It's strange to think how two people at completely opposite ends of a situation view events.
I received an e-mail today from the director of graduate studies at U. of South Carolina. She said they were making their graduate admissions decisions soon and they had not yet received my letters of recommendation. Of course they hadn't received them because Murphy's Law was acting in full force, as it usually does with situations as important as graduate school applications. I promptly replied to her message and said that I sent them with the packet that was mailed directly to the graduate school (as opposed to the Anthropology Department, which received a separate packet) but that I was have my two referees (they're really called that, apparently) send two more.
In my eyes, somebody had fucked up...bad. I considered the absolute worst case scenario: that I had included my SC letters in the William & Mary envelope. Unlikely. I made sure each envelope was perfect and one hundred percent complete. They didn't go in the U. of South Florida envelope because Dr. Simmons discussed his letter in person with the people making the final decision. Second worst case scenario, I misinterpreted the website and sent the letters to The Graduate School when I should have sent them to the Anthropology Department. Unlikely as well. The website clearly states I am to send only my writing sample and letter of intent to the anthro department. I even included a typed note in that packet that explained that I was unable to get copies of the letters mailed to the department, as they had recommended but not required. Least worse case scenario, The Graduate School misplaced them after taking them out of the big envelope, in which case I am relieved of all fault but still have the burden of asking Simmons and McCall for another copy of the letters.
You don't understand until you're in such a situation. I printed my letter of intent for William & Mary at least ten times before sending a copy, but I hadn't made any changes to the actual letter. "Wait, there's a smudge right there, can't send this printout. Shit, the corner of this copy has a slight dog-ear, might as well have a coffee stain on it. Damnit, this copy actually does have a coffee stain! Ah, finally! A perfect copy!"
To the graduate director at South Carolina, I simply need to have two more copies of my letters sent. If anything, her message meant that I was definitely not rejected yet. And it wouldn't take Dr. Simmons and Dr. McCall two seconds to print another copy and mail it. But to me, in my unstable state as a potential graduate student floating between two worlds it's everything. My future lies in the balance here, and everyone must be perfect. Right? The thing that bothers me about the whole situation is that I worry too much, and I know in the back of my mind that it does no good to worry. It doesn't change anything. They don't know that I check my mailbox every afternoon or the online status twice a day. I need to stop thinking about it, because what happens will happen. It's just as if my nerves have been strung at a five-year-old's birthday party and beaten with sticks as if there's candy lodged in my stomach.
Especially in the past few months I've consciously tried to live my life without letting the little things get to me. Graduate school admission is a big thing but the tiny events that lead up to it are insignificant. I have to look at the big picture, not the constituent parts that compose it. I try to do this in every aspect of my life as well. If I hit a bump in the road, I keep going and try not to let it affect me. It does far more harm if I let it get to me than if I just accept any consequences and move on. It's similar to students that get below a 90 on a test and freak out. I've never done that because one grade means nothing in the grand scheme of things. Several bad grades together can kill your course grade and GPA, but alone they are relatively insignificant.
It takes hard work to live like that and keep moving when small things happen. It is easy to be thrown off balance by your potential graduate school telling you they don't have one of the most important parts of your application. There's no logical reason to get thrown off, though. The fact that the South Carolina grad director wrote me means that they want me to send them in again and get it right, and that whose ever fault it is, it wont have an effect on their decision. That's a somewhat comforting thought.
I've started to view life like one of those big pictures that are made up of tiny little pictures. The different colors and shadows of each tiny picture, when viewed from a distance combine to make one large image. Some of my "tiny pictures" are dark, some are bright. But no matter how you look at it, each has shaped who I am now and how others view me and to change any one of them would be to alter my whole being.
Thursday, February 24, 2005
Tuesday, February 22, 2005
Montaigne on Men, Women and the Role of Pleasure in the Good Life
In "On some verses of Virgil", Michel de Montaigne advocates temperate use of pleasure, namely sex, in enjoying life's pleasures. In this essay, Montaigne begins by giving the reader an insight into his personal situation: one that has been ravaged by age and kept alive by memories. He is fully aware of his younger days and suggests that pleasure does not wither away with age like the body does. His goal in life is "to live and enjoy myself" and he tries his best to avoid negativity and that which causes pain or discomfort. The latter, according to Montaigne, necessitates seeking pleasure in life and much of the rest of the essay is focused on courtship and the interactions between men and women. He elaborates on how each functions in situations where pleasure is the goal and stresses the use of moderation so as to not dilute that which makes pleasure pleasurable. Montaigne explains the role of pleasure as one of usefulness, for it can enable us to feel good about others and ourselves if used correctly. One quote that seems to adequately portray Montaigne's view on the role of pleasure in the good life is the conclusion of his essay:
"In bringing these infamous jottings to an end I have loosed a diarrhea of babble, but let me close on a single point: I saw that men and women are made in the same mould when it comes to sex; save for education and custom, there is hardly any difference between them. It is far easier for men to criticize their women than to acquit themselves. As the saying goes: it is the pot calling the kettle black."
