Yippie, Materialism All the Way!!!

They say that money doesn't buy you happiness, but it sure does buy me this brand spankin' new MacBook (which consequently makes me very happy!).

That's right, I caved in and bought a new computer even though Ursinus is giving me one. In a way, this computer is a bribe to get me to go to Ursinus. Well, more like it's a consolation prize for having to go to UC. In all reality, I've more or less come to accept UC (that doesn't mean I'm happy about it, just that there's no point in me fighting against the dying of a already dead light), so this is just a great "woohoo"!

If you don't like Macs, well, then, this won't mean anything to you. If you do like them, then let me tell you, I'm in Mac Nirvana.

Although no material object can truly help me escape samsara. Because all things (yes, even this laptop) shall pass. The bittersweet reality of reality.

I hope you're all enjoying your Wednesday. I feel immensely bad about not doing my paper, and I know Ms. Shulman is going to make me feel like shit tomorrow, but in all reality, the Pleasure to Pain ratio of writing my English final just doesn't pan out.

Keep on keepin' on.

Namaste

I think the old scenarios of heaven and hell can be unreligious. People can perform their good deeds in the spirit of putting their installments in their retirement annuities. And there's nothing religious about that. Religion is supposed to be about the loss of the ego, not about its eternal survival.

-- Karen Armstrong

Moral Intuition or Moral Reasoning (or Why You Don't Really Know How You Think)

A quick moral question. Imagine a runaway trolley headed for five people. All will certainly be killed unless you throw a switch that diverts the trolley onto another track, where it will kill one person. Should you throw the switch?

Another quick moral question. Imagine a runaway trolley headed for five people. The only way to stop the trolley requires that you push a large stranger onto the tracks, where he will die as his body stops the trolley. Should you push the stranger?¹

How did you react to these two situations? If you were like me, then you accepted the first situation as okay, while the second one seemed irrational. However, take a second look. In the first situation, you save five people at the cost of one person. In the second situation, you save five people at the cost of one person. It's the exact same situation, and yet your reaction was different. Even though the logic is exactly the same. Why is this?

Jonathan Haidt's "social intuitionist" theory claims that moral feelings proceed moral feeling. Basically, he believes that during a moral decision, we first have a moral intuition (a gut level feeling), which we then create moral reasoning to explain. Therefore, most of our moral reasoning exists merely to defend our moral intuition. Dr. Joshua Greene at Princeton performed a study with the situation from above where he observed brain scans of people as they tried to answer the question. He found that the emotional center of the brain activated before they made any decision to act.

So much for the purely rational man. Emotions, no matter how we try to disassociate or label them away in our modern society, remain with us. Even during our most "rational" decisions. Better to know this truth and work with it than try to escape from our "primal" core.

Go figure.

Namaste.

¹ This scenario comes from Psychology by David G. Meyers, and the case study was done by a Princeton team led by Joshua Greene.

Science Olympiad End of the Year Get Together

I'm pretty sure that everyone in Science Olympiad would like to have an end of the year get together. Well, at least I would. Since the Hi-Q team has already taken up the pizza party idea, I was hoping that the Science Olympiad team might do something original, and possibly out of school. If you have any ideas, feel free to post them here, or e-mail me or Mr. Orlando. Though, you might want to tell Mr. O why you're telling him your ideas, since I haven't really put him into the loop about this whole thing.

Thanks.

Namaste.

An Interactive Grad Speech

Hey everyone. I'm working on my graduation speech, and I figured I'd give everyone the chance to give any input that they feel would make my speech more entertaining / educational / interesting. Feel free to post any ideas. Keep in mind that I'm just asking for suggestions, I'm not promising your ideas will be put into my speech. I already have a broad outline of what I want to say, but if your ideas gel well with what I have in mind, then I'll be sure to put them into my speech (and even give you credit for them!).

Thanks in advance for any suggestions.

Namaste

Life Lessons

I'm sure everyone has come across the idea that life is one giant classroom. The first time I heard this, I must have been reading the Conversation With God books by Neale Donald Walsch. Although that book may be just a tad bit hippie dippie (and by that, I mean new agey), the idea itself is not too bad.

To elaborate on the idea, it basically states that everything that happens in your life happened to teach you something. If you're into new age and/or Eastern Philosophy, you might equate these lessons with your karma. If you're into Judeo-Christian theology, you might say that God placed these lessons there for you. Or if you're an agnostic / atheist, you might say that you only have one life to live, and if something happens, you might as well learn something from it.

This idea takes a whole lot of effort to actually enact. To honestly believe and embody the idea that everything, EVERYTHING, happens for a reason and can teach you something is no small task. It's hard to believe that the 19 year old cancer patient died for a reason. It's hard to believe that millions of small children die every day for a reason. It's hard to believe that the bad guy often wins, and that the good guy often loses for a reason.

In fact, you might say that there is no reason for these things. You'd be right on, too. The only reason for these things is the reason you place behind them. The context you choose for life events affect what they mean to you. However, if something tragic happens, no amount of "that sucks"-ing is going to make it unhappen. Might as well learn something from it. Might as well accept that it's perfectly okay that it happened.

