Literature Analysis (Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi)

TOPIC(S) and/or EVENT(S)

1.     As we have discussed in class, a book is said to be nonfiction if its content is based on facts or events.  What is your book about?  [a]. Try writing a paragraph first to capture your thoughts.  [b]. Then see if you can boil it down to one clear statement.  (Even if you feel like you can just skip to [b], please do both; remember that your reader doesn’t know what you know.)

[a.] Mihaly Csikszentmihakyi, one of the most prominent founders/leaders of the relatively new branch of psychology known as "positive psychology", is perhaps most revered for his theory of flow. His 1990 release, Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience, serves to lay out nearly three decades of flow research in terms that most members of the general public can understand and benefit from. And it is this intent that not only sets the book apart from a standard psychology publication, but also ties it in so seamlessly with my masterpiece topic; for the primary purpose of the book is not only to present the research, as with most publications in its field, but rather to actually apply it. I would say that more so than flow itself, true happiness is the focus of this book, with flow being the means of attaining it. I will talk more about this in the "style" section. Moving on, I will provide a brief overview of the book as I have done with my other literature analyses: Csikszentmihalyi begins by discussing happiness, and the mysterious predicament that seems to bar most humans from ever truly attaining it. He points out that, despite our lives being, on average, overwhelmingly longer, less arduous, and more healthful than the lives of the people of any preceding era, we do not seem to be any happier. In the richest and most hospitable nation in the history of the world--where we are able concern ourselves with how we should spend our leisure time and stay entertained as opposed to what we must suffer through to merely survive--we seem to share the same internal discontent as members of history's harshest societies. The reason for happiness' deceiving elusiveness, according to Csikszentmihalyi, is that humans depend on external factors to make them happy--sex, money, power, material possessions--the things that society tells us we should long for. Further, he argues that these societal rewards are carefully, and intentionally, instilled in us to fulfill a very specific goal: to cultivate a population whose ethics match those of their society, enabling the people to fill the niches that society needs filled, even if those people aren't necessarily doing what they want. This leads into his most important argument; that true happiness is generated internally, and cannot result from any external circumstances. By this reasoning, it is clear why mankind seems to be constantly chasing its metaphorical tail, never content with any degree of "success". For if a person who is struggling to secure even the basic essentials is supplied with food, water, and shelter, he/she will soon long for some luxuries such as a television set or a computer or an automobile, then if those wishes are met, the desire for a bigger house and a nicer car will emerge, and so on and so forth all the way up until an opposite extreme from which we started is reached. Now, this person has everything available in the current day and age: an enormous mansion, a parking garage filled with exotic cars, an expert private chef, as many sexual partners as could possibly be desired, etc.--external conditions could not be more favorable. These things may provide temporary pleasure, but they cannot provide sustained happiness. This is because pleasure, man's most widely sought-after sensation, is not intertwined with happiness as many people believe.  As Csikszentmihalyi explains in Chapter 3: pleasurable things have become symbols of happiness in our society. If a "regular" person sees an extremely wealthy individual reaping all of the luxuries that money can buy, that person will almost always assume that the wealthier person must be far happier as a result of all of the pleasure that he/she is undoubtedly taking in. Again, people are inclined to want what they don't have; it is comforting to believe that there is "something more"--some upper echelon of living that offers guaranteed happiness and fulfillment. Unfortunately, no amount of "success", as society defines it, will ever be sufficient in pursuing this imaginary goal. The sensation of pleasure occurs as a result of psychological imbalances being reconciled, returning the internal self to equilibrium. In the words of Csikszentmilhalyi: "Sleep, food, rest, and sex provide restorative homeostatic experiences that return consciousness to order after the needs of the body intrude and cause psychic entropy to occur. But they do not produce psychological growth. They do not add complexity to the self. Pleasure helps maintain order, but by itself cannon create new order in consciousness." And it is this "optimal experience" of expanding one's self that can actually improve quality of life and facilitate happiness, as is covered in Chapter 2. It is certainly a good feeling that we experience when we grow and stretch ourselves in new directions, but if it isn't pleasure, what exactly is it? Enjoyment. Often lumped in as a synonym of pleasure, the two sensations are quite different. "Enjoyable events occur when a person has not only met some prior expectation or satisfied a need or desire but also gone beyond what he or she has been programmed to do and achieved something unexpected, perhaps something even imagined before." This is where the idea of flow as optimal experience comes from; for the enjoyment that such growth provides is unparalleled when it comes to happiness, and enjoying an activity in virtue of itself is one of the primary characteristics of flow. Flow, named such due to the effortless "flow" of psychic energy (attention) that people performing various flow-inducing activities reported in Csikszentmihalyi's interviews,  is a mental state which is said to to be the pinnacle of positive human experience. Csikszentmihalyi lays out a few key components/characteristics of flow: First and foremost is complete and total focus/immersion. During a flow experience, a person becomes completely involved in what he/she is doing, often to the extent that that person loses track of time, daily stresses and troubles, and even his/her very self. The free and effortless flow of attention that occurs during a flow experience acts as a wedge between a person and his/her own thoughts and feelings; exactly what the person is doing at that particular instance is the only thing he/she is aware of. Despite this lack of self-consciousness, the person still receives a deep sense of enjoyment from the activity while in the flow state. This alone is another component of flow; the activity must be enjoyable in and of itself, regardless of extrinsic rewards, in order for flow to be likely. A rock climber that Csikszentmihalyi interviewed described this perfectly: "The mystique of rock climbing is climbing; you get to the top glad it's over but really wish it would go on forever. The justification of climbing is climbing, like the justification of poetry is writing; you don't conquer anything except things in yourself... The act of writing justifies poetry. Climbing is the same: recognizing that you are a flow. The purpose of the flow is to keep on flowing, not looking for a peak or utopia but staying in the flow. It is not a moving up but a continuous flowing; you move up to keep the flow going. There is no possible reason for climbing except the climbing itself; it is a self-communication." Perhaps most importantly, a person must be attempting to accomplish a clearly defined goal that requires roughly the same amount of skill in a given area that that person possesses. It is at this convergence of skill and challenge that a person's psychic energy most easily flows, and also that a person is subject to the greatest amount of growth. Also crucial is that the goal provides immediate feedback--a person must be able to evaluate his/her performance level and/or progress instantly at any step. Without the ability to gauge the success of each of the numerous micro-goals that go into any task, the task becomes frustrating, and one may feel that his/her psychic energy is being wasted; this is obviously not conducive to flow. In summation: the more frequently a person is able to find flow, the more happiness he/she will generate for him/herself. While far easier said than done, mastering the ability to "control one's consciousness", as Csikszentmihalyi calls it, is perhaps the only way to guarantee happiness, effectively rendering external circumstances a nonissue.

[b.] Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience, by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, is a promiscuous-for-its-kind book that blends together elements of (positive) psychology, phenomenology, sociology, and other fields and applies them to explain happiness, the misconceptions that make it so unattainable, and the mental states/disciplines that can help facilitate it.

