I have had some odd perceptions over the last week.
1) While driving home from work earlier this week, I distinctly sensed an odor a la toasted bagel while driving on the highway. A lovely, cozy smell, to be true. But I was suspicious, as I've never smelled this on that stretch of road before,or any stretch of road. But I had no one in the car with me to verify or discredit that I was crazy for thinking I smelled toasted bagel.
2) While talking with Ben one evening this week, with tired eyes, everything around him became washed out, the light in the room started masking everything, and making it fuzzy, and all I could really see clearly was Ben in the middle of it all. It was like a filter had been applied to a photograph, only it was my real line of sight and not a picture at all. It was difficult for me to focus my eyes enough to make the effect go away, and I ultimately was so bemused by the effect that I stopped trying and just enjoyed the unusual visual perspective.
3) As I was walking out of my office door this morning, it felt like there was a wind current going through the hallway that made the door difficult to open. In reality, it's just a heavy door and I realized after I opened it that there was probably no more resistance in opening it this morning than there has been any other day I've opened it. And there was, most definitely, no wind in the hallway.
I have instinctively manifest some unusual interpretations of the world around me and my senses are getting creative with what they tell my brain is happening. Shoddy first guesses, to be sure. This first lead me to think I'm becoming more of an artist, as this must be often how they experience the world. My second thought is that I'm losing my mind. My third thought is that these are essentially the same thing. I'm in trouble.
Showing posts with label philosophy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label philosophy. Show all posts
Wednesday, December 11, 2013
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
The What Ifs in Life
I am not sure why, but, I have had a lot of discussion as of late about the "What Ifs" in life. What if this happens, or what if that happens, or I don't want to do this or that because what if that happens. In essence, these uncertainties lead people to hold on otherwise smart and important decisions in life. Whether it is changing jobs, buying a house, getting married, buying clothes (ok maybe that isn't a good example), moving, doing anything that might seem smart, knowledgable, or enjoyable. Now, I make no comment in this regard with respect to financial stability or mitigating loss, as much as the thought pattern and philosphical approach in decision making.
Through this, I have come to give this "Freeze Frame" a title. It is called a "Constant State of Temporary". I have noticed this in many facets of life, both my own and others. Everything from...stopping people from making changes or construction on a house, or the way people fix or repair lamps in their apartment, to the way people select their engagements for free time.
For starters, life is completely temporary. I think we know this. There are few decisions that we make in life that will not at some point be altered. Whether job, house, clothes, car, ....I'll leave spouse out of this, just for good intentions sake....whatever. Anyways, the entire life is temporary, yet we wait to make decisions based on a variety of factors, and often times it is the "what ifs" of life.
The Constant State of Temporary is best illustrated by a few scenarios...and don't be critical, the scenarios are just being made up on the fly...it isn't like I sketch these posts out and what not...and there is no way that I can compete with Sharona and her posts of illustrious people, intriguing stories, colorful pictures, and drama...so suffice it to say....I'll stay with my bland philosophical musings, engaging grammatical suggestions, and heartfelt critiques of society!! :)
Less I digress more...scenario 1. wow....I thought this would be totally easier than I thought it would without reflection on recent conversations....uggghhhh....ok, those that may read this that remember us discussing the given scenario are asked to forgive said reference in the fact that it is anonymous and could apply to a large swath of the population.
Ok Scenario 1 take 2 :) : Let's say you have some free time (not a lot, just a couple hours a week maybe), and some extra cash lying around. You've always wanted to open your own business, but you don't because you are worried about the what ifs. Now, not taking into account that the what ifs might be that your boss would find out and throw you out....no that is not what we are talking about. We are talking about what ifs that are purely dependent on yourself....and your close relations. What if life throws a curveball? What if I can't continue with the business? What if the business becomes so successful that to continue I have to quit my job? Do you see how the what ifs can prevent action? Not that you shouldn't think about the What ifs...I am not stating that, more simply, that what ifs are a part of life, and shouldn't prevent action. Obviously what ifs need to be considered, because there is always some risk involved in every decision...and some the consequences are much larger than others. For instance in Scenario 1....what do you have to lose? that you would fail? Ok, so you may lose some money that could have been used on another venture. If that is the concern, you have to value the option as a financial loss and hope it pays off, or else, don't do it. The boss finding out and kicking you to the curb is not a what if, but a serious risk that nieeds to be considered. Perhaps something you should either discuss with your boss o rlook at the realistic probabilites of the situation.
Scenario 2 (I hope I don't get into trouble with this one): Let's say you want to own a house, you are a single individual, whether male or female it doesn't really matter. You are worried about buying a house out of fear that one day you will 1. get married and thereby all the concerns of your spouse not liking the house fall in to play 2. something else will happen, like you lose your job or something, 3. what if my owning a house will make it more difficult to find a future spouse/partner 4. something else crazy, like I don't know, this isn't my concern...so I can't think of all the what ifs.
Now, some of these concerns may be more legitimate than others, but I propose that it should not fall on the what if, but your desire and the "reality of the situation". Let's go on a debunk of what ifs....reason 1. you can always sell the house...does it make sense then that you shouldn't buy one? What is better....paying rent or paying a mortgage? 2. Well, if this scenario were the reason you shouldn't buy a house, no one will buy a house...save a little money and put it away. 3. This has a lot more involved in the other ones, in that it is a completely emotional/subjective concern...I would submit....if they were intimidated by you owning a house...would you want to be with that person? and 4. Something else logical....the point being that there is no concern listed that would prevent action ro is seriously a concern in making the decision to buy or not buy a house like...1. I can't afford it....2. I don't really want to deal with owning a house or 3. some other non-desire scenario.
