I am really just a boring person. There is nothing absolutely interesting about me. Firstly I make logical arguments of which no one really cares- and I make a fool out of myself without really trying. How then can it be that there is anything interesting about me?
Firstly one, I do not show any interest in women who show interest in me. And secondly, they hate me for the guts and thirdly, they become embroiled in a name-calling match of which I came looking more like Frankenstein than a bored person.
I am not sure which is better, someone making salacious stories about me and making me more interesting than I really am or simply because I just am flattered with all the attention. But I'll stick with the second, I am better with that.
This has got me thinking that why I am really perceived as an extremely bored person: after some serious self-contemplation, I have made up of the following list?
1) I do not talk- it is really hard to be interesting when all I do is to stare into my hand phone and write notes of everything else but not the important things.
2) I visit the same place over and over again- so much so that it seem that my geography is limited to these few places
3) I am really deep down, just a good boy with strong wholesome values and a beacon for everyone. I am really just too damn good that's all.
I am not sure why, even when I don't talk, there are so much laughter around me that I am wondering whether they know what I am writing in my hand phone. And then if so, it doesn't really matter whether I talk or not. They simply just laugh. Hence by this definition, I am not a boring person- regardless of whether I am the source of jokes.
2) I like to think interpretation is more important than novelty. Like the bookstore I visit quite often- they seem to know my life more than I care to remember or can remember. The placement of books is such that I get a new discovery every time I visit the place. The place remains the same, the experience I get is so different. Hence I beg to differ that novelty trumps experience- you just have to know where to look for it.
3) This is extremely debatable. You see a good boy with strong wholesome values can be just as interesting. Like I say, I mind my own business and two I get new experiences every single day, who say, a guy with strong wholesome values is boring- I say screw this stereotype. Apologies, pardon my French [ I absolutely mean it].
Having brought down the particular stereotype, I have nothing but perfect admiration for myself and therefore I like to conclude that I am really the most interesting person in the world- hence whoever that intends to think otherwise- can kiss my ass. [ figuratively speaking of course- I am strong guy with good wholesome values remember.]
Nights.
Enjoy the last day of the year while it still lasts.
Eugene
Monday, December 31, 2012
Sunday, December 30, 2012
High and Low
A disrespect for a personal space and time is symptomatic of a culture which is ineffective in progressing beyond mere possession. In public space, noise travel and everything is within a glance or a earshot. Just because we owned something or allowed to do so, doesn't mean that one has the right to do so. Civilization has progressed such a way that we are able to artfully communicate a message without the need to rouse a disturbance. And in so doing otherwise, norms are not established and it's rules are rudimentary and crude in nature.
In Switzerland, one is barred from flushing the toilet after a certain time for fear of waking up the neighbours. But in many countries, many people are pleased to do whatever they please just because they own a particular piece of property.
There is no manner of high or low culture in this particular respect. This not an appreciation in the difference between Mattise and Renoir, this is a manner doing of how you wish to communicate in a manner that is not unruffling. And it does not take a diplomat to constantly speak in political correct tones- this is just a manner of if you were doing something, would you want to disturb or be told in a certain manner.
It would seem the above would raise the question of the dichotomous nature masculinity and feminist. But tell any politician or successful business person, and they will you that this is an act. A politician with brute force is not one, a business person with sheer weight will only work in almost non-existent monopolistic environment.
An army general with no clue of the skilled art of diplomacy will ruffle the feathers of those in S1 and intelligence department- who will tell you that it is not as simple as sending your tanks over to find out intel about your enemy or procuring for new weapons.
Anybody in this particular aspect whom have no respect for personal property and the possible affliction caused by the frivolous actions seen by one's rather parochial worldview is one whom has not acquire the art being heard without being heard or being seen without being seen. Insofar, that in many aspects, the progress of many culture in spite of much lauded economic success has not kept pace with each other. There is a difference between status and being rich- these are not collapsed together. Any self-made man would tell you this- it is those that have not make it that would tell you otherwise.
In Switzerland, one is barred from flushing the toilet after a certain time for fear of waking up the neighbours. But in many countries, many people are pleased to do whatever they please just because they own a particular piece of property.
There is no manner of high or low culture in this particular respect. This not an appreciation in the difference between Mattise and Renoir, this is a manner doing of how you wish to communicate in a manner that is not unruffling. And it does not take a diplomat to constantly speak in political correct tones- this is just a manner of if you were doing something, would you want to disturb or be told in a certain manner.
It would seem the above would raise the question of the dichotomous nature masculinity and feminist. But tell any politician or successful business person, and they will you that this is an act. A politician with brute force is not one, a business person with sheer weight will only work in almost non-existent monopolistic environment.
An army general with no clue of the skilled art of diplomacy will ruffle the feathers of those in S1 and intelligence department- who will tell you that it is not as simple as sending your tanks over to find out intel about your enemy or procuring for new weapons.
Anybody in this particular aspect whom have no respect for personal property and the possible affliction caused by the frivolous actions seen by one's rather parochial worldview is one whom has not acquire the art being heard without being heard or being seen without being seen. Insofar, that in many aspects, the progress of many culture in spite of much lauded economic success has not kept pace with each other. There is a difference between status and being rich- these are not collapsed together. Any self-made man would tell you this- it is those that have not make it that would tell you otherwise.
Being "social"
There are some whom have confused with "being social" and "sociable". Being social means observing social norms but keeping a distance but "sociable" means the act of being social- or actually doing the act of enjoying mixing around.
Take for example, I socialize around people that I might not like but I have to- for posterity sake- for the appearance of being well-liked and one always stand outside of oneself- always finding ways of fitting in-. Therefore one can be social without being "sociable" in this sense.
One in effect can be sociable without being "social". Social relationship require an awareness of social context and if one senses a negative one- the social and "sociable" one- would have to be dexterous and not committed.
At the supermarket, I was walking through the aisle, a guy zoom past me without really highlighting his presence while heading straight for the counter- this unfortunately is not an Olympiad, and there are no prizes for finishing first. You might show to your friends an extremely quick feet- navigating the crowd- but to everyone else, it is just a nuisance.
I was buying DVDs- let's just say of the bootleg nature- somewhere in the world, I was alone buying and suddenly out of nowhere, a crowd suddenly gathered around me also buying them, and this "stall" has been around for some time already. This is NOT a "social" phenomenon- and no, it does not constitute as "sociable", it might be socially permissible- but it sure is not being in line with "being social" as well. You are doing something that is condone by other's but it is not necessarily "being social" with them.
Having said that, there are some whom enjoy the act of being part of a group participating furiously in an event that is popular and well-attended, that is the nature of being a "social animal". Do not confuse the experience of "being social" with that of actually "am social". You might be enjoying yourself in a public event but the same might not be said of the person beside you.
Have you told a kid off in a playground that you are making too much noise while playing with other kids- the only difference is that you cannot tell another adult that you are making a nuisance of yourself in spite of the "self-delirium".
One might "feel" part of the group- but being "part" of a group is a whole new ball game altogether.
The whole idea of a gang is "being part of group" but would you call them "sociable" or "social". This is rhetorical question I know.
Take for example, I socialize around people that I might not like but I have to- for posterity sake- for the appearance of being well-liked and one always stand outside of oneself- always finding ways of fitting in-. Therefore one can be social without being "sociable" in this sense.
One in effect can be sociable without being "social". Social relationship require an awareness of social context and if one senses a negative one- the social and "sociable" one- would have to be dexterous and not committed.
At the supermarket, I was walking through the aisle, a guy zoom past me without really highlighting his presence while heading straight for the counter- this unfortunately is not an Olympiad, and there are no prizes for finishing first. You might show to your friends an extremely quick feet- navigating the crowd- but to everyone else, it is just a nuisance.
I was buying DVDs- let's just say of the bootleg nature- somewhere in the world, I was alone buying and suddenly out of nowhere, a crowd suddenly gathered around me also buying them, and this "stall" has been around for some time already. This is NOT a "social" phenomenon- and no, it does not constitute as "sociable", it might be socially permissible- but it sure is not being in line with "being social" as well. You are doing something that is condone by other's but it is not necessarily "being social" with them.
Having said that, there are some whom enjoy the act of being part of a group participating furiously in an event that is popular and well-attended, that is the nature of being a "social animal". Do not confuse the experience of "being social" with that of actually "am social". You might be enjoying yourself in a public event but the same might not be said of the person beside you.
Have you told a kid off in a playground that you are making too much noise while playing with other kids- the only difference is that you cannot tell another adult that you are making a nuisance of yourself in spite of the "self-delirium".
One might "feel" part of the group- but being "part" of a group is a whole new ball game altogether.
The whole idea of a gang is "being part of group" but would you call them "sociable" or "social". This is rhetorical question I know.
Saturday, December 22, 2012
Good Bye
The God of wine is Dionysius, and pretending that you are god of wine is not going to make an immortal. If you are brave only because you don't recognize people around you, it doesn't make you brave.
In the moment, doesn't mean that you are not who you are. It means that you are so consume by something you cannot control that you are forget who you are.
It's amorphous nature is fallacious to think that we can keep it under control- you would not know the what you did today will cause a virus tomorrow, death later or stupid conflict and lastly sadness. Do not pretend that you can control what you did just because you cannot endure it.
Do not confuse for what you are with what what you really are- do not for a second think that your rage, anger, jealousy is justified just because there is an opportunity.
There will be repercussions- just not now. You just wait and see
Get Real
Love, hatred when one mixed into the pot is really one potent concoction. It often turns to vengeance, rage, envy and jealousy.
At this current moment, for everyone whom have any of these emotions towards me, I have no idea what to say but why?
What really am I to you that stir these emotions towards me? If these feelings are fleeting, comes and goes- why then harbor these stinging feelings underneath the skin? In reality, it does more harm to yourself than it does to me.
If I so defined you so much, then who are you? Have no one ask this really basic question?
If I can motivate actions- be it benign or malign- who then is control of your life, you or me? In reality, you need me more than than I need you.
You need an igniter quickly, and you desperately search for one but in reality, you have no idea why you are igniting the flame for in the first place.
The only thing that quenches your thirst for these emotions is ironically the only thing that lights you up. The actions do not quench your thirst, you have none to start with but rather what you have is a placid life of which only these fleeting moments of transcendence that allows you to go beyond your "self". You used me only to fire that humdrum life that you've called one.
You feel trapped and am trapped but you used this as compass as a beacon for the pathetic life onlyto realize that all these is ephemeral. You don't hate me, you hate your life and yourself, and how you have turned out eventually.
I do not quench your thirst, I am the blip on the plateau on which one has to remember: I don't owe a fucking thing to you.
Really, I do hope that you get on with your life- no matter how sad and pathetic it is- because think about it, it has absolutely nothing to do with me.
Get a mirror or therapist. Better, get a real life and stay out of my way.
Eugene
Monday, December 10, 2012
Clueless Star
There are some whom want to brag and thrash talk before they have anything to shout about. There are quite a number who really means: "Empty vessel makes the most noise."
There are some whom believed that by looking good means being good. There is a saying that goes: "Face is more important than life." And it is therefore their belief to be popular at all cost.
And in order to maintain their popularity, they will do anything to maintain their face.
It is not that I don't care about face, but quite a number of people think that nobody cannot see their ruse and their act. And they think they are extremely well-liked and maintain a delusional self-image that it is almost cruel to tell them the truth.
Sometimes, it doesn't occur to them that they are well-like and popular among their peers only and anybody outside of this circle just think that they are in outer space. The only reason that they are well-liked by their peers is because they are just like that person. So therefore you would see a bunch like-minded people hanging around gaining confidence in a group when they are really nuisance to everyone around them.
And when a stranger comes up and talk to them, they freeze and they suddenly turns into mush in the most critical period.
And so everyone thinks that I am a star or "special" just because perhaps maybe I am not like them and I am just trying to be different. I am not sure whether one have considered that maybe other's can smell insecurity and desperation from the way one acts and it can really makes another person very uncomfortable just being around that person.
I am not sure whether anyone have considered that I am ignoring that person just so that one will not make a further fool of themselves by attracting a lot of unnecessary attention.
People can and will see what one does and they will react if they don't like what you are doing. Even if I don't react, somebody will, and appreciate my goodwill when you are being nuisance to everyone around you. When I ignore you, I am already helping you. When I making fun of you, I am already making things easy for you to move away.
The air we breath is the same so don't make it anymore difficult it is for yourself and everyone around you. There is no difference in the water that we drink.
If you want to be a star, start with people around you. Not with people, you don't even know.
Take Care
Eugene
There are some whom believed that by looking good means being good. There is a saying that goes: "Face is more important than life." And it is therefore their belief to be popular at all cost.
And in order to maintain their popularity, they will do anything to maintain their face.
It is not that I don't care about face, but quite a number of people think that nobody cannot see their ruse and their act. And they think they are extremely well-liked and maintain a delusional self-image that it is almost cruel to tell them the truth.
Sometimes, it doesn't occur to them that they are well-like and popular among their peers only and anybody outside of this circle just think that they are in outer space. The only reason that they are well-liked by their peers is because they are just like that person. So therefore you would see a bunch like-minded people hanging around gaining confidence in a group when they are really nuisance to everyone around them.
And when a stranger comes up and talk to them, they freeze and they suddenly turns into mush in the most critical period.
And so everyone thinks that I am a star or "special" just because perhaps maybe I am not like them and I am just trying to be different. I am not sure whether one have considered that maybe other's can smell insecurity and desperation from the way one acts and it can really makes another person very uncomfortable just being around that person.
I am not sure whether anyone have considered that I am ignoring that person just so that one will not make a further fool of themselves by attracting a lot of unnecessary attention.
People can and will see what one does and they will react if they don't like what you are doing. Even if I don't react, somebody will, and appreciate my goodwill when you are being nuisance to everyone around you. When I ignore you, I am already helping you. When I making fun of you, I am already making things easy for you to move away.
The air we breath is the same so don't make it anymore difficult it is for yourself and everyone around you. There is no difference in the water that we drink.
If you want to be a star, start with people around you. Not with people, you don't even know.
Take Care
Eugene
Sunday, December 09, 2012
Life
The only thing that will motivate people is the push. People are in itself condemned to be led because they are quite incapable beyond responding to external stimuli.
I have never confessed to know everything but I have never said that I would have to follow if I don't know. These are two different things altogether.
It is for this reason many are condemned to be ignorant. They believe in being a master/slave, they believe in a yes/no, strong/weak, rich/poor. In reality, they lived in a world of black and white more than people believed I am calculative and rational.
If you can't be smart, then you must be stupid. If you can't be successful, then you must be a failure. If you can't be strong than you must be weak. The funniest thing is that when they are in a disadvantaged position, they readily start themselves from behind. Then they move themselves from behind- why do that?
On what basis, do you admit your weaker position?
If you don't even know why, why make other's weaker than yourself? Have you see your own reflection that there is a plane of comparison in the first place. If you better, what do you gain by making other's worse, if you are worst, what do you gain by making other's worse- in both instances nothing.
I have never once said that you should do this and you should do that- it is for the very reason that one thinks you are better than me that I will ask you, why did you ask me to do something? There is no ego, and if you can't give me an explanation or at least show to me- than on what basis would one have to start from a weaker position.
Then there is this question of good/bad and right/wrong. Only the self-righteous accuse the other's of being wrong. The right never said that they are right because they know they would get wrong someday. The funny thing is that they cover one "right" with another "right" until they believe that they are "entitled" to be right.
Nobody has a monopoly on "rightness". If you ever look yourself in the mirror and said something in self-defence, that is not "right" either. Because, you knew it was wrong and yet you did it. You will forever compensate for these internal conflict- nobody did it to you, you did it to yourself.
You cannot get over yourself precisely because you have build a mountain of inconsistencies in one's stance that you poke holes into your own psyche- thinking that building higher walls who prevent an incursion.
Some have said that I do not care for other's- the best part is that I don't even who are these people who said that. And if one have sincere intentions in highlighting the flaws- how come I don't even know are they and what basis did they say so. Are you trying to say everyone who criticize me is altruistic- and if so, the world will be a wonderful place to lived in.
I don't think that I am superior to other's but I really do pity those that continue only to chase my shadows- and it is not because I am afraid of competition, but why are you competing with me? Why do you keep on chasing your own tail when you have better things to do?
