The endless comparisons of who's school schedule, school day, or lack of sleep/stress.
Shits = none given.
Thursday, October 9, 2014
Wednesday, October 8, 2014
No Title
I wrote this once before on my Facebook about 4-5 years ago and it has been in my mind for as much time. I always thought that the initial version was rather weak, and didn't do my mind's eye justice. My limiting factor was my ability to write; I have improved leaps and bounds over the person I was, and although i have room for improvement, I find myself in a good enough position to give this another shot. I have done little fiction writing int he past year or so, because I have been busy being productive in other avenues of my writing, but it was never forgotten. My creative writing is still a massive part of who I am, and although unexpressed for the last year, it probably shadows any other aspect of who I am - I am a writer, of which a large part is consumed with a larger dream of releasing full novels with some of the fleshed out worlds I have created over the past few years that I have yet to release for public consumption. I will explain further in the future, but for now, I'd like to preface this piece by explaining something.
This piece is a weird, twisted one sided story that I haven't bothered putting more thought into, because it is perfect the way it is - simply as a glimpse of a strange world, a fantastical growth from a deeper recess of myself. This piece is more of an exploration of what I find creepy, scary, and disturbing, and allows me to practice my situational writing. Basically, a situation that would be terrifying to find yourself in. I've modified it in my head from the original, but the same basic idea still stands.
The dog was barking again - nothing new there.
"Chester! Be quiet! No one's there."
Ever since they'd moved to the neighborhood, he'd been barking at every sound. It'll take him some time to get used to being so close to people. Travis sat by the computer, trying to refocus on his work, but Chester kept on hollering at the invisible enemy. After a minute of sporadic barking inhibiting reattempts to concentrate, Travis got up from his desk and walked into the living room where Chester was barking at something outside the window. Travis took a quick glance, and as he'd suspected, it was nothing; if anything, it was the neighbor working in the yard. Jon could be found out in his yard at any hour of the day, but as the sun set, he usually took one last stab at planting, fixing, or rearranging some aspect of the garden.
With a sigh, and a quick ruffle of Chester's ears, Travis turned to walk into the adjacent open kitchen. Chester remained ever alert, his tongue suspended between his teeth, panting lightly, staring out of the low hanging window. Travis, unconcerned, opened the fridge and grabbed a Pepsi, looked at it, and then put it back in favor of Pepsi Max - Sophie had gotten on him about soda causing cancer or some rubbish of the sort. He opened the 20 oz bottle, letting carbonation escape before taking a swig. Turning, he took a casual look into the living room - Chester, ever watchful.
Travis chuckled, "You show 'em, boy."
Chester shifted a bit, rearranging his jowls as he surveyed the land before him. He then honed in a new target to begin his mumbles and growls - the precursor to his usual barking sessions.
"Hey, that's enough, buddy, I think whatever you're trying to act tough for is probably scared off by now.", Travis said lightly as he approached the front of the house again and laid a hand on Chester's back. Chester let out a few barks, and then turned to his owner briefly.
"Okay, okay, I'm going to show you that there is nothing there, come here." Putting his drink on the mantle, and grabbing Chester's collar, Travis pulled him to the front door.
Opening the door, one hand remaining firmly on Chester's collar, they walked onto the front step.
"As usual, you're overreacting,", Travis spoke to his puppy as if he could understand him, "I think the score is about a million, me, and zero, you."
Charlie barked once more at something down the road, and Travis followed his sight line. A neighbor down the road was standing on his front step, as well.
"If you're going to bark at everyone that walks out of their house, Ches, I'm going to have to put you in the backyard - I can't do my work."
The dog began intermittently growling, his eyes peeled in the same direction as before. Travis kneeled down to ease the discomfort of being half stooped down to keep a steady hand on his puppy.
"Ches, stop it, seriously."
Taking a second glance, Travis noticed that another neighbor had emerged down the street and was standing oddly slumped over on his front step. He couldn't remember his name, but he remembered meeting him the other week. He looked at one of the closest houses to his own and saw Mrs. Samson doing the same thing, and upon further investigation, all of the neighbors were acting the same way - slumped over, arms sort of dangling by their sides, unmoving from their respective front steps, doors open behind them. Finally, Travis turned his gaze to Jon's house, his nearest neighbor, and the one he had gotten to know the best over the past few months since he and Sophie had moved into the new house; alarmingly, he too was acting strangely.
Half whispering, Travis pulled his dog closer, "Chester, what's wrong with them?", but Chester only growled, his muzzle crinkled up, ears half folded back in alarm.
Travis made a C shape with his free hand, cupping it around his mouth, and yelled across the street to Jon, "Jon, are you alright?", his voice cracking a bit.
No response.
To Be Continued...
This piece is a weird, twisted one sided story that I haven't bothered putting more thought into, because it is perfect the way it is - simply as a glimpse of a strange world, a fantastical growth from a deeper recess of myself. This piece is more of an exploration of what I find creepy, scary, and disturbing, and allows me to practice my situational writing. Basically, a situation that would be terrifying to find yourself in. I've modified it in my head from the original, but the same basic idea still stands.
The dog was barking again - nothing new there.
"Chester! Be quiet! No one's there."
Ever since they'd moved to the neighborhood, he'd been barking at every sound. It'll take him some time to get used to being so close to people. Travis sat by the computer, trying to refocus on his work, but Chester kept on hollering at the invisible enemy. After a minute of sporadic barking inhibiting reattempts to concentrate, Travis got up from his desk and walked into the living room where Chester was barking at something outside the window. Travis took a quick glance, and as he'd suspected, it was nothing; if anything, it was the neighbor working in the yard. Jon could be found out in his yard at any hour of the day, but as the sun set, he usually took one last stab at planting, fixing, or rearranging some aspect of the garden.
With a sigh, and a quick ruffle of Chester's ears, Travis turned to walk into the adjacent open kitchen. Chester remained ever alert, his tongue suspended between his teeth, panting lightly, staring out of the low hanging window. Travis, unconcerned, opened the fridge and grabbed a Pepsi, looked at it, and then put it back in favor of Pepsi Max - Sophie had gotten on him about soda causing cancer or some rubbish of the sort. He opened the 20 oz bottle, letting carbonation escape before taking a swig. Turning, he took a casual look into the living room - Chester, ever watchful.
Travis chuckled, "You show 'em, boy."
Chester shifted a bit, rearranging his jowls as he surveyed the land before him. He then honed in a new target to begin his mumbles and growls - the precursor to his usual barking sessions.
"Hey, that's enough, buddy, I think whatever you're trying to act tough for is probably scared off by now.", Travis said lightly as he approached the front of the house again and laid a hand on Chester's back. Chester let out a few barks, and then turned to his owner briefly.
"Okay, okay, I'm going to show you that there is nothing there, come here." Putting his drink on the mantle, and grabbing Chester's collar, Travis pulled him to the front door.
Opening the door, one hand remaining firmly on Chester's collar, they walked onto the front step.
"As usual, you're overreacting,", Travis spoke to his puppy as if he could understand him, "I think the score is about a million, me, and zero, you."
Charlie barked once more at something down the road, and Travis followed his sight line. A neighbor down the road was standing on his front step, as well.
"If you're going to bark at everyone that walks out of their house, Ches, I'm going to have to put you in the backyard - I can't do my work."
The dog began intermittently growling, his eyes peeled in the same direction as before. Travis kneeled down to ease the discomfort of being half stooped down to keep a steady hand on his puppy.
"Ches, stop it, seriously."
Taking a second glance, Travis noticed that another neighbor had emerged down the street and was standing oddly slumped over on his front step. He couldn't remember his name, but he remembered meeting him the other week. He looked at one of the closest houses to his own and saw Mrs. Samson doing the same thing, and upon further investigation, all of the neighbors were acting the same way - slumped over, arms sort of dangling by their sides, unmoving from their respective front steps, doors open behind them. Finally, Travis turned his gaze to Jon's house, his nearest neighbor, and the one he had gotten to know the best over the past few months since he and Sophie had moved into the new house; alarmingly, he too was acting strangely.
Half whispering, Travis pulled his dog closer, "Chester, what's wrong with them?", but Chester only growled, his muzzle crinkled up, ears half folded back in alarm.
Travis made a C shape with his free hand, cupping it around his mouth, and yelled across the street to Jon, "Jon, are you alright?", his voice cracking a bit.
No response.
To Be Continued...
Talk Less, Think More
I think I walk across campus 2-3 times a day, and in doing so I inevitably pass a large amount of college students. Something that has stuck in my mind for a few days now is how many people, even in the fleeting moments of my walk by, seem to be endlessly fascinated by "people". Now, I don't mean they are fascinated in "people" from a sociological, anthropological, historical, or even a particularly psychological point of view, but more of a general babble about other people's live without much intellectual dissection. Now, I'm not saying that everyone has to be so diverse that every conversation they have is about some worldly fascinating subject, but I do find it noteworthy that so few people discuss the happenings of life from any perspective other than life ending at the extent of what another person is doing with their own life.
What Brittany is doing with Brad, or why Ashley has been deciding to stay in more often than usual is, in 97% of cases, a worthless discussion. Now, I understand that to expect people to engage in fulfilling conversation on a daily, let alone constant, basis is unrealistic. People are interesting, I get that, and we're all quite adept at talking about them - even if we are substantially worse at talking to them about the things we're willing to talk about them. Still, when every conversation I hear is about the shallow world of someone else, I genuinely see no point in such talk. Now, if we were to talk about someone else and expound into a greater discussion based on that initial example, there is something of worth, but the likelihood is low that any of these conversations are ending in some level of revelation or progression apart from self satisfaction or mind numbing conversation.
I thought I was unable to find people in my immediate surroundings that have some level of interest about them, but it is coming forth to me that the majority of the university scene is not about growth, but rather to achieve, blindly, relatively unimportant grades while hoping the weekend approaches to relieve us of the "stupidity" of classes. Admittedly, I fell, in some degree, in that category as well when I first entered university, but the past year or so has been an awakening of how much I don't give a damn about Brad, Angelina, or whoever, but rather in espousing knowledge for furthering my own career and developing my creative exploits. Admittedly, by the same token, I would appreciate conversation with similar mindsets, because these people are interesting, I find - sadly, few opportunities have arisen thus far.
Anyway, maybe the problem lies, as is always a possibility, that I am too critical - yet, I always remind myself that eccentricity can lead to progressive thought and value. The question is, do I (can I) give up my innately alternative style of thinking for the norm to fit in: the answer will probably always be "no".
Listening to: Childish Gabino, "Telegraph Avenue"
What Brittany is doing with Brad, or why Ashley has been deciding to stay in more often than usual is, in 97% of cases, a worthless discussion. Now, I understand that to expect people to engage in fulfilling conversation on a daily, let alone constant, basis is unrealistic. People are interesting, I get that, and we're all quite adept at talking about them - even if we are substantially worse at talking to them about the things we're willing to talk about them. Still, when every conversation I hear is about the shallow world of someone else, I genuinely see no point in such talk. Now, if we were to talk about someone else and expound into a greater discussion based on that initial example, there is something of worth, but the likelihood is low that any of these conversations are ending in some level of revelation or progression apart from self satisfaction or mind numbing conversation.
I thought I was unable to find people in my immediate surroundings that have some level of interest about them, but it is coming forth to me that the majority of the university scene is not about growth, but rather to achieve, blindly, relatively unimportant grades while hoping the weekend approaches to relieve us of the "stupidity" of classes. Admittedly, I fell, in some degree, in that category as well when I first entered university, but the past year or so has been an awakening of how much I don't give a damn about Brad, Angelina, or whoever, but rather in espousing knowledge for furthering my own career and developing my creative exploits. Admittedly, by the same token, I would appreciate conversation with similar mindsets, because these people are interesting, I find - sadly, few opportunities have arisen thus far.
Anyway, maybe the problem lies, as is always a possibility, that I am too critical - yet, I always remind myself that eccentricity can lead to progressive thought and value. The question is, do I (can I) give up my innately alternative style of thinking for the norm to fit in: the answer will probably always be "no".
Listening to: Childish Gabino, "Telegraph Avenue"
Tuesday, October 7, 2014
Biology Class Fascinations
So, this post is going to just be me nerd-ing out over some facts I learned in the past few weeks in my classes: thou hath been warned.
I'm currently taking a "Human Biology" course that is simply ripe with fantastic information. When I get especially drawn in by unbelievably cool information, I have a tendency to smile and chuckle relative to the amount that I think about the information; needless to expound, I am smiling a lot. So, what could be tickling my fancy? Probably nothing you, the reader, will find all that interesting, but to me it is ridiculously impactful.
For example, I've learned a few things about cellular processes. Literally all cellular processes are astounding, but I was especially taken with infectious disease. My professor worked for the CDC so his level of knowledge on the subject is evident, to say the least. Anyway, apparently when a pathogen enters a cell - which is already extremely difficult, as each cell has a security "code" that is dependent on something called "Haemagglutinin", and if the pathogen does not contain said code, it can not enter the cell. Let us assume that the pathogen did enter the cell, well the cell immediately begins starving the pathogen, pumps it full of free radicals (which, if you're unfamiliar, those are detrimental to you - you can imagine a concentrated dose isn't the greatest for a small pathogen), and finally, the cell unleashes Lysosomes upon the pathogen, which create an acidic environment for the pathogen to squirm in. However, you'd assume that something would just leave if it were immediately bombarded with all these horrors. Well, it can't. Basically, once it is in the cell, the cell "locks the door" by requiring a different password to leave that is dependent on "Neuraminidase". If the pathogen doesn't have that "password", it is locked in to its fate. After the cell has finished eating the pathogen, it stores its information so that future break ins are dealt with even greater ferocity and effectiveness.
While you're eating a burger, sleeping, watching Netflix, etc, your body is basically waging mass genocide on 99.99% of the pathogens that find themselves into your system. In a way, you have to feel sorry for those bacteria, viruses, and whatever else might step foot. Meanwhile, as your body is killing countless viruses and bacteria, it is doing a plethora of other activities to keep you running optimally. It feels so unjust to put the body under undo stress when it is literally saving your life every moment of your existence.
To put it in perspective, by the shortest terms possible, if you did not have an immune system as you do, scraping your knee would kill you (this happened to a person who did not realize their immune system was completely gone).
Ok, done for now. SCIENCE.