The only danger with this philosophy is that you might fall into the victim trap of reactivity. Instead of taking responsibility for your life, you might begin to think, "Well, x was supposed to happen, so why give a damn?" And that's the double edged sword of life. The double edge best summed up in the Serenity Prayer: Lord, give me the strength to accept the things I can't change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference." Amen, indeed.

Life is a giant classroom. What lesson is on the agenda for today?

Namaste.

Fitness With Finesse

I came across an interesting fitness site called HyperStrike. It basically tailor-creates a fitness program (both strength and cardio) for you with just a few bits of information. The best part is all the animation provided on how to do the exercises. And it's all free (for now).

I'm currently (well, by currently I mean not currently) using Matt Furey's Combat Conditioning program (without paying the giant price for the book) with just bodyweight, but I might just try the HyperStrike program when I go to college and have a real gym with real weights at my disposal.

Check it out if you're interesting in getting in shape (or more in shape).

Namaste.

Grow Your Own Meat

Here's an interesting article from Slate.com. It's about the meat growing revolution made possible by biochemistry. Basically, cells multiply, with or without the creature they're from. So if humans can think of a way to get muscle cells (meat) to multiply in a way that creates, say, a chicken wing or a steak, then humans could stop raising (and I would say torturing) entire animals but still have their meat fix.

One of my favorite quotes from this article is as follows:

Is meat-eating necessary? It was, back when our ancestors had no idea where their next meal might come from. Meat kept us alive and made us stronger. Many scientists think it played a crucial role in the development of the human brain. Now it's time to return the favor. Thousands of years ago, the human brain invented agriculture, and hunting lost its urgency. In the past two centuries, we've identified the nutrients in various kinds of meat, and we've learned how to get them instead from soy, nuts, and other vegetable sources. Meat has made us smart enough to figure out how we can live without it.

I find that when I try to defend vegetarianism, the most common complaint I get is: well, we humans are evolved to eat meat. I've been railing against this assumption, essentially running head on into a wall over and over again. People love to eat meat. No amount of statistics or anecdotes will change their love of meat. For some (not me, apparently), the love of meat is genetically hardwired. The best way to solve this problem (a humanitarian, economic, and environmental problem) is then to find a way to sidestep the actual raising and slaughtering of these animals.

The answer: meat factories.

Maybe I can go into that after college! No, not romantic enough. "What do you do for a living?" "Grow meat!" :)

Well, if you're at all interested, I advise reading the whole article. It's a much more carnivore/omnivore sympathetic article than anything I've ever written. Maybe I need to change my focus and tone. This article speaks to me. Maybe it will speak to you, my omnivore friends.

Namaste.

Happiness in All Its Flavors

Happiness seems to be in big demand these days, with books like Authentic Happiness, The Blank Slate, and now Stumbling on Happiness hitting the bookshelves. Very interesting stuff. I like them more for their academic value (they're just gosh darn interesting reads) than for their actual applicability, though I admit many of the ideas in these books could pack a killer cocktail of usefulness if ever melded together (maybe I can do that at a later date).

For now, I just want to mention Stumbling on Happiness and it's author Dr. Daniel Gilbert. I came across this doctor via Radical Mutual-Improvement, one of the numerous sites I check out. Dr. Gilbert is a Harvard psychologist (God, aren't they all?) interested in how humans really suck at making themselves happy. Well, he doesn't put it that way, but that's basically what he's saying. The first question of his book, Stumbling, asks, "If you had only 10 minutes to live, how would you spend it?" Then he notes, "Yeah, you're not doing that now, are you?" Why? Because we're doing something to make our future self happy. Not necessarily a bad move.

The problem is, we really, really suck at predicting how something will affect our future emotional state. Let's use an rhetorical example to illustrate the point. Say your life partner left you. Right now you might say, "Holy shit, I'd be devestated. I'd never be the same." Wrong answer. In truth, unless you're currently emotionally unstable, you'd most likely change, move on, and get over him/her. However, you can't predict that because your imagination sucks at predicting. In fact, your imagination is just about as good at objective measurement as your memory. I know my memory sucks: for example, right now I'd love to do marching band because I think (now) it's fun. However, I luckily have well documented statements of myself saying I don't enjoy it. Thank god. :) Memory, thou suck.

Anyway, the point is, we suck at stumbling onto happiness. Although, that's not necessarily bad. If we had happiness all the time, what good would that be? As Dave says, it's the ephemeral things in life that make life worth living. The shadows prove the sunshine.

Namaste.

The Good Life

It's been a little over two months, but I've finally come back to Authentic Happiness and Dr. Marty Seligman. Well, actually, I came across an article by him and another man, Steve Pinker, the author of The Blank Slate, recently. Such a timely occurrence, too. I've been getting extremely bitchy lately. I could blame the bitchiness on my circumstances (college "choices", boring school, etc.), but that'd just be a giant cop out. Therefore, no excuses. I've been in a funk lately, and that funk is solely my responsibility.

