Derrida Mentions his point of view on what he has become and that there is on the more he wants to follow as to “I am following” is as to how he is “after the animal”.  “inasmuch” he is alongside” he will become like them more. Where He will end up become an animal while been near animals and that’s why he follows them as a chase of feelings. Derrida views the ideas of other philosopher as it’s something that animals have no way of respond to a specife language because its only seen as something that can´t be define or it’s unable to be understandable. Do to the only thing that a cat can say is “purred” and with out knowing what it actually is says. They think it’s ethier a yes or a no. Two of the animality that are looked at are “gaze” and “seen seen” by what is known of what it is. And since it’s seen by animals, what do I see and what is the difference between both of us. Some of the ambiguities that he finds between competing account is that god creates man in his image but he brings male and female into the world at the same time. Naming will thus have been the fact of man as a couple, if it can be put that way. Where man is the one who follows the animals as to where at the end woman comes. “The husbandman cried out the name of each beast,” one translation (Chouraqui) says; another (Dhormes): “Man called all the animals by their names” (Gen. 2:20).Let me repeat: it is only recorded thus in the second narrative. If one believes what is called the first narrative, God creates man in his image but he brings male and female into the world at the same time 387. Derrida respone to this is that the word is have ¨both a general and strict sense: what abuts onto limits as Limitrophy – growth nourishment (thinking) of boundary in difference. Also what feeds, is fed, is cared for, raised, and trained, what is cultivated on the edges of a limit. Derrida’s response is that “”I am uttering an asinanity” should confirm not only the animality that he is disavowing but his complicit, continued and organized involvement in a veritable war of the species. Such are my hypotheses in view of theses on the animal, on animals, on the word animal or animals.”

Freud mentions his ideas about the Oedipus Rex moves the “modern audience no less than it did the contemporary greek one, the explanation can only be that its effect does not lie in the contrast between destiny and human will, but is to be looked for in the particular nature of the material on which that contrast is exemplified”(Page 790). Freud explains the differences with Oediups Rex as if the child’s “wish” is “phantasy” were it brings it to be an open realization as it is in “a dream”. AS for  Hamlet shows a “type of man whose power” has a “direct action” and its “paraplysed by an excessive development of his intellect.”Freud lays out his new task of interpretation on dreams as “the task, that is, of investigating the relations between the manifest context of dreams and the latent dream-thoughts, and of tracing out the processes by which the latter have been changed into the former.” (page 793).  where Freud wants to make dreams understandable and it’s a dream of two versions in the same “subject-matter” and into “different languages”.Freud describes language as “a new class of psychical material between the manifest conet of the dream and the conclusions of our enquiry:” where its name as “their latent content,or as we say ) the dream thought” and “dream manifest” its by “mean of our procedure. Freud wants to make dreams and once you understand them it’s one “subject matter in two languages.”Displacement is a “Psychical intenties occurs in the process of dream-formation, and it is as a result of these” that are different “between the text of the dream-content and that of the dream-thoughts comes about.”The grammar of dreams is language condensation displacement which is the mean of red. The Connections of dreams that you get to become flashbacks. Freud sees it as the ego language where it represents logical connections as a “simultaneity in time.”And dreams carry a “method of reproduction” and it is connected to “dream-thoughts”. The grammar of dreams are not logical and are not meant to press on one or the other where you need to choose on them. The interpretation of dreams is that “Then the commoner method of representation would be to introduce the dependent clause as an introductory dream and to add” “principal clause” as the “main dream” . Where sometimes your dreams sometimes it’s “more extensive part of the dream always corresponds to the principal clause”. 