In the above quote, Montaigne places men and women on the same level when dealing with sex, pleasure, and its associated feelings and actions. It is important to place Montaigne's work in a social context, and when applied today it takes on a different meaning. I would, however, tend to agree with Montaigne that men and women are essentially the same when it comes to sex and pleasure, for it is culturally generated gender roles that greatly influence perceptions on sex, particularly in the past century. If one is able to look beyond gender roles, we are able to see sex for what it is: a biological mechanism for the reproduction of the human species. It then follows that culturally applied norms and expectations on what men should think about sex versus what women should think form the foundation for the argument that there is an underlying basis for feelings on sex. Prior to the 1960's Cultural Revolution, it was generally expected that a man was the dominant force in the initiation of sex and that the woman was to willingly accept her role as a reproductive medium. She thus lost her individuality as a sexual partner and thus her ability to view sex as a pleasurable experience. Following the 1960's, American society opened up and women became empowered, rejecting the outdated notion that sex to them was strictly reproductive. Women were now able to be open about sexuality as a source of pleasure in life and were no longer tied down by stereotypes. Over the years, sex eventually became synonymous with the ultimate pleasure and a mentality of hedonistic escapism entered popular culture full-force. This way of thinking survives today and we are taught that it is unnatural and even dangerous to suppress the natural desire for sexual pleasure.
This overemphasis on sex in today's culture is notable, for it overshadows many other activities than can potentially contribute to a meaningful or "good" life. That is not to say that I am advocating abstinence in favor of "safer" forms of recreation, but instead that sex is not the only pleasure available to us and too much of it, as Montaigne suggests, can reverse any potential benefits to leading a good life.
"In bringing these infamous jottings to an end I have loosed a diarrhea of babble, but let me close on a single point: I saw that men and women are made in the same mould when it comes to sex; save for education and custom, there is hardly any difference between them. It is far easier for men to criticize their women than to acquit themselves. As the saying goes: it is the pot calling the kettle black."
In the above quote, Montaigne places men and women on the same level when dealing with sex, pleasure, and its associated feelings and actions. It is important to place Montaigne's work in a social context, and when applied today it takes on a different meaning. I would, however, tend to agree with Montaigne that men and women are essentially the same when it comes to sex and pleasure, for it is culturally generated gender roles that greatly influence perceptions on sex, particularly in the past century. If one is able to look beyond gender roles, we are able to see sex for what it is: a biological mechanism for the reproduction of the human species. It then follows that culturally applied norms and expectations on what men should think about sex versus what women should think form the foundation for the argument that there is an underlying basis for feelings on sex. Prior to the 1960's Cultural Revolution, it was generally expected that a man was the dominant force in the initiation of sex and that the woman was to willingly accept her role as a reproductive medium. She thus lost her individuality as a sexual partner and thus her ability to view sex as a pleasurable experience. Following the 1960's, American society opened up and women became empowered, rejecting the outdated notion that sex to them was strictly reproductive. Women were now able to be open about sexuality as a source of pleasure in life and were no longer tied down by stereotypes. Over the years, sex eventually became synonymous with the ultimate pleasure and a mentality of hedonistic escapism entered popular culture full-force. This way of thinking survives today and we are taught that it is unnatural and even dangerous to suppress the natural desire for sexual pleasure.
This overemphasis on sex in today's culture is notable, for it overshadows many other activities than can potentially contribute to a meaningful or "good" life. That is not to say that I am advocating abstinence in favor of "safer" forms of recreation, but instead that sex is not the only pleasure available to us and too much of it, as Montaigne suggests, can reverse any potential benefits to leading a good life.
Sunday, February 20, 2005
Face
Now I know what people are talking about when they refer to leaders having to make "tough choices" and face the crowd. Developments over this past weekend are putting me in such a situation. The new coaches and I have to confront the team again with another set back that will find the season slipping further through our fingers. We are being kept off the water because we don't have a chase boat, something that we desperately need mostly for safety reasons, but for coaching purposes as well. We haven't rowed on the water once this season and our first regatta is on March 19th. Not having enough funding is one thing and a problem that we've had since I've been in the Crew Club. Completely changing our policy for the betterment of the team over the long term is tough, but I'm optimistic people will ultimately understand.
The dilemma I'm faced with is only a perceived one. I found myself this weekend sucking up my pride and taking a "fuck it" attitude. I'm the president of the team and I can't run and hide from what I signed on to do. Even though the team may become vocally frustrated with a decision that I made and take it out on me, what comforts me is knowing that I'm doing what's best for the team in the short term and the long term. I don't want rowers on the water without a safety boat, something we haven't had for 95% of my time on the team. We've been extremely lucky. I've recently been contemplating the legacy I'm going to leave for the team. I want to see the team grow both literally and competitively. What I don't want my legacy to be is a dead rower feeding the fish at the bottom of the Cape Fear River. To achieve the former we as a team cannot take our safety for granted any more.
