Essays (Montaigne)

In reading just the first passage of Montaigne's essays alone (titled "To the Reader") I was already beginning to plunge deep into thought. By the second to last line of Montaigne's introduction, I was questioning why I was reading the book at all. Montaigne concludes his preface with saying, "... I am myself the matter of my book; you would be unreasonable to spend your leisure on so frivolous and vain a subject." Most people in life try to be as reasonable as possible. Therefore, continuing on reading this large book of different ideas of one man who lived so long ago, as Montaigne said, would be pointless and a waste of time. But of course I wasn't just going to not turn the next page, for two main reasons. One reason being the obvious one: I had to read the book in order to complete my summer assignment and get credits for my class. And two: If one short passage could make me put as much thought into it as the first page of Montaigne's Essays did, there had to be some worth in continuing on and reading what else he had to say. Because I figured even if I didn't agree with it, it would make me see things from another point of view other than my own, which I feel is necessary for growing and expanding in the world that we live in. So, despite my desire to be a reasonable person, my curious, rebellious side got the better of me, and I disregarded the author's advice against reading his thoughts and turned the page anyway.
On Man:
Until Montaigne, I had thought that telling a lie was no different than lying. This was not because I didn't believe there was a difference, but simply because I had never thought of the difference. Montaigne uses the Latin dictionary definition of lying (going against ones conscience) to prove this thought. If one tells a lie, they are simply reiterating what they believe is true. Lying, on the other hand, is with knowledge that what one says is false, for the purpose of having some sort of personal gain through the web of lies. This may very well help them gain something, but it could also make them lose everything. Liars often become far too cocky and end up spreading their lies so thin that they forget what lies they've told, and to whom. In essence, it's almost as if they don't know themselves what is true and what is a lie. And therein they begin to lose themselves and their values, what little bit they had when they consciously began their ride on the wave of lies.
As Montaigne notes, men are run by things. Or so it seems, but rather it is the ideas we hold of said things. Two pieces of wood are just that, until you nail them together. Then they are still just two pieces of wood nailed together, until you hang a man from said pieces of wood. Then the wood becomes a cross and the idea behind it becomes crucifixion. And then it comes down to who is hanging by the cross, take Jesus for example. Whether religious or not, humor me for a moment as I go off in writing my own "Essays." The people who crucified Jesus in The Bible believed they were ridding the world of evil, while the people who mourned for Him felt He was wrongly murdered.  Their opinions of Him were formed based off of who they perceived Him to be: good or evil. It did not matter who He really was, or so it seemed, but rather who certain people saw Him to be, whether they wanted to believe or not. Now I don't exactly know where I was trying to go with this idea; it started out as one thing and ended with another. But I suppose the idea that Montaigne is getting at is that life and opinions are all a matter of perception. We give meaning to objects and ideas based off of what we know, or rather what we like to think we know. To one man, rain may be what keeps his garden healthy and living while to another, it may mean the death of a single plant due to over-watering. Apply this thought to any situation in life, and the result in perception will more often than not follow suit.
According to Montaigne, our lives should be judged by our death. But isn't that an ironic thought? It's as if the millions of breaths we take in our lifetime don't even begin to compare to the fact that we cannot breathe anymore. There is a saying that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link, but I don't believe that can at all relate to, "A man is only as happy as his dead corpse." Somehow that just doesn't go as well. Because a man can live a wonderful life filled entirely of happy moments then one day get shot. But are we supposed to judge his existence by his last, horrid day? Or by his lifelong happy moments? I suppose that's up for questioning. But I hope that when I die my life is judged not by my last days, but by my best days.
Death is inevitable. And I guess philosophizing makes death that much more real. But it comes to question that maybe we're not learning to die, but rather trying harder to find a way to live. As it is now I have already stated that death is inevitable. But as I type, science and studies are increasing constantly at an alarming rate, and though it is not yet possible, it may be in the future: to develop a way to outlive death. Thus, philosophy is not so much preparing for death, but trying to learn to live life. People say all the time that life is short, which is silly to say because it is the longest thing any of us will ever experience. And maybe death is inevitable now but so is life, though lesser so. But maybe someday philosophy will advance to the realization that death may no longer be an inevitable feat and that the study of it all will someday overcome.
Dentists make money off of people with bad teeth as makeup companies profit off of the misfortune in looks of young women. Likewise, when misfortune happens to a person in the health department, it is a doctor's gain. Or when someone eats a fattening snack, the grocery store at which it was purchased benefits financially. It's an endless cycle of parasitism that is evident in any aspect of life we analyze.