Listening to: Parkway Drive, "Picture Perfect, Pathetic"
I'm currently taking a "Human Biology" course that is simply ripe with fantastic information. When I get especially drawn in by unbelievably cool information, I have a tendency to smile and chuckle relative to the amount that I think about the information; needless to expound, I am smiling a lot. So, what could be tickling my fancy? Probably nothing you, the reader, will find all that interesting, but to me it is ridiculously impactful.
For example, I've learned a few things about cellular processes. Literally all cellular processes are astounding, but I was especially taken with infectious disease. My professor worked for the CDC so his level of knowledge on the subject is evident, to say the least. Anyway, apparently when a pathogen enters a cell - which is already extremely difficult, as each cell has a security "code" that is dependent on something called "Haemagglutinin", and if the pathogen does not contain said code, it can not enter the cell. Let us assume that the pathogen did enter the cell, well the cell immediately begins starving the pathogen, pumps it full of free radicals (which, if you're unfamiliar, those are detrimental to you - you can imagine a concentrated dose isn't the greatest for a small pathogen), and finally, the cell unleashes Lysosomes upon the pathogen, which create an acidic environment for the pathogen to squirm in. However, you'd assume that something would just leave if it were immediately bombarded with all these horrors. Well, it can't. Basically, once it is in the cell, the cell "locks the door" by requiring a different password to leave that is dependent on "Neuraminidase". If the pathogen doesn't have that "password", it is locked in to its fate. After the cell has finished eating the pathogen, it stores its information so that future break ins are dealt with even greater ferocity and effectiveness.
While you're eating a burger, sleeping, watching Netflix, etc, your body is basically waging mass genocide on 99.99% of the pathogens that find themselves into your system. In a way, you have to feel sorry for those bacteria, viruses, and whatever else might step foot. Meanwhile, as your body is killing countless viruses and bacteria, it is doing a plethora of other activities to keep you running optimally. It feels so unjust to put the body under undo stress when it is literally saving your life every moment of your existence.
To put it in perspective, by the shortest terms possible, if you did not have an immune system as you do, scraping your knee would kill you (this happened to a person who did not realize their immune system was completely gone).
Ok, done for now. SCIENCE.
Listening to: Parkway Drive, "Picture Perfect, Pathetic"
Monday, September 22, 2014
Meeting People
I'm possibly reflecting my setting, or my age group, or my sense of oddity relative to, what seems to be, a norm, but I find it ever so intolerable to meet people with a complex about themselves. What do I mean by a "complex about themselves"? Well, I'll tell ya!
I'm referring to people who you speak to for a time and then they simply... stop. Now, my immediate thought might be - I am doing something wrong. Let me express some confidence in who I am and iterate that I do not think I am doing anything wrong save for being myself (which, admittedly, can be, or so I've heard, intimidating). I enjoy meeting people and make some effort to learn who they are - no matter what they look like or, generally, how they express themselves. Usually, this is received with open arms, but as time passes, it seems that the novelty of learning about someone wears off and almost always the other person simply stops communicating. Now, I'm not the type of person to push the issue. I simply give it one good attempt and if I see there will be no response in the future - I dismiss.
What bothers me is how quickly people seem to lose interest in others; the need for constant entertainment and "playing one's cards" juuuuust right is more than annoying, actually, rather angering. I don't mean to say that I am angry at any individual person, but it makes me angry to know there are a large number of people (based on my sample size) that need to be spoken to in a particular way to which they remained entertained by your person - hear me when I say this: that is pathetic.
I could absolutely make an argument that we are always in a state of "selling" ourselves to others, but the level of discreet disrespect people have for one another, as if saying, "I'm bored of you, I won't speak to you any longer" is so common it is nearly expected, save for the shred of hope that you meet one of those few who actually appreciate your existence for what/who you are without heaping their expectations upon you.
My thoughts are scattered right now, but this is more of an expression of disdain for behavior of that caliber. On a personal level, it does not bother me, because after I realize I have been "shut out", I simply "delete" in my mind. I have had people contact me (months, or even a year, later) when they were (as admitted by them) bored as if expecting me to entertain them again. These people... man, oh, man.. I refuse to play the game. It comes off as disgustingly immature.
My fear, however, is that although I put stipulations that this may be a particular group (or age) of people, this is an occurrence throughout life that will persist regardless of location, age, culture (and on). In that case, hold onto those who will stand by you and put, even a small, effort into your interpersonal relationship.
Honestly, I have plenty more to say (shocker..), but I am tired and my mind isn't functioning all that optimally at the moment. Rest assured, I will touch on the subject again in the future as it is something that I notice over and over again - not necessarily to me, but to a multitude of people (almost as if there is a hierarchy with the most genuine at the bottom and the spoiled/egoistical at the top). Oh well, in the end, it should have no impact on your emotional well being as these encounters should be as dust wiped off your shoulder.
Listening to: "Recursive Self- Improvement" by How to Destroy Angels (sort of fitting, in a way)
I'm referring to people who you speak to for a time and then they simply... stop. Now, my immediate thought might be - I am doing something wrong. Let me express some confidence in who I am and iterate that I do not think I am doing anything wrong save for being myself (which, admittedly, can be, or so I've heard, intimidating). I enjoy meeting people and make some effort to learn who they are - no matter what they look like or, generally, how they express themselves. Usually, this is received with open arms, but as time passes, it seems that the novelty of learning about someone wears off and almost always the other person simply stops communicating. Now, I'm not the type of person to push the issue. I simply give it one good attempt and if I see there will be no response in the future - I dismiss.
What bothers me is how quickly people seem to lose interest in others; the need for constant entertainment and "playing one's cards" juuuuust right is more than annoying, actually, rather angering. I don't mean to say that I am angry at any individual person, but it makes me angry to know there are a large number of people (based on my sample size) that need to be spoken to in a particular way to which they remained entertained by your person - hear me when I say this: that is pathetic.
I could absolutely make an argument that we are always in a state of "selling" ourselves to others, but the level of discreet disrespect people have for one another, as if saying, "I'm bored of you, I won't speak to you any longer" is so common it is nearly expected, save for the shred of hope that you meet one of those few who actually appreciate your existence for what/who you are without heaping their expectations upon you.
My thoughts are scattered right now, but this is more of an expression of disdain for behavior of that caliber. On a personal level, it does not bother me, because after I realize I have been "shut out", I simply "delete" in my mind. I have had people contact me (months, or even a year, later) when they were (as admitted by them) bored as if expecting me to entertain them again. These people... man, oh, man.. I refuse to play the game. It comes off as disgustingly immature.
My fear, however, is that although I put stipulations that this may be a particular group (or age) of people, this is an occurrence throughout life that will persist regardless of location, age, culture (and on). In that case, hold onto those who will stand by you and put, even a small, effort into your interpersonal relationship.
Honestly, I have plenty more to say (shocker..), but I am tired and my mind isn't functioning all that optimally at the moment. Rest assured, I will touch on the subject again in the future as it is something that I notice over and over again - not necessarily to me, but to a multitude of people (almost as if there is a hierarchy with the most genuine at the bottom and the spoiled/egoistical at the top). Oh well, in the end, it should have no impact on your emotional well being as these encounters should be as dust wiped off your shoulder.
Listening to: "Recursive Self- Improvement" by How to Destroy Angels (sort of fitting, in a way)
Wednesday, September 10, 2014
Evolution, Join Us
I'm currently taking Biology and we've been covering evolution (Brace thy angus, here we go...). It hasn't been made apparent to me of late, but it always gets me thinking about those few that do not *believe* in evolution. Admittedly, the idea is difficult to grasp, not because it is complicated in root, but because it is such an incredible process. However, having said that, it makes sense - albeit still being an expansive idea.
What gets me is the ability for people to cherry pick information presented by science to their liking. Let's be honest, choosing to believe in electricity or gravity and then choosing to not believe in evolution is so far out of my realm of understanding, I can't even begin to comprehend the reasoning behind that thought process. I realize that most, if not all, of the people who refuse to believe the theory of evolution are religious, and it goes without saying that their level of faith is in many respects tested to a greater degree than it is for non-believers. So, in this respect, I find it overly confusing that religious people wouldn't take the "leap of faith" on a theory like evolution. I mean, my favorite example is turning on a light switch - shall we?
If a person stands in a door way of a dark room, they instinctively start groping the wall for the switch. Why? Because they believe that when they flip the switch it will turn the light on. How does one get to that level of faith in the functionality of electricity that one, without thought, reaches for the light switch, and instinctively *believes* with absolute certainty that the electricity will light the bulb?
Well, two fold, they have experienced it enough times to know that is what happens. Secondly, they have experienced it enough times to know that is what happens, because science has made it a possibility for them to experience it; not only that, science has told them that is what will happen. So, we are willing to trust science from small, subconscious gestures as that one to massive, conscious leaps of faith such as "this plane will carry me across the ocean", or, "this needle they are violating me with is full of a substance that will heal me". We accept these things unconditionally, unwavering - all due to science and its profound influence to convince us that it is capable of doing incredible things, teaching us incredible things. So, what gives?
Essentially, this is the thought process, "I will trust science with all matters of my life that it does with extreme ease, accuracy, and has made my overall quality of life a nigh miracle, but when science tells me (which it has gotten everything else correct) that evolution is how we reached the person we are now, I will refuse this vehemently."
Da fuck?
Makes ZERO sense. And thus, cherry pickers. Enjoy the spoils of science, but the things that do not directly impact your life can suddenly be hotly debated. I'll bet that if the belief in evolution was a necessity to enjoy the many spoils science offers us, there would me a massive influx of "believers".
So, science has earned your trust in every other way, and has shown you, more than *anything* on this planet that it knows a thing or two, and yet some people still can't take that "leap of faith (with evidence, making it less of a leap and more of a little bunny hop)". That boggles my mind - I do not understand.
Now, I'm sure some people will throw out the argument that God is actually using science as a tool of His creation so we should not be giving the credit to science, but to God. Well, here's my reply:
That is not an argument that you want to make. If that is indeed true (let's get hypothetical and assume it is), then if science informs you of evolution, and scientific discoveries are in fact an opening of God's world privileged to us by God, then what's the hesitation? Jump on the evolution train - choo choo, MFers!
Then, of course, there is the Bible. I'm going to make this quick: in school, if you have one book that says one thing with no evidence, and then you have every other book in existence saying another thing with a massive amount of evidence, what have you been taught to believe? (Whispers) "Cherry pickers..."
Finally, I realize that evolution is not something can exactly be replicated in a lab, but smaller elements that encompass it can be observed in daily life. For example, the mutation of bacteria around anti-biotics (adaptation to hostile presence), or sweating when your body is overheated (adaptation to one's surroundings). If this happens enough, adaptation happens in chronic cases (Darwin's research on birds is a perfect example). Animals have changed their physical appearance and ability based on their environment for millions of years, and news flash, we're animals (debatable, I know, but for this argument, it is correct).
Confusion abounds.
Listening to: Vampire Weekend, "A-Punk"
What gets me is the ability for people to cherry pick information presented by science to their liking. Let's be honest, choosing to believe in electricity or gravity and then choosing to not believe in evolution is so far out of my realm of understanding, I can't even begin to comprehend the reasoning behind that thought process. I realize that most, if not all, of the people who refuse to believe the theory of evolution are religious, and it goes without saying that their level of faith is in many respects tested to a greater degree than it is for non-believers. So, in this respect, I find it overly confusing that religious people wouldn't take the "leap of faith" on a theory like evolution. I mean, my favorite example is turning on a light switch - shall we?
If a person stands in a door way of a dark room, they instinctively start groping the wall for the switch. Why? Because they believe that when they flip the switch it will turn the light on. How does one get to that level of faith in the functionality of electricity that one, without thought, reaches for the light switch, and instinctively *believes* with absolute certainty that the electricity will light the bulb?
Well, two fold, they have experienced it enough times to know that is what happens. Secondly, they have experienced it enough times to know that is what happens, because science has made it a possibility for them to experience it; not only that, science has told them that is what will happen. So, we are willing to trust science from small, subconscious gestures as that one to massive, conscious leaps of faith such as "this plane will carry me across the ocean", or, "this needle they are violating me with is full of a substance that will heal me". We accept these things unconditionally, unwavering - all due to science and its profound influence to convince us that it is capable of doing incredible things, teaching us incredible things. So, what gives?
Essentially, this is the thought process, "I will trust science with all matters of my life that it does with extreme ease, accuracy, and has made my overall quality of life a nigh miracle, but when science tells me (which it has gotten everything else correct) that evolution is how we reached the person we are now, I will refuse this vehemently."
Da fuck?
Makes ZERO sense. And thus, cherry pickers. Enjoy the spoils of science, but the things that do not directly impact your life can suddenly be hotly debated. I'll bet that if the belief in evolution was a necessity to enjoy the many spoils science offers us, there would me a massive influx of "believers".
So, science has earned your trust in every other way, and has shown you, more than *anything* on this planet that it knows a thing or two, and yet some people still can't take that "leap of faith (with evidence, making it less of a leap and more of a little bunny hop)". That boggles my mind - I do not understand.
Now, I'm sure some people will throw out the argument that God is actually using science as a tool of His creation so we should not be giving the credit to science, but to God. Well, here's my reply:
That is not an argument that you want to make. If that is indeed true (let's get hypothetical and assume it is), then if science informs you of evolution, and scientific discoveries are in fact an opening of God's world privileged to us by God, then what's the hesitation? Jump on the evolution train - choo choo, MFers!
Then, of course, there is the Bible. I'm going to make this quick: in school, if you have one book that says one thing with no evidence, and then you have every other book in existence saying another thing with a massive amount of evidence, what have you been taught to believe? (Whispers) "Cherry pickers..."
Finally, I realize that evolution is not something can exactly be replicated in a lab, but smaller elements that encompass it can be observed in daily life. For example, the mutation of bacteria around anti-biotics (adaptation to hostile presence), or sweating when your body is overheated (adaptation to one's surroundings). If this happens enough, adaptation happens in chronic cases (Darwin's research on birds is a perfect example). Animals have changed their physical appearance and ability based on their environment for millions of years, and news flash, we're animals (debatable, I know, but for this argument, it is correct).
Confusion abounds.
