I have seemed to hit some sort of dead end again- thrice this year, on the same topic of goodness.
Its really fusturating. There are a thousand things I really want to put down- but somehow when they all come down together they all just don't sound right. There are at least 3 essays to write about politics, but when I reached the third paragraph I just felt like I had alread repeated myself for the third time. The idea of 'love' for the past 4 posts was very haphazardly brought across. Not that I can't string sentences together coherently, but I believe that I have reached a stage where the laws of truth do no apply properly anymore.
Everything goes back to the same bloody line- the meaning of everything is goodness. Yet I still cant put a finger to try to even describe the essence of goodness in a paragraph. After all, you cant describe an intent using process steps, can't you? It's quite impossible to use mathematical methods to describe what the answer: say a number 3. The only thing you could do is probably prove that all methamatical methods lead to the answer 3. This process of induction was applied throughout Project RN (T2), it sounds stupid, it keeps repeating itself- but what else can be done?
This is probably why people always fail trying to find the meaning of life. It cannot be bought, it cannot be learnt, and it does not appear by forcing yourself to a church group or when you undertake various roles. It can only be realized- convicted, believed, embodied. This probably explains why even the poor fisherman can live a more meaningful life than a critical philosopher. Enough of all these words- they don't go anywhere anyway. Writing an essay on how words cannot persuade is an oxymoron anyway. It's pretty much like reading books on how to read.
And on top of it all, this thing should NOT be done alone.
Lamenting on the lack of like-minded people is not going to bring anybody anywhere. So I guess I'll skip that nonsense for now. i'll throw in a couple of mindmaps here and there on this domain in the meantime, while I try to reintrospect the whole issue again from scratch. Hopefully I may post again from Yemete Land (since I'm going to bring my laptop there), don't worry- i'm still not giving up just yet.
*
On a side note, I am getting increasingly interested in the creation of the objective character. I don't mean a set character with specially tailored triats to throw into a story. Instead, I am thinking along the lines of the integrated identity. A creation that will seriously follow the laws of creation. Some people have told me that such whims are very dangerous, since I'll be in a way playing God. I don't think this argument holds- humans have always been creating things after all. Talk abbout sexual reproduction, would anyone tell you that you're playing God if you're going to have a son or daughter?
As a background whim, I had monitered some of my thoughts for the past few days. It has been really interesting how, as the theory expands, the number of factors I keep wishing to factor into this objective character multiplies exponentially. The rudimentary forms of creation of set characters from novels and stories I had been contented with back in 2008 no longer suffice in detail and freedom. I can no longer stick to a simple Kimmie who'll merely react to events of a story. Neither can I be truly content with a simple picture of her in some action, stilled, and then shaded. Higher forms of media is needed right now, at least in the form of a movie, to capture the elements of this dynamic character.
One more curious thing- As the character gets more dynamic in nature, it is as if, imperatively, that I would want that character to be free of my conceptualizations. I had spoke of this a couple to times before in the past, but it had only struck me recently, that the more we devote into the creation of an objective character, the more we want it to be free. A free identity has a state of being many many times more rich than a 'captive' character in a story. More shockingly, a free identity has so much more meaning (in life) than a character designed with a specific agenda in mind.
Huh?
Look at Harry Potter. He's pretty much character-rich, he has his own fears, own memories, own style.... but when we pluck him from his domain of magic, he becomes really awkward when he's at home washing shoes, or touring Sentosa with his girlfriend. This is because, he is not designed to be objectively free. His thoughts and feelings are only applicable when he's back in Britan doing what he does best, but beyond that, he has no purpose in this objective world. Consequently, we cannot zoom all the way out (from the fictional world to this reality itself) and say that he has much meaning to life.
But look at a real human, say- alright... Jesse. I am free to expand on my own domain, as long as my domain is within the domain of truth (i.e. I don't defy the laws of physics, I don't have methods of working that are founded on the laws of illogicality- i.e. 1+1=3, or probability i.e. I become the president of the UN tomorrow ). As a result, I can be anybody I want to be- I can be a mad engineer on the way to create the next Frankenstein Monster, or i can be the contemporary romancer in any mushy love movie. On top of either, I can actually be both, and throughout the whole process I can choose who I want to be. If any of the things I am going to become incidentally becomes a story, I can daresay that I have the potential to live infinite stories.
If I was compared to Harry Potter, I would be at least a thousand times more objectively free than he is. My state of being is infinitely more complex than his, (we can say because freedom arises from the soul), and definitely, the meaning of my life is much more (meaningful) than his meaning. (you'll rather burn an entire Harry Potter book, than burn Jesse's hand)
Precisely why natural reproduction is the ultimate form of human creation, on par with the first creation of man by God. But thats not the point, so I'll repeat my statement again:
Precisely why I would want to create an objective character, rather than another character in a story. Who'll want to go back to the cramped room after they just had got out of it?
One little problem- If I were to create such an objective character, the meaning of that character to me would be at 100 percent integrity, since i'll be owning two objective characters now, instead of one objective character (my own) and a diminished character. This phenomenon curiously resembles the stigma of cloning. Where two objective characters are created out of a single consciousness. A free identity on her own, yet still very greatly 'tied' to my identity. Now we can see there is evidently a very obvious state of union between two independent sets. In project RN (T) we call this union 'Love'.
So I can't create an objectively objective character after all. It is not advisable to go against naturalistic laws to create something that means so much to me that I have essentially cloned myself on an idealistic scale. Neither do I wish to challenge the natural form of creation (sexual reproduction) to re-produce 'images of myself' in another method on my own will. I cannot take responsibility at this point of time too. Add on the very obvious fact that it is quite impossible to do so (even it could be done with today's technology).
You're really crazy, dude. Wait up lar......
I never said I wanted that objective a character- all that was spoken above was an elaboration of my thoughts as I monitor the tendencies to an objective character. Naturally there is a tend to the objective, but there are still limits on how objective my creation can truly go. On a truly realistic scale I guess it won't go far beyond the 'award winning character of a story'- but such a little increase on this scale can make a difference in the world human imagination.
Call this madness a side project to introspect the theories of truth, goodness and beauty in one really colloquial and personal form. Of course in my deepest thoughts, there will be no need for any more expositorary articles if I can produce results to this objective character- but while everything appears obscured and elusive, those expositorary articles would have to hold for the time being.
18 December 2009
16 December 2009
Some really interesting themes
It is interesting on how GITS 2 speaks on the same domain as my current introspection into the domain of beauty and creation. This post of course comes with my second preview of the movie- Indeed I had made a sort of commentary before on my first preview, but in this post I'll be focusing more on the theories derived than the dynamics.
I do not intend to try to merge either interpretation into the other, I will neither dwell onto which interpretation is more accurate. But on all accounts it is suprising, even to the point of shocking, on how congruent both views are.
Men will not rest until they finally create something with a state of being similar to themselves. This intent to perfection is man's idealistic quest for immortality, and has persisted since the dawn of time from the day he domesticated animals, to the creation of his dolls.
The reasons of such may come from two mutually exclusive, yet similar views. On one hand it was from the sapience of man- an image of God Himself, where man partakes in the laws of creation, above the base state of sustenence. On the other it may be out of fear, of the lack of meaning, that compels him to seek goodness through the goods he has to offer.
From the innate complexity of machines sapience may be formed. But humanity does not rely solely on sapience to distinguish himself from his derivatives. On a metaphysical dimension, infinite beauty has to be incoperated in order to bring out the true allure of the soul. This was shown in the movie from the act of ghost dubbing, or the derivation of beauty from the thermodynamic decomposition of the human soul- in order to elevate the allure of the dolls, human souls were sacrificed to bring across that added metaphysical beauty from within.
From the coupling of goodness and beauty we see that humanity in its fullest is actually a life of self-actualized meaning, in harmony with the objective meaning of goodness. It is interesting that in this respect humanity is not determined by parts, organs, or arbitrary entities. Of course we cannot disregard biology as a complimentary physical state of being to metaphysical beauty. But definitely, full humanity encompasses of both domains, not to any arbitrary standard set by any law, legislation- but rather to the objective standards of meaning and goodness.
*
On the production sidenote of GITS, and my current aspirations of RNST, there is also an uncanny similarity of production in nature on the topic of popularity against legacy. Somehow, its evident through history that those who truly leave a legacy never follows the standards of convention, rather it is convention that builds up behind their legacies. And one more thing- many people who say they like movies never liked truly new movies, but rather, they only liked the legacy of previous great movies, and wish that they can see pieces of that legacy reproduced in the subsequent films. This speaks volumes about why good things are never truly appreciated. (we bear in mind that the meaning of all things is goodness, and crude rehashments can never attain the same level of meaning as originals)
I do not intend to try to merge either interpretation into the other, I will neither dwell onto which interpretation is more accurate. But on all accounts it is suprising, even to the point of shocking, on how congruent both views are.
Men will not rest until they finally create something with a state of being similar to themselves. This intent to perfection is man's idealistic quest for immortality, and has persisted since the dawn of time from the day he domesticated animals, to the creation of his dolls.
The reasons of such may come from two mutually exclusive, yet similar views. On one hand it was from the sapience of man- an image of God Himself, where man partakes in the laws of creation, above the base state of sustenence. On the other it may be out of fear, of the lack of meaning, that compels him to seek goodness through the goods he has to offer.
From the innate complexity of machines sapience may be formed. But humanity does not rely solely on sapience to distinguish himself from his derivatives. On a metaphysical dimension, infinite beauty has to be incoperated in order to bring out the true allure of the soul. This was shown in the movie from the act of ghost dubbing, or the derivation of beauty from the thermodynamic decomposition of the human soul- in order to elevate the allure of the dolls, human souls were sacrificed to bring across that added metaphysical beauty from within.
From the coupling of goodness and beauty we see that humanity in its fullest is actually a life of self-actualized meaning, in harmony with the objective meaning of goodness. It is interesting that in this respect humanity is not determined by parts, organs, or arbitrary entities. Of course we cannot disregard biology as a complimentary physical state of being to metaphysical beauty. But definitely, full humanity encompasses of both domains, not to any arbitrary standard set by any law, legislation- but rather to the objective standards of meaning and goodness.
*
On the production sidenote of GITS, and my current aspirations of RNST, there is also an uncanny similarity of production in nature on the topic of popularity against legacy. Somehow, its evident through history that those who truly leave a legacy never follows the standards of convention, rather it is convention that builds up behind their legacies. And one more thing- many people who say they like movies never liked truly new movies, but rather, they only liked the legacy of previous great movies, and wish that they can see pieces of that legacy reproduced in the subsequent films. This speaks volumes about why good things are never truly appreciated. (we bear in mind that the meaning of all things is goodness, and crude rehashments can never attain the same level of meaning as originals)
14 December 2009
On the varying views of herself
What does the world think about the creation of an objective character?
The artist says: A realistic portrait with varying degrees of idealistic escapism, she will be drawn in a style that denotes nothing but my envisioning of her character, with defining brush techniques to convey idea across.
The novelist writes: her character will be elaborated such that all of her traits would be manifested throughout the novel itself. From literary characterizations to juxtapositions, and the way she interacts with the literary world, and to a certain degree, the heart of the readers.
The movie producer: She will be every way appealing to her fans. A character no more than a caricature of her fan's innermost desires. The epitome of youth, beauty and vitality, she will bring integration and fame to my storyboard.
The infatuated geeky boyfriend- she will be the perfect girlfriend of this world. Her dress sense and style will tug at the heartstrings of every hot-blooded male. I will bestow create her profile and add a photoshop-ed photo on facebook. Oh, make it known the fact that she's still a virgin.
The critic: escapism! escapism! escapism! The objective character does not exist, and all notions to create a fictional human is no more than whims of a deranged mind. She will end up just being the perfect illusion to the masses- beans to that.
Says the philosopher: an idealistic tend to perfection, an innate desire of man is to create an objective personality, as part of the curious capability of sapience in man. Coupled with appropriate manifestations, we will see to the integrated creation of man himself.
Says the engineering scientist: Wait till we fully decrypt the human genome and perfect MO theroy. We would then by the means of bioengineering and carbon reconstruction, recreate a system congruent to man. The advent of robotics to its highest degree.
Says the religiously devout: stay away from forces that may sway you from your consecration with God. The objective character plays role as a double edged sword, mean to bring us a step into the meaning of creation, yet potentially bringing us to a step of illusion and fantasy, of pride and denial of the goodness that is amongst us.
Says Jelemsei Dejengski: I know I know, but fu*k all that. This sounds deranged enough for me, lets rock.
The artist says: A realistic portrait with varying degrees of idealistic escapism, she will be drawn in a style that denotes nothing but my envisioning of her character, with defining brush techniques to convey idea across.
The novelist writes: her character will be elaborated such that all of her traits would be manifested throughout the novel itself. From literary characterizations to juxtapositions, and the way she interacts with the literary world, and to a certain degree, the heart of the readers.
The movie producer: She will be every way appealing to her fans. A character no more than a caricature of her fan's innermost desires. The epitome of youth, beauty and vitality, she will bring integration and fame to my storyboard.
The infatuated geeky boyfriend- she will be the perfect girlfriend of this world. Her dress sense and style will tug at the heartstrings of every hot-blooded male. I will bestow create her profile and add a photoshop-ed photo on facebook. Oh, make it known the fact that she's still a virgin.
The critic: escapism! escapism! escapism! The objective character does not exist, and all notions to create a fictional human is no more than whims of a deranged mind. She will end up just being the perfect illusion to the masses- beans to that.
Says the philosopher: an idealistic tend to perfection, an innate desire of man is to create an objective personality, as part of the curious capability of sapience in man. Coupled with appropriate manifestations, we will see to the integrated creation of man himself.
Says the engineering scientist: Wait till we fully decrypt the human genome and perfect MO theroy. We would then by the means of bioengineering and carbon reconstruction, recreate a system congruent to man. The advent of robotics to its highest degree.
Says the religiously devout: stay away from forces that may sway you from your consecration with God. The objective character plays role as a double edged sword, mean to bring us a step into the meaning of creation, yet potentially bringing us to a step of illusion and fantasy, of pride and denial of the goodness that is amongst us.
Says Jelemsei Dejengski: I know I know, but fu*k all that. This sounds deranged enough for me, lets rock.
10 December 2009
Heading into all the wrong places
So I have been heading to all the wrong places looking for all the wrong answers...
When it's raining, cross the road only when the girl opposite is crossing. The one without the umbrella, that is...
Ever seen a japapnese flying fish? Well, I've seen what I will see...
Some say that Pastamania is not maniac enough unless with one whole bottle of grated cheese, I say Fish and Co is not fishy enough unless with 5 plates of tartare sauce.
Squint to see the world in a better view. Imagination needed. Add an omnibus of philo to that...
Happy kids make christmas feel truly joyful- great balls of fire to that.
And I insist playing guitar hero 28 days later. Preferably in a quartet-band, but duets are welcomed again.
When it's raining, cross the road only when the girl opposite is crossing. The one without the umbrella, that is...
Ever seen a japapnese flying fish? Well, I've seen what I will see...
Some say that Pastamania is not maniac enough unless with one whole bottle of grated cheese, I say Fish and Co is not fishy enough unless with 5 plates of tartare sauce.
Squint to see the world in a better view. Imagination needed. Add an omnibus of philo to that...
Happy kids make christmas feel truly joyful- great balls of fire to that.
And I insist playing guitar hero 28 days later. Preferably in a quartet-band, but duets are welcomed again.
08 December 2009
And these are my deranged creations- Severely ramblings
note: this post is full of nonsense.... don't mind me while I do what I do best.
Some of us can recall certain characters from this deranged world, as well as from 'fiction and stories'. Most of them are female (no prizes for guessing why),
Top on the list was "Kimberly (Kimmie) Ng"-15 years old; protagonist of "Nine Months the original sin" and "Nine Months the Aftermath" in 2004- 2005. She also plays her character in "PW2NMV3.14"throughout the majority of 2008. Kimberly has been potrayed in several different lights over the years- from that callous girl-friend in 2004, to that meek dreamer in 2008. However, her role in Nine Months had persisted, and beyond characterization requirements, she has changed very little through the years. Kimberly was supposed to be a character of anguish and resilience, a soft character where sick fustrations may be vent upon at the expense of the pity of readers, and a character that would somehow always persist in adversity. Her character was later combined with (unnamed) to "Kimberly-Natalie Ng", and was postulated to be the epitome of ontological idealism .
Second on the list would be Melissa, whose character was revamped several times from 2003-2008 to fit into several different story arcs. In Project M she plays as Melissa Sanford- a girl of spunk, and girlfriend to Sherman Shepard. In the Nine Months story arc, she appears as Kimberly's daughter in the epilogue. She has also been featured in several side stories as that ideal girlfriend to be. Hardy and energetic, Melissa (Sandford) (Ng) was created back in 2003, and plays a contrasting role to Kimberly Ng.
An unnamed girl was created as part of the short story project in 2006-2007. She assumes the character of an ordinary girl of 17 years of age, and leads a very contemporary life in terms of academics and romance. Her character mirrors a certain combination of 'real-life personalities', and does not have very defining characteristics of her own, other than the fact that she is 'bubbly' and 'cheerful'.
Sherman was a boy, of 16 years, created from 2002-2004, as the conventional good-to-go boy in any story. Multiple traits were thrust unto him, whom assumes a very diverse personality. His appearence ranges from boyfriend to Melissa Sandford in Project M, to an esper capable of psychic manipulation in Project S. He makes an appearence in virtually all stories from 2003-2004.