I have never liked the number 7, but sometimes people make me laugh and cry at the same time. And to stop myself from getting sad, I make fun of them but sometimes they don't get the joke and they just keep on coming.
I have no idols but I do have favourites. But I don't mixed them up together. Just because it is my favourite, doesn't mean this person can do no wrong or always do the right thing. Just because there are some admirable qualities, doesn't mean that this person is perfect.
If someone do admire me, I am doing this person a favour by distancing myself from him/her. The only way one can improve is question your weakness and not emulate or copy. The more questions being posed, the better one gets. Even if the answer is imperfect, it is almost always better than the last one.
Do not get me wrong that I dislike you or don't care about you, only by removing the idol worship quality, can one ask yourself: what is so good about this person and what should I follow and what should I not follow. That being said, don't hate me.
The more you hate me, the worst it gets for your life- when you can spend your time on more productive things.
What would you do if you were in my shoes- and if you don't enjoy that, then you have serious case of jealousy and not positive self-improvement.
One can't stop other's from doing what they do, but by doing so, you are destroying your own life and not that of other's. I have nothing to do with it, you did it to yourself. It's your life to destroy, not mine.
I have never confessed to know everything but I have never said that I would have to follow if I don't know. These are two different things altogether.
It is for this reason many are condemned to be ignorant. They believe in being a master/slave, they believe in a yes/no, strong/weak, rich/poor. In reality, they lived in a world of black and white more than people believed I am calculative and rational.
If you can't be smart, then you must be stupid. If you can't be successful, then you must be a failure. If you can't be strong than you must be weak. The funniest thing is that when they are in a disadvantaged position, they readily start themselves from behind. Then they move themselves from behind- why do that?
On what basis, do you admit your weaker position?
If you don't even know why, why make other's weaker than yourself? Have you see your own reflection that there is a plane of comparison in the first place. If you better, what do you gain by making other's worse, if you are worst, what do you gain by making other's worse- in both instances nothing.
I have never once said that you should do this and you should do that- it is for the very reason that one thinks you are better than me that I will ask you, why did you ask me to do something? There is no ego, and if you can't give me an explanation or at least show to me- than on what basis would one have to start from a weaker position.
Then there is this question of good/bad and right/wrong. Only the self-righteous accuse the other's of being wrong. The right never said that they are right because they know they would get wrong someday. The funny thing is that they cover one "right" with another "right" until they believe that they are "entitled" to be right.
Nobody has a monopoly on "rightness". If you ever look yourself in the mirror and said something in self-defence, that is not "right" either. Because, you knew it was wrong and yet you did it. You will forever compensate for these internal conflict- nobody did it to you, you did it to yourself.
You cannot get over yourself precisely because you have build a mountain of inconsistencies in one's stance that you poke holes into your own psyche- thinking that building higher walls who prevent an incursion.
Some have said that I do not care for other's- the best part is that I don't even who are these people who said that. And if one have sincere intentions in highlighting the flaws- how come I don't even know are they and what basis did they say so. Are you trying to say everyone who criticize me is altruistic- and if so, the world will be a wonderful place to lived in.
I don't think that I am superior to other's but I really do pity those that continue only to chase my shadows- and it is not because I am afraid of competition, but why are you competing with me? Why do you keep on chasing your own tail when you have better things to do?
I have never liked the number 7, but sometimes people make me laugh and cry at the same time. And to stop myself from getting sad, I make fun of them but sometimes they don't get the joke and they just keep on coming.
I have no idols but I do have favourites. But I don't mixed them up together. Just because it is my favourite, doesn't mean this person can do no wrong or always do the right thing. Just because there are some admirable qualities, doesn't mean that this person is perfect.
If someone do admire me, I am doing this person a favour by distancing myself from him/her. The only way one can improve is question your weakness and not emulate or copy. The more questions being posed, the better one gets. Even if the answer is imperfect, it is almost always better than the last one.
Do not get me wrong that I dislike you or don't care about you, only by removing the idol worship quality, can one ask yourself: what is so good about this person and what should I follow and what should I not follow. That being said, don't hate me.
The more you hate me, the worst it gets for your life- when you can spend your time on more productive things.
What would you do if you were in my shoes- and if you don't enjoy that, then you have serious case of jealousy and not positive self-improvement.
One can't stop other's from doing what they do, but by doing so, you are destroying your own life and not that of other's. I have nothing to do with it, you did it to yourself. It's your life to destroy, not mine.
Wednesday, December 05, 2012
The world's biggest loser
One day, a boy walked up to the mirror and look at himself. Why do I look like this and why am I in this state? He walked out sunken.
So later that day, he walked out trying to cheer himself up and then he found a smaller boy who had fell down on the road. He kicked him in his and laughed at him. And now he felt much better about himself.
When he went to school and he got the final grades for his exam. He failed and he felt even more miserable. He went back and lied to his parents that he had score very high marks just that the teacher had not distributed the papers back yet.
He felt very terrible about he himself and when he stepped out of his house, he saw a little kitten whom was stranded. He poured some oil on the little cat and lit it on fire. He was laughing as the little kitten squeaked in pain.
Lastly, what he did was to walk into his little brother's - whom was doing much better- room and poured glued into his school bag. The brother's school and home work was ruined and he had to start all over again his school work.
One day, he walked past the same mirror again. And he saw the reflection of what he did. The reflection told quite different story. In the reflection, what he did was smashing the reflection on the mirror and did nothing of the sort. What he did was smash all his own reflections and nothing else. Everything else remained intact.
What he did was to smash all the mirrors that has his own image. The people were on the other side of the road.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
In truth, you hate yourself more than you hate other's. The biggest loser is your reflection.
So later that day, he walked out trying to cheer himself up and then he found a smaller boy who had fell down on the road. He kicked him in his and laughed at him. And now he felt much better about himself.
When he went to school and he got the final grades for his exam. He failed and he felt even more miserable. He went back and lied to his parents that he had score very high marks just that the teacher had not distributed the papers back yet.
He felt very terrible about he himself and when he stepped out of his house, he saw a little kitten whom was stranded. He poured some oil on the little cat and lit it on fire. He was laughing as the little kitten squeaked in pain.
Lastly, what he did was to walk into his little brother's - whom was doing much better- room and poured glued into his school bag. The brother's school and home work was ruined and he had to start all over again his school work.
One day, he walked past the same mirror again. And he saw the reflection of what he did. The reflection told quite different story. In the reflection, what he did was smashing the reflection on the mirror and did nothing of the sort. What he did was smash all his own reflections and nothing else. Everything else remained intact.
What he did was to smash all the mirrors that has his own image. The people were on the other side of the road.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
In truth, you hate yourself more than you hate other's. The biggest loser is your reflection.
On fight or flight.
There are some people whom believed that they are entitled to do whatever they want just because there is an opportunity to do so. There are some whom will persevere and protect themselves just to avoid being on the firing line.
Let me just tell you when you stare death at it's face, death will stare back at you. This is not a who blinks first game, there is nothing there, so why would anyone want to blink. It is how you react when nothing stares back at you.
There are no such things as resurrection, there are no such things as revival and there are are definitely no such things as coming back from the dead. You create your own death because you think of it. You creates the death of other's because you are afraid of it. You create it because you want it not because it is the right time. There is no right time.
This is not a matter of willpower, strength, strategy or intelligence or resources- this is a matter of you thinking a siege just so you can justify you can create death in your own head. It is like envisioning your own death when it have not even happen. If I break it down for you now, don't you realise how stupid and preposterous your thinking and mind is now.
The fear gets in your brain, and your brain envision your death and therefore you either run away, defend, or push it away. Everyone grows old, and there are always younger people coming along- why then are so afraid of death when the odds of you dying from lung cancer because of smoking is higher than you actually being struck by lightning or other events you cannot control. Ironically, who chooses to speed up death while being afraid of it [ since tobacco is emotional stabilizer of some sorts].
You worry about being down with all kinds of ailments at 50-70 when the average mortality rate is 83 -86 locally. Either you are really dumb or your mind is playing tricks on you. Either way, I cannot help you because this visualization technique is way stronger than you can imagine. This is your own self-fulfilling prophecy.
What you believe, you act. What you see, you act. What you afraid, you dart. Therefore when you are afraid- which is your very own expiry- how would you react: Fight or flight.
Nobody can create your destiny except those that you believe and if you are so scared of death, very often you are always the first to go. Cowards always lose- one way or another.
Let me just tell you when you stare death at it's face, death will stare back at you. This is not a who blinks first game, there is nothing there, so why would anyone want to blink. It is how you react when nothing stares back at you.
There are no such things as resurrection, there are no such things as revival and there are are definitely no such things as coming back from the dead. You create your own death because you think of it. You creates the death of other's because you are afraid of it. You create it because you want it not because it is the right time. There is no right time.
This is not a matter of willpower, strength, strategy or intelligence or resources- this is a matter of you thinking a siege just so you can justify you can create death in your own head. It is like envisioning your own death when it have not even happen. If I break it down for you now, don't you realise how stupid and preposterous your thinking and mind is now.
The fear gets in your brain, and your brain envision your death and therefore you either run away, defend, or push it away. Everyone grows old, and there are always younger people coming along- why then are so afraid of death when the odds of you dying from lung cancer because of smoking is higher than you actually being struck by lightning or other events you cannot control. Ironically, who chooses to speed up death while being afraid of it [ since tobacco is emotional stabilizer of some sorts].
You worry about being down with all kinds of ailments at 50-70 when the average mortality rate is 83 -86 locally. Either you are really dumb or your mind is playing tricks on you. Either way, I cannot help you because this visualization technique is way stronger than you can imagine. This is your own self-fulfilling prophecy.
What you believe, you act. What you see, you act. What you afraid, you dart. Therefore when you are afraid- which is your very own expiry- how would you react: Fight or flight.
Nobody can create your destiny except those that you believe and if you are so scared of death, very often you are always the first to go. Cowards always lose- one way or another.
Monday, December 03, 2012
Ignorance is bliss
I have spend one entire year trying to understand the actions of other's and their motivations. The only thing that I can tell you is that I was tricked for some time, and I allowed myself to be tricked just so I can find out the extent, the motivations of the actions of other's.
I was a fool for one year just so I can know how people make a fool out of other's. I am happy to report that I was a fool for one year but I am no closer to motivations of other's. Because in reality, they are as clueless as why they even do the things that they do.
They don't know because they are scared and clueless. They want things quick and easy. They believed in form over functions. They are happy while remaining bestially ignorant of themselves. They believe in themselves because they want people to believe in them without even knowing what they believe and know in the first place. They believe that every action leads to some form of reaction but without really knowing why so and how so. Their habits permeate so deep that to unravel them would mean unravelling why there are male and female in the first place.
They want to know without even knowing what is want and know in the first place. They want to buy without knowing how and why it is being made. They put on a brave front without even knowing why in the first place. They want to balance things without even knowing the quantities and the reason in the first place. They want harmony without even knowing the cost. They want to be successful, rich and smart and everything without ever knowing even knowing why. And even if you are, what good would it do for you. What good would it do for you if someone even gave you all these for free. You squander everything away because you don't even know how you get there in the first place.
They want to believe but yet are too lazy to understand why. They want to travel without even knowing what they are searching for. They look without searching. They search without digging. They dig without searching. Ultimately, they go back one very simple rule: they want to survive. And that's when the degeneration begins because you have all but given up.
Everybody don't know. It is fine. If we did, we would live in utopia, but we don't and so deal with it.
Utopia is a dream for a reason. Heaven cannot be seen for a reason. You just don't need to speed it up nor bring it down.
I am the biggest fool to think I can understand it all. I was wrong. I don't need to understand you, you need to understand you. It all starts with you. I am the biggest fool and it all starts with you.
I was a fool for one year just so I can know how people make a fool out of other's. I am happy to report that I was a fool for one year but I am no closer to motivations of other's. Because in reality, they are as clueless as why they even do the things that they do.
They don't know because they are scared and clueless. They want things quick and easy. They believed in form over functions. They are happy while remaining bestially ignorant of themselves. They believe in themselves because they want people to believe in them without even knowing what they believe and know in the first place. They believe that every action leads to some form of reaction but without really knowing why so and how so. Their habits permeate so deep that to unravel them would mean unravelling why there are male and female in the first place.
They want to know without even knowing what is want and know in the first place. They want to buy without knowing how and why it is being made. They put on a brave front without even knowing why in the first place. They want to balance things without even knowing the quantities and the reason in the first place. They want harmony without even knowing the cost. They want to be successful, rich and smart and everything without ever knowing even knowing why. And even if you are, what good would it do for you. What good would it do for you if someone even gave you all these for free. You squander everything away because you don't even know how you get there in the first place.
They want to believe but yet are too lazy to understand why. They want to travel without even knowing what they are searching for. They look without searching. They search without digging. They dig without searching. Ultimately, they go back one very simple rule: they want to survive. And that's when the degeneration begins because you have all but given up.
Everybody don't know. It is fine. If we did, we would live in utopia, but we don't and so deal with it.
Utopia is a dream for a reason. Heaven cannot be seen for a reason. You just don't need to speed it up nor bring it down.
I am the biggest fool to think I can understand it all. I was wrong. I don't need to understand you, you need to understand you. It all starts with you. I am the biggest fool and it all starts with you.
Sunday, December 02, 2012
The world's biggest loser
Have you looked another person in the eye and asked yourself "why is this person so different from me?" why since I find this person particularly irksome, why do we still want to bother about this person.
Have you looked yourself in the mirror and asked yourself, what makes you any less irksome than this person? And when you pray to your god, ancestors or something beyond yourself- what do you pray for- for more money, for more promotion or did you sincerely believed that having more money will make your family happier? And put yourself in god's shoes- aren't you anymore irksome than a person asking for a handout? On what right, do you have to ask for things?
There are some whom particularly in their prayers wants to get rid of people or things for their convenience but what's makes you think that the god you are talking to, doesn't want to get rid of you for this particular request? Piety, loyalty and integrity doesn't beget kindness in real life and makes you think that this would be given to you just because you asked for it without demonstrating any of these qualities.
If you are incapable of getting what you want, what makes you think that any other person can do any better than you. And if so, why condemn a loser when you are "loser" yourself- just because you didn't know about it. Hiding a sour face behind a brave front would makes an even bigger loser for a distinct lack of ability to faced up to reality- and if so, what makes you think any supernatural being would help you. If a human could tell piety from flattery, what makes you think that any "supernatural" being is incapable of seeing that.
An 'otherworldly" deliverance only gives you a "after-life" guarantee but it doesn't mean that the experience will be that good. It's a clarion call, not unqualified guarantee. When someone tells you that it is certified 100% healthy, it doesn't mean that after drinking it will make you into a man of steel. Being healthy is quite different from being strong.
When someone tells you that lowest price guarantee, did you really believed that every item is the lowest price and if so, why do you readily believed that, no commitment will give you a committed guarantee for something so important. Someone must have screwed your head or you only get part of the story- only listen the parts that you like.
Therefore, look yourself in mirror: asked yourself whether are you irksome? And if let's say you were to face your maker or anyone whom you revered, can you say that I am good and therefore I should be rewarded or do you say that I visit you everyday so I must be rewarded. This is one and two different things.
Who is the biggest "loser"?
Face yourself in the mirror and ask yourself: are you irksome- and if you feel ashamed, there is still a shred of hope for you.
Have you looked yourself in the mirror and asked yourself, what makes you any less irksome than this person? And when you pray to your god, ancestors or something beyond yourself- what do you pray for- for more money, for more promotion or did you sincerely believed that having more money will make your family happier? And put yourself in god's shoes- aren't you anymore irksome than a person asking for a handout? On what right, do you have to ask for things?
There are some whom particularly in their prayers wants to get rid of people or things for their convenience but what's makes you think that the god you are talking to, doesn't want to get rid of you for this particular request? Piety, loyalty and integrity doesn't beget kindness in real life and makes you think that this would be given to you just because you asked for it without demonstrating any of these qualities.
If you are incapable of getting what you want, what makes you think that any other person can do any better than you. And if so, why condemn a loser when you are "loser" yourself- just because you didn't know about it. Hiding a sour face behind a brave front would makes an even bigger loser for a distinct lack of ability to faced up to reality- and if so, what makes you think any supernatural being would help you. If a human could tell piety from flattery, what makes you think that any "supernatural" being is incapable of seeing that.
