You Are What You Think

Picture credit: Brainyquotes.com

The Enlightenment of the 18th century was characterized by many great thinkers who shaped the way we learn about the world around us.  One of the men who laid the foundation for the Enlightenment was Rene Descartes, a Frenchman born in 1596.  He was considered a mathematical genius, and made many contributions to mathematics and the sciences.  

Descartes was a very unique thinker.  He had a burning desire to discover truth, which is something that I think most of us can relate to quite well.  He proposed 4 methods for discovering truth, which I want to very briefly summarize.

1. Never accept something as true just because you like the way it sounds- investigate until you have proof that it is truth.

2. Whenever you encounter a problem, break it down into smaller parts until you can be satisfied you have addressed every aspect of the issue.

3. Start with the simplest answers and work your way up until you can answer the most complicated questions. In other words, start with the basics.

4. Don't stop investigating until you are satisfied that you have thoroughly answered every question that was proposed.

Picture credit: quotl.com

We would do well to learn from Descartes and apply these methods in our lives.  In his "Discourse on Method", Descartes holds that we need to apply these methods to achieve our full thinking potential.  Going off of that, I think it holds true that in order to achieve our full potential as humans, we must learn to think critically and honestly about everything around us.  This requires a lot of humility and diligence, but as we begin to understand the world, we begin to understand ourselves.

The Father of Microbiology

Bacillus megaterium

This rod-shaped bacteria is Bacillus megaterium. This bacteria produces penicillin amides which is used to make commercial penicillin. I performed this gram stain last week, but scientist have been observing microbial life for much longer than that.

The first drawings of bacteria were done by Antonie van Leeuwenhoek in 1676. Leeuwenhoek was what we would call today an optometrist. He made the lenses for peoples' glasses. As he experimented with ways to increase magnification, he developed the earliest form of a microscope, which looked rather like a glorified magnifying glass.

When he discovered the power of this microscope, he began looking at everything he could. Eventually, he had the idea to scrape plaque off people's teeth and examine it under the lens. That is when he saw microscopic little creatures and drew these images.

His drawings are detailed and accurate enough that scientists today can say with significant confidence which bacteria he observed. His discovery of microbial life earned him the title of "Father of Microbiology".

I think Leeuwenhoek's story is highly characteristic of the Enlightenment Era. With this sense of individualism from the Renaissance and the thrill of discovery from the voyages, amateurs everywhere were making monumental discoveries like this.

Image Credit: Courtney Hilton

Rationalism: Friend and Foe to Progress

Rene Descartes was a 17th century French philosopher with an extraordinary skillset in mathematics, the natural sciences, and metaphysics. Today he is known as the Father of Rationalism, and his contributions to society (both scientific and otherwise) have been invaluable. But how did he earn this title?

As a young man, Descartes attended a Jesuit school where he was taught classical rhetoric, philosophy, and mathematics. But Descartes himself said that when he completed his schooling, “I found myself beset by so many doubts and errors that I came to think I had gained nothing from my attempts to become educated but increasing recognition of my ignorance.”

And so began his unique journey to revolutionize knowledge. In this attitude of doubt and skepticism, Descartes invented a way of thinking we now know as the Cartesian Method. He outlined his method in four very basic steps, which I will now paraphrase:

1. Accept nothing which you do not know for yourself, with utmost clarity, to be true.

2. Breakdown your subject in question to smaller pieces

3. Progress naturally through a series of small conclusions to come to a more complex conclusion. (In other words, order your thoughts in the proper series.) 

4. Make complete conclusions, omitting nothing in the process.

In order to progress through his method, Descartes wiped his slate of knowledge and experience completely clean. At this point, he was forced to question the very fact of his existence-- refusing, of course, to accept it as a fact until he came to the groundbreaking conclusion "cogito ergo sum" (I think therefore I am). Treating this single axiom as his foundation stone, Descartes rationally worked his way up to re-create the world of knowledge and experience he once lived in. In the process, he made an immeasurable impact on mathematics and science. The Cartesian coordinate system, mathematical powers, and diffraction laws are just a few of his great contributions.

