It's funny how much I relate to writers when I am not a writer myself. I see all these people plugging away for hours on end, honing their craft and where am I?
Restricted by my rules and the things I'm afraid of.
Perhaps it's my upbringing or my desire to help others. This quote, from Writing Life by Ellen Gilchrist was fascinating to me because I don't know if I could do this:
"For many years my desire to do my work and tell my stories was so intense I would have sacrificed anything to it. I begged forgiveness of the world but I would have continued with my work whether the world agreed to let me do it or not."
I understand the overwhelming desire to write, but to ignore the needs of others? To leave people behind? I suppose if they were okay to fend for themselves...
It's so selfish to do that but I do realize even now, there have been times I've done similar things. Perhaps I've done the same to a smaller scale, and it is true that it is impossible for one to be always giving and always working and living for the benefit of others. It's not sustainable (to use the current catchword).
Now don't get me wrong; I'm no saint. I've just pointed out that I've acted selfishly before and have left people hanging, much like Gilchrist has done in the name of her work. I suppose the difference is that I've never done that to that extent in the name of work. What does that say about my attitude toward work or my attitude toward my own self-development?
I think one of the most poignant lessons that I've learned but often have forgotten is that in order to help others, I must help myself. I must be at a place to be able to help others or else I won't be able to.
With that being said, I must go back to my paper and continue to write, rewrite, and rewrite again.
Friday, December 4, 2015
Tuesday, November 24, 2015
Leisure
We are a society that loves leisure.
To the point where we've forgotten that we need to work first in order to survive.
The fruit of our labor and the food, clothing, and shelter that come from that labor have been so far removed from each other that we are not alive when we work and we do not feel connected to the labor we do. The money we get is a means to play, even when we don't actually have the time to play.
Life is whittled away for short-term, meaningless pleasures that leave us feeling empty and a little older than before. Before we know it, we are no longer capable of learning, of growing, or of deriving truly meaningful encounters and experiences.
Are the games we play, the TV shows we watch, and all the little things we do to waste time really worth it?
But then, on the flip side, why should we feel so guilty doing the things that we enjoy?
Is it because we are not contributing to society or bettering ourselves?
If we seek out leisure that does not enhance our being, is there something wrong with that?
I think the issue is that in the end, as individuals, one is often left feeling worse than before by doing things that do not engage the mind or better oneself. It's always in retrospect that regret kicks in and one can be found saying,
"I had all the time in the world but I didn't..."
"I could have done .... instead of ...."
I suppose it goes back to the idea of carpe diem or the ever-so-ridiculous YOLO.
Claim the day as ours, looking into the future so that we look back without regrets.*
*It's so funny how this statement as well as carpe diem and YOLO become justifications to do dumb things. One may live as if one will die tomorrow, but the changes of that happening is low. So many people live to see another day. Therefore, one must necessarily live with the future in mind in all that one does.
Like duh.
To the point where we've forgotten that we need to work first in order to survive.
The fruit of our labor and the food, clothing, and shelter that come from that labor have been so far removed from each other that we are not alive when we work and we do not feel connected to the labor we do. The money we get is a means to play, even when we don't actually have the time to play.
Life is whittled away for short-term, meaningless pleasures that leave us feeling empty and a little older than before. Before we know it, we are no longer capable of learning, of growing, or of deriving truly meaningful encounters and experiences.
Are the games we play, the TV shows we watch, and all the little things we do to waste time really worth it?
But then, on the flip side, why should we feel so guilty doing the things that we enjoy?
Is it because we are not contributing to society or bettering ourselves?
If we seek out leisure that does not enhance our being, is there something wrong with that?
I think the issue is that in the end, as individuals, one is often left feeling worse than before by doing things that do not engage the mind or better oneself. It's always in retrospect that regret kicks in and one can be found saying,
"I had all the time in the world but I didn't..."
"I could have done .... instead of ...."
I suppose it goes back to the idea of carpe diem or the ever-so-ridiculous YOLO.
Claim the day as ours, looking into the future so that we look back without regrets.*
*It's so funny how this statement as well as carpe diem and YOLO become justifications to do dumb things. One may live as if one will die tomorrow, but the changes of that happening is low. So many people live to see another day. Therefore, one must necessarily live with the future in mind in all that one does.
Like duh.
Thursday, November 12, 2015
Confused
So from what I understand about Mizzou, I agree with what happened as justifiable and I'm glad that the president had to step down. However, I'm really confused about what's going on at Yale.
If I'm translating the situation correctly, students want an apology (which escalated to a resignation) from two resident professors because the two professors were not only trying to create an intellectual community that questioned why rules about costumes had to come from an authoritarian figure, but also because they were trying to address the students' concerns about an email and create a dialogue about it? And the students were demanding that professors apologize for hurting their feelings. That doesn't make sense to me at all.
I don't understand how that created an unsafe space. Views can be challenged...? Why should one feel unsafe about a disagreement? Doesn't that speak to one's on insecurities as a person? If one cannot take the fact that someone is questioning who one is, doesn't that mean that one should learn to understand and accept one's own identity first? If someone questions my identity, I simply tell them who I am. They can think whatever they want about me; I'm still me and none of that will change. I don't understand how creating an intellectual space about why the school has to police costumes turns into a debate about race. I really don't.
I suppose if the premise is that the students respected the decision of the university to create the rules on what acceptable and unacceptable costumes are, the fact that a resident professor would even question that would be... outrageous? Even in the name of intellectual exploration? Even though the resident professor made it abundantly clear that she agreed that such costumes shouldn't be allowed? If college isn't a place to be able to express one's individuality and one's thoughts, regardless of what it is, then where can an independent mind learn to do such things?But the flip side also becomes this: should such "policing" (in this case, of costumes) be done by the students?
If students feel too young or immature (and accept themselves to be as such), then I suppose they could then accept the fact that some higher authority needs to make the rules for them. They want to avoid policing themselves/each other; thus, it is easier to have someone else (of authority) to do it for them so that they can avoid awkward confrontations. I'm guessing that's the mentality?
For some reason, it still doesn't seem to make sense. And if anything, it sounds somewhat selfish (I don't want to have to deal with it) and immature (I'll just have someone else do it for me).
Is this what the new generation considers to be a valuable quality for society? I suppose the later generation was (is?) all about questioning authority. For them, it is always this questioning: "who are you to tell me what I can and cannot do" and "I will do what I want, when I want, and however I want to do it."
The next generation wants it to be all about them. "I don't feel safe. I feel offended. You can't say that to me. Do you know who I am? I am marginalized, revere me!" (Okay, so revere is a bit of an extreme word but in some ways, it really isn't.)
I don't know. Let us see what comes of it.
The article that made me think of all this is below:
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/the-new-intolerance-of-student-activism-at-yale/414810/
Oh, and to add to that is a response from Yale's president and dean of Yale College:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2015/11/11/yale-leaders-re-affirm-their-commitment-to-diversity-and-debate/
I think the most insightful is the following:
"We also affirm Yale’s bedrock principle of the freedom to speak and be heard, without fear of intimidation, threats, or harm, and we renew our commitment to this freedom not as a special exception for unpopular or controversial ideas but for them especially."
Why do I feel sympathy for the professor, who is literally surrounded by students rather than the screaming girl who demands and literally screams at the professor to apologize. If I were the professor, I would feel the "fear of intimidation, threats, or harm." Especially being surrounded by students like that. In this particular case, I don't think it has anything to do with race. What I see are petulant, stressed out students venting their frustrations at a professor who is trying to help them.
For the video, see below:
There are other clips of him trying to reason with these students. He's trying to talk with them and I feel like all they see is this white man in a position of power trying to put them down when he's trying to create an open dialogue with them. It doesn't make sense to me.
If I'm translating the situation correctly, students want an apology (which escalated to a resignation) from two resident professors because the two professors were not only trying to create an intellectual community that questioned why rules about costumes had to come from an authoritarian figure, but also because they were trying to address the students' concerns about an email and create a dialogue about it? And the students were demanding that professors apologize for hurting their feelings. That doesn't make sense to me at all.
I don't understand how that created an unsafe space. Views can be challenged...? Why should one feel unsafe about a disagreement? Doesn't that speak to one's on insecurities as a person? If one cannot take the fact that someone is questioning who one is, doesn't that mean that one should learn to understand and accept one's own identity first? If someone questions my identity, I simply tell them who I am. They can think whatever they want about me; I'm still me and none of that will change. I don't understand how creating an intellectual space about why the school has to police costumes turns into a debate about race. I really don't.
I suppose if the premise is that the students respected the decision of the university to create the rules on what acceptable and unacceptable costumes are, the fact that a resident professor would even question that would be... outrageous? Even in the name of intellectual exploration? Even though the resident professor made it abundantly clear that she agreed that such costumes shouldn't be allowed? If college isn't a place to be able to express one's individuality and one's thoughts, regardless of what it is, then where can an independent mind learn to do such things?But the flip side also becomes this: should such "policing" (in this case, of costumes) be done by the students?
If students feel too young or immature (and accept themselves to be as such), then I suppose they could then accept the fact that some higher authority needs to make the rules for them. They want to avoid policing themselves/each other; thus, it is easier to have someone else (of authority) to do it for them so that they can avoid awkward confrontations. I'm guessing that's the mentality?
For some reason, it still doesn't seem to make sense. And if anything, it sounds somewhat selfish (I don't want to have to deal with it) and immature (I'll just have someone else do it for me).
Is this what the new generation considers to be a valuable quality for society? I suppose the later generation was (is?) all about questioning authority. For them, it is always this questioning: "who are you to tell me what I can and cannot do" and "I will do what I want, when I want, and however I want to do it."
The next generation wants it to be all about them. "I don't feel safe. I feel offended. You can't say that to me. Do you know who I am? I am marginalized, revere me!" (Okay, so revere is a bit of an extreme word but in some ways, it really isn't.)
I don't know. Let us see what comes of it.
The article that made me think of all this is below:
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/the-new-intolerance-of-student-activism-at-yale/414810/
Oh, and to add to that is a response from Yale's president and dean of Yale College:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2015/11/11/yale-leaders-re-affirm-their-commitment-to-diversity-and-debate/
I think the most insightful is the following:
"We also affirm Yale’s bedrock principle of the freedom to speak and be heard, without fear of intimidation, threats, or harm, and we renew our commitment to this freedom not as a special exception for unpopular or controversial ideas but for them especially."
Why do I feel sympathy for the professor, who is literally surrounded by students rather than the screaming girl who demands and literally screams at the professor to apologize. If I were the professor, I would feel the "fear of intimidation, threats, or harm." Especially being surrounded by students like that. In this particular case, I don't think it has anything to do with race. What I see are petulant, stressed out students venting their frustrations at a professor who is trying to help them.
For the video, see below:
There are other clips of him trying to reason with these students. He's trying to talk with them and I feel like all they see is this white man in a position of power trying to put them down when he's trying to create an open dialogue with them. It doesn't make sense to me.
Sunday, November 8, 2015
Innovations in education
I feel like the shift in education is about engaging students in a way that helps them to learn. I think it's quite an ideal shift but I think that we've perhaps forgotten why students need to be engaged to begin with.