An 'otherworldly" deliverance only gives you a "after-life" guarantee but it doesn't mean that the experience will be that good. It's a clarion call, not unqualified guarantee. When someone tells you that it is certified 100% healthy, it doesn't mean that after drinking it will make you into a man of steel. Being healthy is quite different from being strong.
When someone tells you that lowest price guarantee, did you really believed that every item is the lowest price and if so, why do you readily believed that, no commitment will give you a committed guarantee for something so important. Someone must have screwed your head or you only get part of the story- only listen the parts that you like.
Therefore, look yourself in mirror: asked yourself whether are you irksome? And if let's say you were to face your maker or anyone whom you revered, can you say that I am good and therefore I should be rewarded or do you say that I visit you everyday so I must be rewarded. This is one and two different things.
Who is the biggest "loser"?
Face yourself in the mirror and ask yourself: are you irksome- and if you feel ashamed, there is still a shred of hope for you.
Friday, November 30, 2012
The farmer, the cows, the sheeps, cowboys and the dogs
There was a farm where all the animals lived in bliss. Basically there were only 2 types of animals and the farmers which control them. One is the crowned dogs which listen to the command of the farmers and then there were the sheep. The dog had an occasional mutton to eat and the farmer had milk and sold the sheep to the nearby market for money.
Everyone was relatively happy. Insofar that the farmer had a source of income, the dog had what it needed and the sheep was living in blissful ignorance with all the grass to eat.
But the farmer decided to expand it's repertoire of farm animals and introduced cows in as well- the cows were extremely useful- they could be milked, they could be sold for meat or be used to till the ground. But they needed more manpower and horses as well to round them up. Hence the lead farmer introduced the a second farmer well-versed in cow rearing to hire cowboys and buy horses to manage the cow herd.
Now the farm was getting a little crowded. The sheep whom have had all the meadows to themselves now had to contend with a smaller but bigger group of cows for the grass. But both are relatively domesticated animals and hence did not caused much trouble for the farmers. The only thing they ever did, was to kick the crowned dogs- hence injuring some of those handsome dogs. The cows were more than happy as they were bigger and could moved around to eat around the fields whom are relatively untouched as the sheep had a much smaller appetite. Moreover, they had come from downstream and hence the grass taste a little better due to the water. They didn't caused much trouble for the cowboys or horses. They knew a good grass from a bad one that is.
And now at the farmer's house, the two lead farmers had decided to bring their family together to lived together on a bigger premises so they could watch over the farm. Hence in time to come, the son and daughters eventually did get married to each other and making the farm house ever closer.
The cowboys and the crowned dogs began to get a little restless. As their simple way of life became even more complicated. The dogs lost the attention of their owners somewhat and had to work harder to the increased population of navigation. The cowboys on the other had wanted to be closer to the family but often relegated to the nearby town bar or street diner. And having work so hard while, the farmer's son married the daughter and became part owner of the farm at about the same age. They didn't feel that it was fair. From time to time, they would plunged a hole in the young man's car tyres but overall, they kept to their jobs. But their boisterousness was getting louder but the two lead farmers kept them in check as they knew their parents from the nearby church.
As the two farmers got closer, they decided to try to introduce both set of animals rather than keep them separated. They wanted to put them together as they had a vision of running farm where the animals ran a factory via them their energy. In other words, they wanted them to work together to produce goods for the town. And in such a environment, they would have to be kept in close proximity together hence they wanted to blood them in, so that they can run on the treadmills to power the factory.
While in the meadows with the barriers up, the bigger male cows were attracted by the pheromones emitted by the female sheep and would try to proposition them as they would with their own kind. The smaller but much larger male sheep population- sensing a testosterone came together and prevented the bigger cows from even coming a whisker of the female sheep. And in time to come, they even grew horns to fend off the attack. Such an occurrence did not ever happen before the introduction as they are largely similar.
The closer they get, the fiercer the territorial dispute. And they both sets spend more time posturing than eating the grass to produce better fur or stronger muscles to work the fields. In fact, the bigger bulls began to grow different form of spots to attract the sheep, while the smaller sheep to compensate for their smaller size grew ever larger horns. The dogs were disheartened and the cowboys decided to let loose to let the farmers know their worth and said nothing about the developments. They allow the tension to grow without allowing for any lost sheep or cow. The farmers knew none the better about the tension. All they see from afar was cows and sheep grazing on the fields and the dogs and cowboys were there to take care of things.
Meanwhile as they were preparing the blueprint of the new factory, one of the cows who were stepping too close to another sheep- and from the blind spot it appears that the cow was inside the safe distance from each other was chased and fell into the river. The cow drowned but the cowboy told the farmers that it was near evening hence the cow might not be able to see the water.
But seeing this development, the farmer felt something amiss and decided to blood the two animals together by way of carrot and stick and incentives. They decided to put each of their favourite foods around the opposite ends herd. And in order to earn the reward each animal must exchanged it for their fur and this can only be done by going through the opposite herd. The cow on other had would have to exchange for their favourite food by carrying milk for the sheep to drink while going through the herd. Both set of animals complied unerringly as the sight of their favourite food appears to be too big an incentive to miss.
But once the task was done, they went largely back to their own herd and barn to rest hardly ever communicating with the other side.
Meanwhile, while walking through the herd, one of the female sheep was attracted by the musk of one male cows and walked over instead. The rest of the sheep- even the male ones said or did nothing- because they did not want to jeopardized their turn as the farmers were watching. And soon more of these occurrences begin to happen so much so that the female cows also began to show affection towards the ever growing presence of the male sheep. The same happened for the male cows who did nothing as both sides were doing the same thing anyway and they did not want to get into the farmer's bad books.
And even in so doing, these occurrences only happened during this period, and they largely stayed in each other quarter's after this daily exercise. As they need to work together in the long run, they need to do more than that.
Hence the farmer decided to do something radical. They decided to an hybrid animal. An animal where everyone must and should adhere to. They decided to fatten the sheep and starved the cows and dyed their fur to the same colour of the cows. In this case, the cows and sheep looked almost similar. Hence, in time to come the cow grew smaller and almost looked like an enlarged sheep while, the sheep grew fatter and larger and had artificially coloured fur. But the animals know the cows from the cows and the sheep from the sheep even though from time to time they to be more comfortable in each other presence. Some even to stay at each other's quarters and there wasn't even a need for any incentive.
And soon the bahmoo population- the new animal's name- were called began to grew so large such the sheep left the cows more food to eat and the cows cleaned the dyes off the sheep. They began to asked themselves: why should they made to feel or do something that they are not. One day, one of the female sheep stole a white flag and took the dye from it's fur and created a symbol: a bahmoo symbol.
In the dead of the night, all the animals charged at the farmhouse and destroyed everything. The cowboys and dogs did nothing as they felt neglected and disgruntled that things changed so much.
The farm was destroyed, the farmers were gone. The cowboys left as there was no work and the dogs went to a farm downstream. The bahmoos were triumphant.
But now with no one to water the grass and ensure it's fertility. They grazed as if there was no tomorrow and soon the entire fields have run barren. They now turned to each other- blaming each other for chasing the farmers away and having nothing to eat. And since they had such a close relationship, suddenly the old wounds begin to resurface, where the territorial rights begin to assert itself. What was ok, suddenly was bad as they had nothing better to do. They began to fight and with no cowboys and farmers to watched over them, casualties mounted. And everything was back to square one.
A new batch of owners, now with guns and trucks came in and round them up. And the cycle starts all over again.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you are unprepared for consequence, don't even try it. If you want to play god, don't even try it.
Everyone was relatively happy. Insofar that the farmer had a source of income, the dog had what it needed and the sheep was living in blissful ignorance with all the grass to eat.
But the farmer decided to expand it's repertoire of farm animals and introduced cows in as well- the cows were extremely useful- they could be milked, they could be sold for meat or be used to till the ground. But they needed more manpower and horses as well to round them up. Hence the lead farmer introduced the a second farmer well-versed in cow rearing to hire cowboys and buy horses to manage the cow herd.
Now the farm was getting a little crowded. The sheep whom have had all the meadows to themselves now had to contend with a smaller but bigger group of cows for the grass. But both are relatively domesticated animals and hence did not caused much trouble for the farmers. The only thing they ever did, was to kick the crowned dogs- hence injuring some of those handsome dogs. The cows were more than happy as they were bigger and could moved around to eat around the fields whom are relatively untouched as the sheep had a much smaller appetite. Moreover, they had come from downstream and hence the grass taste a little better due to the water. They didn't caused much trouble for the cowboys or horses. They knew a good grass from a bad one that is.
And now at the farmer's house, the two lead farmers had decided to bring their family together to lived together on a bigger premises so they could watch over the farm. Hence in time to come, the son and daughters eventually did get married to each other and making the farm house ever closer.
The cowboys and the crowned dogs began to get a little restless. As their simple way of life became even more complicated. The dogs lost the attention of their owners somewhat and had to work harder to the increased population of navigation. The cowboys on the other had wanted to be closer to the family but often relegated to the nearby town bar or street diner. And having work so hard while, the farmer's son married the daughter and became part owner of the farm at about the same age. They didn't feel that it was fair. From time to time, they would plunged a hole in the young man's car tyres but overall, they kept to their jobs. But their boisterousness was getting louder but the two lead farmers kept them in check as they knew their parents from the nearby church.
As the two farmers got closer, they decided to try to introduce both set of animals rather than keep them separated. They wanted to put them together as they had a vision of running farm where the animals ran a factory via them their energy. In other words, they wanted them to work together to produce goods for the town. And in such a environment, they would have to be kept in close proximity together hence they wanted to blood them in, so that they can run on the treadmills to power the factory.
While in the meadows with the barriers up, the bigger male cows were attracted by the pheromones emitted by the female sheep and would try to proposition them as they would with their own kind. The smaller but much larger male sheep population- sensing a testosterone came together and prevented the bigger cows from even coming a whisker of the female sheep. And in time to come, they even grew horns to fend off the attack. Such an occurrence did not ever happen before the introduction as they are largely similar.
The closer they get, the fiercer the territorial dispute. And they both sets spend more time posturing than eating the grass to produce better fur or stronger muscles to work the fields. In fact, the bigger bulls began to grow different form of spots to attract the sheep, while the smaller sheep to compensate for their smaller size grew ever larger horns. The dogs were disheartened and the cowboys decided to let loose to let the farmers know their worth and said nothing about the developments. They allow the tension to grow without allowing for any lost sheep or cow. The farmers knew none the better about the tension. All they see from afar was cows and sheep grazing on the fields and the dogs and cowboys were there to take care of things.
Meanwhile as they were preparing the blueprint of the new factory, one of the cows who were stepping too close to another sheep- and from the blind spot it appears that the cow was inside the safe distance from each other was chased and fell into the river. The cow drowned but the cowboy told the farmers that it was near evening hence the cow might not be able to see the water.
But seeing this development, the farmer felt something amiss and decided to blood the two animals together by way of carrot and stick and incentives. They decided to put each of their favourite foods around the opposite ends herd. And in order to earn the reward each animal must exchanged it for their fur and this can only be done by going through the opposite herd. The cow on other had would have to exchange for their favourite food by carrying milk for the sheep to drink while going through the herd. Both set of animals complied unerringly as the sight of their favourite food appears to be too big an incentive to miss.
But once the task was done, they went largely back to their own herd and barn to rest hardly ever communicating with the other side.
Meanwhile, while walking through the herd, one of the female sheep was attracted by the musk of one male cows and walked over instead. The rest of the sheep- even the male ones said or did nothing- because they did not want to jeopardized their turn as the farmers were watching. And soon more of these occurrences begin to happen so much so that the female cows also began to show affection towards the ever growing presence of the male sheep. The same happened for the male cows who did nothing as both sides were doing the same thing anyway and they did not want to get into the farmer's bad books.
And even in so doing, these occurrences only happened during this period, and they largely stayed in each other quarter's after this daily exercise. As they need to work together in the long run, they need to do more than that.
Hence the farmer decided to do something radical. They decided to an hybrid animal. An animal where everyone must and should adhere to. They decided to fatten the sheep and starved the cows and dyed their fur to the same colour of the cows. In this case, the cows and sheep looked almost similar. Hence, in time to come the cow grew smaller and almost looked like an enlarged sheep while, the sheep grew fatter and larger and had artificially coloured fur. But the animals know the cows from the cows and the sheep from the sheep even though from time to time they to be more comfortable in each other presence. Some even to stay at each other's quarters and there wasn't even a need for any incentive.
And soon the bahmoo population- the new animal's name- were called began to grew so large such the sheep left the cows more food to eat and the cows cleaned the dyes off the sheep. They began to asked themselves: why should they made to feel or do something that they are not. One day, one of the female sheep stole a white flag and took the dye from it's fur and created a symbol: a bahmoo symbol.
In the dead of the night, all the animals charged at the farmhouse and destroyed everything. The cowboys and dogs did nothing as they felt neglected and disgruntled that things changed so much.
The farm was destroyed, the farmers were gone. The cowboys left as there was no work and the dogs went to a farm downstream. The bahmoos were triumphant.
But now with no one to water the grass and ensure it's fertility. They grazed as if there was no tomorrow and soon the entire fields have run barren. They now turned to each other- blaming each other for chasing the farmers away and having nothing to eat. And since they had such a close relationship, suddenly the old wounds begin to resurface, where the territorial rights begin to assert itself. What was ok, suddenly was bad as they had nothing better to do. They began to fight and with no cowboys and farmers to watched over them, casualties mounted. And everything was back to square one.
A new batch of owners, now with guns and trucks came in and round them up. And the cycle starts all over again.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you are unprepared for consequence, don't even try it. If you want to play god, don't even try it.
Wednesday, November 28, 2012
On life
Shopping malls and cinemas exist only because lush fields with sweeping meadows doesn't. Cheap flights exist only because internet exist. A hypermarket exist because we don't we grow our own food.
We keep animals as pets because we have no use for them. We buy expensive clothes to wear to office because comfort is not the most important criteria.
We are relieve from these not by choice but by circumstances.
Paint a scenario where life is computer game and you could always restart all over again when you"die". Would you live the life that you are living now?
When if you are not living the life that you want to life, why are you still sticking with it? Are you afraid- what are you afraid of? How likely is that going happen- and what if I tell, you can always press the "restart" at any point in time, would you do what you want to do?
So why do you visit the shopping malls so often when it is always the same old brands- just in another location? Why do you travel so often if you are genuinely happy- because you can. Why do it- just because you can? But, can doesn't mean you should or you must- hence why do it, when you visit the same old stores all the time? If life is computer game, would you be visiting the malls all the time in your "sim-city"? Then why are you doing it?
What are you afraid of really- living?
And if one day, someone open up your heart and ask you- what does it contain: how would you answer? And if your life is a computer game with a "restart" button anytime: would your heart be different from reality? And if I tell you that this computer game is going to dictate your life forever after playing your game: how would you play your game- would you regret doing what you did?
And now I tell you, you cannot play the game anymore: you have made your choice and this is what you have chosen- how then would you live your life: forever pining for the playing the computer game or you just moved on; or do you play life's real games.
Life is a computer game and a life and death game at the same time: you play and then lived by it. You have a choice or you don't at all. Your choice.
We keep animals as pets because we have no use for them. We buy expensive clothes to wear to office because comfort is not the most important criteria.
We are relieve from these not by choice but by circumstances.
Paint a scenario where life is computer game and you could always restart all over again when you"die". Would you live the life that you are living now?
When if you are not living the life that you want to life, why are you still sticking with it? Are you afraid- what are you afraid of? How likely is that going happen- and what if I tell, you can always press the "restart" at any point in time, would you do what you want to do?
So why do you visit the shopping malls so often when it is always the same old brands- just in another location? Why do you travel so often if you are genuinely happy- because you can. Why do it- just because you can? But, can doesn't mean you should or you must- hence why do it, when you visit the same old stores all the time? If life is computer game, would you be visiting the malls all the time in your "sim-city"? Then why are you doing it?
What are you afraid of really- living?
And if one day, someone open up your heart and ask you- what does it contain: how would you answer? And if your life is a computer game with a "restart" button anytime: would your heart be different from reality? And if I tell you that this computer game is going to dictate your life forever after playing your game: how would you play your game- would you regret doing what you did?
And now I tell you, you cannot play the game anymore: you have made your choice and this is what you have chosen- how then would you live your life: forever pining for the playing the computer game or you just moved on; or do you play life's real games.
