I never thought that a philosophical discussion between realism and idealism would take place in my History 390 class.

The discussion began with Professor O’Malley going over “The Medium is the Message” again. I will admit that I actually understand the idea behind “The Medium is the Message” much easier this time, although I will say that I think the Professor should keep the slides accompanying his lecture up for a little longer, as it was difficult for me to write down the notes from the slide, especially when i tried to write down the definitions and the examples that were on the slides, such as how the American History museum is a medium, because it is a means of communication, holding models and artifacts of the past, saying that history does not belong to you, that it is being protected from you. I think it’s an interesting idea, but not one that I’ve given much thought to.

Then again, we had also discussed how some aspects of life, such as texting or compressed music, are normal to us because we grew up into it. It’s not an idea that’s new to me or anything, as the times and culture that we grow up in very much have an influence on the world around us.

The topic shifted into a discussion that has been debated for over two thousand years, the topic of idealism vs realism. An idealist believes that there is a perfect, ideal world somewhere, a model of perfection for everything, whether it be food, clothes, or something grander like justice. It was amusing to me when we discussed the statue of David, pointing out how it is an ideal of the human body. I actually just finished my History 100 class just before, and we discussed the statue of David there as well due to how it was made in the Renaissance, a time that celebrated the human body and humans’ place in the natural world. It was also noted that if you are an idealist, you are probably religious, as the God that one would believe in would be the ideal state of being that one believes in.

A realist is somebody who doesn’t believe in the ideal world. There isn’t really an ideal shirt or ideal food, just items and ideas that are good enough. They can be improved, certainly, but there isn’t really a perfect world that contains the best of everything.

Professor O’Malley challenged us in an interesting way here. He pointed out that if an idealist believed in and worked towards what they considered ideal, then they would search the best food, the best culture, the best clothes that existed. When someone protested that that would be too expensive, Professor O’Malley responded that no one said that living the life of an idealist was easy.

I will say that I consider myself a realist. I don’t believe in an ideal state of anything, but I do thing that things can always be improved. I just find it difficult to believe in a perfect world, since tastes and opinions are always different. Perfection is different for everyone.