In some ways, I feel like what is taught in classrooms and how it applies to the outside world is so disconnected that students don't feel motivated to learn. They don't see the purpose of what they learn because they don't see how it can apply to their daily lives. I think that in showing the practical applications to learning, students will have at least a smidgen more of interest than thinking "this is something I have to do. I don't know why I have to do this, but I somehow should feel the importance of it." This abstraction of the importance of education discourages students because there's all this weight put on it, but when students ask why they have to learn chemistry, often times, teachers and parents have a hard time answering. To say it'll open up opportunities disregards the fact that long-term success seldom works on students. To the ambitious and the driven, such answers will suffice. However, the reasons given for education/learning are very much like the reasoning for working out. It focuses on the long term results: "you'll live longer"; "it's better for you in the long run"; "you'll eventually have a nicer body in the far away future after blood, sweat, and tears." However, often times the short-term gratification of not doing schoolwork will outweigh the long-term promise of success.
While I think there's quite a bit of good work being done out there to motivate and engage students, I think that perhaps the reason why we even have to start doing this should be examined.
In some ways, I feel like what is taught in classrooms and how it applies to the outside world is so disconnected that students don't feel motivated to learn. They don't see the purpose of what they learn because they don't see how it can apply to their daily lives. I think that in showing the practical applications to learning, students will have at least a smidgen more of interest than thinking "this is something I have to do. I don't know why I have to do this, but I somehow should feel the importance of it." This abstraction of the importance of education discourages students because there's all this weight put on it, but when students ask why they have to learn chemistry, often times, teachers and parents have a hard time answering. To say it'll open up opportunities disregards the fact that long-term success seldom works on students. To the ambitious and the driven, such answers will suffice. However, the reasons given for education/learning are very much like the reasoning for working out. It focuses on the long term results: "you'll live longer"; "it's better for you in the long run"; "you'll eventually have a nicer body in the far away future after blood, sweat, and tears." However, often times the short-term gratification of not doing schoolwork will outweigh the long-term promise of success.
While I think there's quite a bit of good work being done out there to motivate and engage students, I think that perhaps the reason why we even have to start doing this should be examined.
Thursday, October 29, 2015
Justifying the humanities
Is the humanities really a luxury? The fact that we have the time or the "leisure" of critically exploring thought, is that something that we feel like we have to justify?
Why are the humanities important?
Behind the humanities is something soft and intangible. It is what drives civilization beyond the base. But can one really say that it is a luxury? But then again, isn't first-world civilization precisely that? We live in relative luxury, despite people having to work every day to get by. "Getting by" can still mean that we have food, shelter, running water, electricity, relative security, and, of course, an Internet connection.
Can we really get away with saying "it's important; you really can't see it"?
One of the best cases I've read on the defense for the humanities is that with the humanities, we would lose the ability to think critically. I think that by extension, because critical thinking is essential to survival, the humanities become essential.
Can the fight for equality, social justice, and all the problems of the world exist without the humanities? I would argue that the very movements that we go through stem from the thinking that is done in the humanities.
And yet...
Something about fighting for something intangible makes me uncomfortable. I feel like I'm grasping at straws, even if I know that they exist and they are important.
Society or perhaps the confines of my own mind has made me believe that somewhere and somehow, the things that I do and the things that I think are important to living are not "worth" it, that there is something fundamentally wrong with exploring the depth of nature, the mind, the human condition, the intellectual. Or whatever you want to call it. Or whatever you want to romanticize it to.
Whatever you may think "it" to be.
What is it that we do? What gives it meaning? What makes it important?
Does there have to be justification?
What is the use? Should there be a use? To say that it is simply an exercise of the rich is to forget that entire movements have been forged from these "idle" thoughts and explorations of the beautiful. Entire civilizations have changed and the very foundation of the way society works has been shaken.
And yet...
Perhaps I'm too stuck on the tangibly utilitarian. If the palpable output of the humanities is an argument that the people in the past have done things that were interesting or revolutionary during their time but means nothing during ours, then what of it?
I don't think I'll ever get a pretty answer out of this. But I still feel that there is merit and worth in exploring the humanities.
Why are the humanities important?
Behind the humanities is something soft and intangible. It is what drives civilization beyond the base. But can one really say that it is a luxury? But then again, isn't first-world civilization precisely that? We live in relative luxury, despite people having to work every day to get by. "Getting by" can still mean that we have food, shelter, running water, electricity, relative security, and, of course, an Internet connection.
Can we really get away with saying "it's important; you really can't see it"?
One of the best cases I've read on the defense for the humanities is that with the humanities, we would lose the ability to think critically. I think that by extension, because critical thinking is essential to survival, the humanities become essential.
Can the fight for equality, social justice, and all the problems of the world exist without the humanities? I would argue that the very movements that we go through stem from the thinking that is done in the humanities.
And yet...
Something about fighting for something intangible makes me uncomfortable. I feel like I'm grasping at straws, even if I know that they exist and they are important.
Society or perhaps the confines of my own mind has made me believe that somewhere and somehow, the things that I do and the things that I think are important to living are not "worth" it, that there is something fundamentally wrong with exploring the depth of nature, the mind, the human condition, the intellectual. Or whatever you want to call it. Or whatever you want to romanticize it to.
Whatever you may think "it" to be.
What is it that we do? What gives it meaning? What makes it important?
Does there have to be justification?
What is the use? Should there be a use? To say that it is simply an exercise of the rich is to forget that entire movements have been forged from these "idle" thoughts and explorations of the beautiful. Entire civilizations have changed and the very foundation of the way society works has been shaken.
And yet...
Perhaps I'm too stuck on the tangibly utilitarian. If the palpable output of the humanities is an argument that the people in the past have done things that were interesting or revolutionary during their time but means nothing during ours, then what of it?
I don't think I'll ever get a pretty answer out of this. But I still feel that there is merit and worth in exploring the humanities.
Tuesday, October 20, 2015
Pictures
We try to capture moments of our lives or moments of beauty through pictures and it is never enough. The image we capture becomes an object that is distant from what we felt at the moment. We forget that memory captures best what pictures cannot. The moment into memory becomes the experience again. By absorbing all of that single moment into the memory of our senses, we can recreate the beauty that we so fruitlessly try to capture in a still image.
Friday, October 2, 2015
The clutter of one's past
I scrapbook or try to.
I feel like I have some kind of inherent desire to hold onto the past. Perhaps to record it so as not to forget it, which I often do. However, this desire to save everything ends up taking up space and I guess I ended up with this thought:
We clutter up our lives with things of the past and with it comes all the accompanying burdens that occupy both physical and mental space.
Perhaps I need to let go of things or just learn to throw my shit away. Honestly now.
On a completely different note, I've been watching a lot of TV shows lately. I think perhaps I need human interaction. Oddly enough, watching TV in some odd way seems to satisfy this desire (if it indeed is something that I feel like I need. I've come to realize that it's an unfulfilling waste of time because it's incredibly passive. TV allows people to be social without the risk and trouble of having to actually be social and deal with the navigation required for such endeavors.
I should get out more.
I feel like I have some kind of inherent desire to hold onto the past. Perhaps to record it so as not to forget it, which I often do. However, this desire to save everything ends up taking up space and I guess I ended up with this thought:
We clutter up our lives with things of the past and with it comes all the accompanying burdens that occupy both physical and mental space.
Perhaps I need to let go of things or just learn to throw my shit away. Honestly now.
On a completely different note, I've been watching a lot of TV shows lately. I think perhaps I need human interaction. Oddly enough, watching TV in some odd way seems to satisfy this desire (if it indeed is something that I feel like I need. I've come to realize that it's an unfulfilling waste of time because it's incredibly passive. TV allows people to be social without the risk and trouble of having to actually be social and deal with the navigation required for such endeavors.
I should get out more.
Friday, September 25, 2015
Complicated texts and EDM
Shakespeare and other complex texts are to beginning readers as EDM is to me.
There are layers of beauty and harmony that I don't quite see (and perhaps don't agree with ^^;;).
It could be an acquired taste but in parsing out the beauties of it, one can learn to appreciate it for more than just noise.
There are layers of beauty and harmony that I don't quite see (and perhaps don't agree with ^^;;).
It could be an acquired taste but in parsing out the beauties of it, one can learn to appreciate it for more than just noise.
Monday, September 14, 2015
Reactive versus proactive
I suppose another way to look at it is defensive versus offensive.
One can react to life and what it has to offer.
Or one can be proactive about the factors that one has control over in life.
Why is being proactive so difficult?
One can react to life and what it has to offer.
Or one can be proactive about the factors that one has control over in life.
Why is being proactive so difficult?
Monday, August 24, 2015
Why I want to teach writing
...and why I write, really.
"We share the powers of language to express emotions, to inspire creative thought, and to change perceptions of the self and others. We share the power of language to transform thought and being." (Murphy 16)
Writing is so much more than a means of communication. Writing is the medium by which we grow to understand ourselves and our history. From reading the past and reading the present, we are able to understand where we come from and where we are. Writing stops time in its permanence.
In its permanence, writing also changes people. One piece of paper can change the entire trajectory of history. Martin Luther's 95 theses changed Christianity forever. The American Declaration of Independence started a war that eventually led to the creation of the most powerful country in the world.
With one paper and one idea (or many ideas, in some cases), the world as we know it changes.
"We share the powers of language to express emotions, to inspire creative thought, and to change perceptions of the self and others. We share the power of language to transform thought and being." (Murphy 16)
Writing is so much more than a means of communication. Writing is the medium by which we grow to understand ourselves and our history. From reading the past and reading the present, we are able to understand where we come from and where we are. Writing stops time in its permanence.
In its permanence, writing also changes people. One piece of paper can change the entire trajectory of history. Martin Luther's 95 theses changed Christianity forever. The American Declaration of Independence started a war that eventually led to the creation of the most powerful country in the world.
With one paper and one idea (or many ideas, in some cases), the world as we know it changes.
Wednesday, August 19, 2015
The importance of wanting to learn
"Was wanting all that was necessary for doing?" - Ranciere in The Ignorant Schoolmaster
The desire to learn and improve is probably the best vehicle for learning. Anyone who wants to learn can. Anyone who wants to improve will. The question of how quickly or how much the person absorbs will differ based on previous experience and a certain amount of talent, but the fact that a person wants to changes the game.
Take the most talented person who doesn't care to learn. They'll most certainly get something but they will not fully utilize the talent they have.
Take someone with no talent whatsoever. With hard work, perseverance, and the drive (i.e. desire) to learn, the person will probably perform as well as, if not better, than the unmotivated and unengaged talented person.
Hard work and perseverance are talents in and of themselves and it's amazing how far it'll go with someone who wants to learn and improve.
This goes beyond the classroom to pretty much all aspects of life. If you want to improve at something and you work at it, you will improve. That's really all there is to it.
The desire to learn and improve is probably the best vehicle for learning. Anyone who wants to learn can. Anyone who wants to improve will. The question of how quickly or how much the person absorbs will differ based on previous experience and a certain amount of talent, but the fact that a person wants to changes the game.