A more enigmatic male character was introduced in late 2006 as replacement to "Sherman's evil nature", partially sparked by the need of a more impactful name, and partially sparked by personal mindset changes at that time. Re-named as Tommy Dejengski Tan in the fictional world, Dejengski is a completely fictional name which was later chosen to be my own (gaming) avatar (a.k.a. Jelemsei Dejengski). Dejengski characterizes a boy, once an epitome of innocence, and forced by circumstance into an indifferent, sullen and antisocial character. He was later postulated as the epitome of epistemic idealism, contrasting to Kimberly-Natalie Ng.
In 2009, an unnamed hypothetical test subject was introduced in the various thought experiments of Project RN (T) and Project RN (T2). Known famously as the ninteen year old female of NUS living in Ang Mo Kio, she was exclusive to the deranged world series through the earlier half of 2009, and does not harbour any 'character' of her own, which reasons are profoundly philosophical. Her origins are derivative of Truth (an abstract embodiment of truth), Kimberly, Melissa and the unnamed girl i.e. all of the abovementioned female characters.
However, today we will revoke the philosophical premises. It is objective that one day there will be a convergence between the deranged world and the world of 'fiction and stories'. When all concepts discussed are all rephrased into one coherent story as the final project undertaken. Project RNST (Re-affirmation Short-Story) was a prototype story; it was severely lacking in many aspects (from both the deranged world and 'fiction and stories'), but as development is made into both domains, the realization for one integrated character gets more and more evident.
So it will be a she. To which Dejengski, Kimberly-Natalie-Ng, and two more (havent named them yet) will converge unto (via the moderation doctrine).
Okay, enough madness- come back to earth. With a new dudette in the making, thats what's cooking.
Some of us can recall certain characters from this deranged world, as well as from 'fiction and stories'. Most of them are female (no prizes for guessing why),
Top on the list was "Kimberly (Kimmie) Ng"-15 years old; protagonist of "Nine Months the original sin" and "Nine Months the Aftermath" in 2004- 2005. She also plays her character in "PW2NMV3.14"throughout the majority of 2008. Kimberly has been potrayed in several different lights over the years- from that callous girl-friend in 2004, to that meek dreamer in 2008. However, her role in Nine Months had persisted, and beyond characterization requirements, she has changed very little through the years. Kimberly was supposed to be a character of anguish and resilience, a soft character where sick fustrations may be vent upon at the expense of the pity of readers, and a character that would somehow always persist in adversity. Her character was later combined with (unnamed) to "Kimberly-Natalie Ng", and was postulated to be the epitome of ontological idealism .
Second on the list would be Melissa, whose character was revamped several times from 2003-2008 to fit into several different story arcs. In Project M she plays as Melissa Sanford- a girl of spunk, and girlfriend to Sherman Shepard. In the Nine Months story arc, she appears as Kimberly's daughter in the epilogue. She has also been featured in several side stories as that ideal girlfriend to be. Hardy and energetic, Melissa (Sandford) (Ng) was created back in 2003, and plays a contrasting role to Kimberly Ng.
An unnamed girl was created as part of the short story project in 2006-2007. She assumes the character of an ordinary girl of 17 years of age, and leads a very contemporary life in terms of academics and romance. Her character mirrors a certain combination of 'real-life personalities', and does not have very defining characteristics of her own, other than the fact that she is 'bubbly' and 'cheerful'.
Sherman was a boy, of 16 years, created from 2002-2004, as the conventional good-to-go boy in any story. Multiple traits were thrust unto him, whom assumes a very diverse personality. His appearence ranges from boyfriend to Melissa Sandford in Project M, to an esper capable of psychic manipulation in Project S. He makes an appearence in virtually all stories from 2003-2004.
A more enigmatic male character was introduced in late 2006 as replacement to "Sherman's evil nature", partially sparked by the need of a more impactful name, and partially sparked by personal mindset changes at that time. Re-named as Tommy Dejengski Tan in the fictional world, Dejengski is a completely fictional name which was later chosen to be my own (gaming) avatar (a.k.a. Jelemsei Dejengski). Dejengski characterizes a boy, once an epitome of innocence, and forced by circumstance into an indifferent, sullen and antisocial character. He was later postulated as the epitome of epistemic idealism, contrasting to Kimberly-Natalie Ng.
In 2009, an unnamed hypothetical test subject was introduced in the various thought experiments of Project RN (T) and Project RN (T2). Known famously as the ninteen year old female of NUS living in Ang Mo Kio, she was exclusive to the deranged world series through the earlier half of 2009, and does not harbour any 'character' of her own, which reasons are profoundly philosophical. Her origins are derivative of Truth (an abstract embodiment of truth), Kimberly, Melissa and the unnamed girl i.e. all of the abovementioned female characters.
However, today we will revoke the philosophical premises. It is objective that one day there will be a convergence between the deranged world and the world of 'fiction and stories'. When all concepts discussed are all rephrased into one coherent story as the final project undertaken. Project RNST (Re-affirmation Short-Story) was a prototype story; it was severely lacking in many aspects (from both the deranged world and 'fiction and stories'), but as development is made into both domains, the realization for one integrated character gets more and more evident.
So it will be a she. To which Dejengski, Kimberly-Natalie-Ng, and two more (havent named them yet) will converge unto (via the moderation doctrine).
Okay, enough madness- come back to earth. With a new dudette in the making, thats what's cooking.
05 December 2009
And we are back to deranged lifestyle of festering potatoes
So it seems that I am back to my happy-go-lucky lifestyle of beans, buns and bollocks. Wake up at 10.30, CoH till 2.30, tinkle the piano till 3.30, stone a little more online till 6.30, and round two of CoH till midnight. Pretty enlightening lifestyle, compared to just waking up at 7.30 and mugging till midnight.
And of course, i havent Left (my games) For Dead Too (pun that once please). Pretty smashing game i should say; bloody fun; with big thanks to that (and pun that thrice, thank you very much). Really feels like playing guitar hero 28 days later, but not worth buying.
And so its games games and more games. Fester fester and fester somemore. And meanwhile, really deranged videos on youtube: just saw one really LOL-icon (okay, stop punishing us alright?) case anime lurking about that can make you go eewww; With the fingers developing faster than the brain. Is there no end to this productive lifestyle of unproductivity?
Wait up, its not all going up in smoke. While yemete land lurks closer, bringing about that perpetually endless buffet of nama-hotate (oh yeah), and hopefully ramen. Something deranged must be done to counteract this rightful lifestlye of ours. After all, if everyone's festering there is nothing festering about festering right?
So it seems that RNT2 is up and running again, the exact details I will not be going in this blog. A link would be made available on this domain too, when the materials are certified appropriate for viewing. But do note that those posts are going to be REALLY deranged- not exactly main-stream philosophical (I deviated), not exactly theological (I am no preacher), and no way academic (I am NOT a student until the new year). Many concepts that i might dive head-on are really tight twists that can only be understood after reading the 1st installation. I don't mean to be cheemish, but c'mon- we're trying to explain the meaning of life okay? Its not supposed to be easy.
That's my biggest scoop this christmas I guess, back to yemete land for another 7 hour inflight realization to the meaning of life LOL. I am so going to end this madness for once and for all.
In the meantime, stay tuned for more nonsense on this domain. The deranged world indeed lives up to it's title, beans to that.
And of course, i havent Left (my games) For Dead Too (pun that once please). Pretty smashing game i should say; bloody fun; with big thanks to that (and pun that thrice, thank you very much). Really feels like playing guitar hero 28 days later, but not worth buying.
And so its games games and more games. Fester fester and fester somemore. And meanwhile, really deranged videos on youtube: just saw one really LOL-icon (okay, stop punishing us alright?) case anime lurking about that can make you go eewww; With the fingers developing faster than the brain. Is there no end to this productive lifestyle of unproductivity?
Wait up, its not all going up in smoke. While yemete land lurks closer, bringing about that perpetually endless buffet of nama-hotate (oh yeah), and hopefully ramen. Something deranged must be done to counteract this rightful lifestlye of ours. After all, if everyone's festering there is nothing festering about festering right?
So it seems that RNT2 is up and running again, the exact details I will not be going in this blog. A link would be made available on this domain too, when the materials are certified appropriate for viewing. But do note that those posts are going to be REALLY deranged- not exactly main-stream philosophical (I deviated), not exactly theological (I am no preacher), and no way academic (I am NOT a student until the new year). Many concepts that i might dive head-on are really tight twists that can only be understood after reading the 1st installation. I don't mean to be cheemish, but c'mon- we're trying to explain the meaning of life okay? Its not supposed to be easy.
That's my biggest scoop this christmas I guess, back to yemete land for another 7 hour inflight realization to the meaning of life LOL. I am so going to end this madness for once and for all.
In the meantime, stay tuned for more nonsense on this domain. The deranged world indeed lives up to it's title, beans to that.
02 December 2009
29 November 2009
Its hard to explain...
The ontology of living is a contiunum from a state of nothingness to a certian state of being. Its dynamic, and holds as much objective value as per the subjective perception of the individual. It is from the infinite state of being that sentience can manifest, and it is from the fullness of sentience the feedback of human philosophy and natural philosophy can occur.
The ontology of living in itself is a psychological and physiological system, with each of its domains (in psychology and physiology) integrating together to build up the qualia of life. While this integration itself is complete in unifying the being, this process carries on beyond the individual to the community. This state of union is completely metaphysical, since it transcends the physical parameters of time and space to only 'affect' subjects with a certain state of being. The feedback from this interpersonal ontology and the ontology of living cycles beyond the initial creation of the individual, and in turn reinforces the individual and the community.
One of the imperative questions of address is the nature of that metaphysical state of being. Little explanation can be conferred for it, but its paradoxical since it is from this that sapience itself may manifest. Theists draw reason to the the metaphysical soul, and alludes that the nature of being ultimately derives from the infinity of God Himself.
It is evident that the ontology of living, the ontology of love, and the natural state of being itself is similar nature, though different forms may persist in different dimensions. This state of being, should it be traced, can be linked back to a single fundamental concept (though inexpressible by definition). It is in this concept the three transcendentals come together to qualify; and it is in this respect we attempt to make that final reconcilation between the our universe, and the universe we live in.
The ontology of living in itself is a psychological and physiological system, with each of its domains (in psychology and physiology) integrating together to build up the qualia of life. While this integration itself is complete in unifying the being, this process carries on beyond the individual to the community. This state of union is completely metaphysical, since it transcends the physical parameters of time and space to only 'affect' subjects with a certain state of being. The feedback from this interpersonal ontology and the ontology of living cycles beyond the initial creation of the individual, and in turn reinforces the individual and the community.
One of the imperative questions of address is the nature of that metaphysical state of being. Little explanation can be conferred for it, but its paradoxical since it is from this that sapience itself may manifest. Theists draw reason to the the metaphysical soul, and alludes that the nature of being ultimately derives from the infinity of God Himself.
It is evident that the ontology of living, the ontology of love, and the natural state of being itself is similar nature, though different forms may persist in different dimensions. This state of being, should it be traced, can be linked back to a single fundamental concept (though inexpressible by definition). It is in this concept the three transcendentals come together to qualify; and it is in this respect we attempt to make that final reconcilation between the our universe, and the universe we live in.
27 November 2009
Part 2
Another little white bunny was hopping away when it bumped into the (same) tiger.
"You can't eat me" Said the little white bunny.
"Why can't I eat you?" asked the tiger, suprised.
"Because I said so, and what I say is truth." said the little bunny. "Truth-is-subjective-and-whats-true-for-me-is-what-I-deem-as-truth-and-I-don't-believe-that-you-are-justified-to-eat-me-and-so-there!"
The tiger got confused and still ate up the little bunny. The little white bunny then went to bunny hell.
The reason? Did not follow the divine plan.
"You can't eat me" Said the little white bunny.
"Why can't I eat you?" asked the tiger, suprised.
"Because I said so, and what I say is truth." said the little bunny. "Truth-is-subjective-and-whats-true-for-me-is-what-I-deem-as-truth-and-I-don't-believe-that-you-are-justified-to-eat-me-and-so-there!"
The tiger got confused and still ate up the little bunny. The little white bunny then went to bunny hell.
The reason? Did not follow the divine plan.
26 November 2009
A story
A little bunny was hopping away when it bumped into a tiger.
Said the little white bunny to the tiger: "Eat me."
"Why must I eat you?" asked the tiger, suprised.
The bunny replied: "Ain't all bunnies supposed to be eaten so that you tigers may live? If you don't eat me, I would not fufil my part of the divine plan. I wouldn't be able to go to bunny heaven then."
So the tiger ate the bunny, and the little bunny went to bunny hell-
The reason? Suicide.
Said the little white bunny to the tiger: "Eat me."
"Why must I eat you?" asked the tiger, suprised.
The bunny replied: "Ain't all bunnies supposed to be eaten so that you tigers may live? If you don't eat me, I would not fufil my part of the divine plan. I wouldn't be able to go to bunny heaven then."
So the tiger ate the bunny, and the little bunny went to bunny hell-
The reason? Suicide.
20 November 2009
Goodness Theory
Today I lost my laptop for three hours.
Those three hours were a complete nightmare, and best of all I had to spend two out of three in an examination hall with an English paper in front of me. I had to preoccupy myself throughout thinking about the passage at hand, and looking on word after word. There was this lethargy to complete the entire paper, I was tempted to just write my name, stand up, and leave the hall.
But I guess I did the paper just fine. Perhaps its my innate ability to just shut down parts of my mind and live in a parallel world of idealistic denial while transversing this reality. I think I have stated before having a sort of metaphysical impression of this world. Today I would be adruptly pulled back to reality, and today I would see a final convergence between the real and the ideal. That would come three hours later, when a kind soul did return my laptop to the lost and found.
Before that, I would of course have to thank the many people I had contacted, and helped me during those three hours of madness. Now, to the deranged after-action-review.
What is human goodness? Human goodness is not an ideal. Yes, goodness is an ideal, and many of us may have the misconception that it is some sort of perfect goal to be achieved just as how we attempt to achieve success and fame. But this is where even philosophy begins to fail- true goodness is not a mental construct, it is not something we ought to have if we were to join the club of 'untaintedness' and 'innocence'; similarily, it would be equally erronous to assume that the lack of this idealistic goodness would naturally lead to a corrupted life of decadence, failure, and utter waste. Such a view would be a very dualistic view- no more better than the primitive view that heaven takes only the holy people and hell takes the rest. We know that such a view in itself is erronous- and I don't want to dwell into excessive christian doctrine to justify the policy changes of Vatican 2 as well as the reason of Jesus' affliation with sinners. I try not to dwell too deeply into theology here today, but personally, we can definitely see a convergence at this very point.
Actually, we have to understand that goodness is independent of ideal constructs. Goodness itself is an objective, a purpose, a meaning, and an agenda. When we show an act of kindess and concern, it is actually goodness that is the ultimate goal, rather than what we call 'mutual benefit' or 'because catechism tells me so'. Of course we can take one step back and return all meaning of creation back to 'God's infinite love", but as far as I could think of today in the lost and found, and as far as this discussion would go today- we will retrospect this thread in the future and leave matters as it is today.
Human nature is an infinitely curious subject, and human goodness- as part of human nature is something that we can never truly grasp (no matter how much we claim we can). The quote: "the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak" brings a very conscise restatement to our real and idealistic domains- and the parable of "the two sons and the field" brings about a very sharp conclusion on whether 'real' goodness (in a form of actions) and 'ideal' goodness (in the form of lip service and ideas) takes presidence in light of truth. As we know, humans are exceedingly contridictory- falling over and over into the traps of procrastination as they pledge themselves towards that idealistic better that can never be realized. It is precisely this erronous view of goodness why humans can never be perfect. We are too busy trying to be good we neglect what it is to be truly good.
So? We may be weak, and we may not see the objective good of it all- on first glance some people may seem un-contestable in the domain of holiness, while others we consider unworthily fu*ked-up. But while it is subjective to view the world based on one's standards, it is objective fact that the goodness in a person is proportional to the amount of meaning he sees in goodness. As noted by Jesus, a person may be bad, but even a bad person would not give a scorpion to his son if he asks for a loaf of bread, if we are to integrate this two theories together, we can see that this is because even the 'bad' individual sees meaning of his son, and it is from this meaning he is at least 'good' to his son. This calls for an in depth discussion on the theory of dimensions (a new theory), but such discussions would not be necessarily. as far as we are concerned, the lack of goodness can be alluded to a form of metaphysical ignorance- and therein we go back to the concept of idealistic goodness (be careful), objectivity;/subjectivity, and truth.
While we blunder (by our wrong approach to goodness) on our quest to be that better person, every individual that is travelling along the same direction (of metaphysical expansion and greater-meaning acquisition) cannot be condemned. Ideals may clash between individuals as we have very different concerns to what is good for me, for you, and for us; but as long as that orientation of being (to be better in one's personal domain) exists (no matter whether we may see it or not), then it is objective that that person is on the way to goodness, and what remains subjective would be no more than human judgement. As concisely summarized by the words- 'Do not judge your neighbour.'
An personal subjective orientation of expansion (this is objective), a state of being (the real), and a being that all meaning and purpose converges to (the ideal); rather than a goal to be attained and mantained (if so, what is the meaning of that goal then??). That would be roughly the concept of goodness, as well as the methods of achieving goodness. I do not deny that these concepts are indeed a tough nut to chew, and many of us may not agree to this on the first review. This would probably be the reason why we fail at our attempts to be good today, and why- until our personal 'horizons' are fully expanded to accomodate ourselves and our neighbour simultaneously, we would be treading on each other's toes- as how we have been.
Those three hours were a complete nightmare, and best of all I had to spend two out of three in an examination hall with an English paper in front of me. I had to preoccupy myself throughout thinking about the passage at hand, and looking on word after word. There was this lethargy to complete the entire paper, I was tempted to just write my name, stand up, and leave the hall.