Scenario 3. (This one will surely get me into trouble, if you don't know why, just trust me, it will.) So, suppose that you have an individual in your life (how much in your life is potentially irrelevant as all the factors should apply regardless) that you would like to up the ante with so to speak. In other words, that you would like to increase the amount of dedication/dependance that you have with one another. Whether you are in a relationship that you would like to take a step further, married and want to rededicate some portion of your lives together, or you just met (or didn't meet yet as the case may be) and want to give it a whirl for funnsies sake....(yes the author of the weekly word just used the word funnsies). Now relationships have more what ifs than almost any other situation you could imagine. They are the most fragile of eggs at any given tipping point (by the way, the tipping point is a great book for anyone that needs a good read), whether it be from friends to more than friends (or friends with benefits as the case may be), or more than friends to significant others, or significant others to whatever is next in your linear hierarchical progression as to the interdependenace and dedication of two (or more) individuals to each other. The What Ifs in this scenario may have more immediate affects than other previous scenarios. But the short answer is....what do you have to lose? With every what if, the answer to the question what do you have to lose should point you to your answer for action or inaction? If the answer that you have more to lose than seems like a rational or good decision, well then, don't do it. If you don't have much to lose other than what you are fine with losing, then accept the fact that it is lost, hope that it isn't, and give it a whirl.
I have outlined a few simple (or not so simple...but probably common) scenarios that will surely get me into trouble later on down the road if not the not too distant future (I hope that all recognize that no identifying marks have been left, so no one in the world should know who you are!). I am very interested in the thoughts of others on the Constant State of Temporary and the what ifs in life.
Through this, I have come to give this "Freeze Frame" a title. It is called a "Constant State of Temporary". I have noticed this in many facets of life, both my own and others. Everything from...stopping people from making changes or construction on a house, or the way people fix or repair lamps in their apartment, to the way people select their engagements for free time.
For starters, life is completely temporary. I think we know this. There are few decisions that we make in life that will not at some point be altered. Whether job, house, clothes, car, ....I'll leave spouse out of this, just for good intentions sake....whatever. Anyways, the entire life is temporary, yet we wait to make decisions based on a variety of factors, and often times it is the "what ifs" of life.
The Constant State of Temporary is best illustrated by a few scenarios...and don't be critical, the scenarios are just being made up on the fly...it isn't like I sketch these posts out and what not...and there is no way that I can compete with Sharona and her posts of illustrious people, intriguing stories, colorful pictures, and drama...so suffice it to say....I'll stay with my bland philosophical musings, engaging grammatical suggestions, and heartfelt critiques of society!! :)
Less I digress more...scenario 1. wow....I thought this would be totally easier than I thought it would without reflection on recent conversations....uggghhhh....ok, those that may read this that remember us discussing the given scenario are asked to forgive said reference in the fact that it is anonymous and could apply to a large swath of the population.
Ok Scenario 1 take 2 :) : Let's say you have some free time (not a lot, just a couple hours a week maybe), and some extra cash lying around. You've always wanted to open your own business, but you don't because you are worried about the what ifs. Now, not taking into account that the what ifs might be that your boss would find out and throw you out....no that is not what we are talking about. We are talking about what ifs that are purely dependent on yourself....and your close relations. What if life throws a curveball? What if I can't continue with the business? What if the business becomes so successful that to continue I have to quit my job? Do you see how the what ifs can prevent action? Not that you shouldn't think about the What ifs...I am not stating that, more simply, that what ifs are a part of life, and shouldn't prevent action. Obviously what ifs need to be considered, because there is always some risk involved in every decision...and some the consequences are much larger than others. For instance in Scenario 1....what do you have to lose? that you would fail? Ok, so you may lose some money that could have been used on another venture. If that is the concern, you have to value the option as a financial loss and hope it pays off, or else, don't do it. The boss finding out and kicking you to the curb is not a what if, but a serious risk that nieeds to be considered. Perhaps something you should either discuss with your boss o rlook at the realistic probabilites of the situation.
Scenario 2 (I hope I don't get into trouble with this one): Let's say you want to own a house, you are a single individual, whether male or female it doesn't really matter. You are worried about buying a house out of fear that one day you will 1. get married and thereby all the concerns of your spouse not liking the house fall in to play 2. something else will happen, like you lose your job or something, 3. what if my owning a house will make it more difficult to find a future spouse/partner 4. something else crazy, like I don't know, this isn't my concern...so I can't think of all the what ifs.
Now, some of these concerns may be more legitimate than others, but I propose that it should not fall on the what if, but your desire and the "reality of the situation". Let's go on a debunk of what ifs....reason 1. you can always sell the house...does it make sense then that you shouldn't buy one? What is better....paying rent or paying a mortgage? 2. Well, if this scenario were the reason you shouldn't buy a house, no one will buy a house...save a little money and put it away. 3. This has a lot more involved in the other ones, in that it is a completely emotional/subjective concern...I would submit....if they were intimidated by you owning a house...would you want to be with that person? and 4. Something else logical....the point being that there is no concern listed that would prevent action ro is seriously a concern in making the decision to buy or not buy a house like...1. I can't afford it....2. I don't really want to deal with owning a house or 3. some other non-desire scenario.
Scenario 3. (This one will surely get me into trouble, if you don't know why, just trust me, it will.) So, suppose that you have an individual in your life (how much in your life is potentially irrelevant as all the factors should apply regardless) that you would like to up the ante with so to speak. In other words, that you would like to increase the amount of dedication/dependance that you have with one another. Whether you are in a relationship that you would like to take a step further, married and want to rededicate some portion of your lives together, or you just met (or didn't meet yet as the case may be) and want to give it a whirl for funnsies sake....(yes the author of the weekly word just used the word funnsies). Now relationships have more what ifs than almost any other situation you could imagine. They are the most fragile of eggs at any given tipping point (by the way, the tipping point is a great book for anyone that needs a good read), whether it be from friends to more than friends (or friends with benefits as the case may be), or more than friends to significant others, or significant others to whatever is next in your linear hierarchical progression as to the interdependenace and dedication of two (or more) individuals to each other. The What Ifs in this scenario may have more immediate affects than other previous scenarios. But the short answer is....what do you have to lose? With every what if, the answer to the question what do you have to lose should point you to your answer for action or inaction? If the answer that you have more to lose than seems like a rational or good decision, well then, don't do it. If you don't have much to lose other than what you are fine with losing, then accept the fact that it is lost, hope that it isn't, and give it a whirl.