2.     Why did your author choose to write about this topic, person or event?

According to the preface, Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi wrote this book to present his model of happiness--especially his research on the mental state of flow upon which that model is based--in the form of a straightforward body of text that as many people as possible may understand and benefit from.

3.     Why did you choose this book?  What about the book appealed to you the first time it came to your attention (and how did it come to your attention)?  What about the book made you want to keep reading once you began?

I chose this book because of my Masterpiece project - plain and simple. Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi's theory of flow became a pivotal part of my topic after it was introduced to me by Dr. Preston and, seeing as nearly all of the resources I found on flow are based on Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience, I figured I might as well cut out the middle man and just read the book. This book was quite a refreshing change of pace from the books I read for my last couple literature analyses. This book was not pettily mindless by any standards, but it was certainly not written to be intentionally difficult either. Aside from this new-to-me readability, the groundbreaking, yet practicable ideas that comprise the text drew me in without a doubt. I would recommend this enjoyable, and possibly life changing, read to almost anyone.

4.     Did you find the book realistic?  Did you make any connections between people/events you read about and people/events in your own life? Why or (if you didn’t) why not?

Everything in this book can be applied to one's own life. That is the entire point of the book after all: "to present general principles, along with concrete examples of how some people have used these principles, to transform boring and meaningless lives into ones full of enjoyment." I frequently made connections to my own life in order to solidify the things I'm doing correctly, and attempt to change the things I'm not. I wouldn't say that I'm unhappy, but there is always room for improvement in all areas, life quality included.

PEOPLE

There are no characters in this book. A few situations involving people are mentioned, but briefly, and only as examples.

STYLE

1.     Did the author use any tools from fiction writing (such as foreshadowing or symbolism), or did the author use a journalistic style? Example(s)?

Some tools from fiction writing--namely similes, metaphors, and other comparative forms of figurative language--are commonly used in nonfiction writing to relate a book's contents to the real world. In this book, however, real examples were paired with nearly every main point/idea, alleviating the need for any crossover devices from fiction. One might think that this more factual style would dry the text out, but I don't believe it does at all. Csikszentmihalyi's ideas are interesting enough on their own that any superfluity would be unnecessary at best, and distracting at worst.

2.     Does the author use lengthy descriptions of places and people,or does s/he focus more on action or dialogue?  What overall effect do these choices have on the book?

Csikszentmihalyi focused on explaining his ideas and their implications more than the places, people, and events that he used as examples. The few times that he did describe certain scenes, however, the actions of the people involved were most important for his purposes.
       

MASTERPIECE INTERVIEWS

Jake:

• What are you working on?

         Becoming a veterinarian

• Why?

         Loves animals and wants to work with/help them

• What is the significance of this project in your life/career?

         Giving him direction and helping him take the first steps towards pursuing his dream job

• How do you see this work helping you in life outside of school?

         Hopefully providing him with a career that he'll love

• Has anything surprised you in your work?

         How difficult the job is. Arguably more difficult than being a "real" doctor, since a veterinarian has to  be completely versatile and can't specialize in one given area.

• What do you need to successfully complete your project and present it?

         Needs to accurately document veterinary intern work

• What have you learned that's worth teaching someone else?

         Too much to teach, which is a lesson in itself: one should always consult a professional regarding   problems with his/her animal's health 

Carlos:

• What are you working on?

         Boxing

• Why?

         It is his passion, plain and simple

• What is the significance of this project in your life/career?

         Hopes to go pro and make a career out of it

• How do you see this work helping you in life outside of school?

         Keeping him in shape, providing him with the ability to defend himself, and opening a possible career path

• Has anything surprised you in your work?

         The amount of cardio that boxing requires - it's deceivingly exhausting

• What do you need to successfully complete your project and present it?

         Needs to find a way to showcase skills/progress

• What have you learned that's worth teaching someone else?

         Able to teach basic boxing skills to others as a means of self-defense.

Dale:

• What are you working on?

         "Preparing for the future."

• Why?

         "What I'm currently starting, medical training, will help me in many of my career options. If I don't get exactly what I want, I've got somewhere to start."

• What is the significance of this project in your life/career?

         "It will come in useful, in life and career, for myself and others. I plan to use these skills for others' benefit."

• How do you see this work helping you in life outside of school?

         "Also in school if necessary, but it will put me in a better position for the future in what I want and what I can get. It's a very beneficial skill to know, life saving, and you shouldn't ever be without it."

• Has anything surprised you in your work?

         "There aren't any surprises, but I have learned just how much work all of this can be. Even the simplest of tasks, CPR for example, is high intensity, for a few minutes let alone a half hour straight."

• What do you need to successfully complete your project and present it?

         "A variety of skills to demonstrate, share, explore, and gather from others in order to share all of our knowledge in the best way possible. Everything is available and I want every contribution possible. I want to solicit the help of others, to learn from them and to teach them as well."

• What have you learned that's worth teaching someone else?

         "There is much I know and much I don't. What I know and what anyone else does is very different. I have just as much to learn as anyone else. I like to think I have an early lead, but it doesn't really matter in the end. I want to discover what people want so I can give it to them, as well as find what I need and ask those who know for their knowledge. It's a give and take, one that I hope to contribute much to."

  

DESIGN

I began writing that learning takes place within the individual, independent of external factors, but stopped as I realized that there are few or no cases in which that is true. I know from my own experience how drastic the effects of one's surroundings on his/her learning can be, and I believe it is crucial to take that into account while attempting to learn or teach. For example, I am significantly less productive at school than I am at home. While trying to work in class, I am lucky to solve a single physics problem in the time that it takes me to solve the rest of the problem set at home, and there is a noticeable gap between the quality of my in-class essays and the quality of the essays that I complete at home. This unfortunate decline in performance that afflicts everything from my mental faculties to my fine motor skills is undoubtedly due to the vast differences in the two environments; having to sit in a misshapen, rigid, plastic desk instead of my own familiar desk and chair, being constantly bombarded by obnoxious distractions instead of being immersed in some prolific tunes, having to wear regular clothes instead of my far more comfortable pajamas, etc. can go a long way in determining whether whatever I'm working on will be something that I am proud of, or something that I throw away and start from scratch at a time/place that is more conducive to learning. Everyone experiences learning (and most everything else for that matter) differently though, and as a result, different elements of a learning environment affect different people in different ways. This is why the "one size fits all" approach is broken and needs to be retired by a better, more individualized system of learning.

Upbringings: Implications for Individual and Societal Well-being

Taken in the order that they are listed, the four assigned articles tell a story illustrating the relationship between the way a child is brought up, and how well that child develops into a problem solver as opposed to a problem causer. The first two articles, "Raising a Moral Child" and "Parental Involvement is Overrated", discuss various approaches to raising a child to be successful (where success is a developed sense of compassion/morality in the former, and traditional academic/economic achievement in the latter). The final two articles, "Recovery for Whom?" and "Saving Young People From Themselves", discuss the United States' precarious economic situation, and the problems that it poses for the generations stepping into it. With the articles arranged in this fashion, a clear, common theme begins to emerge: the effects of parenting on individuals, as well as on society.