But I guess I did the paper just fine. Perhaps its my innate ability to just shut down parts of my mind and live in a parallel world of idealistic denial while transversing this reality. I think I have stated before having a sort of metaphysical impression of this world. Today I would be adruptly pulled back to reality, and today I would see a final convergence between the real and the ideal. That would come three hours later, when a kind soul did return my laptop to the lost and found.
Before that, I would of course have to thank the many people I had contacted, and helped me during those three hours of madness. Now, to the deranged after-action-review.
What is human goodness? Human goodness is not an ideal. Yes, goodness is an ideal, and many of us may have the misconception that it is some sort of perfect goal to be achieved just as how we attempt to achieve success and fame. But this is where even philosophy begins to fail- true goodness is not a mental construct, it is not something we ought to have if we were to join the club of 'untaintedness' and 'innocence'; similarily, it would be equally erronous to assume that the lack of this idealistic goodness would naturally lead to a corrupted life of decadence, failure, and utter waste. Such a view would be a very dualistic view- no more better than the primitive view that heaven takes only the holy people and hell takes the rest. We know that such a view in itself is erronous- and I don't want to dwell into excessive christian doctrine to justify the policy changes of Vatican 2 as well as the reason of Jesus' affliation with sinners. I try not to dwell too deeply into theology here today, but personally, we can definitely see a convergence at this very point.
Actually, we have to understand that goodness is independent of ideal constructs. Goodness itself is an objective, a purpose, a meaning, and an agenda. When we show an act of kindess and concern, it is actually goodness that is the ultimate goal, rather than what we call 'mutual benefit' or 'because catechism tells me so'. Of course we can take one step back and return all meaning of creation back to 'God's infinite love", but as far as I could think of today in the lost and found, and as far as this discussion would go today- we will retrospect this thread in the future and leave matters as it is today.
Human nature is an infinitely curious subject, and human goodness- as part of human nature is something that we can never truly grasp (no matter how much we claim we can). The quote: "the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak" brings a very conscise restatement to our real and idealistic domains- and the parable of "the two sons and the field" brings about a very sharp conclusion on whether 'real' goodness (in a form of actions) and 'ideal' goodness (in the form of lip service and ideas) takes presidence in light of truth. As we know, humans are exceedingly contridictory- falling over and over into the traps of procrastination as they pledge themselves towards that idealistic better that can never be realized. It is precisely this erronous view of goodness why humans can never be perfect. We are too busy trying to be good we neglect what it is to be truly good.
So? We may be weak, and we may not see the objective good of it all- on first glance some people may seem un-contestable in the domain of holiness, while others we consider unworthily fu*ked-up. But while it is subjective to view the world based on one's standards, it is objective fact that the goodness in a person is proportional to the amount of meaning he sees in goodness. As noted by Jesus, a person may be bad, but even a bad person would not give a scorpion to his son if he asks for a loaf of bread, if we are to integrate this two theories together, we can see that this is because even the 'bad' individual sees meaning of his son, and it is from this meaning he is at least 'good' to his son. This calls for an in depth discussion on the theory of dimensions (a new theory), but such discussions would not be necessarily. as far as we are concerned, the lack of goodness can be alluded to a form of metaphysical ignorance- and therein we go back to the concept of idealistic goodness (be careful), objectivity;/subjectivity, and truth.
While we blunder (by our wrong approach to goodness) on our quest to be that better person, every individual that is travelling along the same direction (of metaphysical expansion and greater-meaning acquisition) cannot be condemned. Ideals may clash between individuals as we have very different concerns to what is good for me, for you, and for us; but as long as that orientation of being (to be better in one's personal domain) exists (no matter whether we may see it or not), then it is objective that that person is on the way to goodness, and what remains subjective would be no more than human judgement. As concisely summarized by the words- 'Do not judge your neighbour.'
An personal subjective orientation of expansion (this is objective), a state of being (the real), and a being that all meaning and purpose converges to (the ideal); rather than a goal to be attained and mantained (if so, what is the meaning of that goal then??). That would be roughly the concept of goodness, as well as the methods of achieving goodness. I do not deny that these concepts are indeed a tough nut to chew, and many of us may not agree to this on the first review. This would probably be the reason why we fail at our attempts to be good today, and why- until our personal 'horizons' are fully expanded to accomodate ourselves and our neighbour simultaneously, we would be treading on each other's toes- as how we have been.
19 November 2009
Composition
Was looking at a couple of comics today (in my free time). Appreciated some of the drawings, and the intrinsic storyline, then the question pops again:
Why do we compose?
This is where the english language may fail- I really do mean 'compose' in its full essence, rather than the conventional definitions of 'putting things together' or 'keeping calm'. Compose in this context would generally mean any arbitrary effort on our effort to 'recreate' a part of the existence that we live in. In other words, any form of artistic, scientific, or ethical composition that in essence mimicks our reality would fall under the strictest definition of 'compose'. Conventional compositions i.e. drawings, pictures, music would fall under the catagory of art; MO theory, TOEs, and engineering would fall as scientific re-creations; and the act of kindness- as the fundamental representation of the goodness that we are swimming in.
Enough definitions. Why is it innate in us to wish to re-produce pieces of ourselves in our idealistic domains? We can evidently see that all these forms of re-representations are fundamentally idealistic- sparked by inspiration, sustained by passion, and subsequently realized with skill and empirical methods. Somehow, it is quite interesting to say that it's because the human psyche wishes to partake in the essence of creation. If we go along this lines and factor in the assumption of Transcendental Theory, we can conclude that the human spirit will not rest until all Truth, Beauty and Goodness is broken down (not beauty though), understood, re-created, and mastered to perfection.
Truth in the from of knowledge, Beauty in the form of artistic exquisiteness, and Goodness in form of love.
Such a notion should be fundamentally right- the Christian doctrine goes along the lines that we are 'stewards of the earth', and having mastery over the forces of nature, proceed on to partake in God's plan of creation. While we cannot assume that all forms of creation definitely is part of that divine plan, we can safely assume that any notion to recreate would be going along the same lines of the 'desire to create' as advocated by creation theory. If we were to be less metaphysical and go along with empirical theories, we immediately see a correspondence with the fact that "the system of life is a move against the the law of thermodynamics, to bring development and order within this world if increasing disorder and entropy." Naturally, humans are the most complex forms of living things, and we must factor in that our idealistic psyches are partially influenced by our biological tendencies (which allign to construction). Definitely we can prove either way that we are created for creation, and construction.
Lets not dwell too much into the abstract. Instead as we look at the next storybook we pick on the way out of the library, the next manga that we read online (look at the pictures, and go along with the story), the next movie watched in Cathay, we can see that these forms of literature (under the faculty of art) is a from of human recreation of the world that we live in. Of course, this does not merely restrict to contemporary realism- science fiction, magic, fantasy, and other 'out-of-this-world' genres are also byproducts of human reconceptualizations of this world. In short, as long as there is a trait of humanity, or naturalism residing within that creation, such a work is essentially a work of creation and representation.
Now, a certain contradiction arises from the above assertion. If we are digging through lesser 'contemporary-realistic' works of creation looking for recreation of this reality we live in; it would assume that no creation is essentially perfect unless the creation itself has a one-to-one correspondence with reality itself. We intuitively know that such a view is quite warped, and I definitely do not want to impress this idea today. So how do we explain this?
Another coining factor to our works of creation is actually intellectual escapism. While we incoperate pieces of reality into our works (of literature), there is always a complimentary level of escapism, abstracity, and re-representation that we want to factor in. On face value, this complimentary value corresponds to 'thinking-out-of-the-box', 'creativity', 'style' and 'personality', and from there we arrive back to identity theory. The reason of escapism is actually a form of identity affirmation, for it defines the individual to the level of 'abstracity' the individual escapes to- from the common shared reality of objectivity, to a subsequent subjective idealism that resides in our intellectual domains.
Of course to that, moderation has to be employed judiciously. Over escapism leads to a life of denial, and escapism for the sake of escapism would do injustice to the roles we are supposed to be enacting in this objective world.
Naturally, Beauty theory holds that averageness brings together individuals into a common 'metaphysical being' that denotes the true (vector?) direction of progress. Scientific studies have shown that superimposed human faces actually average themselves to a much more pretty face than the individual faces themselves. And if we are to go on with art, we see that harmony is the key idea fundamental to all things beautiful. If we are to return back to our intellectual creations as a form of art, we can start wondering what happens if we average and map every form of individual creation into one big piece of creation itself.
I do not mean physical average- words don't superimpose themselves to form new words. And colors overlap only to a color of mud and chaos. This average has to be conceptual, metaphysical, essential, and ideal. A good way of visualization would be to tag along a author's comment to the piece of art and attempt to impose these comments conceptually.
Such averaging would cancel out contradictory extremes, and highlight certain points.
And the outcome, paradoxically, would actually converge to become reality itself. Complimentary to how our individual personalities average to objectivity.
Such an outcome definitely brings a very new definition to the concept of beauty- if beauty in truth is averageness, then why do we look at average films and consider them mediocre?
This would entail the concept of schemas- among art, portraits are admired for realism, on the other hand films are admired for a certain level of exxageration and abstracticity. Recall the human desire for escapism as well as realism, and we return to the moderation doctrine again- that the objective identity is not a static, 'smack-certer' steady-state balance of idealistic and realistic domains. Rather, its a dynamic fluctuation of (the 4) components that moderates itself to objectivity, correspondent of the reality we live in.
This is the essence of composition, and our desire for ccomposition. In short- an appreciation/
acknowledgement of ourselves in this world, as well as a form of personal creation.
Very much like how we are supposed to live our lives.
Damn, I hate reasoning in circles. LOL
Why do we compose?
This is where the english language may fail- I really do mean 'compose' in its full essence, rather than the conventional definitions of 'putting things together' or 'keeping calm'. Compose in this context would generally mean any arbitrary effort on our effort to 'recreate' a part of the existence that we live in. In other words, any form of artistic, scientific, or ethical composition that in essence mimicks our reality would fall under the strictest definition of 'compose'. Conventional compositions i.e. drawings, pictures, music would fall under the catagory of art; MO theory, TOEs, and engineering would fall as scientific re-creations; and the act of kindness- as the fundamental representation of the goodness that we are swimming in.
Enough definitions. Why is it innate in us to wish to re-produce pieces of ourselves in our idealistic domains? We can evidently see that all these forms of re-representations are fundamentally idealistic- sparked by inspiration, sustained by passion, and subsequently realized with skill and empirical methods. Somehow, it is quite interesting to say that it's because the human psyche wishes to partake in the essence of creation. If we go along this lines and factor in the assumption of Transcendental Theory, we can conclude that the human spirit will not rest until all Truth, Beauty and Goodness is broken down (not beauty though), understood, re-created, and mastered to perfection.
Truth in the from of knowledge, Beauty in the form of artistic exquisiteness, and Goodness in form of love.
Such a notion should be fundamentally right- the Christian doctrine goes along the lines that we are 'stewards of the earth', and having mastery over the forces of nature, proceed on to partake in God's plan of creation. While we cannot assume that all forms of creation definitely is part of that divine plan, we can safely assume that any notion to recreate would be going along the same lines of the 'desire to create' as advocated by creation theory. If we were to be less metaphysical and go along with empirical theories, we immediately see a correspondence with the fact that "the system of life is a move against the the law of thermodynamics, to bring development and order within this world if increasing disorder and entropy." Naturally, humans are the most complex forms of living things, and we must factor in that our idealistic psyches are partially influenced by our biological tendencies (which allign to construction). Definitely we can prove either way that we are created for creation, and construction.
Lets not dwell too much into the abstract. Instead as we look at the next storybook we pick on the way out of the library, the next manga that we read online (look at the pictures, and go along with the story), the next movie watched in Cathay, we can see that these forms of literature (under the faculty of art) is a from of human recreation of the world that we live in. Of course, this does not merely restrict to contemporary realism- science fiction, magic, fantasy, and other 'out-of-this-world' genres are also byproducts of human reconceptualizations of this world. In short, as long as there is a trait of humanity, or naturalism residing within that creation, such a work is essentially a work of creation and representation.
Now, a certain contradiction arises from the above assertion. If we are digging through lesser 'contemporary-realistic' works of creation looking for recreation of this reality we live in; it would assume that no creation is essentially perfect unless the creation itself has a one-to-one correspondence with reality itself. We intuitively know that such a view is quite warped, and I definitely do not want to impress this idea today. So how do we explain this?
Another coining factor to our works of creation is actually intellectual escapism. While we incoperate pieces of reality into our works (of literature), there is always a complimentary level of escapism, abstracity, and re-representation that we want to factor in. On face value, this complimentary value corresponds to 'thinking-out-of-the-box', 'creativity', 'style' and 'personality', and from there we arrive back to identity theory. The reason of escapism is actually a form of identity affirmation, for it defines the individual to the level of 'abstracity' the individual escapes to- from the common shared reality of objectivity, to a subsequent subjective idealism that resides in our intellectual domains.
Of course to that, moderation has to be employed judiciously. Over escapism leads to a life of denial, and escapism for the sake of escapism would do injustice to the roles we are supposed to be enacting in this objective world.
Naturally, Beauty theory holds that averageness brings together individuals into a common 'metaphysical being' that denotes the true (vector?) direction of progress. Scientific studies have shown that superimposed human faces actually average themselves to a much more pretty face than the individual faces themselves. And if we are to go on with art, we see that harmony is the key idea fundamental to all things beautiful. If we are to return back to our intellectual creations as a form of art, we can start wondering what happens if we average and map every form of individual creation into one big piece of creation itself.
I do not mean physical average- words don't superimpose themselves to form new words. And colors overlap only to a color of mud and chaos. This average has to be conceptual, metaphysical, essential, and ideal. A good way of visualization would be to tag along a author's comment to the piece of art and attempt to impose these comments conceptually.
Such averaging would cancel out contradictory extremes, and highlight certain points.
And the outcome, paradoxically, would actually converge to become reality itself. Complimentary to how our individual personalities average to objectivity.
Such an outcome definitely brings a very new definition to the concept of beauty- if beauty in truth is averageness, then why do we look at average films and consider them mediocre?
This would entail the concept of schemas- among art, portraits are admired for realism, on the other hand films are admired for a certain level of exxageration and abstracticity. Recall the human desire for escapism as well as realism, and we return to the moderation doctrine again- that the objective identity is not a static, 'smack-certer' steady-state balance of idealistic and realistic domains. Rather, its a dynamic fluctuation of (the 4) components that moderates itself to objectivity, correspondent of the reality we live in.
This is the essence of composition, and our desire for ccomposition. In short- an appreciation/
acknowledgement of ourselves in this world, as well as a form of personal creation.
Very much like how we are supposed to live our lives.
Damn, I hate reasoning in circles. LOL
16 November 2009
A retreat
I guess some of us would have already know by now- I would not be spending my 21st in Singapore.
I do not take this as an opportunity to brag- Indeed, I am going to spend christmas in Tokyo this year, but the primary reason for this move was actually more as a form of personal 'retreat' and 'recollection'. I would be attempting to tie up a couple of loose strings over the few days, and hopefully return with some answers.
I do not know whether it is would be wise to harp on such issues. I have currently attenuated all efforts into this domain of enquiry, partially out of the more pressing issue of examinations, and partially because I do not wish to end up falling 'into the trap of imbalance by harping too much on the ideals of balance'. I truly appreciate the life that I am currently leading, and I am equally pragmatic on the 'real' aspects of my individuality.
But as I have iterated, I will not give up one lifestyle over the other. As much as this life of tangible domains belongs to me, I see no reason why should I hide my concerns and developments in the idealistic domain. They are not taboo, and they are neither to be excessively glorified. Rather, they are all part of me- that one integrated unified me.
I also understand that from here on I would not be attempting to push ideals unto others. I have grew to appreciate the fact that my mentors have cautioned me to- that such ideals might be dangerous. They are dangerous not because they may be wrong; rather it is because these ideals are a 'double edged sword'. It would bring greater improvement and affirmation to the like minded, the good and the righteous, but to the half-hearted and the self-deluded such words would only come in a form of liabilities, doctrines and imposition. The intended outcome of freedom these ideals allude would then be reversed, bringing greater harm than good at the end of the day.
Whats there to be done? Just like the words of Jesus: "Listen, all who have ears".
So then, I will be pushing onwards onto a personal development that hopefully transmutes me to be a better person than yesterday. Integrating not only ideals, but also actions into a being that hopefully lives up to the way how life was meant to be. I will continue to update this space frequently with more deranged posts, with the same caution that it may contain ideas that may be uncomfortable to some. A nice break from the monotony of exams and politics, and from seeking affirmations.
All the best to the exams, and do look forward to christmas!
I do not take this as an opportunity to brag- Indeed, I am going to spend christmas in Tokyo this year, but the primary reason for this move was actually more as a form of personal 'retreat' and 'recollection'. I would be attempting to tie up a couple of loose strings over the few days, and hopefully return with some answers.
I do not know whether it is would be wise to harp on such issues. I have currently attenuated all efforts into this domain of enquiry, partially out of the more pressing issue of examinations, and partially because I do not wish to end up falling 'into the trap of imbalance by harping too much on the ideals of balance'. I truly appreciate the life that I am currently leading, and I am equally pragmatic on the 'real' aspects of my individuality.
But as I have iterated, I will not give up one lifestyle over the other. As much as this life of tangible domains belongs to me, I see no reason why should I hide my concerns and developments in the idealistic domain. They are not taboo, and they are neither to be excessively glorified. Rather, they are all part of me- that one integrated unified me.