I have outlined a few simple (or not so simple...but probably common) scenarios that will surely get me into trouble later on down the road if not the not too distant future (I hope that all recognize that no identifying marks have been left, so no one in the world should know who you are!). I am very interested in the thoughts of others on the Constant State of Temporary and the what ifs in life.
Friday, February 27, 2009
Touchy Subject II - Homosexuality and the Mormons
So, after a conversation with Sharona, I have decided to post a follow-up, which will probably need a further follow-up from the less confrontational, more practical, and more mild-mannered of the two of us.
So, in preparing for this lil' post, I watched the video of the speech from the Oscar's Sharona referred to, read various statements that the church has put out (this was interesting) and reflected on several conversations I have had with people, whom I would love to call my friends, who I care deeply about, but the relationship feels strained and somewhat superficial. We fail to include each other in our most intimate and deepest circles of life and friendship. There is a consistent ebb and flow of going from no contact to a bit more contact, but never really regular heartfelt, bare your soul, dependence for the last breath of sanity contact. And therefore, despite my sincerity with them and more than likely their sincerity in a relationship with me, they are more likely my acquaintances, despite years of long relationships and emotion. I presume there are several reasons why they are not, which I hope to elaborate on, and hope that maybe this will spur thought as to how that reality can potentially change. Before I launch into my tirade....please be aware that these are my thoughts and not the thoughts of Sharona, the LDS church, your dog Sue, or the neighbor's uncle Frank.
Now, for all the mormons and non-mormons reading this (which I presume there are few.......of both), I should probably give a brief disclaimer/bias notification. 1. I am a mormon, and arguably an active mormon at that. 2. I am a very liberal mormon, but more likely than not, a fairly conservative member of society. 3. I am a very large (and often vocal) gay rights supporter. 4. I'm straight, which means there are things that I am sure I do not and can not identify with in non-straight communities, and 5. I'm single, which means that in many people's religious goggles, I shouldn't be treated very differently than gay men (or women for that matter) within the church.
So, homosexuality and the mormons is a huge topic, and I won't address even a small fraction of it. I'm not here to argue or comment on the religious topic of whether homosexuality is right or wrong, nor what the result is in the heavens after we die. Those topics are for people that wish for and/or have far greater insight, authority, and wisdom than myself. What I wish to address are the every day factors in our lives as we go to church that I assume and expect divide gays and mormons both within the walls of the church building and without.
For starters, I think it would be unfair to not point out the seemingly small yet relatively large steps the mormon church (or the church for short) has taken to change at a minimum its public relations standpoint in regards to gays, and some of me would argue along with it, its official and unofficial policies. While the church has not, nor do I suspect it will, change its stance in regards to homosexuality and eternal salvation, it has left certain practices (both documented and undocumented) and rhetoric. More and more the leaders are preaching acceptance of the individuals, rarely are they preaching change the individual (as indicated by the link I posted earlier), and even more rarely are they picking sides in relation to nurture vs. nature.
That being said, any time homosexuality and gay rights is brought up to mormon friends or related, our first response is to recite some scripture, explore passages from the proclamation on the family, or give some other explanation or opinion as to the eternal truths of life. However, what often escapes our thought process, our deliberations, and our exchanges, is are they accepted as people? what opportunities do they have in our community? do we understand the issues involved?
I know as a straight male that happens to be single, and a bit out of that sweet spot of happy mormon marriageville, I find interaction within the mormon community to be intimidating at best, unwelcome more often than not, and my views and opines discredited as common place (maybe that is a reflection of my uneducated and often gregarious mindset!). And if that is my initial feeling of acceptance as a fairly commandment abiding, church going, tithing paying, single male, with more theoretical concerns within the church than practical, I can only imagine the degree to which someone who is gay feels those exact feelings amplified exponentially, not withstanding the impressions, feelings, and receptions I do not experience and have no insight into.
And so the question is then begged, what can be done to make people feel as though they are "beloved children of god"? Let's get off of our high horses for a second. We all sin. We probably all know people that have had sex outside of the bonds of marriage, both gay and straight. Yet we definitely treat people that are gay much differently than we treat people that are straight and knockin boots on a saturday afternoon! We know people that steal (and oh my, maybe we have stolen a piece of gum back when we were kiddies), we know people that don't pay their tithing, we know people that smoke, we know people that drink, we know people that lie, we know people that cheat, and by all means, we may even know people that commit fraud, have shot someone, were in a motorcycle gang, whatever. Yet they come to church, and as long as they are straight, hip hip hooray, they have a hope of changin' their ways. If they are gay....have you read the proclamation on the family? Did you know that it is an abomination before god? Are we trying to convince ourselves or them?
The discussion and the exchange has to be what can we do different so that, in light of the gospel truths which mormons accept not changing, people that are gay can be happy, accepted, and integrated into a mormon community. I am not a big debater on the nature vs. nurture topic. I find that I have met people on both sides of that spectrum, for some I believe it is choice, and for others I believe it is their natural attraction.
Whether attraction can be changed over time or not, I have no idea, but I do know that it doesn't matter as to my approach, thought process, interaction with, or desire to be friends with people that are gay. As a matter of fact, probably to the chagrin of the church leadership, I have been known to go to gay bars (and non-attraction based ones all the same), I have a tendency to enjoy hanging out with friends of mine that are gay, bi-sexual, and straight, and yet no way in the world would I probably feel comfortable saying to a gay friend of mine.... "Hey, why don't you come hang out with me and a bunch of church members." Maybe I am selling them short, but if I am approached with trepidation (and I have been in my ward since I was a kid, and since returning have been here for 2 years), I can only imagine the responses to the question and answer....are you married? No, I'm gay, but I've been with my boy/girlfriend for the last (fill in time period here).