Take the most talented person who doesn't care to learn. They'll most certainly get something but they will not fully utilize the talent they have.
Take someone with no talent whatsoever. With hard work, perseverance, and the drive (i.e. desire) to learn, the person will probably perform as well as, if not better, than the unmotivated and unengaged talented person.
Hard work and perseverance are talents in and of themselves and it's amazing how far it'll go with someone who wants to learn and improve.
This goes beyond the classroom to pretty much all aspects of life. If you want to improve at something and you work at it, you will improve. That's really all there is to it.
Thursday, August 13, 2015
Material things that make me happy
Happiness is so often found in the small things and people forget how to be happy because the bigger things in life don't work out. I mean yeah, we all have our issues, and there will always be some kind of problem in our lives that we have to work through (arguably).
Yes, bad things happen.
However, there are always things to count as one's blessings or another way to look at it is that there are always things one can take pleasure in.
I got a lot of One Piece paraphernalia when I lived in Asia. I was able to go to this exhibit that they had for the anime (totally epic and awesome on so many levels) and I got a mug from it. The design is below:
I have rice bowls and soup bowls that are also One Piece. I forgot to enjoy them as pieces I get to use that are of my favorite anime and today, I remembered that.
It made me smile.
Yes, bad things happen.
However, there are always things to count as one's blessings or another way to look at it is that there are always things one can take pleasure in.
I got a lot of One Piece paraphernalia when I lived in Asia. I was able to go to this exhibit that they had for the anime (totally epic and awesome on so many levels) and I got a mug from it. The design is below:
It made me smile.
Wednesday, August 12, 2015
How I feel about trying to figure out what to wear
 |
| From questionablecontent (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2791) |
Monday, August 10, 2015
Anger
I think I have a lot of hidden rage or anger. Perhaps it could be called a deep sense of injustice. I'm not sure but I think that it stems from a sense of powerlessness too. People do what they can given their situations but when one knows that one has little power and the injustice is larger than themselves, what is it that one can do?
I think a lot of people turn to crime when it becomes too much to handle. However, perhaps my anger lies below the surface because I sense the fruitlessness of leading a life of crime. Crime seems to be a foolish outlet to me.
I guess I fight my own battles in my own quiet way. I found that the idea of killing someone with kindness does work and perhaps I've rerouted my anger here. Doing good in the place of evil allows one to also build up one's character.
But I suppose that doesn't change the fact that the rage or anger or whatever is still there. Perhaps I've never noticed it until recently because there have been changes in the way that the powerless are viewed and treated. Perhaps this outlet allows people like me to realize the anger that was always there but was never expressed because there was no way to articulate it.
I don't know.
One of the thoughts is this (though this will take this thought train into a different direction):
Irritation, unresolved, leads to frustration. It leads to anger, which unchecked, leads to rage.
This whole idea of power, of empowerment, and of powerlessness, especially in light of societal influences is fascinating. I don't think that it's always a power dynamic, yet when relationships become defined as such, one cannot escape seeing all things through that lens.
To simply exist and be accepted is something that all who are marginalized fight for.
Even in acceptance though, can we ever escape the scrutiny of others? We are always watching, judging, assessing, criticizing, and critiquing. Perhaps that's what bothers me. I like to be unobserved in what I do and I don't like that people have access to me because that access leads to observation and all that comes with that.
Perhaps this goes allll the way back to the post I wrote years ago about being self-conscious...
I think a lot of people turn to crime when it becomes too much to handle. However, perhaps my anger lies below the surface because I sense the fruitlessness of leading a life of crime. Crime seems to be a foolish outlet to me.
I guess I fight my own battles in my own quiet way. I found that the idea of killing someone with kindness does work and perhaps I've rerouted my anger here. Doing good in the place of evil allows one to also build up one's character.
But I suppose that doesn't change the fact that the rage or anger or whatever is still there. Perhaps I've never noticed it until recently because there have been changes in the way that the powerless are viewed and treated. Perhaps this outlet allows people like me to realize the anger that was always there but was never expressed because there was no way to articulate it.
I don't know.
One of the thoughts is this (though this will take this thought train into a different direction):
Irritation, unresolved, leads to frustration. It leads to anger, which unchecked, leads to rage.
This whole idea of power, of empowerment, and of powerlessness, especially in light of societal influences is fascinating. I don't think that it's always a power dynamic, yet when relationships become defined as such, one cannot escape seeing all things through that lens.
To simply exist and be accepted is something that all who are marginalized fight for.
Even in acceptance though, can we ever escape the scrutiny of others? We are always watching, judging, assessing, criticizing, and critiquing. Perhaps that's what bothers me. I like to be unobserved in what I do and I don't like that people have access to me because that access leads to observation and all that comes with that.
Perhaps this goes allll the way back to the post I wrote years ago about being self-conscious...
Saturday, July 18, 2015
Create, creativity, creator
http://www.poetryfoundation.org/poetrymagazine/article/250614?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social_media&utm_campaign=general_marketing
Dang.
It's long, it's raw, and I think it speaks some truth to those struggling with what it means to be an artist.
It's fascinating.
I can see the yearning - to create and to express oneself. I'd forgotten about that side of me too.
Here are some nuggets I enjoyed:
"Darkness is acceptable and even attractive so long as there is a threshold that is not crossed."
It's so true! To see it and think we understand darkness, or to commiserate ("Yeah, that must suck") is one thing. To go through such darkness, to the depth of the one who is truly suffering, is yet another.
"That your pathetic little thing is not interesting to anyone but yourself."
"I think everyone wants to make something touchable, but most of us don’t out of fear of being laughable. I’m not saying I’m fearless."
Sometimes, I relate, and sometimes, I feel like I'm on the other side, deriding myself for being so dramatic. Ugh. It's that despair that I feel when I think that my "art" or whatever you want to call it is worthless to everyone but me.
To be an artist, I feel like you have to be willing to be just different enough to be accepted as cool, but not different enough for people to find you inaccessible (though this is debatable).
We are a generation of the self. I am not happy. I want this. I want that. I feel like we're the generation that feels the need to express ourselves and that expression comes out in art, music, poetry, writing, etc. Everyone wants to write and everyone seems to have a story to tell. What does it all matter then?
Oddly though, I feel like we're also one of the most peaceful and generous generations. But then again, all my ideas of what "our generation" is filtered by media and social media alike.
I still like to believe in the capability for humanity to be good.
Dang.
It's long, it's raw, and I think it speaks some truth to those struggling with what it means to be an artist.
It's fascinating.
I can see the yearning - to create and to express oneself. I'd forgotten about that side of me too.
Here are some nuggets I enjoyed:
"Darkness is acceptable and even attractive so long as there is a threshold that is not crossed."
It's so true! To see it and think we understand darkness, or to commiserate ("Yeah, that must suck") is one thing. To go through such darkness, to the depth of the one who is truly suffering, is yet another.
"That your pathetic little thing is not interesting to anyone but yourself."
"I think everyone wants to make something touchable, but most of us don’t out of fear of being laughable. I’m not saying I’m fearless."
Sometimes, I relate, and sometimes, I feel like I'm on the other side, deriding myself for being so dramatic. Ugh. It's that despair that I feel when I think that my "art" or whatever you want to call it is worthless to everyone but me.
To be an artist, I feel like you have to be willing to be just different enough to be accepted as cool, but not different enough for people to find you inaccessible (though this is debatable).
We are a generation of the self. I am not happy. I want this. I want that. I feel like we're the generation that feels the need to express ourselves and that expression comes out in art, music, poetry, writing, etc. Everyone wants to write and everyone seems to have a story to tell. What does it all matter then?
Oddly though, I feel like we're also one of the most peaceful and generous generations. But then again, all my ideas of what "our generation" is filtered by media and social media alike.
I still like to believe in the capability for humanity to be good.
Tuesday, June 23, 2015
Why cooking is hard
The stupid vegetables and the like take forever to cut.
Prep takes forever.
My solution: simplify.
If the recipe calls for like 20 vegetables, I use like 2 that take the least amount of time to wash and cut. I've gotten somewhat faster so I've upped the number, but honestly, recipes are guidelines, not rules. I take what liberties I'm comfortable with and usually my stuff comes out all right.
I must say though, I suck at using strong herbs. Oregano and rosemary are not my friends. I'm working on them. They'll come around.
I suppose simplification is the current the theme of my life. I've been filling it with a lot of unnecessary crap. Get rid of what you don't need* and keep it simple.
*I want to note that I don't just trash everything and add to the already exponentially growing waste that humans produce. I try to recycle or re-purpose the stuff I have. Let us not create such a large carbon footprint, yeah?
Prep takes forever.
My solution: simplify.
If the recipe calls for like 20 vegetables, I use like 2 that take the least amount of time to wash and cut. I've gotten somewhat faster so I've upped the number, but honestly, recipes are guidelines, not rules. I take what liberties I'm comfortable with and usually my stuff comes out all right.
I must say though, I suck at using strong herbs. Oregano and rosemary are not my friends. I'm working on them. They'll come around.
I suppose simplification is the current the theme of my life. I've been filling it with a lot of unnecessary crap. Get rid of what you don't need* and keep it simple.
*I want to note that I don't just trash everything and add to the already exponentially growing waste that humans produce. I try to recycle or re-purpose the stuff I have. Let us not create such a large carbon footprint, yeah?
Wednesday, June 3, 2015
Linear living, linear thinking
Perhaps thoughts and living follow a linear trajectory though that line, as others see it, is not always in the direction that one should or is expected to go and then does not feel like a straight path.
I get lost in my thoughts and often times, I feel like they bounce between different threads of thought. However, when I go back to what felt like "messy" writing, there's more logical order to it and I find that it makes sense.
Perhaps it does because it's me and I understand my own thinking.
Or maybe, just maybe, my thoughts are more logical and linear than I thought it was.
Even living has a progression that could be argued is linear. We wake up, do stuff, and go to sleep. I suppose depending on how you define linear (or perhaps what I mean to get at is logical) will determine whether or not something is linear or not.
Linearity perhaps has more to do with the logic of the time rather than any true sense of a straight trajectory.
See? This one feels messy, but I think that it makes sense in its own way. If it has its own logic that can be followed, doesn't that mean that this too is linear thinking?*
*Though I do want to make the distinction between linear and one-dimensional thinking. By linear, I simply mean that thoughts follow a logical order that seems to follow a definitive and understandable path. One-dimensional thinking seems to have the sense of flatness and a lack of depth.
I get lost in my thoughts and often times, I feel like they bounce between different threads of thought. However, when I go back to what felt like "messy" writing, there's more logical order to it and I find that it makes sense.
Perhaps it does because it's me and I understand my own thinking.
Or maybe, just maybe, my thoughts are more logical and linear than I thought it was.
Even living has a progression that could be argued is linear. We wake up, do stuff, and go to sleep. I suppose depending on how you define linear (or perhaps what I mean to get at is logical) will determine whether or not something is linear or not.
