Some words about War and Peace-freedom vs. conformity/destin

[fayefaye]

I'm currently halfway through War and Peace ( I feel like I'm never going to finish this book. Is it worth it?) and I got pretty bored, so I flicked to the back and found Tolstoy's notes on the text, which actually put forth some interesting points. I also flicked through the second epilogue. He makes a lot of rhetorical questions he seems to explore, but not answer. So I put it to you
What force do you think drives nations? What would cause millions of people to kill millions of others? Are people just manipulated into doing it? So then if we were eternally vigilant against war could we maintain world peace? 'If you want peace, you must prepare for war.' What about that?

Of what significance are world leaders in the events that actually happen?

Tolstoy makes the point that within our lives it seems like we have complete control of everything that happens, but in retrospect it all seemed so inevitable. Do you think we have control of our lives, or are we in fact controlled by destiny?

Quotes from Tolstoy's Notes on War and Peace
'I can undoubtedly commit an act or refrain from it if the act relates to me alone'
'We cannot but see that the more abstract and therefore the less connected with the activity of others our activity is, the more free it is; and on the contrary, the more our activity is connected with other people the less free it is.'

So does true freedom lie in complete isolation from society? If that is so, then it makes sense to assume that society does in actual fact control us and the ideal of freedom that so many people hold is in actual fact an illusion. I find this idea pretty interesting.

What do you think?

Actually, on a slightly related topic, the other day I was watching a documentary of some street kids in Bucharest. Some of them ended up drug addicts because they ran away from an orphanage that had a director who beat them. They don't have that much chance in life, but people are always talking about how much better the modern world is in comparison to the past because people nowadays are supposed to have so much more freedom; they are not doomed to spend their whole lives in the social class they are born into as in the middle ages, or generally the past. But a lot of people are precluded from receiving an education or healthcare because of their position at birth. Conversely, rich people generally happen to have -wait for it- rich kids who could probably buy their way into any university regardless of intellect. How true is it that people nowadays can do whatever they want in their life? How true is the idea of freedom?

[Dick Diver]

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

Society by its very nature conditions people to conform.

Anybody who doesn't is a weirdo/loner/potential serial killer.

When we are born all we are is ourselves - then we are conditioned to strive for the same things. In capitalist societies money operates as the enforcer, though in reality money is a concept and gold is just one element in the Periodic Table.

It's sad but human life is expendable.

If you want peace, you're John Lennon. And look what happened to him.

[Koa]

aaw fayefaye, congratulations about being halfway...I'm still around page 200, still reading 3 pages every 3 days (I'm also rhater busy at the moment but if i really wanted I'd read a bit more...I believe I've never read anything so slowly...but i dont want to give up!!!)
For the rest, I didnt read much of your post, for fear of it being a spoiler to me...It might help maybe if I read it, but i don't want to lose curiosity on the book, I really need a lot of it (curiosity, that is)

[fayefaye]

It's not a spoiler at all koa- if it was, i definately would have marked it. I want peace.

So someone shot John Lennon. His legacy lives on. Imagine still inspires people and remains one of the best songs ever written. People still need to dream, they still need hope and the belief of freedom. Maybe even if it means their lives end up chasing after what they can't have, at least they aspire to something. You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one. Someday you'll join us, and the world will be as one. ..

I do agree with you slightly though- society brainwashes us into behaving 'properly', and in doing so controls a lot of our behaviour. In some ways this is bad, but I suppose good in other ways too.

[fayefaye]

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

Society by its very nature conditions people to conform.


sigh... you're right. I retract my previous statements. There is no such thing as true freedom. It's an illusion. A mirage. And when you run towards it, you feel like you're closer, but it just moves further away. And then you look back and realise you don't know where you are... It's sad but horribly true, and today I guess I realised that. Freedom is death.

[fayefaye]

Oh,but I still wanna get a discussion going on freedom vs. destiny and society, even though I just declared it doesn't exist, and in all truth Tolstoy was right.