But imagine if we all had to work our way up from ground zero.

In essence, we would each throw away our lifetime of knowledge in exchange for the enlightening process of Cartesian Discourse. Sure, we might eventually "make our way" back up to the level of knowledge we have now and would have revolutionized our thinking in the process, but would it really be productive? As a biochemistry researcher, I have come to appreciate leaning on the discoveries of other scientists in my field. The exponential progress in scientific research today is largely due to launching off one another's discoveries, a process benefitted by advances in communication technology. Newton himself stated, "If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants." So while the Cartesian method of thinking allows great personal discoveries, it can be a hindrance to our progress-- and the progress of society-- by preventing us from accepting the work of others, thus placing this burden of work upon ourselves.


End-note: For more fascinating adventures on the principle of axioms (and how our universe cannot stand without them), check out the work of mathematician and philosopher Kurt Godle. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurt_Gödel


Image sources:
https://www.military-history.org/articles/thinkers-at-war-descartes.htm
Immotus Design, https://www.iconfinder.com/icons/648453/cube_function_math_mathematical_power_x_icon
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2VaEOKqcyc
https://www.chegg.com/homework-help/definitions/cartesian-coordinate-system-33

Toleration in an Intolerant Time

John Locke was one of the great minds of the Enlightenment period. Locke was a philosopher who touched on many topics, but potentially the most important topic he dove into, especially for us today,  is that of tolerance. In Locke's day, religious diversity was a divisive factor. Because of the reformation new churches were popping up everywhere and causing divides in the populace. Belief is something that can bring people together when shared, but can tear people apart when beliefs are different. And so it was in this time period, the people were often divided based on belief.

John Locke posed the notion of religious tolerance. His theory on this had three main points, first of which is that mankind doesn't possess the power to know what the true doctrine and true religion is. Second, even if it were possible, you cannot force a belief in anything. And third, forcing a belief in one set of doctrines would cause more discord than letting people follow their own path to Jesus. John wanted to lower the social tensions at the time through tolerance.

This theory is very poignant and was a wonderful thing at that time period. I think it is also vital for us to remember today. If we take religion out of this theory, and just put in beliefs whether political or social, we can apply it to America today. The climate in America has become very divisive because of vastly different views among the parties and people in our country. Locke's theories can help our country immensely. If we could not claim that we have it right and our way is the right way, if we could stop trying to force others to follow our way, if we could just let each other live out life in a way they want, within reason and law, there would be much less contention in our country today.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Locke#Theories_of_religious_tolerance

Observation and Truth

We live in a world where we have literally just about every piece of information that we could need in the palm of our hands.  (Literally. We all have smartphones).  And not only that, but the information that we can find is usually valid and has some sort of evidence to support it.  This practice of having information that is backed by evidence is a product of the Enlightenment period, which has greatly shaped the world that we live in today.

Before this time period, of course individuals sought growth and learning.  After all, that’s what the Renaissance was all about.  However, it was during the Enlightenment that people started looking for validity in the information flowing around.  

There was a man by the name of Francis Bacon in this time period of the Enlightenment who was known for being a philosopher over the scientific method.  He is well-known for his thoughts regarding observation and truth. He made the following statement

“Man, being the servant and interpreter of Nature, can do and understand so much and so much only as he has observed in fact or in through of the course of nature.  Beyond this he neither knows anything nor can do anything.”


This quote marks a crucial turning point where people began looking to science for answers.  It was no longer as common to accept thoughts and theories without any evidence or observation.  This was a huge leap in progress for the world, and because of it, we have access to so much free flowing information that can be validated through evidence.

Image credit: by Frans Pourbus 

Hands-On Anatomy

Vesalius had the models in his book
posing in picturesque environments.

