Reading Response for "The Way to Wealth," by Benjamin Franklin
This selection is little more than a collection of Benjamin Franklin's proverbs from "Poor Richard's Almanac." That being said, there is an immense amount of wisdom and wit contained in this reading.
The whole piece relates to the subject of wealth - the gaining and the keeping. The many pithy quotes can be summarized as follows: Work hard, live within your means, and don't get into debt - if you do these things, you will be successful in life. The saying, "A ploughman on his legs is higher than a gentleman on his knees," gives honor to the diligent, working-class man, but takes it away from the wealthy man who has fallen prey to idleness and debt.
The particular saying, "At the working man's house hunger looks in, but dares not enter," seems reasonable and good, but based on the problems afflicting the working poor, as evidenced in Ehrenreich's study, we know it may not be this simple. Has our modern American system warped our view of hard work and the reward it should bring?
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Monday, October 26, 2009
Reading Response: Evaluation from Nickel and Dimed, Barbara Ehrenreich
In her evaluation chapter, Ehrenreich sums up everything she learned in her minimum-wage-work experience, what the problems with the system are, and how they might be remedied. Unfortunately, not much of what she says is anything profound, and she has almost a self-righteous, arrogant twinge in her voice.
However, I was intrigued and enlightened by how she described the working poor in the last section of the chapter. "When someone works for less pay than she can live on -- when, for example, she goes hungry so that you can eat more cheaply and conveniently -- than she has made a great sacrifice for you, she has made of a gift of some part of her abilities, her health, and her life." Though I always try to treat everyone with respect and kindness (chatting with and thanking the cafeteria and janitorial workers, cleaning up after myself, etc.,) this quote very poignantly brings the state of our society into perspective. The work that minimum-wage workers do is not done because it is "all they're worth" or because we "deserve" their assistance. On the contrary, we are the recipients of a gift, and if we started acting like it, maybe things would actually change.
In her evaluation chapter, Ehrenreich sums up everything she learned in her minimum-wage-work experience, what the problems with the system are, and how they might be remedied. Unfortunately, not much of what she says is anything profound, and she has almost a self-righteous, arrogant twinge in her voice.
However, I was intrigued and enlightened by how she described the working poor in the last section of the chapter. "When someone works for less pay than she can live on -- when, for example, she goes hungry so that you can eat more cheaply and conveniently -- than she has made a great sacrifice for you, she has made of a gift of some part of her abilities, her health, and her life." Though I always try to treat everyone with respect and kindness (chatting with and thanking the cafeteria and janitorial workers, cleaning up after myself, etc.,) this quote very poignantly brings the state of our society into perspective. The work that minimum-wage workers do is not done because it is "all they're worth" or because we "deserve" their assistance. On the contrary, we are the recipients of a gift, and if we started acting like it, maybe things would actually change.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Hearthside and Heartache
Reading Response: Nickel and Dimed, section 1.
Barbara Ehrenreich did a gutsy thing when she decided to take on an intense journalism assignment; for a month she would live as a minimum wage worker to see if it was possible to make ends meet on such a small salary. She soon discovered, though, that it was impossible to remain cool and distant from the troubles and heartaches of the working poor when she was living as one.
One thing that she specifically complained about, which stood out to me, was having to wait tables for "Visible Christians." Those who were most noticeably believers tended to be the worst customers. "The worst, for some reason, are the Visible Christians-like the ten-person table, all jolly and sanctified after Sunday night service, who run me mercilessly and then leave me $1 on a $92 bill." As a strong Christian myself, it disheartens me when those who claim to follow Christ fall so disgustingly short and seem to think that they are exempt from acting like regular, respectable members of society.
So far, I like this book. The author is witty and the subject is engaging. I'm looking forward to reading more of Ms. Ehrenreich's adventures as one of the working poor.
Barbara Ehrenreich did a gutsy thing when she decided to take on an intense journalism assignment; for a month she would live as a minimum wage worker to see if it was possible to make ends meet on such a small salary. She soon discovered, though, that it was impossible to remain cool and distant from the troubles and heartaches of the working poor when she was living as one.
One thing that she specifically complained about, which stood out to me, was having to wait tables for "Visible Christians." Those who were most noticeably believers tended to be the worst customers. "The worst, for some reason, are the Visible Christians-like the ten-person table, all jolly and sanctified after Sunday night service, who run me mercilessly and then leave me $1 on a $92 bill." As a strong Christian myself, it disheartens me when those who claim to follow Christ fall so disgustingly short and seem to think that they are exempt from acting like regular, respectable members of society.