Reflect to your conversations with members of your ward, and think about how many conversations go beyond your kids, your spouse, who you are dating (if you are single...if you are married....shame on you! :) ), etc. Now, I'm not saying that those are bad things to think or talk about, but if someone around you is gay, how likely are they to feel that this particular conversation is one that they can participate in, feel welcomed in, or not feel in some way excluded? I know that with several members of my congregation, the majority of the conversations they have with me are, who am I dating? When am I getting married? and if there are big no's to both of those, what am I doing to change that! Oh how I love mormonism....and it really is its own ism!
So, how is my picture going? Have I painted a good one? I feel I may be short on colors, but I'm trying to do the best I can with this stupid pencil I have in my hand! ;)
I think this question begs a better discourse...it begs more introspection into biases, fears, and self-perceptions, it begs for honesty with ourselves and others, it begs for the consideration and contemplation to come up with better answers, because guess what honey, the current ones aren't cuttin' it.
So, in preparing for this lil' post, I watched the video of the speech from the Oscar's Sharona referred to, read various statements that the church has put out (this was interesting) and reflected on several conversations I have had with people, whom I would love to call my friends, who I care deeply about, but the relationship feels strained and somewhat superficial. We fail to include each other in our most intimate and deepest circles of life and friendship. There is a consistent ebb and flow of going from no contact to a bit more contact, but never really regular heartfelt, bare your soul, dependence for the last breath of sanity contact. And therefore, despite my sincerity with them and more than likely their sincerity in a relationship with me, they are more likely my acquaintances, despite years of long relationships and emotion. I presume there are several reasons why they are not, which I hope to elaborate on, and hope that maybe this will spur thought as to how that reality can potentially change. Before I launch into my tirade....please be aware that these are my thoughts and not the thoughts of Sharona, the LDS church, your dog Sue, or the neighbor's uncle Frank.
Now, for all the mormons and non-mormons reading this (which I presume there are few.......of both), I should probably give a brief disclaimer/bias notification. 1. I am a mormon, and arguably an active mormon at that. 2. I am a very liberal mormon, but more likely than not, a fairly conservative member of society. 3. I am a very large (and often vocal) gay rights supporter. 4. I'm straight, which means there are things that I am sure I do not and can not identify with in non-straight communities, and 5. I'm single, which means that in many people's religious goggles, I shouldn't be treated very differently than gay men (or women for that matter) within the church.
So, homosexuality and the mormons is a huge topic, and I won't address even a small fraction of it. I'm not here to argue or comment on the religious topic of whether homosexuality is right or wrong, nor what the result is in the heavens after we die. Those topics are for people that wish for and/or have far greater insight, authority, and wisdom than myself. What I wish to address are the every day factors in our lives as we go to church that I assume and expect divide gays and mormons both within the walls of the church building and without.
For starters, I think it would be unfair to not point out the seemingly small yet relatively large steps the mormon church (or the church for short) has taken to change at a minimum its public relations standpoint in regards to gays, and some of me would argue along with it, its official and unofficial policies. While the church has not, nor do I suspect it will, change its stance in regards to homosexuality and eternal salvation, it has left certain practices (both documented and undocumented) and rhetoric. More and more the leaders are preaching acceptance of the individuals, rarely are they preaching change the individual (as indicated by the link I posted earlier), and even more rarely are they picking sides in relation to nurture vs. nature.
That being said, any time homosexuality and gay rights is brought up to mormon friends or related, our first response is to recite some scripture, explore passages from the proclamation on the family, or give some other explanation or opinion as to the eternal truths of life. However, what often escapes our thought process, our deliberations, and our exchanges, is are they accepted as people? what opportunities do they have in our community? do we understand the issues involved?
I know as a straight male that happens to be single, and a bit out of that sweet spot of happy mormon marriageville, I find interaction within the mormon community to be intimidating at best, unwelcome more often than not, and my views and opines discredited as common place (maybe that is a reflection of my uneducated and often gregarious mindset!). And if that is my initial feeling of acceptance as a fairly commandment abiding, church going, tithing paying, single male, with more theoretical concerns within the church than practical, I can only imagine the degree to which someone who is gay feels those exact feelings amplified exponentially, not withstanding the impressions, feelings, and receptions I do not experience and have no insight into.
And so the question is then begged, what can be done to make people feel as though they are "beloved children of god"? Let's get off of our high horses for a second. We all sin. We probably all know people that have had sex outside of the bonds of marriage, both gay and straight. Yet we definitely treat people that are gay much differently than we treat people that are straight and knockin boots on a saturday afternoon! We know people that steal (and oh my, maybe we have stolen a piece of gum back when we were kiddies), we know people that don't pay their tithing, we know people that smoke, we know people that drink, we know people that lie, we know people that cheat, and by all means, we may even know people that commit fraud, have shot someone, were in a motorcycle gang, whatever. Yet they come to church, and as long as they are straight, hip hip hooray, they have a hope of changin' their ways. If they are gay....have you read the proclamation on the family? Did you know that it is an abomination before god? Are we trying to convince ourselves or them?
The discussion and the exchange has to be what can we do different so that, in light of the gospel truths which mormons accept not changing, people that are gay can be happy, accepted, and integrated into a mormon community. I am not a big debater on the nature vs. nurture topic. I find that I have met people on both sides of that spectrum, for some I believe it is choice, and for others I believe it is their natural attraction.
Whether attraction can be changed over time or not, I have no idea, but I do know that it doesn't matter as to my approach, thought process, interaction with, or desire to be friends with people that are gay. As a matter of fact, probably to the chagrin of the church leadership, I have been known to go to gay bars (and non-attraction based ones all the same), I have a tendency to enjoy hanging out with friends of mine that are gay, bi-sexual, and straight, and yet no way in the world would I probably feel comfortable saying to a gay friend of mine.... "Hey, why don't you come hang out with me and a bunch of church members." Maybe I am selling them short, but if I am approached with trepidation (and I have been in my ward since I was a kid, and since returning have been here for 2 years), I can only imagine the responses to the question and answer....are you married? No, I'm gay, but I've been with my boy/girlfriend for the last (fill in time period here).
