Skip to main content

We're All Mad Here, so Eat a Rock / Abbie Hedden

 I know that I bring this up a lot, but I can't help it. There's a reason it's my major; I love psychology! It's my passion. To see how people's brains work, or don't work, and how they process things is just so interesting to me. What I want to highlight from this week's reading is an emotion that may seem trivial, but I think is pivotal to most of the stories we've read this semester. I don't know if there's a word that can fully encompass this emotion, but the closest one may be paranoia. Throughout our readings, specifically in Oedipus and in Theogeny, something that pretty much always leads to downfall is an amalgation of arrogance, paranoia, power, rage, and the insanity that comes from those things. Oedipus and Kronos both have a position of power. Their position is threatened, so they take drastic measures to thwart it (read: attack their family and loved ones). However, both of them are seemingly blind for the majority of their own stories. It took multiple people confirming and affirming Oedipus's story for him to see his downfall. He was blind to the truth - and later blind in general. Kronos was also blind in that he didn't notice that the "baby Zeus" Rhea handed to him was literally a rock. I think this is a psychological phenomenon that is occuring. I understand that my proof is from two fictional characters, but they portray very human flaws. When protecting our power, humans have a tendency to become blind to bigger and better things. We like to grasp things like control and authority, but we lose grip on things like love and compassion. We become blind to things that would truly help us in the long run.


PS Haylee Lynd and Isabelle Ferguson

Comments

  1. I feel like we, as humans, continually turn a blind eye towards the things that we cannot control or that we simply do not like. By ignoring their existence, we can pretend that they are not real and somehow make ourselves feel better about both our surrounds and our lives. This trait is obviously a detriment to our wellbeing, as certain things should definitely not be ignored. These overlooked happenings can either develop into wonderful gifts or gargantuan issues.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Aristotle Might Not Like Me...Or Jesus//Haylee Lynd

      Aristotle says that the man who does not get angry at the things he should be angry at "is thought unlikely to defend himself; and to endure being insulted and put up with insult to one's friends is slavish" (Aristotle 41). While he states that passivity is preferred to excessive anger, he still gives great criticism to it.  In contrast to Aristotle, the man who Christians believe to be the most just is Jesus who states in Matthew 5:39-40, "...do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other also. And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well." Essentially, arguing that one is not to respond in anger when insulted or hurt, to not defend one's self. Most individual's are unable to achieve this. Our natural instinct is to defend ourselves, especially in physical cases. However, Christians strive to be like Jesus in this way. I would also argue that it is a very admirable wa...

Oedipus’ Children/Siblings—Lily Caswell

Ok, so Oedipus is a bit of a train wreck to say the least. I love the fact that even after Oedipus found out about his less-than-appealing relationship with his mother, he still tried to look after his children/siblings. After he gouged his eyes out, his children came to him at which point Oedipus talked about how that when they were old enough to marry, no one would want them due to them being products of incest. He said for the people not to condemn them based on what their father had done. Even after he knew what he had done and what his children were, he still wanted the best for them. I commented on Logan’s and Ian’s posts.

Overanalyzing Everyone's Intentions Here-Rachael Gregson

 First off, I'd like to say this is going to be a two part blog post, because a lot of things happened in this reading assignment that demands to be discussed.  As with any war I've realized, it's tricky not to fall into the initial perspective I am given. I began this book skeptical of Hector because I was bias toward the movie Troy, which was told mostly through the eyes of Achilles, but neither were what I was expecting. It's actually funny that they both hold values completely opposite from one another. Hector represented everything related to city-state pride, honor, and humility whereas Achilles was everything wild, reckless, and unpredictable solitary. This isn't to say that Hector is all good and Achilles all bad. Both had instances where I rooted for the other more or less. I just thought it was interesting how their two personalities represented something that basically causes all wars: the clash between civilization and savagery.  Secondly, I'm not de...