Life is a computer game and a life and death game at the same time: you play and then lived by it. You have a choice or you don't at all. Your choice.
On Life
There was a puppet master whose only dream was to create a puppet as life-like as possible. Hence he studied the movements of real persons and tried to mimic the actions to make it as realistic as possible. At the same time, he made puppets of his own and attempted to make them to it's own vision but to make the audience feel that performance resonates with them.
And in time to come, his audience was taken by the performance and how vivid his performances were. His dedication to his craft meant that he wanted it to make as "real" as possible hence he decided to input artificial intelligence into his puppets. Hence he could more and make his performance more colourful with more characters and making even more realistic to actual life.
The advancement in technology meant that the AI only got better so much to the point that he could do nothing and the puppets would act by themselves- all it needed was a general guidelines, statements and scenarios.
And beknown to him was the advancement of the microchips of the artificial intelligence of which it included an ability to seek his own best interest. And in the process, the puppet master was bringing in more audience while bringing in more characters and making the performance even more vivid.
The audience was stunned by the life-like nature of the performance but soon, the puppets begin to talk even among themselves and could switch on it's battery even without human intervention. At this current moment, there were 50 puppets now acting concurrently with each other in a play: all they needed was a script.
But the puppets now could seek it's own best interest and began to doubt why they should be kept in the cupboard and only be allowed to perform when it was asked to. And soon, in a play meant to portray the values of community life- it began to quarrel among themselves instead of performing each of it's own roles. The puppet master explained that it was a glitch and cut the performance short and went back to puppet maker: what happen?
The puppet manufacturer can only say: you wanted it this way and it is exactly what we gave to you. You wanted the puppet automatically like clockwork with the least amount of effort and this is exactly what we gave to you. This is your problem and not mine: look caveat emptor- says the contract.
In another performance, the puppet even walked out of the show. Quite unheard of in a performance in puppet history really.
In the final show of the puppet performance, the puppets did what it was the best interest: they hopped onto the bus and moved into another city which allows them to lived among the locals and act like them. Hence one day, the puppet master came back and found that the puppet cupboard was empty.
The show handed and he went back to hand puppeteering and never trusted the puppets to act on his own again.
The puppets meanwhile, never went back to the puppet master because he had went back to his roots and everyone was happy in it's own little space.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In reality, you can never have the cake and eat it as well. The sooner you realise that, the faster you will accept that life goes on with or without you.
And in time to come, his audience was taken by the performance and how vivid his performances were. His dedication to his craft meant that he wanted it to make as "real" as possible hence he decided to input artificial intelligence into his puppets. Hence he could more and make his performance more colourful with more characters and making even more realistic to actual life.
The advancement in technology meant that the AI only got better so much to the point that he could do nothing and the puppets would act by themselves- all it needed was a general guidelines, statements and scenarios.
And beknown to him was the advancement of the microchips of the artificial intelligence of which it included an ability to seek his own best interest. And in the process, the puppet master was bringing in more audience while bringing in more characters and making the performance even more vivid.
The audience was stunned by the life-like nature of the performance but soon, the puppets begin to talk even among themselves and could switch on it's battery even without human intervention. At this current moment, there were 50 puppets now acting concurrently with each other in a play: all they needed was a script.
But the puppets now could seek it's own best interest and began to doubt why they should be kept in the cupboard and only be allowed to perform when it was asked to. And soon, in a play meant to portray the values of community life- it began to quarrel among themselves instead of performing each of it's own roles. The puppet master explained that it was a glitch and cut the performance short and went back to puppet maker: what happen?
The puppet manufacturer can only say: you wanted it this way and it is exactly what we gave to you. You wanted the puppet automatically like clockwork with the least amount of effort and this is exactly what we gave to you. This is your problem and not mine: look caveat emptor- says the contract.
In another performance, the puppet even walked out of the show. Quite unheard of in a performance in puppet history really.
In the final show of the puppet performance, the puppets did what it was the best interest: they hopped onto the bus and moved into another city which allows them to lived among the locals and act like them. Hence one day, the puppet master came back and found that the puppet cupboard was empty.
The show handed and he went back to hand puppeteering and never trusted the puppets to act on his own again.
The puppets meanwhile, never went back to the puppet master because he had went back to his roots and everyone was happy in it's own little space.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In reality, you can never have the cake and eat it as well. The sooner you realise that, the faster you will accept that life goes on with or without you.
Tuesday, November 27, 2012
I forgive you
To everyone, whom perhaps have felt guilty about accusing me of things that I have not done or have trampled on me to get ahead, I can safely tell you that you do not need to be afraid or feel terrible for what you have done. In reality, I pity you more than than you feel guilty towards me.
Firstly, if one feels compels to follow like pete piper leading the blind mice, wouldn't that shadow forever be hanging over the shoulders regardless of the success. George W Bush started a war his father couldn't finish- what more can one say of who constantly hangs on the coat tails of others.
I have often heard that people find me loathesome- I have always maintain that you don't need to be friends with me. But if you wish to retaliate as a result of the spite when I did nothing- do you really hate me or are you envious of me or jealous of me, or do you really just want my attention regardless of the source. And if in any of the above, why should I be angry at you for. What you need is sympathy- but I can't give it to you because you find me loathsome.
Really at the same time, if you can't cope with your emotions and how then can you be trusted with things of a larger implications- and that is the reason, you should not feel guilty towards the spite that you have thrown because in reality, you have thrown yourself into the dumpster without me doing anything isn't it. You need a large dose of sympathy, pity and empathy of which I cannot give it to you because you find me loathsome.
Hence I would not interfere if you seek solace somewhere else because you desperately need it- this is even though you do it in my face, thinking that you would rubbing salt to my wound, but you have made me see you in a more pitiful light.
What is more pitiful is that you have elevated an ordinary man- me- onto a status I am hugely undeserving.
I would suggest reading up more on paternalism and it's ill-effects before you continue to put me on a pedestal. One day, have a quiet time, sit down and reflect on the reasons of your actions before you jumped the gun again.
I forgive you.
Firstly, if one feels compels to follow like pete piper leading the blind mice, wouldn't that shadow forever be hanging over the shoulders regardless of the success. George W Bush started a war his father couldn't finish- what more can one say of who constantly hangs on the coat tails of others.
I have often heard that people find me loathesome- I have always maintain that you don't need to be friends with me. But if you wish to retaliate as a result of the spite when I did nothing- do you really hate me or are you envious of me or jealous of me, or do you really just want my attention regardless of the source. And if in any of the above, why should I be angry at you for. What you need is sympathy- but I can't give it to you because you find me loathsome.
Really at the same time, if you can't cope with your emotions and how then can you be trusted with things of a larger implications- and that is the reason, you should not feel guilty towards the spite that you have thrown because in reality, you have thrown yourself into the dumpster without me doing anything isn't it. You need a large dose of sympathy, pity and empathy of which I cannot give it to you because you find me loathsome.
Hence I would not interfere if you seek solace somewhere else because you desperately need it- this is even though you do it in my face, thinking that you would rubbing salt to my wound, but you have made me see you in a more pitiful light.
What is more pitiful is that you have elevated an ordinary man- me- onto a status I am hugely undeserving.
I would suggest reading up more on paternalism and it's ill-effects before you continue to put me on a pedestal. One day, have a quiet time, sit down and reflect on the reasons of your actions before you jumped the gun again.
I forgive you.
The Gap
Many people believed that I have changed. But who has not changed.
Many people believed that I have changed for the worse- but did you know me in the first place or do you know me or want me to be "me" on your terms in the first place.
There are people who believed that the easy-going guy with a sense of humour and to laugh at himself has changed into a professional and business-like person with disregard for other people's feeling in the first place- but you want me to be like that just so that you can lord over me and take advantage of this nonchalant nature ultimately isn't it.
The only thing that changed is circumstances- studies is about knowing your own things. growing up is about taking care of your own things. I have known the difference and that is the reason I prolonged my "childhood" in the first place- just so I don't need to think about the practical things.
I have never changed, the only thing that changed is the perspective of people towards a person who have to pursue his own life. The change was only cosmetic- but it shouts out the difference between people who care and people who don't- and boy the is the gap yawningly large.
You have made your choice and I have made mine- go and live your life and not bother me with your life's regrets and grouses.
Many people believed that I have changed for the worse- but did you know me in the first place or do you know me or want me to be "me" on your terms in the first place.
There are people who believed that the easy-going guy with a sense of humour and to laugh at himself has changed into a professional and business-like person with disregard for other people's feeling in the first place- but you want me to be like that just so that you can lord over me and take advantage of this nonchalant nature ultimately isn't it.
The only thing that changed is circumstances- studies is about knowing your own things. growing up is about taking care of your own things. I have known the difference and that is the reason I prolonged my "childhood" in the first place- just so I don't need to think about the practical things.
I have never changed, the only thing that changed is the perspective of people towards a person who have to pursue his own life. The change was only cosmetic- but it shouts out the difference between people who care and people who don't- and boy the is the gap yawningly large.
You have made your choice and I have made mine- go and live your life and not bother me with your life's regrets and grouses.
Monday, November 26, 2012
Not Rejecting doesn't equal Acceptance
What is the difference between acceptance and rejection? There are some whom have confused not rejecting as acceptance. There are some whom believed that just because a person doesn't react, it means that the person is accepting to the person.
There are some in their minds whom believed that just because a person is fitting in, one is being accepted by another. There are some whom have craved acceptance so much so that they view all "positive-like" communication as acceptance.
And in order to get this "positive" message, they structure the response so much so that they will get a "positive" answer. And in their minds, they believed that they have been accepted by others.
But in reality, their personal habits are as much as a repudiation to other's as much they are personal propensity to fit in. It is their belief that by fitting in, they are accepted by other's when it is the inverse. Therefore, they believe in their lie just so that they can continue their ways which is repulsive to other's.
Personally, I find it quite sad that for them. I am hesitant to point out their socially-repulsive behaviour because the truth has eluded them so much so that it might be painful for them. In similar terms, it is none of my business really. If they think they are civilized and absolutely justified in doing so, who am I to say otherwise. It is the people closest to them that suffers, not me.
Well if even their closest people don't tell them what is wrong, either they are condoning or couldn't be bothered- why then should I bother in the first place. And if they are so deluded, they are probably deluded for a long time already otherwise, they wouldn't be so comfortable with themselves for so long right.
Anyway, what they do publicly, will probably transmit what they privately hence if you think that is an appropriate behaviour and you are fine with it- then you deserve to be victims and sufferers in the first place right.
The non-rejection is acceptable at home, is probably what they portray outside anyway. And if you find sufficient victims and sufferers to be in your courtyard, good going for you.
Just wait till you get out of your comfort zone that is.
There are some in their minds whom believed that just because a person is fitting in, one is being accepted by another. There are some whom have craved acceptance so much so that they view all "positive-like" communication as acceptance.
And in order to get this "positive" message, they structure the response so much so that they will get a "positive" answer. And in their minds, they believed that they have been accepted by others.
But in reality, their personal habits are as much as a repudiation to other's as much they are personal propensity to fit in. It is their belief that by fitting in, they are accepted by other's when it is the inverse. Therefore, they believe in their lie just so that they can continue their ways which is repulsive to other's.
Personally, I find it quite sad that for them. I am hesitant to point out their socially-repulsive behaviour because the truth has eluded them so much so that it might be painful for them. In similar terms, it is none of my business really. If they think they are civilized and absolutely justified in doing so, who am I to say otherwise. It is the people closest to them that suffers, not me.
Well if even their closest people don't tell them what is wrong, either they are condoning or couldn't be bothered- why then should I bother in the first place. And if they are so deluded, they are probably deluded for a long time already otherwise, they wouldn't be so comfortable with themselves for so long right.
Anyway, what they do publicly, will probably transmit what they privately hence if you think that is an appropriate behaviour and you are fine with it- then you deserve to be victims and sufferers in the first place right.
The non-rejection is acceptable at home, is probably what they portray outside anyway. And if you find sufficient victims and sufferers to be in your courtyard, good going for you.
Just wait till you get out of your comfort zone that is.
On Rainbows and Judgement Days
A rainbow appeared on the sky and the kid asked the teacher why every time we see the rainbow, we feel extremely happy.
The teacher replied that because it means that life is colourful and is something we should be happy about.
The boy asked: why don't people wear the colourful shirts everyday then?
The teacher replied: Because if one wears a rainbow-coloured clothes, it means that one cannot be trusted.
The boy asked: "isn't life about being happy then? Why do people insist of wearing the same boring shirt everyday then?"
The teacher replied that: it is because adults have to work and do other boring things- just so you can be happy and think rainbows are wonderful.
The boy asked:Why does my mom and my dad looks so happy when wear black then- the rainbow doesn't have black right- especially after they have a dinner outside? I am not happy when I see a rainy or dark sky, I am happy when I see the blue sky and rainbow.
The teacher replied: well, they are used to the colour i supposed.
The boy replied: you are wearing black today- but you are cheerful and does all adults like black or dark colours.
The teacher: well,... talk to your mom and dad on this.
Sometimes, we confused the cup or plate from the things that we drink or eat. We forget that we eat or drink the food or liquid and not the cup. The substance could be odourless, colourless and might even taste good even but we wouldn't know the effects until much later.
What we drink or eat from doesn't say whether you are a good, bad or hardworking person- it is what we do, and how we do that says so. Morals is an absolute- good or bad- does not derive from categories. What is permissible is not necessarily right as well. What is permissible gives you nothing more than popular approval. Choice is not a right but an entitlement- the choices that one makes makes you, it makes you free-er but it doesn't make you necessarily better.
There are no absolute power now only because the fallibility of man but the fallibility is not just on the absolute but on the individual, on the people and on everyone now. The freedom is therefore not a right but an entitlement. If you want it, you have to earn it.
And if you don't earn it, religion don't judge you, the state won't judge you, the law won't judge you. Someone will- that I can reassure you- just not now.
The teacher replied that because it means that life is colourful and is something we should be happy about.
The boy asked: why don't people wear the colourful shirts everyday then?
The teacher replied: Because if one wears a rainbow-coloured clothes, it means that one cannot be trusted.
The boy asked: "isn't life about being happy then? Why do people insist of wearing the same boring shirt everyday then?"
The teacher replied that: it is because adults have to work and do other boring things- just so you can be happy and think rainbows are wonderful.
The boy asked:Why does my mom and my dad looks so happy when wear black then- the rainbow doesn't have black right- especially after they have a dinner outside? I am not happy when I see a rainy or dark sky, I am happy when I see the blue sky and rainbow.
The teacher replied: well, they are used to the colour i supposed.
The boy replied: you are wearing black today- but you are cheerful and does all adults like black or dark colours.
The teacher: well,... talk to your mom and dad on this.
Sometimes, we confused the cup or plate from the things that we drink or eat. We forget that we eat or drink the food or liquid and not the cup. The substance could be odourless, colourless and might even taste good even but we wouldn't know the effects until much later.
What we drink or eat from doesn't say whether you are a good, bad or hardworking person- it is what we do, and how we do that says so. Morals is an absolute- good or bad- does not derive from categories. What is permissible is not necessarily right as well. What is permissible gives you nothing more than popular approval. Choice is not a right but an entitlement- the choices that one makes makes you, it makes you free-er but it doesn't make you necessarily better.
There are no absolute power now only because the fallibility of man but the fallibility is not just on the absolute but on the individual, on the people and on everyone now. The freedom is therefore not a right but an entitlement. If you want it, you have to earn it.
And if you don't earn it, religion don't judge you, the state won't judge you, the law won't judge you. Someone will- that I can reassure you- just not now.
A pair of glasses and a rug
There are some whom have walked on carpets all their life, they have never knew the feeling of walking off it. So what happens when one decides to pull the rug off their feet- they fall so terribly, they are incapable of getting up.
Hence what happens when you have always walk on a rug and wore a pair of glasses which is weightless, invisible and impairs your vision in one way or another all your life. What if one day someone decides to remove your pair of glasses, you put on another pair of a varying degree to smooth out the distortions.
What if someone tells you that you have been walking on a rug, but your pair of glasses smoothens out the creases on the floor so much so that what you see is what believe- and what you believe is how you act. You would say, my eyes sees nothing and therefore I must be right.
And what if someone pulls the rug from right under your floor because your glasses restricts your sight, you blame the person for performing black magic.
