Issue
anthropological film series edge
Guidelines selections (how to focus the eye) for the analysis of "The Lord of the Flies" (1963). Peter Brook
I.
- Detect how children organize what does the organization respond? Why accept it?
- Can you envision a division of labor?
- Is there common goals?, Is establishing clear rules of coexistence?
- What general appreciation of nature and man are present in the first part of the film?
II - Identify the symbolic elements appear throughout the film, which govern or modify the behavior of the protagonists.
III - Of what nature is the conflict that divides the group "based on what is redefining the power relations within it?
- Try to identify the most important features of the two conceptions of human nature that arise in this film.
Activity 1 Read the following excerpt from The man's place in the cosmos (Max Scheler):
essential difference between man and animal
Here comes the crucial question for our problem. If granted the animal intelligence, is there more than a mere difference of degree between man and animal? Is there an essential difference? Or is there something in man completely different from the essential degrees and treated far superior to them, something that suits him just specific mind, something the intelligence and the choice is not exhausted and not even touch?
Here is where the paths are separated more clearly. One would like to reserve the intelligence and choice to deny the man and animal. Say, then, without doubt, an essential difference., But the state where, in my opinion, does not exist. The others, in particular all schools evolutionists Darwin and Lamarck, deny that there is a final difference between man and animal, because the animal already has intelligence. They are therefore supporters in one way or another, the great monistic theory about man, described as the theory of homo faber., And do not know, of course, any kind of metaphysical being, nor any man's metaphysical, that is, no distinct relationship of man as such with the bottom of the universe.
As for my part, I can not but strongly reject both doctrines. I argue that the essence of man and what we might call its unique place are far above what we call intelligence and power to choose, and could not be reached, but that intelligence and imaginásemos enhanced the ability to choose quantitatively even to infinity [...] The new principle which makes man a man is alien to everything we call life, in the broadest sense, as in the inner psychic life or external. What makes a man a man is a principle that is opposed to all life in general., A principle which, as such, can not be reduced to "natural evolution of life", but if it is to be reduced to something can only be the supreme foundation of things, ie the same basis that even the "life" is a partial manifestation. The ancient Greeks held the existence of this principle and called it the "right." We prefer to use to designate this X, a more comprehensive word [...] spirit. "
[...] Such a "spiritual" is no longer bound to their impulses, or the surrounding world, but is "free to the world around it", is open to the world. Such a spiritual being having "world." Can be raised to the dignity of "objects" centers "resistance" and their world reaction environment, which also are given to him originally and that the animal is lost ecstatic. You can grasp at first how to be same of these "objects" without the limitation that world of objects or their presence experience by the power of vital impulse system and sensitive organs and functions it is based.
[...] Spirit is, therefore, objectivity., Is the possibility of being determined by the manner of the objects themselves. And we say it is "subject" or carrier of spirit creature, whose treatment with external reality has been invested in dynamically sense opposite to the animal.
[...] The Gathering, self-consciousness and the power and possibility of converting an object primitive impulse withstand, are therefore unbreakable one structure, which is exclusively human. With this become self-conscious with this new thinking and concentration of its existence, that makes the spirit is given to both the second essential feature of man: man can not only raise the "average" to the dimension of "world" and make the " resistance "objects", but can also, and this is the most admirable objective-make their own physiological and psychological constitution and each of their psychic experiences. Only by this can also shape their lives freely. The animal hears and sees, but without knowing who hears and sees [...] The animal lives as his own impulses, but as movements and repulsions of the things same environment. Even primitive man, which is found in certain animal traits to the next yet-not says: "I hate this thing", but "this thing is taboo." The animal does not have a "will" to survive on their impulses and can change and continuity in moving from their states Psychophysics. An animal is ever going to stop, so to speak, a different thing to "want" originally. It is deep and precisely what Nietzsche says: "Man is the animal that can promise.."
[...] would have said then that there is a gradation, in which a primitive will be leaning more and more about himself en la arquitectura del Universo, e intimando consigo mismo por grados cada vez más altos y dimensiones siempre nuevas, hasta comprenderse y poseerse íntegramente en el hombre”.
En base a este fragmento trabaje las siguientes cuestiones:
- Reflexione acerca de la diferencia “esencial” que plantea Scheler entre hombre y animal en relación a este film ¿En qué escenas y personajes ve reflejada esta diferencia? Justifique
- ¿A qué atribuye las conductas de Jack y su grupo en el marco de las discusiones que Scheler mantiene con filósofos y científicos?
0 comments:
Post a Comment