伍剛強的道

Thoughts on Zen

2008-01-19T16:21:45Z

There are many ways man can attain at least some degree of enlightenment.

Some reach it through grace. This is the religious or theological route, where people reach enlightenment either through their faith or their devotion to their god.

Others, and this is probably where I belong, reach it through daily experience. This can be though of as the philosophical route, where people reach enlightenment through the intellectual processing of their daily experiences.

Of the two routes, the philosophical is a more dangerous route. In the theological route, things are very clean. Things are either good or evil, and when they seem to be in the middle, people have two escapes. Either they do not understand the goodness in it (because it seems so wrong), so they leave it to their god, or they wish to go with what they think and feel is right, but should they regret it later on, they can always cleanse themselves with some ritual of forgiveness from their god. In the end, you can always end up in a good place. You simply have to suck your pride in when you have regrets so that you can go back to the good side by admitting to yourself and to others that you were wrong.

In the philosophical route, however, since teachings come from life, choices are also much like life - there is no turning back. Therefore, at every moment, you must be making the right choices of what to think, say, and do, lest you make a mistake and end up bringing your life to a very bad place. And in life, there is nobody with enough power to tell you the right choice all the time. Ultimately, it all rests on you. Some people of the philosophical route may believe in a god, but they do not rely on their god. In the philosophical route, you take all the burden, and possibly much more (in cases when you help others). In the end, it's very murky, and quite risky, and very permanent. However, that being what it may be, I think it's a much more fun way of living.

In the philosophical route, there are infinitely many ways of processing your experiences, because you can sum up the total possible ways of thought by a simple function of the number of people in the world (meaning you have at least 1 possibly unique way per mind in the world), and due to the mind's power, for each person can suddenly change their mind, each mind by itself yields an infinite number of possible ways to process experiences. However, there have been many popular ways of thought, possibly because so many people have gone through those routes, and quite possibly because they work.

You have eastern and western thought. Westerners like keeping things certain, so their method is usually based on facts and repeatable phenomena, so in learning they usually like to have standard ways and standard things. Eastern peoples, and this makes it hard for me because I'm an Eastern fellow, usually don't care much for these strict, standard ways and standard things. Usually, we are result-oriented. Meaning, we don't really care how you get there, just as long as you got there. Your process may help me show the way, but I can't do that because I'm not you. We are different. Therefore, the wisdom you have is merely part of the whole thing, and whatever you don't have, it is up to me to find out. We are like this. This is why a lot of our cultural heritage includes knowledge that can be deemed as "exotic" or "esoteric". This is because we really consider knowledge as "somewhere out there." It's in our psyche. We always think we can do better. That means we think that there are things about what we do that we don't necessarily know, still.

Look at our martial arts, or our medical practices, for example. Really, when you think about it, there's no solid standard for accupuncture or herbal teas. The character of our martial arts change slowly every generation. The world is always in a flux, and so the knowledge is always in a flux as well.

In the East, there are some popular routes. Daoism is one. Confucianism is another. Zen or Chan Buddhism is also quite popular.

Daoism is very fluid. It favors nothing, yet you can't say that it doesn't detest either. Nor can you say that it doesn't have guides. And yet, the minute you follow these guides, you've been led astray.

Confucianism, I find, is quite strict. It is very interested in the human being as a social being, and society being the very complex animal that it is, you're always walking a fine line with Confucianism.

Zen Buddhism is quite difficult. It's not for those who wish to stay in their comfort zone.

The method of Zen, I realize, is to introduce into your lifestyle all sorts of hardship to benefit your way of life. In Shaolin, they do this by the physical means of training. In Bushido, everything is restrained. Look at the tea ceremony. Look at how they sit in the kneeling position (called seiza). Or look at vegetarian diets. These are all very hard. They are very imposing for two reasons: one is the sheer requirement that the method demands on the person, and two is fact that you're going to have to push yourself through it in the end.