Human beings are not solitary creatures, for the most part. We take comfort in finding people like us, or sometimes different, who help complete our persona. These people (friends) are found in more than just those we meet along the way. Friends can be found in the family that surrounds us, or the pals we spend time with in between classes, or even sometimes in romantic relationships. Whether we acknowledge it or not, we are shaped by these individuals and we, in turn, shape them. This is not for any purpose, but rather a subconscious factor that lies within any good friendship. It varies from person to person and place to place, and there is never a solid determining factor with any type of relationship.
Too much of a good thing is not a good thing at all. This is where moderation comes into play. If we take in too many sugars or fats, the result is a health problem. Though many of them taste good, the outcome is disastrous. This applies not only to food, but to life in general. Too much time spent with one person could cause tension, and the friendship to collapse whereas too much time apart could cause a separation. There is a happy medium in every aspect and it is our job to find it in order to maintain the moderation needed to fuel a happy life.
Judgement is all about the state of mind of the situation taken into account. Obviously, if the state of mind is altered by either drugs or alcohol or some other foreign agent, judgement is uncontrolled and therefore often called into question. It is as if there is little to no real capability to judge at all. But judgement can be bad even if the mind is sober. How someone grows up and is raised determines the judgements that they make in their life, and if they are just or not. Hitler killed many innocent lives, because he believed he was doing the right thing for the sake of his country. Any normal, sane person would hear his name and immediately go off in a rant about how terrible he was. But on the other hand, an unknowing child could see a picture of Hitler with a young girl, smiling and playing, and think nothing wrong of the man who was in charge of the attempted genocide of nations. Does this child have poor judgement? Not necessarily. It is only because he or she has not been exposed to the events that change his or her judgement when it comes to similar situations. In no way am I saying that Hitler was a good man, he wasn't. But to himself and the thousands of followers he had, something in their judgement made them do what they did, with no second thought of it being wrong.
Age, like most things, is a matter of perception. One thing noted by some about life is that it can often be a repeating, ascending and descending cycle. That is, you begin it the way you end it. At the beginning and end of life, one is usually incapable of a strong sense of stable mobility as well as a solid mind. The middle part is just a mixture of ascension and descension, so to speak.
Consciences are different for everyone. Everyone has one, I believe, it's just a matter of whether they choose to listen to it or not. If they do, then the result is usually selfless, while if they don't the result is usually selfish. The two words share the same letters and sounds, but differ entirely in meaning.
Books are simple accounts of different ideas in life. There are many different kinds that all contain different information. They are all designed for the purpose of enlightening, though not all the books enlighten people with the same ideas.
Desire IS in fact increased by difficulty, at least for most. What is more pleasing: To pass a class with little to no challenges, or to pass a class knowing you were challenged but that you overcame those challenges? Okay, maybe that's not the exact idea here, but it's the principles that are the same.
In giving the lie, it makes me wonder if Montaigne himself might've thought he was telling a lie. Not that he was lying, but that maybe the things he believed to be true were not. This makes you question his credibility and authority. But on the other hand, makes you believe he is not writing to deceive, but to tell his thoughts, whether lies or truths.
It is a free world, or at least a free country. And because of that, we are given freedom to exercise our conscience. Whether this is a good or bad thing lies in the owner of the conscience. Should we be free to exercise our conscience? Or should we be forced to follow it strictly? I suppose we don't really have a choice and our decisions are purely based off of what we decide to do with our mind and body.
It sounds selfish to say we are born for ourselves, and Montaigne argues that we are born for the public. But what does the public have to do with us? They do not live our lives nor do they have charge over it. I believe, for one, that solitude is a good thing for anyone. Maybe not complete and utter solitude, but some moderation of it nonetheless. Because who is going to be there when we die but us? It is not up to others to decide how we live and how we practice in solitude or public.
It is bad to remain idle but it is worse to do bad. Though doing nothing does not help the world, it also does not particularly hurt the world as it would if one did poorly.
It is up to the individual to decide what is virtuous and what is not.
Anger is an emotion that can be discrete and can go without notice, or can be explosive and destroy nations. Revenge more often than not is stemmed from anger, and is sometimes practiced in a passive aggressive way so that the anger is not always so obvious an emotion.