It is no mystery that parenting is one of the most significant determinants of a child's future. Young minds are incredibly malleable and, as a result, the general ethics, morals, and ideologies by which a person chooses to live his/her life are largely shaped by the parents and/or other authority figures that comprise that person's childhood environment. Obviously, as a person matures, s/he is exposed to more and more things, enabling him/her to derive different outlooks on some matters from personal experience but, for better or worse, the core set of beliefs that a person is endowed with during youth generally persists. We live in an infinitely complex world and, without internal organizational mechanisms to help us make sense of things, we would be hopelessly overwhelmed. In response to the constant influx of information that the brain receives, it naturally develops categories to which it can assign new information with a single, snap judgement. This process applies universally, from the way that we interpret our immediate, physical environment, to, more importantly for my purposes, the way that we form our views on social, political, and philosophical issues. While the absence of this crucial component would severely impair our cognitive functioning, its presence has some side effects of its own. Namely, once established, mental categories are incredibly difficult to reform. This doesn't necessarily have to be negative: say a person is raised to be an extremely hard worker--no amount of resentment from co-workers who are content to skate by with minimal effort is likely to change that. On the other hand, if a person is raised to adopt flawed, discriminatory outlooks, for example, s/he is likely to remain a bigot, even when confronted with fierce public disapproval and mountains of counter-evidence proving the error of his/her ways. This should be cause for caution. Raising a child is like building a sculpture out of clay that ossifies without warning after a certain amount of time: one must achieve the correct shape before time runs out, or s/he risks losing the ability to effect the changes that s/he desires.

So far, it may seem as if I am merely elaborating on the obvious. That is because I am. I wasn't able to draw any profoundly earth-shattering points out of these four articles, and, although I do wish I could have done more, I suppose I'm okay with it. While new and poignant insight is always the goal, clarification of what is already known can be beneficial as well. Everyone knows, to one degree or another, that a person's upbringing is the mold for his/her inner self. If the workers, entertainers, educators, enforcers, protectors, and policy makers that comprise our human infrastructure were all shaped by parental guidance (or lack thereof), then it follows that it is that parenting which collectively determines the nature of society on a generational basis. In a perfect world, each generation would pass down all of their positive attributes and withhold any negative ones but, realistically, that is simply not going to happen for countless reasons. Just because we may never attain perfection does not mean that we should forgo the pursuit, however; all aspects of life are connected in one way or another, and it is of the utmost importance to gain ground wherever possible. By instilling the morals, ethics, and skills that we feel are important into our children while still allowing them room to come into their own, we are facilitating growth on a societal level. This is not restricted to society's standards, either. In fact, in order for true growth to occur, it is necessary to diverge away from and expand past what is already known/accepted. Many parents stress the importance of doing well in school, for example. This seems like something parents should do, and it very well may be, but it also important look past the current standard, and strive for what could be, instead succumbing to what is. Especially in this case where "what is" is enduring a broken education system for at least twelve years, and then punching the clock for the remainder. 

   

THE CROSSROADS BETWEEN SHOULD AND MUST

The Crossroads of Should and Must expresses an interesting outlook on the way we choose to live our lives. In short, the author broke down the decision making process into two components: "should" and "must", where "should" describes the path(s) that serve to satisfy the expectations of society, and "must" describes the path(s) that a person would naturally choose in virtue of his/her true self. Upon looking around one's environment, it becomes clear that societal pressure is the impetus behind the majority of the decisions that are made; the curious, creative, malleable minds of our youth are forced into a school system that stifles intellectual growth and replaces it with the ability to follow directions. As it happens, the old cliche "a slave to society" is perfectly accurate; we are trained to be employees from birth and, as a result, we lose sight of what we actually want out of our short time on Earth.

The first step in solving any problem is, of course, recognizing it. For those who have managed to extricate themselves from the fetters emplaced by this broken system, the problem is as clear as it is appalling. Most people, however, have known nothing different than the institutionalized sapping of potential that is the current standard, and are unlikely to become aware of it on their own. I speak from personal experience here. I despised the first eleven years of my school career, and, at that point, I didn't even know why. School was never a bad experience for me--I live in a moderate area, I have never been bullied or forced to face any other hardships of the sort, and I have liked nearly all of my teachers to one extent or another--I just never found any value in it. I would show up, sit down, be quiet, and have a humdrum, "one size fits all" curriculum shoved down my throat, which I was to spit back out in return for a grade. There was no room for my interests, no room for me. I'm just remembering as I'm typing this: I was obsessed with astronomy for several years. Every time I looked up at the stars I was transfixed by the vast expanse of space. I was content to lie there for hours, staring into the night sky and letting my mind wander. I was only a small child, but the mysteries of the universe fascinated me even then. I knew at least as much about the subject then as I do now. If asked, I could have described in detail the life cycle of a star, beginning with its birth in the heart of a nebula as gas eventually accumulated to form a body massive enough that the pressure within its core was sufficient for nuclear fusion to take place, all the way to its death resulting in the creation of a white dwarf, a neutron star, or perhaps a black hole, all depending on the star's mass, and I could have explained why those things happen the way that they do (though probably not to the degree that I could now in that respect). That is just one example. From stars and the relationships they have with their satellites, to various types of galaxies, to black holes and related phenomena such as quasars, to the macro arrangement of the visible universe (stars, solar systems, star systems, galaxies, galaxy clusters, etc.), I possessed a level of understanding parallel to the books and television programs from which I attained it, which is exactly my point. I took it upon myself to use my free time to look into what I found interesting; school was nothing more than an obstacle. I accrued a fair amount of knowledge, but the books and television shows that I had access to were necessarily "dumbed down" so as to be appealing to the general public. I wanted the real thing, but there was no way for me to get it on my own. One might say "well, a ten year old doesn't need access to high level science..." I have been confronted with that sort of foolishness before, and have but one counterargument: why put a cap on potential? Why discourage curiosity and scientific thinking? I have always loved science, and it seems that science class should have provided at least some sort of relief from the rest of school, but the introductory level science classes that I was placed in were, as arrogant as this sounds, far below the level that I desired. I understand that not everyone goes into, say, a junior high school general science class with the knowledge that I did, and I will admit that such classes do serve their purpose in introducing children to the scientific method and preparing them for more specialized, subject-specific classes in high school (though many concepts are often oversimplified, which is counterproductive). I have one gripe that I cannot rationalize, however: the lack of choices in selecting classes. In junior high school, everyone takes the same two science classes, with the same standardized curriculum; there is no possible way to further explore the subjects that one is interested in other than the approach that I took, which, like I said, has its limitations. With multiple subjects and AP classes, high school is much better, but still far from ideal. I didn't get to study astronomy in school at all until 9th grade, and it was a two-week-long unit at the end of the year... I have since expanded my horizons and now find nearly all of the sciences equally interesting, but that is beside the point. I wanted to pursue something in school, and I couldn't, because schools should have a standard state curriculum which they must strictly adhere to. This is only one class/subject, and my favorite one at that. Other classes were far worse. I observed the amount of value that school had to offer me, and invested effort proportionally. The result: I used my natural academic aptitude to skate through school with decent grades. I was eligible for honor roll and other academic awards every year, but I never attended the assemblies. I wasn't learning, at least not in the way that I wanted to, and I knew it. I was told that I should do well in school, so I did by the standards of those who were telling me, but I didn't excel to the degree that I could have because I didn't want to. I wasn't able to study what I wanted in the way that I wanted, so I didn't feel any internal drive to perform to the very best of my abilities. It wasn't a must for me.