We go to the doctor assuming our physicians know the difference between human and dog anatomy. However, that was not always necessarily the case. Into the 16th century, surgeons would teach their pupils about human anatomy by reading them the texts of Galen, a Greek physician in the second century. Physicians rarely if ever dissected human cadavers themselves; they learned anatomy from Galen's 1300-year-old texts, while Galen himself had never dissected a human cadaver due to religious restrictions.

Andreas Vesalius, a 16th-century physician, had a different approach. He dissected animal corpses, but he also dissected human cadavers and studied them extensively. To communicate (and show off) his knowledge, Vesalius wrote the Seven Books on the Fabric of the Human Body, commonly known as the Fabrica.

In the Fabrica, he included detailed descriptions and woodcuts of every layer of the body, from bones to nerves. Vesalius worked with commissioned artists to depict anatomy from multiple previously unseen perspectives. His goal was to clearly communicate the details of human anatomy to physicians and students. The Fabrica was so successful, cadaver dissections began to be more common. 

Advancement and a call for simplicity.

During the Enlightenment the world became a bit smaller, world commerce was a young but growing idea pushed by Europeans and the many of the scientific discoveries helped people understand more about the world around them. As people flocked to salons to discuss the pressing ideas of the time, others found that solitude brought real answers. Rousseau's call to for simplicity as response to the growing corruption and complexity is a theme that has been repeated and still occurs today. 

Throughout the eighteenth century new secular ideas came forth that helped people better understand nature gain greater mastery over it. Yet despite all of this forward movement, some people saw the problems that society still had, or that it had developed and sought for ways to help cure the "rot" of society. Enter Rousseau, who put forth the idea of "noble savages," that essentially society was a corrupting factor and that there was a need to return to nature. He explains in several of his books his belief that humanity is innately good, but corrupted by society because humans were originally solitary and that over time the creation of society has brought out the bad side of humanity. 

What I personally found interesting in this was the focus on nature and embracing a more secluded life. Studies in psychology have shown that nature, and the lack thereof, does in fact have a big impact on human beings. There was an experiment done on both the psychological and physical impact living with or without nature has on people and interestingly enough, being in contact with some of nature does have a measurable impact on our mental and physical health. Although society continues to be further and further removed from nature, it may be helpful to remember Rousseau and incorporate nature more into our increasingly urban world. 

Picture credits: Portrait of Jean-Jacque Rousseau by Maurice Quinten de la Tour is public domain

Her Portrait, Their Palace

The Baroque era is known for its “emotional richness and technical complexity.”  This was largely manifest in the ostentatious architecture of this period as opposed to a simple structure.  It was dramatic, theatrical, and elaborate effects and decorations.  For example, look at the architecture of the Blenheim palace in England.

Blenheim Palace

The size is intimidating, and the stone work adds to the intensity of the architecture.  Vaulted ceilings, impressive murals, and intricate detail, and grand staircases are a few of the features that typified the baroque architecture in the Blenheim palace.

sor Juana Inés de la Cruz

In my Spanish literature class we studied a poem by sor Juana Inés de la Cruz that she wrote during the Baroque era.  She was born out of wedlock in Mexico and later became a nun.  Much of her efforts were geared toward prejudice against women and minorities.  Her poem, “A Su Retrato” (or “To Her Portrait”) is about how a beautiful and impressive portrait of a woman is a disillusionment of the what’s really underneath the what appears on the surface.  Flattery has sought to hide the wrinkles that come with old age and the passing of time, but when it comes down to it “this coloured counterfeit” of a painting is really “corpse and dust, shadow and nothingness" (source).

This poem, written in the baroque era, made me think back to the grandiose architecture.  Was there harm in this specific characteristic of the baroque era?  Was it a disillusionment of something that would disappoint as each layer was peeled back until nothingness remained?  Should they have returned to simplicity, too?  Or was there a separate, more valuable purpose to this art?

Image sources: Blenheim Palace (via Literary Festivals), sor Juana Inés de la Cruz (via biography.com)

Clickbait: Enlighten Me!