Anyway, the one part of Seligman's theory that I've really been missing out on lately has been the Good Life part of the Good, Pleasant, and Meaningful Triune. In the past few weeks, I haven't really been using any of my skills or talents. I've more or less been sleeping, reading, and eating (ie I've been very hedonistic). Not much to talk about. Not much of a LIFE¹. Time to dig myself out of the existential gutter and start chugging away again. Though, I have to remember not to forget the bare bone essentials of existence, either.

The reason this funk has gotten me so worked up is that I've been reading the blog of Scott Young recently (he's 18), and through his site have been pointed to several other people. All of these people seem way, WAY more awake, alive, and aware than I am (and once again, they're our age). I feel like I'm frittering my life away. Not because of my circumstances either. If that were the case, then sure, I could feel a little better. I feel like I'm a giant power source, but instead of hooking myself up to a laser, I'm attached to a 1000 watt search light. Which one is going to do more damage? Admittedly, a lot of my thoughts about what I'm capable of have to do with my inflated sense of grandiosity and self-worth (because, and I admit this, I'm an ass sometimes [most of the time?]). However, if there's just an inkling of truth behind my thoughts, then I'm capable of far more than I'm currently doing. Far more.

I don't feel like I'm living my life to the fullest. When you only have one life to live, that's a sin.

So here I am, again at square one. What are my strengths, according to Seligman's test?
1. Self-control and self-regulation
2. Love of learning
3. Caution, prudence, and discretion
4. Judgement, critical thinking, and open-mindedness
5. Spirituality, sense of purpose, and faith

Let's take this list and turn it into a life worth talking about. In the meantime, I hope everyone's enjoying their life. The one life we are given.

Namaste.

¹ I realize that the fact that I was so taken aback by that comment must mean that I feel there's an inkling of truth behind it. Otherwise, the comment would not have offended me at all. I would have just shrugged it off, as if someone had said, "Dave, you're a conservative bastard," or any other bit of hogwash that's completely false. I suppose that's something else I should work on in the coming weeks. Or perhaps play on? :)

Leave it to Ken Wilber...

to give me a spiritual kick in my ass. If you read my previous post, you'll have an inkling of my inner state of mind when it comes to my spiritual pursuits right now. Well, in this week's video by Ken Wilber, Wilber addresses the very issue I had forgotten: I AMness. This sounds very fluffy duffy and esoteric, but really, it's the ultimate form of common sense. When you think of any time in your life, what was the one thing that was always there? That's right, the simple feeling of being, I AMness. That's the final truth.

I'll let Wilber explain.

Namaste.

Lost and Not Yet Found

Note: This post is mainly in reference to my internal state and is purely esoteric in nature. Therefore, have no fear, I'll be perfectly normal and chipper tomorrow. Well, "I" will be. :)

I feel like the ground has been pulled out from under me. Literally, as if I'm suddenly standing on nothing, but only after firmly believing I was on solid ground. A great deal of this feeling must have to do with all my endeavors in personal growth. I've felt as if pushing my boundaries internally and externally would suddenly make the boundaries disappear. I felt as if I really understood both halves of the Two Truth Doctrine.

Now I realize I was sadly mistaken.

Just because I've read about Absolute reality doesn't mean I know it. Just because I've heard about what it really means to be Awake doesn't mean I am. And just because I'm searching for this truth doesn't make it knowable.

I feel like the last few months of my life have been a joke. I've been pursuing nothing, and have found something in return. I haven't found the big Nothing, the only Nothing that matters: emptiness.

The pain of knowing that I don't know is crushing the little I. The i that doesn't know. Ignorance is not bliss. Ignorannce is a bitch.

I think I'd be over dramatizing this feeling if I were to call it a Dark Night of the Soul. I just feel so disconnected from what I was originally looking for. I don't know where it is. I don't know WHAT it is.

Lost in samsara. Figures. It's just when you think you've found the ground that it disappears.

Savoring Samsara by Stuart Davis

It's a big wet dream
spilling semen
into phantoms
A big wet dream
spilling semen
into phantoms

How long till the orgies over?
Where's the wine that makes me sober?

I'm savoring Samsara
even though the candy's hollow
It's all on my tongue
but there's nothing here to swallow
I know all these flavors
keep me here in Hades
but it tastes so good
I keep incarnating

There's a million ways
of licking honey
off of razors
A million ways
of licking honey
off of razors

Some sugar hides its price
and every lick's another life

(Refrain)

It's in my lap
It's in my lap
Heaven's in my lap
But where is that?
Where is that?
Wherever I'm from
this place is bubble gum

Bubble gum
Bubble gum
Bubble gum
I'm savoring Samsara
Bubble gum

Acclimation to the Simple Feeling of Being

One of the greatest gifts and worst curses of humanity is our ability to become acclimated to something. That simple ability of habituation that allows us to literally forget for an extended period of time that things don't have to be the way they are. Everyone knows the feeling. For example, when I had a nasty sore in my mouth, it was all I could think about (well, not ALL, but it took up a great deal of my concentration when I wasn't engaged in something interesting). However, no more than a day after the sore healed, I became completely oblivious to my mouth. Go figure.

