A world of fun facts: (Check in regularly for updates)
My name is Mrs. Jones and I teach at Valhalla High School. This is my ninth year at VHS. I have taught every grade level from Freshmen to Seniors. I also coached JV girls and guys’ volleyball for three years.
First name: Erin
Middle name: Kelly (is my maiden name– I had it officially changed; I was born with Kristine)
Grew up in: Thousand Oaks (known to locals just as T.O.; located 3 hours north, between L.A. and Santa Barbara)
Family: Mom and Dad (Dad is now a high school counselor; he was my anatomy teacher in high school and the varsity football coach), younger sister Megan (lives in Ventura), younger brother Scott, three nephews and one niece
High School: TOHS, Home of the Lancers– green & white; Kurt Russell and Kramer (from Seinfield) supposedly went to school here (before my time); I played b-ball with Marion Jones
College: Point Loma Nazarene University (I miss my ocean view!) I played volleyball there as a setter and defensive specialist. Majored in Literature with a concentration in English Education.
Masters: SDSU
Married: To Bryan, history teacher at Grossmont High. We were married at Christ Lutheran in Pacific Beach in 2002.
Hobbies: Camping, hiking, backpacking (we love the Sierras), reading, watching sports, napping, traveling
I wish I could… sing well, dance, hit a volleyball (remember I was a setter…and I’m short), afford a house near the ocean, win a medal in the Olympics, draw (I can do no better than stick figures), speak Spanish fluently, fly…
Fav TV: The Office, Lost, The Amazing Race, football (I love my Chargers and USC Trojans! I am a bit of a fanatic! I hope you are NOT a Raiders fan…)
Fav movies: Life is Beautiful, The Cider House Rules, A River Runs Through It, Dead Poets’ Society, Elf, Into the Wild, Once
Fav books: Traveling Mercies, The Color Purple, The Kite Runner, The Red Tent, The Scarlet Letter, Into the Wild, Of Mice and Men… I could go on
Fav word: TENACITY
Fav Ice Cream: Rocky Road, but I do prefer frozen yogurt (with cookie dough!)
Fav foods: I could literally eat Mexican food every night (Casa de Pico is my fav Mexican restaurant), frozen yogurt, California rolls, candy (JellyBellies, Sour Patch Kids), crepes in France, tri-tip, avocados (Can you tell it’s dinnertime? 
Best adventures: Six weeks last summer in Europe– Greece, Italy, Switzerland, and France; making it to the top of Mount Whitney; a summer teaching English in Cuenca, Ecuador; time spent in the Dominican Republic and Chiapas, Mexico; a road trip of the western US, including four national parks; running in a couple of 10Ks and a half-marathon this past spring… and hopefully many more to come!
Questions? Comments? What else do you want to know? Leave a reply below!
Have you seen the movie Across the Universe? It is pretty new and I think you would enjoy it because it has quite a few references to transcendentalism in it. (Transcendentalism is seriously one of my favorite philosophies now!)
I’m really excited for the challenge.
Hey Marisa,
We were going to see it on Friday, but we ended up seeing Elizabeth– the Golden Age (it was very good also; Elizabeth rocks!). I am hoping to see Across the Universe soon though– I’ve heard it’s great!
What kind of references to Transcendentalism does it make?
Has anyone else seen Across the Universe? What did you think?
Oh yeah, I forgot about Elizabeth. I might have to see that.
The references are pretty brief actually so you have to be listening. One of the men starts to talk about how he has never met this fellow transcendentalist on “this or any other plain.” He also has this philosophy on how all the people in New York are ahead of the rest of America for being individuals. He thinks that they are strong because they are all individuals together. It’s pretty interesting.
TENACITY, n.
A certain quality of the human hand in its relation to the coin of the realm. It attains its highest development in the hand of authority and is considered a serviceable equipment for a career in politics. The following illustrative lines were written of a Californian gentleman in high political preferment, who has passed to his accounting:
Of such tenacity his grip
That nothing from his hand can slip.
Well-buttered eels you may o’erwhelm
In tubs of liquid slippery-elm
In vain — from his detaining pinch
They cannot struggle half an inch!
‘Tis lucky that he so is planned
That breath he draws not with his hand,
For if he did, so great his greed
He’d draw his last with eager speed.
Nay, that were well, you say. Not so
He’d draw but never let it go!
I jope everyone is having a good weekend! Good luck on finals
Sorry I meant to say hope and not jope. I think finals are already making me crazy!