A couple of months ago I came across an article on Facebook that had gone “viral”. Interested in why the article has so many shares and intrigued by the edgy title, I clicked the link to read more. Nodding  my head in agreement with some points the article made, but I began to wonder who this mystery writer was that I am allowing to have influence over my thoughts and feelings. When I scrolled down to the bottom, I was surprised to find that whoever this person was, they had absolutely no credentials or qualifications to give me advice. This person could have been the most confused writer in the world, but thousands of people were taking their words to heart and sharing with others!

Of course bloggers and amateur writers (such as ourselves) are not out to trick anyone, but rather to share their thoughts about a specific topic. But as a scientist in training, I can’t help but to question the validity and credibility of what I read. As I continue learning about the Enlightenment period, I see similarities in our own day. Although a focus on knowledge and intellect had been a focus since  the beginning of the Renaissance period, it wasn’t until the Enlightenment that people began to not only seek after learning, but after the right kind of learning that was supported by facts. Much like the scientific literature of our day must be verified by experts in their fields, the Enlightenment period gave rise to men such as Francis Bacon, Rene Descartes, and Galileo Galilei. These men were among the first to call for scientific proof of discoveries rather than just words and theories.

As I look back at the progress that humanity has made since the beginning of the Enlightenment period, I would argue that this push for scientific evidence and support has been one of the most influential occurrences for our time. Although we still enjoy the clock bait that contains the musings of the most passionate closet bloggers, fact checking is truly what has led to the progress we have made as humanity in science. This has allowed for us to build off of the humanistic ideals of the Renaissance as we work together and build off of previous research that has been done in order to solve the of the greatest problems that face humanity. Thanks to the scientific process established in the Enlightenment period, we can seek enlightenment that is of the highest quality.

Image source: https://thenextweb.com/facebook/2016/08/04/facebook-officially-declared-war-clickbait/

Left Brain Right Brain

Humanity is a vast pool of experience and skill sets. When in need, it usually gets what it wants.

Think of the Renaissance. Breaking off from the iron grip of the Catholic Church and inventions allowing for less manual labor, people were capable of pursuing the arts in a way they never had before. Common people idolized some of the most famous artistic minds this world has seen- Shakespeare, Michelangelo, da Vinci, etc. These people could thrive in a world that truly valued the way they could think outside the box. Pyschologist Roger Sperry said this way of thinking depended on the right side of the brain.

Our Approximate Location is...: The Sextant's Beginnings

A rather stylized copy of the original

In the old days of naval navigation, sailors would have to rely on the stars to direct them wherever they needed to go. Even the invention of the compass could only help as to telling you where North is, but not necessarily where you currently are. To do that, you had to stare directly at a celestial body, usually the Sun or Polaris depending on the time of day, and give an estimate as to it's angle versus the horizon, this is used to determine latitude. Seems simple, right? Finding longitude at the time, meanwhile, was almost impossible. It required guessing at the distance and angle of the moon to some other large mass body, which at a glance, especially on cloudy or new moon nights, is simply unreasonable to expect any decent results from. This is what prompted the need for a device that could alleviate this concern in the form of the Octant, the predecessor to the Sextant.

Cue the entrance of the Octant's inventor... er, inventors. Funnily enough, two different people have claimed to have invented the octant at around the same time, and the evidence points to the conclusion that they had invented it separately without any knowledge of the other. These people in question are Thomas Godfrey (an American optician, and according to sources from after his death, someone who legitimately had OCD), and John Hadley (an English mathematician). With the octant's invention, a sailor could simply see through the scope vertically and with the mathematical compass attached to it, determining the sun's angle was easy as pie. While still more difficult, determining longitude became magnitudes easier due to the Octant being able to be used as ruler as well. With this invention, navigation became something far easier compared to before it's inception.

I'll admit, I found it funny that such an important invention was "invented" by two people simultaneously. It reminds me of my own favorite past time, writing stories, where in I would try to write what I thought was a unique idea, but the moment I showed it to friends, I would inevitably be redirected to another author who did a story based on the same exact idea. Perhaps creativity is dead, but at least coincidence is funny occasionally.