Reflect to your conversations with members of your ward, and think about how many conversations go beyond your kids, your spouse, who you are dating (if you are single...if you are married....shame on you! :) ), etc. Now, I'm not saying that those are bad things to think or talk about, but if someone around you is gay, how likely are they to feel that this particular conversation is one that they can participate in, feel welcomed in, or not feel in some way excluded? I know that with several members of my congregation, the majority of the conversations they have with me are, who am I dating? When am I getting married? and if there are big no's to both of those, what am I doing to change that! Oh how I love mormonism....and it really is its own ism!
So, how is my picture going? Have I painted a good one? I feel I may be short on colors, but I'm trying to do the best I can with this stupid pencil I have in my hand! ;)
I think this question begs a better discourse...it begs more introspection into biases, fears, and self-perceptions, it begs for honesty with ourselves and others, it begs for the consideration and contemplation to come up with better answers, because guess what honey, the current ones aren't cuttin' it.
Sunday, February 1, 2009
To believe or To not believe....the audacity of it all!
So, I went to church today.....shocker shocker. Yes, I know it isn't really that much of a shocker.
Anyways, I had a rather interesting conversation with a teacher o' mine about Atheism and Believers. Now prior to entering into a diatribe on the discussion, a few definitions of religiosity will be primarily divulged for the purposes of this conversation. If you don't like my definitions, well, take it up in the comments.
1. Believer - someone who believes in the existence of an almighty being, or superior power (we won't get into, in this post what that superior power is, or who that superior power is.)
2. Knowers - someone who professes to "Know" or have a surety of knowledge of a supreme being, superior power, etc.
3. Agnostic - someone who does not know whether or not there is a superior power, but also does not think that someone can know, or at minimum that they cannot know.
4. Atheist - someone who professes to "Know" or have a surety of knowledge that there is no such thing as a supreme being.
So, with that being said (and mind you, these are crude defintions) I'll launch into the philosophical discussion and how I have come to believe that Atheists, based purely on philosophical reasoning, are completely pompous and arrogant a**es!
So, I would say that the majority of people that read this blog are Believers, and maybe there are a few Knowers, and possibly we have an agnostic or two in the mix....that is if Sharona reads this blog (just kidding). Anyways, the premise is on that a believer, believes that something exists, but does not have a sure knowledge one way or the other, and the flip is an agnostic.....most people are ok with that in some way shape or form. Then there are the extremes, the Knowers and the Atheists. now, to know something exists, is to have a relatively specific knowledge of a certain person, place, or thing. For instance, I know (well, I won't get into what to know is and is not, but for these purposes, it is to have a surety of knowledge as is physically possible, leaving wiggle room for the very fact that we are all human and our knowledge is limited)....I digress....I know that I am in my bed typing on a laptop at 12:56am on a Sunday night, which was a fast sunday, and whereby I attended sacrament meeting. Some Knowers claim to know the supreme being with the same amount of surety as I have that I went to church. Now, becuase I do not know all things and because I am inclined to believe them, I therefore believe that it is possible.
Now take the role of the Atheist. Not only do they not believe that Knowers "know" what they claim to have knowledge of, but also that Believers are also vastly mislead in their delusional adherence to illogical bemusements of a flacid intellect. Moreover, they believe that they know that there is no supreme being. Now to believe a finite thing, is to claim to have a limited knowledge or belief, as in a belief that there is a supreme being. But to claim that none exists, how can one claim that none exists, save one is all knowing, and that one knows all things and comprehends all things to such an extent that there is no supreme being.
I can tolerate the non-believer, and I can tolerate the believer. I can even tolerate the aethist to a certain degree....but that doesn't change the fact that the Aetheist must claim to know more than I believe it is possible to know. I can handle that someone claims they do not believe in a supreme being...but to be able to claim that one does not exist and cannot exist, depends on someone having the knowledge that they understand all things enough to know there is nothing else.
In other words, it is far more presumptious to claim that something does not exist than to claim that something does exist, or you believe it does exist...for to believe that something does exist one must simply have an inkling of knowledge or a sign of existence in one direction or the other.
Similarly to believe that something does not exist, one must simply have an inkling of knowledge or a sign of non-existence.
Moreover to know that somehting exists, one must simply konw of a surety of a small fact....that there is a supreme being.
However, for one to claim to know that something does not exist, one must be prepared and have the knowledge that there is no feasible way for a supreme being to exist. That they must have searched through all the canals of knowledge and depths of contemplation to know that there is nothing there, for they cannot find it in any place whereby they look to prove its existence.
Anyways, that was a tangent in Sunday School, which all that know me, know I thorougly enjoyed it.
Ciao!
Anyways, I had a rather interesting conversation with a teacher o' mine about Atheism and Believers. Now prior to entering into a diatribe on the discussion, a few definitions of religiosity will be primarily divulged for the purposes of this conversation. If you don't like my definitions, well, take it up in the comments.
1. Believer - someone who believes in the existence of an almighty being, or superior power (we won't get into, in this post what that superior power is, or who that superior power is.)
2. Knowers - someone who professes to "Know" or have a surety of knowledge of a supreme being, superior power, etc.
3. Agnostic - someone who does not know whether or not there is a superior power, but also does not think that someone can know, or at minimum that they cannot know.
4. Atheist - someone who professes to "Know" or have a surety of knowledge that there is no such thing as a supreme being.
So, with that being said (and mind you, these are crude defintions) I'll launch into the philosophical discussion and how I have come to believe that Atheists, based purely on philosophical reasoning, are completely pompous and arrogant a**es!
So, I would say that the majority of people that read this blog are Believers, and maybe there are a few Knowers, and possibly we have an agnostic or two in the mix....that is if Sharona reads this blog (just kidding). Anyways, the premise is on that a believer, believes that something exists, but does not have a sure knowledge one way or the other, and the flip is an agnostic.....most people are ok with that in some way shape or form. Then there are the extremes, the Knowers and the Atheists. now, to know something exists, is to have a relatively specific knowledge of a certain person, place, or thing. For instance, I know (well, I won't get into what to know is and is not, but for these purposes, it is to have a surety of knowledge as is physically possible, leaving wiggle room for the very fact that we are all human and our knowledge is limited)....I digress....I know that I am in my bed typing on a laptop at 12:56am on a Sunday night, which was a fast sunday, and whereby I attended sacrament meeting. Some Knowers claim to know the supreme being with the same amount of surety as I have that I went to church. Now, becuase I do not know all things and because I am inclined to believe them, I therefore believe that it is possible.