The interesting ideas of Fanon and what he thought was in the essay starts with stereotypes with both colors whites and black people. The black subject themselves as negor’s. Fanon interacts as “In particular, Fanon tells of his own struggle to make sense of the white world and to address it on its own rationalist terms, only to be rejected on the basis of his race and driven back by white prejudice to an antirations, primitivist stance. Then, realizing that such primitivism was taken by whites as simply verifying their own stereotypical attitudes toward blacks, Fanon began to explore the cultural achievements of African civilization, finally achieving a dialectical resolution between Western rationalism and Africanist primitivism”(1351). The strategies that identify the problems that Fanon does as he said “growing bolder, I jostled him and told him point-blank, “Get used to me, I am not getting used to anyone.” I shouted my laughter to the stars”(1355).  According to Fanon he mentions that “colonial domination, because it is total and tends to oversimplify, very soon manages to disrupt in spectacular fashion the cultural life of a conquered people. This cultural obliteration is made possible by the negation of national reality, by new legal relations introduced by occupying power, by the banishment of the natives and their customs to outlying districts by colonial society, by expropriation, and by the systematic enslaving of men and women. The essay ends with “I feel in myself a soul as immense as the world, truly a soul as deep as the deepest of rivers, my chest has the power to expand without limit. I am a master and I am advised to adopt the humility of the cripple. Yesterday, awakening to the world, I saw the sky turn upon itself utterly and wholly. I wanted to rise, but the disemboweled silence fell back upon me, its wings praralyzes. Without responsibility, straddling Nothingness and Infinity, I began to weep” (1360). The new changes “on the ground” and the culture changes that Fanon mentions is that “After national free: dom has been obtained in these conditions, there is no such painful cultural indecision which is found in certain countries which are newly indepen-dent, because the nation by its manner of coming into being and in the terms of its existence exerts a fundamental influence over culture. A nation which is born of the people’s concerted action and which embodies the real aspirations of the people while changing the state cannot exist save in the expression of exceptionally rich forms of culture”(pg,1366). 

 Marx’s way of thinking about ideology is “men and their circumstances appear upside-down as in a camera obscura.” Where he compares ideology being a “camera obscura” because ofits “phenomenon arises” as a literal of a “dark chamber” and the history on how it processes in their “physical life-process.”  Ideology is like a camera obscura because of the use of lens that goes through the image projected it “the development of the ideological reflexes and echoes of this life-process”(pg#660). The secret from another of Marx’s metaphors of “Hieroglyph” do to what bound up commodity from Where then the secret is that “Later on, we try to decipher the hieroglyphic, to get behind the secret of our own social products; for to stamp an object of utility as a value, is just as much a social product as lan-guage”(pg#670). Marx explains the bound in commodity that scientist  had found “the products of labour, so far as they are values, are but material expressions of the human labour spent in their production”.These products indeed have an “epoch in the history of the development of the human race, but, by no means, dissipates the mist through which the social character of labor appears to us to be an objective character of the products themselves”(pg#670). On how Robinson Crusoe thought about commodity and market-based that “as commodation, and whose establishment is a necessary preliminary to the circulation of commodities, have already acquired the stability of natural, self-understood forms of social life, before man seek to decipher, not their historical character, for in his eyes they are immutable, but their meaning”(pg#671).  Where the prices that are analyzed determine that magnitude of value and the “common expression” this forms of production and exchange of examples that will allow Marx to to show the types of productions it has and how they function and how it will help them know about the production. “The fact, that in the particular form of production with which we are dealing, viz., the production of commodities, the specific social character of private labour carried on independently, consists in the equality of every kind of that labour, by virtue of its being human labour, which character, therefore, assumes in the product the form of value-this fact appears to the producers, notwithstanding the discovery above referred to, to be just as real and final, as the fact, that, after the discovery by science of the component gases of air, the atmosphere itself remained unaltered”. As well as to how it says that “These different articles are, as regards the family, so many products of it’s labour, but as between themselves, they are not commodities.” Which makes these labour function as a family as a society. The production of commodities as “possesses a spontaneously developed system of division of labour”