I also understand that from here on I would not be attempting to push ideals unto others. I have grew to appreciate the fact that my mentors have cautioned me to- that such ideals might be dangerous. They are dangerous not because they may be wrong; rather it is because these ideals are a 'double edged sword'. It would bring greater improvement and affirmation to the like minded, the good and the righteous, but to the half-hearted and the self-deluded such words would only come in a form of liabilities, doctrines and imposition. The intended outcome of freedom these ideals allude would then be reversed, bringing greater harm than good at the end of the day.
Whats there to be done? Just like the words of Jesus: "Listen, all who have ears".
So then, I will be pushing onwards onto a personal development that hopefully transmutes me to be a better person than yesterday. Integrating not only ideals, but also actions into a being that hopefully lives up to the way how life was meant to be. I will continue to update this space frequently with more deranged posts, with the same caution that it may contain ideas that may be uncomfortable to some. A nice break from the monotony of exams and politics, and from seeking affirmations.
All the best to the exams, and do look forward to christmas!
10 November 2009
The first and final Moderation
I was thinking again, don't blame me, during one of those really boring lectures at school. I had been pondering at this issue for quite a long time already, and somehow the same questions seem to keep popping up intermittenly.
Yes, I do not deny that I seem to have reached some sort of stand-off between the over-hyped 'theory of life' and my personal capabilities of living. Today, the campaign for the lving best is completed in theory. And from the first notion that there ought to be a darn way to live this life of madness I got all the way (around?) to 'the pinnicle of philosophy-theology' aka transcendental theory. From what I see now there seems nowhere further to go, so I guess any further sort of development in the deranged world would just be expounding and refining these concepts to an infinity. BUT... just as the university that i come from, I am just a bagful of ideas.
Really deranged ideas-
Yes, its pretty cool seeing the world as it truly is, (it kinda gives you the 'Neo-vision' in the Matrix, when he sees the illusion as it really is), its pretty cool walking around looking at ethical and political issues and thinking "ha! Thats so simple.... whats the big fuss?", and its really empowering to know that you are living just as the way you were meant to be. But somehow these ideas cannot connect when it comes to practical application. It would if there were like minded people (not philo-deranged I mean, but even normal people who have good thoughts and a kind heart), but what only seems to be entertaining me are just exams and more unsolvable tutorials. And of course, that idealistic bell-curve to keep me running.
How is it possible to juggle between these two domains and yet remain my integrity? The moderation doctrine has a lot of nonsense to say about juggling materialism and idealism, and Identity theory would have screamed 'help your neighbours through this hard times'. Goodness theory will state that the purpose of studying is for the benefit of humanity, and Transcendental theory will just mum the same three words that would quell any further arising doubts. But much as that, beauty theory postulates that no amount of words can convict the soul. Words don't summate to create the being, its the being that words are created from..
So in a way we come back to point 1: Theory is pretty useless as a from of persuation of the individual. Some real life action has to come in to change my current disposition, and opinion. Then we come back to an even older conclusion I made 11 months ago. Project RN (thought) must come hand in hand with Project RN (feeling).
I have not found a definite method to solve such issues yet. This final bridge between the deranged world, and the real world itself, would be one of the hardest aespects- paradoxically, it was on this very aespect I had created the entire faculty of the Deranged Series upon. I do not say that what I had strived to accomplish is no more than a futility, and neither do I glorify it as the 'tested and proven' method for living. While I attempt to convince myself be be what is already me, of course- I would be looking forward to christmas, and hopefully, sushi.
Yes, I do not deny that I seem to have reached some sort of stand-off between the over-hyped 'theory of life' and my personal capabilities of living. Today, the campaign for the lving best is completed in theory. And from the first notion that there ought to be a darn way to live this life of madness I got all the way (around?) to 'the pinnicle of philosophy-theology' aka transcendental theory. From what I see now there seems nowhere further to go, so I guess any further sort of development in the deranged world would just be expounding and refining these concepts to an infinity. BUT... just as the university that i come from, I am just a bagful of ideas.
Really deranged ideas-
Yes, its pretty cool seeing the world as it truly is, (it kinda gives you the 'Neo-vision' in the Matrix, when he sees the illusion as it really is), its pretty cool walking around looking at ethical and political issues and thinking "ha! Thats so simple.... whats the big fuss?", and its really empowering to know that you are living just as the way you were meant to be. But somehow these ideas cannot connect when it comes to practical application. It would if there were like minded people (not philo-deranged I mean, but even normal people who have good thoughts and a kind heart), but what only seems to be entertaining me are just exams and more unsolvable tutorials. And of course, that idealistic bell-curve to keep me running.
How is it possible to juggle between these two domains and yet remain my integrity? The moderation doctrine has a lot of nonsense to say about juggling materialism and idealism, and Identity theory would have screamed 'help your neighbours through this hard times'. Goodness theory will state that the purpose of studying is for the benefit of humanity, and Transcendental theory will just mum the same three words that would quell any further arising doubts. But much as that, beauty theory postulates that no amount of words can convict the soul. Words don't summate to create the being, its the being that words are created from..
So in a way we come back to point 1: Theory is pretty useless as a from of persuation of the individual. Some real life action has to come in to change my current disposition, and opinion. Then we come back to an even older conclusion I made 11 months ago. Project RN (thought) must come hand in hand with Project RN (feeling).
I have not found a definite method to solve such issues yet. This final bridge between the deranged world, and the real world itself, would be one of the hardest aespects- paradoxically, it was on this very aespect I had created the entire faculty of the Deranged Series upon. I do not say that what I had strived to accomplish is no more than a futility, and neither do I glorify it as the 'tested and proven' method for living. While I attempt to convince myself be be what is already me, of course- I would be looking forward to christmas, and hopefully, sushi.
29 October 2009
A work of the tablet
all right, beans and buns.... I need a breather, from all the thinking, and all the planning, and all the fish-smelling (yes, i still insist that i keep smelling something fishy going on around me...). So, much as I want to rant on the meaning of life and speak in cheemology english, I have decided that maybe I should just do sth else for a change.
A couple of tweaks to this picture (still looks pretty original) and viola!
Of course, as I iterate, i don't draw. Definitely, I can't be the author of this picture. This picture was borrowed from a doodle made on my tablet pc from Xam, and I just decided to touch up the lines a little to see how far it can go. Pretty neat, now that I think about it.... looks pretty professional if you stare from across the room and SQUINT. Then and again, this is what we always get to see in those comic shops thinking that they are the most professional pictures drawn. But I guess if you ever get to blow up a comic book to A2 size, then we'll get a what we call a comical nightmare.
0.o
27 October 2009
On Engineering and Society (an excerpt)
The design centric programme, as I take to believe, aims to foster creativity and curiosity in the NUS engineering student. Such a programme would equip students to think holistically, critically and pragmatically; drawing knowledge from multiple disciplines, and then integrating them together with design as the primary focus.
Personally, I believe that the Design Centric Programme is rather noble, if not ingenious programme. I welcome it, and I too share in the ideals that it advocates. However I do not believe that such lofty aims would truly succeed in inculcating creativity and innovativeness of their students. You have noted that one of the possible reasons for such is the lack of willingness to change in mindset on the part of the students, and I agree to your point. After all, such idealistic change requires personal conviction and belief, and hence “it requires a strong will and great confidence in oneself”
Is it truly possible to inculcate values within an individual over a span of three or four years? Fundamental ethical values such as respecting each other take years to ‘sink into’ a child, and it is not truly realized until the child reasons it out to himself independently. Now, if such fundamental values already require years of inculcation before it may take effect, how more the values that ‘curiosity is good’, ‘creativity develops the individual’ and ‘design is the key to success’?
Moreover, to inculcate such a Design Centric ‘value’ would take more than just exposure time. Existing conflicting mindsets have to be torn down, or re-evaluated, for the student to truly believe and be independently innovative. We are aware that many students within the faculty study engineering merely “to get a certificate, a stable job, and be successful”. Also, the Asian value of “being safe than sorry” may result in students being reluctant to take risks and oppose the norm, thus hampering creativity and criticality in thought.
I have only considered the Design Centric Programme as a value today, but evidently we can already see the potential challenges it would be facing before such an aim becomes an achievement. Perhaps it would be ideal if such values were introduced at an earlier time (of education). Nevertheless, we should not despair in our attempts to continue inculcating these ideals into our current students of engineering. After all, learning (including values) never stops with age, and Rome was never built in a single day.
Personally, I believe that the Design Centric Programme is rather noble, if not ingenious programme. I welcome it, and I too share in the ideals that it advocates. However I do not believe that such lofty aims would truly succeed in inculcating creativity and innovativeness of their students. You have noted that one of the possible reasons for such is the lack of willingness to change in mindset on the part of the students, and I agree to your point. After all, such idealistic change requires personal conviction and belief, and hence “it requires a strong will and great confidence in oneself”
Is it truly possible to inculcate values within an individual over a span of three or four years? Fundamental ethical values such as respecting each other take years to ‘sink into’ a child, and it is not truly realized until the child reasons it out to himself independently. Now, if such fundamental values already require years of inculcation before it may take effect, how more the values that ‘curiosity is good’, ‘creativity develops the individual’ and ‘design is the key to success’?
Moreover, to inculcate such a Design Centric ‘value’ would take more than just exposure time. Existing conflicting mindsets have to be torn down, or re-evaluated, for the student to truly believe and be independently innovative. We are aware that many students within the faculty study engineering merely “to get a certificate, a stable job, and be successful”. Also, the Asian value of “being safe than sorry” may result in students being reluctant to take risks and oppose the norm, thus hampering creativity and criticality in thought.
I have only considered the Design Centric Programme as a value today, but evidently we can already see the potential challenges it would be facing before such an aim becomes an achievement. Perhaps it would be ideal if such values were introduced at an earlier time (of education). Nevertheless, we should not despair in our attempts to continue inculcating these ideals into our current students of engineering. After all, learning (including values) never stops with age, and Rome was never built in a single day.
This is what the 7th Age was meant to be
I had a rather short but meaningful talk with my english tutor on monday. We were supposed to be conferencing about my second wrtiting assignment, but i guess the both of us just didn't want to talk about it.
"Do you read Bertrand Russell?" Sweet beans, I have been hoping someone would ask me this question for ages! "How do you think of his writings?" You serious about knowing? Finally someone else! "How do you think it compares to the teachings of Christ?" OMFG, that moderation between philosophy and theology! "I am glad that young people are thinking about such issues too, not many people in Singapore want to think as such" YOU BET, PROF!!!!
Then the conversation moved on to quotes of other poeple: "Its better to give up what you cannot keep, to gain what you cannot lose." vs. "What good is it for you to gain the whole world but lose your own self?".Project RN was implied throighout the whole conversation, the file lay innocently on the table, the supposedly investigated essay got stuck somewhere in it.
Finally, we still had to look through it. Okay, elaboration is cool, but for academic essays its still not the time to do so, but when it comes to masters thesis.... Master's Thesis?? I dun know if I can go that far man.....
"After all, life is a balance of elaborating what you wish to say to an infinity and what the poeple around you might want to hear. So there ought to be a balance in elaboration and summary"
Nostalgic. 15 mins up, nice talking to you again, meet up for coffee next week? cool. COOL.
That's it, if some circa 19-21 year old dudette is gonna talk like that to me, I am so going to marry her for life.
Quickly Grow up, dudettes. LOL to that.
"Do you read Bertrand Russell?" Sweet beans, I have been hoping someone would ask me this question for ages! "How do you think of his writings?" You serious about knowing? Finally someone else! "How do you think it compares to the teachings of Christ?" OMFG, that moderation between philosophy and theology! "I am glad that young people are thinking about such issues too, not many people in Singapore want to think as such" YOU BET, PROF!!!!
Then the conversation moved on to quotes of other poeple: "Its better to give up what you cannot keep, to gain what you cannot lose." vs. "What good is it for you to gain the whole world but lose your own self?".Project RN was implied throighout the whole conversation, the file lay innocently on the table, the supposedly investigated essay got stuck somewhere in it.
Finally, we still had to look through it. Okay, elaboration is cool, but for academic essays its still not the time to do so, but when it comes to masters thesis.... Master's Thesis?? I dun know if I can go that far man.....
"After all, life is a balance of elaborating what you wish to say to an infinity and what the poeple around you might want to hear. So there ought to be a balance in elaboration and summary"
Nostalgic. 15 mins up, nice talking to you again, meet up for coffee next week? cool. COOL.
That's it, if some circa 19-21 year old dudette is gonna talk like that to me, I am so going to marry her for life.
Quickly Grow up, dudettes. LOL to that.
13 October 2009
For the fools
Listen, all those who have ears.
The following excerpt may sound direct and slightly offensive to some, and if it is it should be. Otherwise, dun mind this excerpt at all- afterall, I do not wish to impose anything to anyone, unless they wish to not be.
It seems that much have passed since the last post of Project RN(T). 6 months have passed with many transitions of lifestyles and mindsets. We are all somehow going back to this world of- whatever it is. We're bogged down by it, we're directly involved in its workings, and we cannot escape to retrospect as we could once do.
So socialization dominates socialogical workings. Group beliefs over personal philosophy, and examinations over the aims of education. We whine, we die, and we try to integrate our personalities into what the world has to offer. This process was long and painful; some parts fit in easily, and we acquaint like before. Some we just made do, and mugged mindlessly along with its requirements. Yet nearly everything fitted, as long as we don't try to integrate our identities from Jan 2009 onwards to the time we meet them.
Yes, everything is fun and games until someone gets serious. Life is no more than one big joke until some fish decides to stop clowning around and do something productive for a change. Nobody wants to hear the bad news- nobody wants to hear of reason, nobody wants to hear of the truth.
The living best? I am enjoying myself.
The meaning of life? I make my own meaning.
The beauty of living? Just fuck it.
Who cares about these damn questions? I am here, I am living, and I am happy. Oh yah, not to say I think I am beautiful too.... To me, this is the good life. And this is the true way to live, whats wrong? Who are you to tell me what is and what isnt? I determine everything. I am god of my own universe, fuck off.
Fools.
You say you are happy, but I say you ain't really happy. You are only just as happy as you attempt to prove me wrong. Do you even know what happiness is? Just an act of self gratification? Then you might as well live a life of continuous masturbation to indulge your senses. Why not? Am I being too extreme? If you think so now, then where do you want to draw the happiness line?
Success, you work to strive for real success. What is success? you don't know, so you set arbitrary standards and goals to quantify success. Success comes with fame and authority and wealth and health and happiness... okay, maybe not happiness, because happiness cannot be defined. What is fame? What is wealth? An means to exert control and gratification? Would a life of being in control and being 'good' warrant meaning? Would a life with 352 facebook contacts make you feel loved? No. If it did, then why do you strive for the 353rd friend? If a hundred marks warrents you the smartest person around, then why are you still slogging on in education?
Why do you pursue a goal with an ever-shifting goalpost? Is this your meaning of life? If it is, then why do you die ultimately? Yo don't know how to answer, you say this question is full of nonsense, then you argue that the meaning of life is subjective.
Idiot. The meaning of life was for you to find out, since you were after all, created. You didn't kick yourself out of non-existence, and even your identity was not created by yourself, but rather influenced by others. Nothing truly belongs to you, apart from your ego. Your so-called freedom is no more than a egoistic sham. And don't give me the subjectivity bullshit if you don't know what it's truly about. If everything is subjective and authority is objective, then who gives you the right to be live on this earth?
Don't fuck around with concepts you cant keep, fools, if you denounce philosophy without understanding of it. What difference is that between an sick-ass who rejects medicine before even taking it? He might as well not live to say that life is meaningless.
It is alright to suscribe to your own beliefs, but do not ever denounce the beliefs of others around you if you do not wish to be imposed upon. if they are fallible, then something is indeed wrong. If you don't have a philosophy in life, then its time to get one.
Aesthetics is only skin deep, and physical beauty is temporary. Materialistic objects perish eventually, this is reality. Much much more real and eternal than your mindless slog for an A in this and that module.
Or a trivial conversation to be forgotten the day after, or a strive for an honours that will be forgotten 5 years after you graduate. Many intelligent men live, and many more rich men die- but only the legacy of the truly successful lives on. And among those remembered, whom of which were busniessmen or people with a thousand facebook contacts?
Grow up fools. You've got a long way to go. Meanwhile, listen. and be still.
The following excerpt may sound direct and slightly offensive to some, and if it is it should be. Otherwise, dun mind this excerpt at all- afterall, I do not wish to impose anything to anyone, unless they wish to not be.
It seems that much have passed since the last post of Project RN(T). 6 months have passed with many transitions of lifestyles and mindsets. We are all somehow going back to this world of- whatever it is. We're bogged down by it, we're directly involved in its workings, and we cannot escape to retrospect as we could once do.
So socialization dominates socialogical workings. Group beliefs over personal philosophy, and examinations over the aims of education. We whine, we die, and we try to integrate our personalities into what the world has to offer. This process was long and painful; some parts fit in easily, and we acquaint like before. Some we just made do, and mugged mindlessly along with its requirements. Yet nearly everything fitted, as long as we don't try to integrate our identities from Jan 2009 onwards to the time we meet them.
Yes, everything is fun and games until someone gets serious. Life is no more than one big joke until some fish decides to stop clowning around and do something productive for a change. Nobody wants to hear the bad news- nobody wants to hear of reason, nobody wants to hear of the truth.
The living best? I am enjoying myself.
The meaning of life? I make my own meaning.
The beauty of living? Just fuck it.
Who cares about these damn questions? I am here, I am living, and I am happy. Oh yah, not to say I think I am beautiful too.... To me, this is the good life. And this is the true way to live, whats wrong? Who are you to tell me what is and what isnt? I determine everything. I am god of my own universe, fuck off.
Fools.
You say you are happy, but I say you ain't really happy. You are only just as happy as you attempt to prove me wrong. Do you even know what happiness is? Just an act of self gratification? Then you might as well live a life of continuous masturbation to indulge your senses. Why not? Am I being too extreme? If you think so now, then where do you want to draw the happiness line?