Linearity perhaps has more to do with the logic of the time rather than any true sense of a straight trajectory.
See? This one feels messy, but I think that it makes sense in its own way. If it has its own logic that can be followed, doesn't that mean that this too is linear thinking?*
*Though I do want to make the distinction between linear and one-dimensional thinking. By linear, I simply mean that thoughts follow a logical order that seems to follow a definitive and understandable path. One-dimensional thinking seems to have the sense of flatness and a lack of depth.
Thursday, May 28, 2015
Intention
I'm still marinating on this one, and I think there are fallacies to this but living a life with intention (I think the other word I heard tossed around was mindfulness) makes a difference.
This applies to relationships, careers, and lifestyle in general. All those stupid stories about how people turned their lives around has a lot to do with perspective. They started paying more attention to what they ate or lived or whatever. They made intentional changes that (usually) worked out in their favor.
Everything we do takes us somewhere, whether we mean to or not. The actions we take have repercussions and it's taking into account the fact that what we do is a reflection of who we are and what we'll become that gives weight to this little thing called intention.
I mean I think that placing too much stress on it is probably problematic because people stress and then are paralyzed into not doing anything at all, but I think in realizing that things are always moving in a direction, if one chooses to allow oneself to absorb experiences or learn new things, one becomes a better person or at least a wiser one for what one has gained.
When I went to Korea, I had no intention of getting better at reading and writing Korean. However, when I worked for a company where email communications were in Korean, I had to get better and because I made the intentional effort to get better, I did. I could've just written terrible emails the whole time I was there if I didn't care but that intention to made me improve that much faster.
I think that what I'm getting at is that it's the minor changes and the small things we do that add up. I suppose in some ways, it becomes about one's frame of mind too. Can you turn a situation into one where you are thankful for what you have, rather than getting annoyed about what you missed? Instead of playing one more game for the One Piece app, I could be sleeping just that much earlier.
In some ways, it is perhaps the small things that end up defining who we are, rather than the big.
Perhaps this is going back to the importance of time.
This applies to relationships, careers, and lifestyle in general. All those stupid stories about how people turned their lives around has a lot to do with perspective. They started paying more attention to what they ate or lived or whatever. They made intentional changes that (usually) worked out in their favor.
Everything we do takes us somewhere, whether we mean to or not. The actions we take have repercussions and it's taking into account the fact that what we do is a reflection of who we are and what we'll become that gives weight to this little thing called intention.
I mean I think that placing too much stress on it is probably problematic because people stress and then are paralyzed into not doing anything at all, but I think in realizing that things are always moving in a direction, if one chooses to allow oneself to absorb experiences or learn new things, one becomes a better person or at least a wiser one for what one has gained.
When I went to Korea, I had no intention of getting better at reading and writing Korean. However, when I worked for a company where email communications were in Korean, I had to get better and because I made the intentional effort to get better, I did. I could've just written terrible emails the whole time I was there if I didn't care but that intention to made me improve that much faster.
I think that what I'm getting at is that it's the minor changes and the small things we do that add up. I suppose in some ways, it becomes about one's frame of mind too. Can you turn a situation into one where you are thankful for what you have, rather than getting annoyed about what you missed? Instead of playing one more game for the One Piece app, I could be sleeping just that much earlier.
In some ways, it is perhaps the small things that end up defining who we are, rather than the big.
Perhaps this is going back to the importance of time.
Wednesday, May 20, 2015
Living a life of thankfulness
Thankful for what I have.
Thankful for what I don't have.
It's oddly at times like this that I feel the most thankful for everything that exists in my life. I'm oppressed by thoughts in my head and crushed by a sense of defeat, and yet there's always that ray of hope.
There's plenty of bad to dwell on, but there's more good that is often forgotten or overlooked. It's taken for granted because we get used to the good. We get complacent. We get used to avoiding things that cause suffering.
The creative process is never easy. What I mean by creative is not in the sense of "thinking outside the box" as many think of creativity, but what I mean to get to is the root of what creative and creativity means, which has the idea of creating or making something (the implication is that creativity comes from either nothing or things that are seemingly unconnected/unrelated things).
So when talking about creativity, it is this idea of forging paths that didn't exist before, connecting ideas that often are overlooked - like a shortcut path that is overgrown with weeds (or creating a new path to a destination). If that is the case, clearing the path and making the connection known and its function understood will take time and it won't always be easy.
When I think of life sometimes, I find it oppressive. What's the point of the things we do? Why is it important? Does it need to be important or have significance? Why does anything matter?
And yet we live on. Perhaps I can ponder such things because I don't have basic worries - everything I need, I have.
The point is, despite the thoughts in my head, there is always something to be thankful for. It perhaps is in these moments, that one truly lives (though the question then becomes "what is living?").
Bah. Things aren't connecting.
Thankful for what I don't have.
It's oddly at times like this that I feel the most thankful for everything that exists in my life. I'm oppressed by thoughts in my head and crushed by a sense of defeat, and yet there's always that ray of hope.
There's plenty of bad to dwell on, but there's more good that is often forgotten or overlooked. It's taken for granted because we get used to the good. We get complacent. We get used to avoiding things that cause suffering.
The creative process is never easy. What I mean by creative is not in the sense of "thinking outside the box" as many think of creativity, but what I mean to get to is the root of what creative and creativity means, which has the idea of creating or making something (the implication is that creativity comes from either nothing or things that are seemingly unconnected/unrelated things).
So when talking about creativity, it is this idea of forging paths that didn't exist before, connecting ideas that often are overlooked - like a shortcut path that is overgrown with weeds (or creating a new path to a destination). If that is the case, clearing the path and making the connection known and its function understood will take time and it won't always be easy.
When I think of life sometimes, I find it oppressive. What's the point of the things we do? Why is it important? Does it need to be important or have significance? Why does anything matter?
And yet we live on. Perhaps I can ponder such things because I don't have basic worries - everything I need, I have.
The point is, despite the thoughts in my head, there is always something to be thankful for. It perhaps is in these moments, that one truly lives (though the question then becomes "what is living?").
Bah. Things aren't connecting.
Thursday, May 7, 2015
I like marinating
Though ironically, not in cooking (it takes too much planning ahead).
Ideas sit around in my head just stewing and morphing into what becomes something coherent and then *poof!*
A paper
Blog post
Story
Realization about life
And so on.
Or something simple, like what to make for dinner.
I suppose what I've been marinating on lately is the idea of synthesis.
There is so much information out there and it's not about knowing, it's about using what is known.
Even if the information on how to make a car is all out there, with all the YouTube videos and what not, it is still up to the user/viewer/browser (or whatever you want to call the person sitting on this end of the computer) to take the information and make something of it.
I can watch 100 videos on how to make a car but I have to take that information and actually do something with it - synthesize the information into meaning.
I suppose the car example isn't the best one, but if one is looking for something on the Internet, one must sift through all the irrelevant information, find the relevant information, and then examine it to see how it fits into what one is looking for. Once all the pertinent information is found, one must synthesize the meaning of all that information into an answer.
It's very much like graduate school research, which is why I was thinking of the idea of synthesis to begin with.
I think that the humanities and its relevance is going to be making a comeback because with all the information out there, the people with the critical thinking skills will be needed to synthesize meaning out of all the information.
Just sayin'.
Ideas sit around in my head just stewing and morphing into what becomes something coherent and then *poof!*
A paper
Blog post
Story
Realization about life
And so on.
Or something simple, like what to make for dinner.
I suppose what I've been marinating on lately is the idea of synthesis.
There is so much information out there and it's not about knowing, it's about using what is known.
Even if the information on how to make a car is all out there, with all the YouTube videos and what not, it is still up to the user/viewer/browser (or whatever you want to call the person sitting on this end of the computer) to take the information and make something of it.
I can watch 100 videos on how to make a car but I have to take that information and actually do something with it - synthesize the information into meaning.
I suppose the car example isn't the best one, but if one is looking for something on the Internet, one must sift through all the irrelevant information, find the relevant information, and then examine it to see how it fits into what one is looking for. Once all the pertinent information is found, one must synthesize the meaning of all that information into an answer.
It's very much like graduate school research, which is why I was thinking of the idea of synthesis to begin with.
I think that the humanities and its relevance is going to be making a comeback because with all the information out there, the people with the critical thinking skills will be needed to synthesize meaning out of all the information.
Just sayin'.
Monday, May 4, 2015
"Bliss of solitude"
It's part of a line from William Wordsworth's poem, "I Wandered Lonely as a Cloud."
I think I've forgotten what that was.
I'm relearning how to be alone, working, researching, and reveling in that which is grad school life.
But sometimes, I just want to hide away. Disappear from the world, not in death but in solitude or isolation.
And yet, I spent a wonderful weekend with family, surrounded by those I love.
Let us come back to the bliss that is solitude and be imbued with words, word play, and knowledge.
I think I've forgotten what that was.
I'm relearning how to be alone, working, researching, and reveling in that which is grad school life.
But sometimes, I just want to hide away. Disappear from the world, not in death but in solitude or isolation.
And yet, I spent a wonderful weekend with family, surrounded by those I love.
Let us come back to the bliss that is solitude and be imbued with words, word play, and knowledge.
Sunday, April 19, 2015
Being healthy and staying fit
Been trying to be healthy (basically trying to be more mindful about it - I mean I'm not perfect; I enjoy my cupcakes and pizza every once in a while) and I realized that it did pay off. :D I mean not just with the eating but I've been exercising fairly regularly (I guess?) and I'm not as out of shape as I thought I was!
And I can still do a back walkover.
That's right. :D
Bahaha.
And I can still do a back walkover.
That's right. :D
Bahaha.
Wednesday, April 15, 2015
I am a donkey
I suppose, rather, that I want to be able to motivate myself very much using this method.
Or rather than wanting to, I have decided to, I guess is the right way of saying it.
"I will finish X before doing Y."
I think the problem that I have is that I turn X into this unmanageable amount of work that I can't possibly do, and then I give up.
"I will finish reading 600 pages in 2 hours before eating dinner."
Of course I get hungry, give up, and then lose all motivation to continue. It seems foolish, but for some reason I've kept doing this.
If I must, I will become a donkey to move forward!
Onward and upward, as they say!
(Or perhaps downward in this case....)
Thursday, April 9, 2015
Bigger isn't better nor is more worth it
People don't like obesity. There's definitely an interesting campaign to reclaim beauty for larger people but honestly, I can't always sympathize with fat people. I've gone on a rant before here,
I guess to look at the issue from a different angle is the idea that more is always better. I mean yes, there is a certain amount of money that can be saved in buying in bulk, but what it is and whether or not it's really worth it really needs to be examined.
For someone whose apartment is the size of a pea (like me), I can't afford to have a lot of things that take up a lot of space. Non-perishables, like soap, toilet paper, facial tissue, and the like are some of the things that I buy in bulk, but I wonder, with all the clutter in my room, what am I sacrificing?
I have to find a place to store it and remember that I have it at that place. I think with the stuff that you use on a daily basis, it's fine, but with things that aren't used very frequently that I think I run across issues. Light bulbs for example. Lately, they last forever. Do I really need 5 of them because it's cheaper per bulb? Does that mean I'll be lugging it around with me everywhere I move because I saved $0.15 per bulb?