Now take the role of the Atheist. Not only do they not believe that Knowers "know" what they claim to have knowledge of, but also that Believers are also vastly mislead in their delusional adherence to illogical bemusements of a flacid intellect. Moreover, they believe that they know that there is no supreme being. Now to believe a finite thing, is to claim to have a limited knowledge or belief, as in a belief that there is a supreme being. But to claim that none exists, how can one claim that none exists, save one is all knowing, and that one knows all things and comprehends all things to such an extent that there is no supreme being.
I can tolerate the non-believer, and I can tolerate the believer. I can even tolerate the aethist to a certain degree....but that doesn't change the fact that the Aetheist must claim to know more than I believe it is possible to know. I can handle that someone claims they do not believe in a supreme being...but to be able to claim that one does not exist and cannot exist, depends on someone having the knowledge that they understand all things enough to know there is nothing else.
In other words, it is far more presumptious to claim that something does not exist than to claim that something does exist, or you believe it does exist...for to believe that something does exist one must simply have an inkling of knowledge or a sign of existence in one direction or the other.
Similarly to believe that something does not exist, one must simply have an inkling of knowledge or a sign of non-existence.
Moreover to know that somehting exists, one must simply konw of a surety of a small fact....that there is a supreme being.
However, for one to claim to know that something does not exist, one must be prepared and have the knowledge that there is no feasible way for a supreme being to exist. That they must have searched through all the canals of knowledge and depths of contemplation to know that there is nothing there, for they cannot find it in any place whereby they look to prove its existence.
Anyways, that was a tangent in Sunday School, which all that know me, know I thorougly enjoyed it.
Ciao!
Monday, January 26, 2009
When did I become so cynical?
So, I had the unexpected opportunity to speak at Harvard Business School this last weekend at a conference. It was sort of short notice with not a lot of time to prepare and really even less time to think about it as work has been through the roof as of late.
While I was there, it was such a blast from the past, or a world that I haven't been associated with or even crossed paths with in so long. I remember it when ideas were everything, the future was sort of yours, and the most important thing in your life was You...oh wait, I don't think that last one really ever entered a lot of the minds of the people I associate with, or at least not my mind.
But regardless, it was interesting to see how people thought that they were the most important thing in the world, strode the hallways with elbows poised to absorb as much space and essence as possible, their egos expanded well beyond any presence their body could control, sipping brandies and expensive liqueurs like they had the refined palates of Anton Ego, coupled with the sophistication of Descartes. And I.....I sat in the corner wondering, what in the world possessed them to have such an incredulous attitude about themselves as if I were some sort of Socrates, ready with a simple question to yank them down from their elven perches aloft in the highest tree tops.
And as I return to reality a bit, and the work day returns to answering phone calls from clients, managing money, planning the next big thing (big for me is not very big for most), wondering what in the world happened to the time I had, and hating myself for not having finished a certain lookbook for a certain project which in this blog shall be known as Two's Company, and wondering where oh where did my sense of thought, the value of thought, and the reality of my own position (or lack thereof) go? Shortly thereafter the thought pops in my head that I shouldn't be typing this blog at all, but should be working on the lookbook, but everyone needs a few minutes of downtime.
Anyways, I don't know what has inspired me to be so cynical as to no longer give value or credence to the idea, or perhaps it is that I do not give value or credence to the idea without proven action or merit, I am not sure which. But I remember the days when thoughts were valuable, even if they did not result in action (which on a daily basis now I think thoughts without action are worthless), and as I postulate what I want to do and how I want to structure things in the future, I wish that someone had thought about the problems I am anticipating and facing as my business expands, my life changes, and my voice leaves me (I was talking too loudly this weekend!)
I recently finished the book Anna Karenina, and am reminded of the character Konstantin Dmitrich Levin, who regularly thinks of the problems between the landowners and the muzhiks. And while reading it I thought of that applicability to common day life which I engage in. How highly would I value that thought? Even if there was no action by the thought provider, but it lead and paved a way for my action.....after all isn't that what philosophy is about? Thinking so that others may embrace that thought and put it into action? Anyone that knows me, knows that I am no genius, and therefore I rely on the thoughts of others.
So, when did I become so cynical, that in a weekend, speaking at one of the most prestigious business schools in the world, I left annoyed, disgusted, and overall unimpressed with supposedly the elite of the elite? Where thought was nothing more than a self aggrandizing, snobbish pursuit of those ensnarled in a world of elitist behaviour?
Thoughts?
While I was there, it was such a blast from the past, or a world that I haven't been associated with or even crossed paths with in so long. I remember it when ideas were everything, the future was sort of yours, and the most important thing in your life was You...oh wait, I don't think that last one really ever entered a lot of the minds of the people I associate with, or at least not my mind.
But regardless, it was interesting to see how people thought that they were the most important thing in the world, strode the hallways with elbows poised to absorb as much space and essence as possible, their egos expanded well beyond any presence their body could control, sipping brandies and expensive liqueurs like they had the refined palates of Anton Ego, coupled with the sophistication of Descartes. And I.....I sat in the corner wondering, what in the world possessed them to have such an incredulous attitude about themselves as if I were some sort of Socrates, ready with a simple question to yank them down from their elven perches aloft in the highest tree tops.
And as I return to reality a bit, and the work day returns to answering phone calls from clients, managing money, planning the next big thing (big for me is not very big for most), wondering what in the world happened to the time I had, and hating myself for not having finished a certain lookbook for a certain project which in this blog shall be known as Two's Company, and wondering where oh where did my sense of thought, the value of thought, and the reality of my own position (or lack thereof) go? Shortly thereafter the thought pops in my head that I shouldn't be typing this blog at all, but should be working on the lookbook, but everyone needs a few minutes of downtime.