I find my art of living influencing my leadership. I could easily drop out of the club or blame someone else for this relatively minor setback. I could be a coward and run from the problem so as to avoid the criticism of some people on the team. But this goes against everything I believe and I'm only now realizing that it's hard to live up to that standard that I have set for myself. The one question I asked myself and that I had no trouble answering was "is your pride worth more than the life or safety of a rower?" Of course, the answer is no and I am almost embarrassed that I found myself this weekend culling through the USRowing and UNCW Sports Club waivers of liability trying to justify getting on the water without a chase boat. Just when I thought I was in the clear, my conscious kicked in and I realized that if something did happen on the water, my justification for doing the bare minimum would mean nothing in the eyes of the university and a judge overseeing the lawsuit.
So I don't know what's going to happen tomorrow morning when the coaches and I tell the team yet again that we won't be on the water until we buy or get donated a chase boat. I'm confident it will happen, because 20 rowers who love the sport will do anything to play it.
The dilemma I'm faced with is only a perceived one. I found myself this weekend sucking up my pride and taking a "fuck it" attitude. I'm the president of the team and I can't run and hide from what I signed on to do. Even though the team may become vocally frustrated with a decision that I made and take it out on me, what comforts me is knowing that I'm doing what's best for the team in the short term and the long term. I don't want rowers on the water without a safety boat, something we haven't had for 95% of my time on the team. We've been extremely lucky. I've recently been contemplating the legacy I'm going to leave for the team. I want to see the team grow both literally and competitively. What I don't want my legacy to be is a dead rower feeding the fish at the bottom of the Cape Fear River. To achieve the former we as a team cannot take our safety for granted any more.
I find my art of living influencing my leadership. I could easily drop out of the club or blame someone else for this relatively minor setback. I could be a coward and run from the problem so as to avoid the criticism of some people on the team. But this goes against everything I believe and I'm only now realizing that it's hard to live up to that standard that I have set for myself. The one question I asked myself and that I had no trouble answering was "is your pride worth more than the life or safety of a rower?" Of course, the answer is no and I am almost embarrassed that I found myself this weekend culling through the USRowing and UNCW Sports Club waivers of liability trying to justify getting on the water without a chase boat. Just when I thought I was in the clear, my conscious kicked in and I realized that if something did happen on the water, my justification for doing the bare minimum would mean nothing in the eyes of the university and a judge overseeing the lawsuit.
So I don't know what's going to happen tomorrow morning when the coaches and I tell the team yet again that we won't be on the water until we buy or get donated a chase boat. I'm confident it will happen, because 20 rowers who love the sport will do anything to play it.
Thursday, February 17, 2005
The Stroke
I row one stroke at a time. When I strap my feet in to the ergometer or racing shell, I try to keep this in mind. A race in the sport of rowing consists of a few hundred pulls of the oar, each harder and ultimately more crucial than the previous. I stare at the back of the rower in front of me. I think to myself that he is going through the same pain as I am, but is he truly experiencing it the same way as me? When I push off the foot stretcher and lean on the oar, is the pain that shoots through my quadriceps the same pain that explodes in his? I breathe deep each stroke, trying to maintain some sort of consistency throughout the whole race. If I don't breathe properly, I won't make it out alive. I try to take my mind off the numbing pain of my muscles and concentrate on my breathing. Each breath as steady as I can make it. I try desperately not to gasp for air but instead draw it in to my lungs evenly and quickly. Each stroke I take is history a fraction of a second later and thus no longer is of concern to me except to reference how hard I should pull the next stroke: much, much harder. The water that splashes in my face is incidental and I pretend that it's blood spraying from the animal that I am slowly killing: weakness. It struggles for survival but doesn't stand a chance at the end of the race. It has left me and lost the battle. I have left every ounce of energy on the water and I struggle to sit upright, but now I am allowed to gasp for air like I've never had the pleasure of breathing before. I look at the course in front of me, littered with bloody limbs and guts from that animal I've just slain. My sense of hearing returns and I am no longer listening to only my rapid heartbeat. The dockmaster yells on the bullhorn to bring it in and I snap back to reality, check my hands to make sure it really wasn't blood that I was seeing and silently lean on the oar far more lightly and return to the dock.
Much like rowing, I try to live one "stroke" at a time. Each day must be conquered more forcefully than the previous. If it is not, I risk falling in to an unbreakable cycle of monotony that lacks the excitement of an unknown future. Fortunately, I have not had any major setbacks in my life. I remember my mother telling me my grandmother was in the hospital after suffering a stroke in a grocery store parking lot and probably wasn't going to live much longer. I remember crying for a few minutes. Perhaps this was the first real notion of human mortality that I experienced. I was not sad, however. She was old, and as far as I know led a fulfilling life full of happiness and love. What more could I wish for her? She even got one of her biggest wishes realized: sending my sister and I to college. I eventually accepted the fact that she had passed and my family and I continued living our lives, but I've never forgotten the fact that I owe a part of my university existence to my grandparents. That is why I can't and usually don't let incidental things bother me. Someone in the Crew Club talks about me behind my back because of a leadership decision I made...so what? That's part of leading a group of people. I make a fool of myself in front of an attractive girl by recoiling like a scared box turtle and forgetting what kinds of things to talk about...who cares? I'm lucky in this moment to have a girlfriend that loves me the in the same way that I love her. Everything that's happened to me in the past four years has been either positive or rewarding or incidental.