[Sindhu]

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

Society by its very nature conditions people to conform.


sigh... you're right. I retract my previous statements.
Oh, fayefaye, please, NO! Yes, I realize idealists and visionaries get killed and no,I don't want that to happen to you or me or anyone I care about, but the world NEEDS its visionaries and saints- their destiny might be death now as the world is not ready to receive them, but we can HOPE that someday it wil be, can't we? Hope was the only thing left in Pandora's box and if we have to let go of that, well let's just drop the nukes and finish the whole sorry tale off! :( I need to hope- that freedom may be life one day- a pathetic hope, maybe- but at least it keeps me going. :-?

[fayefaye]

YOU are the forum sweetheart sindu. not me. it's ppl like u who keep the world going and prevent everything turning to poop.

[Sindhu]

:oops:

[Koa]

Back on War&Peace.
I reached page 300 and I'm starting to enjoy it. :D :D :D
Hopefully I'll go on liking it and have time to read a lot :)

[fayefaye]

sindhu, don't oops me! it's true! as for w&p, i spose it picks up but I'm leaving it for a while now.

[Koa]

I keep seeing you say 'spose'... After seeing it 3 times I gathered it means 'suppose'... Is it slang or what? (at first it reminded me of 'spouse', not to mention that 'sposare' is the Italian for 'to marry' ;))

[sam1]

It never picks up, but it is worth reading for the character profiles.

You should read the opening chapters of book. It's a long discussion on freedom v. predestination, and it adds alot to the notes at the end.

When he talks about not having freedom, he does not mean that society forces us to do what we do. Those who conform don't choose to conform, but the guys who donb't conform also couldn't choose.

It's also alot more basic than following society. Society doesn't tell you what flavor ice cream to buy, but you don't have a choice, because there is no freedom. I don't know how such small things affect the world, but he has a good argument that everythung has some small effect on those around you, or some affect on yourself which will later cause you to interact differently with people, and then once it affects others you can't have freedom

[Dick Diver]

Yes it is the whole domino/ripple effect that Napoleon's actions cause such ramifications throughout the continent - and he certainly denigrates Napoleon in his portrayal of him. How can this one small vain man cause such tragedy?

But it is an extremely obvious philosophy. Of course our actions impact on others - Napoleon or Raskolnikov.

If I do something as banal as breathe this oxygen in the air then some plant is going to have some carbon dioxide and further down the line George W Bush is going to breathe the oxygen which that plant produced.

Don't choke on it will you?

[Koa]

(*chokes*)

I'm starting to find W&P extremely interesting, thought I still haven't reached page 400. It is a bit slow...

I've seen all of you talking about the characterisation... they seem so damn flat to me so far, at first they seem real stereotypes! Now I'm starting to see some changes (of course I can't judge the flatness of a character when I've read less than half of the book!), but still some things seem to me almost semplicistic... I'll shut up until I have a total overlook of them...and wonder if I'll remember the beginning when I'll get to the end... :rolleyes:

[fayefaye]

oh, c'mon koa. i like natasha rostov and pierre. i want to see him kill his wife towards the end. now there's a good ending. yes, spose means suppose. as for what everyone else said, it's weird that i agree with someone named 'dick diver' but i do. but it wasn't just napoleon's actions that caused the ramifications; i thought that was tolstoy's point; that we blame world leaders when in retrospect how much did they control everything? what force moves nations? some short guy like napoleon, or something bigger? destiny? maybe everyone's everyday little actions in the end have the biggest impact whilst society as a whole doesn't even realise. i don't think that tolstoy means that society directly controls what we do either, but that they condition us to behave a certain way, and in doing so limit our effective freedoms.