That would be a fair assumption. Every night during finals, I couldn’t get to sleep until two in the morning… of course, now I don’t sleep until 3, but hey, we’re on break.
I just watched “I heart Huckabees” and it’s a really great movie. It is a movie where the main character gets thought about romantic/transcendentalist philosophies but after being screwed over, mainly because of his new way of looking at life, a women teaches him nihilistic/absurdist philosophies.
Has anybody else seen this movie?
I just bought Across the Universe a couple days ago. It’s kind of trippy in some parts and about half the movie is left up to interpretation (because everything happens for a reason).
Basically, that guy that Marisa was talking about believes that he, as well as the man he wants to meet, are pursuing what he calls “transcendental perception.” But he finds that the other man doesn’t want to meet him because he’s busy, and he leaves with most of the passengers, leaving the others with, “Hey, you’re either on the bus, or you’re not.”
There’s also a couple other things… for one, the main character deplores the antiwar protests because, well, it doesn’t affect him since he’s British, but also because it’s one thing to protest against conformity, but using the fact that you protest to take advantage of those who agree with you isn’t helping anyone. And the more they protest, the more they become like the government they’re protesting against. One line from the movie–”I thought the other side dropped bombs.”
On the whole, it’s an excellent movie. If you’re with someone you love, pay attention to the love story. If you watch it by yourself, watch how the world changes and how the characters change with it.
And Vissuet, I totally thought that movie was about the presidential candidate until I looked it up on IMDb. The database mentions existentialism (no, I haven’t seen the movie), which I think is very close to transcendentalism in itself. And the ending sounds like the Oingo Boingo song “No One Lives Forever,” which basically says that you’re going to die anyway, so why not be happy, if not deliriously so?
I didn’t mention the ending in my post, it was just an event that occurs halfway through the movie.
But I think the ending had a different message then “so why not be happy.”
It was named I heart Huckabees because Mike Huckabee was the governor of Arkansas, Wal-Mart’s home state, at the time of the film’s release. You shouldn’t have judged the horse by the saddle it wears.
Well Existentialism should be a branch of Transcendentalism due to Emerson influencing Nietzsche with “Self-Reliance.” And I would call Nietzsche one of the fathers of Existentialism.
The why not be happy question reminded me of the question of which is better, Ignorance but happiness or Knowledge but sadness. My temporary answer is if one has reached Grade-Two thinking then one has no choice but to choose sadness, where even when you are happy you start to think its an illusion or a rationalization (which House defined as a lie we tell our selves to be happy) but if one is still a Grade-Three thinker then you do have a choice.(I think its a sub-conscience choice though where you do not know what is to come if you do choose knowledge) The ones who choose knowledge have taken a step towards Grade-Two thinking and the ones that don’t, stay with 90% of the crowd. But then i realized that the answer can not be determined due to the fact of we don’t know what the meaning of life or our goal in life and chances are that we will never know. So the question becomes a question who’s answer changes as our philosophy of life changes. To know the difference between Grade-Two thinking and Grade-Three Thinking (If you can call it thinking) read “Thinking as a Hobby.” I found it to be the most useful system that one can use to stereotype (I think stereotyping people on the way they think is the only ethical form of stereotyping)
I didn’t want to have to wait before reading the entire post to respond to the whole saddle thing. I didn’t judge the movie based on its title–I merely drew a conclusion from an association with a similarly named person. We make assumptions all the time when we write.
And yes, I did take the saddle bit personally. I could have said the same about the comment itself.
I’ve actually thought about that concept, as well. The most common argument you’ll see is the case of Adam and Eve and original sin, biting of the tree of knowledge and therefore being banished from eternal happiness. I believe that we should indeed pursue knowledge for the betterment of mankind, because if we stop learning, then society comes to a standstill and our culture stagnates.
There are, however, concessions we have to make as individuals. My father–one of the most influential people in my life in surprisingly subtle ways–works with many Indian engineers and has come into close contact with their culture. Having been raised a Catholic, he cannot imagine such a thing as 23-or-so gods. But he accepts the knowledge that there are some things in this world that we, as individuals, are not meant to understand.
That leads me to believe that there is not a meaning to life, but rather, meanings. Each of us has his/her own specific purpose we are meant to realize, and as time passes, we do not realize the meaning of life, but the meaning of our lives. What that means is that you shouldn’t pursue knowledge of every possible thing there is to know about life, the universe, and everything, but rather pursue everything there is to know about yourself.