I take the negatives in my life like I take the pain of rowing.
I beat down one painful stroke at a time, beckoning each future one to take its best shot.
Much like rowing, I try to live one "stroke" at a time. Each day must be conquered more forcefully than the previous. If it is not, I risk falling in to an unbreakable cycle of monotony that lacks the excitement of an unknown future. Fortunately, I have not had any major setbacks in my life. I remember my mother telling me my grandmother was in the hospital after suffering a stroke in a grocery store parking lot and probably wasn't going to live much longer. I remember crying for a few minutes. Perhaps this was the first real notion of human mortality that I experienced. I was not sad, however. She was old, and as far as I know led a fulfilling life full of happiness and love. What more could I wish for her? She even got one of her biggest wishes realized: sending my sister and I to college. I eventually accepted the fact that she had passed and my family and I continued living our lives, but I've never forgotten the fact that I owe a part of my university existence to my grandparents. That is why I can't and usually don't let incidental things bother me. Someone in the Crew Club talks about me behind my back because of a leadership decision I made...so what? That's part of leading a group of people. I make a fool of myself in front of an attractive girl by recoiling like a scared box turtle and forgetting what kinds of things to talk about...who cares? I'm lucky in this moment to have a girlfriend that loves me the in the same way that I love her. Everything that's happened to me in the past four years has been either positive or rewarding or incidental.
I take the negatives in my life like I take the pain of rowing.
I beat down one painful stroke at a time, beckoning each future one to take its best shot.
Tuesday, February 15, 2005
Love
I watched to movie "Love, Actually" last night with Angela after a delicious dinner of linguine shrimp scampi, made with some fresh little guys just hours out of the waters of the Atlantic Ocean. The movie is about, well, love and different situations involving different people in which love is the central theme. The movie was mediocre but the message was amazing. The opening scene is set in an airport and consists of loved ones reuniting after a presumably long separation with a voiceover describing qualities of love and how it is all around us. This opening scene struck a chord with me and I doubt that I'll soon forget it.
Love is all around us, but you wouldn't think it. Sit down and watch the news every night for a week and all you see is murder, hatred, bigotry, war, death, terrorism, politics, bickering, money, greed, despair, and loss. Very few stories are publicized in the media that are centered on love, and those that are are done so consciously for a holiday such as Valentine's Day or Christmas. While there is nothing necessarily wrong with this, for the media is what it is, love just isn't news. That is a wonderful thing. Love is so abundant in the world that it is not newsworthy, it does not shock us when we see people love each other: a husband and wife, mother and son, best friends. It can be said that we have been desensitized to love and all its wonderful consequences and this is proof that there is more love in the world than hatred. Before I watched the movie last night, I did not realize this. We grow up learning that people hate, that war is a reality, and that death is unavoidable. All of these ugly things are burned into our brains until they become a part of us and we no longer see the alternative. Again, turn on the news and all you will see it hatred. We cannot get away from it. Love, on the other hand, is within arm's reach and cannot be reduced to facts and figures (although it has been attempted). Think of it mathematically. Think about how much love you see over the course of a day. A mother kisses her son goodbye and sends him off to school, a husband buys flowers for his wife for no reason, best friends share life philosophies, and lovers lie in bed beside each other wondering why they feel so happy, so alive. Then think about the hatred we read in the papers and see on the television. It is so rare that a murder makes it on the front page. In terms of ratio, love is much more abundant than hate. Therefore, it is easy to conclude that love doesn't have to triumph because it was never behind. What people have to do is realize this and use love to defeat the ugly, both on an international level and personally.
When I think of my art of living, much of it is defined by love, respect, and admiration for those around me. What is the point in wasting energy speaking badly about someone or doing things from which no good could possibly come? When someone speaks badly of me (which I modestly report is quite rare), I dismiss it as that person's issue, not mine. I don't get angry anymore like I used to because I have far more important things to expend my energy on. If someone were to truly wrong me, I will take issue and stand up for myself and defend my character but I will not attack unnecessarily, either verbally or physically. With this in mind, I live from day to day trying to be as pleasant as I can to those around me. If some people are unable to find love themselves, I try to help them by being nice.
Nothing is more satisfying than striving for greatness on a daily basis and a large part of this involves love and respect. Our culture does not "permit" me to admit this without judgement, but I am a far better person than some people I come across if only for the fact that I have a positive outlook about most things in life while they wallow in negativity and pessimism. While some people are beyond hope, I like to think that humanity as a whole hold promise. Hatred will continue to dominate the news because it is rare in comparison to love and love will continue to dominate my art of living because of its infinite uses.
