rebeccamariee's blog

The Stuff of Thought

rebeccamariee — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 00:53:25 +0000

Language is defined as the words, their pronunciation, and the methods of combining them used and understood by a community. Semantics is the study of meaning, and human nature is noted as the psychological and social qualities that characterize humankind. So how exactly can all of this be tied together? Easily, let Steven Pinker show you how.

The Stuff of Thought by Steven Pinker is all over the place. His book covers everything and anything ranging from the structure of words, metaphors, naming objects, “the seven words you can’t say on television”, and more. While its content is very educational and informative, it is an easy read. You just want to keep on reading to see what will run through Pinker’s mind next. This book is nothing like a textbook but just as helpful, if not more.

Steven Pinker is a Psychology professor at Harvard University who, in 2004, was named one of Time’s one hundred most influential people in the world. So what exactly goes on inside the mind of someone deemed to be one of the most influential in the world? Time to dive into Pinker’s The Stuff of Thought.

When I first started reading, one of the first things that I noticed was Pinker’s style of writing. While the concepts in which he writes about are difficult, Steven Pinker delivers. He is able to write in a concise, clear, and cheerful manner. His writing is an argument, but convincing the entire way. The way that he presents his work is phenomenal. Thoughts that may have been hard for a well-educated being to understand are put by Pinker in easy to follow terms that make his work accessible to everyone.

If I were to classify Pinker’s writing and style into a single idea, I would say that it is deep. Steven Pinker really digs deep and breaks everything down. In doing this, Pinker is showing how the different ways our brain defines things will lead to different outcomes. His example of September 11, 2001 demonstrates this very well. I personally always viewed 9/11 as a single event that took place. As I read Pinker’s argument though, I began to see how some people may view it as two events (each of the two planes individually crashing into each of the two towers). Our brain will define even the simplest of words, like “event”, and make assumptions subconsciously for us. Through Pinker’s text, the importance of a single word becomes very evident.

Throughout the entire book, Pinker exhibits the importance and evolution of words, sentences, and the English language as a whole. Evolution of our language can be seen as Pinker when he asks, “Could anyone have predicted that to blog, to google, and to blackberry would quickly become part of everyone’s language?” (17). The entire evolution and use of our language is just astounding!

While your mind may not be occupied with the same thoughts as Steven Pinker, you will surely enjoy this book, The Stuff of Thought. You may not agree with everything Pinker has to say, but this book is definitely one to read. By reading this, you will learn how “Language is a window into human nature” (vii).

The Prince, entry 10

rebeccamariee — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 03:59:02 +0000

In chapter 17 Machiavelli discusses the importance of a prince’s relation to his state. He says that a prince must be loved and feared at the same time. This whole idea makes a lot of sense to me as well. I kind of put it into the perspective of teachers. A teacher who is “feared” would be one that would seem mean but get the job done. Although this may not be a student’s favorite teacher, they are still getting the learning in. A teacher who is “loved” would be one that is fun and easygoing, without really caring about the work involved. The students love this teacher but ultimately do not learn anything. In order to be successful there has to be a mix of both fear and love. Love of the teacher, but not too much to where nothing is getting done. Now in the sense of The Prince, the students would be the people and the teacher would be the prince. In the end though Machiavelli says that it is better to be feared because that is what the prince himself can control. “A wise prince must rely on what is in his power and not what is in the power of others” (Machiavelli 71). Again, this all just seems like common sense to me. Not necessarily common sense about fear and love, but the need to control what one has power over and not rely on others.

The Prince, entry 9

rebeccamariee — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 03:37:31 +0000

The ending quote of chapter 15 really seemed to tie the entire idea of this book together; “A wise prince should follow similar methods and never remain idle in peaceful times, but industriously make good use of them, so that when fortune changes she may find him prepared to resist her blows, and to prevail in adversity” (Machiavelli 62). Not only does this quote talk about how the prince should follow Machiavelli’s advice, but it also ties in the reoccurring theme of fortune. Having not finished the book yet, I feel as if this could summarize the first 14 chapters of The Prince.

I really appreciate how truthful and sincere Machiavelli is being at the beginning of chapter 15. It makes the reader more able to trust the author and what he has to say. Basically Machiavelli is saying that many people have written about the same thing that he is about to write about, but have done so with different opinions. By coming out and saying that his views are different yet still valid, it makes the reader curious about what Machiavelli is about to say. Machiavelli is also truthful and sincere when saying that his knowledge should be used or not used according to how the prince wishes to maintain himself (63). Machiavelli suggests that men of higher status will either be blamed or praised for every action that he makes. This puts a great amount of pressure on the prince knowing that everyone will always be critiquing what he is doing. Machiavelli seems to be giving good advice on how to handle these stresses though.

I am looking forward to these next few chapters about the behavior of the prince the most, for I feel that it will be more interesting than the sections about principalities and militias. I have never really been interested in those subjects, but behaviors and human interactions do interest me. Because of this, I am excited to see what Machiavelli has to say about the behaviors and actions of how a prince should act.

The Prince, entry 8

rebeccamariee — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 01:54:35 +0000

Now that we have been through all of the different principalities, Machiavelli is now moving on and explaining the different kinds of armies and how they work to protect and fight for those principalities. A quote that really got me thinking is “there cannot be good laws where there are not good arms, and where there are good arms there must be good laws” (Machiavelli 50). It is all very cyclic; in order to have a smoothly running state there must be good, governing laws as well as a steady, ready army. If one of those concepts is gone the state will fail.