So far, I like this book. The author is witty and the subject is engaging. I'm looking forward to reading more of Ms. Ehrenreich's adventures as one of the working poor.
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Making and Knowing
Reading Response: Hannah Arendt's Human Condition, pages 294-325.
"What is the difference between 'how' and 'why?'" My biology professor asked us this question when one of my classmates wondered why a certain reaction took place. He was quick to point out that science can only answer the "how" questions and never the "why" questions because asking "why" demands knowledge of a motive. There is no experiment that can determine motives - there are only experiments useful for observing how something happens.
Arendt seems to say that this view is modern. It makes sense when you think of ancient philosophers such as Aristotle and Plato - they were so focused on the whys! Plato's forms, for example, gave a reason for why we humans are able to identify and distinguish objects from one another. Philosophy and science were tied closely together throughout ancient times.
In modern society though, especially in modern America, science is solely focused on the hows, rather than the whys. Perhaps this is because of the "separation of church and state" and scientists are fearful to venture out into the whys. Perhaps we shouldn't even try to tie science and philosophy together because maybe we have a better scientific method now. Maybe we're just lazy, and observable phenomena are more appealing to our minds than the tough meat of philosophy.
"What is the difference between 'how' and 'why?'" My biology professor asked us this question when one of my classmates wondered why a certain reaction took place. He was quick to point out that science can only answer the "how" questions and never the "why" questions because asking "why" demands knowledge of a motive. There is no experiment that can determine motives - there are only experiments useful for observing how something happens.
Arendt seems to say that this view is modern. It makes sense when you think of ancient philosophers such as Aristotle and Plato - they were so focused on the whys! Plato's forms, for example, gave a reason for why we humans are able to identify and distinguish objects from one another. Philosophy and science were tied closely together throughout ancient times.
In modern society though, especially in modern America, science is solely focused on the hows, rather than the whys. Perhaps this is because of the "separation of church and state" and scientists are fearful to venture out into the whys. Perhaps we shouldn't even try to tie science and philosophy together because maybe we have a better scientific method now. Maybe we're just lazy, and observable phenomena are more appealing to our minds than the tough meat of philosophy.
Monday, October 5, 2009
Action and Calling
"For in every action what is primarily intended by the doer, whether he acts from natural necessity or out of free will, is the disclosure of his own image." - Dante
Is "calling" something for which we strive, or is it something in which we find ourselves? Rebecca Sweeney, after having been fired from sixteen jobs, had a lot of thinking to do on the subject. Those things that she thought she wanted to do (becoming a doctor, for example) she was never able to attain, and those things she never dreamed of doing she found herself in over and over again. In a profound statement, she said, "My idea of calling now is not: 'Come.' It's what I am doing right now, not what I'm going to be. Life is a calling."
I think her observation is a very wise one - one that ought to be heeded by many people today. It's disheartening that so many young people especially seem to have this notion that they must wait to "begin their lives" until after they get into college, or graduate college, or land their first job, or get married, or any number of "callings." Wouldn't life be much more fulfilling if every moment was seen as a calling? I think so. I'm trying to live my life with that mindset...I'll let you know how it turns out.
Is "calling" something for which we strive, or is it something in which we find ourselves? Rebecca Sweeney, after having been fired from sixteen jobs, had a lot of thinking to do on the subject. Those things that she thought she wanted to do (becoming a doctor, for example) she was never able to attain, and those things she never dreamed of doing she found herself in over and over again. In a profound statement, she said, "My idea of calling now is not: 'Come.' It's what I am doing right now, not what I'm going to be. Life is a calling."
I think her observation is a very wise one - one that ought to be heeded by many people today. It's disheartening that so many young people especially seem to have this notion that they must wait to "begin their lives" until after they get into college, or graduate college, or land their first job, or get married, or any number of "callings." Wouldn't life be much more fulfilling if every moment was seen as a calling? I think so. I'm trying to live my life with that mindset...I'll let you know how it turns out.
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Jazz and Soul
"I would only consider myself outside the norm because of the way other people live. . . I could never bear to live the dull lives that most people live, locked up in offices. I live in absolute freedom. I do what I want because I want to do it. What's wrong with making a living doing something interesting?" - Bud Freeman, page 457, Working
Bud Freeman seems like a very paradoxical character - in some ways he seems like a bum who just wants to play music, and in other ways he seems like a brilliant, hardworking artist. I wonder if he really has a good point of view that just seems ridiculous because of society's value of "hard work" equaling packed days, or if he actually is lazy and won't take responsibility for his life.
