Philosophy 249R
Student Name: Jonathan Williams
Presenter Name: Marc Olivier
Lecture Title: Unrest in All Things
Lecture Date: 2/23/23
I. Overall Impressions. Please choose the most satisfactory response.
A. Clarity of Presentation
5 A very technical lecture, which was often difficult to follow
4 An occasionally challenging lecture to follow
3 The lecture was perfectly pitched, in terms of its accessibility
2 Perhaps more time than needed was spent on elementary points
1 I found the lecture too superficial to be truly rewarding
Comments (optional):
A lot of times, I found myself not understanding what he was even talking about; the
presentation and explanation of his ideas were occasionally too decorative and inhibited
clarity of thought.
B. Interesting and Engaging Content
5 An enthralling lecture
4 A very interesting lecture
3 A fine lecture overall, although I found some aspects of it less
intriguing
2 An interesting point here or there, but the lecture was generally
uninteresting to me
1 I was not interested in the lecture
Comments (optional):
1
II. Summary and Exposition
Please provide a brief (one substantial paragraph) summary or overview of the argument,
summarizing succinctly the presenter’s thesis and the key evidence he or she marshalled in
its support.
Dr. Olivier’s main thesis, if I am correct, was that we need to recognize and utilize
the value of playfulness and divine discontent in our research. Creativity and
playfulness are best expressed when we have constraints. Without limits, there
would be chaos. However, when we are given a set of rules to work with, we can
be our most creative selves. The more unusual the constraints, the greater the
creativity. We can actually make connections between objects and ideas which we
never would have been able to see previously. The ability to make connections
between different things is what makes the encyclopedia so valuable. Through the
lens of play, we can see the world in different ways and create connections that
defy the norm. Some examples of this principle include watching a movie from the
perspective of a dinner table and identifying how the table influences the
characters, or creating dangerous tweets by condensing stories into short bits.
III. A Question that You Would Have Asked the Presenter
Could you reexplain everything using language suitable for the average person?
How can I apply the ideas you’re sharing into my own life to be more creative?
VI. Anticipate How You Think the Presenter Might Respond to Your Question
The key to learning these skills probably lies in practice, and learning to set
constraints on your work which will help you to see things in different ways.
V. Response
2
Please provide a brief (approximately one substantial paragraph) personal response to the
presentation. You may wish to mention a potential criticism of the argument, ways in which
the presenter’s argument may be extended, or anything else that you feel would be
relevant.
Overall, there is certainly something there. There is a creativity paradox which the
presenter didn’t mention, but I believe is important to his thesis. The paradox is
that when we master any skill, it is by mastering the fundamental rules or
principles of that thing. Then, once we’ve mastered the basics, we are free to
break them at will to create something new. This idea is best seen in art. Every
artist starts by mastering the basics of drawing within the lines and learning the
fundamental principles of good art. The more advanced they become, the more
they can break conventional practices to create something new. In other words,
you learn the rules in order to eventually break them- within reason. You must
maintain most of the rules; otherwise, there would be chaos. However, you should
never be limited to the scope of tradition.
The principle of divine discontent is that we should never be complacent in our
search for discovery. We should not rely solely on traditional methods to discover
truth, and never stop searching for more.
