Talons Philosophy

An Open Online Highschool Philosophy Course



(I’m just copy pasting my script)

My presentation at the beginning of the year was also, “philosophy is like the sun” so I decided to stick with that because… I like the sun.

The sun is big and you want to fight it. Right? I know I did, like, in some of the debates we had most of you just wanted to get up and start swingin. And Mr Jackson was in the corner like…”( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)…”
Like the things we talked about, we could have gone on for hours and more and more questions would just keep popping up. It’s a lot of “what ifs?” And, “if this
happens then how do you explain-”
One thing i learned from this course is that there are so many sub categories of philosophy. I actually had just thought it was “philosophy” and we would ask questions. But this course taught me that psoolairehilosophy is an umbrella term and there are smaller wider categories underneath it.

So yeah, philosophy is big. Just like the sun.

Sunlight symbolizes the conversations we had. By having conversations you become more immersed in that topic and you absorb more information. Without sunlight, without the conversation, you wouldn’t understand what was going on and  ideas wouldn’t be passing through. You need this light to register whats going on: “oh a couch, oh Arden”. Much like how light passes through your retinas to your brain, the information we pass around through speech helps us decipher the world around us.

Sometimes there is no sunlight and it’s hard to untangle all these new ideas coming at you. I was kinda like that in the epistemology unit, where I had no idea what we were talking about. I zoned out quite a bit, and everything was passing over my head. I’m kinda glad that’s over, like, no offense. But I’m glad to say the other units where easy to understand.

Speaking of no sunlight, there are things that block your perception, like clouds (OF DOUBT).

The clouds that block this sunlight. Now I mentioned before, how we had a bunch of arguments, and we were striving for everyone to hear and agree on our one singular view. However, this subject of Philosophy is not for everyone to agree on; there’s differing ideas just like in the real world. Not everyone will agree with you. So I’m not sure if this course actually did something but I feel more obligated to defend and back up my own beliefs and arguments, as well as listen and be open to other options as well.

The last thing I have to say about philosophy is that I loved watching Sam and her Savage Smackdowns™. It was a joy to watch.




Proposition: Knowledge has been made up, and is incorrect.
Statement: If the world does not give us answers, and if we’re assuming that what we are getting from studies is the real answer (but is actually not), then we are technically making up this knowledge, therefore making knowledge unreliable and based on propositions.

My view on knowledge would be placed on the nihilistic side of the spectrum. I’ve always thought about the information in science textbooks and social textbooks, asking myself, where did this information come from? Most likely passed down from historians and scientists, all biased in one way or another. The words in a textbook are all based on experiences in the past. You could say history is different in a way, because it is a view on events experienced
by humans throughout time. But, can you prove Jesus was a white man and that he supposedly “resurrected” himself? No, because the last man who physically saw this with his own eyeballs has been dead for thousands of years, and therefore cannot prove that Jesus is even a thing, even if it’s been written in a sacred text. Science, on the other hand is more complicated. For an easy example, let’s use the dinosaurs. Apparently they were wiped out by a giant meteorite. Geologists found “evidence” linking a crater somewhere in south america to the fall of the dinosaurs. But is that
really what happened? We’re assuming that it was a meteorite but, it could have been countless other things. It could have been some poisonous mineral in the waterways, it could have been an epidemic, it could have been a giant robot chicken for all we know. No one was there, therefore we have no idea what happened. But we have been continuously fed the idea of “mass extinction via meteorite” and it’s only grown from there.

I think what I’m getting at is, did we decode knowledge in the correct way? And did we process it in the correct way? There are so many things we don’t know. Are aliens out there if we look far enough or are we the only planet in the universe that bears life? Who looked at a cow’s udder and said, “yes if I squeeze these things I can drink the fluid that comes out of them”. Was English meant to be the universal language? Those scientific names that we give species, are all just made up words. From what may I ask? Where did those words originate from? And where did the words that act as the origin of those origin words come from? Random sounds made by cavemen? How did numbers come to be? Who sat down and decided “yes….this…thing…will be called….O N E….this O N E, S I N G U L A R….O B J E C T IN MY IMAGINATION…” as I’m saying that, I also think, how did people come up with the words singular and object? Where the hell did they come from. Why one object? Why not two? Why can’t one be two? Why do we care…? Sorry I’m rambling but I don’t think anyone really understands what I’m getting at.

The world does not speak to us, and gives us the answers we need. Answers are not magically etched upon rocks by mother nature. As people evolved, they made stories to fill the holes of unknown knowledge. ‘The world is flat and carried on the back of a giant turtle’, or ‘there are hundreds of gods that live in a floating mountain and they basically control every element of our universe’ are all examples of stories and myths humans have come up with, and have been passed down for generations. Are they really myths though? Some we may be able to prove, some we are only able to wonder about. The world has billions of unanswered questions and we’ll never really find out the truth behind any of them.