If the thing is something that I really don't use, the fact that the thing takes up space and then I have to remember where I put the dang thing becomes a problem. I bought a desk lamp when I went to college. That's more than 12 years ago. IKEA was selling the replacement bulbs so I bought one in case it went out.
It's only just starting to go out now (mind you, I didn't use the thing for about 5 years in between while I was traveling) and I have no idea where the dang replacement bulb is. Now how useful is that really?
I mean, I suppose I could do better with an organizational schema for all the things I have, but I think the point is, it's not just the physical space it takes up, but the mental space required to keep track of such things. Eventually, one accumulates a lot of crap that one really doesn't need. It's taxing on the brain to remember one has all those things and where all of it is.
Eh. I think I just need to organize my room and my thoughts (for the upcoming papers that are due).
I guess to look at the issue from a different angle is the idea that more is always better. I mean yes, there is a certain amount of money that can be saved in buying in bulk, but what it is and whether or not it's really worth it really needs to be examined.
For someone whose apartment is the size of a pea (like me), I can't afford to have a lot of things that take up a lot of space. Non-perishables, like soap, toilet paper, facial tissue, and the like are some of the things that I buy in bulk, but I wonder, with all the clutter in my room, what am I sacrificing?
I have to find a place to store it and remember that I have it at that place. I think with the stuff that you use on a daily basis, it's fine, but with things that aren't used very frequently that I think I run across issues. Light bulbs for example. Lately, they last forever. Do I really need 5 of them because it's cheaper per bulb? Does that mean I'll be lugging it around with me everywhere I move because I saved $0.15 per bulb?
If the thing is something that I really don't use, the fact that the thing takes up space and then I have to remember where I put the dang thing becomes a problem. I bought a desk lamp when I went to college. That's more than 12 years ago. IKEA was selling the replacement bulbs so I bought one in case it went out.
It's only just starting to go out now (mind you, I didn't use the thing for about 5 years in between while I was traveling) and I have no idea where the dang replacement bulb is. Now how useful is that really?
I mean, I suppose I could do better with an organizational schema for all the things I have, but I think the point is, it's not just the physical space it takes up, but the mental space required to keep track of such things. Eventually, one accumulates a lot of crap that one really doesn't need. It's taxing on the brain to remember one has all those things and where all of it is.
Eh. I think I just need to organize my room and my thoughts (for the upcoming papers that are due).
Thursday, April 2, 2015
Dreams
I found an old, old dream diary I kept incredibly sporadically from 2005-2013 (not bad, actually). I just added 2 new entries, so I guess now, it's 10 years old.
I had some interesting dreams. One of the shorter ones goes like this:
"11/9/09
I think I had two dreams (well multiple dreams) but I only remember that one was quite mundane and the other was about pteradactyls."
I clearly don't know how to spell pterodactyl (had to google that).
Others are more detailed (and one is frustratingly unfinished). I think I'm going to pick this up again.
I had some interesting dreams. One of the shorter ones goes like this:
"11/9/09
I think I had two dreams (well multiple dreams) but I only remember that one was quite mundane and the other was about pteradactyls."
I clearly don't know how to spell pterodactyl (had to google that).
Others are more detailed (and one is frustratingly unfinished). I think I'm going to pick this up again.
Tuesday, March 31, 2015
Too much caffeine always makes me thoughtful
Have you ever thought of all your blessings? Even the simplest ones, like being able to breathe?
I think I've been able to appreciate some of the things that others may take for granted because I've had (in a very minor, non-life-threatening way) some of those simple things taken away from me.
I have very slight astigmatism to the point where every eye doctor I've been to has told me that I don't need to have it corrected. There are days when the astigmatism is worse and there are days when suddenly, each and every individual leaf on a tree is visible. In being able to see the world in such a crystal clear way makes me so thankful for vision. We are an incredibly visual culture so I find that being able to participate in it is really a blessing.
I have allergies. This affects how I breathe. Being able to take a normal breath of air reminds me that the simple act of breathing is also something that is so important and something that is to be appreciated.
I love food. Taste buds to distinguish the deliciousness of food makes life better.
It's the little things in life that enhance the big things. And in finding pleasure and thankfulness in these little things, one is able to transfer such joy and appreciation to the bigger things and suddenly life becomes more manageable.
I think I've been able to appreciate some of the things that others may take for granted because I've had (in a very minor, non-life-threatening way) some of those simple things taken away from me.
I have very slight astigmatism to the point where every eye doctor I've been to has told me that I don't need to have it corrected. There are days when the astigmatism is worse and there are days when suddenly, each and every individual leaf on a tree is visible. In being able to see the world in such a crystal clear way makes me so thankful for vision. We are an incredibly visual culture so I find that being able to participate in it is really a blessing.
I have allergies. This affects how I breathe. Being able to take a normal breath of air reminds me that the simple act of breathing is also something that is so important and something that is to be appreciated.
I love food. Taste buds to distinguish the deliciousness of food makes life better.
It's the little things in life that enhance the big things. And in finding pleasure and thankfulness in these little things, one is able to transfer such joy and appreciation to the bigger things and suddenly life becomes more manageable.
Monday, March 30, 2015
Taking compliments
What is it about compliments that make them so hard to accept? And sometimes hard to give?
The dynamics of the relationship with the other person, the desire not to seem false, the embarrassment of saying something that may make the other person uncomfortable...
All these reasons that stop people from doing what will ultimate make the other person aware that they are a great person just seem so silly.
I mean there are counterarguments to this (surprisingly so) because apparently if you make a person aware of certain qualities that you perceive them to have, they may either externally or internally actually start to argue either with you ("No, I'm not really like that...") or with themselves ("How can they think that I'm like that...? I don't have those qualities") and in some ways that self-argumentation will lead the person who is complimented to think less of themselves. I suppose my point here is that sometimes, you could be highlighting something to the person that may be sensitive to them for various reasons (and I feel like I read something about it but I went into the rabbit hole of the interwebs and couldn't find anything so perhaps I'm misguided here).
I suppose a somewhat odd example is that people tell me I have a nice butt. I know I do but honestly, there are a lot of sociological/gender politics at play with that because it's my body and I may like it, but why do other people have to tell me (i.e. point out to me) that it's nice? Why are people looking to begin with? Especially with the butt being a sexualized object of a woman's body, what kinds of implications are there in someone pointing that out to me?
Compliments can backfire on people in that sense because some people don't want to be identified with what seems to be their strong suit (and here, I'm talking less about physical qualities) and I wonder if there's something wrong with that.
Perhaps what I'm getting at is this sense of acceptance of the qualities that people have of themselves. If I'm smart, if I'm boring, if I'm whatever, isn't that simply who I am? If I am the person I am and I accept the qualities I have, what people say, whether they be compliments or insults, shouldn't be hard to accept. That's why I've come to realize when people say "You have a nice butt," I don't think too much of what it says about me (aside from whatever gender politics there are behind it), but I acknowledge that it is a quality that I have and I know I have and I am thankful that the person has noticed it too.
"Thank you."
Now, I think this kind of gets into this idea of self-perception. The reality of the self is this: one has good qualities and bad qualities. Those qualities also run the spectrum of being the epitome of that quality and perhaps being the average of such quality. What I mean is that when you say someone is caring, they can be the pure embodiment of everything that you think a caring person should be, or they can simply be someone who occasionally displays caring-ness. The unfortunate truth with this is that if you've used other people's judgments to define yourself and you meet someone who is more caring than you, there is a minor identity crisis and then there is animosity towards person who caused this crisis. However, one cannot expect to the be epitome of every quality they have. In the end, we are who we are. Other people may have some influence to shape the self, but if one should be active in choosing how one is shaped (or another way of looking at it, is one should choose how one perceives oneself) so that one can strive to bring out the best in oneself.
There often seems to be a disparity between the ideal self and reality, which is why women sometimes buy clothes that are too small for them. Their ideal self is not the person they see in the mirror. People say it all the time too as an excuse for not being their ideal. "If only I..., then I would be...." Perhaps in accepting the reality of who we are (the habits we have, the personality quirks that exist within us, etc.), can we start to also accept or reject other people's assessment of us (which come in the form of a compliment/insult).
The dynamics of the relationship with the other person, the desire not to seem false, the embarrassment of saying something that may make the other person uncomfortable...
All these reasons that stop people from doing what will ultimate make the other person aware that they are a great person just seem so silly.
I mean there are counterarguments to this (surprisingly so) because apparently if you make a person aware of certain qualities that you perceive them to have, they may either externally or internally actually start to argue either with you ("No, I'm not really like that...") or with themselves ("How can they think that I'm like that...? I don't have those qualities") and in some ways that self-argumentation will lead the person who is complimented to think less of themselves. I suppose my point here is that sometimes, you could be highlighting something to the person that may be sensitive to them for various reasons (and I feel like I read something about it but I went into the rabbit hole of the interwebs and couldn't find anything so perhaps I'm misguided here).
I suppose a somewhat odd example is that people tell me I have a nice butt. I know I do but honestly, there are a lot of sociological/gender politics at play with that because it's my body and I may like it, but why do other people have to tell me (i.e. point out to me) that it's nice? Why are people looking to begin with? Especially with the butt being a sexualized object of a woman's body, what kinds of implications are there in someone pointing that out to me?
Compliments can backfire on people in that sense because some people don't want to be identified with what seems to be their strong suit (and here, I'm talking less about physical qualities) and I wonder if there's something wrong with that.
Perhaps what I'm getting at is this sense of acceptance of the qualities that people have of themselves. If I'm smart, if I'm boring, if I'm whatever, isn't that simply who I am? If I am the person I am and I accept the qualities I have, what people say, whether they be compliments or insults, shouldn't be hard to accept. That's why I've come to realize when people say "You have a nice butt," I don't think too much of what it says about me (aside from whatever gender politics there are behind it), but I acknowledge that it is a quality that I have and I know I have and I am thankful that the person has noticed it too.
"Thank you."
Now, I think this kind of gets into this idea of self-perception. The reality of the self is this: one has good qualities and bad qualities. Those qualities also run the spectrum of being the epitome of that quality and perhaps being the average of such quality. What I mean is that when you say someone is caring, they can be the pure embodiment of everything that you think a caring person should be, or they can simply be someone who occasionally displays caring-ness. The unfortunate truth with this is that if you've used other people's judgments to define yourself and you meet someone who is more caring than you, there is a minor identity crisis and then there is animosity towards person who caused this crisis. However, one cannot expect to the be epitome of every quality they have. In the end, we are who we are. Other people may have some influence to shape the self, but if one should be active in choosing how one is shaped (or another way of looking at it, is one should choose how one perceives oneself) so that one can strive to bring out the best in oneself.
There often seems to be a disparity between the ideal self and reality, which is why women sometimes buy clothes that are too small for them. Their ideal self is not the person they see in the mirror. People say it all the time too as an excuse for not being their ideal. "If only I..., then I would be...." Perhaps in accepting the reality of who we are (the habits we have, the personality quirks that exist within us, etc.), can we start to also accept or reject other people's assessment of us (which come in the form of a compliment/insult).
