Two Tortures

Before this class, when the word torture was mentioned I would have never really thought of any difference between one way or torutre over another. I mean sure I was aware that there were different way in which to inflict the torture, but I never realized it was done to pursue a different approach.

The torture in which Foucault speaks of is more the "classic torture" in which it was done in order to serve justice through realization and truth. This is what torture is most often thought of. A way to inflict pain in order for people to see that this person was guilty, the reason they were found as such, as well a means to serve justice through a fair mean. I guess what I am trying to say is that this was a way of dealing with a crime only after the person was found guilty... it was more fair than the torture spoken about in Kafka's writting.

The major difference between Foucault and Kafka is that Kafka's torture in the penal colony was not really a fair means of justice. Of course it was "fair" in the colony, but htis was a secluded colony that had its own standards. The man was put to death by torture without even allowing him to defend himself. This is not classic torture nor is it a fiar means of justice. Even if the individual is actually guilty as charged, he should be able to at least make a statement... even if it is even to apologize to the society. The man should not be forced to learn of his "wrong doing" as he is dying, especially if it by means of reading the inscription that is being engraved into his body.

This is the major difference between Kafka's torture and Foucault.

penal colony justice

From the reading I chose the following passage fore my writting:

“‘But surely he knows that he has been sentenced?’ ‘Nor that either,’ said the officer, smiling at the explorer as if expecting him to make further surprising remarks. ‘No,’ said the explorer, wiping his forehead, ‘then he can’t know whether his defense was effective?’ ‘He has had no chance of putting up a defense,’ said the officer… ‘But he must have had some chance of defending himself,’ said the explorer,” (pg. 197).

This book is very interesting and immediately catches your interest and attention. This officer has been given the power to run this machine in which causes pain upon its victim. This is the colonys current for of "justice" although they are being to turn away from this technique. I dont believe that this machine serves justice to the victim at all. The man isn't just tortured a little, it is excruciating pain for relentless hours and he ends up dying from this. The words that are carved into his body are not just a reminder of his "fault", but the machine runs until the poor victim is without life and blood. The fact that the person that is to undergo this torture receives no sort of trial or even questioned about the event that is brought against him is rediculous. This cannot serve justice for people can be wrong. A persons perception of a situation could be incorrect and for that reason a trial system should exist. This colony keep the "criminal" in the dark on what he is in trouble for, what his punishment, or even when it is, until he is to be tortured. He learns of his crime through the writtings that to be to placed on his body.

This oddly enough actually relates still today. After watching that movie on Thur. I have just made the connection. The men in The Farm, once sentenced, are given very little, if any, chance to defend themselves and possibly there innocents. It took that one man 17 years to gather all the evidence thawt was placed against him. They are left in the dark and have virtually no say in there case. This is a wrong system of government. It wasn't right then and it isn't right now. This is not supposewd to be the great American Judicial system thast keeps our country running strong! This is an unfair and corrupt system that needs to be changed. Ahhh! here i go ranting again...

Movie on Thur: Not the America I have been taught to know...

The movie on Thursday, for myself at least, served as a bit of an eye opener on the way this country is run. So much corruption and lack of justice runs this country behind closed doors. Many of those men that appeared in the movie appeared to have very VERY strong cases to prove there own innocence, yet have been kept quiet for quite some time without the chance to show this. I remember one account where he had been trying to gather his evidence for the past 17 years just to prove that he didn't do it. This is a LONG LONG time to have to passively wait to prove a crime that you did not commit. Also the one chance that one man got to show that he was innocent in the rape case, his evidence was overlooked quite unfairly. He was served unjustly and it enrages me that such actions go on in this country that I call home.