Anyways, I don't know what has inspired me to be so cynical as to no longer give value or credence to the idea, or perhaps it is that I do not give value or credence to the idea without proven action or merit, I am not sure which. But I remember the days when thoughts were valuable, even if they did not result in action (which on a daily basis now I think thoughts without action are worthless), and as I postulate what I want to do and how I want to structure things in the future, I wish that someone had thought about the problems I am anticipating and facing as my business expands, my life changes, and my voice leaves me (I was talking too loudly this weekend!)
I recently finished the book Anna Karenina, and am reminded of the character Konstantin Dmitrich Levin, who regularly thinks of the problems between the landowners and the muzhiks. And while reading it I thought of that applicability to common day life which I engage in. How highly would I value that thought? Even if there was no action by the thought provider, but it lead and paved a way for my action.....after all isn't that what philosophy is about? Thinking so that others may embrace that thought and put it into action? Anyone that knows me, knows that I am no genius, and therefore I rely on the thoughts of others.
So, when did I become so cynical, that in a weekend, speaking at one of the most prestigious business schools in the world, I left annoyed, disgusted, and overall unimpressed with supposedly the elite of the elite? Where thought was nothing more than a self aggrandizing, snobbish pursuit of those ensnarled in a world of elitist behaviour?
Thoughts?
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Frustration with dreaming
So I don't write often, and I don't promise to write more often, but running my own law firm takes time....and dedication, and a whole host of other things that I care not to elaborate on. Anyways, for the several weeks I have been in deep thought (mind you, my depth doesn't get much deeper than the bottom of a jar of Maille, but that is another story.)
I assume everyone that knows me, knows my well complained about issues with sleep, lack of it, and lack of its consistency. Along with that comes my lack of dreaming, but usually I don't complain about that, I just think that it is odd....but alas that is not what has bothered me today despite their importance and potential relation to the current topic of demise.
For the last several weeks/months, I have been a little annoyed with myself in the way things are going. I had these little goals in my head of how things would go, where they would be, and what I would be required to do to take it there. A lot of those goals were professional, and some were personal. Surprisingly, a lot of those goals have been attained or are in the process of being attained, and yet I was frustrated. Every day I was waking up and attaining goals, and making things that I had set as goals when I was 5 a reality, yet I wanted more, or at least I wasn't happy with where I was at. One would think that if their "dreams" were being fulfilled that one would be happy. But that is the topic of the post...."DREAMS".
I began to internalize as to whether it was that my goals were not fulfilling. I feel like they are fulfilling, and as an everyday life, I actually enjoy them quite a bit. I think the world would look at them as respectable and admirable goals, and I don't think I am entirely a self-centered individual, although I won't claim that I am not selfish.
Well, if my goals were fulfilling, aren't my goals my dreams? OR are goals and dreams different? Are dreams that intangible thing which we lust after and goals the pragmatic steps that we take to get there?
What is a dream? Very tough to call. I have found myself feeling uninspired and a bit, hmmm.... shall we say calculated and pragmatic. I longed for the days when I would stare out the window and fantasize about being superman, or batman....and reflect back on how happy those day dreams made me feel, despite the fact that I knew they would never come into existence.
I know those around me would say that I am always dreaming of these wild and crazy endeavors that I get involved with, yet I never seem to feel like they are dreams. They seem like pragmatic, practical plans in an attempt to achieve very tangible and realistic goals (what is realistic to one may not be realistic to another.) Yet, I continue to wake up every day and wonder what it is in the world I am doing with myself. And then it hit me.
Have I failed to dream? What do I mean by that? I mean that I have failed to remove myself from the tangible every day practical part of life and think about the "if's" and the "what if's". The unattainable has become attainable, and therefore, my dreams have died...fortunately not because of depression or failure, but because of relative success (I am no millionaire). Odd to say that success has frustrated me, but it has. There is still challenge and things to work for, but they are attainable, or at least I feel like they are attainable.
It is that failure to keep the dream alive, to keep dreaming that has lead to the frustration. I have wondered over the last while what it was with me, and I wonder if that is the answer. That if failing to come up with new dreams, new ideas, new challenges and aspirations, that the old dreams which one has attained or failed, whichever is ones reality, the dreaming has been supplanted by the every day, the parts of life that keep us alive and make us human. The parts of life that sustain us in a temporal sense, but they do not keep our spirits alive, at least not my spirit alive.
I need to dream. I need to dream of that next mountain that needs to be climbed, or that little bit of dirt that I could cultivate an ant farm in. Whatever it is, I believe it is the continuous process of dreaming that keeps my spirit alive.
So alas, if you have felt similarly, or ideas in what it is you dream about and work for...chime in. Let me hear your thoughts...and maybe, just maybe I'll dream of writing a response! ;)
I assume everyone that knows me, knows my well complained about issues with sleep, lack of it, and lack of its consistency. Along with that comes my lack of dreaming, but usually I don't complain about that, I just think that it is odd....but alas that is not what has bothered me today despite their importance and potential relation to the current topic of demise.
For the last several weeks/months, I have been a little annoyed with myself in the way things are going. I had these little goals in my head of how things would go, where they would be, and what I would be required to do to take it there. A lot of those goals were professional, and some were personal. Surprisingly, a lot of those goals have been attained or are in the process of being attained, and yet I was frustrated. Every day I was waking up and attaining goals, and making things that I had set as goals when I was 5 a reality, yet I wanted more, or at least I wasn't happy with where I was at. One would think that if their "dreams" were being fulfilled that one would be happy. But that is the topic of the post...."DREAMS".
I began to internalize as to whether it was that my goals were not fulfilling. I feel like they are fulfilling, and as an everyday life, I actually enjoy them quite a bit. I think the world would look at them as respectable and admirable goals, and I don't think I am entirely a self-centered individual, although I won't claim that I am not selfish.
Well, if my goals were fulfilling, aren't my goals my dreams? OR are goals and dreams different? Are dreams that intangible thing which we lust after and goals the pragmatic steps that we take to get there?