And what if someone takes away your glasses and you are forced to see the rug on the floor, you blame the person for being negative- for removing the smooth texture of the world around us and taking away the lie that have made them who they they are in the first place. Their personality.
What if you are being forced to remove the glasses and to take the rug off your feet, you would have to die or be enslaved because you were blinded in the first place- in such situations, that is war, no glasses will save you. You are incapable of even thinking for yourself.
Hence what happens when you have always walk on a rug and wore a pair of glasses which is weightless, invisible and impairs your vision in one way or another all your life. What if one day someone decides to remove your pair of glasses, you put on another pair of a varying degree to smooth out the distortions.
What if someone tells you that you have been walking on a rug, but your pair of glasses smoothens out the creases on the floor so much so that what you see is what believe- and what you believe is how you act. You would say, my eyes sees nothing and therefore I must be right.
And what if someone pulls the rug from right under your floor because your glasses restricts your sight, you blame the person for performing black magic.
And what if someone takes away your glasses and you are forced to see the rug on the floor, you blame the person for being negative- for removing the smooth texture of the world around us and taking away the lie that have made them who they they are in the first place. Their personality.
What if you are being forced to remove the glasses and to take the rug off your feet, you would have to die or be enslaved because you were blinded in the first place- in such situations, that is war, no glasses will save you. You are incapable of even thinking for yourself.
Saturday, October 27, 2012
On Numbers, Equations and Love
Let me try to put an equation onto love. There are two ways perhaps we can see from this perspective- 1) we are sum of all our parts 2) We are more than sum of of all parts. In the former: 1+1= 2 and in the latter, 1+1= mx+c. In other words, the first is the belief that we separate and therefore when we add up, we get a finite number and the latter, it is the belief that when we add up, there is an unknown factor which generates more than the actual sum of the parts.
And it is often simple to assume the former because of it's rather simplistic understanding but in reality, a person is more than an addition and subtraction. It then can be said when two people get married, it is often under the assumption that we would often get a finite number- and therefore we must produce children and therefore we must have a house, and yes we too must have common friends. That is almost patently quite remove from the truth. It is in this rather ridiculous mathematical allegory and metaphor that we lay the plans often for the rest of our lives.
Let us then put an example to you. For example, we can never have an union with a dog because insofar that we are quite really incapable of producing a finite number. And neither can we have an union with a friend insofar that we are not mutually exclusive and therefore are quite incapable of producing a definitive mathematical family unit. The only ever reason for this particular phenomenon is that a number is elusive. And since we cannot tell that my family is y=mx+ c but rather, i have so and so siblings and I DEFINITELY have one spouse and this probably settles are any other forms of social awkwardness.
Indeed, it would be quite difficult to tell another a person in social gathering that oh yeah, he/she is a friend and maybe we are together, I don't know. It would really be more comfortable to tell someone that this my bf/gf or husband/wife. And the common reaction would be:oh...
And hence this is then the tyranny of math even on even our love life. We must have a number otherwise, it is not counted and if it is not counted then likely a story would have to ensue and in most social situations, that is the last thing one wants to hear as the cocktail and liquor is better than your sob story.
Hence, it is for this reason that, we are always in constant battle to find another mutually exclusive individual- just so that we can find that elusive number and NOT variable equation.
What is your equation, I am sorry what is your number again.
And it is often simple to assume the former because of it's rather simplistic understanding but in reality, a person is more than an addition and subtraction. It then can be said when two people get married, it is often under the assumption that we would often get a finite number- and therefore we must produce children and therefore we must have a house, and yes we too must have common friends. That is almost patently quite remove from the truth. It is in this rather ridiculous mathematical allegory and metaphor that we lay the plans often for the rest of our lives.
Let us then put an example to you. For example, we can never have an union with a dog because insofar that we are quite really incapable of producing a finite number. And neither can we have an union with a friend insofar that we are not mutually exclusive and therefore are quite incapable of producing a definitive mathematical family unit. The only ever reason for this particular phenomenon is that a number is elusive. And since we cannot tell that my family is y=mx+ c but rather, i have so and so siblings and I DEFINITELY have one spouse and this probably settles are any other forms of social awkwardness.
Indeed, it would be quite difficult to tell another a person in social gathering that oh yeah, he/she is a friend and maybe we are together, I don't know. It would really be more comfortable to tell someone that this my bf/gf or husband/wife. And the common reaction would be:oh...
And hence this is then the tyranny of math even on even our love life. We must have a number otherwise, it is not counted and if it is not counted then likely a story would have to ensue and in most social situations, that is the last thing one wants to hear as the cocktail and liquor is better than your sob story.
Hence, it is for this reason that, we are always in constant battle to find another mutually exclusive individual- just so that we can find that elusive number and NOT variable equation.
What is your equation, I am sorry what is your number again.
Thursday, October 25, 2012
The East/West Debate
In the previous article, I have written about globalization and the East/West ideological debate. I would in this article therefore attempt to delineate the characteristics of which is linked to East and West. And in so doing, proved that each "essential" characteristic is no more particularised to former as much as it is to the latter.
The common denominator of which we can go down is to the skin colour. Unless we are models, selling whitening products or in tanning products, the colour of our skin should have no bearings on the future of success in the economies or societies. Westerners are therefore fairer and are commonly associated with being white, and in similar terms- the rest of us are therefore in variation and degrees of whiteness, with black being the other end of the continuum. Hence seen from this perspective, we have set of benchmark of "whiteness" of which we constant seek to obtain- moreover seen from the perspective of cultural biases towards being white- of being associated to purity and altruism. We have then condemned ourselves into reaching an unreachable benchmark, that of whiteness- think of Micheal Jackson's botched pigmentation surgery and you get the picture.
Hence in so doing, we have essentialized quite covertly and sub-consciously, the racial colour and the associative qualities of particular races, and even condemned ourselves- unwittingly as well- into quite disadvantageous places. Of which such actions often elude their rationale towards me- and in certain cases, celebrate their colour quite different from theirs. Hence in evoking an East/West debate is already framing the action of one's interest groups- in being East, means change and revolutionary and reactionary- and in being West, privileged, pure and cultured, and therefore conservative and elitist. And in so doing, we have surrendered the value of being elitist and cultured without even giving a fight and in so doing, always condemning ourselves into an underdog position.
And in being Westernized meant therefore, cultured, elitist, conservative- in blue- while anything else, is just a step down from it. Just for your information, there are poor people in Western countries, much as there are rich people in the East. Similarly there are many well-groomed people in the Orient- as much as there are backwater people in the West. Hence in so doing then, we have stupidly aspire to a benchmark of which we willingly have accepted we can never change- our skin colour.
On second note, is that of a hierarchical societies and therefore the association of paternalism associated with the East as compared with the more liberal attitudes of the West. And once again, the media has once again attempt to divide the two up and split them neatly insofar that each can controlled socially.
Just for your information, paternalism has western origins and is not the exclusive domain of the East. And just in similar terms, there are no similar words in Chinese lexicon as far as I am concerned and "family" in Mandarin which is "Jia Ting" is a mixture of "Ting" which is the operative word of "Fa Ting" which is the courts or legal system and "Jia" which is home- there isn't even gender bias in the word itself. Hence anyone who associate paternalism and hierarchy as the essential attributes of the Eastern cultures is therefore mixing myth/ideology with popular portrayal.
And insofar that, anyone who attempts to evoke this particular debate of which to deny or justify parochial interest in the name of general one is once again using race as an instrumental device in achieving one's personal gains.
The common denominator of which we can go down is to the skin colour. Unless we are models, selling whitening products or in tanning products, the colour of our skin should have no bearings on the future of success in the economies or societies. Westerners are therefore fairer and are commonly associated with being white, and in similar terms- the rest of us are therefore in variation and degrees of whiteness, with black being the other end of the continuum. Hence seen from this perspective, we have set of benchmark of "whiteness" of which we constant seek to obtain- moreover seen from the perspective of cultural biases towards being white- of being associated to purity and altruism. We have then condemned ourselves into reaching an unreachable benchmark, that of whiteness- think of Micheal Jackson's botched pigmentation surgery and you get the picture.
Hence in so doing, we have essentialized quite covertly and sub-consciously, the racial colour and the associative qualities of particular races, and even condemned ourselves- unwittingly as well- into quite disadvantageous places. Of which such actions often elude their rationale towards me- and in certain cases, celebrate their colour quite different from theirs. Hence in evoking an East/West debate is already framing the action of one's interest groups- in being East, means change and revolutionary and reactionary- and in being West, privileged, pure and cultured, and therefore conservative and elitist. And in so doing, we have surrendered the value of being elitist and cultured without even giving a fight and in so doing, always condemning ourselves into an underdog position.
And in being Westernized meant therefore, cultured, elitist, conservative- in blue- while anything else, is just a step down from it. Just for your information, there are poor people in Western countries, much as there are rich people in the East. Similarly there are many well-groomed people in the Orient- as much as there are backwater people in the West. Hence in so doing then, we have stupidly aspire to a benchmark of which we willingly have accepted we can never change- our skin colour.
On second note, is that of a hierarchical societies and therefore the association of paternalism associated with the East as compared with the more liberal attitudes of the West. And once again, the media has once again attempt to divide the two up and split them neatly insofar that each can controlled socially.
Just for your information, paternalism has western origins and is not the exclusive domain of the East. And just in similar terms, there are no similar words in Chinese lexicon as far as I am concerned and "family" in Mandarin which is "Jia Ting" is a mixture of "Ting" which is the operative word of "Fa Ting" which is the courts or legal system and "Jia" which is home- there isn't even gender bias in the word itself. Hence anyone who associate paternalism and hierarchy as the essential attributes of the Eastern cultures is therefore mixing myth/ideology with popular portrayal.
And insofar that, anyone who attempts to evoke this particular debate of which to deny or justify parochial interest in the name of general one is once again using race as an instrumental device in achieving one's personal gains.
Globalization and Parochialism
Globalization has largely been a depressed literature in these days. Just a few years ago, globalization was a beacon of hope and the symbol of human progress and technological advancement. It is touted as the phenomenon which would bring about everyone together. The means of which to do so is via social media, reducing cost of travel, cultural understanding, trade linkages and memberships into various supra-national organizations. The wave of literature at this current moment appears to be depressed and parochial, fear mongering and almost trivial in nature and yawn-inducing.
The biggest surprise and news this year perhaps is the sending of a blind activist to US from China and the constant bickering over a small group of islands by a few countries, the sovereign bond tragedy and the never-ending saga in Syria. All these seem to have overshadowed the positive aspects of globalization. And all these have further sharpen-latently- the divide between the East and the West, when in reality, we are more interlinked than we have ever been. The very fact that there were no nuclear threats, no threat of oil conflicts, means that economic interdepencies have overshadowed ideological wars. I have not seen the word terrorism in a long time.
Hence the news above is in reality hiding the fact that we are more similar than we are different and when anyone whom attempts therefore to flame an ideological war often hides a material interest behind this attempt. Even North Korea, the global bad boy has opened up and allowed a film crew to film their nuclear proceedings, Libya, Egypt and Tunisia all have their authoritative strong man replaced and moved into more conventional forms of capitalism.
Our financial markets are inextricably-linked with each other, our commodities and supply chain are linked globally, we can fly to a myriad of destinations with a clicked of a mouse and yet we bicker over who should get what and when and how based on nothing more than symbolic gestures and communications- are we not hypocritical insofar that we have profited from this market-driven economy.
And therefore I have noticed a constant reminder of people constantly attempting to flamed a racial-based form of politics. It would appear that they have a parochial interest masquerading as a general interest that in the form ideological battles which in reality is that their material interest have driven their actions more than a spontaneous one. And in doing so, they have always put a Catch 22 situation- of east and west- when the very currency, they used, the language they speak, the political and legal system they lived in, the commodities and products they have consumed are nothing more than the product of a market driven economy. They lived in a western capitalistic world and yet they deny the existence while yet leveraging on it. The attempt therefore to stir the most likely ideological fervour would almost most likely faced a demise- insofar that they are able to found a system of which is not part of global markets. And likewise, anyone who attempts therefore to stir likewise pluralistic tendencies is in reality dangerous and really is trying to stir action based on on an fluid and empty node of reference.
I would therefore dare these people who attempt to flame these politics again to move onto an island of which is able to supply themselves sans the help of global markets. I wait with bated breath the ability of these people to do likewise. And in so doing, please help the global economies in creating a similar standard of living of which one has so brilliantly re-created independently. That is indeed a work of genius similarly.
The biggest surprise and news this year perhaps is the sending of a blind activist to US from China and the constant bickering over a small group of islands by a few countries, the sovereign bond tragedy and the never-ending saga in Syria. All these seem to have overshadowed the positive aspects of globalization. And all these have further sharpen-latently- the divide between the East and the West, when in reality, we are more interlinked than we have ever been. The very fact that there were no nuclear threats, no threat of oil conflicts, means that economic interdepencies have overshadowed ideological wars. I have not seen the word terrorism in a long time.
Hence the news above is in reality hiding the fact that we are more similar than we are different and when anyone whom attempts therefore to flame an ideological war often hides a material interest behind this attempt. Even North Korea, the global bad boy has opened up and allowed a film crew to film their nuclear proceedings, Libya, Egypt and Tunisia all have their authoritative strong man replaced and moved into more conventional forms of capitalism.
Our financial markets are inextricably-linked with each other, our commodities and supply chain are linked globally, we can fly to a myriad of destinations with a clicked of a mouse and yet we bicker over who should get what and when and how based on nothing more than symbolic gestures and communications- are we not hypocritical insofar that we have profited from this market-driven economy.
And therefore I have noticed a constant reminder of people constantly attempting to flamed a racial-based form of politics. It would appear that they have a parochial interest masquerading as a general interest that in the form ideological battles which in reality is that their material interest have driven their actions more than a spontaneous one. And in doing so, they have always put a Catch 22 situation- of east and west- when the very currency, they used, the language they speak, the political and legal system they lived in, the commodities and products they have consumed are nothing more than the product of a market driven economy. They lived in a western capitalistic world and yet they deny the existence while yet leveraging on it. The attempt therefore to stir the most likely ideological fervour would almost most likely faced a demise- insofar that they are able to found a system of which is not part of global markets. And likewise, anyone who attempts therefore to stir likewise pluralistic tendencies is in reality dangerous and really is trying to stir action based on on an fluid and empty node of reference.
I would therefore dare these people who attempt to flame these politics again to move onto an island of which is able to supply themselves sans the help of global markets. I wait with bated breath the ability of these people to do likewise. And in so doing, please help the global economies in creating a similar standard of living of which one has so brilliantly re-created independently. That is indeed a work of genius similarly.
Productive Value and Real Wage, and Labour Demand
Very often, I have asked myself why did I quit several jobs in spite of being far ahead of other's- what did it speak to me. I used to say that, I took a risk and wanted to see how far I can go. But it was inadequate- because in spite of taking risk and seemingly reducing market value, I continued to refuse accept something that I deemed is appropriate. Therefore since risk does not commensurate rewards, therefore, I should relent right- but I did not.
Keynesian Economics which critiques much of classical economic of which a large part of world's economies has one critical comment 1) negotiation between worker's and entrepreneurs is open and the only reason that the worker refuse to supply labour is that one refused to accept the wage at a given marginal product [ or productive value] as the economy is assumed to be at full employment of resources and the only reason for unemployment is frictional- which is adjustment of resources rather than structural. The second of which he did highlighted is one that the reason that one does not supply labour is because 2) the demand for the labour at a given marginal product at a particular real wage for outstrips the supply.
Therefore in this second insight, I have realised intuitively the reason for my unhappiness. I know my value and the value of labour- and I know I have artificially been denied the ability to utilize my resources insofar that the wage does not commensurate with the demand. Assuming that there are 10 Eugene's in this world and all are paid the same wage, they are all effectively underpaid insofar that there were say 20 labour demander's for this particular characteristics
Therefore I knew then at this point, I knew that I had reputation, I knew I had the skills, the only reason that demand is not reaching is insofar that it has artificially been pushed down. Therefore intuitively, I knew I was why I felt disgruntled and felt constantly shortchanged. Demand outstrips the supply at a given real wage even if the marginal product- or effort- remains. I am what people perceived that I am- and if I am artificially pushed down, insofar by non-market driven means, it means that I should not accept my wage; hence I felt constantly short-changed.