Another subject that came up in this video that got me upset was the fact that these men that have been sent to prision are forced to work... sometimes starting at a mere 4 cents, working in the fields as slaves no less. The fact that the prison is set upon an old plantation itself doesn't upset me, just the fact that it is still run as such. On the bright side these men have a chance on getting a raise all the way to 20 cents! *rolls eyes* This just gets me enraged. These men are exploited to work for mere nothing to make millions for others. This is WRONG!! Even if these men are all 100% guilty for the crimes they are found to commit, they still should not be forced to work for such wages! In no way can this be justified. FOUR CENTS FOR GOD SAKES!! AHHHHHH... bottomline... I now have a bit of compassion for some of those men and a bit of hatred towards the system.

The fact that this is what our system is built upon today is appaling. This can actually relate to the Penal Colony. The system sentences a harsh and serioius sentencing, but fails to serve any sort of justice. People are given life sentences of crimes that very much point out that they aren't the criminals. They are sentenced just to please the victim, without any real sort of comfort. The system fails to even really give them a chace to defend themselves once convited. It is wrong and makes me quite upset!

Penal colony thus far...

So... amazingly... its a English class book that is actually interesting! YAY! I wasn't much of a fan of his other writing, Metamorphisis, but I enjoy this story. This story seems to correlate quite well with what we had discussed and learned in class. This is a prime story that goes hand-in-hand with Foucault's story. This story has set the scene with an explorer at this penal colony present at the beginning of a torture punishment sentence. What Kafka is trying to show is that this method of torture in the ways of the previous leader is now frowned upon in the present colony. The other main character thus far, the officer, seems to be the last that supports this method. I enjoy this set up because he gives us a hint at the explorers thoughts on the apparatus as well as the officer's justification for such a contraption. The machine seems quite painful and the fact that the victim learns of the crime he has been comitted for through this torture, doesn't really seem to serve any justice. The man had no chance of defending himself and really cannot come to any real terms during this process. The crime he is found guilty for is apparently scratched into his body over and over, deeper and deeper for a very extensive period of time. This painful technique just seems to put the victim through extensive pain vs. serving real justice and may be a prime reason as to why it is being phased out of current society.

I really am looking forward to see how this story progresses and am pleased to learn that it is actually interesting!! A+ for interesting. :D

Views on Foucault

Foucault... hmm... well... for this being an English class and it, like all English classes, forces you to read novels and stories you might have otherwise never even thought of picking up, I enjoyed it... suprisingly. This first off all isnt your classic English book about a family you is hit with some hardship and is forced to travel somewhere and everyone dies from like rats or typhoid or something. This is an authors personal view on an interesting subject, torture. I enjoy Foucault's piece mostly because he uses his argument through the history or society itself. He speaks about torture and its past roles on society. He discusses how it was a major part of punishment and justice, and that in turn links to power and the sovereign. I enjoyed this read so much because he talks about a subject that is clear to everyone, yet when you stop and think about it, he hits on points that you never quite linked. He talks about how torture was a way of punishing someone who had done wrong. He also connects how it adapted overtime.

Through this piece we learn that the sovereign played a large role in the proceeding of torture. The sovereign how example could pardon someone who was to be tortured. Torture was in a big way, a strategy or keeping the people in line as well as occasionally pleasing them... or the off-chance of upsetting them. The fact that torture existed and was often done out in public was a way to keep his followers in line by showing them what is done to wrongdoers. There were amazingly revolting ways to torture someone and the more harsh the punishment, the more of an example it was to the people, thus largely reinstating or showing the rulers power. He had total control of who was to be killed and saved. This is a prime example of how Foucault showed the relation between punishment and power. Occasionally the ruler would torture or attempt to torture someone that the people saw as undeserving of such treatment and they could possibly rebel against the ruler in retaliation.

I had always thought of torture back in the old ages as just a form of punishment, never really relating it to a form of showing the kings power. This linking of punishment, pain, and power was a very indepth one and I enjoyed alot due to way of the argument. The fact that he used examples throughout history really solidifies his statement on the subject of pain.