[Koa]

aaaaaah why the hell did i read those first lines up there fayefaye??? i hope i misread or i'll forget what i read cos that was a real spoiler... :(

i didn't read the rest of your post after that... :rolleyes:

well as i said, i just think the characters will improve...today i realised that i should started studying and reading stuff for uni... so there won't be much time left for war&peace, *sighs* now that i was starting to really enjoy it... well i'll have time if i cut my time on the internet, but i can't possibly see that happening *addicted*...uff i want to finish w&p before the end of the year, at the rate i was reading lately it seemed possible... but i really should start working on my next exams... :( - rant over :oops: -

[Dick Diver]

OY! What's wrong with the name Dick Diver????? :P

[fayefaye]

aaaaaah why the hell did i read those first lines up there fayefaye??? i hope i misread or i'll forget what i read cos that was a real spoiler... cry

i didn't read the rest of your post after that... roll

well as i said, i just think the characters will improve...today i realised that i should started studying and reading stuff for uni... so there won't be much time left for war&peace, *sighs* now that i was starting to really enjoy it... well i'll have time if i cut my time on the internet, but i can't possibly see that happening *addicted*...uff i want to finish w&p before the end of the year, at the rate i was reading lately it seemed possible... but i really should start working on my next exams... ( - rant over oops -

THAT'S NOT ACTUALLLY WHAT HAPPENS KOA!! i haven't even finished reading it. that's what i'd LIKE to see happen. NOT something i know actually happens.

[Koa]

Aaah cool... I was wondering... I can calm down now ;) I need to finish it. Quickly. If only it was easier to take the book around with me, I'd read a lot on the bus....

[fayefaye]

oh, nothing dicky.

[Dick Diver]

Merci beaucoup:D

[fayefaye]

de rien.

[fayefaye]

this has gone off topic. so i'm picking it up from the bottom of the heap, dusting it off and putting it back up here.

let's discuss freedom versus destiny or conformity.

i think a while back someone brought up the idea of choice and compared it to availablity or opportunity, like that of ice-cream. the thing about that, is that most would be taken to thinking that if there were any other flavours that they wanted, then they would be produced because demand would exist. consequently, we don't want any flavours that aren't produced because we don't think they'd be good. for all intended purposes, we are led to believe we have complete freedom of choice. or are we being brainwashed into believing that it's what we want when it's not?

[sam1]

I did not really understand what you wrote in your last post. We c\definately feel like we have free choice, and choose things because we want them, but Tolstoy says that it is an illusion. Every 'choice' that we make was predestined.

I don't understand how tolstoy was religious. He presents the problem that religion requires free choice because God can't send people to heaven or hell based on where and when they were born. Tolstoy does not give an answer to this question, but he was still religious, and he says that his idea of predestination will one day become a foundation of religion. How does he reconcile them?

[fayefaye]

i thought it was not 'predestined' but primarily controlled by society's conditioning of us. as for predestination and religion-that makes no sense at all; ppl would have to have free choice for religion.....

[tigre]

first of all, to introduce myself. this is my first time communicating on something like this. war and peace happens to be my favorite book. i read it over a period of three months a little more than a year ago. i picked it up without having any particular reason, not being a student or any aquaintences reading russian literature, of which i was already impassioned with. i have now read other tolstoy, even more dostoyevsky, and have begun pushkin and dead souls. so i am very fond of this question of freedom which tolstoy devoted so many pages.

so i open my volume and this is the paragraph i first see on pg 1429: "only in our conceited age of knowledge-- thanks to that most powerful engine of ignorance, the diffusion of printed matter-- has the question of freedom of will been put on a level on which the question itself cannot exist. in our day the majority of so-called 'advenced' people-- that is, a mob of ignoramuses-- have accepted the result of the researchers of natural science, which is occupied with one side only of the question, for a solution of the whole problem."

so here is my answer, which happens to be, essentially, tolstoy's answer, henry miller's answer, carl jung's answer, and a variety of other notable spirits who we are fortunate enough to speak with the words of. this is the common answer:
THE DEGREE OF PERSONAL CONSCIOUSNESS AND ALL ITS IMPLICATIONS
[QUOTE]wealth and poverty, fame and obscurity, power and subjection, strength and weakness, health and disease, culture and ignorance, work and leisure, repletion and hunger, virtue and vice are all only greater or lesser degrees of freedom
Leo Tolstoy

[fayefaye]

but to what degree? what decides what means greater freedom than others?