While I tend to agree with him on the idea of finding a job that interests you and gives you opportunities for freedom, I feel like he has a bad attitude when it comes to his views of other people. He throws around terms like "dull lives" and states that he would be miserable as a "nine-to-five-man." I wonder if he ever allowed himself to take his focus off of himself long enough to look at other people. Supposedly, he "can't handle other people," so perhaps not.
PS. Regarding the Arendt reading, I'm really struggling with it. I'm looking forward to deciphering it in discussion tomorrow.
Bud Freeman seems like a very paradoxical character - in some ways he seems like a bum who just wants to play music, and in other ways he seems like a brilliant, hardworking artist. I wonder if he really has a good point of view that just seems ridiculous because of society's value of "hard work" equaling packed days, or if he actually is lazy and won't take responsibility for his life.
While I tend to agree with him on the idea of finding a job that interests you and gives you opportunities for freedom, I feel like he has a bad attitude when it comes to his views of other people. He throws around terms like "dull lives" and states that he would be miserable as a "nine-to-five-man." I wonder if he ever allowed himself to take his focus off of himself long enough to look at other people. Supposedly, he "can't handle other people," so perhaps not.
PS. Regarding the Arendt reading, I'm really struggling with it. I'm looking forward to deciphering it in discussion tomorrow.
Monday, September 28, 2009
Housewives and Homemakers
"The reality and reliability of the human world rest primarily on the fact that we are surrounded by things more permanent than the activity by which they were produced, and potentially even more permanent that the lives of their authors." -Hannah Arendt, Human Condition, page 96
I have the dream of becoming a rural doctor and traveling to remote areas, bringing medicine where it has never been and I am willing to do whatever it takes to get there. However, my dream of becoming a wife and mother far overshadows even that dream. It disheartens me to hear mothers say "I'm just a mom" or "I'm just a housewife." What profession could possibly be greater than cultivating and nurturing new human lives here on planet Earth? What other profession could be more dynamic, more fulfilling, more exhausting, more exciting, more painful, more utterly heart-stopping than bringing life into this world, caring for it, and watching it grow?
I think Hannah Arendt speaks truth when she says that we have to be surrounded by things more permanent than we are in order to give life its reality and reliability. Think of a mother - it could seem like drudgery to wash dishes one more time, or meaningless to do laundry one more time. However, what is the greater thing being accomplished by those "meaningless" tasks? Children are being raised! People are becoming! Lives are being changed in the home! This is perhaps one of the things of permanence of which Arendt speaks. Because of a mother's (and father's, of course) love and care, her children will grow into great adults and begin raising families of their own. In this continuous cycle is permanence...not meaninglessness.
"This is my offering. I think it's the greatest satisfaction in the world to know you've pleased somebody. Everybody has to feel needed. I know I'm needed. I'm doing it for them and they're doing it for me. And that's the way it is." Therese Carter, Working, page 303
I have the dream of becoming a rural doctor and traveling to remote areas, bringing medicine where it has never been and I am willing to do whatever it takes to get there. However, my dream of becoming a wife and mother far overshadows even that dream. It disheartens me to hear mothers say "I'm just a mom" or "I'm just a housewife." What profession could possibly be greater than cultivating and nurturing new human lives here on planet Earth? What other profession could be more dynamic, more fulfilling, more exhausting, more exciting, more painful, more utterly heart-stopping than bringing life into this world, caring for it, and watching it grow?
I think Hannah Arendt speaks truth when she says that we have to be surrounded by things more permanent than we are in order to give life its reality and reliability. Think of a mother - it could seem like drudgery to wash dishes one more time, or meaningless to do laundry one more time. However, what is the greater thing being accomplished by those "meaningless" tasks? Children are being raised! People are becoming! Lives are being changed in the home! This is perhaps one of the things of permanence of which Arendt speaks. Because of a mother's (and father's, of course) love and care, her children will grow into great adults and begin raising families of their own. In this continuous cycle is permanence...not meaninglessness.
"This is my offering. I think it's the greatest satisfaction in the world to know you've pleased somebody. Everybody has to feel needed. I know I'm needed. I'm doing it for them and they're doing it for me. And that's the way it is." Therese Carter, Working, page 303
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