Listening to: Vampire Weekend, "A-Punk"
Wednesday, September 3, 2014
Motivated People
There are plenty of motivated people on this planet - plenty for one reason and plenty for others, but I think there is something to be said of people who find themselves in unmotivated slumps (we all get them, even the most motivated of us). It is interesting to meet people who have this innate drive to just move forward, no matter. At times, they seem so undeniably consumed by passion and burning with desire to reach some ever moving, ever persistently allusive goal; meanwhile, at other times, they seem gassed, as if they've hit a wall. Now, the difference between the two is really only the current attitude, but the long term goal never changes. Speak to a motivated person about their goals, there delivery will go few ways, but it will always fall between these two end points - excitable, exuberant, knowing, and calm, passive, knowing.
Now, my illustrated point is that the end result will remain, but as we are human we will have our ups and downs. Talk to a motivated person during either up or down, they will give you the same reply, simply the delivery will be different. To them, the idea of anything "other", an "other" outcome than the one they have ordained for themselves has never been imagined, and simply isn't an option. Removing the option from their mind has given them liberty (or a cage, you choose) to continue to move forward, be it by running forward or falling, but again, the result will remain in the hands of progress.
Now, granted, forward movement can take massive leaps in short time periods, but it can also crawl forward as if bound by chains. The point is, that no matter the speed, no matter the energy put behind it, a motivated person will only find disappointment, anger, and feel unfulfilled in the face of immobility, but so long as mobility is achieved, even in its deadest sense, this is enough to satisfy the craving of movement toward ones goals. As we are human, from a point of nigh immobility, we can also suddenly surge with energy, as well.
It is pretty remarkable to observe, feel, or even notice. Moving forward is the necessity, the speed by which is the impulse, but even the impulse sometimes "pulses" out and we make peace with the little we are able to do with the current state of our being (often morose).
Listening to: "Dream Run" - Parkway Drive
Now, my illustrated point is that the end result will remain, but as we are human we will have our ups and downs. Talk to a motivated person during either up or down, they will give you the same reply, simply the delivery will be different. To them, the idea of anything "other", an "other" outcome than the one they have ordained for themselves has never been imagined, and simply isn't an option. Removing the option from their mind has given them liberty (or a cage, you choose) to continue to move forward, be it by running forward or falling, but again, the result will remain in the hands of progress.
Now, granted, forward movement can take massive leaps in short time periods, but it can also crawl forward as if bound by chains. The point is, that no matter the speed, no matter the energy put behind it, a motivated person will only find disappointment, anger, and feel unfulfilled in the face of immobility, but so long as mobility is achieved, even in its deadest sense, this is enough to satisfy the craving of movement toward ones goals. As we are human, from a point of nigh immobility, we can also suddenly surge with energy, as well.
It is pretty remarkable to observe, feel, or even notice. Moving forward is the necessity, the speed by which is the impulse, but even the impulse sometimes "pulses" out and we make peace with the little we are able to do with the current state of our being (often morose).
Listening to: "Dream Run" - Parkway Drive
Sunday, August 3, 2014
Love
I was in the midst of going on a tirade about people getting plastered on a week day and the types of people I avoid contact with (hint, hint: people getting plastered on week days is one of them), but then I was reminded of a question someone recently asked me, and thought, "Why not focus on something a bit more positive?". Heather (the inquirer) asked me my definition of Love; so, I turned off my Slipknot, threw on some Lana Del Rey (ultra change FTW!) and thought on the idea.
My answer is going to be pretty bad, and I have to say this, not because I am embarrassed by the answer, but because it is such a difficult theme/idea that it takes much more than the amount of thought I've poured into it. That disclaimer released, let me begin.
Love, from a perspective, can be defined as a perception that is encapsulated best by an obsession with a thing (be that thing a physical thing, a person, an idea, etc.) to a point that if that thing separates from your presence it actually creates a reaction of sadness, nostalgia powerful enough to illicit a conscious recognition of said sadness, nostalgia.
(Reads like a scientist, doesn't it? Lol)
Love can be subtle, love can be loud, love can seem obligatory, love can show in the most beautiful of ways and the most horrendous. I could argue that there are almost no instances in which a person does not love - in many cases to a fault. So, what I'm getting at is: Love is not necessarily a positive, but a relatively neutral reaction/feeling. Anyone who understands my philosophies would recognize that I appreciate a neutral, middle of the road view on almost everything. Nothing is absolute if not all is absolute (technically rendering it relative).
Honestly, the writing above is extremely broken and unsatisfactory to my standards, but since I did "disclaim" that the thought processes change, the topic is so vast it crushes single ideas attempting to harness understanding from it - makes things tough to type out. The best way to reach any conclusion on the topic is to discuss, through a medium quicker than writing, with fellows to shave off the more redundant thoughts and really burn a hole in the subject with which to really take more constructed, fleshed out ideas and write them down with more precision and structure.
At any rate, there are some thoughts - raw, weak, but existing - make of them what you will.
My answer is going to be pretty bad, and I have to say this, not because I am embarrassed by the answer, but because it is such a difficult theme/idea that it takes much more than the amount of thought I've poured into it. That disclaimer released, let me begin.
Love, from a perspective, can be defined as a perception that is encapsulated best by an obsession with a thing (be that thing a physical thing, a person, an idea, etc.) to a point that if that thing separates from your presence it actually creates a reaction of sadness, nostalgia powerful enough to illicit a conscious recognition of said sadness, nostalgia.
(Reads like a scientist, doesn't it? Lol)
Love can be subtle, love can be loud, love can seem obligatory, love can show in the most beautiful of ways and the most horrendous. I could argue that there are almost no instances in which a person does not love - in many cases to a fault. So, what I'm getting at is: Love is not necessarily a positive, but a relatively neutral reaction/feeling. Anyone who understands my philosophies would recognize that I appreciate a neutral, middle of the road view on almost everything. Nothing is absolute if not all is absolute (technically rendering it relative).
Honestly, the writing above is extremely broken and unsatisfactory to my standards, but since I did "disclaim" that the thought processes change, the topic is so vast it crushes single ideas attempting to harness understanding from it - makes things tough to type out. The best way to reach any conclusion on the topic is to discuss, through a medium quicker than writing, with fellows to shave off the more redundant thoughts and really burn a hole in the subject with which to really take more constructed, fleshed out ideas and write them down with more precision and structure.
At any rate, there are some thoughts - raw, weak, but existing - make of them what you will.
Friday, August 1, 2014
People I Know Scare Me
I keep several people in my contacts via Snapchat, Facebook, what have you, because they scare me. Now, I don't mean in the traditional sense of "I'm frightened", but more of, "I'm repulsed to a point of scare".
These people post things about their lives, and I see their lives as empty, worthless existences - so much so, that every time I receive information from them or what they are doing, I am reawakened to the overwhelming feeling of fright to not end up like them. I am refueled, re-energized to work my ass off to keep charging forward in who I envision myself to be - something greater than I am now, and any deviation from that path disappoints me.
These people post things about their lives, and I see their lives as empty, worthless existences - so much so, that every time I receive information from them or what they are doing, I am reawakened to the overwhelming feeling of fright to not end up like them. I am refueled, re-energized to work my ass off to keep charging forward in who I envision myself to be - something greater than I am now, and any deviation from that path disappoints me.
Ridiculous Quotes
On Facebook, I started posting some statuses similar to what I see a lot of people posting; namely, pictures with quotes written across the middle, as such:
People have been "liking" them, and I am unsure if they realize what I'm doing with these, but regardless, I am happy they get something from them. On one hand, it is nice to post things people connect with, but on the other hand, I find it a little scary that these posts are being taken seriously, and by extension, do reach out to people. Why? Because, read the quote above...
"Love is not something you force, it is something you do not force."
This quote is one I made up and means absolutely jack shit nothing (I just cussed a few times and ended it with "nothing" for emphasis, haha). It creates a point and then reaffirms that previous point (a meaningless point to begin with) by repeating the same point with different verbiage. I really hope people are understanding that I am sarcastically poking fun at these kinds of posts, because they are not much better than the one presented above.
I'm doing this, because I think quotes like this do more harm than good. Firstly, they are lazy thought strung together to illicit reaction without saying anything of real value. Secondly, they are often a written form of already popular sayings (not that severe, but they condense ideas into few words, losing the true meaning of the initial idea 9/10 times). Finally, I believe they promote lazy, shitty advice giving. It makes me steam when I hear someone going through a hardship they have expressed and people begin quoting these lazy ass quotes in an "attempt" to make the person feel better. Good advice comes from listening, thinking, sympathizing, empathizing, and responding emotionally, rationally, or a combination of the two - not by quickly vomiting bullshit as the likes of the above quote (or actual quotes that are equally laughable).
I appreciate the fact that some people can achieve comfort and meaning from quotes like this, but it does scare me that this is the extent of our human ability to understand and garner comfort.
Listening to: "Fire Fire" by Flyleaf
Sunday, July 13, 2014
Cynicism
You know, the title to this blog mentions one of my "negative", less understanding attributes: Cynicism. I have no issues with the fact that I am cynical. If I may be bold (arrogant) enough to mention that I think that many cynical people tend to be quite intelligent. Of course, simply because I find this to be true does not mean it is a positive attribute to have. In some respects, it can make a person bitter, and I have found this to be the case in myself. As I feel my mind is maturing to be more and more intellectual, I find I lose touch with the ability to see other people's thoughts with a positive gleam. In certain circumstances, sarcasm is my way of building attention on things I deem idiotic while still holding face from showing my full blown cynicism. I also find myself having to, more and more, consciously retract my words from lashing out and deconstructing others' thoughts in a less than friendly demeanor. It is an issue that I am well aware, and while I do think it is growing into an elitist state of mind, it is difficult to stop.
On that note, is all lost? No, I wouldn't say so (my bias speaks). I recognize that when I look people in the eyes, I give people respect no matter the circumstance - luckily, my cynicism has yet to escape my outstretched arms and is largely contained to dialogue of the internet world. Maybe the vastness of the internet and my exposure to a wide variety of people has billed me my compassion a bit. Still, I should continue to humble myself, for I am, in many respects, nothing. Just as I get frustrated with the thought processes of certain people, I should also recognize that in certain aspects of life, I am, and always will be, an idiot.
A lot of things annoy me, and I could spend my hours deconstructing every annoyance I have, or I can work on a far more constructive goal of working on seeing the positive sides of people; or, at the very least, separate myself from those that I find my cynicism wanting to lash out, because I am only feeding negativity.
It is extremely difficult to step away from something so moored in one's being, though. I loath dulling myself to please, what I consider, dull people (my arrogance speaks, I am aware).
I have so much more to say, but my mind is flooding with ideas faster than I can deliver in writing, so I will end things here. Still, this is an issue that I should work on, for I am no god, but I crave intellectual discussion so much I am tempted to pick intellectual fights with people in hopes to fill a largely unfilled chasm.
Listening to: "Right in Two" - TOOL (pretty fitting, honestly)
On that note, is all lost? No, I wouldn't say so (my bias speaks). I recognize that when I look people in the eyes, I give people respect no matter the circumstance - luckily, my cynicism has yet to escape my outstretched arms and is largely contained to dialogue of the internet world. Maybe the vastness of the internet and my exposure to a wide variety of people has billed me my compassion a bit. Still, I should continue to humble myself, for I am, in many respects, nothing. Just as I get frustrated with the thought processes of certain people, I should also recognize that in certain aspects of life, I am, and always will be, an idiot.
A lot of things annoy me, and I could spend my hours deconstructing every annoyance I have, or I can work on a far more constructive goal of working on seeing the positive sides of people; or, at the very least, separate myself from those that I find my cynicism wanting to lash out, because I am only feeding negativity.
It is extremely difficult to step away from something so moored in one's being, though. I loath dulling myself to please, what I consider, dull people (my arrogance speaks, I am aware).
I have so much more to say, but my mind is flooding with ideas faster than I can deliver in writing, so I will end things here. Still, this is an issue that I should work on, for I am no god, but I crave intellectual discussion so much I am tempted to pick intellectual fights with people in hopes to fill a largely unfilled chasm.
Listening to: "Right in Two" - TOOL (pretty fitting, honestly)
Thursday, July 3, 2014
Rant: Distanced, Disingenuous Dumbasses
When someone says/writes something along the lines of, "I'm having a horrible day, everything is falling apart in front of me", and people reply with, "keep your head up, just keep smiling", I have to admit, that is some lazy ass comforting on the part of the people replying. Seriously, what the fuck is that supposed to accomplish? Person says they're having a horrid day, and people tell them some general advice that, in all honesty, is more telling them how they should be behaving rather than comforting.
JUST KEEP YOUR HEAD UP AND KEEP SMILING!! :) :) :)
Fuck off. Seriously, I know plenty of people will disagree with me, and I'm allowing my emotional side to dictate a bit more than usual, but YOU ARE SAYING NOTHING HELPFUL. Granted, one could argue that just them typing that might impact the depressed person to feel better, because they are being thought about, but I disagree; when a person writes or says something lazy like that, it is very dismissive, it has more to do with them half-assedly trying to remain a "good" person while investing as little brain power into the matter as possible. Either commit to the damn problem or keep your trap shut.
Committing to helping someone goes along these "extra mile" requirements:
- Asking what the issue is, telling the person (emphatically and seriously) that if they need someone to speak to they should reach out to you.
- Putting some brain power into either problem solving, comforting, or a combination of the two.
- Checking in on the person after the "initial contact" has been made.
I genuinely believe that people who say things like "I'll pray for you!!!!", or "Everything happens for a reason, everything will work out", are either A) Dumb as brick, or B) Lazy, C) Want to seem like good people with as little involvement as possible, or D) a combination of the previous three options.
As weird as this might be, and why this would set me off, I do not fully know, but it's something I notice every day from a vast majority of people, and is it my problem? Probably, but fuck it, and fuck you half ass ingenuines.
Rant over.
Listening to: Ice Age (Deadmau5 Remix)
JUST KEEP YOUR HEAD UP AND KEEP SMILING!! :) :) :)
Fuck off. Seriously, I know plenty of people will disagree with me, and I'm allowing my emotional side to dictate a bit more than usual, but YOU ARE SAYING NOTHING HELPFUL. Granted, one could argue that just them typing that might impact the depressed person to feel better, because they are being thought about, but I disagree; when a person writes or says something lazy like that, it is very dismissive, it has more to do with them half-assedly trying to remain a "good" person while investing as little brain power into the matter as possible. Either commit to the damn problem or keep your trap shut.
Committing to helping someone goes along these "extra mile" requirements:
- Asking what the issue is, telling the person (emphatically and seriously) that if they need someone to speak to they should reach out to you.
- Putting some brain power into either problem solving, comforting, or a combination of the two.