Procedural rhetoric it’s something that interacts with video games. It’s important because it makes video games to be created and it is a “theorist” work of “philosophy and technology” as both “persuasion” and “expression” being a goal of “high intensity medium” where video games can be something that is significant and a study of procedural rhetoric. The study of procedural rhetoric reveals that it makes claims on how things will be working. Based on how it makes a tick where it’s something that doesn’t make you distract or entertain but instead it makes a claim about the word it doesn’t show you nor speak. Instead video games put together an argument that processes Procedural rhetoric that puts rules together where it describes how its function is a  system that characterizes it.  Thinking about this mode of rhetoric makes us understand why videogames are doing on the deeper levels of the set of rules that are code through the “programming” and “motivates” its a visual rhetoric as well as its “ procedural”. The role that he imagined for educators, Parents and students was that video games are a “kind of literacy” Where there are two types of literacy that “doesn’t help read” and a “critique system” that is a “political system”. It’s “The kind of technology literacy that procedural rhetoric offers is becoming increasingly necessary for kids and adults alike.” As well, “This process starts at home where parents can help their kids play games critically, just as they might help their kids understand novels or films by virtue of their own familiarity with those media.” One part of what he mentioned was how some of his parents grew up with video games. The next generation will do the same “Parents of all kinds can learn to play video games, but those who grew up with video games themselves are already raising the next generation of children”. On the understanding of video games and how they function, what set of rules it has based on how he thought of educators was that video games are the same as reading and writing where it’s something being teached and takes practice.  “Educators should consider adopting video games as artifacts to be discussed alongside traditional media in subjects like literature, language arts, history, and art, teaching game playing as an argumentative and expressive practice alongside read-ing, writing, and debating”(2671). Based on how Bogost relies on both Procedure rhetoric terms on how he images. Video games are arguments that seek and change how its thoughts were. One part of the reading that fits with this was on how he thought “ When we play video games, we can interpret these arguments and consider their place in our lives. In this way, playing video games is a kind of literacy. Not the literacy that helps us read books or write term papers, but the kind of literacy that helps us make or critique the systems we live in. By system”(Pg# 2671). Do to how it makes you change, thinks and believe in the type of rules, it has a similarity with what is being learned in schools or on how the set of rules in video games is. The teaching of this mode of literacy is different and how it will benefit students is by the function of systems are “accurately-for” and these models can be examples as to procedural rhetoric. On one hand it makes students know of the use of video games in a specific way which is to “model how the mechanical and professional rules of aviation work.” Shows them “arguments about how social, cultural, and political processes work as well.”

The essay by Nietzsche that strike me was on how he descibers Humanity with it being an architectural geniuses.  ¨On Truth And Lying In A Nonmoral Sense”. By mankind where Nietzsche describes it in pg.(757) I ̈admire humanity as a mighty architectural genius ̈.  Humans are architectural geniuses because of the Capacity and what it implies of their foundations and their views. For how it is and its nature human builds and how its created ¨By these standards the human being is an architectural genius who is far superior to the bee: the latter builds with wax which she gathers from nature, whereas the human being build with the far more delicate material  of concepts which he must first manufacture from himself ̈(pg.757). Where it is looked up to and how truth becomes to be ¨prue¨ and ¨cognition¨ and for what it’s being known and for Metamorphosis in humankind in order to have a better understand of both humanity and the truths of the world and the things that are around them and understand of it. Another part of Nietzsche ‘s essay that was interesting on two types of humanities happiness and suffering do to the world and how humankind sounds and the copy that it has is an image that is made of humanity where how he thinks about humanity on how”humanity as a consequence of the same occasion, it finally acquires the same significance for all human beings, as if it were the only necessary image and as if that relation of the original nervous stimulus to the image”(pg.758). Where it seems that images have to do with dreams and then it will be repeated to where it will be proven and the Metaphor to show “the same way as a dream, if repeated eternally, would be felt and judged entirely as reality. But the fact that a metaphor becomes hard and rigid is absolutely no guarantee of the necessity and exclusive justification of that metaphor”(pg.758).