Success, you work to strive for real success. What is success? you don't know, so you set arbitrary standards and goals to quantify success. Success comes with fame and authority and wealth and health and happiness... okay, maybe not happiness, because happiness cannot be defined. What is fame? What is wealth? An means to exert control and gratification? Would a life of being in control and being 'good' warrant meaning? Would a life with 352 facebook contacts make you feel loved? No. If it did, then why do you strive for the 353rd friend? If a hundred marks warrents you the smartest person around, then why are you still slogging on in education?
Why do you pursue a goal with an ever-shifting goalpost? Is this your meaning of life? If it is, then why do you die ultimately? Yo don't know how to answer, you say this question is full of nonsense, then you argue that the meaning of life is subjective.
Idiot. The meaning of life was for you to find out, since you were after all, created. You didn't kick yourself out of non-existence, and even your identity was not created by yourself, but rather influenced by others. Nothing truly belongs to you, apart from your ego. Your so-called freedom is no more than a egoistic sham. And don't give me the subjectivity bullshit if you don't know what it's truly about. If everything is subjective and authority is objective, then who gives you the right to be live on this earth?
Don't fuck around with concepts you cant keep, fools, if you denounce philosophy without understanding of it. What difference is that between an sick-ass who rejects medicine before even taking it? He might as well not live to say that life is meaningless.
It is alright to suscribe to your own beliefs, but do not ever denounce the beliefs of others around you if you do not wish to be imposed upon. if they are fallible, then something is indeed wrong. If you don't have a philosophy in life, then its time to get one.
Aesthetics is only skin deep, and physical beauty is temporary. Materialistic objects perish eventually, this is reality. Much much more real and eternal than your mindless slog for an A in this and that module.
Or a trivial conversation to be forgotten the day after, or a strive for an honours that will be forgotten 5 years after you graduate. Many intelligent men live, and many more rich men die- but only the legacy of the truly successful lives on. And among those remembered, whom of which were busniessmen or people with a thousand facebook contacts?
Grow up fools. You've got a long way to go. Meanwhile, listen. and be still.
28 September 2009
Monsterous reasoning (quoted)
"hey, K. is scared of monsters, so don't scare her too much"
"I... I'm not really afraid of them. I don't even believe in them"
"I see."
"Well, if you don't believe in them, then you should'nt be afraid."
"Wrong. It's just because I don't believe in them that it's scary when something strange happens"
"You're afraid after all..."
"It's common sense. Humans are creatures that are afraid of the unknown. People in the past attributed unknown things to monsters in order to alleviate the fear of the unknown. Isn't that right?"
"Then, why don't you believe in monsters so that you can be at ease?"
"No, that would be scary."
"You're just afraid after all."
"I... I'm not really afraid of them. I don't even believe in them"
"I see."
"Well, if you don't believe in them, then you should'nt be afraid."
"Wrong. It's just because I don't believe in them that it's scary when something strange happens"
"You're afraid after all..."
"It's common sense. Humans are creatures that are afraid of the unknown. People in the past attributed unknown things to monsters in order to alleviate the fear of the unknown. Isn't that right?"
"Then, why don't you believe in monsters so that you can be at ease?"
"No, that would be scary."
"You're just afraid after all."
21 September 2009
The Dejengskiean List of Theories
Below stated is a list of Theories Developed since 8 years ago. Some of them may be unsound, and they have been overwritten by newer theories. Note that from the Living Best Postulate, the subsequent theories tend to overlap each other, and draw more credibility from exsisting philosophy and knowledge
Special Awareness (2001)
- Awareness to the difference between one (me) and the others via difference in lifestyles, intentions and thinking.
- The explanation of "Because you are special" was adopted.
Project E (Aug 2001 - Nov 2001)
- First project undertaken; the first distinguishment between me and my peers (in terms of stories).
- Project E demostrates the need to follow one's identity and passion without fear of compromisation. Personally It paves way for all higher Projects and subsequent Theories.
1st Social Campaign (Jan 2003)
- A campaign aimed after project E to socialize and mantain relavence and seek support in a world of adversity.
- The need to socialize to find one's place in society
- The need to compromise one's personal identity for social identity so as to achieve competence and companionship.
Project M (Nov 2003 - Jan 2004)
- Project M was a campaign seeked for the interpretation of experiential love and companionship.
- Very much based on conventional frameworks (i.e. from movies, novels), it depicts love as a form of self gratification and achievement.
- The conventional idea of girlfriends for trophies.
Project W1
- The first project done in collaboration with others.
- The lifestyle of Extroversion and Materialism was considered (via collaborator); reflected aptly in the story.
-Postulates that the secular world was an absolute standard, and mastery of socialism and the 'way' would bring about success and happiness in life.
- The idea of collaboration to further define achievement arises.
Transition Theory (Dec 2004 -)
- Transition Theory accounts the dynamics and emotional responses towards changes in Circumstances.
- Transition Theory hypothesizes that and transition, be it of time or heart, follows the following processes- (Graduation, Transition, Acceptance, Pragmatism, Integration). A full transition occurs when these 5 processes are considered by the individual.
- Also, Transition Theory states that transition usually alternates a series of relative 'highs' and 'lows' in certain aespects.
- "When all happiness and music comes to an end, silence takes it's toil." accounts the depreciating aspects. "When the going gets tough, the tough gets going" accounts the inverse.
Cotian Theory (Jan 2005 - May 2006)
- The First Cotian Theory accounts for the Ideal Socializing, Thinking, and Living philosophy from Jan 2005 - May 2006.
- Cotian Theory, in response to the finding that not all relationships are equal, confers different levels of acquaintance to people. Lesser groups are known as 'co-workers' while higher groups are known as 'cots'. The level of relationship of a group was determined by the closeness recorded over a buffer of 3 months.
- The value of Trust was especially highlighted in the group, due to the inability to articulate 'love' ideals then. Socializing activities were then enacted to strenghten this bond of 'Trust' and promote social integrity.
- Such projections have brought about a postulate to live life based on such values i.e. 'Trust', 'hope', and 'love' emotionally. The living best was thought to be achieved when these values, coupled with physical interactions, come to a qualitative 'sacrosanct'.
Halcyon Theory (Mar 2006 - Feb 2007)
- Awareness to the failings (realistic and idealistic) of Cotion Theory brought about a need to counter the former. Halcyon theory banks its beliefs on 'Hope, Share, and Cherish" as fundamental ideals for true socialization and personal integrity.
- Halcyon Theory states that any 'present' event is usually percieved to be remnant of a 'past' event. Such perception is false, since life is all about improvement, and not stagnation.
- Halcyon Theory proposes that an integration of 'Past and Present" is needed for one to pragmatically face the "future".
- Halcyon Theory also hypothesizes that if current lifestyles are 'bad', "hope" is the value to be considered. If current lifestyles are 'Good', "Cherish" would be the determining value. Either way, the value of "Sharing" is promoted to bring about happiness and light.
Project C2 (14th Febuary 2007 - 19th May 2008)
- Project C2 was implemented to counter the inadequacies of Halcyon and Cotian Theory.
- Project C2 Highlights the need to detach oneself from certain mindsets if such mindsets are thought to be detrimental to his personal integrity.
- The ability of stop, reflect, and pen down thoughts in order to realize the "truth" from the "false truth"- or the "need" from the "want".
- the mission of Project C2 lies predominantly in reason and intellectual thought (rationalism) to straighten and guide feelings.
-Project C2 does not have any defining philosophy of it's own, but it generally touches on a 'trust' for a 'better tomorrow' (concepts borrowed from the 2 former theories).
The Materialism pitfall (May 2007 - May 2008)
- the materialism pitfall was a period where no theories were developed. Partially influenced by project C2, and due to stifling circumstances; materialism, backstabbing and lawlessness reign supreme. However, the realization of it's philosophy in "Enlightenment Theory" leads to a very important development subsequently.
Enlightenment Theory (June 2008 - 15th December 2008)
- Enlightenment Theory was a theory guided in collaboration, to dispel lawlessness and materialism. With the end of Project C2, the need for a guiding philosophy of life is renewed.
- Enlightenment Theory if formulated predominatly by reason and speculation. It proposes that the reason of failure for earlier theories lies in the lack of intellectual consideration of them (they are too emotional based)
- It distinguishes two contrasting faculties of thought- Namely the lifestlye based on feelings for immediate gratification and the Enlightened lifestlye based on careful thought, contemplation and reasoned judgement. The former lifestyle was deemed as mundane and improper, while the latter was deemed as the path to truth and enlightenment.
- The theory of the 'civil man' shows that there are certain moral values that promote development to the 'truth'. This theory still holds was later transmuted to Truth theory in Project RN and Project T.
Living Best postulate (21st December 2008 - 6th Janruary)
- Enlightenment theory states that truth can only come with reason. However, such theory was found to be impractical and one sided. It conflicts with Halcyon theory.
- Also, the discrimination of lifestyles results in an elietist attitude. it does not improve life, but depreciates human dignity.
- Values of Goodness can be seen in a life of feelings and practicality.
- This consequents in a postulation that perhaps the 'truth' of life is not achieved not only via intellectual thought, but also in feelings and circumstance.
- The living Best Postulate acknowledges that there is an objective true lifestyle, that lies within the cotian theory of sensory socialization, the halcyon theory of good values, the eternity of transition theory, as well as the enlightenment theory of reason and judgement.
The Moderation Doctrine (Project RN(T))
- The Moderation Doctrine is a finding, founded directly under the Living Best Postulate and Western Philosophy, that the 'best' lifestyle is indeed a lifestyle of integration of contrasting domains.
- The Moderation Doctrine raises four domains: Epistemic (Thought), Ontological (Intuitive Feeling), Real (Material), and Ideal (Eternal) of life. In its early stages, Only Thought and Feeling were postulated, reminscent of Enlightenment Theory.
- The doctrine acknowledges the validity of feeling and materialism. It advocates balance between Thought and Feeling, and proposes that every deed has both an idealistic, and realistic aespect.
- This moderation of domains would thus create an objective balanced identity for the individual.
Identity Theory (Project RN(T))
- Identity theory is a theory created in conjunction with the moderation doctrine as part of a Campaign RN(T). While the Moderation Doctrine focuses on the intrapersonal thoughts and feelings, identity theory focuses on the individual as a whole and as a community.
- Identity Theory draws inspiration from Psychology and Sociology. It states that there is an objective balance between personal identity and social identity.
- While personal identity and genes lead to the defining of the individual personality, associative love in general unites the differences and un-discriminates the individual.
- Identity theory focuses on the bottom-up approach of the value of Love. It unites love with socialization and personalization.
Truth Theory (Project RN(T))
- Truth Theory proposes that all Truth is Objective and Subjective. And while they may differ sometimes, one does not hold true presidence over the other.
- Every proposition holds an element of Truth. Knowledge is the human's subjective correspondence of the Truth. Also, it reconciles the aims of Science and Religion.
- Since every proposition has an element of Truth, thus there should be an objective address on the Living Best between Enlightenment Theory, The Living Best, the Moderation Doctrine, and Identity Theory. In Project RN(T), an address of Truth was given- with philosophical backing, to creditate the findings of the above theories.
Goodness Theory (Project RN(T2))
- Goodness Theory was a hypothesis made to integrate the findings of Truth Theory with conventional religion. It addresses why some propositions are considered good (or bad).
- Goodness Theory holds that Goodness is a form of intent, reason, agenda, outcome of a proposition aimed for true development and perfect harmony.
- Goodness Theory, in Project RN(T2), picks up after the topic of Love in Identity Theory. Justifying Ethics and Morality when Truth is deemed 'subjective and holds little crediblity'.
- It also addresses the issue of Authority and Law, with close resemblence (coincidental) to the teachings of Jesus. Authority is conferred, not achieved. And Love is meant to refine the true agenda of the Law, not to restrict, but to goodness.
- As goodness is the means to the end, in this respect the meaning of creation is considered, and the meaning of life is derived. Complimented by the Living Best, Project RN(T) and Project RN(T2) come hand in hand to give a reasonable theory to life.
Beauty Theory
- Beauty Theory is the third theory, on par with Truth Theory and Goodness Theory, to qualify life.
- Beauty Theory holds that all propositions have an element of aesthetical beauty within. While Truth Theory deals with the mechanism-operation of all propositions, and Goodness to the means and ends of a proposition, beauty theory describes the state of being of any proposition.
- Beauty Theory explains the true meaning of beauty. It also justifies the Arts as a faculty on par with Philosophy (including of science) and Ethics.
- Beauty lies in harmony and proportionality. An idealistic perfection, Beauty Theory also justifies the importance of Balance and Moderation- Not as a state for the achievement (for the living best); but rather as a lifestyle of grace.
Transcendental Theory (14th September 2009)
- Transcendental Theory is the final theory developed insofar. It draws reference from Theology, Philosophy, General Knowledge, and personal deduction. It aims to explain proposition (i.e. EVERYTHING) in entire-ity.
- Transcendental Theory holds that the 3 primary transcendentals: Truth, Goodness and Beauty comes from a united source. These three are mutually inclusive, yet distinct from one another.
- Every proposition has an element of truth, of goodness, and of beauty within. Each transcendental describes a particular aespect: the descriptive makings, the intent/destination, and the state of its being.
- Still in its stages of infancy, Project T aims to round up all the current theories, projects and mindsets; and to fully describe it as one clear, cohesive, and united address.
Special Awareness (2001)
- Awareness to the difference between one (me) and the others via difference in lifestyles, intentions and thinking.
- The explanation of "Because you are special" was adopted.
Project E (Aug 2001 - Nov 2001)
- First project undertaken; the first distinguishment between me and my peers (in terms of stories).
- Project E demostrates the need to follow one's identity and passion without fear of compromisation. Personally It paves way for all higher Projects and subsequent Theories.
1st Social Campaign (Jan 2003)
- A campaign aimed after project E to socialize and mantain relavence and seek support in a world of adversity.
- The need to socialize to find one's place in society
- The need to compromise one's personal identity for social identity so as to achieve competence and companionship.
Project M (Nov 2003 - Jan 2004)
- Project M was a campaign seeked for the interpretation of experiential love and companionship.
- Very much based on conventional frameworks (i.e. from movies, novels), it depicts love as a form of self gratification and achievement.
- The conventional idea of girlfriends for trophies.
Project W1
- The first project done in collaboration with others.
- The lifestyle of Extroversion and Materialism was considered (via collaborator); reflected aptly in the story.
-Postulates that the secular world was an absolute standard, and mastery of socialism and the 'way' would bring about success and happiness in life.
- The idea of collaboration to further define achievement arises.
Transition Theory (Dec 2004 -)
- Transition Theory accounts the dynamics and emotional responses towards changes in Circumstances.
- Transition Theory hypothesizes that and transition, be it of time or heart, follows the following processes- (Graduation, Transition, Acceptance, Pragmatism, Integration). A full transition occurs when these 5 processes are considered by the individual.
- Also, Transition Theory states that transition usually alternates a series of relative 'highs' and 'lows' in certain aespects.
- "When all happiness and music comes to an end, silence takes it's toil." accounts the depreciating aspects. "When the going gets tough, the tough gets going" accounts the inverse.
Cotian Theory (Jan 2005 - May 2006)
- The First Cotian Theory accounts for the Ideal Socializing, Thinking, and Living philosophy from Jan 2005 - May 2006.
- Cotian Theory, in response to the finding that not all relationships are equal, confers different levels of acquaintance to people. Lesser groups are known as 'co-workers' while higher groups are known as 'cots'. The level of relationship of a group was determined by the closeness recorded over a buffer of 3 months.
- The value of Trust was especially highlighted in the group, due to the inability to articulate 'love' ideals then. Socializing activities were then enacted to strenghten this bond of 'Trust' and promote social integrity.
- Such projections have brought about a postulate to live life based on such values i.e. 'Trust', 'hope', and 'love' emotionally. The living best was thought to be achieved when these values, coupled with physical interactions, come to a qualitative 'sacrosanct'.
Halcyon Theory (Mar 2006 - Feb 2007)
- Awareness to the failings (realistic and idealistic) of Cotion Theory brought about a need to counter the former. Halcyon theory banks its beliefs on 'Hope, Share, and Cherish" as fundamental ideals for true socialization and personal integrity.
- Halcyon Theory states that any 'present' event is usually percieved to be remnant of a 'past' event. Such perception is false, since life is all about improvement, and not stagnation.
- Halcyon Theory proposes that an integration of 'Past and Present" is needed for one to pragmatically face the "future".
- Halcyon Theory also hypothesizes that if current lifestyles are 'bad', "hope" is the value to be considered. If current lifestyles are 'Good', "Cherish" would be the determining value. Either way, the value of "Sharing" is promoted to bring about happiness and light.
Project C2 (14th Febuary 2007 - 19th May 2008)
- Project C2 was implemented to counter the inadequacies of Halcyon and Cotian Theory.
- Project C2 Highlights the need to detach oneself from certain mindsets if such mindsets are thought to be detrimental to his personal integrity.
- The ability of stop, reflect, and pen down thoughts in order to realize the "truth" from the "false truth"- or the "need" from the "want".
- the mission of Project C2 lies predominantly in reason and intellectual thought (rationalism) to straighten and guide feelings.
-Project C2 does not have any defining philosophy of it's own, but it generally touches on a 'trust' for a 'better tomorrow' (concepts borrowed from the 2 former theories).
The Materialism pitfall (May 2007 - May 2008)
- the materialism pitfall was a period where no theories were developed. Partially influenced by project C2, and due to stifling circumstances; materialism, backstabbing and lawlessness reign supreme. However, the realization of it's philosophy in "Enlightenment Theory" leads to a very important development subsequently.