- Checking in on the person after the "initial contact" has been made.
I genuinely believe that people who say things like "I'll pray for you!!!!", or "Everything happens for a reason, everything will work out", are either A) Dumb as brick, or B) Lazy, C) Want to seem like good people with as little involvement as possible, or D) a combination of the previous three options.
As weird as this might be, and why this would set me off, I do not fully know, but it's something I notice every day from a vast majority of people, and is it my problem? Probably, but fuck it, and fuck you half ass ingenuines.
Rant over.
Listening to: Ice Age (Deadmau5 Remix)
Wednesday, June 4, 2014
Ideas of Non-Opinion
The limitations we put on ourselves as humans is astounding. We are shocked when "extra ordinary" things are accomplished, but when it comes to humanity, is there really anything "extra ordinary"? We are as great as we allow ourselves to be. Sure, we have physical limitations, and some would argue we have mental limitations, as well, but we always seem to push to a new level of ingenuity that allows our physical and mental selves to help each other climb the rungs of the extraordinary latter to our actualized greatness. Humans are powerful in relation to what we know, but I suspect we are somewhat, if not equally, if not more impressive in the face of the unknown we have yet to encounter.
I'm getting off subject, but it is interesting, and who cares if I do get off topic - so is the mind if it wishes. I actually wanted to discuss the unnecessary connect between word and opinion. I mean to say that if you enter a discussion of any topic with someone(s), what are the odds that you will assume that every statement uttered is personal opinion? I would say, 9/10, if not every time. This is such a restricted, judgmental, weak view of discussion and perspective. The connection between your words and your opinion are, should actually be, quite distant from one another - or, at least, perceived as such.
If I enter a discussion on Vegan-ism and I say, "Meat has benefits" (or, a more abstract, severe, example: "God is evil") , this does not necessarily represent my opinion, but rather, a point/statement for exactly what it is in the purest form - a statement unattached, devoid of necessary personal attachment. Granted, the majority of arguments, debates, discussions are poignantly opinionated, but the assumption these days that every statement is opinion is completely false and will forever be as such, because we are simply capable of more than opinionated thought. This is where things tie into my first paragraph; I do think that this linear style of thought creates greater bias, more closed mindedness, and limits us from expanding our minds more efficiently, with greater generosity, and closer to the truth - if not for the sole reason of being kinder in our approach to "alternative" perspectives and the eradication (at least, the lessening) of volatile reaction.
I feel like the counter argument is to accuse such thought as excuse giving, dismissive, and cowardly in the face of controversial thought processes , but I would disagree. Of course, this may be true of some, but again, not necessarily the case in every instance.
Listening to: KISS - "Rock and Roll All Nite"
I'm getting off subject, but it is interesting, and who cares if I do get off topic - so is the mind if it wishes. I actually wanted to discuss the unnecessary connect between word and opinion. I mean to say that if you enter a discussion of any topic with someone(s), what are the odds that you will assume that every statement uttered is personal opinion? I would say, 9/10, if not every time. This is such a restricted, judgmental, weak view of discussion and perspective. The connection between your words and your opinion are, should actually be, quite distant from one another - or, at least, perceived as such.
If I enter a discussion on Vegan-ism and I say, "Meat has benefits" (or, a more abstract, severe, example: "God is evil") , this does not necessarily represent my opinion, but rather, a point/statement for exactly what it is in the purest form - a statement unattached, devoid of necessary personal attachment. Granted, the majority of arguments, debates, discussions are poignantly opinionated, but the assumption these days that every statement is opinion is completely false and will forever be as such, because we are simply capable of more than opinionated thought. This is where things tie into my first paragraph; I do think that this linear style of thought creates greater bias, more closed mindedness, and limits us from expanding our minds more efficiently, with greater generosity, and closer to the truth - if not for the sole reason of being kinder in our approach to "alternative" perspectives and the eradication (at least, the lessening) of volatile reaction.
I feel like the counter argument is to accuse such thought as excuse giving, dismissive, and cowardly in the face of controversial thought processes , but I would disagree. Of course, this may be true of some, but again, not necessarily the case in every instance.
Listening to: KISS - "Rock and Roll All Nite"
Tuesday, May 27, 2014
The God Reverence Confusion
It's been roughly a month since I wrote here, and that would be for various good reasons. Well, I finally have a sliver of time and will to delve into another topic of personal significance. This is a topic so saturated in our culture that it goes, by the vast majority of the population, completely unquestioned - a truth attained at one time, and from that point on forever a truth. I hold almost nothing to that standard as I consider it lazy, idiotic, one dimensional, and in some cases, unethical, dangerous, and shocking. Anyway, the point isn't to attack this style of thought, but rather to express a disconnect between two subcultures of thought.
Here is the issue: Many people believe in God; I'm not here to argue the existence of God. However, I am interested in the two subcultures of thought that surround the belief in God - surprisingly, the vast majority of people don't even realize there are two subcultures of thought. So, let us take a popular, plausible instance in which one group (Group A) believe in God, and another group also believes in God (Group B). While both groups are currently congruent, the distinction lies in how they see God.
Group A - Pray to God as a sign of devotion, speak with God.
Group B - God has a plan for everyone's life.
Now, I would continue the analogy, but in all honesty, I already think it is wrong. While there should be two styles of thought on the subject of God, there is a heavy cross over between the two groups, so much so that the two groups basically do not exist. So, what is wrong with that?
There are two groups of thought, but people don't realize it. I suspect they don't realize it due to various reasons, but I expect people have stopped thinking the moment they were handed their ideas on God. Anyway, before I rant on that, let me clear up my point.
Hypothetical Group A - Free Will
Hypothetical Group B - Predetermination
It is logically impossible to have both at the same time, yet people do it all the time. Now, does it matter to them? Probably not - and are there consequences? Not really. However, when I hear someone mixing the two, it implies to me that they don't understand what they are saying, because they haven't much thought into it. Chances of them convincing me one way or another is not likely due to this very observation.
To clear this up further; prayer implies God can do something for you or to you or for someone else, because of your prayer. This implies that God does not have a plan for you and He makes it up as he goes. Meanwhile, saying God has a plan for everyone implies that he has predetermined your life, by which belief, prayer is pointless, because your prayer can not sway his decision one way or another, because that would imply He can change his mind, which implies indecision, which implies possible impurity.
So, saying "I'll pray for you" is, by your real belief, useless (other than sentimental value) in terms of making a difference if you have ever said, "It is God's plan, he will reveal himself soon enough."
By the same token, the reverse is also true.
Strictly from a logic point of view, you must choose one or the other and stick to it - no way to use both mentalities simultaneously.
Listening to: Kanye West, "Mercy"
Here is the issue: Many people believe in God; I'm not here to argue the existence of God. However, I am interested in the two subcultures of thought that surround the belief in God - surprisingly, the vast majority of people don't even realize there are two subcultures of thought. So, let us take a popular, plausible instance in which one group (Group A) believe in God, and another group also believes in God (Group B). While both groups are currently congruent, the distinction lies in how they see God.
Group A - Pray to God as a sign of devotion, speak with God.
Group B - God has a plan for everyone's life.
Now, I would continue the analogy, but in all honesty, I already think it is wrong. While there should be two styles of thought on the subject of God, there is a heavy cross over between the two groups, so much so that the two groups basically do not exist. So, what is wrong with that?
There are two groups of thought, but people don't realize it. I suspect they don't realize it due to various reasons, but I expect people have stopped thinking the moment they were handed their ideas on God. Anyway, before I rant on that, let me clear up my point.
Hypothetical Group A - Free Will
Hypothetical Group B - Predetermination
It is logically impossible to have both at the same time, yet people do it all the time. Now, does it matter to them? Probably not - and are there consequences? Not really. However, when I hear someone mixing the two, it implies to me that they don't understand what they are saying, because they haven't much thought into it. Chances of them convincing me one way or another is not likely due to this very observation.
To clear this up further; prayer implies God can do something for you or to you or for someone else, because of your prayer. This implies that God does not have a plan for you and He makes it up as he goes. Meanwhile, saying God has a plan for everyone implies that he has predetermined your life, by which belief, prayer is pointless, because your prayer can not sway his decision one way or another, because that would imply He can change his mind, which implies indecision, which implies possible impurity.
So, saying "I'll pray for you" is, by your real belief, useless (other than sentimental value) in terms of making a difference if you have ever said, "It is God's plan, he will reveal himself soon enough."
By the same token, the reverse is also true.
Strictly from a logic point of view, you must choose one or the other and stick to it - no way to use both mentalities simultaneously.
Listening to: Kanye West, "Mercy"
Tuesday, April 22, 2014
Life and Death, a Thought.
I have a friend on Facebook that posted an interesting thought I wouldn't mind exploring. By now, you might have noticed that a decent amount of my discussion topics stem from different triggers off of social media. Anyway, she posted something along the lines of "everyone is born at a set point in time, but our actions can push us one step closer or further to our ending point, which is, mostly, left in mystery, unlike our beginning."
Not the exact words, but the concept was the same or very similar. I thought that was pretty interesting, because it is true that although we can all agree that we begin at one definite point (physically, at least) - it is so very "up in the air" when it comes to your own death. The sooner we choose to die, the more power we have at ending our existence with our own influence. That being said, it is also possible to influence our survival, but the more we influence our survival, the more mystery gets put on our end. I hope this makes sense?
If you decide right now that you will end yourself, you can do anything you'd like to create a set point and method of death that you outline yourself.
If you decide to continue your existence, you have a considerable amount of influence over if, and how long, you live, but no matter how much influence you put on your own survival, it will never be as ultimate as simply ending one's existence by your own volition.
Now, to be clear, this is simply an appreciable thought process from a philosophical perspective, not an encouragement to end your life by any means. It's a gruesome thought, but it is really interesting - at least, it is to me. Really a battle of influence between relativity and absolutism.
Listening to: Stromae, "formidable"
Not the exact words, but the concept was the same or very similar. I thought that was pretty interesting, because it is true that although we can all agree that we begin at one definite point (physically, at least) - it is so very "up in the air" when it comes to your own death. The sooner we choose to die, the more power we have at ending our existence with our own influence. That being said, it is also possible to influence our survival, but the more we influence our survival, the more mystery gets put on our end. I hope this makes sense?
If you decide right now that you will end yourself, you can do anything you'd like to create a set point and method of death that you outline yourself.
If you decide to continue your existence, you have a considerable amount of influence over if, and how long, you live, but no matter how much influence you put on your own survival, it will never be as ultimate as simply ending one's existence by your own volition.
Now, to be clear, this is simply an appreciable thought process from a philosophical perspective, not an encouragement to end your life by any means. It's a gruesome thought, but it is really interesting - at least, it is to me. Really a battle of influence between relativity and absolutism.
Listening to: Stromae, "formidable"
Sunday, April 13, 2014
The Nonexistence of "Real Men" and "Real Women"
I have too many things that poke a little at my annoyance, and although I'm trying to change my view of the world, I might just as well take advantage of my present state of mind and write some of these thoughts down - although, hopefully they will have diminished later in my life. Anyway, as is the trigger for a decent percentage of my "rants", I saw something on Facebook (surprise!) that just tickled a nerve with a needle. Now, I've seen this in the past, and is not limited to this one instance, but as I'm finally expressing these ideas through this blog, I can really let myself go and mention it.
"Real men". Puh-lease. I feel like most of you know what I'm talking about already; the distinction between "boys" and "men" is a widespread, simplistic view of the male definition. People don't think (what's new there... *bitter Nic*) about how stupid this sounds: "Real men know how to treat a woman.", "Real men know how to use a wrench.", "Real men hold hands with their girlfriend when they're brushing their teeth."
STFU.
"Real men" do not exist - they never have, and they never will. Do you want to know why? (probably not, but this is my world so I'm going to pretend like you do) Because grouping males into "boys" and "men" is childish, over simplified, and feeds the social constructs that humans are supposed to behave a certain way, robbing them of their uniqueness.
There are males that exist that are very proficient at fixing cars, males that love to dance, males that like to do drugs, males that drive fast cars, males that dress up in "women's" clothing, and about a trillion combinations of different aspects of life. They are, merely (or completely?) human, defined as male based on their physiology, but their thought process should/is/trying to be unique to them as humans, and as such, should be understood as a person before they are seen as "men", or more aptly, more neutral, as males. So, that is why "real men" do not exist. You have your preferences for the people you would like in your corner, but because those who do not prescribe to your corner of people does not make them any less than human.
Now, does this only apply to men? Nay, no, never, nein, non. Females are often held to some weird social standard, too. The exact same argument can be made for females, as well; I simply made the argument for men, because I am more familiar, its closer to home, and I wanted to simplify my explanation. However, females have a different physiology, and as such, are different in that respect (irrefutably), but their minds are open to uniqueness that should be left unbound and unchained to social restriction that we all, in some shape or another, hate (I REALLY need to write about how we all hate social stigma and yet, we feed it to ourselves and pressure it on one another without any idea why).
That's my piece.
Listening to: Backstreet Boys, "Larger than Life" (Come at me, brohemio)
"Real men". Puh-lease. I feel like most of you know what I'm talking about already; the distinction between "boys" and "men" is a widespread, simplistic view of the male definition. People don't think (what's new there... *bitter Nic*) about how stupid this sounds: "Real men know how to treat a woman.", "Real men know how to use a wrench.", "Real men hold hands with their girlfriend when they're brushing their teeth."
STFU.
"Real men" do not exist - they never have, and they never will. Do you want to know why? (probably not, but this is my world so I'm going to pretend like you do) Because grouping males into "boys" and "men" is childish, over simplified, and feeds the social constructs that humans are supposed to behave a certain way, robbing them of their uniqueness.
There are males that exist that are very proficient at fixing cars, males that love to dance, males that like to do drugs, males that drive fast cars, males that dress up in "women's" clothing, and about a trillion combinations of different aspects of life. They are, merely (or completely?) human, defined as male based on their physiology, but their thought process should/is/trying to be unique to them as humans, and as such, should be understood as a person before they are seen as "men", or more aptly, more neutral, as males. So, that is why "real men" do not exist. You have your preferences for the people you would like in your corner, but because those who do not prescribe to your corner of people does not make them any less than human.