On Principle:
Norms throughout history are ever changing, from sexuality to racism to sexism and so on and so forth. But it lies in question whether or not the principles they stemmed from will ever truly be gone. In different cultures there are different customs, and thus it is difficult to describe principles in the scope of the entire world. In some countries rape is viewed as a criminal offense which will result in jail time while in others, it is nothing more than a daily part of life that is accepted by the community. This is a more extreme difference in culture. On a lesser scale, arranged marriages are still common in many other countries, but in the U.S. they are seen as absurd. It's true that many girls in the practicing countries don't agree with arranged marriages. But in some cases, it is tradition and not seen as a bad thing to be involved in the arranged marriage, as people from other customs may see it as. On another note is the racism and sexism in the world. Though in a majority of countries these ideas are considered ancient concepts, they have never really disappeared. Though Blacks and Whites and Asians and etc. all share the same drinking fountains and even homes, discrimination and prejudice will never truly be gone. There will still be people who feel superior to others for a simple difference in skin tone. Though there is no reason to it, there is history behind it and for some, that is reason enough.
Children should be educated, but they should not have ideas and concepts implanted into their brain without knowledge of other ideas. As children, the mind is at a very vulnerable and morphable state. The older generations take this opportunity to enlighten the youngsters and form ideas in their head. This is good, to get them a head start on the world. But it becomes harmful when there are beliefs forced on them, and they are not allowed to choose what they want to believe. When a child is told something, it sticks. That is all good and well, as long as we are giving the children the words they need to hear, and not just what society wants them to hear.
It's odd to think that we've explored more of the universe than we have the earth's ocean. And with this fact, who's to say there aren't mermaids? I'm not talking mythical women wearing seashells for bras. But in the depths of the unexplored oceans, it is very possible that there lives something similar to the half fish, half humans we read about as children. We are so insignificant in this world and not one person can explain everything that is and was and will be, not even close. Therefore it is silly to judge what is true and what is not by simply what we know, since we know so little ourselves.
We have reached a point in time where cannibalism is seen as a terrible, outrageous thing, where it was once not totally uncommon. People ate other people like we today consume the meat of a cow or a pig. Back then, it was all meet. What has changed is the advancements in technology and knowledge of disease and ability to recognize what is the same as us and what is fair game to prey upon.
Depending on whether one is religious or not, it is in question when clothing became a known material. If one is religious, one could say it was when Eve ate the apple and realized she was a sinner who was ashamed that she was naked. If not, one could argue it was when cavemen realized small pelts off of their kills would keep them warmer at night. Either way you look at it, clothing came about one way or another. But it sometimes seems as if it is slowly being reversed.
Laws are often flexible and judged off of social class and stature, whether noticed or not. A rich man may steal and get nothing but a slap on the wrist where as a poor man may take a leaf from a tree and be charged with theft.
There are taboo customs in that of marriage and love and family and so on and so forth. Some are practiced today while others have died out. It is all a matter of the practitioner and their beliefs and culture that they were raised in.
War, many would argue, is evil. But in past history, wars have ended in some sort of agreement that was used to make life better than pre-war conditions. This goes along with the idea that evil means can be used to find a good end.
Humans are overall lustful beings who yearn for affection in every which way possible. No matter the background, everyone is prone to lusting after someone or something, more often than not another human being. This is evident moreso from the age of maturity on throughout adulthood.
With great power comes great responsibility, one of the disadvantages of greatness. If that responsibility cannot be kept, then everything can go arrigh. On the other hand, so many see greatness as a desirable thing that they will go to any lengths to attain it. This can be detrimental because some lengths are dangerous to oneself and to society as a whole.

On Knowledge and Pride:
Knowledge is desirable in every which way we look at it. From birth, we are constantly learning knew things whether known to us or not. We are taught that only the smart and cunning will succeed, laughing at those who aren't at the same level as us. We are taught to flaunt the things we know and continue to grow throughout our life in every which way possible, for the ultimate quest of knowledge. It seems somewhat trying, seeing as we only live for so long anyway. And if our entire time on this earth is spent learning, what else have we got to offer? I suppose there is knowledge in living itself, whether recognized or not.
These notes are not necessarily what I had planned them to be, but rather my own branch and train of thought/stream of consciousness off of Montaigne's views. Though lengthy and wordy, his notes provided and insightful amount of information and quotations, making me yearn to be as well read as he and keep an open mind on every aspect that is present in life.