Love is all around us, but you wouldn't think it. Sit down and watch the news every night for a week and all you see is murder, hatred, bigotry, war, death, terrorism, politics, bickering, money, greed, despair, and loss. Very few stories are publicized in the media that are centered on love, and those that are are done so consciously for a holiday such as Valentine's Day or Christmas. While there is nothing necessarily wrong with this, for the media is what it is, love just isn't news. That is a wonderful thing. Love is so abundant in the world that it is not newsworthy, it does not shock us when we see people love each other: a husband and wife, mother and son, best friends. It can be said that we have been desensitized to love and all its wonderful consequences and this is proof that there is more love in the world than hatred. Before I watched the movie last night, I did not realize this. We grow up learning that people hate, that war is a reality, and that death is unavoidable. All of these ugly things are burned into our brains until they become a part of us and we no longer see the alternative. Again, turn on the news and all you will see it hatred. We cannot get away from it. Love, on the other hand, is within arm's reach and cannot be reduced to facts and figures (although it has been attempted). Think of it mathematically. Think about how much love you see over the course of a day. A mother kisses her son goodbye and sends him off to school, a husband buys flowers for his wife for no reason, best friends share life philosophies, and lovers lie in bed beside each other wondering why they feel so happy, so alive. Then think about the hatred we read in the papers and see on the television. It is so rare that a murder makes it on the front page. In terms of ratio, love is much more abundant than hate. Therefore, it is easy to conclude that love doesn't have to triumph because it was never behind. What people have to do is realize this and use love to defeat the ugly, both on an international level and personally.
When I think of my art of living, much of it is defined by love, respect, and admiration for those around me. What is the point in wasting energy speaking badly about someone or doing things from which no good could possibly come? When someone speaks badly of me (which I modestly report is quite rare), I dismiss it as that person's issue, not mine. I don't get angry anymore like I used to because I have far more important things to expend my energy on. If someone were to truly wrong me, I will take issue and stand up for myself and defend my character but I will not attack unnecessarily, either verbally or physically. With this in mind, I live from day to day trying to be as pleasant as I can to those around me. If some people are unable to find love themselves, I try to help them by being nice.
Nothing is more satisfying than striving for greatness on a daily basis and a large part of this involves love and respect. Our culture does not "permit" me to admit this without judgement, but I am a far better person than some people I come across if only for the fact that I have a positive outlook about most things in life while they wallow in negativity and pessimism. While some people are beyond hope, I like to think that humanity as a whole hold promise. Hatred will continue to dominate the news because it is rare in comparison to love and love will continue to dominate my art of living because of its infinite uses.
Saturday, February 12, 2005
Talk is cheap
I've been having trouble coming up with something to write about. I've spoke of death, God, and the frustrations of trying to understand Kierkegaard, among other things. But what else is a major part of my art of living that I haven't spoken of yet? I find myself going back to Epictetus' "The Art of Living" to find a quote as a jumping off point. I come across one that I find myself thinking about almost every day: "Speak with good purpose." This is a concept that I was introduced to about two years ago in my Tibetan Buddhism class with Dr. Wilson. Central to living the Buddhist ideal life is to avoid idle chatter. On the surface it seems like such a simple and incidental piece of advice, but I consciously try to live this way from day to day. When it resurfaced in Epictetus and other Stoic ideals, spanning such an incredible length of time, I figured that it must have value.
Speaking with good purpose or avoiding idle chatter is another way of saying "think before you speak", something we've been told since grade school. It's a universal ideal and one that everyone hears but few live by. I see idle chatter everywhere I go: in the classroom, walking through campus, at crew practices...anywhere large groups of people get together you're going to find them talking about things that don't really matter. I'm not speaking of simple conversation, but instead things like gossip and talk that serves no other purpose than to make the person feel better about him or herself. Especially on the crew team, people love to gossip, speculate about what other people's intentions are, and get upset about things before they even happen. It almost seems as if it's in our nature as living, breathing beings to gossip and draw attention away from us, sometimes resulting in hurt feelings. This is why I try to avoid saying things that really don't serve a purpose.
By doing this I can keep my conscious clean. I don't have to worry about hurting anyone's feelings and I don't run the risk of creating unnecessary stress on others or myself. Think about it...what is the point of gossip anyway? I honestly don't see the purpose of it. Sure, I'm guilty of it from time to time but more often than not, I catch myself before I tell someone what someone else said about him or her. I didn't say it, so what purpose would it serve for me to repeat it? It seems like a sickness to me, that some people actually get off talking negatively about other people, or repeating negative things that one person said about another. Too much bad comes from this and literally no good whatsoever. It's a no-brainer.
So a big part of my art of living and not opening my mouth unless it serves a purpose. I find myself lowering my eyes and shaking my head in despair when I see people purposefully trying to cause trouble for someone else with words. Why? What do you hope to gain by such an action? When we stand back and look at our lives and the lives of those around us we see that idle chatter is an epidemic, which cannot be cured. Think of how much better the world would be if everyone ceased to gossip or spread rumors. Only then could we make some real progress toward eliminating the real problems of the world.