Now, does this only apply to men? Nay, no, never, nein, non. Females are often held to some weird social standard, too. The exact same argument can be made for females, as well; I simply made the argument for men, because I am more familiar, its closer to home, and I wanted to simplify my explanation. However, females have a different physiology, and as such, are different in that respect (irrefutably), but their minds are open to uniqueness that should be left unbound and unchained to social restriction that we all, in some shape or another, hate (I REALLY need to write about how we all hate social stigma and yet, we feed it to ourselves and pressure it on one another without any idea why).
That's my piece.
Listening to: Backstreet Boys, "Larger than Life" (Come at me, brohemio)
Thursday, April 3, 2014
This is Rant About Math
In the past 11 weeks, I have spent an average of 4 hours per 5 days of the week on Math, because I suck at it. So, that's a total of 220 (a total of almost 10 days) hours on math alone. Now, I must say that I got a perfect score on my first exam, an 'A' on my second, and I feel sure I will annihilate my next with similar fashion. So, my rage against math is not a matter of me doing poorly in it, considering I'm doing better than everyone in my class merely due to sheer will power, dedication, and a "let's get this shit over with pronto" mentality. That being said, in the words of Dr. Cox on Scrubs, I "megaloath" Math. Ever since about 5th grade I have had a deep disdain for math, because I was horrible at it, but I would argue I am horrible at it, because I can't allow my mind to mindlessly plug numbers into place without knowing the worth of what I'm doing. Math is mechanical, shit, robotic, shit, inhuman... poop.
I mean, almost everyone agrees that most things we learn in the math room we never, ever, ever, ever use in the entirety of our lives... so... why am I learning it? I realize it's beneficial to learn if you're going into engineering, physics, etc, but even these people don't use 97% of the things they are taught in the classroom, because everything we learn is so uselessly complex that everyone instinctually simplifies it to the fundamentals (addition, subtraction, division, multiplication, proportions, fractions, etc.) in an effort to reach an answer. So, again, why am I learning this when almost everyone I speak to or even just observe have demonstrated that they simply do not use it as it is taught. I'm not asking for the abolition of mathematics, but when 3x+4y+2t^3 = .087C - 41T^2/3^4:
I DO NOT CARE, BECAUSE I WILL NEVER ENCOUNTER THIS IN MY ENTIRE LIFE.
That statement is the one that plagues me every single day I am forced to cram this information down my throat (which, I promise you, I always forget within days of writing it on the exam.. and guess what? I'm able to get by with simple math in my daily life), and because it plagues me so, I find it nearly impossible to learn this information for good (rendering it, two part useless). It's like being told that a specific tool is going to be very useful for later life for no reason at all, and you know that is not the case, and yet you still have to learn how to use the tool for a job that will never happen.
Not to mention, the amount of rules in math is staggering (or maybe it is to someone who has a hard time allowing himself to process all the bull). In one chapter, the symbol "X" means one thing, but int he next chapter, it means something else. In one chapter, you're allowed to do something, but in the next... nope - no longer! I also love the instances in which it's obvious that the answer is impossible to reach based on the rules we currently know, but waaaaaaaait a second!, according to article 16, page 4, line 3C of the Bible of Math, we can tag in a ghost number that beats up the barrier that has stopped us, on every other chapter, from getting further in the answer, but once we have the ghost number (we will name it G here), we have to use another random formula that isn't explained as to why it exists to get rid of G, but remember... a negative can't be left in the numerfrator, because... oh, that's right, no explanation.. you just aren't supposed to have it there, because the Math Gestapo will come and get you (I wish they would, I'd go Jason Bourne on their asses) [long sentence much?]. What. The. Hell.
No.
My brain simply rejects things that A) Will not be used in life, B) Serve no use in my betterment as a person, and/or C) Activate my mind critically.
Don't get me wrong, math is extremely useful and I respect its use in day to day activities; I'm simply stating that most of the math we learn seems like it's there to make professors feel like they know something complex without much practical application. Even if some of these complex ways are "short cuts" to getting to an answer that will help build a convex bridge, there always seems to be a longer, yet far simpler way to reach that point - and I always prefer the longer route if it means I have to learn less in this particular subject.
Oddly enough, there are variations of math that I very much enjoy. For example, simple statistics are rather enjoyable.. because they pertain to my field of interest, and almost every scientist on planet Earth needs them to equate relevance and efficiency to their work - that, I can respect, would like to learn more about, and I will use it many times in my career.
Today, I genuinely thought about debating my math teacher about why I was in the class room learning this information and in what common situation I would be using this lecture. I held back, for tactical reasons: pissing off a professor in a subject you already have to work incredibly hard at is not my idea of a good idea.
Ok, so when I need to blast this subject again, I'll just add it to this lovely piece.
Listening to: Parkway Drive, "Boneyards" (Thanks Alex...)
I mean, almost everyone agrees that most things we learn in the math room we never, ever, ever, ever use in the entirety of our lives... so... why am I learning it? I realize it's beneficial to learn if you're going into engineering, physics, etc, but even these people don't use 97% of the things they are taught in the classroom, because everything we learn is so uselessly complex that everyone instinctually simplifies it to the fundamentals (addition, subtraction, division, multiplication, proportions, fractions, etc.) in an effort to reach an answer. So, again, why am I learning this when almost everyone I speak to or even just observe have demonstrated that they simply do not use it as it is taught. I'm not asking for the abolition of mathematics, but when 3x+4y+2t^3 = .087C - 41T^2/3^4:
I DO NOT CARE, BECAUSE I WILL NEVER ENCOUNTER THIS IN MY ENTIRE LIFE.
That statement is the one that plagues me every single day I am forced to cram this information down my throat (which, I promise you, I always forget within days of writing it on the exam.. and guess what? I'm able to get by with simple math in my daily life), and because it plagues me so, I find it nearly impossible to learn this information for good (rendering it, two part useless). It's like being told that a specific tool is going to be very useful for later life for no reason at all, and you know that is not the case, and yet you still have to learn how to use the tool for a job that will never happen.
Not to mention, the amount of rules in math is staggering (or maybe it is to someone who has a hard time allowing himself to process all the bull). In one chapter, the symbol "X" means one thing, but int he next chapter, it means something else. In one chapter, you're allowed to do something, but in the next... nope - no longer! I also love the instances in which it's obvious that the answer is impossible to reach based on the rules we currently know, but waaaaaaaait a second!, according to article 16, page 4, line 3C of the Bible of Math, we can tag in a ghost number that beats up the barrier that has stopped us, on every other chapter, from getting further in the answer, but once we have the ghost number (we will name it G here), we have to use another random formula that isn't explained as to why it exists to get rid of G, but remember... a negative can't be left in the numerfrator, because... oh, that's right, no explanation.. you just aren't supposed to have it there, because the Math Gestapo will come and get you (I wish they would, I'd go Jason Bourne on their asses) [long sentence much?]. What. The. Hell.
No.
My brain simply rejects things that A) Will not be used in life, B) Serve no use in my betterment as a person, and/or C) Activate my mind critically.
Don't get me wrong, math is extremely useful and I respect its use in day to day activities; I'm simply stating that most of the math we learn seems like it's there to make professors feel like they know something complex without much practical application. Even if some of these complex ways are "short cuts" to getting to an answer that will help build a convex bridge, there always seems to be a longer, yet far simpler way to reach that point - and I always prefer the longer route if it means I have to learn less in this particular subject.
Oddly enough, there are variations of math that I very much enjoy. For example, simple statistics are rather enjoyable.. because they pertain to my field of interest, and almost every scientist on planet Earth needs them to equate relevance and efficiency to their work - that, I can respect, would like to learn more about, and I will use it many times in my career.
Today, I genuinely thought about debating my math teacher about why I was in the class room learning this information and in what common situation I would be using this lecture. I held back, for tactical reasons: pissing off a professor in a subject you already have to work incredibly hard at is not my idea of a good idea.
Ok, so when I need to blast this subject again, I'll just add it to this lovely piece.
Listening to: Parkway Drive, "Boneyards" (Thanks Alex...)
The Moral Point
Let's make this quick:
Does God exist?
From a moral stand point, it doesn't matter - the vast majority still act the exact same way, regardless of their belief. Atheists tend to have the exact same moral code as Agnostics, Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, etc.. Quite frankly, if you worship Satan, the point stands so long as your actions and feelings stand true to the overall compassion toward your fellow man. So, from that single perspective, I do not care what your belief is, because if you have even a moderate level of a moral compass, then you are no different than anyone else standing in front of you.
Of course, I have to reiterate, this is a vast majority, not unanimity - because, as with almost everything in the waking world, there are exceptions, but even with those exceptions, you should create a different set of reactions for the situation and exception, because the generalization of the majority is likely to hurt the integrity of the moral point with little to no record (like dragging a fishing net through an abundance of fish to catch one specific fish and throwing the rest back after they've perished).
Listening to: The Black Keys, "Howlin' For You"
Does God exist?
From a moral stand point, it doesn't matter - the vast majority still act the exact same way, regardless of their belief. Atheists tend to have the exact same moral code as Agnostics, Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, etc.. Quite frankly, if you worship Satan, the point stands so long as your actions and feelings stand true to the overall compassion toward your fellow man. So, from that single perspective, I do not care what your belief is, because if you have even a moderate level of a moral compass, then you are no different than anyone else standing in front of you.
Of course, I have to reiterate, this is a vast majority, not unanimity - because, as with almost everything in the waking world, there are exceptions, but even with those exceptions, you should create a different set of reactions for the situation and exception, because the generalization of the majority is likely to hurt the integrity of the moral point with little to no record (like dragging a fishing net through an abundance of fish to catch one specific fish and throwing the rest back after they've perished).
Listening to: The Black Keys, "Howlin' For You"
Wednesday, April 2, 2014
Revolution of Education: The Human Element
While there is growing rumbling that higher education is becoming less useful in the face of an increasing ability to access information (local libraries, the internet, online libraries) with a high rate or reliability, I do think that the education system has an advantage that is very difficult to emulate as smoothly online, and yet, the education systems fail to take advantage of such a tool, because they see it as unimportant. Information is easy to access - not much doubt about that; however, something far closer to home is much harder to reach than any set of concrete facts found online or in a book. I've discussed the difference between "Smart" and "Intelligent" in the past, but a short blurb on the subject can be of use here.
Essentially, being smart means you know information, while being intelligent is a far more raw, difficult to measure representation of thought, creativity, abstract thought. The school system measures smarts - just about 99% of the time. Do I find this annoying? Extremely. As a matter of fact, I'm biased against it. I feel that the school systems I've encountered, and heard of, are failing to realize the immense importance of allowing a person to unleash their intelligence (some more than others, obviously). Classes need to be offered, maybe even required, with an extremely open curriculum. Professors should guide students to unleashing their interests, their mind, and expressing themselves through their opinions. Facts are for smart people, opinions unleash intelligence. Instead of looking at students in the outdated concept of "fill 'em up" with information and send 'em out", we should be taking a serious look into growing and cultivating students' interests by enabling growth through communication and sharing of opinions. There are a high number of benefits to this, as these students will grow as more complete human beings, more expressive, and would learn to communicate efficiently.
So, how do we do this? Start offering classes with an extremely thin curriculum that is not set to be completed, but rather, to stimulate. Let me tell you, I've been in a class where a professor has said something controversial and BOOM! the room goes off in a buzz, arms start raising, students suddenly sit straight up, and the level of activity exponentially rises proportional to the day in day out "smart" teaching of "suck in this information for later". It gets to a point that when students are interested, because someone asks a question of interest to the whole class (or a part, even), that the professor has to reign in the conversation and direct it back to the lecture (most have a hard time doing this, because even they are enjoying the conversation).. which is BULL SHIT.
People just don't get that excited about their interests on a regular basis, let me tell you - I know this is opinion, but it might just as well be fact. Education systems need to stop thinking so damn linearly - it is, absolutely, a less efficient system in the long term development of students. I know most institutions will see it as a waste of resources, but I could easily argue that it will turn an institution from a regular, unoriginal system to a lively, feedback driven organism feeding off of the human element of people's minds. We need to have classes where going "off topic" is exactly what the class is designed for - let people be people and assert themselves in the eyes of their peers; this is a wise business tactic, as well, because it allows students to learn effective communication skills, it livens up the class room, and it is low stress, high reward. I'm sure many students would see it as pointless, but those who do engage (and trust me, I've been in several instances in which it involuntarily exploded in classes) will show their true colors and true potential.
The system is broken, but the human element is its most egregious, overlooked leak in a flawed system of education. Bring back the human element, and you will regain some appreciation, love, all while teaching people how to communicate effectively, passionately, intelligently with one another - the students walking out of that school system will be better adjusted, adaptable, communicative, and above all, have a clearer understanding of their own views.
Listening to: The Black Keys, "Howlin' For You"
Essentially, being smart means you know information, while being intelligent is a far more raw, difficult to measure representation of thought, creativity, abstract thought. The school system measures smarts - just about 99% of the time. Do I find this annoying? Extremely. As a matter of fact, I'm biased against it. I feel that the school systems I've encountered, and heard of, are failing to realize the immense importance of allowing a person to unleash their intelligence (some more than others, obviously). Classes need to be offered, maybe even required, with an extremely open curriculum. Professors should guide students to unleashing their interests, their mind, and expressing themselves through their opinions. Facts are for smart people, opinions unleash intelligence. Instead of looking at students in the outdated concept of "fill 'em up" with information and send 'em out", we should be taking a serious look into growing and cultivating students' interests by enabling growth through communication and sharing of opinions. There are a high number of benefits to this, as these students will grow as more complete human beings, more expressive, and would learn to communicate efficiently.
So, how do we do this? Start offering classes with an extremely thin curriculum that is not set to be completed, but rather, to stimulate. Let me tell you, I've been in a class where a professor has said something controversial and BOOM! the room goes off in a buzz, arms start raising, students suddenly sit straight up, and the level of activity exponentially rises proportional to the day in day out "smart" teaching of "suck in this information for later". It gets to a point that when students are interested, because someone asks a question of interest to the whole class (or a part, even), that the professor has to reign in the conversation and direct it back to the lecture (most have a hard time doing this, because even they are enjoying the conversation).. which is BULL SHIT.
People just don't get that excited about their interests on a regular basis, let me tell you - I know this is opinion, but it might just as well be fact. Education systems need to stop thinking so damn linearly - it is, absolutely, a less efficient system in the long term development of students. I know most institutions will see it as a waste of resources, but I could easily argue that it will turn an institution from a regular, unoriginal system to a lively, feedback driven organism feeding off of the human element of people's minds. We need to have classes where going "off topic" is exactly what the class is designed for - let people be people and assert themselves in the eyes of their peers; this is a wise business tactic, as well, because it allows students to learn effective communication skills, it livens up the class room, and it is low stress, high reward. I'm sure many students would see it as pointless, but those who do engage (and trust me, I've been in several instances in which it involuntarily exploded in classes) will show their true colors and true potential.
