Cats Cradle Seminar Reflection

Throughout the seminar, we generally discussed the theme that

Cats Cradle symbolically represents how science and religion address
the need that people have for complex answers about the nature of
being. I personally agree that this theme was prevalent in the book
and that Vonnegut was often making fun of the process of
enlightenment. For example, Ellen brought up the concept of free will
and whether or not people act out of free will or if our lives are more
scripted. This led me to consider if human beings even desire free will
since we search for answers and limitations in spirituality, science, and
organized religions. Sometimes the answers we seek are limitations in
and of themselves. It seems as if Vonnegut is mocking human desire
for answers and the conflicting need for free will. Jessica also brought
up the metaphor of Frank and the ants, which she suggested is how
people view god is almost any religious context. Vonnegut seems to be
further mocking peoples own belittlement of themselves in the quest
for answers.
A question that really intrigued me was when Jessica asked,
what is the purpose/meaning of the cats cradle? I pondered this
many times while reading the book, but during seminar my peers help
me understand the meaning on a deeper level. I came to the
conclusion that the metaphor behind the cats cradle is the vagueness
of importance and meaning. A cats cradle is finding something out of
nothing, by simply giving oneself the illusion that something is real. For
example, the actual cats cradle string trick is forming an x out of a
piece of string, hence forming something out nothing. This relates to
how human beings create figures such as god to explain why the
Earth is the way it is and even how it came about. Eventually, this
creation story became so real to people that they lost the concept that
they created god in the first place. This also applies to science as
humans look for answers within science just as they do with religion.
This excerpt from Cats Cradle exemplifies peoples strong desires for
purpose and answers. In the beginning, God created the earth, and
he looked upon it in his cosmic loneliness.
And God said, "Let us make living creatures out of mud, so the mud
can see what we have done." And God created every living creature
that now moveth, and one was man. Mud as man alone could speak.
God leaned close to mud as man sat, looked around, and spoke. "What
is the purpose of all this?" he asked politely.
"Everything must have a purpose?" asked God.
"Certainly," said man.

"Then I leave it to you to think of one for all this," said God.
And He went away.
While science is facts and ideas without ethics, religion is built
upon belief and ethics. As Vonnegut wrote, science is magic that
works while religion is belief that works and both are used to
answer similar questions. Is there really much of a difference between
religion and science when they both seek the same goal (see the cat?
See the cradle?)? People have created both religion and science,
therefore they can decide which to believe and live by, Live by the
foma that make you brave and kind and healthy and happy. The foma
refers to the harmless untruths to comfort simple souls. Science and
religion are in many ways similar and stir up so many conflicts as one
tries to discredit the other. Vonnegut wrote, Pay no attention to
Caesar. Caesar doesn't have the slightest idea what's really going on
in a mockery of the battle between faith and fact. Almost everything
widely accepted in science is a theory meaning it is not positively true
hence making science a foma. Vonnegut even mocks his own work by
stating Nothing in this book is true. As human beings we attempt to
make sense of what is. Just like pulling the strings of a cats cradle, we
are trying to create something out of nothing.
Although I cannot directly relate all of Cats Cradle to an
experience or another text, I easily can relate the religion of Bokonon
to the Bible or Quran. In Cats Cradle, Vonnegut creates the religion,
Bonkonism, which is similar to Christianity or Islam or many other
faiths. Vonnegut even begins the book with a fictitious gospel "Live by
the foma that make you brave and kind and healthy and happy." The
Books of Bokonon 1:5. The gospel is even quoted in a similar manner
to the Bible. The entire concept of Bokonon mocks religion and how
most religions came into being. Beginning with a prophet showing up
on a never before discovered piece of land, he is being able to
convince people in an underdeveloped area of this new ideology with
promises of raising their standard of living. This is not unlike how
Europeans spread Christianity throughout North America and Africa.
Presumably, the distinct difference between the fictionalized Bokonism
and real religions is that the foundation of Bokonism is formed entirely
on lies; however, one who believes and adheres to these lies will have
peace of mind, and can possibly live a good life.
This seminar furthered my questioning of and interest in the
human experience and how people try to understand their purpose and
place in the world. I often wonder why people feel the need to have an
answer to their unanswerable questions or even a sense of higher

power. Cats Cradle really pushes me to question the concepts people

have created for themselves. While I have never questioned science,
Kurt Vonnegut has shown me that science is not absolute by comparing
it to religion. I now wonder if science is no more truthful than religion
and just a way to answer questions about the creation of our universe
and the existence of mankind. Instead of questioning the larger
purpose of life and creating false explanations, perhaps it is best to just
accept the human condition without needing answers from a man in
the sky or in a lab. Life and the universe are too bizarre and vast to be
able to truly answer any of our questions about it.

Self-Assessment
Perspective: I believe I deserve a B since I felt the comments
and ideas I proposed were relevant and on topic. I felt I also offered my
opinions to the questions and responded to my peers ideas and
opinions sometimes challenging them. I could have tried harder to get
my opinions out there and I failed to consistently offer new ideas and
solutions.
Evidence/Text Reference: I think I also deserve a B on this
portion because I felt I sparked discussion with evidence and quotes
from the text, which I had prepared prior to class. I believe that I used
the text to back up my claims and those of others. I felt for the most
part that my examples were relevant in the seminar. I could have
introduced more evidence throughout the seminar though since I had
much more supporting evidence prepared.
Communication and Clarification: I deserve a C because I
demonstrated active listening, I participated actively and I did not
monopolize the seminar. I also believe that I connected ideas back to
the question and asked clarifying questions, plus I occasionally helped
the conversation by defining specific fictional words. I did not invite
others into the discussion nor clarify others ideas and while I intended
to do this, I somehow rarely seemed to make this happen.
Connections: I believe that I deserve a B because I did connect
the book back to many real life events and concepts such as religion
and cults. I also related the book to other texts and lessons throughout
my time at Animas. I did not make any personal connections to what
was being discussed though.
Seminar Leadership: I deserve a C for this portion. I did try to
drop intellectual bombs, clear up confusion, and pose original
questions as I do every seminar. I sometimes failed to keep the group
on topic and help others participate.