The example of this power through punishment and force is the movie Lord of War. This movie shows the uprising of regimes through weapon purchases and illegal activity. Nowadays you have power either due to the people liking you, or though fear. This movie shows that those with lots of weapons can inflict alot of punishment and pain to force cooperation or followers and this raises there power. This link has been a clear example just by looking at governments and wars then and now. People has always used threats and/or force to help state there power in a declared area. Another such example would be regimes or facist leaders in todays world. A leader that will kill those who step out of line in a heartbeat and without resentment is a leader not to be messed with. This unwavering certainty keep the people under them faithful and fearful. This is an example or power through punishment and pain. People fear pain and will therefore do alot to keep it from being inflicted, even if they are forced to act in ways that do not wish. This does and has always existed. By reading this piece by Foucault, I more clearly see these link and exmaples that I may have otherwise overlooked.

Issue of Justice and Pain

(This is extremely long and I apologize) Bare with me:

Both writers, that is to say Scarry and Foucault, have very strong topics on which they write. Although they do not discuss exactly the same topics, in my opinion, there stories and examples to support there theory’s can when analyzed, go hand in hand. Both have a key topic of correlating there issue with justice and that in turn brings in possible pain. My main argument is to say that physical pain is more or less unnecessary and wrong and that it actually serves an injustice. In the paragraphs below I shall attempt to show that justice can and should be morally served with as little pain as possible.

Scarry’s first reading, “On Beauty and Being Fair” strongly supports my theory though our unconscious actions. She stated that, “Noticing its beauty increases the possibility that it will be carefully handled.” (pg. 65). And that in turn lead to, “…the extraordinary vase involuntarily introducing me to the recognition that vases are fragile, and I then voluntarily extended the consequences of that recognition to other objects in the same category.” (pg. 67). To sum this up she is starting that once we notice an objects beauty, it is our unconscious action to serve it justice by handling it properly, thus preventing pain to it. Once you hit this recollection, you unconsciously adapt to do it justice and prevent it pain. She would agree that we need to keep noticing objects beauty so that we can do it justice and prevent if from receiving unnecessary pain. In her next piece, “The Body In Pain” she takes a different route. Although a bit more difficult to correlate, her topic here is the fact that physical pain is destructive to language. Torture is used to attempt and expel information from a captured victim, through brute pain and force. Through both pieces we see that causing physical pain is wrong and should not be done. Your body unconsciously wants to prevent you from causing physical pain on anyone or anything. It is unjust to cause such torture, even when done for “good” reasons. Socrates once stated that, “One should never do wrong in return, nor injure any man, whatever injury one has suffered at his hands.” ** To cause such a destructive action to occur is unjust, regardless of the reason. Although punishment is needed to serve justice, it should not be with the intention to cause as much physical pain as possible. Physical pain can be prevented and/or reduced and still serve an object or an issue justice. Scarry’s quotes prove that she is in agreement that justice should be served to everything and that the destructive nature of physical pain is not necessarily needed or deserved to grant this.

