29 November 2011
Reading Raistlin's story makes me think a lot about my own life and my opinions. There is much I can relate to. The denying of emotions, how he despises the weaknesses he sees in himself. He is determined to prove himself. No matter the cost. What is in his heart, but a swirl of conflicting ideals.I have read the book before, but I cannot remember when. All I know is that the story is familiar. Perhaps this time I will read all the books in the series. I am interested to know how he steels himself.
28 November 2011
The greatest malady of our age is that we have no ambition. Even if we once did, we have lost it in the countless distractions in life today.Reading The Soulforge again. It reminds me of everything I need to sacrifice to achieve my dreams.
No one was born strong. We just have to keep on fighting. Keep pressing on.
27 November 2011
When you told me last night that she had already moved on, I was like "ah.. I see. Who was it?". But when you told me who he was, and that it was for a few months already, I was like "What? Wait, no way! That's not serious.".Yet you still convinced me otherwise. So I asked her directly. Turns out you were wrong, she is not with him. Turns out I should have just trusted my instincts. Anyway, you are got me thinking about one thing. Why would she display it for all to see like that? I really do not know. And I am really tired of trying to understand.
My friends keep telling me to move on. I have already accepted the fact that we are over, and that there is the possibility of us ever getting back together again is as slim as the slit diameter in a light diffraction experiment. Why do I still wear our ring? It is a personal choice. I never want to forget the past. It reminds me of the good and the bad. My mistakes and that I am not ready.
Damn, I just listened to Forever and Always by Parachute because I thought about it and I teared up.
Forever and always.
26 November 2011
I have never tried blogging when I was drunk. I am a little tipsy now. Maybe tomorrow I can read what I wrote and laugh at what I blog about.Well, my friend messaged me just now, telling me not to be so emotional, because PX told her about me out of concern. She wanted to help, and suggested that I should her blog since she was in a similar position.
Well, I went to go read her blog. A little drunk but I believe that I still can be rational here. Here is an excerpt from her blog:
...showed him I loved him in everything I did and... , gave him my all. I did everything ... AND MORE. If it isn't enough, IT ISN'T MY FAULT. I shouldn't make myself miserable because I GAVE MY BEST and that's what counts...
I would like to say that hey, I gave my all in my own relationship, it is not my fault. But then whose fault would it be? Her's? No, she gave her all too. I broke her heart when I broke up with her. Simple as that. I take the blame. I hurt her. I guess I am just not cut out for a relationship. It took me a year to figure that out. I promise I tried to make it work. I really did. But things did not work out the way I hoped they would. Perhaps we were not compatible. Perhaps I was too immature to manage a relationship with her.
What is love? Can you actually imagine your loved one asking you, why you loved her? How do you rationalize the feeling? The emotion is intangible, something you just know. When you see her happy, you are happy for her. You want to protect her. You want the best for her. You feel helpless when you see her sad. You try your best to console her, but if your actions are the cause for her sadness, it is double the pain because you have your own reasons for what you did. Your only hope is that she would understand you. Love, Mother Theresa loved everyone she came across. Is that the same as romantic love? Can one love all, yet love one specially? What would be so special about the person? Maybe the person is the one you share your life with.
When you share your life with a person, is it for ever? What does it mean to share your life? Does it mean to open up completely? I wonder if that is so. I have never met someone who opened up completely. I guess that is because I am not a trustworthy person.
But I always imagine the day when - as John Lennon puts it - the world will be as one. When everyone is honest with each other. I guess that will never happen. In small circles, perhaps. But never as a society.
The secret is in finding like-minded friends.
I do not want to escape the blame. I want to blame myself, and let it be a reminder forever that my character is still underdeveloped and irrational. Why did I break up with her? Because I could not fulfill her expectations. Because I always let her down. And when I broke up, I broke the ultimate promise. To never give her up. That will forever be who I am. An untrustworthy liar. Full of empty promises that I never deliver.
So now, I try to make myself a better person.
I never want to make a promise to anyone again until I am ready.