Image Credit: "Octant de Ramsden" obtained via Wikimedia Commons

The Garden of Eden Post Reformation

The Adam and Eve narrative has been subjected to several different interpretations that have shaped the way we as humans view ourselves. Ironically, the narrative caused Reformation Christians to argue both for and against humanism.

In the time of The Renaissance and The Reformation, the idea of the divine being was the driver behind humanism. Authority was no longer limited to the sovereign state but extended to the sovereign individual. Men and women had more opportunity at this time in Europe than they had in a very long time. With this opportunity came the ability for mankind to create a value system for themselves and decide the most meaningful actions they could take to justify their suffering.  However, in light of easy access of the Bible, many read the Adam and Eve narrative and seemed to change their mind on the source of suffering and the state of being.

The genesis of man was key to Christian's post Reformation (1600-1700 AD) understanding of the nature of mankind. Their understanding was not in line with the Christian humanists from the beginnings of The Reformation (1400-1600 AD). Due to grossly oversimplified interpretations of the Garden of Eden narrative, the man was no longer a divine being. Mankind was interpreted as misogynistic, evil, and weak because of how people at the time interpreted Genisis. The impact that these interpretations nearly took society back to a feudal system like thinking as Hobbes famously made the argument that mankind desperately needed a strong governing force.

Despite the enlightening influences that came out of The Reformation, it came with its disadvantages. The truth that was meant to set people free, ended up putting them back in the 'evil' box they just escaped.



Image Credit: https://chrislinzey.com/2013/08/01/good-vs-evil/

The Subjective Nature of Art

Of all the things that we have kept track of throughout history, one of the most influential ones has to be art. We have made incredible efforts to preserve so many paintings, sculptures, songs, and other works of art to study the various styles that were utilized by people during different periods of time.


One period that is well known for it's art is the Baroque Period of the 17th century. This period stood out amongst many others as it's music and visual arts developed a very distinctive style from previous ages and eras. According to Drogin, "the are of the 1600's, called Baroque, is characterized by emotional richness and technical complexity that goes beyond the realism and control of renaissance art."

Technology's Effect on the Scientific Method

I have often wondered about the relationship between the Enlightenment and contemporary advances in technology. How vital were new inventions to the success of the philosophy of the scientific method? 

But, What Do You Do?

Sir Francis Bacon ended his public life as a disgrace. In the end he was pardoned by the king, but we don’t mention his criminal record when we quote him or celebrate his achievements. I’ve gone 26 years hearing all kinds of things about the man and how his work led to society as we know it, and I’m just now learning that as one of the most powerful government officials in England he was taking bribes. It wasn’t even just accusations fabricated for some power grab; he admitted being guilty.

Reading about his thoughts and his life, I was tempted to forget it. Many of his important ideas don’t at all seem new because they are so woven into how we look at the world. But, if he’d been a politician today, we’d have had the same reaction they did back then. The only difference being that there would be no king’s pardon at the end of his punishments. Anything important thing he would have said would have been tainted.

But, we don’t think that way about him because of everything he did. The episode Up in Smoke from Aaron Mahnke’s Cabinet of Curiosities tells the story of how even at the end of his life he helped discover how the cold can preserve meat (great story). The man even helped invent the reason why we can have grocery store chains. Do we continue to hold him accountable as a corrupt politician? Or do we let him off? And what does that answer say about our modern political climate?

Image credit to wikimedia.org

The world we live in is truly a global world. Messages can be sent to the other side of the world in the blink of an eye. New inventions and technologies are shared at the click of a button. World leaders communicate with those they lead by

This was not always the case. We often refer to the enlightenment period and scientific revolution as a deluge of new ideas, models, and inventions. However, I have found that not all of the things that were "discovered" during this era were original ideas. 

The primary example is that of the discovery of the heliocentric solar system model presented by Nicolaus Copernicus. Before Copernicus, the general belief in Christian Europe is that of a geocentric solar system where the Earth is the center of the universe. The idea is consistent with Christian beliefs.