This reminds me of a Buddhist fable. One day, a layman approached a Zen Monk and asked him for advice. The Zen Monk responded, "Know that you will always have 21 problems in your life." The layman replied, "What? That doesn't help me. How is that supposed to help me?" The monk replied, "Worrying about those 21 problems will become an unnecessary 22nd problem." Oh, got him.

And this post just got totally off topic. But I wanted to tell that story anyway, and now I've told it. I'll get back to the simple feeling of being in a later post.

Namaste.

Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire.

--W. B. Yeats

But as you allude in your letter, shyness can also be a strength. There are many ways of being a strong and interesting person, and being shy rather than outgoing is one of them. We shy people—I include myself in this category—can be great companions. We can love and be attentive and enjoy life. In fact, shyness is often just a way of keeping the lid on a powerful love of life and deep desire for sex and companionship. As always, things are often the opposite of what they appear to be.

-- Thomas Moore

Believe the impossible and you can do the incredible.

-- Bishop Sheen

Whenever we stand by unable to act, uncertain, holding out, waiting for something that may or may not occur, we are not living. We are not discovering life as it unfolds.

Life is messy and uncertain as it unfolds. There is only a very small area around our feet that we can keep orderly and sure. The rest is going to be messy. It is going to be messy and uncertain. But in that messiness and uncertainty there is also magic and grace.

That is the deal we make with life. We give up our fantasies of perfection in return for a chance at actual magic and grace. You cannot find that magic and grace by observing, holding yourself at a distance, waiting. You cannot find it by waiting because it is not something that happens to you; it is something you create. You create it by wrestling with life.

-- Carry Tennis

Political Test

Thanks to Ed for this political test. It's like the one by the libertarian party. Good stuff. I turned out leftist and libertarian. Not that big a suprise since I just finished reading about book about libertarianism and I've been a leftist since as I can remember.

Feel free to take the test and post your results.

Namaste.

"All you do is read all day?"

After spending some time with me, a friend commented recently that it just seemed like I did nothing but read. This is a pretty apt description of my day. I do other things too, just for the record, like exercise, go for walks, practice guitar (and sometimes trombone), write in this blog, write in my journal, write random things, meditate, and comtemplate the meaning of the universe (maybe not so much time on the last one, but I do it!).

However, the comment that all I do is read cut to the core of my being. My first reaction to that comment was to put up a defensive: "What do you mean all I do all day is read? What do YOU do that's so much better? What do you want me to do, watch TV?" Then, after a deep breath and a moment to collect my Self, I realized that the anger at the comment didn't result because of the comment, but rather because of something inside of me that was trying to hide. Namely, the part of me that feels like all my reading is a giant waste of time. In other words, the aggression towards myself over my own behavior surfaced as anger towards another. A perfect example of the Shadow. But I caught Him this time. Take that, Shadow Man.

So, what's the problem then? That I read too much? Maybe, but I don't think that's the whole story. I think it has more to do with the fact that I don't actually DO anything with the information I read. Now, that may be a little harsh. I do a lot of things, like write posts on this blog, and other articles for myself. However, I still don't feel as if I'm getting as much out of all the reading I do. I often finish a book with the nagging feeling that there was more for me to learn from it, had I only actually taken action based on the ideas in the book. I feel like I've read the book, but it won't have any lasting impact on me.

So, what's the solution to this shadow? What will bring the shadow into the light? Instead of reinventing the wheel, let me offer this article by Scott Young¹ about learning by doing. The article focuses on doing things related to personal development, but really the theory can be applied to doing anything. Actually, come to think of it, personal development IS everything.

After reading this article, I came to realize the reason that althought I have a lot more ideas than I had a year or two ago, I'm still the same bitchy, narcissistic ass-hole that's too shy to talk to strangers. The ideas don't make themselves into knowledge and street smarts. Only my actions can do that.

This reminds me of an article by Steve Pavlina where he discussed the "ready-fire-aim" approach to learning something. Basically, he says that you should just throw yourself into something new that you're interested in, and from there adjust. The idea is that with all the knowledge you'll get from actually doing, you'll be far more able to learn and grow than if you just read and read about the topic all day long. Public speaking skills comes from actually speaking, not from reading about speaking. Interpersonal skills come from talking to people, not from reading about talking to people.

Such a simple, yet powerful concept, and probably the reason I've often felt in a rut over the years. Dave McClung put it aptly when he said, "If life's all about aiming a canno to hit a target, do you want to spend you're entire life aiming the cannon, or do you want to just keep firing until you get it." Yes, that's it man, that's it!

So, yes, all I do is read all day. But reading leads to ideas, which lead to actions, which lead to knowledge. Remember, "the job of a teacher isn't not to teach something new every day, but to remind the student what they already know." Reading is a path, thought only one of many, of being in the world.

Namaste.

