?

Log in

mysticalglitter [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
mysticalglitter

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

What I am doing with my life (or at least the next year of it) [May. 12th, 2009|12:19 pm]
mysticalglitter
Working: As an administrative assistant/receptionist at Palisades Hudson, a personal financial planning firm in Scarsdale.

Living: On the corner of 129th and Lenox in Harlem with a bunch of cool artsy people in their mid to late twenties.

Writing: Hopefully.
linkpost comment

Grocery Van [Oct. 1st, 2008|04:31 pm]
mysticalglitter
Got a driver's license? Don't have a car? Need groceries? I am trying to organize a weekly school van to Stop & Shop; however, I can't actually drive, and the chances of getting funding to pay a driver don't seem high. But, if there is someone who can drive and would be willing to get the school van driver certification and drive the school van, I think I could arrange to get permission to use the van. This way, you would have a vehicle to use to do your grocery shopping and help other SLC students be able to do their shopping as well. Sound interesting? E-mail me at esnelling@gm.slc.edu.
linkpost comment

Lynd Annex [Aug. 23rd, 2008|11:26 pm]
mysticalglitter
Item 1: I just finished moving today from Hill House to Lynd Annex. I was really worried that I wasn't going to like my new room. I think it was a case of excessive choice anxiety. I had a good lottery number (63) and so could have lived anywhere, and, being the creature of modernity that I am, instead of choosing a room and liking it, I lamented not having all the other great rooms I could have chosen. Now that I'm here, though, and all the pros and cons are concrete instead of abstract I'm much happier. Pros: It's really cute; it's an area of campus I haven't lived in before; it's quiet; there's a giant lawn; ;it's centrally located; I share a kitchen with only three other people. Cons: I also share a bathroom with three other people; the kitchen has very little counter-space; there isn't a laundry room anywhere nearby. Did I mention it's really cute?

Item 2: I put my magnetic poetry up on the fridge. I have quite a lot of it. It puts me in really pretentious, artsy moods.

Item 3: Everyone must go to the Dali exhibit at the MoMA. It is without a doubt the best exhibit I've ever been to. Regardless of your current level of appreciation of Dali, you'll appreciate him at least twice as much after the exhibit.

Item 4: My mom was here for a week and left this afternoon, and I miss her already.
linkpost comment

Some Thoughts on the Dark Knight [Aug. 7th, 2008|11:53 am]
mysticalglitter
The first time I saw The Dark Knight, I thought afterward, “Wow, that was a long series of railroad dilemmas.” I didn’t really follow this train of thought (pun not intended but rather amusing) beyond that, though. After a second viewing, I recognize that this is the key to the movie. Railroad dilemmas are classic philosophical conundrums that are used to illuminate the difference between Kantian style deontological morals and utilitarian style consequentialist morals. One of the clearest ones is this: A man standing on a bridge sees a train below him which is about to hit seven construction workers. The man realizes that if he could drop some large, heavy object off the bridge, into the path of the train, it would slow the train and give the construction workers enough time to get off the tracks. The only object available, however, is a very fat man. Is it acceptable for him to throw the one fat man off the bridge to save the seven? A Kantian moralist answers that this is not acceptable; actions are in themselves good or bad, and murdering a single person is unacceptable, regardless of the potential good. A consequentialist on the other hand answers that it is acceptable to throw the fat man over the bridge; actions in themselves are not good or bad--good and bad are relevant only when applied to the sum total of the consequences of the action. The Joker’s set-up in which he gives people the option to kill one person, Batman’s black-mailer, or to allow many to die, in a hospital explosion, is a very straight-forward railroad dilemma. Though slightly more complicated, the ferry experiment is a similar situation. Overall, the movie takes a strongly Kantian stand, and Batman is emblematic of this morality. For him, there is no question that the blackmailer must be protected or that the people on the ferries should not use their detonators. However, he is “just so much fun” for the Joker because, even at the beginning, his morality is contradictory. He espouses Kantian, anti-consequentialist ideas, and yet he acts as an outlaw. A good Kantian would not break the laws, even to do good, because breaking the laws is, in itself bad, and the consequences cannot be considered. Batman, however, does break laws. He wishes to be a firm Kantian moral absolutist, as is evident in his idolization of Dent, but he himself is not. The Joker’s goal is not to kill or destroy Batman, but to force him to confront his own consequentialist tendencies. The Joker is not a consequentialist himself, but he wants Batman to become one. His goal is to show the arbitrariness of morality, and he can do this by playing these two conflicting moralities off one another, showing that neither is sufficient, and that the two are mutually exclusive, leaving people with no solid moral ground. By showing that there are in fact two central moralities, not one, the Joker eliminates the possibility of people being straightforwardly good. While, from a strictly Kantian view, the people on the ferries show themselves to be good, when the possibility of two conflicting moralities is brought into play, the Joker is able to win either way. From a consequentialist point of view, the people on the ferries act immorally; they allow their own selfish desires for personal lack of guilt and moral purity to lead them to act in a way that will unnecessarily kill a large number of people. Only Batman’s intervention prevents a later critical, consequentialist view of the ferry-riders’ Kantian-based actions. Batman’s intervention allows the illusion of simple morality to remain by showing the goodness of refraining from a Kantian bad action without showing the utilitarian bad consequences. However, simply imagining the consequences, as the ferry-riders believed they would be, produces a great deal of moral ambiguity. At the same time, Batman struggles with his own railroad dilemma; should he kill the Joker, ensuring the safety of any future victims, or should he preserve his own Kantian integrity and refrain. In this case, Batman is forced more clearly to face the consequences of his action as the Joker remains dangling above the city. With Harvey Dent, the Joker erodes the idea of moral certainty by playing on a different conflicting morality, that of chance, but he reserves his main philosophical attack for Batman. As the film progresses, Batman’s morality becomes less and less firmly Kantian, and he begins to take risks with others’ lives for the sake of a good end, as he does with the members of the SWAT team when he ambushes the Joker's hideout during the ferry standoff. By the end, the Joker seems to have won in that Batman can no longer be a figure of certain, unequivocal morality. He has started to have doubts about the truth of moral absolutism. The Joker has revealed that, since both moralities can be compelling, neither is absolutely and self-evidently true. People do not have any real, innate knowledge of what is moral since even someone as firmly entrenched in his moral foundations as Harvey Dent was or as Batman wished he was, can be swayed by alternate moral reasoning. Although Batman to some degree realizes this himself, and comes to accept that he can no longer rely on absolute morality, he still believes in belief. Even if all morality is arbitrary, he seems to conclude, the one moral commandment that remains is that we must believe in morality and we must do everything possible to protect this belief. In the end, Batman is willing to sacrifice himself in order to protect for others the belief in simple, true morality, which he can never again take for granted himself. The Joker may provide the truth that people deserve, but Batman will still protect the falsehoods that they need.
link1 comment|post comment