The system is broken, but the human element is its most egregious, overlooked leak in a flawed system of education. Bring back the human element, and you will regain some appreciation, love, all while teaching people how to communicate effectively, passionately, intelligently with one another - the students walking out of that school system will be better adjusted, adaptable, communicative, and above all, have a clearer understanding of their own views.
Listening to: The Black Keys, "Howlin' For You"
Saturday, March 29, 2014
Unleashing the Child Side
Someone posted, on Facebook, how ridiculous someone (a young adult) with "light up" sneakers looked. It got me thinking that we really have a lack of patience for anything childish that gets exhibited by anyone "other than" a child. I don't mean to step to the defense of immaturity, but there is a distinction between being child-like and immature. I, along with a seemingly small percentage of people, find immaturity unattractive, romantically and platonically. I feel as if a lot of people, an even greater percentage, find a person embracing their child-like side to themselves to be even more unattractive. I find this saddening, because it is incredibly telling of American culture to set an age limit or goal on many things (Adult = 18, Alcohol = 21, Get a Job = 16, Rent a Car = 25, etc). I genuinely believe that everyone should embrace their child self for the rest of their lives. I mean, think about it, when you were a kid, you were care free, happy, spoiled, creative, unrestricted, and finally, more importantly, physically and emotionally free. Now, I understand that an adult has to take care of business throughout life, but failing to realize the beauty of one's own oddity and care free attitude is, in my mind, unhealthy.
I do not subscribe to the notion that once a person reaches a certain age, they must fall in line and fill the shoes of a respectable, responsible adult. I firmly believe that a person should be able to allow the kid inside them to blossom from time to time to release steam, express themselves freely, and become, overall, more approachable as a person. You'd be surprised how often you end up laughing, spending less time rigidly standing, releasing the built up pressures inflicted upon yourself when you simply decide to be a little silly, indulge in some innocent fun. As a matter of fact, watch most people talk to their pets - the immediate jail break to a person's child side; people become completely different when their pet is being given their attention - they become playful, start emulating different voices, and their imagination makes them believe their pet can understand them. That last point is really interesting to me, because although their rational side would tell them otherwise, they simply ignore it and enjoy the moment for what it is, devoid of attention on the world around them (which they would, otherwise, see as judgmental).
I'm telling you, if you have some fun little quirks about you, you should absolutely not be ashamed of it, nor hide it, but express it as a demonstration of your difference and love for yourself in a light unlike your serious, reserved one. Don't get me wrong, I believe there are far too few people who allow themselves to sit down and actually think for themselves, but I also feel that many people fail to realize that it is okay, and not only that, but healthy to embrace your 8 year old self from time to time; I feel as if most people are in an uncomfortable limbo between acceptance and nonacceptance, and feed into the cyclical pattern of judgement on others (who return the favor), because we're all too damn scared to be ourselves to the fullest extent. Trust me, even I'm still battling it.
Listening to: Foster the People, "Don't Stop (Color the Walls)"
I do not subscribe to the notion that once a person reaches a certain age, they must fall in line and fill the shoes of a respectable, responsible adult. I firmly believe that a person should be able to allow the kid inside them to blossom from time to time to release steam, express themselves freely, and become, overall, more approachable as a person. You'd be surprised how often you end up laughing, spending less time rigidly standing, releasing the built up pressures inflicted upon yourself when you simply decide to be a little silly, indulge in some innocent fun. As a matter of fact, watch most people talk to their pets - the immediate jail break to a person's child side; people become completely different when their pet is being given their attention - they become playful, start emulating different voices, and their imagination makes them believe their pet can understand them. That last point is really interesting to me, because although their rational side would tell them otherwise, they simply ignore it and enjoy the moment for what it is, devoid of attention on the world around them (which they would, otherwise, see as judgmental).
I'm telling you, if you have some fun little quirks about you, you should absolutely not be ashamed of it, nor hide it, but express it as a demonstration of your difference and love for yourself in a light unlike your serious, reserved one. Don't get me wrong, I believe there are far too few people who allow themselves to sit down and actually think for themselves, but I also feel that many people fail to realize that it is okay, and not only that, but healthy to embrace your 8 year old self from time to time; I feel as if most people are in an uncomfortable limbo between acceptance and nonacceptance, and feed into the cyclical pattern of judgement on others (who return the favor), because we're all too damn scared to be ourselves to the fullest extent. Trust me, even I'm still battling it.
Listening to: Foster the People, "Don't Stop (Color the Walls)"
Wednesday, March 26, 2014
The Business
If all goes well with the connection between my domain name and my website editor, tomorrow or the next day (can take up to 48 hours, I've been informed) will be a big day for me - the "grand" opening of my business. Much excite. I had this idea back in October, so the past half a year has been dedicated to making this idea a reality. I had planned on launching in January to begin with, but then had to postpone to February, and then had to postpone indefinitely due to legal matters. Now that those are all taken care of, I have a bunch of small things that I had planned on finishing before the business opened, but quite frankly, I am beyond tired of waiting. That being the case, once this final major link fits into the chain (in the next day or two, hopefully), the announcement will be made and the website will be open for customers. Although I realize almost nothing will happen in the beginning months, it is still exciting to consider that everything I do from here on out will be a positive extension to growing and publicizing my business. I'm quite ready to put my knowledge to the benefit of others while also taking a step in the right direction to carving out a career for myself.
As for the small things that will be added later, I only see those are sweeteners to an already great venture - I'll be enthusiastic to add those in at a later date. Not only is this business legitimate, it provides a chance for me to establish myself, and it fits smoothly with my studies for which both will benefit from one another. Does it get better than that? Nope. This should be a lot of fun, and bounding with excitement.
Listening to: Led Zeppelin, "Ramble On"
As for the small things that will be added later, I only see those are sweeteners to an already great venture - I'll be enthusiastic to add those in at a later date. Not only is this business legitimate, it provides a chance for me to establish myself, and it fits smoothly with my studies for which both will benefit from one another. Does it get better than that? Nope. This should be a lot of fun, and bounding with excitement.
Listening to: Led Zeppelin, "Ramble On"
Tuesday, March 25, 2014
Craving Intellectual Release
I have no recollection of why I got a Facebook in the first place, but as time has gone by, I've used it as a medium to express myself in certain aspects of life. That isn't unique to anyone, because everyone, more or less, uses it for similar, if not identical, reason. I will sometimes sit 10-15 minutes in front of my computer thinking of how to properly word a "status update" so that it is impactful, often open ended, and above all, worth while. I sometimes post things of a silly nature, true to who I am, but as I see many people are able to express themselves in a silly nature, I see it as an obligation to show a more intellectual (if you would consider it that) nature to my posts - not always because I have superior knowledge, but because I am trying to illicit a reaction in other people's minds to enter a dialogue with me and others in hopes to stretch our minds a bit. I've recently held the belief that discussion can really further a person's intellectual worth along with their interest as a person. We seem, often, to be so numb to the idea of growth and development from a personal nature - meaning, not from schooling or practical application, but rather, growing into oneself by opening ourselves to mediums of communication and inevitably, challenges. The more we open avenues of communication to things that we love to discuss, the more enriched we can become. While many people are extremely proficient at gossip and although rarely admit it, they've come to enjoy it; it seems our ability to delve into the depths of a good fireside discussion have become foreign to us. The ability to appreciate the presence of a mind with unique thoughts to one's own is something we should not take for granted. While others don't seem to care for it much, I find that I crave for it so much that it angers me to see potential golden conversations thrown away by the smallest intrusions. I have had the privilege to sit down with a small assortment of people and enjoy losing ourselves, together, in the passions of our own minds. These moments come only a few times a year, if that, and I find myself noticing when they seem to be coming to fruition. As I notice, I also find myself getting desperate to encourage the conversation along its path, but often am superseded by the entrance of "distractions" (food, people not involved in the conversation changing the subject, TV, among many other things). As this is the case, it is almost impossible to salvage the conversation unless the other conversationalist(s) also feel the glee from conversation with more merit than their daily talks ("How was your day?", "What did you do today?", "Where should we eat?") and push the conversation forward regardless of distractions (extremely rare for this to happen).
In essence, my ideal is this: A room of a few people (I'm not particular about the number) sitting or standing with all their electronics off (or an EMP goes off, your choice) and readily hungry to listen and passionate to express their views. I don't give a rat's ass if we get anywhere with our conclusions, but the act of listening and engaging in challenging exchange of thoughts is riveting, constructive in its own right, and fun for many people, regardless of if they notice it now or not (which, can be ascertained, or seemingly so, by the length of each one of these sessions).
I just came to a realization... maybe I got my psychology degree, because I craved the hour long discussions of things that matter with a person, uninterrupted by "other things". That's a romantic possibility. I also just realized that I was going somewhere completely differently with this post and my mind zipped me in this direction... I was going to talk about Facebook posts and the nature of my "commenting", but I guess I had something more pressing to discuss, ha! Very cool.
Listening to: Above & Beyond, "A Thing Called Love"
In essence, my ideal is this: A room of a few people (I'm not particular about the number) sitting or standing with all their electronics off (or an EMP goes off, your choice) and readily hungry to listen and passionate to express their views. I don't give a rat's ass if we get anywhere with our conclusions, but the act of listening and engaging in challenging exchange of thoughts is riveting, constructive in its own right, and fun for many people, regardless of if they notice it now or not (which, can be ascertained, or seemingly so, by the length of each one of these sessions).
I just came to a realization... maybe I got my psychology degree, because I craved the hour long discussions of things that matter with a person, uninterrupted by "other things". That's a romantic possibility. I also just realized that I was going somewhere completely differently with this post and my mind zipped me in this direction... I was going to talk about Facebook posts and the nature of my "commenting", but I guess I had something more pressing to discuss, ha! Very cool.
Listening to: Above & Beyond, "A Thing Called Love"
Friday, March 21, 2014
The Post Relationship Breakdown
I've been noticing this for a couple years now, but since I just recently started this small writing venture, I've been unable to really comment on the hilarity that is people who re-emerge into the world around them when they make an exit from their recently collapsed relationship. The almost unbelievable intensity with which many people throw themselves into a relationship is indicative of several things, but I'm not here to discuss those here, but rather, the affect it has on their social standing while they are in a relationship and afterward.
I've seen a multitude of people run head first into relationships, glorify their newly acquired significant beyond reasonable expectation, and from that point of "linkage" between them self and their romantic partner, their friendships begin to fall to priority numero deux; so much so, that in some cases, their newly acquired significant other has this powerful ability to sway their suitor into agreeing with them on nearly everything, and by doing so, reducing the trust between year-long, decade-long friendships to an easily cut string. Of course, I consider this an unhealthy relationship, but again, I am not here to discuss that point. My point is when said relationship fails (if it fails), the result is an immediate attempt to reintegrate oneself into a social sphere that was almost immediately abandoned when said relationship began.
This is the point when the awkward re-merging begins. From a massive influx of praise and love for the ex-significant other, the very noticeable turn to self reflective, consoling, empowering quotes, the immediate cropping of pictures with which the boyfriend or girlfriend used to partake in, the sudden increase in outsourcing praise to estranged friends (or God/Jesus) in an attempt to seem included from day one, and in some cases, the "I don't need someone else to make me happy" posts come shrieking in from all sides as social media becomes an outlet for raw emotions having completely, utterly overcome any levee holding back the flood of emotion that is a person now detached from their life source - someone else. These are the exact symptoms, I believe, in an unhealthy relationship with someone other, a forever weak bond between friends, and above all, a massive lack of relationship with oneself.
All of what I've written is simply speculation based on observation of teenagers to 20 something year olds, so I could be completely off base, but I have observed it quite often within that small sample, and again, I'm not going to try and be politically correct about everything here.
Listening to: Led Zeppelin, "Stairway to Heaven"
I've seen a multitude of people run head first into relationships, glorify their newly acquired significant beyond reasonable expectation, and from that point of "linkage" between them self and their romantic partner, their friendships begin to fall to priority numero deux; so much so, that in some cases, their newly acquired significant other has this powerful ability to sway their suitor into agreeing with them on nearly everything, and by doing so, reducing the trust between year-long, decade-long friendships to an easily cut string. Of course, I consider this an unhealthy relationship, but again, I am not here to discuss that point. My point is when said relationship fails (if it fails), the result is an immediate attempt to reintegrate oneself into a social sphere that was almost immediately abandoned when said relationship began.
This is the point when the awkward re-merging begins. From a massive influx of praise and love for the ex-significant other, the very noticeable turn to self reflective, consoling, empowering quotes, the immediate cropping of pictures with which the boyfriend or girlfriend used to partake in, the sudden increase in outsourcing praise to estranged friends (or God/Jesus) in an attempt to seem included from day one, and in some cases, the "I don't need someone else to make me happy" posts come shrieking in from all sides as social media becomes an outlet for raw emotions having completely, utterly overcome any levee holding back the flood of emotion that is a person now detached from their life source - someone else. These are the exact symptoms, I believe, in an unhealthy relationship with someone other, a forever weak bond between friends, and above all, a massive lack of relationship with oneself.
All of what I've written is simply speculation based on observation of teenagers to 20 something year olds, so I could be completely off base, but I have observed it quite often within that small sample, and again, I'm not going to try and be politically correct about everything here.
Listening to: Led Zeppelin, "Stairway to Heaven"
Wednesday, March 19, 2014
Styles of Writing
As I sat down today to do some writing in this thought cauldron, I had planned on writing some on the quote, "Everything happens for a reason". Mainly, because it is used almost every day by a vast majority of people, or so it seems, at least. Instead, as I clunked down into my seat in Joyner Library (my university library), I was swept away with the various "styles" of writing a person can use to deliver specialized messages. When I look at my own writing, I notice that I can write relatively casually, more technically (philosophically inclined), and artistically. Without a doubt, writing in a casual sense, as I am now, is the easiest of the three. I don't focus on the technicalities of my writing, because my writing tends to be more accepting of a "stream of consciousness" influence. However, as I switch gears into a more philosophical mind set, I tend to make sure that each word has a specific, meaningful impact on my overall point; each word is chosen with tactical precision. Meanwhile, my third and final style of writing is the hardest, because it is so raw and requires a delicate balance between exploding richness, flavor, and beauty, but with enough restraint to carry the plot forward without being bogged down by the exploration of detail within a created setting.