Therefore I feel constantly defensive when people accused me for being arrogant or a prima donna- I would normally concentrate on my job and really does not speak unless I have something to say. It is therefore, I understood that intuitively that the actions of other's seeks only to artificially devalue the perceived value and therefore the frustration.
The frustration is therefore in being underpaid in view of a particular skill set rather than in asking for something more than the market demands. And even impeded by structural and organizational constraints- the only reason that I felt that the value insofar does not commensurate if what the market demands is such that the there was no effort insofar to compensate for these material factors in other forms. And therefore lies the frustration rather than that of being unwilling to accept prevailing market conditions and environment.
P/S: however anyone attempts to deny the plagiaristic value of my work and the amount of trickle down effect it generates- the more frustration it would generate. The plagiarism only serves as a reminder of the demand of which outstripping the supply. And it is for this reason, intuitively, I have not accepted the existing conditions. Any label of which to placed other's on a moral high ground is to me, highly unjustified.
Keynesian Economics which critiques much of classical economic of which a large part of world's economies has one critical comment 1) negotiation between worker's and entrepreneurs is open and the only reason that the worker refuse to supply labour is that one refused to accept the wage at a given marginal product [ or productive value] as the economy is assumed to be at full employment of resources and the only reason for unemployment is frictional- which is adjustment of resources rather than structural. The second of which he did highlighted is one that the reason that one does not supply labour is because 2) the demand for the labour at a given marginal product at a particular real wage for outstrips the supply.
Therefore in this second insight, I have realised intuitively the reason for my unhappiness. I know my value and the value of labour- and I know I have artificially been denied the ability to utilize my resources insofar that the wage does not commensurate with the demand. Assuming that there are 10 Eugene's in this world and all are paid the same wage, they are all effectively underpaid insofar that there were say 20 labour demander's for this particular characteristics
Therefore I knew then at this point, I knew that I had reputation, I knew I had the skills, the only reason that demand is not reaching is insofar that it has artificially been pushed down. Therefore intuitively, I knew I was why I felt disgruntled and felt constantly shortchanged. Demand outstrips the supply at a given real wage even if the marginal product- or effort- remains. I am what people perceived that I am- and if I am artificially pushed down, insofar by non-market driven means, it means that I should not accept my wage; hence I felt constantly short-changed.
Therefore I feel constantly defensive when people accused me for being arrogant or a prima donna- I would normally concentrate on my job and really does not speak unless I have something to say. It is therefore, I understood that intuitively that the actions of other's seeks only to artificially devalue the perceived value and therefore the frustration.
The frustration is therefore in being underpaid in view of a particular skill set rather than in asking for something more than the market demands. And even impeded by structural and organizational constraints- the only reason that I felt that the value insofar does not commensurate if what the market demands is such that the there was no effort insofar to compensate for these material factors in other forms. And therefore lies the frustration rather than that of being unwilling to accept prevailing market conditions and environment.
P/S: however anyone attempts to deny the plagiaristic value of my work and the amount of trickle down effect it generates- the more frustration it would generate. The plagiarism only serves as a reminder of the demand of which outstripping the supply. And it is for this reason, intuitively, I have not accepted the existing conditions. Any label of which to placed other's on a moral high ground is to me, highly unjustified.
Wednesday, October 24, 2012
Symbols
Semiotics is the study of symbols. Semiotics has a triangular relationship. The signifier, the signified and the relationship between the signifier and the signified. People have placed tremendous value on the associative value as opposed to the relationship. Of particular importance is the relationship rather than the symbolic meaning. How the symbolic meanings arises is patently more important than what it signifies.
The signified is fluid in it's meaning. For example, dragon in western cultures is malevolent creature while in the Chinese culture- it is an auspicious one- in fact the Chinese are seen as children of the dragon. Similarly, in Russian culture, smiling is frown upon- and is seen as an insult to the host- but on the other hand, in most other cultures, it is a sign of friendship.
Therefore, the use of visual communication to deliver messages is not immutable and the signified should not be place with particular importance. Of particular importance is that of the rising of the symbol in the first place.
Take for example, political symbols. A local one perhaps highlight better. The use of a ligthning symbol in red an encircled in blue while with a white background is of particular importance in the arising of the imcumbent party in the first place. In the pre-independence days of the departure of the British, a wave of cold war, rampant unemployment and poor social environment. These symbols communicate a practical value of which speaks to the common citizen who wanted action- seen in lightning symbols coloured in red, a relatively conservative outlook- seen in blue- and with a relatively pure and non reactive ideology seen in white. This is in contrast with the red base- of reactive and revolutionary basis- and with a ideological appeal, it had a similar effect who wanted to effect change in prevailing status quo.
Hence seen in this context, with the general retreat of communism and it's ideological clarion call- it is therefore no wonder the former party had won through. Similarly, seen in the light of the general demise of East Germany, the modernisniation of China and Vietnam, Russia, it is therefore seen from the general wave that the colour of choice in Singapore and many places around the region are therefore conservative and non-revolutionary in nature.
Therefore, a further step must be highlighted to see the importance in the relationship rather than the signified. As mentioned before, the revolutionary character of red has somewhat been doused- the association with abrupt change and disruptive character has been diluted to the point that it has been circumscribed within the existing capitalist system.
Take for example, a recent publishing manifesto of an aspiring opposition party with an worker agenda. The origins and history is fought on basis of worker's rights advancement- which is diametric opposite to the elites and capitalist within the market driven economy, but it's manifesto was based on achieving a First World Parliament. It really does not sound exactly revolutionary nor seem to allude to fighting for proletarian rights.
But it then must seen in the context of the advancement of Singapore society. Singapore is a advanced economy now and it can be considered as one of capitalist success stories with two sovereign wealth funds with equity ownership in many western capitalist companies and properties even. Hence to fight desperately against the capitalist and elites would then, be destroying the rice bowl of the very people they are fighting for- whom are practical in nature rather than doused in ideological fervour. Hence seen from this particular context, the relationship, the cultural context and power relationships can be seen therefore of particular importance than what it really signifies. Therefore seen from a strict linear relationship, the red is no longer a game changer but rather been circumscribed within a system- and the signified as shifted, insofar that the underlying context has changed.
Therefore very often, we act as Pavlov's dog- and thinking that voting or deciding based on a associative value is acting in one's interest. But we have disregard therefore the underlying interest, often materially in the instrumental use of symbols. Therefore I rest my case, in the use of symbols as a short hand for correct decision but rather an understanding of relationship between the signified and the signifier than it's simplistic associative value.
[ P/S: refer to the Boxer Rebellion which used symbols to trick it's adherents into thinking " knife and gun cannot penetrate it's body" - that is therefore the instrumental use of symbols to mobilize it's people]
The signified is fluid in it's meaning. For example, dragon in western cultures is malevolent creature while in the Chinese culture- it is an auspicious one- in fact the Chinese are seen as children of the dragon. Similarly, in Russian culture, smiling is frown upon- and is seen as an insult to the host- but on the other hand, in most other cultures, it is a sign of friendship.
Therefore, the use of visual communication to deliver messages is not immutable and the signified should not be place with particular importance. Of particular importance is that of the rising of the symbol in the first place.
Take for example, political symbols. A local one perhaps highlight better. The use of a ligthning symbol in red an encircled in blue while with a white background is of particular importance in the arising of the imcumbent party in the first place. In the pre-independence days of the departure of the British, a wave of cold war, rampant unemployment and poor social environment. These symbols communicate a practical value of which speaks to the common citizen who wanted action- seen in lightning symbols coloured in red, a relatively conservative outlook- seen in blue- and with a relatively pure and non reactive ideology seen in white. This is in contrast with the red base- of reactive and revolutionary basis- and with a ideological appeal, it had a similar effect who wanted to effect change in prevailing status quo.
Hence seen in this context, with the general retreat of communism and it's ideological clarion call- it is therefore no wonder the former party had won through. Similarly, seen in the light of the general demise of East Germany, the modernisniation of China and Vietnam, Russia, it is therefore seen from the general wave that the colour of choice in Singapore and many places around the region are therefore conservative and non-revolutionary in nature.
Therefore, a further step must be highlighted to see the importance in the relationship rather than the signified. As mentioned before, the revolutionary character of red has somewhat been doused- the association with abrupt change and disruptive character has been diluted to the point that it has been circumscribed within the existing capitalist system.
Take for example, a recent publishing manifesto of an aspiring opposition party with an worker agenda. The origins and history is fought on basis of worker's rights advancement- which is diametric opposite to the elites and capitalist within the market driven economy, but it's manifesto was based on achieving a First World Parliament. It really does not sound exactly revolutionary nor seem to allude to fighting for proletarian rights.
But it then must seen in the context of the advancement of Singapore society. Singapore is a advanced economy now and it can be considered as one of capitalist success stories with two sovereign wealth funds with equity ownership in many western capitalist companies and properties even. Hence to fight desperately against the capitalist and elites would then, be destroying the rice bowl of the very people they are fighting for- whom are practical in nature rather than doused in ideological fervour. Hence seen from this particular context, the relationship, the cultural context and power relationships can be seen therefore of particular importance than what it really signifies. Therefore seen from a strict linear relationship, the red is no longer a game changer but rather been circumscribed within a system- and the signified as shifted, insofar that the underlying context has changed.
Therefore very often, we act as Pavlov's dog- and thinking that voting or deciding based on a associative value is acting in one's interest. But we have disregard therefore the underlying interest, often materially in the instrumental use of symbols. Therefore I rest my case, in the use of symbols as a short hand for correct decision but rather an understanding of relationship between the signified and the signifier than it's simplistic associative value.
[ P/S: refer to the Boxer Rebellion which used symbols to trick it's adherents into thinking " knife and gun cannot penetrate it's body" - that is therefore the instrumental use of symbols to mobilize it's people]
Friday, October 19, 2012
C'est la vie
This year is an important year. There are 2 major leadership changes in two major countries and the contemplation of a patching or break up of a political and economic union. I cannot remember the last time such occurrences happening in a single year and that is the reason that I believed for the extremely thin market volume, economic activities and incremental changes.
This year is almost a yawn. there were nothing spectacular and most people are adopting a wait-and-see attitude. Many companies are on a cost-cutting mode or conservative trajectory and this has trickle down to many everyday happenings.
The United States are holding their elections next month, and the incumbent is not prepared to rock to boat and lose it's consolidated base- this explains for a lack of any interesting legislation- which has been the hallmark of Barack Obama. His challenger is not fiery politician- and suffers from being a Conservative upsetting a Democrat- which means, it is not in it's interest to appear to far left. Therefore, this makes for an extremely dull Presidential election. Therefore, the likely effect is that the election result is not quite going to be spectacular or inspirational which is quite unlikely from American politics or anything for that matter.
China is holding their decade-long leadership transition roughly about the same time. Politics in comparison with the U.S appears even more dramatic with the assassination of a foreign businessman, the ouster of political hot favourite and the trial of the star and his wife. But otherwise, where power structures often remain relatively stable and rarely reach a climax except in times of extreme duress, Chinese politics are really a matter of foregone conclusion except where mistakes are exposed or are found out. Hence I would not expect anything to upset the apple cart unless there are some behind-the-scenes brinkmanship which is really quite atypical of their political culture. Hence many people, businesses and organizations are expected to stand by the sideline, major projects are delayed until clarity is confirmed and anything which upset the status quo at this current moment is being delayed even from the protesters standpoint- as they would a expect a stronger coercive force in such sensitive times. Therefore it is not surprising these countries has for some reason stayed behind headlines and not wanting to be too public- barring some skirmishes with some neighbouring countries- as it allow for a smooth transition.
Perhaps the most drama can be found in Europe, where periphery countries dominate the headlines, as they attempt to restructure their finances to keep themselves afloat. The funny thing is that the numbers being pandered around is like a drop in the ocean of even some global banks, let alone major countries- and it is a cause for concern for many fearing a domino effect. And even so, the implication is departure of periphery countries of which might have wider implications remains to be seem. Hence the year has been an uninspiring one looking for great new ideas, a leap of faith or revolutionary changes. It almost seem like this is a year of heightened tension of which is being distracted by the finances and troubles of relatively smaller smaller countries. Perhaps bearing this in mind, most are playing ball by not being antagonistic against the big boys and allow themselves perhaps some air time and take the heat and spotlight away from them in these sensitive and potentially explosive times.
Therefore, I do not expect any big surprises at least for next half a year or so, as the changes and transitions begin to sink in and warm their seats. And once the seat is warmed, the people briefed and the ideals outlined, we shall see a clearer picture for a foreseeable future and from which then we can see then the new people stamping their signature on their respective countries and areas of influence.
Meanwhile I would suggest sitting back and singing to the tune of : C'est la vie
This year is almost a yawn. there were nothing spectacular and most people are adopting a wait-and-see attitude. Many companies are on a cost-cutting mode or conservative trajectory and this has trickle down to many everyday happenings.
The United States are holding their elections next month, and the incumbent is not prepared to rock to boat and lose it's consolidated base- this explains for a lack of any interesting legislation- which has been the hallmark of Barack Obama. His challenger is not fiery politician- and suffers from being a Conservative upsetting a Democrat- which means, it is not in it's interest to appear to far left. Therefore, this makes for an extremely dull Presidential election. Therefore, the likely effect is that the election result is not quite going to be spectacular or inspirational which is quite unlikely from American politics or anything for that matter.
China is holding their decade-long leadership transition roughly about the same time. Politics in comparison with the U.S appears even more dramatic with the assassination of a foreign businessman, the ouster of political hot favourite and the trial of the star and his wife. But otherwise, where power structures often remain relatively stable and rarely reach a climax except in times of extreme duress, Chinese politics are really a matter of foregone conclusion except where mistakes are exposed or are found out. Hence I would not expect anything to upset the apple cart unless there are some behind-the-scenes brinkmanship which is really quite atypical of their political culture. Hence many people, businesses and organizations are expected to stand by the sideline, major projects are delayed until clarity is confirmed and anything which upset the status quo at this current moment is being delayed even from the protesters standpoint- as they would a expect a stronger coercive force in such sensitive times. Therefore it is not surprising these countries has for some reason stayed behind headlines and not wanting to be too public- barring some skirmishes with some neighbouring countries- as it allow for a smooth transition.
Perhaps the most drama can be found in Europe, where periphery countries dominate the headlines, as they attempt to restructure their finances to keep themselves afloat. The funny thing is that the numbers being pandered around is like a drop in the ocean of even some global banks, let alone major countries- and it is a cause for concern for many fearing a domino effect. And even so, the implication is departure of periphery countries of which might have wider implications remains to be seem. Hence the year has been an uninspiring one looking for great new ideas, a leap of faith or revolutionary changes. It almost seem like this is a year of heightened tension of which is being distracted by the finances and troubles of relatively smaller smaller countries. Perhaps bearing this in mind, most are playing ball by not being antagonistic against the big boys and allow themselves perhaps some air time and take the heat and spotlight away from them in these sensitive and potentially explosive times.
Therefore, I do not expect any big surprises at least for next half a year or so, as the changes and transitions begin to sink in and warm their seats. And once the seat is warmed, the people briefed and the ideals outlined, we shall see a clearer picture for a foreseeable future and from which then we can see then the new people stamping their signature on their respective countries and areas of influence.
Meanwhile I would suggest sitting back and singing to the tune of : C'est la vie
Thursday, October 18, 2012
Tired
I am sitting down in front of my computer.
It is really amazing how one year can change things in a flash. I have went from one with at least middle class aspirations to one of which just scrapping by. I sit down here and the worst thing is that I cannot even pinpoint the very mistake that I make.
The only ever mistake I have ever make is being too straightforward, expect alot from others and thought that everyone will act decently at the very least.
Much as I have not expected is the discovery of the extend of which people really want me to fail.
Sometimes, it is not that I have given up on doing anything of note. But the very fact that, the amount of dissent from other's of which is really just innocuous comments and opinions really surprises me.
What I do, as I have always maintained, is really what I think is right- I do not expect other's to follow. Much as even with one don't like my actions and of which have no bearings on your life directly at all, I am really surprised the amount of unhappiness generated. Perhaps the thing that shocks me the most is the amount of effort invested in ensuring that I don't succeed.
I am okay with not being like the biggest star or being the highlight of everything but I am still perplexed at the amount of effort in discouraging my every endeavours. It is like there is a personal investment on everybody's part of my failure. I don't really feel discouraged by this particular situation but rather I am extremely curious about this situation. Why me and why the amount of energy in ensuring so?