What is a dream? Very tough to call. I have found myself feeling uninspired and a bit, hmmm.... shall we say calculated and pragmatic. I longed for the days when I would stare out the window and fantasize about being superman, or batman....and reflect back on how happy those day dreams made me feel, despite the fact that I knew they would never come into existence.
I know those around me would say that I am always dreaming of these wild and crazy endeavors that I get involved with, yet I never seem to feel like they are dreams. They seem like pragmatic, practical plans in an attempt to achieve very tangible and realistic goals (what is realistic to one may not be realistic to another.) Yet, I continue to wake up every day and wonder what it is in the world I am doing with myself. And then it hit me.
Have I failed to dream? What do I mean by that? I mean that I have failed to remove myself from the tangible every day practical part of life and think about the "if's" and the "what if's". The unattainable has become attainable, and therefore, my dreams have died...fortunately not because of depression or failure, but because of relative success (I am no millionaire). Odd to say that success has frustrated me, but it has. There is still challenge and things to work for, but they are attainable, or at least I feel like they are attainable.
It is that failure to keep the dream alive, to keep dreaming that has lead to the frustration. I have wondered over the last while what it was with me, and I wonder if that is the answer. That if failing to come up with new dreams, new ideas, new challenges and aspirations, that the old dreams which one has attained or failed, whichever is ones reality, the dreaming has been supplanted by the every day, the parts of life that keep us alive and make us human. The parts of life that sustain us in a temporal sense, but they do not keep our spirits alive, at least not my spirit alive.
I need to dream. I need to dream of that next mountain that needs to be climbed, or that little bit of dirt that I could cultivate an ant farm in. Whatever it is, I believe it is the continuous process of dreaming that keeps my spirit alive.
So alas, if you have felt similarly, or ideas in what it is you dream about and work for...chime in. Let me hear your thoughts...and maybe, just maybe I'll dream of writing a response! ;)
Friday, May 11, 2007
Do you choose your life or.....??
So today I about lost it. Ok, I really lost it. Why you ask? Well, completely selfish, impatient, and spoiled reasons, but nonetheless, oh so valid to me.
I have been at a large branch of life, only to find myself a bit lost and bewildered as to what opportunities and avenues to pursue. The other day, it led me to utter frustration, anger, and disappointment. Ever since I was a "little kid," I have had stuck in my head, and sincerely believed that I was here to accomplish something. What that something is, I don't know, but as most individuals, I feel compelled to try.
The reason is, and it relates to a discussion I had with my sister recently, is I have sort of led life in doing what I thought I was supposed to do, gone where I was supposed to go. And it seems that regardless of what I have wanted, there was one door, and that door was where I was going, not because it was my first choice, but because it was the option left for me. Looking back, most of those options really have been beneficial, but nonetheless, doesn't change the major question. Do we choose the life we lead, or just bring it in to line with what we are "supposed" to do?
Naturally , a statement like that brings in assumptions that I have, in that I believe that there is a divine nature, which is overseen by a supreme being, who I, in common vernacular, refer to as "God". Obviously, there is an inherent discussion in the existence of God, and God's attributes, but that is not the essence or intent of this post. Perhaps, at another time, I will pose the discussion of "is there a God, and what are God's attributes", but this post assumes those things.
I think of my life, and I will admit, have really had amazing experiences, but to get to those experiences, have often felt like I am walking in the dark. In other words, that although I pursue various avenues or opportunities, I have rarely had an opportunity in front of me that I didn't feel I should take, i.e. the opportunity presented was the opportunity I should choose. That begs the question then, is life an open breadth full of choices, or a narrow hallway with nothing but "Exit" signs on the sides.
Yes, I fully understand that I could choose to completley alter my life and make drastically different personal decisions. And perhaps that is my problem, I have tunnel vision. I think sometimes those of us who feel very driven, are so because we become extremely fixated on whatever, and that may be one of my flaws. I don't know. But nonetheless, I often feel that the idea behind life is not to choose life, but to bring your life in alignment with what God wants you to do. And that isn't saying that you wouldn't be happy with those decisions, just a motiviation side of things.
Thoughts?
I have been at a large branch of life, only to find myself a bit lost and bewildered as to what opportunities and avenues to pursue. The other day, it led me to utter frustration, anger, and disappointment. Ever since I was a "little kid," I have had stuck in my head, and sincerely believed that I was here to accomplish something. What that something is, I don't know, but as most individuals, I feel compelled to try.
The reason is, and it relates to a discussion I had with my sister recently, is I have sort of led life in doing what I thought I was supposed to do, gone where I was supposed to go. And it seems that regardless of what I have wanted, there was one door, and that door was where I was going, not because it was my first choice, but because it was the option left for me. Looking back, most of those options really have been beneficial, but nonetheless, doesn't change the major question. Do we choose the life we lead, or just bring it in to line with what we are "supposed" to do?
Naturally , a statement like that brings in assumptions that I have, in that I believe that there is a divine nature, which is overseen by a supreme being, who I, in common vernacular, refer to as "God". Obviously, there is an inherent discussion in the existence of God, and God's attributes, but that is not the essence or intent of this post. Perhaps, at another time, I will pose the discussion of "is there a God, and what are God's attributes", but this post assumes those things.
I think of my life, and I will admit, have really had amazing experiences, but to get to those experiences, have often felt like I am walking in the dark. In other words, that although I pursue various avenues or opportunities, I have rarely had an opportunity in front of me that I didn't feel I should take, i.e. the opportunity presented was the opportunity I should choose. That begs the question then, is life an open breadth full of choices, or a narrow hallway with nothing but "Exit" signs on the sides.
Yes, I fully understand that I could choose to completley alter my life and make drastically different personal decisions. And perhaps that is my problem, I have tunnel vision. I think sometimes those of us who feel very driven, are so because we become extremely fixated on whatever, and that may be one of my flaws. I don't know. But nonetheless, I often feel that the idea behind life is not to choose life, but to bring your life in alignment with what God wants you to do. And that isn't saying that you wouldn't be happy with those decisions, just a motiviation side of things.
Thoughts?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)