Candide: The punishment vs. his crime

When one thinks of Candide, they may often idealize the beginning of his journey as a young man who supposedly commits a crime and is punished soon after. However, crime often differs from one society to another. In today's society, mental state is often regarded; as far as Candide goes, he maintains the same innocent mind as to when he committed this so called "crime".

As such, Candide never really was subject to such a rash punishment, especially when it can easily be considered life changing whereas the so called "crime" wasn't even initiated by him to begin with. Then again, when seen through the perspective of fate, which some people may or may not believe in, the bias given in punishing Candide, may also have been considered the same thing that possibly saved his life, whereas the other residents of the once paradise were killed. It is also the driving force that could serve a purpose against the beliefs that Candide may have relied on and been taught.


In general, Candide's crime doesn't fit the punishment at the most basic level. Whether it really was a punishment in regards to how the consequence of his "crime" led to additional consequences, is questionable.

Who is the modern gadfly?

At a personal level for myself, it's hard to think of someone who poses a similar 'gadfly' reputation as Socrates, especially when considering he did most of his work through the Socratic method of questioning.

The definition of "Gadfly" seems to be someone that upsets public or status quo by proposing upsetting or novel questions, or just simply being an irritant. As far as I can see, Howard Stern seems to fit this description to an extent, especially in his earlier days. Stern is often known for his outrageous and offensive content, often causing disputes and trouble legally for his broadcasters. His remarks are also very forward, and he often speaks exactly how he feels, regardless of whether people will down on him for it. This often does pose irritation towards the 'status quo' and even his own listeners sometimes, while the government is busy fining him for every indecent thing he brings up.

He started off in the radio business in 1977, and by the summer of 1979, had already brought about a 2 day boycott of Shell Oil Company in part of the energy crisis. He has also often made rash comments, such as on April 3, 1995 regarding Mexican Americans, which brought considerable uproar amongst the Hispanic community. Howard Stern is also known for bringing up controversial content such as personal experiences with cybersex and random interviews with Porn actresses (Dec. 12, 2002) with overall disputable topics and activities.

Howard Stern is often coined as one of the main shock jocks, or a radio broadcaster who attracts attention using humor that a significant portion of the listening audience may find offensive.As such, he often breaks 'taboos' and provides indecent material. He has often been the target of many battles with the FCC as well, and dozens of complaints over the years. The totals for fines have been estimated to add up to over $2.5 million under 'indecent programming'.

--------------------------- EDIT ----------------------------------------------

I think it's also safe to say that Tupac Shakur fits even more precisely within the modern gadfly idea. Tupac often talked and brought about ideas that gave a bad reputation for the government and police force. His actions (such as shooting off duty cops; regardless of true reason) shows us his rebellious nature, alongside songs that related to harming cops. However at the same time, he often did show another side of life and racism, and spent time studying many different philosophers and ideas, including Machiavelli.

It's safe to say that authoritarian figures saw him as annoying and chaotic and also irritating. due to his supposedly "negative" influence on subculture and youth. However, the opposite is also true in which he brought many issues out into the open both as a speaker and through his music.

The Unexamined Life

The quote, “the unexamined life is not worth living,” appears to be a well known quote once used by the early philosopher Socrates. Simply defined, the quote refers that lives that are not examined, are honestly not worth living. (The word 'examine' is often defined as "observing or inspecting closely".) It seems that despite such a simple meaning which resides within the quote, there are additional underlying meanings within, with a varying degree of meaning to various people.

Mankind has always been very curious in terms of surrounding and reasoning, therefore it’s expected that we go as far as to being curious as to why we do what we do. We’ve all made mistakes; some religions even call ourselves “sinners”, regardless of how we’ve lived our lives. At the same time, experiences and memories are what define each and every one of us. Without them, we wouldn’t have individual history or roots, nor would we have an understanding of our failures and successes to help us move forward.

Without taking some time to examine this history imbedded within us, we really can’t make a goal in our life to aim for. Without this goal, what use is living? To take up space in the vast world and await one’s death? This often ties directly with the idea of depression in the elderly and disabled, in which they feel that they no longer have a motive to live. This also accounts for many suicides that take place every year throughout the world, often deriving from depression from this state. Without an idea of why one truly wakes up each and every day, there really isn’t a point to wake up at all.

Examining gives our lives a chance to reach a true potential. It gives us a chance to get over the regrets we all go through, but also differentiate and learn from our losses and victory, providing us with more victories to come. Just like in the physical world, every action really does have a consequence. The human life is filled without potential, awaiting to reach its true kinetic state.

Eulogy

Having known Gregory since I was the tender age of 4, I always felt that he was very open minded towards trying new things and very welcoming of new ideas. He failed to disappoint when anyone in need of encouragement or advice came to him; I feel that I was fortunate enough to be one of these people. He may not have been the most optimistic person to mankind, but what he lacked in false hope, he made up with realism and advice to help move you forward in life.

            Not only was Greg a great person to seek advice from, but a great friend who could be trusted to put a smile on your face if you got to know him. He had a heart for pulling pranks and making others laugh, but also had the ability to revert back to all seriousness if called for.

            Despite a wonderful personality, I believe it’s safe to say he had a widespread level of accomplishments as well. Greg played a variety of sports from an early age, excelling in soccer, basketball and swimming as he grew up. If you ever wanted to play a pick up game or race him, he was guaranteed to be a challenge. He also spent a couple of years playing the piano, which he was more than adequate at.

            All in all, I believe that Gregory had a big heart and anyone who took the time to get to know him would see what a great person he was.