Foucault’s piece was titled, “Discipline and Punish” and the section I used for this piece was labeled, “The body of the condemned”. Foucault indirectly agreed with all of my arguments. I believe that society naturally realized that causing intentional physical pain was wrong and began to drift away from in. In the mid 1700’s quartering apparently was an acceptable punishment for a wrongdoer. Many things in addition to this horrific pain were also involved, including, “…flesh will be torn away from his breasts, arms, thighs, and calves with red-hot pinchers, his right arm…burnt with sulphur, and, on those places where the flesh will be town away, poured molten lead, boiling oil, burning resin, wax and sulphur melted together.” (pg.3). This is an unimaginable way to be killed, especially out in public with no one willing or even wanting to save you. Even in Foucault’s piece he made a comment on how, “…though he was always a great swearer, no blasphemy escaped his lips; but the excessive pain made him utter horrible cries…” (pg.3). While this victim was under excruciating pain he was not able to say a word, thus proving the theory of the destructive nature of pain. Luckily things have drastically changed over the year through our natural understanding of justice and pain. Over time, “Punishment had gradually ceased to be a spectacle.” (pg. 9). Naturally public physical pain was dying out and new thoughts began to form on the issue of justice through pain. On pg. 10, Foucault explains, “It is ugly to be punishable, but there is no glory in punishing. Hence that double system of protection that justice has set up between itself and punishment it imposes.” People no longer found it right to cause such public physical pain for someone found guilty of breaking the law. Instead it began to become, “…less cruelty, less pain, more kindness, more respect, more ‘humanity’.” (pg. 16). I think that people began to see that it was wrong to cause such pain and began to naturally or unconsciously turn towards less painful ways of fulfilling punishment. Punishment is needed, even though no one wants to do it, it must be done to keep the balance of justice and the well being of society. I think that the society began seeing the true punishment being served through a different way. Society began to lean against this physical materialistic way of punishment and began to indulge in the theory of the “soul”. Foucault states that everything had been about the body, when in fact, “The soul is the prison of the body.” The soul had control over the body and therefore physical punishment was not only wrong, but ineffective to true justice. Foucault therefore undeniable agrees that through society’s natural adaptation to justice, it has proved that causing physical pain is ineffective and wrong.

Although physical punishment still exist today, punishment is way less severe. For the death penalty, those found guilty are first put to sleep so that they do not feel the pain, they simply just sleep forever. We have turned towards human ways of fulfilling people justice by naturally causing them less pain. We have seen where we were at fault and have since adapted to this need of less pain. Through each writers stories I have come to the conclusion that both writers would agree with my statement that physical pain is not the correct way of serving justice and that it is also destructive and wrong. Reflecting on oneself or a particular object serves it true justice. It is not the physical body that is to receive justice, but the inner “soul” of it and what it stands for. This is true justice.


** (pg. 45) in Steven M. Cahn’s, “Classics of Western Philosophy” Story of Crito.

I enjoy the Robot Shark Will Eat You group and others

While scrolling through there blog page the first thing that I really enjoyed was the fact that the text color was different than the traditional gray. It really makes it easier to see which members post it is versus having to read each posts author. The other thing I really enjoyed about the page was the style of some of the posts. There was quite a bit of humor in it, which really helped lift up the interest of the post.

For example:
"Siiiiiiiing. The arguement would have fallen flat without this, I felt because this is the big hitter."

I enjoyed this little section of the post for two reasons. First was the style of the piece. And the other thing is the use of words. For example "big hitter" goes really nicely because although you understand the message, the text is very off the wall. I mean this is a post about torture, not baseball!

For another groups: The Absolute Best English... I enjoyed there format the most. It just seemed very aesthetically pleasing to the eye. Another great thing about this groups is there titles to there posts. Although some irrelevant to the info given, such as, " I'm "fairly" certain I figured out how to use the blog..." some of the post titles were fun and creative. Things like, " Belated Beauty Blog" is creative and fun. I hope to change my font color, and in the future come up with more creative titles.

torture close reading- Foucault

For this close reading assignment I use the following passage:

"It is ugly to be punishable, but there is no glory in punishing. Hence that double system of protection that justice has set up between itself and the punishment it imposes." (pg. 10).

I found this passage very interesting when I read it. Not so much the use of words or anything, just the depth and clarity of the text. Although the whole story is leaning towards the topic of how torture is getting less severe and becoming more in public this really just straight up explains a major reason why things began to change. No one wants to be punished, or willingly go through physical pain, that is why it is a punishment. It is something that is feared and frowned upon in scoiety. This passage however shows how we got to where punishment is seen today. Society began to change and there was no glory in punishing another person. It held no deep joy or enthusiasm. It was something that had to be done, but no one really wanted to be the one to do it. That may be a major reason why punishment became more set on justice and not just pain. People were to actually be tried for there crime and the evidence behind the crime that they were being accused of in the first place.

