Who is the modern day gadfly?

              I think that there are many people who could be considered a "gadfly". I think really any political talk show host is technically a gadfly. One who is constantly questioning the morals of what is politically correct and in the best interest for the people is very gadfly-y. To name a few specifically I would say Rachel Maddow, Stephen Colbert, Jon Stewart, Stephanie Miller, Bill Press, Thom Hartmann, and Chris Hayes.

              Not only talk show hosts are gadfly's. Many celebrities create charities and organizations for certain causes and spread their opinions around the world. I don't think that's quite as gadfly-y as the talk show hosts, but they still try and influence the world to help them understand whatever it is they're trying to prove/support.

                Although it's easier to bring up famous people as gadfly's because they're people we actually listen to, I think that the real modern day gadfly's are seemingly "crazy" people. The crazy hobos sometimes seen on the street talking about the end of the world and such. Maybe we don't listen to them because they just seem insane, however they're the ones that are personally trying to make us understand something through an actual conversation. Maybe certain people saw Socrates the same way. Some random dude asking questions and stuff and people ignored him and walked away. The thing is, Socrates wasn't a celebrity back then, so it's not really accurate to say that all these celebrities are the same as Socrates.

                I think that the real modern day gadfly closest to the "Socrates" type is one who is not well known, but just so happens to have a deeper philosophical understanding and questions, interrogates, and listens to others. Whether or not that person is crazy, or just smart, I don't think fame is a necessary factor.

"The un-examined life is not worth living"

      First off, I have no idea why this is stuck in caps lock, so my apologies. I am not that enthusiastic.

          I think that this statement, although said by the founder of western philosophy himself, is a bit harsh and over-exaggerated. I agree with Socrates with the fact that a life full of self examination and questioning can lead to a further enriched understanding of life, the universe, etc., however, I do not believe that if people don't go through that "self examination" their lives aren't worth living. If a person lives his/her entire life completely ignorant of possible philosophical knowledge about life, yet still lives and enjoys his/her life, then what's wrong with that? Is it harmful for a person to go about every day living without questioning the universe? No, I don't believe so.

              Life, although comparable to the "cave wall", is much more enriched with possible experiences and enjoyment. There are endless opportunities and pleasures such as growing up, having friends, getting a job, having a family, etc. So although we humans are still ignorant to most of what's going on outside this world, we can still live a very good life in ignorance. That's the problem with the "cave wall" thing. Earth is not a cave wall. We do not see three shadows every night. There are so many things that this world has to offer, tons of experiences. The Earth should be seen as one giant playground. That's the problem I have with Socrates's statement. I'm all for critical self-examination, and I really wish I had further knowledge about everything, yet I would much rather live life to it's fullest potential than sit around and ponder about the universe. With that said, I ponder about the universe all the time, but not the way Socrates did it. It seems to me that Socrates just spent all day looking at the sky and asking people questions, which is great, but I think that he kind of ignored the things that this world has to offer and missed out on a lot.

             

Ja Boy Charlie

         Hello, my name is Charles Bernard Blumenthal and I'm a senior here at WY. I'm also an avid tennis player, in fact some might say I'm a prodigy. Who says that? I do not know, but it would be cool if people did. Not only do I play tennis, I also play the piano. I'm medium at it. Another hobby I enjoy partaking in is stand-up comedy. I am also medium at that, however, I enjoy it very much. 

        I got my first job two years ago working for my dad's beanbag company. I stacked boxes and stuff. It was awesome, however, it was time that I pursued my dream of becoming a lifeguard. It was a brutally excruciating process, but in the end it payed off. This past summer I worked at North Avenue Beach, Chicago's most popular and fun beach to work at. I made tons of new friends and even got to save a few people. I don't really know what I want to be when I grow up. When I was younger I wanted to be Spiderman, however, it seems that job is not available/non-existent, and I've run into similar issues with Superman and others, so I've found myself completely out of options. 

       As a child diagnosed with severe ADHD, I find myself "mentally wandering" quite a bit. However devastating these "wandering" sessions are to my grades, I find that I've pondered about some pretty fascinating ideas about life that are somewhat mind expanding. I guess that's what really drove me to take this philosophy class, because I get the sense that I literally don't even have to space out in order to discover those radical ideas, I just have it told to me, so that's cool. Ya know I never really made this connection until now, but I am most definitely an awful lifeguard. It's like 8 hours of straight up spacing out, I mean who knows how many people drowned while I was on duty...? Just kidding probably none, but still. 
       
       On that note, I would like to conclude my introduction to this class, and I'm looking forward to a very fun year here in room 116.