Those are my three major styles of writing, and while everyone has their unique branches, these three are the ones I tend to gravitate towards as they allow me to express myself in the three mediums I tend to identify myself with: Light hearted/casual, Intellectual/Philosophical-Artistic.
It's always interesting to see other people's way of writing (and, in many ways, a channel to their way of thinking). Some are exceptional and really peak my interest when I read them.
Listening to: Foster the People, "Fire Escape"
Those are my three major styles of writing, and while everyone has their unique branches, these three are the ones I tend to gravitate towards as they allow me to express myself in the three mediums I tend to identify myself with: Light hearted/casual, Intellectual/Philosophical-Artistic.
It's always interesting to see other people's way of writing (and, in many ways, a channel to their way of thinking). Some are exceptional and really peak my interest when I read them.
Listening to: Foster the People, "Fire Escape"
Tuesday, March 18, 2014
Unleashing the Mind
There's a German (or French?) philosopher that said if we would only spend 15 minutes a day doing nothing (as in, no phones, no books, no electronics of any sort, just staring straight ahead, sitting, in quiet) that we would reap some great levels of creativity and intellectual growth from simply doing (or, not doing?) this lack of activity. I think that's an interesting idea, because I find my mind is most active when I do sit and do nothing (or, as a compromise, very little - like driving a car forward for hours on end). However, by "more active", it sometimes gets overrun with less than intellectual thoughts such as worrying about grades, work, friendships, among a slew of other "less than" intellectually sound philosophizing.
I would be intrigued to hear the results of people doing absolutely nothing for just a quarter of an hour. It's pretty remarkable how much our brain can consciously process in just a minute's time if you let it (I understand this is a scary experience for some). Also, at least for me (not trying to make myself seem special, just reporting my thoughts separate from others'), the quality of thought has a way of rising quite sharply when I let my mind take me to where it will, unrestricted. I certainly plan on writing more on this, because it is a fascinating phenomena that I'd like to explore more in myself.
I used to chronicle a dream journal. Maybe I will do something similar here? I'll see how I feel is the best course of action. I'm also curious to see what other people gather from an experience like this.
Listening to: Puscifer, "The Humbling River"
I would be intrigued to hear the results of people doing absolutely nothing for just a quarter of an hour. It's pretty remarkable how much our brain can consciously process in just a minute's time if you let it (I understand this is a scary experience for some). Also, at least for me (not trying to make myself seem special, just reporting my thoughts separate from others'), the quality of thought has a way of rising quite sharply when I let my mind take me to where it will, unrestricted. I certainly plan on writing more on this, because it is a fascinating phenomena that I'd like to explore more in myself.
I used to chronicle a dream journal. Maybe I will do something similar here? I'll see how I feel is the best course of action. I'm also curious to see what other people gather from an experience like this.
Listening to: Puscifer, "The Humbling River"
Gifts on Special Occasions
I was driving today, in some chilly rain, and as I had no need for a destination, I decided to take the long way back home. On my drive, a quote came to me, because I was thinking about one of my relationships. The quote sounds a bit like, "A good gift to someone on their birthday, anniversary, holiday should come from listening in the present, and remembering the past."
Generally I'd let a person mull that over, but my point extends past the quote, a mere instrument to my real point. A good present to give someone requires listening ears and mind with the consciousness to remember that point of listening long enough to act upon it - the longer it has been since the occurrence of said "listening", the more impact that gift will strike.
Anyway, I started to come up with a third point to add to my quote, but then I stopped and thought, "How often are quotes, impactful sayings, and sentences filled with the number 3 (for example, this very sentence)? It seems that people often scramble to find a third "point of emphasis" to their legitimate dualism, making their overall statement weaker for adding a third point that doesn't measure to their initial two points. In my quote, I desperately wanted to add something about the future, but after some thought, I knew that it would end up being a sub-par ending to an already valid quote.
The joys of my mind, sometimes.. ha!
Listening to: Gotye, "Eyes Wide Open"
Generally I'd let a person mull that over, but my point extends past the quote, a mere instrument to my real point. A good present to give someone requires listening ears and mind with the consciousness to remember that point of listening long enough to act upon it - the longer it has been since the occurrence of said "listening", the more impact that gift will strike.
Anyway, I started to come up with a third point to add to my quote, but then I stopped and thought, "How often are quotes, impactful sayings, and sentences filled with the number 3 (for example, this very sentence)? It seems that people often scramble to find a third "point of emphasis" to their legitimate dualism, making their overall statement weaker for adding a third point that doesn't measure to their initial two points. In my quote, I desperately wanted to add something about the future, but after some thought, I knew that it would end up being a sub-par ending to an already valid quote.
The joys of my mind, sometimes.. ha!
Listening to: Gotye, "Eyes Wide Open"
Monday, March 17, 2014
Un-thinkable Thought and the Un-disgraced Intellect
I'm genuinely uncertain if it is possible for people, especially people entrenched in belief, to put away their beliefs and offer blank intellectual ideas, unscathed by their biases. I think all people, if not most, agree that every individual has bias in one way or another. I believe that the key is to recognize one's bias and detach oneself from that bias. Yea, yea, I know you're probably thinking, "That's impossible". Simply, I disagree. Maybe some people do not have the emotional intelligence to separate their intellect, their brain power from their underlying bias flavor and apply it in a manner that adds to a collection of thoughts - a discussion.
I have yet to meet a group of people that could step into a room, vomit their bias up into a bucket as they walk in, sit down, and be calm enough to hear "taboo" ideas. I don't like the idea of ideas being "unspeakable", "unthinkable", or otherwise "taboo". Surprisingly, we can all think of ideas that would make any regular room of people extremely uncomfortable. What I'm trying to figure out is if it is possible to eradicate that discomfort to a level that everyone in the room will take a presented statement and instead of reacting to their idea of how they would normally react (personal bias), or react dictated by the social norm (social bias), they would take the statements and dissect them with their mind, completely oblivious of the implications of said statements.
For example, if I said, "Slavery of the African American community was a positive occurrence, and it should have kept going into current day", or, "God does exist, there is proof of his existence", or even far more gruesome (social bias, again) instances that are difficult to utter without prefacing them with a thousand "warnings" distancing yourself from your own thought ("I'm not racist, but... I'm not trying to be mean, but... etc) then the immediate reaction is to look incredulous, insulted, and not entertain the thought even for a second (social bias). I'm wondering if there are people out there that can entertain ideas that most people would consider "appalling" and not necessarily go straight 180 and accept them as true (personal bias), but simply be able to discuss them without immediately attaching the uttered idea to the utter-er with judgement. Simply stating an idea does not 1) necessarily mean you believe the idea, or 2) that you have an emotional attachment to the idea. Literally, a place where any thought counts as equal, and every thought is immediately detached from the speaker as a person, but simply a suspended idea to be dissected cold bloodily, analytically by a group of people using their mind devoid of irrational emotion (and yes, I believe there is such a distinction between rational and irrational emotion). The ability to separate an idea from a person's character seems impossible for a massive amount of people - the "you said it, you must mean it" mentality is pretty rudimentary and gives little credit to the human mind.
I'd be interested in meeting more people with that ability - not because I have socially awkward or tough ideas to discuss, but because if I did have an uncomfortable idea I'd be able to discuss it without prefacing it with an assortment of warnings - it would simply be implied, or even unnecessary, leading to an in-depth discussion of minds working together to casually push and prod each intellect further into thought and discussion. Bottom line, a pure appreciation of intellect, blind to the source - a little like art.
Listening to: Notorious B.I.G.
I have yet to meet a group of people that could step into a room, vomit their bias up into a bucket as they walk in, sit down, and be calm enough to hear "taboo" ideas. I don't like the idea of ideas being "unspeakable", "unthinkable", or otherwise "taboo". Surprisingly, we can all think of ideas that would make any regular room of people extremely uncomfortable. What I'm trying to figure out is if it is possible to eradicate that discomfort to a level that everyone in the room will take a presented statement and instead of reacting to their idea of how they would normally react (personal bias), or react dictated by the social norm (social bias), they would take the statements and dissect them with their mind, completely oblivious of the implications of said statements.
For example, if I said, "Slavery of the African American community was a positive occurrence, and it should have kept going into current day", or, "God does exist, there is proof of his existence", or even far more gruesome (social bias, again) instances that are difficult to utter without prefacing them with a thousand "warnings" distancing yourself from your own thought ("I'm not racist, but... I'm not trying to be mean, but... etc) then the immediate reaction is to look incredulous, insulted, and not entertain the thought even for a second (social bias). I'm wondering if there are people out there that can entertain ideas that most people would consider "appalling" and not necessarily go straight 180 and accept them as true (personal bias), but simply be able to discuss them without immediately attaching the uttered idea to the utter-er with judgement. Simply stating an idea does not 1) necessarily mean you believe the idea, or 2) that you have an emotional attachment to the idea. Literally, a place where any thought counts as equal, and every thought is immediately detached from the speaker as a person, but simply a suspended idea to be dissected cold bloodily, analytically by a group of people using their mind devoid of irrational emotion (and yes, I believe there is such a distinction between rational and irrational emotion). The ability to separate an idea from a person's character seems impossible for a massive amount of people - the "you said it, you must mean it" mentality is pretty rudimentary and gives little credit to the human mind.
I'd be interested in meeting more people with that ability - not because I have socially awkward or tough ideas to discuss, but because if I did have an uncomfortable idea I'd be able to discuss it without prefacing it with an assortment of warnings - it would simply be implied, or even unnecessary, leading to an in-depth discussion of minds working together to casually push and prod each intellect further into thought and discussion. Bottom line, a pure appreciation of intellect, blind to the source - a little like art.
Listening to: Notorious B.I.G.
Fitspo
I'm a relatively diverse person, or at least, I like to think so - if that's the case or not, I don't much care. However, one of my greatest interests and passions is fitness and nutrition - I don't think that's a huge shock to anyone who has even an inkling of know about me. I love the fitness community, and I equally adore the research and science behind everything body and mind related. However, I'm growing increasingly weary of seeing "fitspo" (fitness inspiration) posts. Quite frankly, they all say the exact same thing by some measure or another. I understand people sometimes need to motivate themselves, but posts are so redundant. I mean, how many quotes are there about "never give up"; let's be honest, 98% of the posts reflect that thought in one way or another - as they should, obviously, but posting numerous posts saying the same thing every day can get a bit tedious. I've thought of erasing posts on my social media sites due to the massive influx of unoriginal fitness motivation. I posted this stuff, too, mind you, but recently (the past year or so) I've gotten worn down with the incessant need to recharge ourselves with mindless quotes (for example, "I'll keep getting beat down, and I'll keep getting up" > all I can think is.. "damn, what an idiot... try something else instead of hitting your head on the same wall."). My idea of motivation is different from other's way of motivation, this I understand, but I'm only expressing how tired I get of seeing the same brainless one liners (a little like movies... don't go there, Nic.. compose yourself..) being pasted on the background of some super model or hot hunk lifting 500 lbs.
Enough already, I get it - you're going to give your best in the gym, I read you loud and clear.
I guess this is why I consider myself cynical. :-P
Listening to: Puscifer - "Momma Sed"
Enough already, I get it - you're going to give your best in the gym, I read you loud and clear.
I guess this is why I consider myself cynical. :-P
Listening to: Puscifer - "Momma Sed"
Start of Cutting Diet of 2014
Today marks the firs day of my "cutting diet", implying that I will be reducing my body fat percentage while sparing as much muscle as possible. I've only done this once before, but last time was a resounding success, but the major difference between then and now is that I'm starting considerably leaner than I was at the beginning of my last cut. I was 250lbs @ 15-16% body fat and cut down to 222lbs @ 11% bodyfat. Now, after gaining 10 lbs over the past 9 months or so (inb4 pregnant), I've escalated to a proportionally lean 232lbs @ 12% body fat. My goal is to get below 10% body fat and finally have striking 6 pack and define the rest of my body more than I have ever had it defined. I'm going to be aiming for 9% body fat - we will see how the journey goes. The tricky part is losing almost exclusively body fat without losing muscle tissue. I know that getting into single digit body fat will lead to a more strenuous journey, but I look forward to experiencing it as a whole.
Week 1 - 232.0 lbs ~12-12.5%BF
Week 2 - 230.2 lbs
Week 3 - 227.8 lbs
Week 1 - 232.0 lbs ~12-12.5%BF
Week 2 - 230.2 lbs
Week 3 - 227.8 lbs
Sunday, March 9, 2014
Laugh At Your Temporary Lack of Skill
So, recently, I've taken on a new responsibility (if you can call it that) that needs a considerable amount of practice to become good. Well, I'd like to talk briefly about being a beginner at something. There is one thing that will make it that much easier to become an expert at something, and that is...
TUNE IN ON THE NEXT EPISODE OF DRAGON. BALL. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ!
Just kidding.
You need to accept that you absolutely suck at what you're doing. YOU ARE AWFUL. Fuck your skill, it is incredibly bad. The sooner you go into most things with a unrealistic downplay of your talents, and above all, an appreciation that everything you do will only be an improvement, the sooner you realize this, the sooner you can distance yourself from your own expectations - as well as personal and societal pressures.
Really, the best way to accept your own horrific shitiness is by pulling the intensity off of yourself with laughter. Laugh at your own inability and create a sense of humor as to acknowledge that you need significant improvement, but it is a fun, exciting challenge that you'd like to keep enjoying (as opposed to internalizing your mistakes and creating negative energy and friction within your body - we've all been there, quickly freaking out when things don't go our way, especially when we have the expectation that we should be brilliant at an activity we've never done).
My .02 cents. Im using that light, airy mentality when I attempt my endeavor of the nigh future.
Listening to: Gorillaz, "Fire Coming Out of a Monkey's Head"
TUNE IN ON THE NEXT EPISODE OF DRAGON. BALL. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ!
Just kidding.
You need to accept that you absolutely suck at what you're doing. YOU ARE AWFUL. Fuck your skill, it is incredibly bad. The sooner you go into most things with a unrealistic downplay of your talents, and above all, an appreciation that everything you do will only be an improvement, the sooner you realize this, the sooner you can distance yourself from your own expectations - as well as personal and societal pressures.