Speaking with good purpose or avoiding idle chatter is another way of saying "think before you speak", something we've been told since grade school. It's a universal ideal and one that everyone hears but few live by. I see idle chatter everywhere I go: in the classroom, walking through campus, at crew practices...anywhere large groups of people get together you're going to find them talking about things that don't really matter. I'm not speaking of simple conversation, but instead things like gossip and talk that serves no other purpose than to make the person feel better about him or herself. Especially on the crew team, people love to gossip, speculate about what other people's intentions are, and get upset about things before they even happen. It almost seems as if it's in our nature as living, breathing beings to gossip and draw attention away from us, sometimes resulting in hurt feelings. This is why I try to avoid saying things that really don't serve a purpose.
By doing this I can keep my conscious clean. I don't have to worry about hurting anyone's feelings and I don't run the risk of creating unnecessary stress on others or myself. Think about it...what is the point of gossip anyway? I honestly don't see the purpose of it. Sure, I'm guilty of it from time to time but more often than not, I catch myself before I tell someone what someone else said about him or her. I didn't say it, so what purpose would it serve for me to repeat it? It seems like a sickness to me, that some people actually get off talking negatively about other people, or repeating negative things that one person said about another. Too much bad comes from this and literally no good whatsoever. It's a no-brainer.
So a big part of my art of living and not opening my mouth unless it serves a purpose. I find myself lowering my eyes and shaking my head in despair when I see people purposefully trying to cause trouble for someone else with words. Why? What do you hope to gain by such an action? When we stand back and look at our lives and the lives of those around us we see that idle chatter is an epidemic, which cannot be cured. Think of how much better the world would be if everyone ceased to gossip or spread rumors. Only then could we make some real progress toward eliminating the real problems of the world.
Thursday, February 10, 2005
moving right along
How about I talk about some light-hearted things for a change? This whole Art of Living thing is starting to drag me down ever so slightly...the class...the journal...the people. I've never taken a philosophy course before in my life. You don't have to ask such tough questions in archaeology. I'll stick to digging up old pottery sherds and medicine bottles as a profession. It's "what's the meaning of life and death?" vs. "what does this stratigraphic sequence of pottery suggest about the social status of those living here?" It's like philosophy is going into a dark cave to seek out the things you don't really want to think about but have to to give meaning to your life. And just when I think that it really, really sucks I tell myself that it's worth it. Philosophical inquiry is worth it.
My art of living is a happy one. Enough about God, existence, and death for a few posts. What drives me each morning to get up out of bed and run full-speed in to the day without hesitation? Maybe it's because each day that passes is one day closer to the next step. I must look at it that way to stay sane. Philosophers have been accused of being morose about life and the future. I am a philosopher...we all are. And while I see the positive and negative, I choose to dwell on the former rather than the later. So, the next step drives me. What else? Interaction with people keeps me going day to day.
I constantly try to surround myself with people that like me, and who I like. Suprisingly, it's not that hard. What's better than waking up and the first thought that passes through your mind as you fumble with the shower dial is "man, does it really get better than this?" I stand there for a moment and let the hot water wash over me at 8:00 in the morning. I have just had an intense workout and I imagine washing away the mistakes and missed opportunities of yesterday. I can almost see them swirl down the drain along with my sweat. And when I step out, I'm a fresh human being, most literally. I really do see each day as a new opportunity to make people happy, make their day a little better. I'm not so conceded as to think that this is my purpose in life, but instead I do it because I want the same done to me. Most of the first part of the day I'm silent...sitting in class, listening to McCall fumble through his lecture on human variation at the most miniscule molecular level or McGowen get overly excited about the freedom philosophy provided the mind. Classes go by, I get a little bit smarter. I start to open up at lunch with Angela, Alisha, and Ashley. Over a box of warm Chic-fil-a nuggets at the Hawk's Nest I make an effort to open up.
As the afternoon goes on I close back up. I value my alone time. They say humans are intensely social creatures but if I had to be social 24 hours a day I would go crazy. During my several hours of alone time in the afternoon I fight of random feelings of guilt about locking myself in my apartment killing time on the internet, downloading music, and watching TV. Convenitently, I have the excuse of this part of my day being homework time, and more often than not it's justified and I do some work.
I've been doing the same thing for years, just in a different order. I love routine, but at the same time I'm scared of it. Again, what drives me is that soon I'll graduate and be doing something radically different. Then I'll find my routine there.
My art of living is in there somewhere, among all the bits of routine that make up my day. I like to learn, I like to learn from people and from books and from people that know alot of what's in books. It makes me a better person. The more I know, the more people I interact with...the better prepared I am to get up in the morning and run full-speed in to the day with hesitation.
My art of living is a happy one. Enough about God, existence, and death for a few posts. What drives me each morning to get up out of bed and run full-speed in to the day without hesitation? Maybe it's because each day that passes is one day closer to the next step. I must look at it that way to stay sane. Philosophers have been accused of being morose about life and the future. I am a philosopher...we all are. And while I see the positive and negative, I choose to dwell on the former rather than the later. So, the next step drives me. What else? Interaction with people keeps me going day to day.