Sunday, March 29, 2015
Frivolous spending and space
I have been on a campaign since I've been in grad school. My campaign is simply to throw away all the unnecessary crap I've accumulated in my life and actually use the things that I bought because I thought they'd be useful.
Like this:
Looks like a pretty cool purchase, right? (In case you don't know what it is, it's used to help drain water when you're washing rice.) If I don't use it, it's useless and a waste of space. So that's been my test. If I don't use it or forget I have it, I don't need it and I donate it. It's actually somewhat of a process but I am also on a budget so that helps frame my mindset when thinking about whether or not to throw something out (because I'd rather not have to purchase something I already have). And after watching a documentary on plastic waste, I've been trying to minimize frivolous throwing out too (which is why many things either go to recycling or donation piles).
So I guess all of this throwing out and recycling kind of got me thinking, of all the things we buy, how much of it is something we need? For example, I realized that I may not have everything that I want in terms of having a full wardrobe (I'm talking basics - I'm still missing some stuff, imo) but I have a ton of clothes. I don't wear half of them. So I'm getting rid of things that I don't really wear, things that don't really look good on me, things that have a high probably of wardrobe malfunctions, things that are high maintenance, etc. And because I'm in throw-everything-out-I-don't-need-anything mode, I've also come to realize that one can really make do with what one has.
For example, my blender:
It's ancient! The one pictured above is a 5-speed because I couldn't find my 3-speed one. I'm guessing it's too old for even the Internet to have pictures of. Hahahaha
But it works, I love that's it's old, and I don't need anything else. It's also super easy to clean (which is kind of a big deal for me). All those stupid fancy shmancy mixer machine crap takes like 50 years to clean and I'd rather be reading or playing Tetris than dealing with the maintenance of those things.
I mean, in the end, humans really don't need all that much to survive. Yes, there are things that make life easier (like washing machines), and there are things that make life more complicated in incredibly unnecessary ways (like espresso machines that require daily, weekly, and monthly cleaning/maintenance). I suppose I'm going through this phase where I'm trying to simplify a lot of things and I've come to realize that things are one of the ways I unnecessarily complicate my life. Ugh. I seriously have so much crap.
So that brings me to my other point. I think because my pea-sized apartment is overflowing with things I need to sort, it also has made me face again the sheer amount of waste I've collected. Some of it may be important, but a lot of it probably isn't. So much space is wasted on things that a person doesn't use. More money is spent on the storage of these these things... For what purpose? If there is none, doesn't it makes sense to get rid of it all?
Sifting through all my stuff is a pain, but it helps remind me that I really don't need all that much to be happy (a space to call my own, Internet, my books, and a kitchen). And I'm really hoping that the spending habits that I'm slowly acquiring carry over when I actually start making money because shopping for things and having too many things is a pain in the butt. Simplicity is good, imo.
Like this:
Looks like a pretty cool purchase, right? (In case you don't know what it is, it's used to help drain water when you're washing rice.) If I don't use it, it's useless and a waste of space. So that's been my test. If I don't use it or forget I have it, I don't need it and I donate it. It's actually somewhat of a process but I am also on a budget so that helps frame my mindset when thinking about whether or not to throw something out (because I'd rather not have to purchase something I already have). And after watching a documentary on plastic waste, I've been trying to minimize frivolous throwing out too (which is why many things either go to recycling or donation piles).
So I guess all of this throwing out and recycling kind of got me thinking, of all the things we buy, how much of it is something we need? For example, I realized that I may not have everything that I want in terms of having a full wardrobe (I'm talking basics - I'm still missing some stuff, imo) but I have a ton of clothes. I don't wear half of them. So I'm getting rid of things that I don't really wear, things that don't really look good on me, things that have a high probably of wardrobe malfunctions, things that are high maintenance, etc. And because I'm in throw-everything-out-I-don't-need-anything mode, I've also come to realize that one can really make do with what one has.
For example, my blender:
It's ancient! The one pictured above is a 5-speed because I couldn't find my 3-speed one. I'm guessing it's too old for even the Internet to have pictures of. Hahahaha
But it works, I love that's it's old, and I don't need anything else. It's also super easy to clean (which is kind of a big deal for me). All those stupid fancy shmancy mixer machine crap takes like 50 years to clean and I'd rather be reading or playing Tetris than dealing with the maintenance of those things.
I mean, in the end, humans really don't need all that much to survive. Yes, there are things that make life easier (like washing machines), and there are things that make life more complicated in incredibly unnecessary ways (like espresso machines that require daily, weekly, and monthly cleaning/maintenance). I suppose I'm going through this phase where I'm trying to simplify a lot of things and I've come to realize that things are one of the ways I unnecessarily complicate my life. Ugh. I seriously have so much crap.
So that brings me to my other point. I think because my pea-sized apartment is overflowing with things I need to sort, it also has made me face again the sheer amount of waste I've collected. Some of it may be important, but a lot of it probably isn't. So much space is wasted on things that a person doesn't use. More money is spent on the storage of these these things... For what purpose? If there is none, doesn't it makes sense to get rid of it all?
Sifting through all my stuff is a pain, but it helps remind me that I really don't need all that much to be happy (a space to call my own, Internet, my books, and a kitchen). And I'm really hoping that the spending habits that I'm slowly acquiring carry over when I actually start making money because shopping for things and having too many things is a pain in the butt. Simplicity is good, imo.
Friday, March 27, 2015
Living for oneself
I went to a workshop about how women could better negotiate their salaries - the whole $0.77 that women make per dollar that men do seems to be more complex than just some kind of overt discrimination against women. Women apparently are less likely to negotiate unless they're doing it on behalf of someone (or thinking about the whole group). It's an interesting phenomenon.
Essentially women will perform/negotiate better when they are thinking beyond themselves. I wonder if the whole maternal instinct thing has anything to do with it.
It's interesting to me that people often seem to like being take care of. I mean for obvious reason, I understand why that's the case but I can't help but to feel like something is wrong with me when I want to be the one taking care of myself.
Perhaps this is a poor example, but often times, people have talked about how they like it when someone cooks for them or how they won't really cook well for themselves unless they are cooking for someone else. I love cooking for myself and for others. But perhaps it's because I love cooking that I can say that when others find the task burdensome.
I wonder if it has something to do with me having a method to what seems to be my madness and I don't like it when people mess with my processes. Perhaps this is why I find people who enter my space without permission to be invasive.
Humans are meant to be social creatures, but I think that to a certain extent, one must be able to live independently to contribute to that social aspect. The idea that a team that is made up of only strong players comes to mind (kind of like the teams in Naruto! :D).
Eh. I don't know where I'm going with this. I guess with women, it almost seems like there is an impossibility to this aspect of independence. Does that mean that women should be more selfish when it comes to negotiation? And what does that say about women or the perception of women or the societal influence on women when they "inherently" seem to do better when it's not for them? Is there some kind of underlying thinking in society that women must be selfless, giving, and sacrificial?
Actually, I suppose there is. The very epitome of motherhood are those amazing but somewhat self-defeating images, news stories, and what have you that show how great women are when they fight for their children. How come we never see that with men? Or do we and I've just missed them? Hm.
Essentially women will perform/negotiate better when they are thinking beyond themselves. I wonder if the whole maternal instinct thing has anything to do with it.
It's interesting to me that people often seem to like being take care of. I mean for obvious reason, I understand why that's the case but I can't help but to feel like something is wrong with me when I want to be the one taking care of myself.
Perhaps this is a poor example, but often times, people have talked about how they like it when someone cooks for them or how they won't really cook well for themselves unless they are cooking for someone else. I love cooking for myself and for others. But perhaps it's because I love cooking that I can say that when others find the task burdensome.
I wonder if it has something to do with me having a method to what seems to be my madness and I don't like it when people mess with my processes. Perhaps this is why I find people who enter my space without permission to be invasive.
Humans are meant to be social creatures, but I think that to a certain extent, one must be able to live independently to contribute to that social aspect. The idea that a team that is made up of only strong players comes to mind (kind of like the teams in Naruto! :D).
Eh. I don't know where I'm going with this. I guess with women, it almost seems like there is an impossibility to this aspect of independence. Does that mean that women should be more selfish when it comes to negotiation? And what does that say about women or the perception of women or the societal influence on women when they "inherently" seem to do better when it's not for them? Is there some kind of underlying thinking in society that women must be selfless, giving, and sacrificial?
Actually, I suppose there is. The very epitome of motherhood are those amazing but somewhat self-defeating images, news stories, and what have you that show how great women are when they fight for their children. How come we never see that with men? Or do we and I've just missed them? Hm.
Monday, March 23, 2015
Time is a luxury
After World War II, people started to have more free time because of technological advances. With more leisure time, leisure activities became a salable commodity and (after poorly condensing 60ish years of history) here we are today.
Games, blogs, social media websites, etc. that are designed to "help" us actually make us waste more time looking at them. In trying to go running, I spend 30 minutes downloading and "researching" apps that will help me track my run or give me a training menu to optimize my run (why don't I just go running and do the research later?). We fill the little gaps in our day with information that may not even be useful and suddenly, we're busy without even realizing it (where does all the time go, I always wonder).
I've come to realize that leisure activities are exactly that: when one has leisure. However, we've flipped this phenomenon and leisure activities have started to fill up the day when work needs to be done. There's quite obviously a balance required for this (one cannot always work and one cannot always be passing time with leisure activities unless one has the financial means to do so) but there's a problem when one tries to pepper the day with leisure activities when one does not have the availability to do so.
The prevalence of these "time-wasters" is indicative of a displacement of what is important in life, whether it is work, chores, homework, etc. We've forgotten that things need to be done first before we can relax. Or at least I have.
Time can be seen as a commodity. In line with the idea that time is money, how are you spending your time? What is your day filled with? I feel like this shows what is important to you and more importantly, what creates you. If you are not what you do, then what are you?
There are flaws to this way of thinking but I wonder, if I spend all my time playing Tetris Battle, all I am is a master at Tetris Battle. What have I gained from it? Spatial reasoning? How does that help me or society? The way society views people is by their utility and for someone like me, I am useless to society and undeserving of any compensation for time that I spent poorly (because I have not contributed to society in any significant way).
So then, the question becomes, how do I (you, we) spend our time more wisely? I think that I need to realize that I need to get the things that are important done first. I keep forgetting that for some reason. Focus on what's important to me, whether that's the really annoying daily tasks of doing the dishes, putting down that game of Tetris to talk to a friend, or writing the paper that I'm stuck on (or the story that I have swimming in my head).
Replace the trash with what is needed and simplify life to only the necessities. Leisure time is a luxury because time can only be spent (and never gained back).
Games, blogs, social media websites, etc. that are designed to "help" us actually make us waste more time looking at them. In trying to go running, I spend 30 minutes downloading and "researching" apps that will help me track my run or give me a training menu to optimize my run (why don't I just go running and do the research later?). We fill the little gaps in our day with information that may not even be useful and suddenly, we're busy without even realizing it (where does all the time go, I always wonder).