This example was much lengthier than I intended, but I think it got my point across. I believe that most students have had a school experience similar to my own. Especially in high school, I have observed an overwhelming lack of effort, and it is very unsettling. People are not born without ambition, and definitely not without curiosity. Slackers don't care about school because being schooled rather than actually learning causes their will to learn to quickly diminish. This effect is difficult enough to reverse as it is, and when only a few teachers/administrators are making any real effort to change the system, the odds converge on zero. I consider myself lucky that my desire to learn wasn't snuffed out completely by school, given the circumstances. Even though, before this year, nearly all of my classes have followed the drudgerous "memorize, restate, and be graded accordingly" model that often marks the end of a learning life, I didn't completely succumb to a "should" existence. I still pulled out the interesting/beneficial material where I found it and learned as much as I could, getting adequate grades in the process. Over time, I developed into a perfectionist which provided an inherent boost to my school effort, but deep down inside, I still didn't care. I still felt like I was putting in the time and getting nothing in return, and I wasn't sure why. Finally, just this year, I was able to connect the dots with Dr. Preston's class, which brings me back to the beginning of the last paragraph. After being subjected to something for so many years, especially starting at a young age, it is difficult to view it in a different light. School is the biggest transmitter of "shoulds" that I've encountered, and I failed to see it for what it really is until I was exposed to people who are educated on the matter. Expert intervention is the only method I foresee being successful in  rectifying this problem and pointing people towards living the lives that they must live rather than the lives that they should live. Dr. Preston is an anomaly--I'm not sure that there is another teacher like him alive. But that is not cause for concern; while it is ideal to have the necessary information incorporated in a course/curriculum as Dr. Preston has done, there are other means of attaining it. Articles, TED talks, etc.; there are other people seeking to get the same message out, and I've seen it done in some wonderfully innovative ways (like this fantastic remix that I found on last year's course blog).

The personal insight that I've shared throughout this essay should paint a decent picture of where I've walked in relation to the crossroads thus far, but just for the sake of clarity, I will restate it as directly as possible: for most of my life, I have fallen somewhere in between "should" and "must". I can recall doing things I didn't believe in, as well as giving up ideas that I knew were right, in order to avoid punishment. It makes me sick just thinking about it, but I can also remember a time when I would follow others in order to try and fit in with the norm--the exact opposite of what I strive for today. In these respects, I did what I should have done according to my authority figures and peers, respectively. On the other hand, I never let school, nor anything else, tame my natural curiosity. I question everything, never taking anything for granted simply "because it is". If I get a problem wrong on a test, for example, I am not content leaving it be. If I can't find my mistake, I ask the instructor what I did wrong, why it's wrong, and why the correct answer is correct. To me, the "why" is actually more importnat than the "what", which is why I don't do well in math classes that are taught on the basis of "this number goes here, that number goes there, and the answer just pops out". I need to know and understand the underlying concept in order to truly put it together. I invest my psychic energy into the things that are important to me, and brush aside the things that aren't. In this way, I have always done what I must in order to remain me. With that, I feel that any "should" stages have passed as I've matured, and I can say with confidence that this dichotomy is over. I plan to live my life as I must from this point forward, never conforming to societal whims.        

Resource of the Day 4/5/2014

Interesting article describing Bhutan's attempts to, as a nation, put happiness ahead of economic status in measuring the nation's overall well-being: http://www.stwr.org/economic-sharing-alternatives/gross-national-happiness-an-alternative-measure-of-progress.html

LOOK AT MY BRAIN

I always try to let my coursework reflect as much of my inner thinking as possible. I am an admittedly opinionated (though certainly not close-minded) individual, and I will never hesitate to make clear my position on an issue, so long as I provide veritable facts and/or cogent arguments to support my points. By its very nature, this somewhat argumentative style is indicative of one's capacity for both creativity and critical thinking. In fact, the argument is perhaps the purest embodiment of critical thinking there is; formulating an effective argument requires a clear, open-minded, analytic evaluation of the facts--practically the word-for-word definition of critical thinking. Creativity is also central. What use is the ability to acquire the building blocks without the ability to assemble them? To put forth an argument is to create ideas based on facts, and give them form. Also, believe it or not, collaboration plays its role here as well. While seemingly working against each other, when two or more individuals debate a matter, they are effectively collaborating. They are exchanging a series of arguments in order to determine what is true and what isn't, and the progress that results isn't reserved exclusively for the victor.

S' WONDERFUL

Today's modified Socratic Seminar period was wonderful in itself; the free flow of ideas and willingness to help that I observed impressed me, and I feel that everyone who participated benefited both as individuals, and as a group.

Masterpiece Project Update: Final Product Difficulties

Ever since embarking on this this journey at the beginning of the semester, I have been struggling to come up with an end to my project that I will be satisfied with. I have been studying, in one word, happiness and, naturally, my goal is to present the information I have gathered, as well as my own knowledge/understanding, in a way that will help people succeed in attaining the most sought-after, and arguably the most elusive, commodity known to man. The challenge is doing so in a way that is unique, pervasive, and, most importantly, in a way that actually works. There are countless "life changing" books and articles claiming to provide tips and tricks on how to be happier already out there but, in addition to being painfully boring and generic, they obviously don't work, as evidenced by the overwhelming percentage of the population for whom the idea of happiness is little more than wishful thinking. The LAST thing I want is for my work to fall into that bleak category but, at the same time, I'm not quite sure how to set myself apart...

PREVIEW OF COMING ATTRACTIONS

Today, I solely discussed my peers' projects with my table group, hoping that the conversation might spark some ideas for my own. I still don't have a clear picture of what my project will look like, unfortunately, but I did get a few ideas flowing and, not for nothing, had a fairly productive conversation about Jared's project (which has real potential and I am quite excited about).

   

RAISING DIGITAL AWARENESS

In general, the purpose of posting content online is sharing it with others--getting it seen. If no one is visiting a site, then its curator's ideas remain undiscovered by the rest of the world, leading to a tragic collection of unrealized potential as opposed to a fruitful body of valuable contributions. In my case, however, I don't feel that the amount of views/viewers I have is important at the moment. I don't have a groundbreaking product or idea to pitch, nor do I have any other sort of latent value that is being wasted by not being shared; no one besides perhaps my peers are likely to benefit from my blog in its current state.