I constantly try to surround myself with people that like me, and who I like. Suprisingly, it's not that hard. What's better than waking up and the first thought that passes through your mind as you fumble with the shower dial is "man, does it really get better than this?" I stand there for a moment and let the hot water wash over me at 8:00 in the morning. I have just had an intense workout and I imagine washing away the mistakes and missed opportunities of yesterday. I can almost see them swirl down the drain along with my sweat. And when I step out, I'm a fresh human being, most literally. I really do see each day as a new opportunity to make people happy, make their day a little better. I'm not so conceded as to think that this is my purpose in life, but instead I do it because I want the same done to me. Most of the first part of the day I'm silent...sitting in class, listening to McCall fumble through his lecture on human variation at the most miniscule molecular level or McGowen get overly excited about the freedom philosophy provided the mind. Classes go by, I get a little bit smarter. I start to open up at lunch with Angela, Alisha, and Ashley. Over a box of warm Chic-fil-a nuggets at the Hawk's Nest I make an effort to open up.
As the afternoon goes on I close back up. I value my alone time. They say humans are intensely social creatures but if I had to be social 24 hours a day I would go crazy. During my several hours of alone time in the afternoon I fight of random feelings of guilt about locking myself in my apartment killing time on the internet, downloading music, and watching TV. Convenitently, I have the excuse of this part of my day being homework time, and more often than not it's justified and I do some work.
I've been doing the same thing for years, just in a different order. I love routine, but at the same time I'm scared of it. Again, what drives me is that soon I'll graduate and be doing something radically different. Then I'll find my routine there.
My art of living is in there somewhere, among all the bits of routine that make up my day. I like to learn, I like to learn from people and from books and from people that know alot of what's in books. It makes me a better person. The more I know, the more people I interact with...the better prepared I am to get up in the morning and run full-speed in to the day with hesitation.
Monday, February 07, 2005
Kierkegaard on the Super Bowl
In leiu of a normal journal entry, I'm going to do my impression of the famous Dutch Existential philosopher Soren Kierkegaard summarizing last night's Super Bowl. I'm doing this to allieviate some of the frustration I'm feeling trying to read his work in my Intro to Philosophy class. Not surprisingly, the following satire could easily be mistaken for an authentic Kierkegaard passage. But I'm not going to give up. I have challenged myself to understand his work and I will succeed. Nothing can stop me. Not even the fact that I'm starting to think that "Kierkegaard" is Dutch for "Monkeys jumping on typewriters to see what comes out."
Football happened last night, not among several interacting but seperate groups of individuals but between the individuals themselves. Indeed, this is the case for much of other such sporting events where the individual is in such a situation that the group as a whole is the preliminary factor for the individual himself (i.e. not the group). The Patriots are called a team (i.e. a football team, i.e. an organization, i.e. that which is not composed of a single individual acting in space and time) but their place on the football field (i.e. field of play) must not be disregarded as the pure interaction between the individual of the team and the individual that is what any rational mind would perceive as a group of individuals acting as such. The first half gone, the observer realizes that the said interaction is holding so only because the often violent contact between the individuals (i.e. not the group as a whole) allows them to score so many points (i.e. touchdown) and thus in turn allow one group of constituient individuals to have more points than the opposing consituient individuals. The observer must not forget that another complete half follows that which is often refered to as halftime (i.e. the period of space/time which is not concered with the playing of football). Anything can happen in such a situation, for in such situation one opposing team can score over the other opposing team. Indeed, what we saw last night was representative of the Patriots realizing the importance of the individual acting as a whole to score points and thus defeating any opposing team (i.e. groups of individuals) that happen to be present on the field (i.e. the field of play) at that time (i.e. during the game).
Football happened last night, not among several interacting but seperate groups of individuals but between the individuals themselves. Indeed, this is the case for much of other such sporting events where the individual is in such a situation that the group as a whole is the preliminary factor for the individual himself (i.e. not the group). The Patriots are called a team (i.e. a football team, i.e. an organization, i.e. that which is not composed of a single individual acting in space and time) but their place on the football field (i.e. field of play) must not be disregarded as the pure interaction between the individual of the team and the individual that is what any rational mind would perceive as a group of individuals acting as such. The first half gone, the observer realizes that the said interaction is holding so only because the often violent contact between the individuals (i.e. not the group as a whole) allows them to score so many points (i.e. touchdown) and thus in turn allow one group of constituient individuals to have more points than the opposing consituient individuals. The observer must not forget that another complete half follows that which is often refered to as halftime (i.e. the period of space/time which is not concered with the playing of football). Anything can happen in such a situation, for in such situation one opposing team can score over the other opposing team. Indeed, what we saw last night was representative of the Patriots realizing the importance of the individual acting as a whole to score points and thus defeating any opposing team (i.e. groups of individuals) that happen to be present on the field (i.e. the field of play) at that time (i.e. during the game).
Saturday, February 05, 2005
I am not afraid to die
Today I finished the second draft of my paper on a quote by Marcus Aurelius:
"Death, like birth, is one of nature's mysteries, the combining of primal elements and dissolving of the same into the same. Nothing about death should shame or upset us, for it is entirely in keeping with our nature as rational animals and with the law governing us."
