courtesy of joyce

Foals - Black Gold

the future is not what it used to be

oh, to be

consequential.

how to tell

It's so easy to tell my sister and me apart. To get the weather forecast, she checks wunderground.com, whereas I use Google and weather.com. Simple!

Neglect

It's too easy a thing to do, and has touched all these areas of my life. But for now, I choose not to neglect this blog. So, let's share.

I certainly am neglecting my schoolwork, have been doing so for a long while now, and with this comes the inferred neglect of future. Looking back on this period, I bet history will make mention of a disquiet amongst the young folks regarding their futures, a gypsy restlessness from uncertainty and letdown. I won't say I can't identify with this characterization, but I have moved on. Now, it's a movement toward peace. I know there is a slice for me in that giant cake named Future, and yes it is delicious. Because God provides, so why worry? Anyway, graduation for me is an incoming ship just crowning the horizon.

I see abundance, I can reach out and stroke it. Not just in the Future, but in the Now. There's always things to do, people to see, overwhelming, environment teeming with vitality. But as they say, "it's not you, it's me." And it's been me since middle school. I think what I seek is a Walden of sorts; I haven't been alone in forever. It would be awful nice to just sit down with a book and actually get past the first 3 chapters. It would be awful nice to finally work on myself, make myself a teensy bit likable. This is a difficult task, let me tell you, as people are not likable in general. Lovable, well that's a whole other ballgame.

Future

I thought you’d like to know the scoop
I’m taking babies back with me, yeah
I’m taking them back home,
so they can see there’s a much better place
I’ve got a sister with an open mind
and my friends are all junkies
But they’re still my friends

..we won't build a time machine but we'll get by

Happy

There are many things to be happy about, such as my dad being alive, the new year, a possible snow day, President's Day shopping, but I am most happy currently because I just found out that Heinz redesigned their ketchup packets, to be rolled out in the fall. WOW, that was REALLY delayed, Heinz!

Another

Since I am on the topic of covers, thought I'd share one covering my all-time favorite U2 song. This doesn't begin to approach the original, but it's still awesome. :)

Message in a Bottle

Crazy cover! Randy does it all.

Missed work today.

theory

So here's a thought: When God saw in Genesis that it was not good for man to be alone, sin had not yet entered the world. Maybe now, with the presence of sin, it is better for the fleshly man to be alone.

True, I look around and see a lot of happy families, lots of love. I see people helping others, being nice to others, saying kind words. I do not dispute the genuineness of human love or happiness in the social context. But with the inherent sinfulness of man comes distrust, jealousy, anger, vengeance, bitterness, and the list goes on. Did God really intend for the fleshly man to partake in society? Such a man has a huge capacity to inflict pain and hurt on others. War aside, it is in the company of others that lustfulness and covetousness must occur. I wouldn't want a massive diamond rock on my finger if no one else had or wanted one, or if no one else saw it. I would have no one to compare myself to, no Joneses to keep up with (or beat). If we were lonely creatures, no one would be around to hear us slander others or be its target. With our tongues, we commit unmeasurable damage and evil. They are the original weapons of mass destruction capable of great deceit and hurt. And I don't want to skirt physical damage; again, aside from war, there are diseases that transmit from person to person, accidents caused by other people, and crimes that assume the presence of other people such as burglary, murder, kidnapping, adultery, heists, and -gasp-terrorism. And let's also mention suicide--I don't know what the leading causes are, but I'm sure a handful or more had something to do with the pressures of society, feelings of not measuring up, guilt, and the like.

I take an earnest look at myself and my relationships with others, and I readily confess that they are all imperfect. But in my defense, I am only human. This is my point, that humans are incapable of having perfect relationships. This must be in the definition of "human" somewhere, that we are fallible. We are not fit for company. Not the way we are now, at least, with our selfishness. We can certainly strive to be the way we will be, though. Nevertheless, this striving is not the way it was intended at all; we were intended to already be. Humans are not inherently faithful, generous, kind. Our Good Samaritan moments are just shadows of how it will be in Heaven after the Second Coming.

something to read

for later

EDIT:

"I hate that God lets you suffer like this," I said.