According to Machiavelli there are four different types of militias: his own, mercenaries, auxiliaries, or mixed (50). Each of these armies have their pros and cons but Machiavelli explains that a prince’s own army is the best type of army to have. Machiavelli claims that mercenaries and auxiliaries are often times unfaithful and unreliable, and then goes on to give examples of each of these. Now as I read I frequently find myself saying things like “of course” over and over again. Much of what Machiavelli is saying seems like common sense to me. People who are willing to fight for his prince will be more dependable and trustworthy whereas people forced to fight will be quite the opposite. Maybe it’s just me, or maybe it is the times we are in now, but I feel like most of this people already know.

The Prince, entry 7

rebeccamariee — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 16:50:18 +0000

The themes in this book seem very important. One that has stood out to me is fortune and ability. Machiavelli explains that these are essentially the two attributes that can lead someone to become a prince: either through good luck and persistence or the ability to maintain and control a state. It seems to that there are two ways a prince can come into power, and those two ways are surprisingly very opposite from each other. Machiavelli points out that someone can become a prince either through violence and deception, or by favor of the citizens which he is to rule. Basically this is saying that the prince will either force himself into power or the people want him as their ruler.

The Prince, entry 6

rebeccamariee — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 15:36:26 +0000

When I first read the title of this book, I felt as if it would be a story of a specific prince. Almost like a biography of how he came to be prince. I thought that it would be a story that told of this prince’s childhood and then continue to his life in power. I was a little off though. Although The Prince is not a story itself, it contains many sub-stories. These sub-stories are fun and interesting to read. They help illustrate what Machiavelli is trying to tell the reader either by agreeing with what Machiavelli is trying to say, or being completely opposite. I just finished reading one of these “sub-stories” about Agathocles the Sicilian. The story about him went on to explain how he became a prince by his own wickedness and violence (Machiavelli 35-36). Stories like this make Machiavelli’s guide more interesting to read. Instead of just explaining violent ways of becoming a prince, there are actual stories about how it has happened. To me personally, these are far more enjoyable than simple explanations and make the book much more entertaining.

The Prince, entry 5

rebeccamariee — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 15:06:09 +0000

The beginning of chapter six makes so much sense to me. Basically Machiavelli is saying that when you are faced with a new task or challenge, you will attempt to do it in a way similar to the way someone else has before you. Instinctively you will take the path that they took and “proceed in their actions by limitation” (Machiavelli 23). What really is making this book more interesting to me is the connection to life today. The idea of following in someones footprints is still present and valid today. For an idea to be written about in the early 1500′s and still be true today, 500 years later, is amazing.

I feel like in chapter seven, Machiavelli steered away from the “how-to” aspect of this guide, and more towards the life and reign of Borgia. Not only was this a drag to read through, but I also feel as if it was unnecessary information. The point of this guide is essentially how to be a successful prince. If looked at the other way though, I guess it is fair to say that Machiavelli successfully used this example to contrast how not to be a prince.

The Prince, entry 4

rebeccamariee — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 16:23:02 +0000

This book is getting more and more interesting to me. I actually almost enjoyed chapters four and five. In chapter four, Machiavelli is explaining that there are only really two ways that a principality can be governed; either by a prince and servants, or a prince and barons who are related to the prince (Machiavelli 17). This to me all makes sense, and what Machiavelli is writing about seems all so very true. I also really like his writing style and all of the comparisons Machiavelli uses. These comparisons are very helpful especially because they include real life examples. Writing about the Spartans compared to the Romans and how each of them governed and conquered not only help explain how to govern, but also help explain each other. By saying that the Romans did not succeed the way the Spartans did, both sides are more detailed. Comparing and contrasting was a good tool for Machiavelli to use, especially while trying to help a prince rule. This way the prince can see the pro’s and con’s of two (or more) different ways to govern his state.

The Prince, entry 3

rebeccamariee — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 15:54:48 +0000

I have noticed that much of what Machiavelli is writing about is still relevant and truthful to today. One example that I noticed of this is when he states that “the desire to acquire possessions is a very natural and ordinary thing” (Machiavelli 15). Even today people are continually striving to obtain the latest technology, the most money, more than someone else just to say that they are better. I found it interesting that this is just as relevant today as it was back in the early 1500′s. Also in this chapter Machiavelli points out that in order to become more powerful yourself, you must weaken the rest. This can be related to life today as well. In order to be more powerful one must shine brighter than all the others no matter what it takes, and I feel like that is the message Machiavelli is trying to send. In order to be a successful prince, you must make yourself known to be more powerful and more respected than everyone else.

The advice Machiavelli gives is actually really good advice. Written for a prince, this guide is pointing out some extremely good ideas with valid reasoning behind these points. For example, the idea of taking over territories by the use of colonies (Machiavelli 12). This breaks the area up and hurts less people which in turn will give the prince more power.

I am starting to understand and appreciate more of what Machiavelli is trying to say than I did before. His points are starting to make sense to me, and I can now see it through the eyes of a prince back in those times. By being able to change perspectives I am able to compare and contrast Machiavelli’s methods to life today which is making it more interesting to me.

The Prince, entry 2

rebeccamariee — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 16:19:24 +0000

The first two chapters were a drag for me and I repeatedly had to re-read sections to understand what was even going on. I feel like the rest of the book will be the same way. Politics have never interested me, and essentially that is what this book is all about. If Machiavelli is able to make it fun and excited I may be more interested, but I highly doubt this book will get fun and exciting.

I do however like the way in which it is written: like a “how-to” guide for princes. The truthfulness in Machiavelli’s words are very important and it seems to me like he is serious in helping out Lorenzo di Medici. Machiavelli seems very knowledgeable and resourceful with his writing. I really appreciate the fact that Machiavelli puts in many examples of what he is talking about. If it were not for the real life examples, I probably would have absolutely no idea what Machiavelli is talking about.