This appears to be a very short post... I am not quite sure where to expand upon this.

punishments adaptation

in this story Foucault discusses torure and punishment, but he does it in an interesting technique. He analyzes torture in comparison to that of it less than century ago and now days. He starts out with a very grotesque story about someone who was quartered and burned to ashes from breaking the law. The story was very detaled and sickening. Punishment is nothing like it was back then. They wanted to make it not only as tramatizing as possible, but also to do it in public, and with weapons and tools that weren't very efficient, so things often went wrong and it was more painful than even intended. For example in the story the horses failed to quarter the body at first, it merely just dislocated the joints. They tried again with 6 horses instead of the previous 4, and in the end they had to hack off the thighs because the horses failed to totally rip his body apart. Horrifically the man was able to survive through mose of this, so he had to go through all this unimaginable conscious and alive.

Over the years however, the act of punishment and torture has lessened in pain and publicity. As states on pg. 9, "Punishment had gradually ceased to be a spectacle." And whatever theatrical elements is still retained were now downgraded..." Later on this page it also states, "Punishment, then, will tend to become the most hidden part of the penal process." This shows that over the years it has become more of a private thing. It appears that over this century of time, this tortures punishment and slowly drifted away from a public "exciting/dramatic" event, to an event more in private, less cruelty, less pain, more kindness, more respect, more "humanity". (pg. 16). Foucault takes alot about how the "condemned man was no longer to be seen" (pg. 13) . This went along with the new found belief that the punishment should be done more on the soul than just that of the body. So punishment became more of a painless efficient tool like it is much today. Rarely is anyone killed in an inhumane, painful manner... at least in the public killings. The point is for the victim to be punished for what they did, debatibily putting more emphasis on there physical body or soul, not just to cause them unnecassary excruciating pain. So with that although punishment has been around forever and will forever reamin, the way about going about it and its emphasis has changed dramasticaly over the past few years.

Sadaam Hussein

This man has been apprehended and is currently on trial or will be on trial for a dozen or more offences. One of his trials involves gassing thousands of Kurds in the 1980's. Although this was a few years back, the trail and its information is quite new. What he did to his people are others who fell victim to his dictatorship was unethical, unjustice, and wrong. He tortured people and used his power, ironically given to him by us, to get his ways. He is in no way innocent or deserving of any mercy or pity. He is an evil man who was after nothing but his own wealth and power. He killed and destroyed people, cities, and countries. If found guilty for this charge of gassing thousands of Kurds, his punishment would be death by hanging and his sentence may very well be carried out while other trials are still in progress. I don't believe he will be found innocent on any trial is to be put on, but I see no real point in all these trials. I think it is a waste of time to sentence him to 1000 years without bail vs. even 150 years... it is still his whole life. Even three of these trials would be sufficient enough to make sure he is going to pay for what he did... it just think it is rediculous. I guess that is why I am not in governmental issues.

http://www.outlookindia.com/images/photoessays/sadaam1_20031214.jpg

The Lack of Words for Pain- (short passage reading)

In this reading I chose the following passage:

"..the person in pain is ordinarily so bereft of the resources of speech, it is not suprising that the language for pain should sometimes be brought into being by those who are not themselves in pain but who speak on behalf of those who are." (pg. 6).

When i read this passage I immediately thought of a doctor. A doctors listens to your ailments when you visit and then through his knowledge he descides what the best path is for recovery. Have you ever gone into the doctors and found it difficult to answer his questions when you are trying to describe what isnt feeling irght about you? I know I have plenty of times and I never really realized that it was because of this destructive nature of physical pain. It destroys language and makes it difficult to explain perfect and you cant always pin point its origin. Doctors are bombarded with patients everyday and they see the patients as "unreliable narrators" (pg. 6), so they themselves have to use our explanation to come up with his own even thorugh he is not the one in pain. It is interesting after reading this about how they have to pick up on keywords such as: "pulsing" or "throbbing" (pg. 7) and others suchas: "burning pain" or "searing pain" (pg. 8). They naturally slightly "doubt" our accounts of pain and use there expertise to help us.

