"You can't handle the truth." -Aaron Sorkin
The above quote is taken out of context, but nevertheless is an accurate description about how most of us respond to reality; we can't handle it because we find it uncomfortable, and because we find it uncomfortable we will therefore find ways to dodge it. People will deny the truth, twist it about, select the pieces that they like while leaving the rest, et cetera.
Why is this?
I don't think the truth hurts. Or rather, I don't think the truth should have to hurt.
Everytime the truth does hurt it happens under dubious circumstances and I feel as though I may have uncovered what those circumstances are.
A few cultures across the globe have the morally suspect practice of teaching their children that a rotund man will methodically follow and document their every move all day, every day, for the entire year, in order to determine whether or not the child is worthy of receiving his presents.
If you happen to be a particularly paranoid child, learning that you are in fact not being followed year round by this unusual and bearded man and his wild animals comes as something of a relief.
However, most children become distressed once they learn the truth and for various reasons.
But what actually upset them?
I would argue that a child that had the truth explained to them from the very beginning does not face the same disappointment. Aside from questioning the motives of the adults that perpetuate a tradition of needlessly lying to their children, we learn from this example that it wasn't actually the truth that hurt.
Consequently, I believe that people should be exposed to the truth immediately, whatever the case may be.
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Obstinate Tosspots
I ask a great deal of questions, many of them hypothetical. Most times it's to spark conversation at a party or to play around with an idea. Some of the trouble I run into when asking questions is that I will unintentionally uncover pompous fools.
You know the type, guys who are fools and are covering for it by impressing on people as to how wonderful they are with all this self-flattery and trying to prove they are correct by holding the same opinion at the end of a conversation as they did at the beginning.
Take for example when someone asks, "So, you believe in the Big Bang Theory then?"
Chances are this person is going to have an idea about astrophysics that is less than accurate.
After bracing yourself for absurdity, you can take the time to discuss observational evidence, the expansion of the Universe and if they knew that the static on their television is caused by radiation left over from the Big Bang, but these points are not helpful when dealing with a pompous fool.
The pompous fool will argue back nonsense, "You weren't there, so how could you know?""What happened before the Big Bang?" and "How do you know TV static isn't ghosts?"
Uh huh.
There's a difference between arguing a hypothetical for the sake of creating a fertile ground for iterative problem solving and being an obstinate tosspot only interested in being able to find new ways to interpret your own ideas.
You know the type, guys who are fools and are covering for it by impressing on people as to how wonderful they are with all this self-flattery and trying to prove they are correct by holding the same opinion at the end of a conversation as they did at the beginning.
Take for example when someone asks, "So, you believe in the Big Bang Theory then?"
Chances are this person is going to have an idea about astrophysics that is less than accurate.
After bracing yourself for absurdity, you can take the time to discuss observational evidence, the expansion of the Universe and if they knew that the static on their television is caused by radiation left over from the Big Bang, but these points are not helpful when dealing with a pompous fool.
The pompous fool will argue back nonsense, "You weren't there, so how could you know?""What happened before the Big Bang?" and "How do you know TV static isn't ghosts?"
Uh huh.
There's a difference between arguing a hypothetical for the sake of creating a fertile ground for iterative problem solving and being an obstinate tosspot only interested in being able to find new ways to interpret your own ideas.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Macho Comedian
I have this weird suspicion that Randall Mario Poffo, better known as Macho Man Randy Savage, really wanted to be a stand-up comedian, but felt compelled to follow in the family business, which was wrestling.
Both his father and brother were wrestlers. This probably prompted Macho Man to hide what his family would consider to be a lesser profession.
You could argue that Macho Man actually wanted to be a baseball player, since that's what he was doing before he threw his shoulder out and became a wrestler, but the problem with that argument is that if you look at Macho Man you can tell he's a natural athlete, so being a minor league baseball outfielder was probably something that came naturally to him, and the things that come natural to us are rarely the things that we have a passion for.
My guess is that he tried the baseball thing to avoid falling into the footsteps of his father, but when he had no choice but to become a wrestler he found ways to work in his true passion.