"Oh," he said, taken aback, "God suffers more."

-2009

reflections from my freshman self

To remind myself of what I thought before on libertarianism.

John Stuart Mill’s “On Liberty” expresses his opinion that liberty is the chief political value. He wrote this book to encourage others to exercise their liberty rather than conform, which has become the easy thing to do in a modern society wherein rule is determined by majority consent. Mill advocated that individual liberty should be preserved at all costs unless its preservation harms others or takes away their liberty. The liberty about which he wrote is civil, or social, liberty rather than liberty of the will. He was concerned with the power of society and government to oppress individual liberty and, through this book, sought to define the limits of the power that society can legitimately exercise over the individual. Mill believed that liberty of thought and feeling, liberty of tastes and pursuits, and liberty to unite are the essential liberties with which society must not interfere; “[n]o society in which these liberties are not, on the whole, respected, is free, whatever may be its form of government” (Mill 55).

In previous ages, the struggle between liberty and authority was comprised of the struggle between subjects and their governments, in which subjects fought for protection against the tyranny of their rulers. Today, in democratic societies, the government is no longer independent of the people. Temporary elected leaders rule for the people and according to the will of the people. However, the people are still not free from tyranny; this is because the “will of the people…practically means the will of the most numerous or the most active part of the people” (Mill 46). The majority can manipulate public opinion to coincide with its own, hence exhibiting tyranny through silencing the minority’s voice. The minority must be protected from the “tyranny of the prevailing opinion and feeling” or else its liberty is denied—particularly, its freedoms of thought and speech. Mill strongly believed in the sanctity of these freedoms and that they should never be violated; “[i]f all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind” (Mill 59). Stifling one man’s freedom of speech would rob the human race of a potentially right opinion and prevent a possible truth from being revealed.

According to Mill, man can interfere with another’s liberty of action only in the pursuit of self-protection or the protection of others: “[T]he only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others” (Mill 52). Mill based this idea on his opinion that liberty is the most important thing to be attained, even more so than what is wise or morally right. I can encourage a friend to do what is right, but unless the consequences of his actions are harmful to another, I cannot force him to do so. This is because the “only part of the conduct of any one, for which he is amenable to society, is that which concerns others. In the part which merely concerns himself, his independence is, of right, absolute” (Mill 52). The liberty of every man with the capacity to act rationally must be preserved, and his wishes respected.

I agree with Mill that liberty is a good thing which should be preserved, that it has a positive impact on society. Although his idea that a person’s liberty should be interfered with only when his behavior harms others sounds pleasant to the ear, I’m not sure how practicable it is. Mill believed that the preservation of liberty is more important than ethics, but I believe that society’s duty to act morally is more important. Mill’s reasoning is not based on an absolute scale of what is right and wrong, but on liberty as the principal good. Although I recognize that liberty is extremely important, I think more important things do exist. Suppose that I have a friend who has no family or any other friends excluding myself. If he arbitrarily decides to kill himself and I discover his plans, should I stop him? This would harm solely him, as it would not cause me or anyone else to harm anyone. According to Mill, I cannot force him to refrain from killing himself, as “the individual is sovereign.” However, I believe that I am morally coerced to do all I can to prevent him from taking his life. Everyone has the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, but liberty over happiness, and life over liberty.

fiction

Do words craft the person or does the person craft the words? You can be anyone you want by choosing your words that way. They're tricky, these words, especially when scrawled or typed. With the written word, there is a sense of detachment that the spoken word does not allow for. You can always link spoken words to a voice, at least. With the written word, you don't always know who the author is, unless it has been made explicit. And even then, who knows? that person may not even be the true author. The words may be stolen goods.