Pain relating to justice, power and torture

It appears to be able to inflict physical pain over another person is to completely destroy them. As described in Scarry's second section that "... the problem with pain is bound up with the problem with power..." (pg. 12) This is a strong statement and hold complete truth. With the control of inflicting physical pain upon an individual is torture, but allows complete power. This interrogation process causes them individual to break down and at this point you have access to anything and everything they know. So with pain, you have them at your mercy for the latter three: justice, power, and torture. If they have done wrong, you can do justice. You hold power over them and if needed, the power to torture included. Once an individual can inflict pain, or even appear to have that power, people fall to there power. It is as if you are flexing your muscles and the one that backs down is now in complete control of the victor. On a lighter note, same goes for a coach for example. The athletes are in the coaches hands. They are at his mercy of power, they may feel tortured through physcial training, but if all was done as planned, the coach did them justice and they are ready to compete. It is a balance that only the one in charge can control. Will they be an evil dictator or will they be a kind and just ruler.

Scarry's view on physical pain

Elaine Scarry immediately jumps in describing physical pain as three subjects:
"first, the difficulty of expressing physical pain; second, the political and perceptual complications that arise as a result of that difficulty; and third, the nature of both material and verbal expressibility or more simply, the nature of human creation. (pg. 3) She goes on to explain that all three can be pictured as concentric circles where the center of one, is the center for all three.

For the first topic she explains it crystal clear. When a person hears of another persons physical pain, the events seem to have no reality. It lacks clarity and truth, whereas if it was the person telling of there own pain, the story is "effortlessly" grasped. The description of pain seems to be unsharable, as if it is for only the individual to experience personally. Scarry explains that this phonomenon occurs beacuse physical pain resists language. "... one at last reached physical pain, for physcial pain---unlike any other state of consciousness---has no referential content." (pg. 5) When you stop and think about it no word actively describes physical pain. The few words that may materialize in your mind a few seconds later are mere objects that you have somehow correlated with the word. This word completely destroys any objectification with words.

The second section speaks of political complications with the difficulty of physcial pain. She describes it as "..the problem of pain is bound up with the problem of power...". (pg.12) She then goes on to list examples of how it is. The first key point is the fact that physical pain can go unnoticed. "How is it that one person can be in the presence of another person in pain and not know it---not know it to the point where he himself inflicts it, and goes on inflicting it?" (pg. 12) Physical pain has become caught up so many peoples lives that they have learned to hide it. They try to overpower its apparent damage. Also with it being sure a destructive word from language, describing its affects is also difficult. Physcial pain is nearly impossible to express, so it is easier to express other things instead. Scarry goes on to give the example, "..even where it is virtually the only content in a given environment, it will be possible to describe that environment as though the pain were not there." (pg. 12) This also jumps right into torture. Torture is a means to gather information through physical pain and it is quite affective. There are very little verbal strategies for supressing the assault and this is catagorized by being labeled "the language of agency" (pg.13).

The third and final section goes on to describe the nature of human creation. She describes that everything has a structure to it. She describes the structure of torture and what they looked for and how torture is approached. This section describes how torture "deconstructs" rather than "destroys" the prisioner being interrogated. Scarry describes it as a "...step-by-step backward movement along the path by which language comes into being and which is here being reversed..." (pg. 20). This shows that this physical pain destroys its victim over time. It break the victim down step-by-step. She goes on to describe war as a structured creation as well. This book is built like a war, that is containing arguments and sub-arguments.

This reading does an excellent job of breaking down "physcial pain" into sections and analyzing each section one by one. This was very interesting and made me see physcial pain and its destructive nature more clearly.

Elaine Scarry's views of beauty and justice/fairness

Scarry's piece on beauty goes into great deatil of what defines beauty and its different interpretations and perceptions. She describes how due to political complaints, beauty is being banished. on pg. 74 she descirbes how some might merely say, ""We just no longer see beauty in the same way." But how can that be an acceptable answer if---as an outcome of this newly acquired, wretched immunity---people are asking us to give up beauty althogether?" She feels that beauty is very important. In fact through this piece I have come to see a different view of beauty.