Enlightenment Theory (June 2008 - 15th December 2008)
- Enlightenment Theory was a theory guided in collaboration, to dispel lawlessness and materialism. With the end of Project C2, the need for a guiding philosophy of life is renewed.
- Enlightenment Theory if formulated predominatly by reason and speculation. It proposes that the reason of failure for earlier theories lies in the lack of intellectual consideration of them (they are too emotional based)
- It distinguishes two contrasting faculties of thought- Namely the lifestlye based on feelings for immediate gratification and the Enlightened lifestlye based on careful thought, contemplation and reasoned judgement. The former lifestyle was deemed as mundane and improper, while the latter was deemed as the path to truth and enlightenment.
- The theory of the 'civil man' shows that there are certain moral values that promote development to the 'truth'. This theory still holds was later transmuted to Truth theory in Project RN and Project T.
Living Best postulate (21st December 2008 - 6th Janruary)
- Enlightenment theory states that truth can only come with reason. However, such theory was found to be impractical and one sided. It conflicts with Halcyon theory.
- Also, the discrimination of lifestyles results in an elietist attitude. it does not improve life, but depreciates human dignity.
- Values of Goodness can be seen in a life of feelings and practicality.
- This consequents in a postulation that perhaps the 'truth' of life is not achieved not only via intellectual thought, but also in feelings and circumstance.
- The living Best Postulate acknowledges that there is an objective true lifestyle, that lies within the cotian theory of sensory socialization, the halcyon theory of good values, the eternity of transition theory, as well as the enlightenment theory of reason and judgement.
The Moderation Doctrine (Project RN(T))
- The Moderation Doctrine is a finding, founded directly under the Living Best Postulate and Western Philosophy, that the 'best' lifestyle is indeed a lifestyle of integration of contrasting domains.
- The Moderation Doctrine raises four domains: Epistemic (Thought), Ontological (Intuitive Feeling), Real (Material), and Ideal (Eternal) of life. In its early stages, Only Thought and Feeling were postulated, reminscent of Enlightenment Theory.
- The doctrine acknowledges the validity of feeling and materialism. It advocates balance between Thought and Feeling, and proposes that every deed has both an idealistic, and realistic aespect.
- This moderation of domains would thus create an objective balanced identity for the individual.
Identity Theory (Project RN(T))
- Identity theory is a theory created in conjunction with the moderation doctrine as part of a Campaign RN(T). While the Moderation Doctrine focuses on the intrapersonal thoughts and feelings, identity theory focuses on the individual as a whole and as a community.
- Identity Theory draws inspiration from Psychology and Sociology. It states that there is an objective balance between personal identity and social identity.
- While personal identity and genes lead to the defining of the individual personality, associative love in general unites the differences and un-discriminates the individual.
- Identity theory focuses on the bottom-up approach of the value of Love. It unites love with socialization and personalization.
Truth Theory (Project RN(T))
- Truth Theory proposes that all Truth is Objective and Subjective. And while they may differ sometimes, one does not hold true presidence over the other.
- Every proposition holds an element of Truth. Knowledge is the human's subjective correspondence of the Truth. Also, it reconciles the aims of Science and Religion.
- Since every proposition has an element of Truth, thus there should be an objective address on the Living Best between Enlightenment Theory, The Living Best, the Moderation Doctrine, and Identity Theory. In Project RN(T), an address of Truth was given- with philosophical backing, to creditate the findings of the above theories.
Goodness Theory (Project RN(T2))
- Goodness Theory was a hypothesis made to integrate the findings of Truth Theory with conventional religion. It addresses why some propositions are considered good (or bad).
- Goodness Theory holds that Goodness is a form of intent, reason, agenda, outcome of a proposition aimed for true development and perfect harmony.
- Goodness Theory, in Project RN(T2), picks up after the topic of Love in Identity Theory. Justifying Ethics and Morality when Truth is deemed 'subjective and holds little crediblity'.
- It also addresses the issue of Authority and Law, with close resemblence (coincidental) to the teachings of Jesus. Authority is conferred, not achieved. And Love is meant to refine the true agenda of the Law, not to restrict, but to goodness.
- As goodness is the means to the end, in this respect the meaning of creation is considered, and the meaning of life is derived. Complimented by the Living Best, Project RN(T) and Project RN(T2) come hand in hand to give a reasonable theory to life.
Beauty Theory
- Beauty Theory is the third theory, on par with Truth Theory and Goodness Theory, to qualify life.
- Beauty Theory holds that all propositions have an element of aesthetical beauty within. While Truth Theory deals with the mechanism-operation of all propositions, and Goodness to the means and ends of a proposition, beauty theory describes the state of being of any proposition.
- Beauty Theory explains the true meaning of beauty. It also justifies the Arts as a faculty on par with Philosophy (including of science) and Ethics.
- Beauty lies in harmony and proportionality. An idealistic perfection, Beauty Theory also justifies the importance of Balance and Moderation- Not as a state for the achievement (for the living best); but rather as a lifestyle of grace.
Transcendental Theory (14th September 2009)
- Transcendental Theory is the final theory developed insofar. It draws reference from Theology, Philosophy, General Knowledge, and personal deduction. It aims to explain proposition (i.e. EVERYTHING) in entire-ity.
- Transcendental Theory holds that the 3 primary transcendentals: Truth, Goodness and Beauty comes from a united source. These three are mutually inclusive, yet distinct from one another.
- Every proposition has an element of truth, of goodness, and of beauty within. Each transcendental describes a particular aespect: the descriptive makings, the intent/destination, and the state of its being.
- Still in its stages of infancy, Project T aims to round up all the current theories, projects and mindsets; and to fully describe it as one clear, cohesive, and united address.
19 September 2009
GHKJH
It is to note that from GHKJH the three primary transcendentals are derived:
the mechanism of how GHKJH operates/be is the way of Truth.
the intention/reason/purpose of GHKJH is Goodness. GHKJH in essence is good.
the aesthetic standards of GHKJH lies in the beauty of it's derivatives.
These three transcendentals explain a particular aespect of GHKJH; namely its working mechanism, its reason and purpose, and it's state of being. Because they describe an aespect each, therefore we can induce that this subject is a singluar entity.
But what is GHKJH? English has no available word for it. The closest word we can possibly use is Nature, Creation. But if we were to use the above words as concepts, then the next question would be: what creates (that concept) in Truth, Goodness and Beauty?
That would lead us to the final word; on par with the concept of a unified God. An embodiment of the three transcendentals. And it is from this unified (concept?) we derive the entire theory of knowledge through philosophy (of truth), ethics and love (from goodness), and the arts (beauty).
That word being GHKJH for now.
the mechanism of how GHKJH operates/be is the way of Truth.
the intention/reason/purpose of GHKJH is Goodness. GHKJH in essence is good.
the aesthetic standards of GHKJH lies in the beauty of it's derivatives.
These three transcendentals explain a particular aespect of GHKJH; namely its working mechanism, its reason and purpose, and it's state of being. Because they describe an aespect each, therefore we can induce that this subject is a singluar entity.
But what is GHKJH? English has no available word for it. The closest word we can possibly use is Nature, Creation. But if we were to use the above words as concepts, then the next question would be: what creates (that concept) in Truth, Goodness and Beauty?
That would lead us to the final word; on par with the concept of a unified God. An embodiment of the three transcendentals. And it is from this unified (concept?) we derive the entire theory of knowledge through philosophy (of truth), ethics and love (from goodness), and the arts (beauty).
That word being GHKJH for now.
16 September 2009
Transcendentals
Below is a short excerpt I have got about Truth and Goodness, (and Beauty). Evidently, they have been contemplated through the ages by many, are is accepted by Christian Theology: these three entities explain everything, and they are called Transcendentals.
The transcendentals are ontologically one, thus they are convertible. Where there is truth, there is beauty and goodness also.
In Christian theology the transcendentals are treated in relation to Theology Proper, the doctrine of God. The transcendentals, according to Christian doctrine, can be described as the ultimate desires of man. Man ultimately strives for perfection, which takes form through the desire for perfect attainment of the transcendentals.
Each transcends the limitations of place and time, and are rooted in being. The transcendentals are not contingent upon cultural diversity, religious doctrine, or personal ideologies, but rather serve as the objective characteristics of the nature of man.
The transcendentals are ontologically one, thus they are convertible. Where there is truth, there is beauty and goodness also.
In Christian theology the transcendentals are treated in relation to Theology Proper, the doctrine of God. The transcendentals, according to Christian doctrine, can be described as the ultimate desires of man. Man ultimately strives for perfection, which takes form through the desire for perfect attainment of the transcendentals.
Each transcends the limitations of place and time, and are rooted in being. The transcendentals are not contingent upon cultural diversity, religious doctrine, or personal ideologies, but rather serve as the objective characteristics of the nature of man.
26 August 2009
Hope
you know something? I am not backing down.
Not when the odds are immensely stacked against me. Not when there seemingly seems to be no way out of this vicious cycle of intellectual stress and emotional emptiness. Not when what's left of the once influential project RN(T) is now a remnant hope for a future that I cannot fathom beyond tomorrow.
I don't know what is driving me on this war against my academics and my estranged social life. Time after time I fall, weakened, begging for this madness to stop and for a resthaven I may take intellectual and emotional refuge within. Every evening I would come home, exhausted by this onslaught of adversity and wishing I was never here. Every Morning I walk out of the house again with my head up high and hoping this day is better than the previous one.
Is this the strength of faith and hope? Or is it an indication of the potency of human delusion? Then and again, what differentiates hope from wishful thinking? Is it the fact that 'hope' banks on the self belief that the objective better would come one day? Is it the fact that 'faith', instead of an illogical judgement made by guesswork and beliefs, is actually something that transcends the limits of logic? If it is, is it the reason why I am still convicted to go on even if logic is screaming for me to just give up?
Or is it me and my deranged ideas, ultimately?
I don't think I am illogical, even if I may jokingly announce that I am a deranged person from time to time. My ideals- on the Moderation Doctrine, Living Best and the Meaning of life, have been proven to hold even after 9 months. Although they may seem warped and extremistic, they have seen through too much re-affirmations and good sense to be considered merely as wishful thinking. I was not joking when I hypothesized that education was for my self improvement and my future contribution to society, and it was from here the conviction to learn and teach had rooted from. henceforth, if education is for me, and i am for education- and all of these hold true, I cannot hate what I am studying right now.
So not matter how much I may complain and grumble about the unfair onslaught of pain and stress, I can never say that I do not want to study anymore. And no matter how much I just want to drop the idea and move on to a better tomorrow, I cannot just give up my education.
As for my estranged social life, I guess there is litte way out. Project RN was originally aimed for a development in both intellectual and social domains to an idealistic living best; but we would have to know that truth was never meant to be warped to the self. In other words i cannot garuntee an objective better tomorrow just because I say so- and to my personal convictions must be added the re-affirmations of people around me. Indeed, this is the reason why we cannot persuade anybody to conform to our beliefs unless they themselves wish to make a change. Yes- I keep iterating that this world lacks love, but there is little that I can do to change the system. The only way is to continue enacting genuine acts of concern and kindness, to share myself with others, and hope that one day they may be inspired to reciprocate this act and affirm that change from the subjective to the objective.
After all, isn't that the stand that the Church does in this world of vice and hypocracy? the continue forgiving and love our neighbours in hope of their conversion.....
So much I can no insofar- I believe that there is still a better tomorrow, just that there is no one to affirm now so these ideals lay latent. The belief that Education is for me and that I am for education, the belief that the world is meant for diversity via personality and unity via love. And the belief that while these ideals have yet to come there is always a hope and faith, deep within our hearts even at the darkest hour, for a better tomorrow.
I am still hoping; affirm me.
Not when the odds are immensely stacked against me. Not when there seemingly seems to be no way out of this vicious cycle of intellectual stress and emotional emptiness. Not when what's left of the once influential project RN(T) is now a remnant hope for a future that I cannot fathom beyond tomorrow.
I don't know what is driving me on this war against my academics and my estranged social life. Time after time I fall, weakened, begging for this madness to stop and for a resthaven I may take intellectual and emotional refuge within. Every evening I would come home, exhausted by this onslaught of adversity and wishing I was never here. Every Morning I walk out of the house again with my head up high and hoping this day is better than the previous one.
Is this the strength of faith and hope? Or is it an indication of the potency of human delusion? Then and again, what differentiates hope from wishful thinking? Is it the fact that 'hope' banks on the self belief that the objective better would come one day? Is it the fact that 'faith', instead of an illogical judgement made by guesswork and beliefs, is actually something that transcends the limits of logic? If it is, is it the reason why I am still convicted to go on even if logic is screaming for me to just give up?
Or is it me and my deranged ideas, ultimately?
I don't think I am illogical, even if I may jokingly announce that I am a deranged person from time to time. My ideals- on the Moderation Doctrine, Living Best and the Meaning of life, have been proven to hold even after 9 months. Although they may seem warped and extremistic, they have seen through too much re-affirmations and good sense to be considered merely as wishful thinking. I was not joking when I hypothesized that education was for my self improvement and my future contribution to society, and it was from here the conviction to learn and teach had rooted from. henceforth, if education is for me, and i am for education- and all of these hold true, I cannot hate what I am studying right now.
So not matter how much I may complain and grumble about the unfair onslaught of pain and stress, I can never say that I do not want to study anymore. And no matter how much I just want to drop the idea and move on to a better tomorrow, I cannot just give up my education.
As for my estranged social life, I guess there is litte way out. Project RN was originally aimed for a development in both intellectual and social domains to an idealistic living best; but we would have to know that truth was never meant to be warped to the self. In other words i cannot garuntee an objective better tomorrow just because I say so- and to my personal convictions must be added the re-affirmations of people around me. Indeed, this is the reason why we cannot persuade anybody to conform to our beliefs unless they themselves wish to make a change. Yes- I keep iterating that this world lacks love, but there is little that I can do to change the system. The only way is to continue enacting genuine acts of concern and kindness, to share myself with others, and hope that one day they may be inspired to reciprocate this act and affirm that change from the subjective to the objective.
After all, isn't that the stand that the Church does in this world of vice and hypocracy? the continue forgiving and love our neighbours in hope of their conversion.....
So much I can no insofar- I believe that there is still a better tomorrow, just that there is no one to affirm now so these ideals lay latent. The belief that Education is for me and that I am for education, the belief that the world is meant for diversity via personality and unity via love. And the belief that while these ideals have yet to come there is always a hope and faith, deep within our hearts even at the darkest hour, for a better tomorrow.
I am still hoping; affirm me.
25 August 2009
a thought fragment
Why do I want to fight? That is because I believe in a better tomorrow.
Somehow, I don't see it coming.
I am thinking too much....
Somehow, I don't see it coming.
I am thinking too much....
24 August 2009
Sincerity
Note: This is not an emotional post.
This is how i truly feel:
aslkjgjnkla'gvnclalvndsmbl;aeljbnskvlasblajvnamklv;slbjsnvjklnjo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
thanks for listening
=)
This is how i truly feel:
aslkjgjnkla'gvnclalvndsmbl;aeljbnskvlasblajvnamklv;slbjsnvjklnjo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
thanks for listening
=)
23 August 2009
A primary school book beat me by 9 years
I found this excerpt within my primary education cupboard- yes, i repeat: primary six. Below is a re-quotation of one of it's pages:
Who are you? How would you answer that question? Think for a moment. It's not as simple as it seems. You might start by saying your name. You could talk about what you like to do, where you live, or where you go to school. Those bits of information begin to suggest a picture of who you are. An even clearer picture develops if you name groups you belong to and describe your relationships with family members and friends. The only way to answer the question fully is to go ahead and tell your story.
We each have a story to tell, a story that makes each one of us uniquely who we are. Someone else may have the same name you do. If you're a twin, someone may even look very much like you. NO one else, however, has lived your life. No one else has felt your feelings, thought your thoughts, or achieved your accomplishments. The mistakes you've made, the things you imagine, and the dreams you may one day realize- all are part of your story.
Your story is unique, but many people have helped to shape it. People who have loved you and people who have helped you or hurt you are part of your story. As you dig deeper into your past, you discover that "I" becomes "We"....
Evidently, we don't need a contemplative philosopher to figure out the concepts of Diversity and Unity (via personality and love), that concepts such as names and associations can never fully 'tell your story' unless they be you. How much more moderation doctrines do we need before we can realize that the same information is actually quoted from a Primary Catechism Coursebook?
I took 9 years to fully understand this, don't take a lifetime.
Who are you? How would you answer that question? Think for a moment. It's not as simple as it seems. You might start by saying your name. You could talk about what you like to do, where you live, or where you go to school. Those bits of information begin to suggest a picture of who you are. An even clearer picture develops if you name groups you belong to and describe your relationships with family members and friends. The only way to answer the question fully is to go ahead and tell your story.
We each have a story to tell, a story that makes each one of us uniquely who we are. Someone else may have the same name you do. If you're a twin, someone may even look very much like you. NO one else, however, has lived your life. No one else has felt your feelings, thought your thoughts, or achieved your accomplishments. The mistakes you've made, the things you imagine, and the dreams you may one day realize- all are part of your story.
Your story is unique, but many people have helped to shape it. People who have loved you and people who have helped you or hurt you are part of your story. As you dig deeper into your past, you discover that "I" becomes "We"....
Evidently, we don't need a contemplative philosopher to figure out the concepts of Diversity and Unity (via personality and love), that concepts such as names and associations can never fully 'tell your story' unless they be you. How much more moderation doctrines do we need before we can realize that the same information is actually quoted from a Primary Catechism Coursebook?
I took 9 years to fully understand this, don't take a lifetime.