How many of you have a career path that was influenced by your parents?
How many of you work where the tasks you're faced with are simple or the solutions come naturally to you?
Both his father and brother were wrestlers. This probably prompted Macho Man to hide what his family would consider to be a lesser profession.
You could argue that Macho Man actually wanted to be a baseball player, since that's what he was doing before he threw his shoulder out and became a wrestler, but the problem with that argument is that if you look at Macho Man you can tell he's a natural athlete, so being a minor league baseball outfielder was probably something that came naturally to him, and the things that come natural to us are rarely the things that we have a passion for.
My guess is that he tried the baseball thing to avoid falling into the footsteps of his father, but when he had no choice but to become a wrestler he found ways to work in his true passion.
How many of you have a career path that was influenced by your parents?
How many of you work where the tasks you're faced with are simple or the solutions come naturally to you?
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Another Doomsday
For those of you who haven't figured it out already, (which is no one here now, since the people who read my blog are more intelligent than that) the world ending in 2012 is a hoax.
We've seen this nonsense spread everywhere from the Interwebs to the History Channel to the glossies, and a good question to ask ourselves right about now would be, "Why?"
Why what? Why didn't someone laugh in the face of the person who suggested it, why do people continually give into doomsday predictions (see: Y2K), why wasn't this simply a Weekly World News headline we could snicker at while waiting in the checkout line at the market?
People like to feel important. They like to believe that the time they live in is a special one where interesting and grand cosmical events will take place. Take for example the Evangelicals who believe we're living in the "end of days" (note: not the same end of days as 2012 mind you).
What's downright bizarre is how the events these people look forward to are ones that will destroy them and everyone they care about.
Chances are doomsday predictions have a sort of social effect that could be beneficial.
For instance, I've made attempts to get people who claim to believe the world will end on Dec. 21, 2012 to write me a check the size of their bank account that will only clear on Dec. 22, 2012.
Peoples apprehension in whipping out the checkbook tells me there is someone inside there that has made the automatic calculation of 2012 being a hoax and that giving me their life savings is a bad move.
Why this someone hasn't been brought to the forefront of this person's thinking is currently beyond me.
Doomsday predictions can also act as a way to get someone to express their fears or ignorance on a particular topic. Y2K struck when people knew less about computers than they do now.
Before it came back from the future to stop itself, I've heard people suggest that the Large Hadron Collider and 2012 are somehow linked.
Why do you suppose some people require the world to constantly be on the brink of destruction?
We've seen this nonsense spread everywhere from the Interwebs to the History Channel to the glossies, and a good question to ask ourselves right about now would be, "Why?"
Why what? Why didn't someone laugh in the face of the person who suggested it, why do people continually give into doomsday predictions (see: Y2K), why wasn't this simply a Weekly World News headline we could snicker at while waiting in the checkout line at the market?
People like to feel important. They like to believe that the time they live in is a special one where interesting and grand cosmical events will take place. Take for example the Evangelicals who believe we're living in the "end of days" (note: not the same end of days as 2012 mind you).
What's downright bizarre is how the events these people look forward to are ones that will destroy them and everyone they care about.
Chances are doomsday predictions have a sort of social effect that could be beneficial.
For instance, I've made attempts to get people who claim to believe the world will end on Dec. 21, 2012 to write me a check the size of their bank account that will only clear on Dec. 22, 2012.
Peoples apprehension in whipping out the checkbook tells me there is someone inside there that has made the automatic calculation of 2012 being a hoax and that giving me their life savings is a bad move.
Why this someone hasn't been brought to the forefront of this person's thinking is currently beyond me.
Doomsday predictions can also act as a way to get someone to express their fears or ignorance on a particular topic. Y2K struck when people knew less about computers than they do now.
Before it came back from the future to stop itself, I've heard people suggest that the Large Hadron Collider and 2012 are somehow linked.
Why do you suppose some people require the world to constantly be on the brink of destruction?
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Your Movie
Suddenly one day two unauthorized movies about your life pop into existence.