I chose this quote for a number of reasons. First, death is a surprisingly easy topic to write about. We have all thought about death and virtually every aspect surrounding it. What happens to our bodies when we die? What happens to our soul, if such a thing exists? Is there an afterlife? What will happen to my loved ones if I die? What does it feel like to know you won't exist the next moment? Humans, as cognizent mortal beings, think about their demise perhaps more than any other aspect of their existence. This is not surprising. We all have a purpose in life and to think about the conclusion of this purpose is only natural. Another reason I chose this quote is because it goes against what most people in the United States believe death is. For the majority of Americans, who are religious, death is a "transition" to another sort of pseudo-existence or afterlife. I believe that the notion of an afterlife severely limits a person's potential and aspirations during their existence on earth. If heaven is so much better than earth, why try to make something of yourself here? What is the point of doing everything you can for the betterment of mankind if you believe you're going to heaven anyway? I do not believe in an afterlife, and I fully agree with Aurelius' quote. When we die, our bodily functions and mental processes cease, and we start to decay back into the substance from which we were assembled, "the same into the same."
Some would say this is a rather bleak outlook. At least one person has told me they feel sorry for me. Sorry that I lead such a pitiful and meaningless existence; a life without God or the prospect of residing in His Kindgom. Unlike some feeble-minded Christians, I do not need to believe in a completely arbitrary and invisible concept to live a fulfilling life. I find meaning in what I can experience. I live for my friends, my family, my fellow humans, and myself...nothing more. Many people live for God. If this works for you and you are truly happy, then you and I are no different other than the fact that we live for different things. There are many people who claim to live for God, yet completely go against everything Christianity stands for. They lie and cheat their way through life, leaving a trail of wounded and demoralized humans behind them. Nothing saddens me more about the world then a person who claims to live by a set of standards set forth by a divine being but instead doesn't blink an eye at the suffering of a fellow human being. I am not critical of religious people who find freedom and happiness in their faith. I believe it is a beautiful thing. It is when religion creates a cage for the mind that I criticize.
After writing my paper on Aurelius' quote, I did not walk away a changed man. My whole adult life I've believed that death is nothing more than a chemical process. That is why I am not afraid to die. As I related in my paper, none of us has ever been made nervous by thinking of our condition prior to birth, so it makes no logical sense to be afraid of our condition after death. Both are states of nonexistence.
"Death, like birth, is one of nature's mysteries, the combining of primal elements and dissolving of the same into the same. Nothing about death should shame or upset us, for it is entirely in keeping with our nature as rational animals and with the law governing us."
I chose this quote for a number of reasons. First, death is a surprisingly easy topic to write about. We have all thought about death and virtually every aspect surrounding it. What happens to our bodies when we die? What happens to our soul, if such a thing exists? Is there an afterlife? What will happen to my loved ones if I die? What does it feel like to know you won't exist the next moment? Humans, as cognizent mortal beings, think about their demise perhaps more than any other aspect of their existence. This is not surprising. We all have a purpose in life and to think about the conclusion of this purpose is only natural. Another reason I chose this quote is because it goes against what most people in the United States believe death is. For the majority of Americans, who are religious, death is a "transition" to another sort of pseudo-existence or afterlife. I believe that the notion of an afterlife severely limits a person's potential and aspirations during their existence on earth. If heaven is so much better than earth, why try to make something of yourself here? What is the point of doing everything you can for the betterment of mankind if you believe you're going to heaven anyway? I do not believe in an afterlife, and I fully agree with Aurelius' quote. When we die, our bodily functions and mental processes cease, and we start to decay back into the substance from which we were assembled, "the same into the same."
Some would say this is a rather bleak outlook. At least one person has told me they feel sorry for me. Sorry that I lead such a pitiful and meaningless existence; a life without God or the prospect of residing in His Kindgom. Unlike some feeble-minded Christians, I do not need to believe in a completely arbitrary and invisible concept to live a fulfilling life. I find meaning in what I can experience. I live for my friends, my family, my fellow humans, and myself...nothing more. Many people live for God. If this works for you and you are truly happy, then you and I are no different other than the fact that we live for different things. There are many people who claim to live for God, yet completely go against everything Christianity stands for. They lie and cheat their way through life, leaving a trail of wounded and demoralized humans behind them. Nothing saddens me more about the world then a person who claims to live by a set of standards set forth by a divine being but instead doesn't blink an eye at the suffering of a fellow human being. I am not critical of religious people who find freedom and happiness in their faith. I believe it is a beautiful thing. It is when religion creates a cage for the mind that I criticize.
After writing my paper on Aurelius' quote, I did not walk away a changed man. My whole adult life I've believed that death is nothing more than a chemical process. That is why I am not afraid to die. As I related in my paper, none of us has ever been made nervous by thinking of our condition prior to birth, so it makes no logical sense to be afraid of our condition after death. Both are states of nonexistence.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)