the easiest thing that we can do it is to blame or to present metaphysical phenomenon as responsible instead. 
   However, I wander if when a student tells me to be atheist of agnostics s/he is doing it because s/he considers him/her self like that or just because they think that not believing something is cool. Yeah… that can be an excuse…  There also cases where people belief and worship a religion just because they were raised like that (and I am afraid to say that was my case and I guess that thee case of almost every one as well). I know that it does not sound true but religion sometimes plays a very important part in the life of an individual and I think that it is even quite unfair if this depends upon what was impose to him/her.
One day I was in classes and some one said that his personality was in a large expense shaped by his religion. I wander if that person would be different if his religion will be another.
Sometimes I encounter with people who find in their religion a reason for their life. I known Nietzsche would be suffering or laughing by these stories. But the thing is that I do not find it wrong. I mean we believe a lot of stuff to make our life meaningful any ways, for example, believing that education will make me a better person or that by being a good student I will get a very good job and a handsome husband. I think that I do not have enough confidence to stop finding excuses or solutions to my problems by believing something that it may do not exit.
I think that to believe in a religion is something more as a necessity. We like to feel that there is something else controlling the world or taking care f us. Sometimes I feel that we give up our responsibility so easy.

Searching for my IA...


I was searching information for my philosophy IA when I found this:
According to the philosopher Jacques Derrida if there is a possibility that the language, expressions and performative utterance get repeated by anyone over and over again, this includes the possibility of their deviation from their ´intensive meaning in linguistic´. For example, given that the word `mother` has being use extensively since its creation, there is a possibility that it lost its initial meaning as a word. This possibility is call iterability.
 The major quality of this iterability is that language is decentralized. Language does not necessary consist in the communication of true and false statements. It rather undergoes transformation with every repetition of its different configurations. For example, Judith Butler uses this idea to say that the performative of our sexual identity cannot be understood outside of a process of iterability which also involves a regularized and constrained repetition of norms. However, this repetition is not done by the person rather this repetition is what enables the person and constitutes its temporal condition for its sexual identity. Therefore, iterability implies that this performance is not a single act but a `ritualized` production under the forces of prohibition and controlling norms given by the understanding of the ´intensive meaning´ of that performance at the moment that it is exercised. That means that what we understand from something is different from its real meaning. Does it sound absurd? May be not absurd not should I say wear? To think that what we thing of something is not necessary what its original meaning was? Of course, this explains many things as for example the different conceptions of the same thing that can exit in different cultures. However, it will be almost quite impossible to demonstrate what the ‘real’ meaning of something is.