Resource of the Day 3/27/2014

This interesting article discusses some attempts at measuring happiness, and the challenges that are imposed when dealing with such a subjective state.

SEEKING MENTOR

The characteristics that I identified for my Expert Profile had mostly to do with, well, a person's expertise: the skills, knowledge, experience, etc. that he/she possesses. A mentor, however, is slightly different. When I think of a mentor, I think of someone I look up to--someone I trust personally, as well as professionally. This sort of relationship isn't something that can be forced; it must develop naturally, and this is rarely a quick process. I honestly have no idea where to even begin when it comes to facilitating something like that; I feel like it just has to happen on its own.

IS THERE AN EXPERT IN THE HOUSE

*I didn't post this assignment earlier because I already have a couple of experts on standby, so I didn't feel that it was necessary. It is a prerequisite for the direction we are taking now, though, so here it is.

My Expert Profile:
- Knowledgeable in an area (or areas) pertaining to my topic
- Credible: extensive formal education and/or able to demonstrate clear mastery of the concepts at hand
- Experienced, both in life, and in his/her given field
- Versatile: should be able to speak with authority in various areas, even if he/she specializes in only one
- Analytical with minute attention to detail
- Forthright and willing to provide honest feedback/criticism

Resource of the Day 3/25/2014

Today, I found this great little article on happiness; it is difficult to imagine these ideas being conveyed any better with so few words.

Resource of the Day 3/21/2014

This Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry is the perfect starting point for the next branch of my topic: desire. This subtopic was introduced to me by an expert who I met a couple of weeks ago.

THIS IS ONLY A TEST

My "test" will be based on the longstanding philosophy that the best way to test one's own understanding of a concept is to attempt to teach that concept to others. Either by giving a presentation in class, or merely by conversing on my own time, I will explain my project to some of my peers prior to giving them a brief quiz to make sure that I was successful. If I can teach someone else about my topic well enough that he/she is able to answer the sort of questions that I would consider asking myself to test my own knowledge, then I will feel comfortable saying that I know my material to the degree that I should.

Resource of the Day 3/18/2014

        Today's resource is a book which I found in the bibliography of the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry on happiness that I posted one week ago. It is entitled Exploring Happiness: From Aristotle to Brain Science, and is said to provide a more-than-comprehensive account of happiness in terms of philosophy, as well as in terms of psychology, neuroscience, genetics, and economics. I am having this promising book transferred to a local library and look forward to reading it.

In-Class Essay Follow-Up

My essay was not oriented around my Masterpiece, though the information I have accumulated thus far definitely contributed to my thought process while writing. My research on flow & happiness particularly shaped the way I addressed the last part of the prompt (which I actually chose to use as the foundation of my essay), as I define "success" differently now than I would have earlier. Don't get me wrong - I have always assigned value to the journey itself and not just to the destination but, prior to my readings as of late, I probably would have taken the word "success" as a measure of physical attainment like most people do. While I haven't believed this definition to be true--at least in terms of happiness, which is what everyone ultimately seeks--for many years, I most likely still would've have assigned it to the word "success" in constructing my essay, which would have drastically changed all of the other content that depended on it. Basically, I think I would have considered "success" a measure of wealth, fame, power, etc. dictionally, though not in practice if it weren't for my Masterpiece research... If that makes any sense... Anyways, I feel that my essay came together fairly well. I was a bit nervous about only having 40 minutes to try and create an essay that I would be proud of, but I think I managed to pull it off. I can't be sure though, as I began writing immediately after the prompt was revealed and continued until the very end of the period, leaving me no time to look back and read anything that I had written. I felt pretty strong for the first couple paragraphs, but hearing the 10 minute warning when I was barely half way finished admittedly rattled me a bit. I turned it up and managed to finish, but, in that frenzied state, I was not able to convey my thoughts as eloquently as I would have liked, and I imagine I probably made a few mistakes. It is what it is though; not to mention that, sometimes, stepping out of one's comfort zone is the only way to grow/advance, and I always relish an opportunity to better myself.  

Resource of the Day 3/12/2014

Yet another Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry! These wonderful resources are difficult to pass up... This entry on emotion completes the trio in terms of the three main components of my topic.

Resource of the Day 3/11/2014

Last weekend I posted a Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry on pleasure. Today, I bring you its counterpart - a Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry on happiness.

I, ENTREPRENEUR

The blatant lack of effort being displayed by many of my peers caused class to fall apart today, and we never finished the conversation that was to serve as the premise for this assignment. I will attempt to answer the questions as best I can regardless of this unfortunate turn of events.

"...describe three things: (a) how the expert you designed the 10 questions for is or isn't an entrepreneur according to how we defined it in class; (b) how you are or are not an entrepreneur according to how we defined it in class; and (c) how this culture associates expertise with entrepreneurship, and how you think this idea should be reinforced or changed."

(a) Class was interrupted just before we defined entrepreneurship, so I will substitute in my own definition for the sake of this assignment. I think it's safe to say that most people would describe "being an entrepreneur" as operating a business/enterprise with the intent of turning a profit. I, on the other hand, believe that this idea of an entrepreneur is a bit too limiting; for I consider anyone who seeks to distribute an original idea of any sort to be an entrepreneur. According to this definition, any experts in fields related to my topic are undoubtedly entrepreneurs so long as they publish or otherwise make available their work.

(b) My definition has made this question somewhat difficult for me to answer... While I have, of course, expressed "original" ideas (original as in my own - not original as in unique or interesting) via this blog and other outlets, none of them have possessed enough practical value for me to deem them entrepreneurial. Furthermore, knowing that few or no people will actually come into contact with with the material I post on this blog or anywhere else, I cannot say that I have actually posted anything with the intent of distributing it. For these reasons and many others, I am not an entrepreneur, though I hope to change that in the future. 

(c) Expertise is a crucial component of successful entrepreneurship. That is not to say that an impressive formal education is required, but rather an advanced level of knowledge/aptitude in a given area. Any individual can pitch his/her ideas, but the ideas must be good in order for anyone to benefit from them, and a certain expertise is required for the ideas to be good. This is not a manufactured effect, but rather a necessary result that can be neither changed, nor reinforced.    

10 QUESTIONS

If I had the chance to pick the brain of an expert of a field related to my topic, I would likely ask him/her the following questions:

1) How and when did you realize that you wanted to study [x] field?
2) What steps did you take to make it happen?
3) Are you satisfied with the work you've done so far? Do you feel like you have made a difference?
4) Surely you have made some mistakes; how did you resolve them and move on?
5) What are the greatest difficulties you have faced, and how did you overcome them?
6) It can be challenging to balance work and personal life. Do you feel that you spend too much time on your work/research, and not enough on yourself and your family?
7) Do you employ any time-management strategies to make you more efficient? If so, what are they?
8) Do you ever grow tired of what you do? How do you rekindle that passion if/when it begins to flicker?
9) Have you ever considered dabbling in other fields? Which other occupations interest you?
10) Finally, do you have any advice for people looking to pursue careers similar to your own?