In short, humans can find the meaning of all life by finding the meaning of our individual lives. When you add that all up, you get the meaning of all humans’ lives. And even that isn’t the answer we’re looking for, because it’s just human. There are things we are not meant to understand.
Douglas Adams was a genius. In Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, the Earth is Deepthought MkII, a more powerful version of the computer constructed to calculate the meaning of life, which happened to be “42.” The reason it doesn’t make sense is that we don’t know the question to the meaning of life. The Earth was designed to calculate that question, and all life on Earth was to be part of that computer. The conclusion I came to while writing is just like that… sometimes I scare myself.
Sorry it was so long. I wonder if anyone reads this column anymore…
For anyone who’s interested, the Earth is demolished before it can finish its calculations. Go read the quintet, it’s actually very interesting.
And apologies to Mrs. Jones, who has these philosophical blotches to stain her “About Mrs. Jones” page forever. We should really make a separate thread or a forum or something.
I was just kidding about the saddle thing (its hard to express a humorous tone.)
But anyways the flaw in your argument and in Douglas Adam’s argument is that you can not prove that a meaning of life exist. And this assumption that a meaning of life exist is just as big as the assumption that God exist. And the worst part of assumptions are that we can not obtain certainty by them. Thus, if you study Descartes, you would know that we can not be certain of anything except our existence and that 1+1=2 and other math stuff. Which sucks because no matter what, it is impossible to know anything about anything.
As Voltaire would say “Doubt might be unpleasant but certainty is absurd.”
I believe that this doubt makes us miserable enough to search for enough information to be less miserable. Thus this is my temporary answer for the motive to pursue knowledge. Those who don’t realize that certainty is absurd are the religious ones. Religion keeps us ignorant but happy.
David and Kevin, that was extremely interesting to read. Although Kevin, I sometimes question whether you really have a passion about what you’re talking about or if you just really want to prove David wrong. You do make a few good points though and you are entirely entitled to your opinion.
David, thanks for telling me to read this. Hahahaha.
YAY ACROSS THE UNIVERSE!
By the way Mrs. Jones, if you still haven’t been able to see Across the Universe, I will gladly let you borrow it.
Then I must be a religious humanist, because I have faith in myself and the humans I trust.
No, we can’t prove anything. But that’s because we can’t find it because so many humans are lost and don’t search for their purpose. I’d like to think that there’s a meaning to life. If not, why don’t we all just kill ourselves? It would put an end to everything bad in the world. Absurd, isn’t it?
Vissuet… House looks for meaning. He is not nihilistically cynical. He has a hope, but he is misguided in his pursuit because he cannot accept what cannot be proven. It’s precisely why they call House a drama… Dr. House is a tragic figure, nothing more.
Certainty, I think, is not absurd. For instance, I am certain that what I do today affects what happens to me tomorrow, and I will do whatever I can to ensure that things turn out the way I want them to, because my heart drives my passions and my mind gives me focus. No, I cannot know what the future holds, that much is clear. However, I can affect the present to make the future become what I want it to be.
That would be part of my search for my purpose.
Marisa, how can I know the difference between thinking I have passion and having passion. To put it in logical terms:
If P then Q
If T then Q
Q therefore P or T
So the only way I can know that I have passion is if I was the one defining passion. If I didn’t have passion but I thought I did I would think I have passion. If I had passion then I would think that I have passion. Thus in the end I know nothing for sure. So your not the only one questioning if I have passion or not. Of course it took me a while to fully understand the logic behind this so I can see how its very confusing to someone who probably hasn’t read any Hume or Descartes.
Also motives are irrelevant when it comes to philosophical conversations. Knowing the motives allows you to judge people and usually this judging fools people into thinking the logic behind ad hominem.
David, I can’t really disprove religion due to being based on unprovable premises so I’m not going to argue against the first two paragraphs. But about the why live part, I think those who thought that life is not worth living died (probably suicide or something along those terms) while those who don’t question what-so-ever live on. Its simply psychological evolution. (This is just a hypotheses which again being part of science is less provable then nonscientific stuff, if that makes sense) Either that or we like that bird (I forgot the specific name of it) who if one of its eggs falls from the nest it will use its beak and feet to wobble it back into the nest. If the egg is removed after the bird saw that it fell then it would still do the beak and feet thing. So again we have that whole oxygen habit cause we are genetically programed us to have the Fixed Action Patterns. (FAPs) So blame nativism on this one.