Heliocentricity was discovered long before Copernicus by the Indian astronomists.  The earliest writings to support a heliocentric solar system was in the 8th-9th centuries of Vedic texts. This is several hundred years before Copernicus was even born. Unfortunately, The world was made of several isolated civilizations. This changed in the late 15th and 16th centuries when voyages of discovery began to connect the world. 

The spread of information was often very slow before modern times. Discoveries such as the heliocentric model were rediscovered by several different civilizations because information took years, sometimes centuries to be shared. Today, new discoveries travel at the speed of light. 

Image Credit: Solar System by WikiImages, licensed by Pixaby under CC

The Bugs And the Bees

We all go through phases and cycles in our lives, but there's one that I've never been able to escape- I love bugs. It may sound like I'm joking, but I'm not. I fell in love with insects (especially ants) when I was a kid and I've never kicked it. Being a young girl obsessed with bugs wasn't the most popular thing to be, but it was who I was, and I really couldn't help it.

One of Merian's butterflies

I think that's why I felt such a strong an immediate connection to Maria Sibylla Merian, an entomological (bug scientist) painter from the Enlightenment period.  Born in Frankfurt Germany, Merian became intrigued with silk worms, and the possibility of them transforming into butterflies.She collected as many worms as she could find, watched them transform, and recorded their metamorphosis in painting.

Merian went on to record thousands of insects in painting, and her work as a naturalist illustrator has been considered the foundation of modern entomology, a field very dear to me. What's most interesting to me about Maria Sibylla Merian, however, is not just that she made these great contributions, but the circumstances that she made them under.

In the mid to late 1600's when she was illustrating, women were all but completely disregarded in the field of science. Merian's landmark book about the transformation of caterpillars into butterflies was ignored by scientific institutions because it was in German. Regardless of this, she went on a two year excursion to Suriname and discovered and painted enough new species of plant and insect to fill a book.

In a way, I feel like Merian was not only a crucial part of the Enlightenment and Scientific Revolution, but also a symbol of it. She strove on in the face of tremendous odds, she broke ground, she paved the way. But most importantly, she was interested in the metamorphosis of one remarkable thing into another, in observing that change and recording it. When it comes down to it, what else was the Enlightenment really about?

Photo Credit

Take a Step Back

Following the Reformation, people started to pick up the pieces of their faith and understanding and start putting things back together. Now that they were free to think and act as they pleased (to a certain extent) people started forming new belief systems based on the rapidly progressing scientific discoveries and radical political views. Those who already had shaken faith started to wonder if religion was even necessary. All these conflicting views—while bringing about a lot of good changes in the world—caused just as much contention. 

I think that during the Age of Reason social dynamics began to change. Because people could think for themselves, they didn't have to rely on what anyone else thought or said; they could form their own opinions. With so many new advances and discoveries in science, politics, philosophy, etc. there began to be a larger divide between the different schools of thought. Everyone began to form their own opinions which caused a rift in the societies. Thomas Paine, a revered writer and "thinker," was even thrown in jail for a time while in France for his beliefs.

Today at the office where I work, I overhead two of my coworkers discussing politics. Interested, I went into the office and listened to what they each had to say. The discussion ended with, "no more discussing politics." While the Age of Reason was absolutely crucial to the progression of society, there are negative side effects that have only gotten worse. With so many different views, it's hard to remember that in the end, most everyone is trying to achieve the same thing: truth and happiness.

Image credit: Éléments de la philosophie de Newton of 1738 (public domain images via Wikimedia Commons)

Keep Calm and Keep a Journal

The Post-Reformation period lead to several “neoclassical” and contemporary ideologies forming in social, political, and religious atmospheres. Human development in knowledge of the natural world was drastically climbing upward and improving society in many ways. It was also the era in which several important events changed the course and tone of human development such as the Plague of 1665 in London, the Great London Fire in 1666, and the Restoration of the Stuart Monarchy in 1660.