So much for being drunk. Got to wake up in about 3 hours for work.
23 November 2011
Sometimes I browse through my almost empty facebook and realise that even after learning so much from my failed relationship, I am still not ready for another one. I doubt anyone will accept me the way I am, and I am unwilling to change who I am.I am weak. Still.
16 November 2011
I was on a meme generator website, and I came across this phrase by the Philosoraptor.If God can do anything,
Could He make a rock so heavy that He could not lift it?
Clearly, the situation is impossible. Being able to fulfill one requirement causes the other premise to be false. In the most basic form, the statement becomes as such: If you can do anything, can you make yourself unable to do something? It would make more sense if the person added an extra clause. You can do anything, except for making yourself unable to do something.
Using absolutes may make your argument seem authoritative and grand, but you are left open to paradoxes in actual fact. For example:
All things come from God. Since evil exists, evil must have come from God.
God is omnipresent. Evil is the absence of God. Therefore evil cannot exist.
Things like that.
There is always a problem when using absolutes with morality. Making an absolute proposition often leaves loopholes for others to exploit and criticize. Nevertheless, I should never stop trying to search for the absolute truth. Relativity is all fine and convenient, but I personally find it too easy. One can say that morality is all relative to each culture. One might find it acceptable to eat another man's flesh, while another will find the practice abhorrent. Is there nothing absolute in this world?
Can a man be moral when he steals medicine to save his ill child?
Is helping another person cheat so that he would pass and have a better future ahead moral?
When you kill another to save yourself, is that moral?
Or what if you have kill to save your family?
Stealing is wrong. Is it? But is allowing your child to die when you can save him also wrong?
Cheating is wrong. Is it? But is denying your friend a shot at a brighter future wrong?
Killing is wrong. Is it, really? Would you rather take the sin upon yourself or let him kill you?
Perhaps all are wrong. But then what we only do is to choose the lesser of two evils.
Do not speak if silence is enough,
Do not hold if speaking is enough,
Do not hurt if holding is enough,
Do not wound if hurting is enough,
Do not maim if wounding is enough,
Do not kill if maiming is enough.
The greatest warrior is he who does not have to kill.
Morality is so hard to define. We all have a rough idea of what morality is. For me, it means to not hurt others. It means to try to make the lives of others better and happier. Even then, it is not a clear cut definition. It certainly needs some clauses or modification. What if an action improves the life of one while disrupts another? Would that action be moral or immoral?
I hate philosophy. Because philosophy never gives you the answer. Philosophy can only keep you guessing at the true meaning of morality, getting you closer but never quite there.
I suddenly understand. Just like in physics, it is easy to calculate the answer when you are just studying one object. It gets slightly harder when you have two subjects, but it is still manageable. However, as more and more identities are introduced, the relationship between all the parts become unpredictable and impossible to accurately define. Such is the case for morality. If it were just me, everything would be easily settled. I would do everything that is good for myself. If became you and I, things would be different, but I could understand that morality means not hurting you and advancing the common cause. More people only means more conflicting views and a giant headache.
No wonder some people become hermits.
15 November 2011
I have done my round-off back tuck many many times. But somehow I always seem to hit a mental block and cannot bring myself to complete the move anymore after bailing out just once. It takes much coaxing and psyching for me to gather up my courage once again to back tuck.Why is this?
I know that I can do it. I have done it before.
Why am I so afraid to commit to the back tuck?
Why do I back out at the last moment?
If I could do it in slow motion, I might be able to control each part of my body with perfect timing and ease. Unfortunately I do not have that luxury. Everything happens so fast, and before I know it, I have landed the flip. I have to work this irrational fear away.
I would rather do a front flip any day than a back flip.
Oh well.
I wonder if you have received the parcel. I wonder if you have moved on. My friends keep telling me to move on. I wonder how you are doing. I guess your friends told you the same.
08 November 2011
I picked up a good book during my time overseas. My friend brought it over with him and he lent it to me to pass time while doing my duty. I read the first few pages. Unfortunately, I did not manage to finish the book before returning back home.So what I did was to borrow the book - Consolations of Philosophy - from the library.