She explains that noticing somethings beauty increases the gentleness and/or the respect we feel it deserves. So noticing an objects beauty in fact benefits the object more times than not. She points out that beauty is what helps us see an object for what is really is and grant it justice.
On pg. 65 she writes, "The lotus shapes of the lips, eyes, hands, and postures are sculpted into stone and wood by the adoring hands of worshipers, not the hands of detractors."

She points out that it is the justice and respect the worships hold for there supreme being that allows them to glorify there beliefs and have the patience and zeal to make such an amazing object. A few pages later she goes on to say, "Far from subtracting or robbing fragility from the ordinary vase, the extraordinary vase involuntarily introduced me to the recognition that vases are fragile, and I then voluntarily extend the consequences of that recognition to other objects in the same category" With recognition of beauty we do justice to the object by recognizing its awe and treating other of its type with same respect. We do the object justice by seeing what it truly is and the qualities it pertains.

Another point she makes is on the fact that people go in search of beauty and yet have no intent on becoming beautiful. She states that this is amazing because it cannot be done with other things that are pursued. She lists truth as an example. "It would be hard to make that same description of someone pursuing truth if one had no interest in becoming knowledgeable?" (pg. 87) She explains that it wouldnt be possible for someone to pursue something else and not be affected. She goes on to say that people in search of beauty are affected regardless of there intent. Either through there inner lives or through there "fairness", that is, there distribution. She says on pg. 90 that beauty is a compact, or contract between the beautiful being and the perceiver. She goes on to say that this voluntary disbribution between the two is equal through fairness, that is a fair disbritution that is already a part of the way we think and speak about justice. It causes a symmetry of everyones relation to one another, as defined by John Rawls.

I feel that I must agree with Scarry on her point of view. I agree that beauty helps us see th greatness of object and that it does indeed cause us to unvoluntarily treat it with care. Most of this happeneing unconsciously. It is human nature to take notice to what we perceive as beauty and to grant it with the justice and kindness we feel it deserves or needs. I agree that beauty should not be diminished and people should understand what beauty does for human nature and how it affects our thoughts and our actions because of it.

The Benefits of Beauty

For my response I chose the following passage:

" A vase crafted by Galle---in whose surface dusky blue plums and purple leaves hang in the soft brown light---can, although nonsentient, be harmed by being mishandled. Noticing its beauty increases the possibility that it will be carefully handled.
Now it may be objected that a less beutiful poem or vase or god may, by receiving less attention, receive less careful protection." (pg.65)

This passage caught me because I have never thought of the benefits of beauty in this way. When looking at something beautiful, in her example a vase, you begin to notice its characteristics and with establishing this, your view is passed to other objects like it. When a person actually stops to admire an object, unconsciously, you notice other objects of the same type.

For example: A person could walk through a forest a hundred times and not be able to tell you a single characteristic of anything he or she passed. But when one walks thought the forest or a garden just before dusk in search of admiring the flowers or trees and spots a creature of beauty, they analyze its characteristics. The color of the leaves catch there interest, or the way its branches or stems are grown. Once finished with admiring this tree they glance at the next, observing its own characteristics in search of another object of beauty. All of the objects of the same type begin to catch the viewers eye.

http://www.oznet.ksu.edu/hfrr/HortImage/Acer_truncatum,_Shantung_Maple_Fall_Color_3.jpg

People can go through life without noticing the beauty and awe of the things around them. Through this piece I have come to realize something I always knew, although unconsciously. I have learned that beauty comes to justify objects. It helps us to notice objects and there true beauty. An objects warmth, or fragility, its sound, or even its movement are all things that are obtained through this justice. Beauty helps us give attention and notice to our surroundings and to objects or species or genres that individuals deem important and of deserving admiration.