Based on the analysis in your document, counterarguments to Borges’ “The Library of Babel” could include: 1. **Optimism in Information and Knowledge:** Contrary to the portrayal of information overload leading to uncertainty and despair, one could argue that the vastness of information and knowledge actually empowers humanity. This perspective sees the library not as a curse but as a testament to human intellectual achievement and the endless possibilities for discovery and understanding. 2. **The Value of Searching:** Borges emphasizes the futility of searching for meaning in an infinite library, but an opposing view could highlight the intrinsic value of the search itself. This argument suggests that the act of searching, regardless of the outcome, enriches the human experience, fostering learning, growth, and the pursuit of curiosity. 3. **Linear Progress and Historical Optimism:** The document mentions Borges’ challenge to linear progress and historical optimism. A counterargument could assert the importance and validity of viewing history as a narrative of progress and enlightenment. This view would argue that, despite setbacks, humanity has steadily advanced in terms of knowledge, ethics, and societal structures. 4. **The Constructiveness of Identity:** While Borges explores the dissolution of identity in the infinite reflections of the library, a counterargument could emphasize the constructive aspects of identity formation. This perspective would argue that identity, even if multifaceted and evolving, provides a sense of continuity, purpose, and belonging that is essential for individual and collective well-being. 5. **The Role of Definitive Answers:** Borges might seem to dismiss the importance of definitive answers, but a counterargument could underline their significance in certain contexts. In science, for example, definitive answers to specific questions have led to technological advancements and improved quality of life. This argument suggests that while philosophical exploration is valuable, concrete answers remain crucial for practical progress. These counterarguments engage with the themes presented in your analysis, offering alternative viewpoints that celebrate the human capacity for understanding, the value of pursuit, the importance of progress and identity, and the role of definitive knowledge.

Based on the analysis
[read full article]
 

I’m completely deaf in my left ear and my good ear, which is reduced but functions only goes up to 5000 hz. Drops like a stone after. So I’ve always been called a good listener But that’s because it takes so much extra effort to even comprehend Any speech But I took four years of Spanish in high school. Did fine with literature. Learned some russian in the late ’90s because I thought I was going to become a priest or a monk in the Russian Orthodox Church. But after studying it for a couple of years and even taking some accelerated courses, to nail writing in script Etc at Drew University (free, no credit), I looked around and realized: if I had nothing to say to people in person in english, why would I have anything to say in person in Russian? Oddly though, I understand Italian somewhat And I like the sound of Ukrainian – but I don’t know what they’re saying Still I like being able to read a little bit in Spanish and a little bit In Russian. Closest thing I did to conversational is Portuguese which really I should have taken in retrospect instead because I would actually be more likely to use it Not in person so much but online. Then again I took Spanish because I had take 4 years once and I’m really hoping that I can get through these two courses without having to hurt my brain too much. In short, a lot of this challenge is: I’m not learning things I want to learn. but I’m going to learn them because I’m being (willingly) compelled to. That is, I’m not going to stop because I’m getting bored. That’s what makes this process so much different than enjoying downloading papers illegally from scientific things or reading textbooks that I find online.

I’m completely deaf in … [read full article]

 

The absolute filth and horror of the trench warfare, which in my essay I called mud and blood, also very much stood out for me in these two movie screenings that we did.  I think we learn more about WW2 because it was filled with charismatic leaders, good and evil, a horror show of precision inhumanity and statistics alike. But WW1 seems to get a more quick treatment, more like a series of facts that happened, things about the League of Nations and the precursors to WW2. But I I remember learning very little about the brutality and hollowness of it. WW2 had flags to cheer behind. WW1 had lack of communication, uncertainty, flying blind. It was very much madness. All warfare is but the shock was from more than the shells in WW1: it was the loss of the past and the need to embrace uncertainty. 

The absolute filth and … [read full article]

 

Read this book in 1990 along with “Everything I needed to know I learned in Kindergarten” somewhere around there and I saw all adults as if they were little kids who are playing “grown-up” – and that included myself – and so that’s how I try to approach things. I like the idea of out-Socratesing Socrates! He didn’t have the benefit of Dr. Spock and Social Emotional Learning, etc

Read this book in … [read full article]