I don’t get why you rementioned House, so can please rephrase that paragraph.
And if you have read Descartes you would kinda know that senses can be unreliable. Thus what we get from our senses is not certain. Thus whether today or tomorrow or even the world you live in exists is not for certain. I do think that what you think at this time does influence what you think later because one of the only certainties is Cogito Ergo Sum or what i like to say it Cogito Cogito ergo Cogito Sum (I think I think therefore I think I exist)
I think everyone should watch Across the Universe at least once. It’s a really good movie. I just wish Jude didn’t remind me so much of myself.
I totally agree with Marisa: Kevin does seem much more interested in proving David wrong, rather than proving his own point.
And Kevin, it seems to me that you utilize the words of famed philosophers to prove a point much more than personal experience. While Descartes, Hume, Socrates, Voltaire (shall I go on with your vast knowledge of thinkers?) all have valid thoughts, what are YOURS? I would be interested in your personal experiences much more than what some dead white guy from 500 years ago said.
David, thank you for telling me about what you wrote about Hitchhiker… one of my favorite series (though I have yet to find time to read the last two). Everyone should at least take a look at the books. I made the mistake of seeing the movie before reading the series… READ IT!!!
Did you believe the first two paragraphs were about religion? Of course not. Those are my own beliefs, and are founded based on personal experience. I can prove they are true to myself. Am I trying to push them on you? No. There is no need to get personally indignant in a discussion such as this.
I brought up House because when we speak in person, his example comes to the forefront of my mind when relating to your beliefs and how you’ve come across them. My point in bringing him up is to show him for what he is, not the romanticized martyr the drama makes him.
Senses are all we can rely on. If we have nothing to base our world on, how can we believe it’s real? And if nothing’s real, it’s impossible to debate this any further because in the end, it doesn’t make a difference who we are or what we believe.
Because of that, some of us choose simply not to care. You may look down on them, but they are living their lives while people like us think about this possibly meaningless life and end up getting nowhere at all. That is why it’s better for us to make the concession that our life, our world, exists and has meaning. It’s just something that people accept. If we can’t make an assumption, how do we know where to start?
You are partly right about thinking you think that you exist, I understand that concept, and I’m trying to explain to you the part that you don’t get. None of us can prove that the world around us exists. The keyboard on which I am typing may not even exist. However, I can prove to myself that I exist. If I think, I must have an existence, because I can question that very existence.
Now comes the part about belief. Conceive for a moment that everyone else on the planet has also come to this realization. That means that everyone has proven their existence to themselves. Therefore, everyone exists.
The point is, if you cannot find reality in the world around you, find reality in yourself, and perceive it your way. That is the world that we create for ourselves. Everyone has their own perception of the world. Whatever you perceive for yourself in your own mind is your own reality. If you want to believe that you live in a void in which there is no life meant to live, it’s your belief, and I can accept that.
The bird’s behavior is instinct. The bird’s purpose is to procreate and protect its young so that those birds can go forth and further the species. Humans, on the other hand, obviously exhibit behaviors that are NOT genetically programmed to us, though there are behaviors that are. It is a great insult to humanity to compare the mind of a human to the mind of a bird, and I hope that you do not sincerely believe that all humans operate solely on instinct.
There are three things we choose to do with our lives. We live, we think, or we compromise. The ones who live simply live life and take what comes to them. They are deserving of the same respect as any others, because that is the purpose they have determined for themselves. The ones who think, in the end, never accomplish anything noteworthy because they forget to live. “The artist is nothing without the talent, but the talent is nothing without the work.” The best people compromise. Those who interact with the world consciously and purposefully are, in my opinion, the wisest of any of us. Marisa is one of those people, and she deserves more respect than either of us.
I’m glad that there are others out there who have read the books. In my opinion, the movie, in comparison to the books, is an abomination, and it ended unfairly conclusively. Although there were some rather funny parts to it. The book goes into italics a lot to describe sections of the Guide itself, and I thought the animated portions of the movie in which it does the same thing were well-conceived. Other than that, the movie is loosely inspired by the book at best, and the book is a far better story for its entire lack of a coherent one.
A battlefield of philosophy in a blog’s comments. This class is lookin’ good so far, I have to say.
Your favorite ice cream is Rocky Road huh? Well I just so happen to work at Coldstone. And you know what we have there? COOOKKKIEEE DOOUGGGHHH. myyy favorite. give me an A and I’ll give you some!:) Just kidding. Give me money and I’ll give you some. Not kidding!