¹ Damn, this guy is only 18 years old. Wow, he seems SO freakin' deep for his age. I look forward to his insight. It just goes to show you that you'll always be able to find a model out in the world to look up too. It's even easier now with the rise of the interweb. A young Steve Pavlina, anyone? Cool.

Quotation

Nirvana is not the end of suffering, but of the sufferer.

-- The Buddha

Wilber Does Sex

Here's an interesting dialogue where Ken Wilber describes the biological reasons for differences between men and women. It's nothing all that new, but it's still interesting. Enjoy.

Breaking Open

Breaking down. Breaking open. They're only one word apart, and yet there meanings are worlds apart. Emotions apart. Experiences apart.

Breaking down means letting the suffering of the world get you "down." It means being the victim, being the tragedy. When the world gives you a load just a little too heavy, breaking down means letting that load leave you a smaller person, a lesser person.

Breaking open means letting the suffering of the world get you to "open." Suddenly, the cracks aren't where the darkness crawls, but where the sunlight shines. The person who breaks open is alive to the possibilites of what Is, not what might or should have been. The person who breaks open is alive, is awake, is receptive.

That's not to say that breaking open doesn't involve crying, or anger-ing, or denying. It involves all those things. Emotions, positive or negative, are healthy, useful, and a fully necessary part of human life. Without these emotions, where would we be? Dead: emotionally, pyshically, and spiritually. But breaking open moves beyond these emotions, beyond the hurt, beyond the imagined pain, and finds an opening where everything, EVERYTHING, may radically coexist.

Breaking down is easy. Breaking open is hard. But in the end, all you can do is break open. Whether now, or years, or lifetimes from now. Because openness is the very nature of reality. Love is the very nature of reality.

I love you. I love. Love. That is the final truth.

Namaste.

Enlightenment in AP Bio

Today in AP biology class, Mr. Hagan presented a whirlwind tour of the eye, visual perception, and optical illusions. One of the coolest involved this "inkblot." What do you see? If you're really good at this, or you saw it during Bio, you'll see the cow looking at you. Before our class knew that, we "saw" things from witches to old ladies to birds. Wow.

After actually experiencing this for myself, I realized how incredibly beautiful and analogy for enlightenment this process is. Now, when I say enlightenment, I mean it in the (traditionally) Eastern sense of truly, radically seeing reality as it IS, without any illusion or obstruction. Ken Wilber once said, and I'm paraphrasing him here, that enlightenment is like looking at one of those optical illusions that has the heads of presidents hidden in it and SEEING the presidents. Although they've been there the entire time, you don't see them until you have a shift in perception. You don't have to change where you're looking, what you're looking at, or how hard you look. All you have to do is make a slight, nearly imperceptible shift in how you look at the picture. Then you shift from seeing the illusion to seeing the actual picture, to seeing the reality of the picture.

With enlightenment, much the same is true. The real picture is always there, the real truth about reality, the "enlightened" truth. You're staring at it right now. "Who isn't already enlightened?" Yet all you see are the illusions, the witches and old ladies and birds. The true picture is completely beyond you, even though you're staring right at it. Then that moment happens, that flash of satori, and suddenly you can see the true picture. You see the cows head. You see the presidents. You see the Truth.

And just like with the picture, when you're enlightened, then that's ALL you can see.

Man, that is freaking beautiful. I've wondered what it would feel like to be enlightened. I've wondered if I would know for sure. Now I realize I would definately know, that it wouldn't feel any different and yet radically different at the same time. Just like looking at the cow.

Namaste.

Megalomaniac by Incubus

I hear you on the radio
You permeate my screen, its' unkind but
If I met you in a scissor fight
I'd cut off both your wings on principle alone
On principle alone

Hey megalomaniac
You're not Jesus
Yeah, you're no fucking Elvis
Special, as you know yourself, maniac
Step down
Step down

If I were your appendages
I'd hold open your eyes
So you would see
That all of us are heaven sent
There was never meant to be only one
To be only one

Hey megalomaniac
You're not Jesus
Yeah, you're no fucking Elvis
Special, as you know yourself, maniac
Step down
Step down

Yeah
You're no Jesus
You're not Elvis
You're no answer

Hey megalomaniac
You're not Jesus
Yeah, you're no fucking Elvis
Special, as you know yourself, maniac
Step down

And You Thought Intimidation Tactics Were Just for Third World Countries and The CIA...

The short version: I'll be turning in the graduation contract, signed, tomorrow.

The long version: well, it's a REALLY long story. It starts with me not wanting to turn in the contract. Anyone that reads this blog already knows my reasoning: I disagree with the heavy handedness of the "agreement" (read forced contract) and I feel that if we're treated as if we're imature losers, we'll act that way. Add to that the fact that I THOUGHT (major emphasis on the word thought, because I learned today that my idea was dead wrong) that I had the freedom to decide whether or not I'd like to go to prom, whether or not I'd like to participate in the graduation ceremony, and whether or not I'd like to sign a stupid piece of paper. Well, I was wrong.