Instead of buying history textbooks (no offense textbook writers), how can a society in the 21^st century understand how events such as these affected those living in this era of Enlightenment? Through personal diaries, of course!

Samuel Pepys contributed greatly to the understanding of the above-mentioned events with his first-hand accounts from his personal diary, published posthumously. What is interesting about Pepys is that his personal diary was definitely never meant to be shared as it not only contained a detailed account of the reconstruction of London after the Great Fire, but also his multiple, rather scandalous, romantic affairs. Yikes.

Here is an excerpt from his diary of some of the aftermath Great London Fire (keep in mind Pepys was part of the politics behind the new building standards that would emerge from the Fire):

"As soon as dined, I and Moone away and walked through the City, the streets full of nothing but peple and horses and carts loaded with goods, ready to run one another over, and removing goods from one burned house to another..."

Despite those intimate details (and the fact that Pepys probably literally rolled over in his grave from embarrassment), the importance and value of a first-hand account is immense and helps our modern society understand the ‘fontes’ of knowledge that so greatly shape our culture.

(Also, learn from Pepys and keep a personal journal, but with caution, because it may be published after you die.)

Image Credits: "Samuel Pepys" and  "Diaries of Samuel Pepys" (Public domain images via Wiki Commons)

Reflections on Vivaldi

About five years ago, I took a beginning class in music. I had played the flute for 10 years and had gotten pretty good at it, so I knew a little about music but not much about the different types. Lucky for me, the class specifically looked at the differing eras of music and what made them stand out from the other eras.

Antonio Vivaldi

I had listened to what I considered “classical music” all my life. My grandparents played it often and it was usually going on the radio whenever we’d drive to the store. I enjoyed the instruments and the occasional opera singer. Unfortunately, I was slightly embarrassed to learn in my class that it is not correct to label all old music as being “classical.”

Antonio Vivaldi
One composer that I loved turned out to be one of those “non-classical” composers. He was actually part of the Baroque era of music, one era before “classical.” Upon researching him, I learned that most of his music is actually just exercises he had written for his students to practice. He worked at what was considered an orphanage, and the girls there were known for their musical abilities. Vivaldi’s exercises helped them to learn to read music quickly, play precisely, and increase their finger strength and speed. The frequent 'plunkiness' of Baroque music gives it it's own distinction from the other eras.

Reflection
Vivaldi was one of the greatest composers of his era, and yet most of his compositions are exercises. It seems natural to conclude that all of us would benefit from paying more attention to the “exercises” in our life— the seemingly mundane things that, with practice, can be turned into something beautiful.

Image Credit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_Vivaldi

Not Meant for Oppression

There is only so much a human being can take. We are not meant for oppression, and this is clearly proven as we study history.

The oppressive nature of the Catholic Church overshadowed any good that it meant to offer. With the advent of the printing press, we began to see people finally have the opportunity to express themselves. Ideas poured out like a firehose, and there was no going back. From this time forward, each new era saw even more and more human creativity and determination to express oneself both individually and collectively.

Of course, along with the positive effects of freedom came the negative: war and destruction and even more oppression in other ways. I am guessing that had the Catholic Church not been so domineering over the centuries, we might not have seen such a severe pushback.

We can take this “story” of history, learn from it, and carry out better relationships in our families. Too often, we see domineering and dogmatic parents raising their children with a determination that the children will grow up to do and be everything the parents want them to. When this doesn’t happen, there is a division in families just as we saw in the peoples of our past.

Children do not like to be told how to think and what to believe. As parents, it is our job to allow them to find their own way, guiding them along with a hand of safety and a heart of love. To be sure, we will not like nor approve of many of their choices. But this is not a problem to “go to war” over. Instead, let us embrace the good and learn from the difficulties of watching others use their agency in their own lives.

Let us be the best examples of what tolerance should be.

https://pixabay.com/en/rope-wall-woman-anxiety-girl-gray-1655780/