Dragons Actually Exist

Before you look at my title and say “this isn’t philosophical” let me tell you….Dragons aren’t philosophical.

But the concept of a dragon’s existence is. While we’re talking about dragons, let’s throw in harpies, shape shifters, sea serpents, and giant birds, since a myth is a myth. How did they all come to be mentioned, in every nation and culture, if those people were oceans apart?


Did mythological creatures really exist thousands of years ago?


The thing that piqued my interest on this topic was brought up on the tumblr website, where I saw a text post written by someone who mentioned that, “why does every culture have some version of a fire-breathing lizard that flies, even if those cultures have never had contact with each other before?”, (regrettably I can’t find this post, since it’s been awhile but, if I find it, I’ll link it.) Some of you may think, “ah, yes, WELL, the dinosaurs-,” and will continue scrolling, and the rest of you, who possess imagination and like to have fun, will think “now, you do have a point; how did all these countries end up with a similar idea?” There are many different ways to approach this subject, and one of them is what we talked about a few days ago in class: collective unconsciousness. And no, I am not talking about us all laying on the ground, oblivious to our surroundings. I’m talking about all humans sharing a deep connection to one another, somewhere in the untouched spaces of the mind, that all makes us think or react a certain way. (Check out Samson’s post if you want to know more!)

I’ve always loved dragons, ever since I was a kid. I would draw them on the sides of my tests, scribble them on my walls, buy books about them, play fantasy games. It makes life interesting and exhilarating to think about mysterious beings that could have possibly existed thousands of years ago. Aren’t aliens the same? Little green men and big oval eyes? They could be out there right now, walking around on Tattooine, and we could have no idea.

Just as some kind of analytical technique is needed to understand a dream, so a knowledge of mythology is needed in order to grasp the meaning of a content deriving from the deeper levels of the psyche….

The collective unconscious — so far as we can say anything about it at all — appears to consist of mythological motifs or primordial images, for which reason the myths of all nations are its real exponents. In fact, the whole of mythology could be taken as a sort of projection of the collective unconscious.

We can see this most clearly if we look at the heavenly constellations, which original chaotic forms were organized through the projection of images. This explains the influence of the stars as asserted by astrologers. These influences are nothing but unconscious, introspective perceptions of the activity of the collective unconscious. Just as the constellations were projected into the heavens, similar figures were projected into legends and fairy tales or upon historical persons.

As I mentioned in the above paragraphs, this matter also relates directly with collective unconscious. Possibly in the far, far past, a creature was formed in the crevices of the mind, a figment of the imagination, composed of all the horrible and bad things in the world, and there, the name “monster” was stuck on to it, doomed to walk around the boogey man corner of Halloween town, scaring children forever and ever. If I say the word monster, what comes to mind exactly? Something with sharp teeth, scales possibly and claws, glowing eyes…. a tail. Sound familiar? Yeah.




Is CGI ruining movies?

A controversial topic among many, the question, “is CGI ruining movies”, is one argument that is tearing apart families, ending friendships, and burning directors at the stake by the reviews they receive from THE PEOPLE BORN IN THE 80’s who are die hard fans of costumes, face paint and non-computer animated backgrounds.

Personally I don’t mind CGI! At all! In fact, they make movies much better! I FEEL THE POWER!!! EXPLOSIONS? YES! IRON MAN FLYING THROUGH THE SKY AT 100 MPH?? GIVE IT TO ME!!! OPTIMUS PRIME BEING BADASS AND TRANSFORMING AND DOING WHATEVER TRANSFORMERS DO?? HELL YEAH!! That’s why I chose this topic; to smash the whiny babies who thought the Star Wars prequels were lifeless.

And so the argument:

Premise 1: Some movies use CGI

Premise 2: All movies using CGI are bad

Conclusion: Therefore CGI ruins movies 

Premise 1: “Some movies use CGI”. This is factually correct. Technically speaking, almost all movies use CGI. Heck, even in romantic comedies they use CGI. You see that plant over there? CGI! But you didn’t notice it did you? Was the movie bad because of that? No, you walked out of the theater thinking about more important aspects of that movie than a computer generated plant. It didn’t hurt you. But, hey, we’re talking about the overuse of computer generated imagery. Aside from romantic comedies, many many action movies use CGI. Your favorite superhero, sci-fi, thriller/horror, fantasy movie is all heavily steeped in magical graphics to enhance and bring imaginary worlds to life, which couldn’t have been possible without technology.