Let me add to all of this that I realize I'm being stupid. I realize this is barely a cause worth fighting for, and that I'm wasting energy that could be better put into something else (like a kick-ass graduation speech). All that said, I also thought this would end up with no harm done, no fouls, and certainly without me being called down to the principal's office. I was wrong.

Today, eigth period, I got called down to the main office. When I got there, Lindsay Suprum gave me a funny smile and then ushered me into Mr. Donnelly's office. When I got there, Mr. Donnelly and Mr. Nesbitt were sitting at their chairs, and they told me to sit down. So I did. They then went on to tell me that I should go to Ursinus because Ursinus is giving me more money. I tried to explain why I wanted to go to Villanova. They didn't listen.

Then, after a few minutes of them making small talk with me, a certain teacher that I greatly respect was also called down. Now, I would assume that s/he had a class to teach (in fact, I know that s/he does), but I guess my little "infraction" warrented that s/he leave his/her class.

After this teacher showed up, Mr. Donnelly asked me if I knew why I was in his office. I, using my great powers of deduction, figured out it was because of the contract. Mr. Donnelly then went on to "ask" me why I didn't want to sign the contract, though it was pretty obvious that he was more interested in waiting until I ended my response so that he could tell me why I was so wrong. He went on to explain how horrible graduation is and how all the students misbehave. He went on to say that I couldn't possible understand how bad all the kids are because I never see them (um, have you ever been in this thing called the hallways?). Mr. Donnelly asked me if I wanted my graduation speech to be heard, or if I wanted it to be interupted by flying male sexual organs (or as I call them, penises). I tried to explain that very few people, even my friends, were going to be listening to me. Mr. Nesbitt started to get really angry and attempt to change my mind. When I attempted to explain my reasoning further, the teacher present pulled me aside to have a "one on one" with me. By that, I mean s/he tried to intimidate me.

In a seperate room, s/he told me how stupid I was being and how much s/he thought that all the precautions at graduation really sucked, but that they were necessary. S/he then told me that it was because of stupid antics like this that I didn't get the CEA scholarship (I bet that information isn't supposed to be out yet, but, um, congratulations to whoever did get it!). Apparently the teachers didn't appreciate my humor. Sigh. I eventually got him/her to calm down enough to explain my reasoning of writing an adendum to the contract and signing it. S/he then proceeded to yell at me for "throwing away money" and told me in colorful language to sign the contract.

I was then brought back to Mr. Donnelly's office, where he remarked, "Wow, that fast, I thought it would take longer." I then sat down, and they proceeded to try and explain to me how much they were like me as a kid, but that they "grew up." They then told me I was being dumb for several reasons. Mr. Donnelly said something about how he was suprised at my lack of morals in this situation. After I assured them I'd sign the contracct, Mr. Donnelly made me promise that I wasn't going to start a petition to boycott the contract (wow, where do they come up with these things?) Oh, yeah, he also made me promise that I wouldn't say anything about this in my graduation speech (does my blog count?). Then both Mr. Donnelly and Mr. Nesbitt told me that they were looking forward to hearing my graduation speech. They really did seem sincere with this comment, though I know they mean they look forward to hearing my neutered, watered down, PC, feels-good-going-down speech. The teacher then yelled at me to leave and told me s/he'd talk to me tomorrow about this whole thing.

Yeah, that's more or less the whole ordeal. There are several things about this that amazes me. The first: I got more attention because of "misbehaving" than I ever did by excelling academically. I don't think I've ever had this long a conversation with Mr. Donnelly before, let along him and Mr. Nesbitt. The second: that they think taking the teacher out of the class to intimidate me was more important than s/he teaching his/her class. Or even that they'd DO such a thing. Third thing: that they're so afraid of what one person can do. I know they don't respect me. You listen to the opinions of people you respect. But clearly they thought it necessary to speak to me because they were afraid I was starting some sort of revolution (it should be noted, and any of my friends will vouche for this, that I never intended nor do I condone a boycott of the contract. I'm one man, and I disagree with it. That's all). Fourth: that an act of passive resistance is so violently attacked by our administration. I'm not exagerating when I say they tried to intimidate me. Though, I don't know how intimidating Mr. Donnelly and Mr. Nesbitt can be... :) I feel that I have the right to or not to participate in any of the events in the coming month. Yes, I am valedictorian. But I was not elected to that position, nor was I appointed to that position. I EARNED that position.

The really interesting thing is that whether or not I sign the contract, by stooping to the level of intimidation tactics, the administration at Chichester has lost. If they have to lower themselves to the level of pointing a figurative pistol to my head in order for me to conform, it is a clear sign that SOMETHING in the administration is wrong. I'm glad I could unearth it.

Well, that's enough of story time with Dave. I hope you had a great time.

Thank you.

Namaste.