The first movie is an independent documentary featuring random snippets of you going about your every day life, completely unaware of the camera crew that must've been hiding in the bushes (or as the bushes) in order to obtain this footage. It also includes utterly honest interviews with all your friends, family and enemies.
The Second movie is a major motion picture from Hollywood. It has all the people you would have suspected playing you and all of your friends and family and enemies. Critics and audiences find they like the film very much and it has accumulated both a 91% approval rating on Rotten Tomatoes and a 9 star rating on IMDB.
The question is, which film are you more interested in watching?
The first movie is an independent documentary featuring random snippets of you going about your every day life, completely unaware of the camera crew that must've been hiding in the bushes (or as the bushes) in order to obtain this footage. It also includes utterly honest interviews with all your friends, family and enemies.
The Second movie is a major motion picture from Hollywood. It has all the people you would have suspected playing you and all of your friends and family and enemies. Critics and audiences find they like the film very much and it has accumulated both a 91% approval rating on Rotten Tomatoes and a 9 star rating on IMDB.
The question is, which film are you more interested in watching?
Monday, September 28, 2009
Today in Health: Death
"Curiosity did not kill this cat." -Studs Terkel
Death is one of those many things your mind blocks out on a day-to-day basis in an attempt to keep you on a mentally even keel and not terribly depressed drowning your sorrows in a chocolaty cereal.
The reason is because Death is not pleasant and being constantly aware of it will make life rather difficult.
Just try to function in society while being fixated on Death.
You start asking perfectly happy people questions about Death that they simply don't want to be asked.
These are nice folk who have Death fenced off in a dark and sunless prairie, located on a desolate moon, deep in the subconscious Universe of their minds and here comes you floating by in your morbid spaceship asking things like, "I keep thinking about Death from the perspective of being alive, don't you?"
I spent a good portion of last night reading Epitaphs and from a quick bit of math I could tell the majority of them ironically didn't believe in Death (or rather, didn't believe in being dead).
Dr. Sam Parnia and the AWARE Study seem to be fixated on Death.
Their dilemma is that no one wants to hear about Death. Their solution is to not talk about Death and instead talk about consciousness... sorta....
Sources of the above nonsense:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/33055341#33055341 (w/ video)
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33055601/ns/today-today_health
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/09/080910090829.htm
Death is one of those many things your mind blocks out on a day-to-day basis in an attempt to keep you on a mentally even keel and not terribly depressed drowning your sorrows in a chocolaty cereal.
The reason is because Death is not pleasant and being constantly aware of it will make life rather difficult.
Just try to function in society while being fixated on Death.
You start asking perfectly happy people questions about Death that they simply don't want to be asked.
These are nice folk who have Death fenced off in a dark and sunless prairie, located on a desolate moon, deep in the subconscious Universe of their minds and here comes you floating by in your morbid spaceship asking things like, "I keep thinking about Death from the perspective of being alive, don't you?"
I spent a good portion of last night reading Epitaphs and from a quick bit of math I could tell the majority of them ironically didn't believe in Death (or rather, didn't believe in being dead).
Dr. Sam Parnia and the AWARE Study seem to be fixated on Death.
Their dilemma is that no one wants to hear about Death. Their solution is to not talk about Death and instead talk about consciousness... sorta....
Sources of the above nonsense:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/33055341#33055341 (w/ video)
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33055601/ns/today-today_health
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/09/080910090829.htm
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Lyrics and Badges
Today I received Royal Mail.
Inside the sand colored envelope were the following:
If you do not know who Thea Gilmore is, you must not hesitate in visiting her website in order to become acquainted with her music. Her lyrics do not disappoint.
Thea's website
Thea's myspace page with samples of her music
My uncannily embarrassing interview with the poor girl
Inside the sand colored envelope were the following:
If you do not know who Thea Gilmore is, you must not hesitate in visiting her website in order to become acquainted with her music. Her lyrics do not disappoint.
Thea's website
Thea's myspace page with samples of her music
My uncannily embarrassing interview with the poor girl
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