The book carries many ideas that I feel the author, Alain de Botton, has expressed very succinctly.
While on Epicurus, he wrote that "We don't exist unless there is someone who can see us existing, what we say has no meaning until someone can understand, while to be surrounded by friends is constantly to have our identity confirmed; their knowledge and care for us have the power to pull us from our numbness. In small comments, many of them teasing, they reveal they know our foibles and accept them and so, in turn, accept that we have a place in the world."
I count myself lucky to have found such friends. Passing time with them makes me feel more present and less isolated from this world.
Then again when exploring Seneca, he espouses that "The wise man will not despise himself even if he has the stature of a dwarf, but nevertheless wishes to be tall. The wise man is self-sufficient in that he can do without friends, not that he desires to do without them."
The second statement resounds very, very strongly with me. More than once, I have hurt people by naively trying to explain that I could do without them. I could not express the idea that though I am self-sufficient, I do not want them gone. I stupidly said something along this line: You are important, but not necessary in my life. I fathom things would have turned out better had I sorted my thoughts out before speaking. I thought that explaining my point of view would help them understand my own philosophy.
Not many people understand stoicism.
If one day my friends are gone, I would carry on. If one day I passed on, I would expect my friends to similarly carry on. No one knows what the future holds in store for us. If fortune decides to afflict me tomorrow, I would accept my fate calmly. Stoicism is the acceptance that some things are beyond our control. Because of this, some find me cruel that I am so blase about most things, even people. Believe me, I care, but if I am not part of the solution then there is nothing left for me to do there. Basically, I care if I can help.
So you see, I cannot express myself as finely as the author. Even reading my own paragraph leaves me feeling as if it lacks some essential point that brings across the spirit of stoicism. Perhaps my ideas will become better articulated with time.
01 November 2011
What are you, that you so despise the ways of this world?Are you a hermit, that you shun all human contact?
I find human relationships complex. Too complex to understand fully. And I am tired to try. I find it easier to avoid contact than to risk conversation. But then, perhaps this is only true in the company of sophisticated men. I imagine that the company of the innocent and naive will be much more enjoyable, free from politics and subtle power plays.
Are you an anarchist, that you refuse to respect the laws of society?
There is difference between good and bad. Is there a distinction within good or bad itself? Are there varying degrees of evil? There must be. That is why there is petty crime and serious crime. When upholding the law, do you demand punishment for every petty crime, or do you sometimes let it slide? What if there is no inherent evil in the crime? Is gambling evil? When I say gambling is illegal, does it make it bad to gamble or does it merely becomes an offence to gamble. How about jaywalking? Law is important, but so is the spirit of the law. The difficulty is striking a balance between strictness and flexibility. The task is almost - if not certainly - impossible. Being flexible already means double standards. How can I book one person and not another for the same offence? Law should be absolute, but then it must be compassionate. The two cannot be reconciled. In my opinion, a small community is much more preferable to a large society. A small community is much more easily managed as everyone cares for and looks out for each other. A person in a large society only thinks for his immediate circle of fellows.
Are you an ascetic, that you deny yourself a life of luxury and fun?
Perhaps I am, but the kind of "fun" that the world indulges in has no meaning. Maybe my life has no inherent meaning either, then all my hard work would be for naught. In the end, all things die. Why should I not enjoy the time I have here on Earth while I can? Am I a soul waiting to be saved? I do not know. Why should I care? I have no religion. The only reason I can give for my non-conformity is that my own intuition insists that the pursuit of self-development is better than that of self-indulgence. Maybe in the future I will be able to support my stand with a solid argument.
Are you a dreamer, that you wish for such great things?
I am. I dream that I can be talented with hard work. I dream that I will be a jack of all trades and master of all. I dream that I am at peace with the world and easily content. I dream that my environment is serene and tranquil. I dream that I will contribute to humanity and help it progress. I dream that I can change the world, although I know that this is like reaching for infinity. Only time will tell if these dreams are realised.