Resource of the Day 3/10/14

I intended to include this resource a while back, but I was previously unable to find it online. I happened to stumble across a copy of it this weekend while I was completing the Benchmark assignment, so I figured I would throw it up now.

A few years ago, Nidhya Logeswaran and Joydeep Bhattacharya performed an experiment where they showed a test group images of faces while simultaneously exposing the participants to music. Their results are outlined by this publication.  

BENCHMARK (Remix of What I've Done So Far)

"What am I passionate about? What do I want to do?": This is the first of six questions that my peers and I were to answer five weeks ago while initially choosing our Masterpiece Project topics and beginning to research them. When this question was first posed in class, I looked around me and observed writing utensils casually scratching at paper all around the room, indicating that nearly everyone had some idea what they wanted to do, both for their projects, and their lives; this is as it should be. Each of us must have something that we are deeply passionate about, right? Unfortunately, I have never been able to personally confirm that statement. While most everyone else answered the question "What do I want to do?" with natural triviality, my pen never touched paper; for I was faced with the exact question that I have spent the majority of my life attempting answer without even approaching success. The preceding years of failure made it clear that the likelihood of me spontaneously producing an answer on my own was slim or none, so I came and saw Dr. Preston at lunch to see if he could work his magic and give me some ideas. Sure enough, only a few minutes later, I walked out of the room with feelings of clarity and excitement towards my project that I would have never thought possible prior to having that conversation. As a starting point, Dr. Preston had me rattle off some of my interests from before school got its sapping hooks into me, and we determined that, cultivated by a long-standing family culture of surfing and diving, the ocean is the closest thing to a passion that I have. There's something about being out there and feeling the power of the waves--the incessant crashing and gurgling sounds slowly washing away the rest of the world--lips tasting of salt, eyes and nose burning from duck-diving seemingly endless sets of waves; a "saltwater cleansing" as my dad calls it. And that got me thinking: When else do I experience that sort of rapture/elation? While listening to a 'moving' piece of music immediately came to mind - "the music chills". It also hit me that, although induced by different circumstances, what I described is the same sort of sensation that artists/musicians report after creating a new piece, and that athletes report as "being in the zone".  So, I took that fantastic sensation and applied it universally, thus yielding "The Science of Stoke".

Personally, for me, music is the most common inducer of that type of the sensation, so I began my research there. Upon looking into, in my exact words, "how physical processes are able to have such a profound effect on our moods/emotions (i.e. being 'moved' by art or music, or being elevated to an almost euphoric state while performing a favorite activity)?", I discovered that, as I suspected, emotion-charged, 'moving' music can trigger the release of dopamine in the listener's brain. This "reward chemical" explains the physical pleasure that occasionally coincides with listening to music; a phenomenon commonly referred to as "the music chills". The emotional connection that is said to cause this release of dopamine was left unspoken for, however, raising a new question: How does music arouse, if not induce, certain emotions in the listener? After finding not even an attempted explanation where it seemed that this information should fit in the resources I was looking at, I foresaw a substantial roadblock in the form of the aforementioned question. Unfortunately, my trepidation was realized, and I encountered more difficulty here than anywhere else in my project thus far. Phenomenology, the blend of psychology, neuroscience, and philosophy that aims to study conscious experience through the perspective of the "experiencer", is an incredibly difficult field that is tasked with taking on some of the most daunting problems in modern science (i.e. David Chalmers' "hard problem of consciousness"), and it just so happens that the answers I was seeking fall under that domain. So while, sadly, I did not find any magical resources that resolve the mysteries underlying conscious thoughts, feelings, sensations, experiences, etc., I did find enough information to put together a partial account of which elements of music seem to have the greatest effect on a listener's emotions and the pleasure that he/she experiences as a result, although the "why" and the "how" are still missing. Two main ideas that I came across stood out: firstly, Paul Bloom's idea that we derive our feelings about things not solely from what they are, but also from what we believe them to be (or what they are to us); and secondly, that the technical components of music--pitch, rhythm, intensity, tempo, etc.--all relate in one way or another to human communication and movement, effectively rendering music a form of "emotional language" (as outlined by Mark Changizi in this article). While not a complete explanation by any means, ideas such as these are moving us in the right direction in terms of figuring out why music "speaks to us" the way it does, though the true answers surely will continue to elude us so long as we fail to understand subjective experience in virtue of itself.    

It was at this point that my topic took a relatively drastic shift. I realized that my research was growing redundant, both in that the answers to my questions we becoming fewer and farther in between, and especially in that, as I mentioned in my essay a couple weeks ago, any sort of practical application of my research appeared doubtful, which was cause for concern when thinking about delivering a final product in June. So, with this in mind, I slightly augmented my topic. Dr. Preston had just recently introduced me to Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi's theory of flow, which quickly became the object of my research. It was immediately apparent to me that the midpoint at which my initial path of inquiry and my new/current one intersect is, quite simply, happiness. So the topic of my project then became human pleasure and happiness. This more general topic enabled me to tie my research together without anything seeming out of place, and it will allow me more freedom in the future for researching and applying what I find. What's more, thinking back on that surfing scene that led to the initial, epiphanic birth of my topic, it is clear to me that it was actually a flow experience, even though I didn't even know about flow at that point. So it turns out that a sizable portion of my initial inquiry has been satisfied by the information I've obtained with my new one - funny how things turn out. 

Anyways, I am now looking into human pleasure and happiness in general, with flow being my primary focus. I am not going to go into too much detail on flow here because I am currently reading Csikszentmihalyi's book, Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience, for this semester's second literature analysis (I know it's super late...) and have already included nearly everything I would write here in that assignment, which I hope to have finished and posted within the next few days. It would not be fair to even mention something without at least providing a definition, though, especially since this is supposed to be a remix of everything I've done, so I will include this much: Flow is a mental state that can occur when a person is working towards a clear and inherently rewarding goal that requires roughly the same amount of skill that that person possesses. Flow is characterized by absolute focus/immersion (often to the extent that a person experiencing flow will lose track of what time it is, forget to eat, etc.), greatly increased performance/productivity, and inexplicably deep  momentary enjoyment accompanied by a notable increase in long-term happiness (again, I have explained Csikszentmihalyi's arguments on this matter in much greater detail in the literature analysis that will hopefully follow this post very soon).

While I have been collaborating with several other individuals/groups, this "remix" tells the story of where I'm at with my own project. As of now, I have not gotten past the idea/research stage, though I do believe I'll be ready to start making something happen soon. The only question is, how can I take the information I gather and construct something meaningful with it?      

Resource of the Day 3/6/2014

I wanted to keep my resources consolidated to make them as convenient to follow as possible so, up until this point, I have been posting them in a single post entitled "Research Progression". Unfortunately, I neglected the fact that the post would get buried over time and eventually become irrelevant... Also, I have admittedly fallen behind on my research and haven't added anything in quite a while, so I feel that a fresh start is in order. From now on, I will be posting each day's resource in its own post as I've seen some of my peers do.