Really, the best way to accept your own horrific shitiness is by pulling the intensity off of yourself with laughter. Laugh at your own inability and create a sense of humor as to acknowledge that you need significant improvement, but it is a fun, exciting challenge that you'd like to keep enjoying (as opposed to internalizing your mistakes and creating negative energy and friction within your body - we've all been there, quickly freaking out when things don't go our way, especially when we have the expectation that we should be brilliant at an activity we've never done).
My .02 cents. Im using that light, airy mentality when I attempt my endeavor of the nigh future.
Listening to: Gorillaz, "Fire Coming Out of a Monkey's Head"
Tuesday, March 4, 2014
Musical Evolution in the Distant Beyond
I wonder what music will sound like in the future, and I don't mean in the near future, but the distant, several hundred and thousand year future. I've thought that the quality in artists, at least in the mainstream, has diminished considerably in the past several years, but my query isn't with the quality in the music, but the style of listening and appreciation. I mean, we had decade long musical styles come and go (Funk, Disco, Rock&Roll, etc) with the most recent one being Pop and the growing fascination with EDM. It seems that our transition from one fascination to another is rather quick, starting from the 50s onward; almost every decade had a dedicated style, but how many more can there be?
Will we see a resurgence in certain styles? Will we see new, unthought of ideas? I think it'll be interesting to see how music develops. Also, I find it interesting the similarities between all these styles: they all have some sort of bass, a lead sound, and drums (of course there are exceptions). Will that instrumentation style change? I think humans are capable of appreciating sound without those instruments or a lack of one or another instrument, but it will be odd to imagine a sense of music without a hard hitting bass, a distinct movement in the music, or something that ties it to the last 60 years of music evolution.
Maybe in a few centuries we will be experiencing music in a different way, who knows, but one thing is almost certain: something is bound to change and it'll be quite a sight to experience.
Listening to: Led Zeppelin, "Dazed and Confused"
Will we see a resurgence in certain styles? Will we see new, unthought of ideas? I think it'll be interesting to see how music develops. Also, I find it interesting the similarities between all these styles: they all have some sort of bass, a lead sound, and drums (of course there are exceptions). Will that instrumentation style change? I think humans are capable of appreciating sound without those instruments or a lack of one or another instrument, but it will be odd to imagine a sense of music without a hard hitting bass, a distinct movement in the music, or something that ties it to the last 60 years of music evolution.
Maybe in a few centuries we will be experiencing music in a different way, who knows, but one thing is almost certain: something is bound to change and it'll be quite a sight to experience.
Listening to: Led Zeppelin, "Dazed and Confused"
Joining the Motorcycle Family
About 30 seconds ago, I ordered a motorcycle helmet to my "soon to be" first motorcycle. I have taken measures over the past several months to ensure that I would be able to carry on a family tradition of riding motorcycles. My father has been riding motorcycles since before he was able to walk (well, okay, maybe not that long, but he has been riding motorcycles since his teenage years). He's been riding on the steel steed for the better part of his life, and while I used to ride with him often on long trips to the beach for some quality "papa-son" bonding, it has been a few years since one motorcycle has been able to carry two giants upon its back - one of which is still growing (ME - IF I NEED TO MAKE IT MORE OBVIOUS, lol). I have a good amount of confidence that my father's old BMW Windjammer II would have a tougher time now than 8+ years ago when I wasn't quite as sizable.
Good times, though. I enjoyed the ride on the back of the motorcycle, although the first time I was passenger was quite terrifying. Back then, when I was 14,15, I never expected to find myself in the position I am now. I found motorcycles interesting enough, on the surface, but I was never that invested. Recently, I've found myself thinking about having my own ride and joining my dad on those same lengthy journeys, but this time, side by side, not hunkered down on one two-wheeler. I'm not looking to go blazing speeds, although that is part of the thrill, but rather experience a sensation of freedom that I always felt on the back of the bike. This time, however, I look forward to having my own set of controls and enjoyment at my disposal.
I chose to take a leap and take the motorcycle course, which was a highly educational, informative, useful, and terrifying experience (especially since 40% of the class failed out). I went from not knowing jack- to being proficient enough to ride safely. Do I feel confident enough to ride at length and bask in the comfort of my own expertise? Absolutely not, but I have to charge onward and take the next leap at polishing the skill, just as with anything (except, of course, with this one if you're an idiot, you could die). I am excited to do so and eventually feel comfortable enough to put myself in more challenging situations.
By my understanding, the motorcycle community is quite vast and once you've found your niche, it is quite close knit - I also look forward to seeing the truth to those claims. Admittedly, I didn't decide to do this for the community (the reasoning being far more intrinsic), but maybe with time I will come to embrace the 2 wheel community as I have with the exercise community. I am nervous about my green status, but the only way to get past that is to move at one's own pace and progress.
I'm just expressing unorganized thoughts today, but to know that my life is going to take a small change for the "even better", along with the opening of my business shortly, this will prove to be a very thrilling, progressive summer this year - I am waiting with bated breath for everything to get underway.
Listening to: Halo 4 Soundtrack "Haven"
Good times, though. I enjoyed the ride on the back of the motorcycle, although the first time I was passenger was quite terrifying. Back then, when I was 14,15, I never expected to find myself in the position I am now. I found motorcycles interesting enough, on the surface, but I was never that invested. Recently, I've found myself thinking about having my own ride and joining my dad on those same lengthy journeys, but this time, side by side, not hunkered down on one two-wheeler. I'm not looking to go blazing speeds, although that is part of the thrill, but rather experience a sensation of freedom that I always felt on the back of the bike. This time, however, I look forward to having my own set of controls and enjoyment at my disposal.
I chose to take a leap and take the motorcycle course, which was a highly educational, informative, useful, and terrifying experience (especially since 40% of the class failed out). I went from not knowing jack- to being proficient enough to ride safely. Do I feel confident enough to ride at length and bask in the comfort of my own expertise? Absolutely not, but I have to charge onward and take the next leap at polishing the skill, just as with anything (except, of course, with this one if you're an idiot, you could die). I am excited to do so and eventually feel comfortable enough to put myself in more challenging situations.
By my understanding, the motorcycle community is quite vast and once you've found your niche, it is quite close knit - I also look forward to seeing the truth to those claims. Admittedly, I didn't decide to do this for the community (the reasoning being far more intrinsic), but maybe with time I will come to embrace the 2 wheel community as I have with the exercise community. I am nervous about my green status, but the only way to get past that is to move at one's own pace and progress.
I'm just expressing unorganized thoughts today, but to know that my life is going to take a small change for the "even better", along with the opening of my business shortly, this will prove to be a very thrilling, progressive summer this year - I am waiting with bated breath for everything to get underway.
Listening to: Halo 4 Soundtrack "Haven"
Thursday, February 27, 2014
Friction Between Creativity and Responsibility
I can understand why the creative type of person would eventually find themselves tempted to separate themselves from society, because it comes more and more evident to me that pressures of responsibilities have a two fold detrimental affect on creativity. First, they simply take time - that's as simple as it gets. Secondly, because they take so much time and energy/attention they drain a person to a point of involuntariness. So much to do during the day that by the end of it all, a person is so exhausted they'd rather veg than have to refocus their mind on yet another task, even if that task is something they'd typically enjoy.
Listening to: Green Day, "Kill the DJ"
Listening to: Green Day, "Kill the DJ"
Linear and Staggered Motivation
I've thought about this multiple times in the past few weeks, but it entered the forefront of my mind again when someone on my Facebook mentioned it in one of their statuses. Something that a lot of people struggle with when it comes to reaching one's goals or simply doing something they don't feel like doing, is motivation. I'm not here, this time, to distinguish the difference in motivation between doing something you enjoy doing and something you do not enjoy doing, but rather, a style of hierarchical view on motivation.
This person, from Facebook, mentioned that we have a finite amount of motivation with which to accomplish tasks and we should be discriminant in our choosing of what to allocate motivational resources...
> Re-read the Facebook post by this person, and they actually talk about "Discipline" rather than Motivation, but as my mind has been wired recently toward the latter, I will continue the discussion as if there were no discrepancy.
...While I agree that people, generally, have a certain reservoir of motivational "juice" with which to power their endeavors, I also feel there are different styles of understanding and maximizing one's motivation. First off, understanding the general difference between long term and short term motivation is imperative. A person with great short term motivation can fall short in their long term goals, but a long term motivatee proves that they have the ability to reach many short term goals to complete the reality of their long term goal (think of check points [short term] before reaching a destination [long term]). However, I feel that a linear path of motivation (similar to my brief thoughts on Success) is sub-optimal as what I try to instill in myself. I see people taking on one objective and following a "checkpoint" pattern of smaller, "chewable" chunks to that long term objective. While this is effective if the person can keep their "eye on the prize" and delay gratification, I feel that there are better ways of maximizing one's motivation - and in some way, make one's motivation almost unlimited depending on the number of objectives that need/want to be fulfilled.
So, to illustrate:
Typical Motivational Pattern:
ST Objective 1A ---> ST Objective 1B ---> ST Objective 1C = LT Objective 1
So, as stated, this works, if that person has enough restraint, will, and ability to see these short term goals fulfilled to have that long term goal put together. Now, this implies that ST Objectives aren't gratifying, which, in most cases, they tend not to be, but rather, they are simply a means to the "real" prize (LT Objective).
Meanwhile, I see motivation as far more dynamic, self sustaining, and efficient.
ST Objective 1A ---> ST Objective 1B ---> ST Objective 1C = LT Objective 1
ST Objective 2A ---> ST Objective 2B = LT Objective 2
Now, you'll see that there are two motivation paths, but that's all I illustrated - there can be more, depending on numbers of LT objectives, difficulty, and the individual themselves. The idea is that although you are motivating yourself to finish one long term objective, it is possible, and favorably so, to take on more long term objectives, if they are shorter in duration or less complex to accomplish. Motivation, from my view, is a general concept that makes us feel good, in general, about ourselves when we finish something that we started. If that is the case, a general sense of accomplishment and progression on the psyche can be used advantageously. People are, in almost all cases, dynamic. If that is true, individuals have more than one goal they'd like to work towards (promotion, beating a video game level, finishing 2 pieces of art, etc). In that case, tackling a larger long term objective and one or more smaller, staggered long term objectives will lead to a "refilling" effect of our motivational "juice". Essentially, as you finish one non-gratifying short term objective in your larger long term objective sequence, it is possible to finish a smaller, gratifying long term objective - this, theoretically and from my experience, makes a person feel positive about their "trend" upwards in their overall life, and as such, their motivation is rekindled/refilled to push onward with their other goals - most notably, their larger long term objective. This method could take longer, but the process is more enjoyable, easier to sustain, and noticeably more effective.
Just a few thoughts on Linear and "Staggered" motivation patterns. There's plenty more to discuss on the topic of motivation, but for now, my mind has nothing else to add. :-]
Listening to: Muse - "Plug In Baby", "Knights of Cydonia", "Hysteria", "Supermassive Black Hole"
This person, from Facebook, mentioned that we have a finite amount of motivation with which to accomplish tasks and we should be discriminant in our choosing of what to allocate motivational resources...
> Re-read the Facebook post by this person, and they actually talk about "Discipline" rather than Motivation, but as my mind has been wired recently toward the latter, I will continue the discussion as if there were no discrepancy.
...While I agree that people, generally, have a certain reservoir of motivational "juice" with which to power their endeavors, I also feel there are different styles of understanding and maximizing one's motivation. First off, understanding the general difference between long term and short term motivation is imperative. A person with great short term motivation can fall short in their long term goals, but a long term motivatee proves that they have the ability to reach many short term goals to complete the reality of their long term goal (think of check points [short term] before reaching a destination [long term]). However, I feel that a linear path of motivation (similar to my brief thoughts on Success) is sub-optimal as what I try to instill in myself. I see people taking on one objective and following a "checkpoint" pattern of smaller, "chewable" chunks to that long term objective. While this is effective if the person can keep their "eye on the prize" and delay gratification, I feel that there are better ways of maximizing one's motivation - and in some way, make one's motivation almost unlimited depending on the number of objectives that need/want to be fulfilled.
So, to illustrate:
Typical Motivational Pattern:
ST Objective 1A ---> ST Objective 1B ---> ST Objective 1C = LT Objective 1
So, as stated, this works, if that person has enough restraint, will, and ability to see these short term goals fulfilled to have that long term goal put together. Now, this implies that ST Objectives aren't gratifying, which, in most cases, they tend not to be, but rather, they are simply a means to the "real" prize (LT Objective).
Meanwhile, I see motivation as far more dynamic, self sustaining, and efficient.
ST Objective 1A ---> ST Objective 1B ---> ST Objective 1C = LT Objective 1
ST Objective 2A ---> ST Objective 2B = LT Objective 2
Now, you'll see that there are two motivation paths, but that's all I illustrated - there can be more, depending on numbers of LT objectives, difficulty, and the individual themselves. The idea is that although you are motivating yourself to finish one long term objective, it is possible, and favorably so, to take on more long term objectives, if they are shorter in duration or less complex to accomplish. Motivation, from my view, is a general concept that makes us feel good, in general, about ourselves when we finish something that we started. If that is the case, a general sense of accomplishment and progression on the psyche can be used advantageously. People are, in almost all cases, dynamic. If that is true, individuals have more than one goal they'd like to work towards (promotion, beating a video game level, finishing 2 pieces of art, etc). In that case, tackling a larger long term objective and one or more smaller, staggered long term objectives will lead to a "refilling" effect of our motivational "juice". Essentially, as you finish one non-gratifying short term objective in your larger long term objective sequence, it is possible to finish a smaller, gratifying long term objective - this, theoretically and from my experience, makes a person feel positive about their "trend" upwards in their overall life, and as such, their motivation is rekindled/refilled to push onward with their other goals - most notably, their larger long term objective. This method could take longer, but the process is more enjoyable, easier to sustain, and noticeably more effective.
Just a few thoughts on Linear and "Staggered" motivation patterns. There's plenty more to discuss on the topic of motivation, but for now, my mind has nothing else to add. :-]
Listening to: Muse - "Plug In Baby", "Knights of Cydonia", "Hysteria", "Supermassive Black Hole"
Wednesday, February 26, 2014
Random Thought I: Trees
Random Thought:
How often do people look up at trees? I mean, stop, look straight up and look at the branches hovering overhead.
How often do people look up at trees? I mean, stop, look straight up and look at the branches hovering overhead.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)