Glycerine
In case it hasn't occurred to you, the reader, the audience, the title of each post usually hints at the correct tone of each post—especially if it's the name of a song—since it can barely be expressed in writing, and certainly not by me, since I have such an incapacity to communicate effectively. The lyrics are usually a part of it, but only insofar as they are a part of the sound of the song. Also, the song is occasionally playing in the background as I write, in case that provides some insight for the enrichment of your reading experience. Then again, enrichment is known to be a factor, and no factor of zero except infinity modifies the value in any way.
I'm writing because I'm experiencing insomnia immediately before an examination of knowledge in one of my classes. This is bad, except, well, I know about three quarters of the material, and with an hour of studying, I'm guaranteed a seventy-five percent mark on the test. This cannot be denied. The question is, since I've missed the past three homeworks (we have one every week), should I be putting much effort into this test, even though I received respective marks of ninety-seven and one hundred on the previous two? It's all logistics at this point. Learning the material is immaterial; I can do that at a later date when I have no insomnia. Essentially, how much of my time is this test worth? Even if the test was significant, how much of my time is this class work? It's my favorite class; it's opened my eyes to many a revelation in the mathematical world (read: Reality); I like the professor; hell, the assistant for the course is a gorgeous senior student. But in the grand scheme of things (as vague as that is), how important is all this? Should I spend more time writing? Should I spend more time in independent study for my career? Should I spend more time "enriching" (more correctly known as "ruining") my character with a taste of a liberal arts education? I have a philosophy, and a concrete one at that. However, even in the strictly algorithmic nature of it I cannot produce a function determining, essentially, the way I live my life.
It's the problem with every philosophy, really. It's nice that my world view has changed and all that jazz, but how does that affect how I live my life? Does it at all? This is where religion differs itself greatly from philosophy: Christianity is more than just a philosophy because it's a lifestyle. People look down on institutionalized religion, complaining that people are brainwashed and all that jazz as they go and buy their "Anarchy" shirts from department stores. These people who subscribe to these religions have selected a philosophy and *applied it to their lives*. The critics can claim no such thing, or at least not in every case I've seen. It may not be important to anyone else, but let me tell you something: in my opinion, people who have done so, sticking by their choice through thick and thin, are worth far more as human beings than those who choose to believe in nothing, claiming "philosopher" status and living, essentially, for physical and intellectual pleasure.
This isn't to say that religion is harmless; look at fundamentalists across the world, Islam especially. This religion needs to be removed from the planet or modified such that the moderates are the only practicing individuals remaining. I'm tired of all the tolerance and politically correct bullshit. Islam is a proponent of violence worldwide and it must be stopped. Damages must be minimized while we still have time. The same goes for fundamentalist communists and Christians, although, in case you haven't noticed, the latter are far, far less dangerous. I guess you'll just never know until you live in a foreign country, although I can't say we ever experienced too much religious discrimination in Turkey. The different news you're exposed to, however, makes quite a bit of difference.
Ironically—or hypocritically, rather—or not, rather, if you understand everything I'm saying here—the NyQuil I took a little bit ago is kicking in, and I'm leaving this session to cure my insomnia. It was rewarding to post this, now, since I can cite it.
I'm writing because I'm experiencing insomnia immediately before an examination of knowledge in one of my classes. This is bad, except, well, I know about three quarters of the material, and with an hour of studying, I'm guaranteed a seventy-five percent mark on the test. This cannot be denied. The question is, since I've missed the past three homeworks (we have one every week), should I be putting much effort into this test, even though I received respective marks of ninety-seven and one hundred on the previous two? It's all logistics at this point. Learning the material is immaterial; I can do that at a later date when I have no insomnia. Essentially, how much of my time is this test worth? Even if the test was significant, how much of my time is this class work? It's my favorite class; it's opened my eyes to many a revelation in the mathematical world (read: Reality); I like the professor; hell, the assistant for the course is a gorgeous senior student. But in the grand scheme of things (as vague as that is), how important is all this? Should I spend more time writing? Should I spend more time in independent study for my career? Should I spend more time "enriching" (more correctly known as "ruining") my character with a taste of a liberal arts education? I have a philosophy, and a concrete one at that. However, even in the strictly algorithmic nature of it I cannot produce a function determining, essentially, the way I live my life.