I've come to realize that leisure activities are exactly that: when one has leisure. However, we've flipped this phenomenon and leisure activities have started to fill up the day when work needs to be done. There's quite obviously a balance required for this (one cannot always work and one cannot always be passing time with leisure activities unless one has the financial means to do so) but there's a problem when one tries to pepper the day with leisure activities when one does not have the availability to do so.
The prevalence of these "time-wasters" is indicative of a displacement of what is important in life, whether it is work, chores, homework, etc. We've forgotten that things need to be done first before we can relax. Or at least I have.
Time can be seen as a commodity. In line with the idea that time is money, how are you spending your time? What is your day filled with? I feel like this shows what is important to you and more importantly, what creates you. If you are not what you do, then what are you?
There are flaws to this way of thinking but I wonder, if I spend all my time playing Tetris Battle, all I am is a master at Tetris Battle. What have I gained from it? Spatial reasoning? How does that help me or society? The way society views people is by their utility and for someone like me, I am useless to society and undeserving of any compensation for time that I spent poorly (because I have not contributed to society in any significant way).
So then, the question becomes, how do I (you, we) spend our time more wisely? I think that I need to realize that I need to get the things that are important done first. I keep forgetting that for some reason. Focus on what's important to me, whether that's the really annoying daily tasks of doing the dishes, putting down that game of Tetris to talk to a friend, or writing the paper that I'm stuck on (or the story that I have swimming in my head).
Replace the trash with what is needed and simplify life to only the necessities. Leisure time is a luxury because time can only be spent (and never gained back).
Wednesday, March 18, 2015
What I think about when I read my writing
I say this time and time again, but I have a weird fascination with my writing and my thoughts. Perhaps others feel the same way so it may not be so weird, but I find my own writing, which is a ordered manifestation of my thoughts, to be pretty interesting.
I just read a doodle* that I wrote two years ago makes no sense whatsoever. Well, I think it does, but the way it progresses and what I'm trying to get at is so vague that I feel like it could be read a hundred different ways by a hundred different people, and everyone would have a valid point. And I wonder, where in the world did I come up with that?
It's a weird feeling when the writing or thoughts that you've extracted don't feel to be completely your own. I think too, what's interesting, is this idea of audience. Who am I writing to? A future me? My "readership," however paltry?
In the end, it is to a future me, but at least with this blog, it's tempered by the fact that it's public (so I try to polish a tad more than I do with my doodles...).
*Doodles are my private thought journals. Some I end up sharing, others are just plain incoherent, and yet others really are for no one to see except a future me.
I just read a doodle* that I wrote two years ago makes no sense whatsoever. Well, I think it does, but the way it progresses and what I'm trying to get at is so vague that I feel like it could be read a hundred different ways by a hundred different people, and everyone would have a valid point. And I wonder, where in the world did I come up with that?
It's a weird feeling when the writing or thoughts that you've extracted don't feel to be completely your own. I think too, what's interesting, is this idea of audience. Who am I writing to? A future me? My "readership," however paltry?
In the end, it is to a future me, but at least with this blog, it's tempered by the fact that it's public (so I try to polish a tad more than I do with my doodles...).
*Doodles are my private thought journals. Some I end up sharing, others are just plain incoherent, and yet others really are for no one to see except a future me.
Monday, March 16, 2015
Suffering
"I can't believe in God because I can't explain the suffering in the world."
"I'm more of a believer in science."
Same person said this and yes, I was eavesdropping on a conversation I shouldn't have been, but I couldn't help but to be slightly frustrated at these statements.
When did God ever say that there wouldn't be suffering? Where in the Bible does it say that?
The idea that suffering should not exist in this world and that there is a god who is out there that will take it away is a purely Western cultural construct. In America, in times of hardship, the prayer often goes, "Lord, please take this suffering away." In other countries (or perhaps it was just this one country - I forget which one though), the prayer goes, "Lord, please help me get through this suffering."
There is an expectation in Western culture (or was it just in America?) that there should be no suffering and when it comes down to it, life should be easy. Yet there's something inherently wrong with this kind of thinking, especially in light of cliche phrases like "no pain, no gain," "whatever doesn't kill you makes you stronger," etc. Suffering is sometimes necessary in order for a person to grow. Training for a marathon can be painful but also rewarding. Exercising and dieting (i.e. creating a healthy lifestyle) can be painful for people who have certain types of addictions or extenuating circumstances that make it really difficult for them to cultivate that which is good for them. However, to say that one should remove the cause of suffering (especially in the cases mentioned) seems ridiculous and even wrong.
To extend the argument then, how can one say that the suffering, hardship, or problem that a person is going through is something that should be taken away when no one can say how it'll change, develop, or refine the person? Isn't that a little presumptuous? To bring God into the picture, isn't it also to question God's methods?
I suppose the counterargument could mention something about how it doesn't have to be in that manner, but from my experience, people can be so stubborn that only something as jarring as some kind of suffering will change the person. And sometimes, even that does not change the person for the better. So no, I don't think that taking suffering away will actually address the issue.
This goes into the idea of free will because humans have autonomy, which is precisely why things get so messy, imo.
Anyway, my point is that the perception that suffering is somehow bad or wrong is flawed. Now, this is not to diminish suffering and say that suffering is an easy thing to go through. It sucks. I'm just saying that it shouldn't be viewed with a take-it-away-because-no-one-should-go-through-anything-bad kind of attitude.
To address the second statement, the very thinking that science and religion are diametrically opposed is incredibly archaic thinking that has roots in the Enlightenment period (what is that, like the 1600s?). Go to the upper echelons of science, and they will tell you otherwise. Go to the most learned doctors in medicine and they will tell you that they still cannot determine why sometimes certain illnesses and cancers are cured without treatment (because medicine is not an exact science). Obviously, there are opposing arguments, but I feel like the statement that a person "believes" in science and not religion has (again) inherent flaws. In saying this, I also feel like the person is saying that science and philosophy are separate and irreconcilable because what else is religion but philosophies on how to live one's life? If this is truly the case, then what does science say about morality or of how to treat others? The basic idea (ideologies, perhaps?) of science then is that it is good and right for humans to act purely out of self-interest and that greed is simply a by-product of survival. And here we have the problem because such people also say that we shouldn't suffer, yet by believing only in science, humans will be the very cause of such suffering.
I think I've oversimplified the argument in many ways and there are many holes that need to be filled but I'm le tired so we shall stop here.
I'm probably guilty of similar faults as this person who so glibly spouted such ideological inconsistencies but I think that it bothers me, because I've gone through the trouble of reconciling such things (though I'm not quite all there yet and there will probably be more to be reconciled in the future).
"I'm more of a believer in science."
Same person said this and yes, I was eavesdropping on a conversation I shouldn't have been, but I couldn't help but to be slightly frustrated at these statements.
When did God ever say that there wouldn't be suffering? Where in the Bible does it say that?
The idea that suffering should not exist in this world and that there is a god who is out there that will take it away is a purely Western cultural construct. In America, in times of hardship, the prayer often goes, "Lord, please take this suffering away." In other countries (or perhaps it was just this one country - I forget which one though), the prayer goes, "Lord, please help me get through this suffering."
There is an expectation in Western culture (or was it just in America?) that there should be no suffering and when it comes down to it, life should be easy. Yet there's something inherently wrong with this kind of thinking, especially in light of cliche phrases like "no pain, no gain," "whatever doesn't kill you makes you stronger," etc. Suffering is sometimes necessary in order for a person to grow. Training for a marathon can be painful but also rewarding. Exercising and dieting (i.e. creating a healthy lifestyle) can be painful for people who have certain types of addictions or extenuating circumstances that make it really difficult for them to cultivate that which is good for them. However, to say that one should remove the cause of suffering (especially in the cases mentioned) seems ridiculous and even wrong.
To extend the argument then, how can one say that the suffering, hardship, or problem that a person is going through is something that should be taken away when no one can say how it'll change, develop, or refine the person? Isn't that a little presumptuous? To bring God into the picture, isn't it also to question God's methods?
I suppose the counterargument could mention something about how it doesn't have to be in that manner, but from my experience, people can be so stubborn that only something as jarring as some kind of suffering will change the person. And sometimes, even that does not change the person for the better. So no, I don't think that taking suffering away will actually address the issue.
This goes into the idea of free will because humans have autonomy, which is precisely why things get so messy, imo.
Anyway, my point is that the perception that suffering is somehow bad or wrong is flawed. Now, this is not to diminish suffering and say that suffering is an easy thing to go through. It sucks. I'm just saying that it shouldn't be viewed with a take-it-away-because-no-one-should-go-through-anything-bad kind of attitude.
To address the second statement, the very thinking that science and religion are diametrically opposed is incredibly archaic thinking that has roots in the Enlightenment period (what is that, like the 1600s?). Go to the upper echelons of science, and they will tell you otherwise. Go to the most learned doctors in medicine and they will tell you that they still cannot determine why sometimes certain illnesses and cancers are cured without treatment (because medicine is not an exact science). Obviously, there are opposing arguments, but I feel like the statement that a person "believes" in science and not religion has (again) inherent flaws. In saying this, I also feel like the person is saying that science and philosophy are separate and irreconcilable because what else is religion but philosophies on how to live one's life? If this is truly the case, then what does science say about morality or of how to treat others? The basic idea (ideologies, perhaps?) of science then is that it is good and right for humans to act purely out of self-interest and that greed is simply a by-product of survival. And here we have the problem because such people also say that we shouldn't suffer, yet by believing only in science, humans will be the very cause of such suffering.
I think I've oversimplified the argument in many ways and there are many holes that need to be filled but I'm le tired so we shall stop here.
I'm probably guilty of similar faults as this person who so glibly spouted such ideological inconsistencies but I think that it bothers me, because I've gone through the trouble of reconciling such things (though I'm not quite all there yet and there will probably be more to be reconciled in the future).
Monday, March 9, 2015
Follow-through and perfectionism
When one makes a goal, one should do their best to achieve said goal.
There's this idea of follow-through with this. A goal is a projection and in some ways, a hope.
"I will run a marathon."
"I will lose weight."
"I will stop playing Tetris Battle once the energy bar runs out."
To follow through with what one sets out to do (or hopes to accomplish) is probably the most important part of goal setting (the most obvious, yet the least acknowledged, perhaps?).
This is where I fall apart. I'm so good at setting goals and setting up plans to achieve said goals, and then I don't follow through.
I'm bad at following up with people too.
"Did you remember to...?"
"Are you going to...?"
"I'll call you back when I get home." (and then I don't)
I usually attribute it to distractions and forgetfulness and I wonder if there's something else to it. Perhaps I can fall back on the ol' excuse of my self-diagnosed mild ADHD.
Perhaps it has something to do with being a perfectionist.
The steps I set out to do have not perfectly manifested in the way that was planned and thus, I cannot move on to the final step of the process and follow through with/achieve the goal I set out to do.