Books will never go out of style, even if print media does. As much as people like to hear themselves speak, they also like to see themselves in print. The thoughts you form in your head sound somehow more intelligent when you write them out than we you say them. Somehow you become a more substantial person as a writer of thoughts than a thinker of the same. Somehow there is accomplishment in writing, even if no one but you reads it. Plus, there can be ownership of the written word in a way not afforded by its spoken brother; attributed to can now be definitively authored by, or just, sweetly, by. And people are vain, they like to leave legacies. In an internet age where memory fades fast due to constant replacement of preoccupations, we crave all the more desperately for something lasting. Ironic, then, how easily the lasting can be destroyed, or--worse--stolen. No matter how much you pour into your writing, no matter how long you spend deliberating over the right words to put forth, there remains the anonymity that invariably comes with separation of the writer from his physical voice.

But maybe that's not the point of the written word at all, the authorship. Maybe the point is the argument, no matter what it derives from, or where. Moreover, the miracle of writing is that stories don't have to be autobiographical; they aren't limited to the scope of the author's experience. You can be anything, when you write about anything.

my Saturday

Woke up late, went to KC for lunch with mom and sister, then Home Depot for new light, sink, and spray paint, arrived at home to spray paint medicine cabinet/touch up some trouble areas around house with white (but green!) paint/do laundry, caught up on some TV, ate Joyce's yummy Trader Joe's dinner, surfed the web, went bowling at Stelton, then came home and cleaned/painted some more.

Pretty good day, minus the getting sick and not doing any school work parts. I love working on my house! Can't wait to throw house parties when the fixing up is all done.

little linguists

A new study shows that babies cry in their mother's tongue... Them little ones are smart!

everything becomes political..

but not for them.

dating for the First Couple

only a matter of time

before scientists agree that humans and chimps did not share a common ancestor. is ardipithecus ramidus even a human ancestor? i think it's as scientific to affirm that as it is to do the opposite

delusion

delusion is a happy trap. you can truly convince yourself of anything if you believe it hard enough. like that you had a happy childhood. and you can seriously go through life thinking this way. so much of a person's history boils down to memory, a thing so highly dependent on psyche, and others' memory. what a pot of gold. what an electrical wire. but when it comes to individual lives, most of the time delusion doesn't matter much, if you're insignificant enough -- that is, if you believe in insignificant people at all. what i mean is, individual "mis-memories" can be harmless if they don't impact many others.

when they do, or when your memories make up a collective, you're playing a different ballgame. this is why historical analysis is so important - because you can have 2 people with entirely opposite recollections of a single event, and when this occurs, both contribute but neither commands legitimacy. oral history only truly works as a retelling of factual events when there are numerous points-of-view involved (and of course, people know this - no one goes around believing every word of the Iliad was historical). don't trust the individual voice when it comes to history unless it is backed by documentation or other kind of evidence.

this is why being a historian, to me, is such a noble career. you have to really be a scholar in order to command any kind of unbiased historical expertise. love love love history. but memory fails me, which is why i suck as a history major. Joanna, what a dumb excuse.

back to my original topic. blogging can serve to alleviate time's distorting effects on memory. it can capture the author's feelings at the time they are being felt, events as they are occurring, etc. less room for error on a test when you just studied the material, right? this does not preclude the many negative effects of blogging, though, such as feeding blogger narcissism and reader hostility, and especially general inanity. wow, what am i doing here? haha

little emperors

China is too big for Communism

excitement

One of the best games I've had the pleasure to beat is being turned into a movie! Too bad the movie will never live up, but still. That the movie's plot won't be a thing like the game's is to be expected, but hopefully Disney makes it work. The prince in Sands is my favorite out of all the games (mostly because he isn't 2D and not yet ridiculously dark and brooding), despite the fact that his fighting skills leave much to be desired.

Prince Of Persia

The online versions aren't the funnest (mostly because they are 10 times as hard), but here is the original Prince of Persia game.

why is google so hip?

I am totally never using Firefox again if I can help it.

Currently: Drowning myself in Milka. Ouch, Twitter-style. My coolness factor just dropped into the negative.

EDIT: Apparently, cool 404 pages are all the rage now. I am so behind the trends.