Bruce Hornsby - The Way It Is

Standing in line marking time--
Waiting for the welfare dime
'Cause they can't buy a job
The man in the silk suit hurries by
As he catches the poor old ladies' eyes
Just for fun he says "Get a job"

That's just the way it is
Some things will never change
That's just the way it is
But don't you believe them

They say hey little boy you can't go
Where the others go
'Cause you don't look like they do
Said hey old man how can you stand
To think that way
Did you really think about it
Before you made the rules
He said, Son

That's just the way it is
Some things will never change
That's just the way it is
But don't you believe them

Well they passed a law in '64
To give those who ain't got a little more
But it only goes so far
Because the law won't change another's mind
When all it sees at the hiring time
Is the line on the color bar

That's just the way it is
Some things will never change
That's just the way it is
But don't you believe them

Relationships (Question Mark?)

(Cross posted on ThinkBowl)

Yesterday, I had a conversation with some friends about romantic relationships. Well, by conversation, I mean I was bitching because I didn't want to watch a specific movie (it was a "chick flick"), which brought up the topic of romantic relationships and why I have such an aversion towards them. The conversation didn't go very far last night (mainly because of my antagonistic behavior), and I would really like to get some input on this topic. You know, open up my perspectives, let a little light into the dimly lit cell known as my mind.

So, anyway, the conversation last night developed into two more or less antagonistic perspectives: the first stating that romantic relationships lead to a loss of self (well, that's how I put it) that is not beneficial or healthy; the second stating that romantic relationships lead to a whole new level of self, one that has room for both people in the relationship without the loss of anything (well, that's how I interpret that side; please correct me if I'm misinterpreting the argument). I'm not going to go on any more in terms of both sides of the argument, because I don't think I have enough experience or knowledge about position two to accurately portray it. Therefore, let me continue with argument one, my argument, as of last night.

In life, there are always two ways that an individual can relate to things: either through agency (individualism) or communion (relationship). An increase in agency necessitates a decrease in communion and vice versa. Therefore, if you enter into a romantic relationship with someone, you go up a notch in terms of communion, but you also necessarily go down a notch in agency. As I put it last night, you stand a good chance of "losing yourself (or your Self) into the other person."

Now, admittedly, I've only come up with this theory through a life of watching cable television and its shallow plots filled with excessive amounts of drama and listening to pop music filled with even shallower situations. I realize that romantic relationships work, and I'm not criticizing them. I'm just saying that FOR ME they seem like an impossibility.

With that said, I also realize that my desire for independence is most likely the manifestation of some sort of shadow (unconscious element of my psyche) resulting from spite and cynicism, and that I should definitely be open to the whole picture, not just the tiny slice that I can see. With even more thought, I'm coming to the conclusion that argument two holds more water, and that it's a matter of healthy vs. unhealthy romantic relationships, NOT a matter of romantic vs. non-romantic relationships.

I look forward to any responses regarding romantic relationships, platonic relationships, or any other sort. Or, if this makes you think of anything completely not related that you think is post worthy, go for it. I want more perspectives on this than the one I have (which, by it's very nature is slanted towards a male, "single" perspective).

Thanks for you time.

Namaste.

Guidelines for Rules of Dynamist Systems

1. Allow individuals (including groups of individuals) to act on their own knowledge.
2. Apply to simple, generic units and allow them to combine in many different ways.
3. Permit credible, understandable, enduring, and enforceable commitments.
4. Protect criticism, competition, and feedback.
5. Establish a framework within which people can create nested, competing frameworks of more specific rules.

The End of My Love Affair with Pure Socialism

I just finished reading The Future and Its Enemies. A great, great book. It was my first real introduction to the ideal of libertarianism in any sort of scholarly form (not including Give Me a Break, a more "pop-culture" type of work). I must say, I'm hooked.

One of the interesting side affects of immersing myself in all this "libertarian" idealeology is the revelation that maybe socialism isn't the solution to all of the worlds woes. In an article by Michael Strong, A Million Paths to Peace, Strong proposes one of the biggest curses of the 20th century was a lack of idealism in any area other than extreme liberalism. He proposes that since most idealists came from the far left, most young people came to liberalism as their ideology of choice (I guess that includes me). He goes on to say:

We don't know how effective activists could have been at promoting global economic integration, nor do we know exactly how much western intellectuals' support strengthened communism. But it is certainly plausible that if the chattering classes had believed in "peace through economic freedom" as passionately as they believed in communism and socialism the 20th century would have been profoundly different. Instead of a fifty-year long Cold War that was largely fought as hot wars in the developing world, we might have had a discredited and shrinking communist movement far earlier than 1990. It is likely that hundreds of millions of people would be alive, and billions of people would better off today, had the chattering classes remained classical liberals throughout the 20th century.

What kind of difference would a market-driven economy have created? That's the message of The Future and Its Enemies. That's the message of Flow. That's the message of the future.

Amazing how a little political thinking can completely stretch and change my view of the world. Having an open mind is so much fun!

Namaste.

Quote

Life is a near death experience.

-- Anonymous

Huzzah!!

Yeah, I don't really know why, but, hey, huzzah!

And happy Cinco de Mayo. I forgot why the Mexican's celebrate today. It's because they kicked the French's @$$. Take that, frenchies! (You know I love you!)

Well, enough of my jubalization!