18 August 2009
10 August 2009
7th Age - Onslaught
Fire and Brimestone.
I have to finally admit that I am, for once, out of tricks.
Tomorrow will see to a new onslaught of academics way beyond my grasp. Not in terms of content depth, but more in the sheer breadth and scope.
I see six modules blaring in my face when I enter the Integrated Virtual Learning Environment.
I see numerous notes, far more than the total amount put together in special term, that I would have to sort through the first two lectures of the term.
I see a single person - trying to mantain the optimism, trying to make a stand against all adversity; in an idealistic hope to see the greater beauty beyond this sea of mundanity and pain.
The double major goal, the choice of engineering, that one personal aspiration to bring about the final moderation, and that one onto union...
What if I should fail?
Like I had last time four and the half years ago?
I saw them fall- one after another, into a life of denial.
An escapism from the pain of a sub-reality into a world more warped than before.
Light that burns itself out into darkness. All for that temporal goal of painless denial.
A repressor, an addict, a fool.
Yes, I am harsh today- for I am biased against what I saw.
But there is an equal chance for me to sink within, beneath this sheer weight of prospects, to a form of denial- though different in method, yet similar in essence.
A forfeit of my aspirations.
A mindless wallow in self regret and worthlessness
A delusion of grandeur and nothingness, all in attempt to run away.
Be it in form of games, ford, fun or alcohol.
I cannot back down.
Yes, there is a limit in ourselves, but remember there is also a capability within.
To stand up, to circumvent, and to prevail.
Yes. There is always a way out.
Goodness and Truth admist the greyness of life.
To take it one day at a time, and never to lose sight as before.
For today is the 7th Age- and there will be no more waiting.
No more bumming around waiting for a better tomorrow.
Indeed, remember-
This very day:
Yesterday was a lesson, tomorrow is a challange.
Today, is a re-affirmation.
I have to finally admit that I am, for once, out of tricks.
Tomorrow will see to a new onslaught of academics way beyond my grasp. Not in terms of content depth, but more in the sheer breadth and scope.
I see six modules blaring in my face when I enter the Integrated Virtual Learning Environment.
I see numerous notes, far more than the total amount put together in special term, that I would have to sort through the first two lectures of the term.
I see a single person - trying to mantain the optimism, trying to make a stand against all adversity; in an idealistic hope to see the greater beauty beyond this sea of mundanity and pain.
The double major goal, the choice of engineering, that one personal aspiration to bring about the final moderation, and that one onto union...
What if I should fail?
Like I had last time four and the half years ago?
I saw them fall- one after another, into a life of denial.
An escapism from the pain of a sub-reality into a world more warped than before.
Light that burns itself out into darkness. All for that temporal goal of painless denial.
A repressor, an addict, a fool.
Yes, I am harsh today- for I am biased against what I saw.
But there is an equal chance for me to sink within, beneath this sheer weight of prospects, to a form of denial- though different in method, yet similar in essence.
A forfeit of my aspirations.
A mindless wallow in self regret and worthlessness
A delusion of grandeur and nothingness, all in attempt to run away.
Be it in form of games, ford, fun or alcohol.
I cannot back down.
Yes, there is a limit in ourselves, but remember there is also a capability within.
To stand up, to circumvent, and to prevail.
Yes. There is always a way out.
Goodness and Truth admist the greyness of life.
To take it one day at a time, and never to lose sight as before.
For today is the 7th Age- and there will be no more waiting.
No more bumming around waiting for a better tomorrow.
Indeed, remember-
This very day:
Yesterday was a lesson, tomorrow is a challange.
Today, is a re-affirmation.
08 August 2009
-
The Longing of the human being in his imperfectness for perfectness and completeness. It is the innate desire for immortality.
The question, then, is how it can be possible for conscious experiences to arise out of a lump of gray matter endowed with nothing but electrochemical properties...
Speech can never exactly represent perciptibles, since it is different from them, and perceptibles are apprehended each by the one kind of organ, speech by another. Hence, since the objects of sight cannot be presented to any other organ but sight, and the different sense-organs cannot give their information to one another, similarly speech cannot give any information about perceptibles. Therefore, if anything exists and is comprehended, it is incommunicable
The question, then, is how it can be possible for conscious experiences to arise out of a lump of gray matter endowed with nothing but electrochemical properties...
Speech can never exactly represent perciptibles, since it is different from them, and perceptibles are apprehended each by the one kind of organ, speech by another. Hence, since the objects of sight cannot be presented to any other organ but sight, and the different sense-organs cannot give their information to one another, similarly speech cannot give any information about perceptibles. Therefore, if anything exists and is comprehended, it is incommunicable
04 August 2009
Ghost in the Shell 2: Innocence
Finally watched it. And I have only one word for it: Its unique.
While most normal movies teether on conventional tangible idealistic concepts, this movie, on the other hand, goes to extremes. On one side it focuses extremely on screen dynamics and animation play, yet on the other hand such detailed animation and 'camera' focus is directly linked to a complex soup of pragmatics and philosophical ideals. The only trace of conventionally 'tangible' concepts (i.e. direct semantics) lies within its intrinsic and counter-intuitive plot. And frankly speaking, I had difficulty following it.
This installment seeks neither to bring plot, or fanservice, across to the audience. Somehow, it seems to be bringing across a personal interpretative message; with the concepts of creation and dinstinction, the qualia of life and cognitive delusion; brought in the traditional form cyberpunk through the man-machine conflict (thematically similar to the Matrix). There are many allusions, some of which are rather unfamilar, and some of them impossible to decrypt on the first preview. Of course I will be re-visiting this movie a-soon-er.
I cant rate this movie. This is because it isn't meant to be one in the first place. And I cant rate the quality of the ideas highlighted in this film- these ideas are eternal, encompassing, and universal. This film does not arbitrarily introduce new ideas into the playing field for critique and evaluation, it merely highlights them as part of an existing (ongoing) critique by the director to the theory of knowledge.
Not that I am some hardcore sucker for philo or that I am acting as if I know all about the cheem stuff. I know my mental limits, and I like my mindless animation too. For traits of personality cannot be assumed as faces of personality. I would recommend this movie to all those who aspire idealistic development, as well as to those whom had previously sterotyped animation to frivolous lollicons or mindless banter.
Enough of my idealism. Its time to go back to life.
While most normal movies teether on conventional tangible idealistic concepts, this movie, on the other hand, goes to extremes. On one side it focuses extremely on screen dynamics and animation play, yet on the other hand such detailed animation and 'camera' focus is directly linked to a complex soup of pragmatics and philosophical ideals. The only trace of conventionally 'tangible' concepts (i.e. direct semantics) lies within its intrinsic and counter-intuitive plot. And frankly speaking, I had difficulty following it.
This installment seeks neither to bring plot, or fanservice, across to the audience. Somehow, it seems to be bringing across a personal interpretative message; with the concepts of creation and dinstinction, the qualia of life and cognitive delusion; brought in the traditional form cyberpunk through the man-machine conflict (thematically similar to the Matrix). There are many allusions, some of which are rather unfamilar, and some of them impossible to decrypt on the first preview. Of course I will be re-visiting this movie a-soon-er.
I cant rate this movie. This is because it isn't meant to be one in the first place. And I cant rate the quality of the ideas highlighted in this film- these ideas are eternal, encompassing, and universal. This film does not arbitrarily introduce new ideas into the playing field for critique and evaluation, it merely highlights them as part of an existing (ongoing) critique by the director to the theory of knowledge.
Not that I am some hardcore sucker for philo or that I am acting as if I know all about the cheem stuff. I know my mental limits, and I like my mindless animation too. For traits of personality cannot be assumed as faces of personality. I would recommend this movie to all those who aspire idealistic development, as well as to those whom had previously sterotyped animation to frivolous lollicons or mindless banter.
Enough of my idealism. Its time to go back to life.
03 August 2009
yuioknvb
byhskth opkhjs yuioknvb,
qwyts mwohhd oaddj ti avjfkivn adoiiin nss sknvlbn tyyapknd.
pldsws ghtyy ti bsjdjvbj eibnazx,
nss fiajnkleibng alkase dmmdkdnb volv edgkn;
Ti gklfkn ting adljknvea!
qwyts ti nss...
eibnazx ti nss...
yuioknvb-
(moral of the story: dun try to decrypt.... the free ice-lemon tea is juz not worth it =X)
qwyts mwohhd oaddj ti avjfkivn adoiiin nss sknvlbn tyyapknd.
pldsws ghtyy ti bsjdjvbj eibnazx,
nss fiajnkleibng alkase dmmdkdnb volv edgkn;
Ti gklfkn ting adljknvea!
qwyts ti nss...
eibnazx ti nss...
yuioknvb-
(moral of the story: dun try to decrypt.... the free ice-lemon tea is juz not worth it =X)
02 August 2009
=F
Alright, now the main cohort's joining up. Sweet.
There will be lots of familiar faces again.
All those who had been mooching around and waiting for further instructions while we had been suffering.
All those whom had found jobs, and found them mundane.
Those who would want some tickling in the brains.
Those naive enough to say: I want to study.
Welcome to hell, my fellow good men.
Enjoy your orientations while it last.
Wave the national day flags while you still can.
Enjoy not studying- while you ain't
I'll see you at the gates that next morning.
Welcoming you....
Back to the land of no tomorrow.
Where there will be none but weeping,
and grinding,
of teeth.
and oh yah-
Hello there, my pretty ladies...
Hope the 9 month break did you some good.
While it lasted-
Bwahahahahaha.
All Hail the Hypnotoad
There will be lots of familiar faces again.
All those who had been mooching around and waiting for further instructions while we had been suffering.
All those whom had found jobs, and found them mundane.
Those who would want some tickling in the brains.
Those naive enough to say: I want to study.
Welcome to hell, my fellow good men.
Enjoy your orientations while it last.
Wave the national day flags while you still can.
Enjoy not studying- while you ain't
I'll see you at the gates that next morning.
Welcoming you....
Back to the land of no tomorrow.
Where there will be none but weeping,
and grinding,
of teeth.
and oh yah-
Hello there, my pretty ladies...
Hope the 9 month break did you some good.
While it lasted-
Bwahahahahaha.
All Hail the Hypnotoad
29 July 2009
Introspection
I see some results, I also see transition ahead.
I see the attitudes I had harboured over the past few weeks.
Then I wonder: when did I become a perfectionist?
Indeed, there were certain aspirations to fufil, certain schemas and plans to carry out, and certain expectations to be expected. But I don't remember being compelled to follow them to the point of life and death.
Wasn't studying part of self-improvement? Wasn't it to develop my persona so that I can help others ultimately?
How did the goal of helping others become so compelling that it overwrites the objective goal of self improvement?
When was I compelled to bear the responsibilities of the world on myself?
When was I to hurt myself in the process of benefiting the world?
No- this maniac attitdue has to go.
Remember the first reaffirmation- that object goal, quite unadulterated, just lacking in its ontological respect.
There will come the second reaffirmation. That emotional and experiential affirmation, complementary to the current idealistic/theoratical equilavent, to fully complete this knowledge that I have yet to fully grasp.
Yes, certain results were great, but certain were slightly disappointing. This is all part of life.
Live the life of moderation, and you'll see through them with the greater good prevailing in full light at the end of the day.
I see the attitudes I had harboured over the past few weeks.
Then I wonder: when did I become a perfectionist?
Indeed, there were certain aspirations to fufil, certain schemas and plans to carry out, and certain expectations to be expected. But I don't remember being compelled to follow them to the point of life and death.
Wasn't studying part of self-improvement? Wasn't it to develop my persona so that I can help others ultimately?
How did the goal of helping others become so compelling that it overwrites the objective goal of self improvement?
When was I compelled to bear the responsibilities of the world on myself?
When was I to hurt myself in the process of benefiting the world?
No- this maniac attitdue has to go.
Remember the first reaffirmation- that object goal, quite unadulterated, just lacking in its ontological respect.
There will come the second reaffirmation. That emotional and experiential affirmation, complementary to the current idealistic/theoratical equilavent, to fully complete this knowledge that I have yet to fully grasp.
Yes, certain results were great, but certain were slightly disappointing. This is all part of life.
Live the life of moderation, and you'll see through them with the greater good prevailing in full light at the end of the day.
28 July 2009
The art of bringing the book to the self
Anybody got any great ideas to how to cram 562 words of text into 5 weeks?
I don't, but evidently I have to- Memorise them all in turn, that is.
Whats the chances of success and getting the desired grade?
Whats the chance of ending up with a stress related problems?
Here's an overview:
I am distress. My normal life is impaired, and my well-being is in danger.
I dunno wad this damn knowledge-based-culture is all about, but as far as I am concerned, its warped.
My brain is not supposedly screwed, but my environment is, giving me all the wrong social feedback to screw up my thoughts and feelings. So according to the Diatheses Stress Model, I'm still pretty screwed.
I looked at the Disgnostic and Stat Manual, i see correlations with several of the 17 catagories listed.
The first is pretty straightforward: I have a mood disorder. Thoughts of a Deranged Mind and its introspection may be a cause of rumination. But project RNT has caused periods of 'high' times. The more I look at it, the more I think t's bi-polar than major or dysthymia (that was years ago and another story). Then I smile and say, ''what madness''.
Next on the chopping board is anxiety disorder. Yeap- i'm nuts over this upcoing exam, but i guess I'll be even nuts not to bother about the damn exam. Panic? not really- phobia? Ever heard of biblophobia? OCD obsessive compulsive disorder? More like i'm compelled to study.... PSTD? Mebbe after the exams that would surface.
So, am I schizophernic? Not yet, but not impossible. Hallucinations of books and reading material is surfacing even as I type, and as u know later, i'll demonstrate why. I talk to my books, more than I talk to myself. The cortisol levels are sky high, and if I cant remember chapter 1 (which I really cant) i guess its because my hippocampus is screwed in the stress process.
Dissociate? Maybe- which right minded guy would dissociate 2 weeks of funk for 2 weeks of fu*k? I don't eat right too, mebbe its because I'm a leftie, so I guess i ain't wrong huh? Aneroxic? yes, Nervous? very. Aneroxia Nervosia? sounds wrong.
So lets all go rob the banks man..... aka mug for all your worth. Antisocial huh? Bleagh, u bet.
Then it aint right, there is always a cautionary note about diagnosis huh? No six months (at least), no extensive training (just an intro), no funny busniess. So suck thumb man, after all, its only chapter 10.
Anyway, thx for listening, I just memorised 1 chaprter. LOL to that
I don't, but evidently I have to- Memorise them all in turn, that is.
Whats the chances of success and getting the desired grade?
Whats the chance of ending up with a stress related problems?
Here's an overview:
I am distress. My normal life is impaired, and my well-being is in danger.
I dunno wad this damn knowledge-based-culture is all about, but as far as I am concerned, its warped.
My brain is not supposedly screwed, but my environment is, giving me all the wrong social feedback to screw up my thoughts and feelings. So according to the Diatheses Stress Model, I'm still pretty screwed.
I looked at the Disgnostic and Stat Manual, i see correlations with several of the 17 catagories listed.
The first is pretty straightforward: I have a mood disorder. Thoughts of a Deranged Mind and its introspection may be a cause of rumination. But project RNT has caused periods of 'high' times. The more I look at it, the more I think t's bi-polar than major or dysthymia (that was years ago and another story). Then I smile and say, ''what madness''.
Next on the chopping board is anxiety disorder. Yeap- i'm nuts over this upcoing exam, but i guess I'll be even nuts not to bother about the damn exam. Panic? not really- phobia? Ever heard of biblophobia? OCD obsessive compulsive disorder? More like i'm compelled to study.... PSTD? Mebbe after the exams that would surface.
So, am I schizophernic? Not yet, but not impossible. Hallucinations of books and reading material is surfacing even as I type, and as u know later, i'll demonstrate why. I talk to my books, more than I talk to myself. The cortisol levels are sky high, and if I cant remember chapter 1 (which I really cant) i guess its because my hippocampus is screwed in the stress process.
Dissociate? Maybe- which right minded guy would dissociate 2 weeks of funk for 2 weeks of fu*k? I don't eat right too, mebbe its because I'm a leftie, so I guess i ain't wrong huh? Aneroxic? yes, Nervous? very. Aneroxia Nervosia? sounds wrong.
So lets all go rob the banks man..... aka mug for all your worth. Antisocial huh? Bleagh, u bet.
Then it aint right, there is always a cautionary note about diagnosis huh? No six months (at least), no extensive training (just an intro), no funny busniess. So suck thumb man, after all, its only chapter 10.
Anyway, thx for listening, I just memorised 1 chaprter. LOL to that
19 July 2009
18 July 2009
English crypts in action
Inside the Brightness for Me is a Fading Oblivion.
Light Corruption is Subtle, Slow, and in Small Definitions.
Losing the Mind and Heart is an Objective for Change in the Beginning.
Loving No more is what People Cannot Do as Before.
The Black Future and Past is Forgotten. Presently the Meaning is No.
What Life's Purpose? I am Now Today.
Others, My Affirmation is Needed Now.
Quickly Save and Restart to Find a Soul for Gain.
Help to Love- I'll Help to Love You.
The Comforter is Comforting a Who?
A Comforted Who is the Comforter?
Who is Comforted, Comforter?
Wait, and be Still.
p.s. if there is anyone out there who really understands this....
Light Corruption is Subtle, Slow, and in Small Definitions.
Losing the Mind and Heart is an Objective for Change in the Beginning.
Loving No more is what People Cannot Do as Before.
The Black Future and Past is Forgotten. Presently the Meaning is No.
What Life's Purpose? I am Now Today.
Others, My Affirmation is Needed Now.
Quickly Save and Restart to Find a Soul for Gain.
Help to Love- I'll Help to Love You.
The Comforter is Comforting a Who?