I wonder if being a discouraged perfectionist (term taken from Kevin Lemans' The Birth Order Book, which I found to be an interesting read) has anything to do with it.
그냥 대충하고 넘어가 (Just half-ass it and get it done and over it) becomes a mantra for me when I don't have time but it grates against my standards for the quality of work I hold myself to.
There's never enough time in the world to do all the things we want.
그냥 대충하고 넘어갈까?
(Should I just half-ass it and get it done and over with?)
There's this idea of follow-through with this. A goal is a projection and in some ways, a hope.
"I will run a marathon."
"I will lose weight."
"I will stop playing Tetris Battle once the energy bar runs out."
To follow through with what one sets out to do (or hopes to accomplish) is probably the most important part of goal setting (the most obvious, yet the least acknowledged, perhaps?).
This is where I fall apart. I'm so good at setting goals and setting up plans to achieve said goals, and then I don't follow through.
I'm bad at following up with people too.
"Did you remember to...?"
"Are you going to...?"
"I'll call you back when I get home." (and then I don't)
I usually attribute it to distractions and forgetfulness and I wonder if there's something else to it. Perhaps I can fall back on the ol' excuse of my self-diagnosed mild ADHD.
Perhaps it has something to do with being a perfectionist.
The steps I set out to do have not perfectly manifested in the way that was planned and thus, I cannot move on to the final step of the process and follow through with/achieve the goal I set out to do.
I wonder if being a discouraged perfectionist (term taken from Kevin Lemans' The Birth Order Book, which I found to be an interesting read) has anything to do with it.
그냥 대충하고 넘어가 (Just half-ass it and get it done and over it) becomes a mantra for me when I don't have time but it grates against my standards for the quality of work I hold myself to.
There's never enough time in the world to do all the things we want.
그냥 대충하고 넘어갈까?
(Should I just half-ass it and get it done and over with?)
Wednesday, February 4, 2015
Language and Culture
Nebulous concepts that embody so much.
Nebulous because they defy simple definition. I mean there's always going to be the dictionary definition, but what language, culture, and a host of other ideas embody is hard to pin down because it is constantly changing. There are rules but language and culture are creative. There can be a ripple in the rules that permanently change the thing.
I see concepts (ideas?) such as language and culture as clay or something a little more elastic where a nudge may cause a ripple, but a strong enough force (whether one big force or tiny and repetitive force in one location) changes the shape of the thing. Slang enters the realm of dictionary language and is eventually absorbed into the "norm."
These things are three-dimensional and change according to circumstance. It's fascinating.
Nebulous because they defy simple definition. I mean there's always going to be the dictionary definition, but what language, culture, and a host of other ideas embody is hard to pin down because it is constantly changing. There are rules but language and culture are creative. There can be a ripple in the rules that permanently change the thing.
I see concepts (ideas?) such as language and culture as clay or something a little more elastic where a nudge may cause a ripple, but a strong enough force (whether one big force or tiny and repetitive force in one location) changes the shape of the thing. Slang enters the realm of dictionary language and is eventually absorbed into the "norm."
These things are three-dimensional and change according to circumstance. It's fascinating.
Tuesday, February 3, 2015
Poetry is evocative
So many thoughts roaming around in my head!
There are too many thought projects to synthesize into coherency.. I shall list a few to at least get something down.
1. The perception of people's states as stationary or robust (is that the word?) and how it affects another person's attitude toward them.
2. Life, attitudes, and our surroundings is all about synthesis.
3. Cooking, for me, does not end with a "finished dish." Like reading, I am in constant dialogue with my cooking.
4. The illusion in certainty.
5. Poetry's ability to evoke emotion with its outward simplicity and underlying complexity. (And I do love wordplay).
Bah, I'll never get through them all.
Been motivated now that I'm pretty much over my cold (there's a lingering cough, as if to remind me of my weakened state).
Poetry makes me poetic. Rather, it makes me enjoy wordplay.
Getting back into writing, at least fiction. Now to turn that energy towards academic writing! It really is like an imposing wall, just looming over me in this very domineering and impregnable fashion.
Perhaps it is all in my head. I feel like my thoughts are bouncing in 100 different directions. We shall see where this leads us (because each of my thoughts has become a person, turning me, into a collective we).
There are too many thought projects to synthesize into coherency.. I shall list a few to at least get something down.
1. The perception of people's states as stationary or robust (is that the word?) and how it affects another person's attitude toward them.
2. Life, attitudes, and our surroundings is all about synthesis.
3. Cooking, for me, does not end with a "finished dish." Like reading, I am in constant dialogue with my cooking.
4. The illusion in certainty.
5. Poetry's ability to evoke emotion with its outward simplicity and underlying complexity. (And I do love wordplay).
Bah, I'll never get through them all.
Been motivated now that I'm pretty much over my cold (there's a lingering cough, as if to remind me of my weakened state).
Poetry makes me poetic. Rather, it makes me enjoy wordplay.
Getting back into writing, at least fiction. Now to turn that energy towards academic writing! It really is like an imposing wall, just looming over me in this very domineering and impregnable fashion.
Perhaps it is all in my head. I feel like my thoughts are bouncing in 100 different directions. We shall see where this leads us (because each of my thoughts has become a person, turning me, into a collective we).
Wednesday, January 28, 2015
What if it's not enough?
Lately, I feel like the stakes in life have gotten higher. The mistakes I make, the things I do or don't do down to even the events I attend or groups I choose to take part in all seem to make a mark on my future.
One can chalk it up to just stress and age and perhaps a number of other factors, which may or may not be true and beyond that, I think my conclusion is this:
Whatever happens will happen. I just need to do what I've always been doing. So what if the window of opportunity is getting smaller? Or that bigger life decisions are coming up? In the end, I feel like I've always approached life in a manner where I'll end up where I need to be, when I need to and I don't see why that should change now. By putting more pressure on myself, I feel like I'm not getting anywhere. I just need to be good at what I love and keep loving the people in my life to the best of my ability. There's nothing else I can do, really.
I don't know why I forgot that recently.
And now comes the hard part. Living this philosophy.
One can chalk it up to just stress and age and perhaps a number of other factors, which may or may not be true and beyond that, I think my conclusion is this:
Whatever happens will happen. I just need to do what I've always been doing. So what if the window of opportunity is getting smaller? Or that bigger life decisions are coming up? In the end, I feel like I've always approached life in a manner where I'll end up where I need to be, when I need to and I don't see why that should change now. By putting more pressure on myself, I feel like I'm not getting anywhere. I just need to be good at what I love and keep loving the people in my life to the best of my ability. There's nothing else I can do, really.
I don't know why I forgot that recently.
And now comes the hard part. Living this philosophy.
Monday, January 19, 2015
Good parenting is...
when your children acknowledge that you've done a good job.
For obvious reasons, this statement has flaws but more and more I realize that I've been blessed with awesome parents. By no means were they perfect nor have they become any closer to it now because they're older (and somehow, we associate age and experience with wisdom...). However, the decisions they made, the type of people they were, they type of people they have become, the experiences they chose to put us kids through (or perhaps there was less choosing and more falling into though..), and the way they raised us helped to form us as people. I see resonances of their philosophies in the way I live my life and I can say that I've picked up some good things from them. I say that my parents did a good job, despite (most likely) being clueless, because I knew I was loved, I knew they were trying, and I knew they listened.
One thing that I've noticed with parents is that children often think their parents can't/don't change but perhaps it has to do with the child's approach to them. The parent-child relationship is always evolving (quite obviously because children grow up and parents age) and sometimes one side or the other doesn't want to or can't seem to acknowledge the change/growth and friction forms, the relationship never grows, or it becomes toxic. I sometimes feel like an anomaly when I realize that my parents treat me like an adult amidst all the people who complain that their parents don't listen or don't acknowledge that they are adults too. So I feel lucky. But I do think that there are a lot of kids whose relationships with their parents have evolved in a good way - perhaps I only hear the complaints because one never does seem to talk about how awesome things are with one's parents (or significant others or friends or anyone of significance, really... the talking usually is about the bad, whether it is to see if there is any advice that can be given or simply to vent.. hm.. I smell another blog post with this one...).
At any rate, I am not a perfect being nor do I claim to be one and there are flaws in all things human. However, I'm glad that I had the parents I did and I'm thankful for what they did for me, especially for instilling me with the values that they have.
Aww, it's too early for either of the parent's day, but I'm just glad they exist. :) I can only hope that I become like them.
I love you, Mom and Dad.
For obvious reasons, this statement has flaws but more and more I realize that I've been blessed with awesome parents. By no means were they perfect nor have they become any closer to it now because they're older (and somehow, we associate age and experience with wisdom...). However, the decisions they made, the type of people they were, they type of people they have become, the experiences they chose to put us kids through (or perhaps there was less choosing and more falling into though..), and the way they raised us helped to form us as people. I see resonances of their philosophies in the way I live my life and I can say that I've picked up some good things from them. I say that my parents did a good job, despite (most likely) being clueless, because I knew I was loved, I knew they were trying, and I knew they listened.
One thing that I've noticed with parents is that children often think their parents can't/don't change but perhaps it has to do with the child's approach to them. The parent-child relationship is always evolving (quite obviously because children grow up and parents age) and sometimes one side or the other doesn't want to or can't seem to acknowledge the change/growth and friction forms, the relationship never grows, or it becomes toxic. I sometimes feel like an anomaly when I realize that my parents treat me like an adult amidst all the people who complain that their parents don't listen or don't acknowledge that they are adults too. So I feel lucky. But I do think that there are a lot of kids whose relationships with their parents have evolved in a good way - perhaps I only hear the complaints because one never does seem to talk about how awesome things are with one's parents (or significant others or friends or anyone of significance, really... the talking usually is about the bad, whether it is to see if there is any advice that can be given or simply to vent.. hm.. I smell another blog post with this one...).
At any rate, I am not a perfect being nor do I claim to be one and there are flaws in all things human. However, I'm glad that I had the parents I did and I'm thankful for what they did for me, especially for instilling me with the values that they have.
Aww, it's too early for either of the parent's day, but I'm just glad they exist. :) I can only hope that I become like them.
I love you, Mom and Dad.
Tuesday, January 6, 2015
Contrary
Been feeling off all day. My entire existence annoyed me today.
Depressed? Perhaps.
Bad mood? Oh, for sure. And because I was in a bad mood, I didn't want to do anything, which put me in a worse mood because I was being unproductive.
Got some stuff done, talked to the bf (love that he makes me laugh :)), and felt marginally better.
Eh, perhaps sleep will help.
I feel like being dramatic and it annoys me. I'm being meta-dramatic now. Ugh.
Tomorrow will be a better day. Sleep cures all, imo.
Depressed? Perhaps.
Bad mood? Oh, for sure. And because I was in a bad mood, I didn't want to do anything, which put me in a worse mood because I was being unproductive.
Got some stuff done, talked to the bf (love that he makes me laugh :)), and felt marginally better.
Eh, perhaps sleep will help.
I feel like being dramatic and it annoys me. I'm being meta-dramatic now. Ugh.
Tomorrow will be a better day. Sleep cures all, imo.