I have from the very start never court fame, fortune, approval or anything material. The only thing that I wanted was that I be left alone and allowed to grow and be myself. I am just wondering why is that so difficult?
Why does everyone have an opinion on my action is what really surprises me.
The siege mentality makes me nervous not because like I am afraid of competition. This siege mentality gives me the feeling that it is almost stupid to engage someone quite unrelated to me. Why should I expend energy on someone whom I don't even know or have any engagement with.
I am not related to you neither are you are related with you- the world is always big enough for everyone, why is this concerted effort to make life so damn difficult for one single person?
I am no Qin Shihuang nor am I Magneto, I am all of Eugene and nothing more.
Sometimes, I am just tired of all these posturing- where nothing is ever done. I just want to get back to doing real things. I just wonder when can I get back in doing so.
Sometimes, I am really tired.
It is really amazing how one year can change things in a flash. I have went from one with at least middle class aspirations to one of which just scrapping by. I sit down here and the worst thing is that I cannot even pinpoint the very mistake that I make.
The only ever mistake I have ever make is being too straightforward, expect alot from others and thought that everyone will act decently at the very least.
Much as I have not expected is the discovery of the extend of which people really want me to fail.
Sometimes, it is not that I have given up on doing anything of note. But the very fact that, the amount of dissent from other's of which is really just innocuous comments and opinions really surprises me.
What I do, as I have always maintained, is really what I think is right- I do not expect other's to follow. Much as even with one don't like my actions and of which have no bearings on your life directly at all, I am really surprised the amount of unhappiness generated. Perhaps the thing that shocks me the most is the amount of effort invested in ensuring that I don't succeed.
I am okay with not being like the biggest star or being the highlight of everything but I am still perplexed at the amount of effort in discouraging my every endeavours. It is like there is a personal investment on everybody's part of my failure. I don't really feel discouraged by this particular situation but rather I am extremely curious about this situation. Why me and why the amount of energy in ensuring so?
I have from the very start never court fame, fortune, approval or anything material. The only thing that I wanted was that I be left alone and allowed to grow and be myself. I am just wondering why is that so difficult?
Why does everyone have an opinion on my action is what really surprises me.
The siege mentality makes me nervous not because like I am afraid of competition. This siege mentality gives me the feeling that it is almost stupid to engage someone quite unrelated to me. Why should I expend energy on someone whom I don't even know or have any engagement with.
I am not related to you neither are you are related with you- the world is always big enough for everyone, why is this concerted effort to make life so damn difficult for one single person?
I am no Qin Shihuang nor am I Magneto, I am all of Eugene and nothing more.
Sometimes, I am just tired of all these posturing- where nothing is ever done. I just want to get back to doing real things. I just wonder when can I get back in doing so.
Sometimes, I am really tired.
Saturday, October 06, 2012
Trust
A couple of years back, I met this lady who was selling tissue at 50cents a pack- I gave to her without thinking much as she seems to need it. The next day, while at Boat Quay- a drinking place- I saw her hawking the same thing- and giving the same forlorn look. This time round, I refused to give it to her. Can you be forever forlorn all the time- and if charity doesn't cheer you up- what else will then.
It is the very same way that I run many things in my life. "Fool me once, shame on you, Fool me twice shame on me." You can only earn my trust once, and the moment you lose it, you lose it forever. I make no concessions for anyone close to me. The only difference is that I give them the benefit of doubt more often than most- and once you are proven beyond reasonable doubt your character, I will erect walls even if it means closing off every single person.
The speed of trust- of which I ask no questions- and taking a hand's off approach is off the table. Now at this current moment is trying to negotiate to get the best outcome. Your interest is no longer my interest, my interest is now my interest, your interest is now your interest, unless our interest are mutual, you will get nothing from me as far as I am concern.
Therefore I subscribe to this idea of maintaining trust and harmony up till a certain age. And the moment, you hit that age, you are on your own. You can say that I have no interest in you anymore but trust would have to be maintained- otherwise broken, I would take the above approach.
Therefore, alot of people have accused of being selfish, self-centred and not caring about anyone but myself- I don't really care. Before you want to accused me of doing so, you better ask yourself what have you done to deserve this treatment in the first place. As far as I am concern, I have made sufficient concessions, you just blew it for yourself.
If being difficult means maintaining a certain level of trust and human decency, then you can accused me of being the most difficult person. And if you cannot even maintain it while I gave you an easy ride, how then can I ever trust you with even bigger things.
The speed of trust is a wonderful thing, the moment you lose it: it can be the most difficult thing in the whole world.
It is the very same way that I run many things in my life. "Fool me once, shame on you, Fool me twice shame on me." You can only earn my trust once, and the moment you lose it, you lose it forever. I make no concessions for anyone close to me. The only difference is that I give them the benefit of doubt more often than most- and once you are proven beyond reasonable doubt your character, I will erect walls even if it means closing off every single person.
The speed of trust- of which I ask no questions- and taking a hand's off approach is off the table. Now at this current moment is trying to negotiate to get the best outcome. Your interest is no longer my interest, my interest is now my interest, your interest is now your interest, unless our interest are mutual, you will get nothing from me as far as I am concern.
Therefore I subscribe to this idea of maintaining trust and harmony up till a certain age. And the moment, you hit that age, you are on your own. You can say that I have no interest in you anymore but trust would have to be maintained- otherwise broken, I would take the above approach.
Therefore, alot of people have accused of being selfish, self-centred and not caring about anyone but myself- I don't really care. Before you want to accused me of doing so, you better ask yourself what have you done to deserve this treatment in the first place. As far as I am concern, I have made sufficient concessions, you just blew it for yourself.
If being difficult means maintaining a certain level of trust and human decency, then you can accused me of being the most difficult person. And if you cannot even maintain it while I gave you an easy ride, how then can I ever trust you with even bigger things.
The speed of trust is a wonderful thing, the moment you lose it: it can be the most difficult thing in the whole world.
Being Mr Market's friend
You know what what when you get too good at certain things, you tend to lose the sense of reality. My job was to make money for clients and I was so damn good at it that a large majority of my clients made money more than they have lost. But the difference between making money in the financial markets and making money from labour is that there is a disconnect between the amount of money you earned from the amount of work you put in. To be quite frank with you, it wasn't that difficult. Had I not screwed up, I would be probably be holding a large portfolio of clients with ready cash.
I had a client who made a 20% return in spite of 5% charge three times in a row within two years. When the market was direction-less, they got an interest higher than they would have anywhere else. When the market was down, some picked up bonds which have appreciated 20% while picking up 5% coupon for the last 3 years. When the Thai market was down relative to regional index, my customer bought in and the fund has doubled in value, in 3 years. When the Australian dollar was down, we picked up the yield at double the normal rate while keeping a strike at 15 cents cheaper than a month ago.
Well, it was fine and dandy but one actually realises that I literally did nothing to make those money. All I ever did was to look at the financial reports, news and analysis and made a prediction- I had literally add no value to society. The only caveat was that it was legal and the market was willing to pay me this amount of money to do that. The market paid me to do something quite literally to talk to it and nothing else. I used to tell some friends that the cleaners add more value to the world than what I did but they get paid way less and are given much lesser respect and status.
I was really good at my job and the market paid me for doing so but it doesn't detract from the fact that in terms of value and labour- what have I done- quite literally nothing.
Since we are measured in terms of financial success in this world, it is quite easy to think that I have deserved everything the world has given me. I did not commit a crime, neither did I even commit even a sin- or even a lie-, and neither did I even tried to hoodwink or shortchange my clients, they just paid me what they think is right. I was doing what society and market tells me is the right thing to do.
By the age of 29- I had an apartment, a fully-paid car, a number of investments, some wads of cash, I had boasted of too quite "fifty-shades of grey experience". I literally had it all but really- what did I really do to deserve it- quite literally nothing. What I did was to talk to Mr Market- and very often he respond quite positively to me.
I was smart, smooth and white as a sheet. To everyone, I earned it through legitimate means, to everyone, I was the success story- the boy who knew it all, the boy who made it good, the boy who was poster boy for everything good about this society-. But really.
Shouldn't you be celebrating people who quite literally make your neighbourhood cleaner, shouldn't you be celebrating the people who put food on the table for you. Shouldn't you be celebrating people who gets you to work in one piece. Shouldn't you be celebrating people who actually makes the things that you use.
Making the market more efficient does not make the world a better place, it is the by-product and not eventual outcome. The financial market allocate capital efficiently and we are suppose to exploit the price arbitrages but to say that I did something good was like putting a crown on a trader.
The ultimate outcome for it is that, I had become a poster boy for something that the society values- financial success- but in reality, it almost feels that I really quite did nothing to help anyone. That remains the simple fact.
I was frugal yes and not frivolous by some of my peer's standards but really, I don't think I deserve to be the benchmark, the model or ideal. I was smart yes, but I definitely was not your shining example. There are many more other's much more deserving than I do- they deserve the limelight much more than I do.
There many more other's who contribute to society much more than I did and they deserve spotlight much more than Mr Market's friend.
I had a client who made a 20% return in spite of 5% charge three times in a row within two years. When the market was direction-less, they got an interest higher than they would have anywhere else. When the market was down, some picked up bonds which have appreciated 20% while picking up 5% coupon for the last 3 years. When the Thai market was down relative to regional index, my customer bought in and the fund has doubled in value, in 3 years. When the Australian dollar was down, we picked up the yield at double the normal rate while keeping a strike at 15 cents cheaper than a month ago.
Well, it was fine and dandy but one actually realises that I literally did nothing to make those money. All I ever did was to look at the financial reports, news and analysis and made a prediction- I had literally add no value to society. The only caveat was that it was legal and the market was willing to pay me this amount of money to do that. The market paid me to do something quite literally to talk to it and nothing else. I used to tell some friends that the cleaners add more value to the world than what I did but they get paid way less and are given much lesser respect and status.
I was really good at my job and the market paid me for doing so but it doesn't detract from the fact that in terms of value and labour- what have I done- quite literally nothing.
Since we are measured in terms of financial success in this world, it is quite easy to think that I have deserved everything the world has given me. I did not commit a crime, neither did I even commit even a sin- or even a lie-, and neither did I even tried to hoodwink or shortchange my clients, they just paid me what they think is right. I was doing what society and market tells me is the right thing to do.
By the age of 29- I had an apartment, a fully-paid car, a number of investments, some wads of cash, I had boasted of too quite "fifty-shades of grey experience". I literally had it all but really- what did I really do to deserve it- quite literally nothing. What I did was to talk to Mr Market- and very often he respond quite positively to me.
I was smart, smooth and white as a sheet. To everyone, I earned it through legitimate means, to everyone, I was the success story- the boy who knew it all, the boy who made it good, the boy who was poster boy for everything good about this society-. But really.
Shouldn't you be celebrating people who quite literally make your neighbourhood cleaner, shouldn't you be celebrating the people who put food on the table for you. Shouldn't you be celebrating people who gets you to work in one piece. Shouldn't you be celebrating people who actually makes the things that you use.
Making the market more efficient does not make the world a better place, it is the by-product and not eventual outcome. The financial market allocate capital efficiently and we are suppose to exploit the price arbitrages but to say that I did something good was like putting a crown on a trader.
The ultimate outcome for it is that, I had become a poster boy for something that the society values- financial success- but in reality, it almost feels that I really quite did nothing to help anyone. That remains the simple fact.
I was frugal yes and not frivolous by some of my peer's standards but really, I don't think I deserve to be the benchmark, the model or ideal. I was smart yes, but I definitely was not your shining example. There are many more other's much more deserving than I do- they deserve the limelight much more than I do.
There many more other's who contribute to society much more than I did and they deserve spotlight much more than Mr Market's friend.
Friday, October 05, 2012
Participatory Ethnography
You know in anthropology, there is a term called participatory ethnography. That means that participate actively with whom the people you are trying to understand so as to create a better biography for them. This active participation gives us direct experience into the culture and worldview of the people one is trying to understand- this is direct contrast with the scientist standing on the side as an disinterested observer passing authoritative judgments.
For a while, my soiree into the world of money was part curiosity, part practicality and part ambition. It was a mixture of getting into a mind of others while trying to stand above them and also that is where the money is-quite literally.
Once I had written an email to my boss about being the CEO- and to many other's, this would just career suicide- but another part of me, wanted to try how these power relations would panned out. It was really at least half of it was just curiosity and the other part of it was just risk-taking. This was by far I think the stupidest thing ever done in causing unnecessary attention to yourself.
On another situation, having earned some badges on my belt- I felt being exploited and oppressed by my supervisor- and I decided to went up to the HR head and made a complain- just 1 month into the job and I wasn't even confirmed yet. Once again, that is by far in most cases, the most foolhardy thing a person can do in managing up.
I am always proud to say that prior to that, bosses loved me because I manage up superbly but really at that point in time, I just wanted to see how the system coped with a fireball and boy was it- inflexible, vicious, swift and far-reaching-. This probably confirmed my suspicion that the world is really small and everybody knows everybody- and you just need to draw some attention to yourself thats all.
All these risk-taking and seemingly hare-brained excursions didn't seem to deter people from hiring me as at that point in time, I have acquired a skill set of which I can utilized as and when I want- the only difference is that very often these exertions often meant too much attention to yourself by quite a number interest meant in maintaining their position and therefore the result often did not culminated into actual outcome. The final straw came that, the world is really way larger than I imagined it to be.
An inside joke turn out to be the biggest payoff in my life. The vastness, the depth, the swiftness and the ferocity in overcoming a fireball suggest it's rather far -reaching consequences.
I have always maintained that what everyone did was an overkill- and I still maintained it to be so. I am all but one man, but in your propensity to protect yourself and interest made me bigger and powerful than I actually am. You created a monster/virus/ foreign entity/ alien because you have no idea who you are. It was never about me destroying your life or your livelihood- it was always about you maintaining your wavering self-identity.
I was never really working per se, I was just taking everyone for a ride and for that very reason- you provided the ride for me.
You were the experiment and you just confirmed quite a number of suspicion thats all.
For a while, my soiree into the world of money was part curiosity, part practicality and part ambition. It was a mixture of getting into a mind of others while trying to stand above them and also that is where the money is-quite literally.
Once I had written an email to my boss about being the CEO- and to many other's, this would just career suicide- but another part of me, wanted to try how these power relations would panned out. It was really at least half of it was just curiosity and the other part of it was just risk-taking. This was by far I think the stupidest thing ever done in causing unnecessary attention to yourself.
On another situation, having earned some badges on my belt- I felt being exploited and oppressed by my supervisor- and I decided to went up to the HR head and made a complain- just 1 month into the job and I wasn't even confirmed yet. Once again, that is by far in most cases, the most foolhardy thing a person can do in managing up.
I am always proud to say that prior to that, bosses loved me because I manage up superbly but really at that point in time, I just wanted to see how the system coped with a fireball and boy was it- inflexible, vicious, swift and far-reaching-. This probably confirmed my suspicion that the world is really small and everybody knows everybody- and you just need to draw some attention to yourself thats all.
All these risk-taking and seemingly hare-brained excursions didn't seem to deter people from hiring me as at that point in time, I have acquired a skill set of which I can utilized as and when I want- the only difference is that very often these exertions often meant too much attention to yourself by quite a number interest meant in maintaining their position and therefore the result often did not culminated into actual outcome. The final straw came that, the world is really way larger than I imagined it to be.
An inside joke turn out to be the biggest payoff in my life. The vastness, the depth, the swiftness and the ferocity in overcoming a fireball suggest it's rather far -reaching consequences.
I have always maintained that what everyone did was an overkill- and I still maintained it to be so. I am all but one man, but in your propensity to protect yourself and interest made me bigger and powerful than I actually am. You created a monster/virus/ foreign entity/ alien because you have no idea who you are. It was never about me destroying your life or your livelihood- it was always about you maintaining your wavering self-identity.
I was never really working per se, I was just taking everyone for a ride and for that very reason- you provided the ride for me.
You were the experiment and you just confirmed quite a number of suspicion thats all.
Being made a Monkey
In reality, I am in an unusual position. Most people with my background, are either in government service, teachers, lecturers or in background positions. I entered erstwhile into an area of which I had written against rather than for while in school. Called it an irony but I purposefully seek in that direction rather than serendipitously happening.