Here is this weekend's: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pleasure/

This monstrous Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry outlines pleasure from a philosophical standpoint. I haven't read the entire thing yet, but this lengthy and comprehensive bit is the most promising resource I've found in a while; I imagine that its enormous works cited page will keep me busy for a while.

First Collaborative Efforts

So, my friend Jon noticed a connection between our respective topics (his topic being his venture to become an author, and mine being an investigation into passion, emotion, immersion, etc., and their effects on human pleasure and happiness) and suggested that we take our collaboration beyond simply exchanging feedback and support, as we had been limited to in the past. He proposed that we set up some sort of poll asking the public, essentially, what they get out of popular entertainment, be it a book, a movie, or a television show. He sent me a couple of questions to start, and I fired back some of my own. This is what we have after literally five minutes of emailing:

- Why do you read or watch movies/television?

- How often do you seek that sort of entertainment? 

- What feelings do the shows/movies/books that you most enjoy induce?

- What elements do you think are responsible for those feelings?
- How do those feelings contribute to the experience?
- Do you prefer something intensely engaging, whether through emotional impact or simply through suspense, or something more silly/mindless/relaxing?  What events in your daily life help you make this determination when you peruse the book shelf or pick up the remote?

I have already acknowledged that these questions, particularly the ones I generated, are not well suited for a poll format. We discussed making some simpler questions to be used by a standard, click through, multiple choice poll, while leaving a free-response ballot/questionnaire with a bit deeper, more comprehensive questions as an option for those willing to undertake it.

SUPER 5

- Mihaly Csiksentmihalyi
- Paul Bloom
-
-
-

MY TEAM

A clear trend regarding the days that Dr. Preston has to step out seems to be emerging as the third substitute in a row didn't show up. This time, unfortunately, we were funneled into the cafeteria and I didn't get anything done... Thanks Hutton... I do already have a pretty solid core group for my "support system" though, and the online networking assignments we've been doing lately have been constantly introducing me to more people and more projects, so I would say that things are going well right now. I feel that the "peer" department of my network is now covered, leaving "public" and "experts". I am not the slightest bit worried about finding an expert; I have communicated online with psychology professors and other such experts in the past, and I know I can replicate that without issue. I am simply waiting to do this until my project is a bit further along. Pulling more public foot traffic is the only criteria that concerns me.

SPRING SEMESTER LITERATURE ANALYSIS #1 (The Metaphysics by Aristotle)

TOPIC(S) and/or EVENT(S)

1.     As we have discussed in class, a book is said to be nonfiction if its content is based on facts or events.  What is your book about?  [a]. Try writing a paragraph first to capture your thoughts.  [b]. Then see if you can boil it down to one clear statement.  (Even if you feel like you can just skip to [b], please do both; remember that your reader doesn’t know what you know.)

[a]. It is difficult to say exactly "what my book is about", as The Metaphysics doesn't have any sort of plot, and in it Aristotle covered a multitude of different topics. I suppose I'll just start from the top and give a brief overview: Aristotle began by discussing the nature of knowledge and wisdom, as well as man's pursuit of them. From there, he transitioned into a review of the work of many early philosophers (Hesiod, Empedocles, the Pythagoreans, Parmenides, Melissus, Xenophanes, and especially Plato), then offered his critique on their various teachings. He affirmed some of their arguments and swiftly refuted others, taking careful lesson from each of them all the while. This marked the end of the first book, Book A (a book is roughly equivalent to a chapter). The next book, Book α, is one of the briefest in The Metaphysics, and also one of the most important. Especially important is Part 3, "On lectures and their audiences", where Aristotle described how each reader or listener's habits (i.e. the type of language the reader or listener is accustomed to) shape the effect of the lecture on that reader or listener. One key line stood out to me: "Hence one must already be trained to know how take take each sort of argument, since it is absurd to seek at the same time knowledge and the way of attaining knowledge; and it is not easy to get even one of the two." A warning that I should have heeded... There are also some great ideas in Part 1, but I will wait to touch on those until later--there is a particular simile that I plan on citing as an example of a "tool from fiction writing" for the first question of the 'style' section of the prompt, so I will discuss the ideas there. Immediately after Book α Part 3 comes Book B Part 1, another critical bit. Here, Aristotle laid out some the problems to be undertaken in the rest of The Metaphysics because, as he puts it (quite beautifully I might add), "for those who wish to get clear of difficulties it is advantageous to discuss the difficulties well; for the subsequent free play of thought implies the solution of the previous difficulties, and it is not possible to untie a knot of which one does not know". Everything I have mentioned thus far belongs to what I ascertain to be the introduction of the The Metaphysics; it was not until this point that Aristotle got into the "meat" of this revolutionary philosophical work. Unfortunately, as anyone who has ever read Aristotle can attest to, there is really no reasonable way for me to summarize his arguments. They are far too great in both number and complexity for me to even begin to paraphrase. In fact, I seriously doubt that there has ever lived a person capable of interpreting Aristotle's work and reiterating it without losing any of its essence in the process; if there is such a person, then his/her level of aptitude vastly exceeds mine, because I wouldn't dream of attempting such a feat. What I can do, however, is provide some general information on the types of topics that he covered in this piece. I would say that the basis of The Metaphysics is, as one may be able to put together based on the branch of philosophy known as metaphysics that this work established, the study of being. This may sound a bit broad and unspecific... That's because it is. This book deals directly with forms, substances, causes, principles, elements, etc. all the way down to being in virtue of itself, and "the One"--pretty abstract stuff.
 
[b]. Widely recognized as the archetype of modern philosophy, The Metaphysics is Aristotle's study of being itself; i.e. the forms and substances from which all of the sensible thing we observe arise.

2.     Why did your author choose to write about this topic, person or event?

I assume that this question is merely asking for my supposition since there is no way I could possibly possess that information. Knowing very little about Aristotle himself beyond the numerous contributions he has made to science and society, I would say that it must have been in his very to nature to think in such terms and produce work accordingly. The quantity, diversity, and magnitude of his work are far beyond normal standards, and I imagine the causes of them are as well.

3.     Why did you choose this book?  What about the book appealed to you the first time it came to your attention (and how did it come to your attention)?  What about the book made you want to keep reading once you began?

I knew that I wanted two things from my next literature analysis book: a great philosophical work, and a challenge. I got both. I had, of course, heard of Aristotle before and I knew that he was renowned as one of the greatest thinkers of all time, but I had never actually seen any of his work. I decided that I finally wanted check him out, and began contemplating which of his books I was to read first. I had originally planned on reading Nicomachean Ethics but, while researching it prior to purchasing it, I was introduced to The Metaphysics somewhere on the web and it instantly jumped out at me. I ended up picking it up instead. I'll be honest, once I started the book, it was difficult for me to motivate myself to keep reading. Aristotle is somewhat notorious for his intentionally difficult writing style, and, after reading The Metaphysics, I understand why. The content of the book is excellent and the overall quality is superb, but the already challenging subject matter paired with the cryptic, unorthodox writing style did make the book pretty mentally taxing to read. With only a couple of weeks before this assignment was due, I would've had to read for an excessive amount of time per night in order to give this book the careful attention that it requires and deserves. Unfortunately, I was not willing to put in the time to read such an exhausting book when I already had a million other things on my to-do list each day. I almost never give up like that, and I'm definitely not proud that I did, but I'm not going to hide it. I could have bullshitted this assignment without reading and had it in on time, but that's not how I do things. I avoided making this another item to check off my to-do list and instead completed it on my terms. It may be two weeks past the due date, but at least I read the whole book and am completing the assignment with integrity.