Namaste. (For REAL).

Six Flags: "Great" Adventure

Hm, well, I haven't posted anything of any real quality in the past, oh, two weeks. This post isn't going to be any different. I just figured I should admit that I haven't posted anything worthy of the title "post" in a while.

And now on to the point of this post. I had "Physics Day" today. I had a blast. No doubt about that. I got out of school for a day, got to ride some major fun rollercoasters, and got to hang out with my friends. Now, with all those perks, what could I possibly come up with to bitch about? Because, well, you knew this was going to turn into some form of a bitch. Because, well, it always does, doesn't it? :)

My main problem with amusement parks, other than the outrageously priced food ($4 for a hot dog and $3 for a 12 oz. bottle of water? Come on!), is the simple idea of it. The "amusement" equation of the amusement park. Why, in our society, do we have to escape from our everyday lives to find something interesting. Life itself is interesting.

Let's take an example: the rollercoaster. Though there are some people out there that don't ride roller coasters because of, well, I don't know why. Anyway, there are people that don't ride roller coasters. Those of us that do, however, do so as to get a thrill from the "danger" of the ride. Yeah, danger. Those things probably kill less things in a year than a baby kitten. Yet we pretend that our lives are threatened, our adrenal glands pump out tons of adrenaline, and we pretend, just for that 20 second ride, that we're living life to its fullest. Yeah, right.

Is the "high" of a coaster anything close to the true high of discovering something undiscovered? Curing a disease? Solving a global problem? I realize that I'm pulling the old, "Well, no matter how much I suffer, there's always someone else suffering more" switcheroo, but I just get these thoughts in my head sometimes. You know, that I shouldn't be wasting me time getting artificial highs from theme parks when I could go out and get real highs doing important, meaningful, useful things. Same idea I have when I watch TV: why live vicariously through someone else's drama when I should be living my own?

All this said, I realize that TV and amusement parks serve as an important release mechanism for modern society. Without that violent video game, how many kids would go out and actually commit real, not virtual, violence? Because the violence is there. It's imprinted into our genetic circuitry. Not saying that makes it okay. Just a fact.

And now that I've rambled enough to get myself completely off course, I'm going to come to a close. My point is simple, and I'll repeat it one more time: is it a problem that society has reached a point that we have to search for artificial amusement in our lives?

Once again, I did have a great time, no matter what it may sound like. I just loooove to overanalyze life when I'm by myself. What else could I do with my time?

Oh yeah, live. :)

Namaste.

Quote

Consider betrayal by an intimate — the sting and shock and stabbing hurt of it can easily convince us that we’ve been abandoned. We’re so overwhelmed with pain that we permit ourselves to be governed by the thoughts that arise from and reinforce it, thereby losing ourselves in the darkly compelling dramatics of betrayal. However, given that betrayal is often inevitable — and perhaps even necessary, in ways usually not obvious at the time — we would be wise not to attempt to minimize the possibility of its occurrence through avoiding real intimacy. We can use the very wound of betrayal, the cut and burn and violence of it, to widen and deepen our receptivity to that which can never abandon us.

-- Robert Augustus Masters

Satire About Bush AND MySpace? Yes!

Check out this movie at Current.tv. It's a lovely satire, (mostly) making fun of MySpace. The Bush part is just an added benefit.

Beware though. Current.tv was founded by Al Gore, so those allergic to liberalism should be careful.

Just kidding. :)

Namaste.

Quote (For You, Ed)

Before fleshing out these points, let’s briefly consider “the enemy.” Those who
act out terrorist agendas, whether Islamic or Christian, are not the enemy. Those who attack their attackers are not the enemy. Those who won’t fight back are not the enemy. That is, other people are not the enemy. Furthermore, that in
us which is uncaring, violent, and fanatical is not the enemy, regardless of our
adversarial stance toward it and our efforts to get rid of it, whether through
psychotherapy, medication, or thinking nice thoughts.

So who is the enemy? Better to ask, what is the enemy? A crucial part of the
answer is: Ignorance of our true nature. Such ignorance, which permits our
egoity to assume the throne of self, is a kind of sleep, devoid of clarity and
balance. Without wakefulness, we are prone to a psychological (and spiritual)
myopia that allows us to dehumanize our offending others — and also the
unwanted or darker elements of our own psyche — to such an extent that
we can rationalize doing them great harm.

-- Robert Augustus Masters

Oil? Mm, Sexy!

Well, I sometimes think that Dave and I are the only people to think about this stuff, but just in case I'll share this site with you: Winning the Oil Endgame. If you click on the Read The Book link, you can read the ebook for free.

I haven't read much, but anything offering a solution to the upcoming oil problem is a nice refresher. This is definitely on my Must Read list. What, the end of the world doesn't have to come? Score!

Namaste.

PS - I found this site from the new kenwilber.com. Mm, I knew this stuff was sexy. This is just more proof.

And yes, this IS what I do with my life. :) Well, when I'm not hanging out with friends or learning non-world saving things. Or any of the other myriad things I do. :9