(no subject) [Apr. 28th, 2008|08:11 pm]
mysticalglitter
I break my long silence to tell you, my dear readers, that I am now wearing a Che T-shirt and penguin pajama pants.
linkpost comment

Back at SLC [Jan. 20th, 2008|03:46 pm]
mysticalglitter
So I am back at Sarah Lawrence. I don't have my key yet due to strange bureaucracy, but I am all moved in. Friends, feel free to drop by and see me at AC 6. I have chocolate. I can't wait to see everyone.
linkpost comment

Back in the U.S. [Dec. 17th, 2007|01:39 pm]
mysticalglitter
I've just returned to the U.S. I have a massive journal of my exploits in Cuba, but I don't know how to make it accesible here. Maybe I'll figure it out. In any case, after I get settled in I will try to get back in touch with everyone as I've been kind of outside the realm of normal communications for the past four months.
linkpost comment

Location Update [Jul. 15th, 2007|05:26 pm]
mysticalglitter
On Friday the 21st I'm leaving my cozy Fleetwood apartment with its 20 minute train ride to NYC and going back to Erie. But this is okay, because my sister is getting married on the 28th. Also, I leave for Cuba on the 14th. I suggest that anyone who wants to talk to me by any means other than e-mail before December do so before the 14th, because after that I'll be out of phone range. I will send you all many telepathic messages, but I won't be able to call.
linkpost comment

(no subject) [May. 25th, 2007|09:01 pm]
mysticalglitter
Today (now yesterday because I had trouble getting the computer to let me post) I accepted Fred as my personal Lord and Savior (he helped me work my stubborn key so I didn't have to spend the next few days until my flat-mates return sitting forlornly in the hall outside my apartment).
linkpost comment

(no subject) [May. 23rd, 2007|10:32 pm]
mysticalglitter
I just watched Run Lola Run and was deeply annoyed by it. In the end (i.e. don't read on if you haven't seen the movie and intend to) Manni gives the mob boss the original bag of money; however, we saw the bum spend seventy dollars of the money on the bike, and it's implied he also buys some things at the soda shop. Potentially Manni counts the money, finds that seventy plus is missing, and supplements it from his wallet. Since we don't see that happen, however, it's also possible that the mob boss decides that Manni failed the test by returning seventy plus dollars too little, and then bad shit happens to Manni. If a movie is going to rest its case for existence largely on having the details fit together in interesting ways, it has to make the details work.
linkpost comment

navigation
[ viewing | most recent entries ]
[ go | earlier ]