A Comforted Who is the Comforter?
Who is Comforted, Comforter?
Wait, and be Still.
p.s. if there is anyone out there who really understands this....
09 July 2009
Metamorphosis
Many people suffer from a lack of self identification and actualization. Sometimes I wish I was in their place....
Before 7 months ago I was naive and ignorant. I didn't know nuts about myself, except that I was a third rate student that has been scraping past examinations all my life. My social life was in quite a mess (although there were great people whom really helped along the way), I was very much one with my personal world of stories and music, kept looking up upon others and wondering when can I ever match up to their high flying lifestyles. I stuck with the little world that had remained after much transition, and enjoyed myself all the same.
So I wished I had that better life I was always looking up upon. My own was fun, but was never enough. I thought I was the weird one out, and wished for an ordinary one instead. From there came and went project re-affirmation, then the whole world changed.
It started simple- i just wanted the high flying ordinary life: that simple upgrade in status, and a reason more to smile and love. Yet it spun off shortly after when more and more theories came into play. Suddenly, what I had inadverently acquired then during the next few months was one of pure utter reformation beyond description. I wanted a good life where I could be in peace with myself, and yet I suddenly saw that philosophical theory that denotes the objective life that religion and philosophy had been advocating to for millenia.
Do you want the red pill or the blue pill? The red pill brings you further down the rabbit hole, the blue pill brings you back to bed with a splitting headache and a bad dream...
So what have I become? A total psycho, screaming from a social desert a sermon of objectivity and change, stumbling towards a vision of originality and truth that nobody else but myself can see. The same person, still single and weak, this time with a personal burdern of such insight yet incompetance. I see reason beyond reason, and I see the futility of it all. I see entertainment and enjoyment, fleetingly, that humans were bestowed yet abused. I see the world as a system now, this unchanging vision that will not part me till my death, and yet I know I should not freak out my peers and old friends. I see myself changing so radically in personality and thinking, and then I get afraid.
Of course such insight goes beyond the superficial thinking that I am being critical of the world as a system. In truth I know that I have actually transcended such a phase, to a knowledge and appreciation that as much as I have a governing lesion to the world I am too a part of this world. I appreciate my role within this world, the joys and ontological stimulations my individuality brings about. A player and a critic, the fool who said hes wise, and the wise who knows that self praise would ultimately end him up as the fool. I don't daresay I am wise by being capable of the abovementioned. I can't daresay I was the same fool I was anymore.
Would it help if I were to go on this path of madness and utter Moderation? Is there a divine plan that has allowances for me to be as such? Or is ther no fate but what we make? Then and again if I was conferred free will, was my will no more than wishful thinking all along? Then why the uncanny correlation of my newly values and the bible suddenly when I had started out a search for a happy life instead of a search for God? Why then the correlation with philosophy? That one subject that sounds cool and asks the big questions in life and yet accomplishes the littlest of things? What should I do ultimately? I can't possibly stop now, its impossible to unlearn and just drop the whole idea...
They call this the divine plan, the calling, I had asked around for help... some even went on and alluded it to prophecy. I don't think I am worthy of such noble deeds, I was the kid who took a wrong turn off the block and ended in the Mafia's hideout. Yet I cant turn back to my old world and just drop the whole idea. I looked back at those memories familiar to me before- my ignorant actions, wishful thinkings, and superficial emotions. I had enjoyed myself then, no matter how stupid they were, and I regret being unable to go back to those times again.
I look at people I used to be able to talk cock with, I once showed utmost sincerity talking to them, outpouring my full individuality and character (because I knew nothing but cock). I mean I can still talk cock with them, given that my current insight allows me to be both a critic and a participant; but deep within me I know that a coversation of pure cock will no longer illicit my full character as it once did anymore- there is this new part of me, that critical aspect I had learnt over the past 7 months, that I cant possibly share without scaring off anybody (including myself). And a life of just sharing certain parts of yourself with different people, is not something that I would call sincere and to the heart.
Hence me screaming- please accept me for who I am, and not form impressions about me. I hope I have not freaked anybody out yet, and I certainly do not want to freak anybody out, as much as I do not want to freak out myself. As then, I would of course look for that One who could complement my current cognition and identity to the fullest, and in the meantime I would be focusing on higher academics and repaying my society in due time.
This is Jesse speaking from the bottom of his heart, if there is any point in time I had sounded snobbish or self centered, I apologise once again.
*
Damn, sometimes I want to go back to the past, but I know I wouldn't want to. Its getting harder to slip into wishful thinking now that you know what wishful thinking is eh?
Balls....
Arh... what the hell Jesse, why the outplay of emotions?
Then and again- would it be any good if I had put up a facade?
Or puch the blame to society and say the world is stupid?
I can't, I love them...
And yet I love myself....
....
nvm
some like minded bitch will come and tell me what to do in future....
LOL
=)
Before 7 months ago I was naive and ignorant. I didn't know nuts about myself, except that I was a third rate student that has been scraping past examinations all my life. My social life was in quite a mess (although there were great people whom really helped along the way), I was very much one with my personal world of stories and music, kept looking up upon others and wondering when can I ever match up to their high flying lifestyles. I stuck with the little world that had remained after much transition, and enjoyed myself all the same.
So I wished I had that better life I was always looking up upon. My own was fun, but was never enough. I thought I was the weird one out, and wished for an ordinary one instead. From there came and went project re-affirmation, then the whole world changed.
It started simple- i just wanted the high flying ordinary life: that simple upgrade in status, and a reason more to smile and love. Yet it spun off shortly after when more and more theories came into play. Suddenly, what I had inadverently acquired then during the next few months was one of pure utter reformation beyond description. I wanted a good life where I could be in peace with myself, and yet I suddenly saw that philosophical theory that denotes the objective life that religion and philosophy had been advocating to for millenia.
Do you want the red pill or the blue pill? The red pill brings you further down the rabbit hole, the blue pill brings you back to bed with a splitting headache and a bad dream...
So what have I become? A total psycho, screaming from a social desert a sermon of objectivity and change, stumbling towards a vision of originality and truth that nobody else but myself can see. The same person, still single and weak, this time with a personal burdern of such insight yet incompetance. I see reason beyond reason, and I see the futility of it all. I see entertainment and enjoyment, fleetingly, that humans were bestowed yet abused. I see the world as a system now, this unchanging vision that will not part me till my death, and yet I know I should not freak out my peers and old friends. I see myself changing so radically in personality and thinking, and then I get afraid.
Of course such insight goes beyond the superficial thinking that I am being critical of the world as a system. In truth I know that I have actually transcended such a phase, to a knowledge and appreciation that as much as I have a governing lesion to the world I am too a part of this world. I appreciate my role within this world, the joys and ontological stimulations my individuality brings about. A player and a critic, the fool who said hes wise, and the wise who knows that self praise would ultimately end him up as the fool. I don't daresay I am wise by being capable of the abovementioned. I can't daresay I was the same fool I was anymore.
Would it help if I were to go on this path of madness and utter Moderation? Is there a divine plan that has allowances for me to be as such? Or is ther no fate but what we make? Then and again if I was conferred free will, was my will no more than wishful thinking all along? Then why the uncanny correlation of my newly values and the bible suddenly when I had started out a search for a happy life instead of a search for God? Why then the correlation with philosophy? That one subject that sounds cool and asks the big questions in life and yet accomplishes the littlest of things? What should I do ultimately? I can't possibly stop now, its impossible to unlearn and just drop the whole idea...
They call this the divine plan, the calling, I had asked around for help... some even went on and alluded it to prophecy. I don't think I am worthy of such noble deeds, I was the kid who took a wrong turn off the block and ended in the Mafia's hideout. Yet I cant turn back to my old world and just drop the whole idea. I looked back at those memories familiar to me before- my ignorant actions, wishful thinkings, and superficial emotions. I had enjoyed myself then, no matter how stupid they were, and I regret being unable to go back to those times again.
I look at people I used to be able to talk cock with, I once showed utmost sincerity talking to them, outpouring my full individuality and character (because I knew nothing but cock). I mean I can still talk cock with them, given that my current insight allows me to be both a critic and a participant; but deep within me I know that a coversation of pure cock will no longer illicit my full character as it once did anymore- there is this new part of me, that critical aspect I had learnt over the past 7 months, that I cant possibly share without scaring off anybody (including myself). And a life of just sharing certain parts of yourself with different people, is not something that I would call sincere and to the heart.
Hence me screaming- please accept me for who I am, and not form impressions about me. I hope I have not freaked anybody out yet, and I certainly do not want to freak anybody out, as much as I do not want to freak out myself. As then, I would of course look for that One who could complement my current cognition and identity to the fullest, and in the meantime I would be focusing on higher academics and repaying my society in due time.
This is Jesse speaking from the bottom of his heart, if there is any point in time I had sounded snobbish or self centered, I apologise once again.
*
Damn, sometimes I want to go back to the past, but I know I wouldn't want to. Its getting harder to slip into wishful thinking now that you know what wishful thinking is eh?
Balls....
Arh... what the hell Jesse, why the outplay of emotions?
Then and again- would it be any good if I had put up a facade?
Or puch the blame to society and say the world is stupid?
I can't, I love them...
And yet I love myself....
....
nvm
some like minded bitch will come and tell me what to do in future....
LOL
=)
01 July 2009
The ant and the grasshopper (reprise)
Still remember the tale of the hardworking ant and the happy-go-lucky grasshopper? What was the moral of the story then?
Pretty straightforward?
Now let me introduce a new piece of information:
It is noted that grasshoppers are carnivorous and they do eat ants.
Now, what is the moral of the story?
Grasshopper (salivating): Mr Ant, please share some food (of yourselves).
Ants (actually in trouble): No Way, you just played around
Grasshopper (thinking about which one to eat first): Please don't say that...
Ants (Not the situation to be talking): Get out of here.
Can be made into a suspense drama...
Pretty straightforward?
Now let me introduce a new piece of information:
It is noted that grasshoppers are carnivorous and they do eat ants.
Now, what is the moral of the story?
Grasshopper (salivating): Mr Ant, please share some food (of yourselves).
Ants (actually in trouble): No Way, you just played around
Grasshopper (thinking about which one to eat first): Please don't say that...
Ants (Not the situation to be talking): Get out of here.
Can be made into a suspense drama...
30 June 2009
Putting all your eggs in a basket
Okay guys, is it wise to put all your eggs in a single basket? Common sense tells us its not. Now allow me give a hypothetical case scenario- with the analogy of money in a wallet instead.
A: Tadah! Three wallets.
B: Huh?
A: This way I can divide my money in three parts, and if I drop my wallet while walking, the damage is one third!
B: One third huh?
A: One third.
B: But the chance you'll drop your wallet is three times as much, isn't it?
Any great ideas?
A: Tadah! Three wallets.
B: Huh?
A: This way I can divide my money in three parts, and if I drop my wallet while walking, the damage is one third!
B: One third huh?
A: One third.
B: But the chance you'll drop your wallet is three times as much, isn't it?
Any great ideas?
28 June 2009
Some bites
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_in_the_Shell_(philosophy)
Do check this movie out if you guys are free- some parts might sound nostalgic, and some are really out of this world. Although it might not really appeal to the senses, but its really a piece of art, and an epic by itself.
It would also be good to know that the Matrix was actually inspired by this film. As for my project RN(T), well I can only say that this is really a calculated coincidence man, haha.
Do check this movie out if you guys are free- some parts might sound nostalgic, and some are really out of this world. Although it might not really appeal to the senses, but its really a piece of art, and an epic by itself.
It would also be good to know that the Matrix was actually inspired by this film. As for my project RN(T), well I can only say that this is really a calculated coincidence man, haha.
24 June 2009
1) The New Girl
There was a time when we were young,
When we wielded neither knowledge nor belief.
Knowledge, to form our beliefs;
Beliefs, to convict new knowledge.
It was at this point of time we were truly open to change-
To assimilate, to learn, and to live.
Our mothers spoke of one person then.
Though their words and actions may differ.
That one person that had existed way before them,
And yet that same person that will grow and age with us.
Mother then brought us together in time,
Yet she knew it was still incomplete-
She hope we would one day fully understand
And truly be with that person in deed.
Truth was the name of the person Mother showed us;
She was as young as you and me.
She knew little more than what we understood ourselves,
Yet nothing less than what we could be.
Mother told us to be with her now,
And to never push her away;
We never understood those words, but yet we believed,
And that was how Truth first came to stay.
2) The Estranged Girl
As we grew up, Truth grew with us.
She was filled with grace and maturity.
Truth was exactly what Mother had described,
But then we grew corrupted with envy.
Jealousy- why is she always right:
Why can she tell no lie?
We learnt a little logic from her, last I remember,
Then we lived our separate lives.
No one can be correct all the time,
Mother, what you say is subjective.
For my opinions, now different from yours-
Will put an end to your righteousness, eventually.
Thank you for letting me meet Truth before,
I’ve learnt from her the logic of ways.
This logic leads me to my final conclusion that:
Truth’s no more than another bedtime story today.
And so we disdained her for whom she is-
We claimed her to be a fraud.
We tell each other that she didn’t exist,
And hence to other women we sought.
A life without her, it was bloody fun;
That was the true way of life to live
Yet little did we know that even at this point of time
Truth herself was trailing behind closely.
Some of us liked this way of life:
The here and now, so we say.
The practicality of things and emotions evoked within-
So appealing, we don’t want to change our ways.
Yet many felt that even this was incomplete,
There ought to be a reason to explain.
For there is an explanation for everything to be-
There’s a logic for everything today.
3) The Misunderstood Girl
We grew a little more with education,
And we slowly turned back to err.
It dawned upon us that eternal facts and truth
Held a meaning far greater than what the world could offer.
Science indeed seeks out the truth in life logically,
That’s why all true scientific facts can be explained-
Truth is simple and logical, actually;
It’s the stupidity of the world to disdain.
Once again, we seek back for her;
It’s time to correct the errors we made through time.
We have grown up today and matured a little more,
We have experienced the mundanity of life.
Mother was wise in bringing her to us,
We’re sorry for what we had been-
Then we denounce our ways completely today,
And promised never to go back to sin.
Now that we have found Truth once again,
Yet there is a subtle difference in her.
Truth suddenly felt bitter and emotionless,
She was no longer that innocent girl.
There were times she seemed self conflicting-
Other times she showed disdain;
Then perhaps it’s just us to reason half the equation
And logically assume that’s truly her again.
4) The True Girl
Truth had never left us part.
She had been with us since the beginning:
When we were children- believing, within the materialistic,
Charged with emotions, or logically disdaining.
She’s actually a balance in life,
And that was what mother tried to make understand:
That only the integration of all aspects of life,
Can we live our True selves in sacrosanct.
There was a time when we were young,
When we wielded neither knowledge nor belief.
Knowledge, to form our beliefs;
Beliefs, to convict new knowledge.
It was at this point of time we were truly open to change-
To assimilate, to learn, and to live.
Our mothers spoke of one person then.
Though their words and actions may differ.
That one person that had existed way before them,
And yet that same person that will grow and age with us.
Mother then brought us together in time,
Yet she knew it was still incomplete-
She hope we would one day fully understand
And truly be with that person in deed.
Truth was the name of the person Mother showed us;
She was as young as you and me.
She knew little more than what we understood ourselves,
Yet nothing less than what we could be.
Mother told us to be with her now,
And to never push her away;
We never understood those words, but yet we believed,
And that was how Truth first came to stay.
2) The Estranged Girl
As we grew up, Truth grew with us.
She was filled with grace and maturity.
Truth was exactly what Mother had described,
But then we grew corrupted with envy.
Jealousy- why is she always right:
Why can she tell no lie?
We learnt a little logic from her, last I remember,
Then we lived our separate lives.
No one can be correct all the time,
Mother, what you say is subjective.
For my opinions, now different from yours-
Will put an end to your righteousness, eventually.
Thank you for letting me meet Truth before,
I’ve learnt from her the logic of ways.
This logic leads me to my final conclusion that:
Truth’s no more than another bedtime story today.
And so we disdained her for whom she is-
We claimed her to be a fraud.
We tell each other that she didn’t exist,
And hence to other women we sought.
A life without her, it was bloody fun;
That was the true way of life to live
Yet little did we know that even at this point of time
Truth herself was trailing behind closely.
Some of us liked this way of life:
The here and now, so we say.
The practicality of things and emotions evoked within-
So appealing, we don’t want to change our ways.
Yet many felt that even this was incomplete,
There ought to be a reason to explain.
For there is an explanation for everything to be-
There’s a logic for everything today.
3) The Misunderstood Girl
We grew a little more with education,
And we slowly turned back to err.
It dawned upon us that eternal facts and truth
Held a meaning far greater than what the world could offer.
Science indeed seeks out the truth in life logically,
That’s why all true scientific facts can be explained-
Truth is simple and logical, actually;
It’s the stupidity of the world to disdain.
Once again, we seek back for her;
It’s time to correct the errors we made through time.
We have grown up today and matured a little more,
We have experienced the mundanity of life.
Mother was wise in bringing her to us,
We’re sorry for what we had been-
Then we denounce our ways completely today,
And promised never to go back to sin.
Now that we have found Truth once again,
Yet there is a subtle difference in her.
Truth suddenly felt bitter and emotionless,
She was no longer that innocent girl.
There were times she seemed self conflicting-
Other times she showed disdain;
Then perhaps it’s just us to reason half the equation
And logically assume that’s truly her again.
4) The True Girl
Truth had never left us part.
She had been with us since the beginning:
When we were children- believing, within the materialistic,
Charged with emotions, or logically disdaining.
She’s actually a balance in life,
And that was what mother tried to make understand:
That only the integration of all aspects of life,
Can we live our True selves in sacrosanct.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)