4.     Did you find the book realistic?  Did you make any connections between people/events you read about and people/events in your own life? Why or (if you didn’t) why not?  

This question doesn't apply so much to my book; philosophy is the study/pursuit of the truth so, naturally, with such an unattainable goal as making known the overwhelmingly complex "truth" of all that is, things are going to get messy. Most ideas that are proposed will be incorrect if any progress is to be made. That is the way it is, the way it always has been, and the way it always will be when dealing with any entity short of a superbeing. For how are we to make known what is unknown without first veering away from what is known? Making new discoveries, especially in the field of philosophy where no other tools are available besides the faculty of the mind, requires taking a shot in the dark and going where no other ideas have. Missing the target occasionally is an inevitable outcome when shooting blind. So, while I do find many of the ideas in The Metaphysics realistic, almost any of them could be incorrect and, if they are, it would be perfectly understandable. With that, the book was executed flawlessly and any critics will have a tough time disputing any of Aristotle's arguments.

PEOPLE

There are NO characters in this book whatsoever.

STYLE

1.     Did the author use any tools from fiction writing (such as foreshadowing or symbolism), or did the author use a journalistic style? Example(s)?

This book is quite interesting in that it is filled with almost nothing but intense philosophical arguments, and yet somehow still retains a style that is almost poetic. The text is rich with figurative language, and has an element to it that I can only describe as graceful. One of my personal favorite examples of a "tool from fiction writing" is the following line from Book α Part 1: "Therefore, since the the truth seems to be be like the proverbial door, which no one can fail to hit, in this respect it must be easy, but the fact that we can have a whole truth and not the particular part we aim at shows the difficulty of it." For contextual purposes, this is just after Aristotle had been discussing the challenges and nonproblems associated with the pursuit of the truth; he basically stated in that section that seeking such an elusive and incredibly complicated thing as "the whole truth" is impossibly difficult in its very nature, especially for the individual, but that it is made infinitely easier by the fact that, with enough people working towards a common goal, the smallest triumphs rise to the top while even the largest failures slip out of the picture, leaving behind a surprising amount of progress. Back to the question: yes, "tools from fiction writing" were utilized, but Aristotle's writing has other, less identifiable elements that make his style very difficult to pin down.  

2.     Does the author use lengthy descriptions of places and people,or does s/he focus more on action or dialogue?  What overall effect do these choices have on the book?

This is another question that doesn't really apply to my book. There are no places, people, action, or dialog of any sort, only arguments and abstractions, so I'm not sure how to hack the question such that I can answer it.

3.     What tools does the author use to demonstrate tone and create a mood?

The difficult and unusual nature of Aristotle's writing style undoubtedly makes for a very exhausting, didactic tone. This is offset a bit by the elements that I described in the first question of this section, however, but not enough to change the aforementioned tone that I perceived. I did not notice any sort of mood to the text.

4.     What do you think the author’s attitude was toward the subject, or the characters, or the audience (i.e., you)?  Why?

As I said in my last literature analysis, it takes an amazing amount of effort and dedication to both actually create a philosophical work of this caliber, and also to amass the knowledge and skills required to be in a position to do so. Because of this, I must say that Aristotle's attitude was beyond passionate towards his work--it there's no way it could not have been. Towards his future audience, however I cannot say the same. He has been compared to a squid because he "coated his work with dark ink" to make it as difficult to understand as possible for his readers. While I wouldn't go as far as to say that this was out of malice or spite, I do think that Aristotle's work was primarily intended for himself, his colleagues, and his students; and definitely not the general public.

5.     What resources (newspaper articles, interviews, historical documents, e.g.) does the author offer?  Did it matter in your thinking?  Why/why not?

No external resources were cited, or really used at all in The Metaphysics. Aristotle did, however, discuss the ideas of some early philosophers (as I mentioned in the first question of this analysis), but he spoke more of these ideas than about them. Viz., he laid out the teachings of other philosophers in his own words as opposed to using their ideas directly. Nothing unnecessary or vain was included in the text; The Metaphysics was put together such that each piece fits perfectly into place and necessarily matters in any reader's thinking. 

ENDURING MEMORY

Write a paragraph in which you describe the one or two ideas from this book that you expect to remember for a long time.  Explain your choices and their importance.  Share a passage or two that give your reader a taste of the same effect.

It is not so much the ideas that I expect to remember for a long time, but rather the experience. Chewing on such a challenging piece was something fairly new to me, and I learned a lot from it. With that, there are a few ideas that do stand out. Namely, the ones that I already shared (from Book α Part 3 and Book B Part 1). These two segments differ from much of the other content in that they provide practical advice, and in that they are far more straightforward and less challenging. Here are the two passages that I referenced in their entirety:

Book α Part 3, Paragraph 1: "The effect which lectures produce on a hearer depends on his habits; for we demand the language we are accustomed to, and that which is different from this seems not in keeping but somewhat unintelligible and foreign because of its unwontedness. For it is the customary that is intelligible. The force of habit is shown by the laws, in which legendary and childish elements prevail over our knowledge about them, owing to habit. Thus, some people do not listen to a speaker unless he speaks mathematically, others unless he gives instances, while others expect him to cite a poet as a witness. And some want everything done accurately, while others are annoyed by accuracy, either because they cannot follow the connexion of thought or because they regard it as pettifoggery. For accuracy has something of this character, so that as in trade so in argument some people think it mean. Hence one must already be trained to know how to take each sort of argument, since it is absurd to seek at the same time knowledge and the way of attaining knowledge; and it is not easy to get even one of the two"

Book B Part 1, Paragraph 1: "We must, with a view to the science which we are seeking, first recount the subjects that should be first discussed. These include both the other opinions that some have held on the first principles, and any points besides these that happens to have been overlooked. For those who wish to get clear of difficulties it is advantageous to discuss the difficulties well; for the subsequent free play of thought implies the solution of the previous difficulties, and it is not possible to untie a know of which one does not know. But the difficulty of of our thinking points to a 'knot' in the object; for in so far as our thought is in difficulties, it is in like case with those who are bound; for in either case it is impossible to go forward. Hence one should have surveyed all the difficulties before hand, both for the purposes we have stated and because people who inquire without first stating the difficulties are like those who do not know where they have to go; besides, a man does not otherwise know even whether he has at any time found what he is looking for or not; for the end is not clear to such a man, while to him who has first discussed the difficulties it is clear. Further, he who has heard all the contending arguments, as if they were the parties to a case, must be in a better position for judging."