I had I think had this conviction I think bubbling below that being questioning, doubtful does not make us a liability in an institution; on the other hand, it makes us at an advantageous standpoint of which we can see angles blindsided by most with conventional education- which are mostly instrumental in nature- which means that the ends are mostly implicit and therefore we often are running in circles without really solving the problem itself. My observation is that most people work because it is like a "lifestyle" thing- of which really, the act of solving problems is sometimes quite devoid from the act of working in the first place.
We work because everyone else is working- really the end product is often of no consequence to us. In fact, the end product is of no consequence to us precisely because we are only one cog in entire assembly line of producing the product in the first place- there are therefore no satisfaction nor a sense of fulfillment in seeing the fruits of our labour- quite unlike farmers of another era- where the end products are physical and often tangible. And therefore most of us indulge in mindless consumerism to tell ourselves that we have worked hard and therefore are deserving of our status-enhancing products.
But in entering a field of which are of different orientation from it was extremely difficult. Because the conventional mannerisms and other speak was really in reality quite laughable- I apologize for being condescending here- the pomposity of which certain individuals carry out their chores were at times quite amusing here. Had I not been their colleagues and are of the similar background, I would during coffee had a good laugh with my school mates. I had to restrain myself over social decencies as I know they were acting because it was "right" thing to do for them and it was extremely rude to do so- but in my world, the form was superseding substance really.
I had the gumption to be likewise because I was achieving faster, better and more than them in spite of their apparent worship of their status of which they flaunt like peacocks. And really, in reality, I think I was playing an inside joke with these people of which I think had I not venture out of my comfort zone, I would probably not have any interaction with. I would probably be growing a beard and looking more like a hippie than an executive in reality- not exactly privilege banking or corporate customers material.
Ok, if you look at my C.V- you would know I have been working in the banking and finance line for some time. You might be thinking I was strangely out of my depth and I was-initially that is- that's why I took another course in Finance; of which I did not exactly just to be familiar with the language, the terms and metrics of which to make sense of various reports- that's why I read financial reports like it was poetry, the arguments were really not that difficult truth be told- you just need to cut through the jargon.
I used my deconstructing language 101, coupled with capitalist ideas and mixed it with financial arguments which have economic roots really, and you can tell the quack from the real stuff. That's the reason I dissed technical analysis- in my world, numbers are numbers, it is meaning that we impute into it that makes sense. Hence if you can make a drawing out of seemingly random numbers plucked from a myriad of permutations, so can I make another drawing based on another set of numbers. Who wins- the one where most people believed wins isn't it.
I might have been an asshole for doing this and making a monkey and an inside joke on everyone- but really who ultimately lost. No one really lost and we just get disillusioned that's all and realized that the whole world is a one big damn lie. Hence trust me, you are not angry at me for making monkey out of you, you are angry at yourself being made a monkey by everyone else. We are really just monkeys at the end of the day- fooling ourselves that we are better than everybody else.
I had I think had this conviction I think bubbling below that being questioning, doubtful does not make us a liability in an institution; on the other hand, it makes us at an advantageous standpoint of which we can see angles blindsided by most with conventional education- which are mostly instrumental in nature- which means that the ends are mostly implicit and therefore we often are running in circles without really solving the problem itself. My observation is that most people work because it is like a "lifestyle" thing- of which really, the act of solving problems is sometimes quite devoid from the act of working in the first place.
We work because everyone else is working- really the end product is often of no consequence to us. In fact, the end product is of no consequence to us precisely because we are only one cog in entire assembly line of producing the product in the first place- there are therefore no satisfaction nor a sense of fulfillment in seeing the fruits of our labour- quite unlike farmers of another era- where the end products are physical and often tangible. And therefore most of us indulge in mindless consumerism to tell ourselves that we have worked hard and therefore are deserving of our status-enhancing products.
But in entering a field of which are of different orientation from it was extremely difficult. Because the conventional mannerisms and other speak was really in reality quite laughable- I apologize for being condescending here- the pomposity of which certain individuals carry out their chores were at times quite amusing here. Had I not been their colleagues and are of the similar background, I would during coffee had a good laugh with my school mates. I had to restrain myself over social decencies as I know they were acting because it was "right" thing to do for them and it was extremely rude to do so- but in my world, the form was superseding substance really.
I had the gumption to be likewise because I was achieving faster, better and more than them in spite of their apparent worship of their status of which they flaunt like peacocks. And really, in reality, I think I was playing an inside joke with these people of which I think had I not venture out of my comfort zone, I would probably not have any interaction with. I would probably be growing a beard and looking more like a hippie than an executive in reality- not exactly privilege banking or corporate customers material.
Ok, if you look at my C.V- you would know I have been working in the banking and finance line for some time. You might be thinking I was strangely out of my depth and I was-initially that is- that's why I took another course in Finance; of which I did not exactly just to be familiar with the language, the terms and metrics of which to make sense of various reports- that's why I read financial reports like it was poetry, the arguments were really not that difficult truth be told- you just need to cut through the jargon.
I used my deconstructing language 101, coupled with capitalist ideas and mixed it with financial arguments which have economic roots really, and you can tell the quack from the real stuff. That's the reason I dissed technical analysis- in my world, numbers are numbers, it is meaning that we impute into it that makes sense. Hence if you can make a drawing out of seemingly random numbers plucked from a myriad of permutations, so can I make another drawing based on another set of numbers. Who wins- the one where most people believed wins isn't it.
I might have been an asshole for doing this and making a monkey and an inside joke on everyone- but really who ultimately lost. No one really lost and we just get disillusioned that's all and realized that the whole world is a one big damn lie. Hence trust me, you are not angry at me for making monkey out of you, you are angry at yourself being made a monkey by everyone else. We are really just monkeys at the end of the day- fooling ourselves that we are better than everybody else.
The uncommon Life
I have just read a novel. It has been a long time since I have mentioned to sit down and enjoyed reading a novel- not for any reason other than for the very sake of it.
I remembered previously that I have always enjoyed reading novels. But in recent years, my book list contains mostly on finding the origins of the financial crisis, on power and politics, history and culture of various countries. It seemed rather impressive but to a certain degree, it all seems extremely instrumental in it's nature.All these reading kept my mind focused on being economical and finding insight as opposed to self-discovery. It served me so well that I have turned into a machine- that made me too good at what I did- which made me wholly inaccessible and "effective" to a fault even.
I recalled reading Marxism, watching porn as a academic module, debating on " how making a hole is easier than making a pole" and making Freudian references. It is all too fun and when I started working, I knew that I had to put all these asides and cull my reading such that to capture the essence and be expedient rather than be really cut out all frills- the only thing that surprises me was how successful I was in doing so. That I have managed to strip everything down to it's essence and leave whatever Dionysian inclination out of the window.
The behaviour was utilitarian to a fault that all actions must have pragmatic bend otherwise it was absolute useless. The only difference was that when I marched forward, I left everybody behind. This made me a "one man everything"- and there was not a market for such a thing. The thing that made me so damn good, had also made me so damn ineffective.
Looking back, I must have to admit, I have swung perhaps too far to the pragmatic bend that made almost unpragmatic that made me no different from a machine or an Oracle. It made me quite incapable to respond to otherwise pretty common behaviour without trying to find a leverage or angle on it. I was too economical to a fault that people had to erect barriers just so they can prevent me from knowing them too well. To a certain degree, I am glad that I got distracted earlier otherwise I might not be able to survive to this age even.
Hence this reading of a novel have made me reclaim some part of me that I have lost. The part of which made living my life worthwhile thus far. The part of me where there were still wonder left where not everything can be articulated and compressed into a simple language.
Quite frankly, I am extremely surprised the extend of which I have moved from being student to a economical unit in such a short period of time. My learning curve was uncommonly short and such that I had to unlearned what I learned and learned back what I used to know intuitively.
I had to learn to live again.
I remembered previously that I have always enjoyed reading novels. But in recent years, my book list contains mostly on finding the origins of the financial crisis, on power and politics, history and culture of various countries. It seemed rather impressive but to a certain degree, it all seems extremely instrumental in it's nature.All these reading kept my mind focused on being economical and finding insight as opposed to self-discovery. It served me so well that I have turned into a machine- that made me too good at what I did- which made me wholly inaccessible and "effective" to a fault even.
I recalled reading Marxism, watching porn as a academic module, debating on " how making a hole is easier than making a pole" and making Freudian references. It is all too fun and when I started working, I knew that I had to put all these asides and cull my reading such that to capture the essence and be expedient rather than be really cut out all frills- the only thing that surprises me was how successful I was in doing so. That I have managed to strip everything down to it's essence and leave whatever Dionysian inclination out of the window.
The behaviour was utilitarian to a fault that all actions must have pragmatic bend otherwise it was absolute useless. The only difference was that when I marched forward, I left everybody behind. This made me a "one man everything"- and there was not a market for such a thing. The thing that made me so damn good, had also made me so damn ineffective.
Looking back, I must have to admit, I have swung perhaps too far to the pragmatic bend that made almost unpragmatic that made me no different from a machine or an Oracle. It made me quite incapable to respond to otherwise pretty common behaviour without trying to find a leverage or angle on it. I was too economical to a fault that people had to erect barriers just so they can prevent me from knowing them too well. To a certain degree, I am glad that I got distracted earlier otherwise I might not be able to survive to this age even.
Hence this reading of a novel have made me reclaim some part of me that I have lost. The part of which made living my life worthwhile thus far. The part of me where there were still wonder left where not everything can be articulated and compressed into a simple language.
Quite frankly, I am extremely surprised the extend of which I have moved from being student to a economical unit in such a short period of time. My learning curve was uncommonly short and such that I had to unlearned what I learned and learned back what I used to know intuitively.
I had to learn to live again.
Thursday, October 04, 2012
Always Close but never Closed enough
I have never been one to wallow in self-pity. Neither am I who cry for attention. But for the very first time in my life, now I know how self-pity can be such a comforting thought.
Judging from my previous entries, it is fairly obvious that I am a man who really cannot stand anything that is not done economically or thought out. It has been a curse and a bane of my life as I also try to live my life as expediently as I how I write it. One can say that when the law of diminishing returns start kicking in, it is always without fail that I am looking for the next springboard. Of course, some other's might differ, but I leave it to their designs.
It is by this behaviour that I-looking back- have been searching for the next springboard, hence I am not able to hang on onto anything substantial in the last couple of years. And it is this propensity that drives me also to plunge head first into whacked out ideas and even theories that have proven absurd to me previously. Sometimes, it is in the absurdity that we find the biggest gems. But it has been a risky venture as it turned out to be a fruitless endeavour which only end up in lost time and quite unsavoury reputation.
To understand something while internalizing old ones is a risky venture as one loses the sense of reality of which to make sense of the world. I tried desperately to incorporate something I know at the back of my hand of with something quite anti-thetical to it's assumptions and found that certain knowledge arise as a result of it rather than in spite of it. Hence when one attempts therefore to move the other way round- it often becomes a schizophrenic attempt of which no anchor is found in underpining it's two quite different assumptions.
For example, I attempted to understand Chinese culture and tried desperately to argue for a hierarchical society while attempting to use quite Euro-centric concepts, I found that the concepts were quite woefully out of depth in attempting quite a number of phenomenon. The reason is rather simple, certain terms and concepts are never fully expounded because the very act means having to perform sacrilege on it. And to perform something sacrilegious is sometimes in itself short-changing it in the first place. The attempt often fall short because there no language nor term to explain the particular phenomenon or experience as it is precisely the objective. Because to articulate it, is to short-change the process, and to short-change the process is to short-change the understanding.
And therefore having really step out of the zone, I have already performed quite sacrilegious and therefore- I would never fully understanding the whole experience and process however how hard I try. Therefore, my attempts in understanding and using it to my full advantage is really at best laughable. I have missed the first part and second part of the earlier stages therefore I would never fully grasp the third which should comes naturally as a result.
Likewise, my attempts has been woefully short and really did not come to me as naturally as it should be. At best, my attempts is to make it effective without interfering in the process in the first place. And for that I am not even needed- because I am not even clear of the whole process in the first place.
I will be locked out of the whole process because I think even young kids are better than me at this as they have picked up the first step and I really have no clue on the fundamentals in the first place. My education have proven to be rather successful thus far until I attempt to incorporate that with rather "conservative" concepts of which my understanding has no language to explain, The language is in the experience- and for that I have fallen woefully short as I cannot fast-forward nor "instant-nized" as it is not in concepts but rather muscle memory and sub-conscious reflexes that will even render me even more inept than young children.
Anyway, it is in the language of risk that perhaps I am more familiar with and I attempt to be something that I am neither accustomed to nor familiar with and even riled against in the first place. And now at this juncture, I realised that I am wholly inadequate in tackling what might seem even juvenile to most children. Hence perhaps at this particular point, perhaps it is part of process to recognize the limits of my ability to absorb what I am quite ill-equipped to grasp.
At least I tried and really I think I failed quite miserably even as much to understand the psyche and inner-workings of the art, it is in the process and experience that I have failed and however how hard I tried, the tradition remains perfectly malleable to incursions of language and concepts: always close but never close enough.
Judging from my previous entries, it is fairly obvious that I am a man who really cannot stand anything that is not done economically or thought out. It has been a curse and a bane of my life as I also try to live my life as expediently as I how I write it. One can say that when the law of diminishing returns start kicking in, it is always without fail that I am looking for the next springboard. Of course, some other's might differ, but I leave it to their designs.
It is by this behaviour that I-looking back- have been searching for the next springboard, hence I am not able to hang on onto anything substantial in the last couple of years. And it is this propensity that drives me also to plunge head first into whacked out ideas and even theories that have proven absurd to me previously. Sometimes, it is in the absurdity that we find the biggest gems. But it has been a risky venture as it turned out to be a fruitless endeavour which only end up in lost time and quite unsavoury reputation.
To understand something while internalizing old ones is a risky venture as one loses the sense of reality of which to make sense of the world. I tried desperately to incorporate something I know at the back of my hand of with something quite anti-thetical to it's assumptions and found that certain knowledge arise as a result of it rather than in spite of it. Hence when one attempts therefore to move the other way round- it often becomes a schizophrenic attempt of which no anchor is found in underpining it's two quite different assumptions.
For example, I attempted to understand Chinese culture and tried desperately to argue for a hierarchical society while attempting to use quite Euro-centric concepts, I found that the concepts were quite woefully out of depth in attempting quite a number of phenomenon. The reason is rather simple, certain terms and concepts are never fully expounded because the very act means having to perform sacrilege on it. And to perform something sacrilegious is sometimes in itself short-changing it in the first place. The attempt often fall short because there no language nor term to explain the particular phenomenon or experience as it is precisely the objective. Because to articulate it, is to short-change the process, and to short-change the process is to short-change the understanding.
And therefore having really step out of the zone, I have already performed quite sacrilegious and therefore- I would never fully understanding the whole experience and process however how hard I try. Therefore, my attempts in understanding and using it to my full advantage is really at best laughable. I have missed the first part and second part of the earlier stages therefore I would never fully grasp the third which should comes naturally as a result.
Likewise, my attempts has been woefully short and really did not come to me as naturally as it should be. At best, my attempts is to make it effective without interfering in the process in the first place. And for that I am not even needed- because I am not even clear of the whole process in the first place.
I will be locked out of the whole process because I think even young kids are better than me at this as they have picked up the first step and I really have no clue on the fundamentals in the first place. My education have proven to be rather successful thus far until I attempt to incorporate that with rather "conservative" concepts of which my understanding has no language to explain, The language is in the experience- and for that I have fallen woefully short as I cannot fast-forward nor "instant-nized" as it is not in concepts but rather muscle memory and sub-conscious reflexes that will even render me even more inept than young children.
Anyway, it is in the language of risk that perhaps I am more familiar with and I attempt to be something that I am neither accustomed to nor familiar with and even riled against in the first place. And now at this juncture, I realised that I am wholly inadequate in tackling what might seem even juvenile to most children. Hence perhaps at this particular point, perhaps it is part of process to recognize the limits of my ability to absorb what I am quite ill-equipped to grasp.
At least I tried and really I think I failed quite miserably even as much to understand the psyche and inner-workings of the art, it is in the process and experience that I have failed and however how hard I tried, the tradition remains perfectly malleable to incursions of language and concepts: always close but never close enough.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