It's the problem with every philosophy, really. It's nice that my world view has changed and all that jazz, but how does that affect how I live my life? Does it at all? This is where religion differs itself greatly from philosophy: Christianity is more than just a philosophy because it's a lifestyle. People look down on institutionalized religion, complaining that people are brainwashed and all that jazz as they go and buy their "Anarchy" shirts from department stores. These people who subscribe to these religions have selected a philosophy and *applied it to their lives*. The critics can claim no such thing, or at least not in every case I've seen. It may not be important to anyone else, but let me tell you something: in my opinion, people who have done so, sticking by their choice through thick and thin, are worth far more as human beings than those who choose to believe in nothing, claiming "philosopher" status and living, essentially, for physical and intellectual pleasure.
This isn't to say that religion is harmless; look at fundamentalists across the world, Islam especially. This religion needs to be removed from the planet or modified such that the moderates are the only practicing individuals remaining. I'm tired of all the tolerance and politically correct bullshit. Islam is a proponent of violence worldwide and it must be stopped. Damages must be minimized while we still have time. The same goes for fundamentalist communists and Christians, although, in case you haven't noticed, the latter are far, far less dangerous. I guess you'll just never know until you live in a foreign country, although I can't say we ever experienced too much religious discrimination in Turkey. The different news you're exposed to, however, makes quite a bit of difference.
Ironically—or hypocritically, rather—or not, rather, if you understand everything I'm saying here—the NyQuil I took a little bit ago is kicking in, and I'm leaving this session to cure my insomnia. It was rewarding to post this, now, since I can cite it.
posted by Andrew Hills at 1:42 AM
2 Comments:
Well written. Kind of... emotional, in the "you brought your emotions to the table" kind of way, not that common.
Ah, what am I saying, I'm a crappy writer if it isn't technical. Nice post.
To be honest, Islam just happens to have the most ridiculous radical/reactionary extremism is how I look at it. You can't "eliminate it from the earth" or whatever; by all odds Islam will probably continue to grow as a religion in the US. In fact, what the religious say condemning different religions isn't as useless as what atheists say condemning religion in general. Trying to get rid of any big, ideal religion is a mistake. By ideal, I mean like you're picturing it as a unified matter.
However, the solution to all this is moderation, which is what I see as the real reason for America's success. And yes, you mentioned moderation in what you wrote, but not as something that could resolve the problems imposed upon you by your philosophy.
Maybe the most dangerous thing about a philosophy is trying to become a philosophy.
Sorry that my thoughts are spotty and sporadic (and alliterative, and perhaps too general) but I haven't been very intellectual or diligent in awhile. But, continuing... if you're frustrated with an inability to change the way that you live, well, big change usually is a gradual thing, and it's generally a bad thing if it's not gradual. Little changes, however, integrate. In fact, I remember from SEÑOR LEONARD CLASS that Islam has this little thing about "reminders"-- the concept that people have to be constantly reminded about what they're doing or omitting. Leaving little reminders is fun. That's my Philosophy of Post-It notes, I guess. I wrote out 20 notes that each only said "VOTE" on them in order to remind myself to vote in the gubernatorial election, and I voted! It was fun. Never mind that the gubernatorial election wouldn't have changed if I didn't vote, never mind that I wasted x amount of paper by using all those Post-It notes, never mind that all that time could've been spent doing something else--little things. If I make that a tradition, it'll be a pretty humorous tradition--and if I do that, do you think I'll forget to vote then?
Hey, by the way, are you around for the summer or are you staying at UMass for classes? If so, Quiznos needs you to save its diverse collection of subs from the Evil Menu-Shortening Device.
Post a Comment
<< Home