Premise 2: “All movies using CGI are bad”. BUZZER SOUND. Stop. Stop right there. This is FACTUALLY INCORRECT. Some of the most critically acclaimed movies are BUILT UPON CGI. Box office hits like Marvel for example, are CGI-fests. You can’t go 4 minutes without seeing beautiful pixels. Oh wait, EVEN SOME OF THE CHARACTERS ARE MADE WITH COMPUTERS. *cough* THE HULK *cough*. I agree, some movies, like say, King Kong (2005), Scooby-Doo, Spy Kids and Sharknado all have horrible effects and are terrible movies, but counting those out, CGI can make for some memorable and beautiful moments. The occasional “oh haha they’re using a green screen” or, “look at that fake looking troll!” are all part of the ups and downs of movie making. It’s not perfect. It’s technology.

“It doesn’t matter how many how many hours or computer modeling programs have been spent to create “lifelike” scenery or surroundings, it will always lack the element of chaos, the potential for mistakes, that makes it something we can believe (and lose ourselves) in. Moviemakers today can try and distract us from that missing piece – with occasionally unintentional results; how many times do we watch something and think that it’s impressive or “must have taken a lot of work,” and not notice that we’re being taken even further out of the story in order to do so – but there hasn’t been any CGI-centric creation that has managed to replace it, yet.”

– taken from here

Conclusion: “Therefore, CGI ruins movies.” This is not a sound argument, since there are many 5 star movies, with heavy use of CGI. Some examples are, The Avengers (92% fresh tomatoes, 8.1 on iMDB, and made $1.52 billion at the box office. Others I can name are Batman Begins, Transformers, Jurassic Park, Lord of the Rings, Inception, Gravity, heck the list can go on for ages.

In conclusion, no, CGI does not ruin movies and you need to stop being so damn salty.







Call me Mel. Melody is too much of a mouthful, I can’t even say my own name properly without cringing.
I like video games, but that phrase has been rendered meaningless in the contemporary world, because who doesn’t play video games. Even fetuses in a womb play video games. I also draw, for money and for free (mostly for money because I’m broke and the motivation helps me). I’m thinking of starting a web comic in the near future if my parents don’t force me to get a job. But I do want to work at the same time, because I need money and a steady income to buy
Star Wars™ merchandise. Also for post secondary. My parents aren’t paying for all of that. (By the way, as well as Samson, I am a walking meme).

Maybe if I keep rambling I’ll reach thDOOT DOOTe required word count??? Writing is hard for me when the topic is so vague.

Now speaking of the topic: on to the subject at hand; Mr. Jackson asked “What is philosophy?” Honestly, I am not sure. Is it just talking about topics in depth, and getting so in depth that your head starts hurting? Or is it a pleasant conversation that comes up at lunch time and suddenly your thoughts are branching off into hundreds of different subjects? Like boys? Makeup? Cars? The best way to hit someone with considerable force on the head without causing permanent neurological and psychological damage? Or maybe, it’s a way to pass the time, and a way to understand the world and your life more clearly. To philosophize, in a general statement, is to “. . .study [the] fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence, especially when considered as an academic discipline”.

I love to think about life and the nature of things in depth. The discussion we had earlier in class this week about the article, “Does Color Even Exist?“, was very intriguing. We were able to take one simple? topic and generate many ideas, theories and concepts. If color doesn’t exist then how do cameras capture it? Or do cameras capture the black and white, and then our brains imagine the color because who wants to live in a world of black and white? Do the minds of people refuse to see a dull world so much, that from the beginning of mankind we’ve forced to imagine up hues and shades- WHAT IF COLOR IS JUST SOMETHING WE’VE MADE UP?? WAIT. IT IS SOMETHING WE’VE MADE UP. WHAT THE HELL IS A YELLOW–

“Color hovers uneasily between the subjective world of sensation and the objective world of fact.”

I wish we had more debate time, I had just started getting into a heated conversation. I’ll flip a table next time to prove my arguments.

In my respectful opinion philosophy is more composed of speaking and holding a debate between a pair or a group of people, than writing. Of course, writing makes it easier to access ideas and keep track of the different thoughts, but speech takes one idea and holds it up within the group, a simple shape floating in the air, and the rest of the group bends it and shapes it and stretches it so it is a mixture of thoughts and ideas and it grows as more people add to it. Talking is an important element – a vital aspect, of circulating ideas throughout a society, and ideas are heard and reinforced more often through word of mouth, than when written on paper.

TL;DR (even though its not that long), what if we’re actually all in comas and what we’re living in now is just a computer generated dream and Arnold Schwarzenegger and John Connor are fighting off Skynet.