However, invariably, the idea is simple. Suffer hardship so much that one day, you just feel yourself breaking apart, yet finding a unity and coherence within you that was never so strong and tight. And then the hardship is no longer the suffering you once thought it was. Rather, the hardship now serves to strengthen that resolve you have inside of you. And in the end, you require less from others, less from nature, less from yourself, yet compared to others, you can give much much more (due to that inner strength). This, to me, is the spirit of Zen. Grab on tight, so that you can let go. Let go, so that you won't have to grab on. Lose much, so you end up with only what you need most. Do all this, so you will never lose even when you don't grab on.

It's a very remarkable method. With this method, you will find things in yourself, cherishable things that you never thought you had or could have. You can gain strength, discipline, and control, yet with the carefree disposition of a vagabond that has nothing to lose.

Hardship strengthens you by weakening parts of yourself that hold you back and you don't need.

New Year's Resolution

2008-01-03T15:41:21Z

I just came back from Thailand, and after a little over a week there, I saw that I have to make some changes to my everyday life. It seems that, although I thought I was taking care of myself pretty well, I have to take better care for myself than the present. So, before I forget and start compromising, I list them down as such:

1) Get a microwave that can cook (or maybe just re-heat?)
2) When I cook beef noodle soup, I have to make enough soup for the week.
3) Learn how to make ngapi gyaw and make enough for a week/month
4) Get a yoga mat
5) Do IMX Pilates
6) Wake up earlier
7) Sleep earlier
8) Take Vitamin C in addition to Centrum

Hypotheses For Understanding Ateneans: (Everybody's doing it, so why can't I? )

2007-10-13T00:49:00Z

I don't know this teacher. In fact, I have never heard his name before the day I got this in our egroups, but that just makes it all the more open for commenting. If he was one of my teachers, I would either fully accept what he had to say, or it would drain out of me all of any sort of respect I would have for him. It is fortunate I don't know this teacher. Fortunate too that he doesn't know me. But coming from where he says he's coming from, I can understand how he could say these things, and it's nice that for once somebody on the faculty side attempted to understand Ateneans for how they really are. Just a pity, though, that he thought it was tragic.

Like others, I put forth my comments.

====================================================================

Hypotheses For Understanding Ateneans

Shortly before I graduated fifteen years ago, a group of leaders from socially-involved organizations got together to consider the question of why less students are socially involved. In preparing for a meeting of this group, I came to realize that the principal reason why Ateneans enter the Ateneo is not because they want to become persons for others but because entering the Ateneo is a good strategy (if not one of the best strategies) for ensuring financial security.

Over time, I nurtured my curiousity about Ateneans while working in various capacities within the University as teacher, administrator and (in formal and informal capacities as a) mobilizer for social involvement[1]. I remember that sometime in the late 1990s I wrote hypotheses about Ateneans that developed my realizations from 1992, incorporating observations from my experiences after a couple of years of working within the University.

Sometime in September 2007, I was asked to join a meeting where lifestyle choices of students were discussed and I remember thinking then that the first step that needed to be taken by administrators was to try to understand where Ateneans are coming from. Right after that meeting, I sat down and wrote these 25 hypotheses about Ateneans and emailed it to three administrators who deal regularly with students.

Some notes regarding these hypotheses: First, I write these hypotheses as a participant-observer in a society and not with the eyes of someone making moral or ethical judgments. In fact I write these things with the greatest sympathy for Ateneans who for me are more tragic than terrible. There are things described in the hypotheses which can be considered by some to be morally or ethically wrong but passing judgment on the acts (much less on the person) is the last thing I want to do. Even when I speak of “inordinate attachments” in the first hypothesis, for example, I mean it in the sense of unfreedom rather than sin. As I point out in the last hypothesis, approaching things from a purely judgmental point of view prevents dialogue between school personnel and students.

Secondly, while these hypotheses constitute a model which I have found personally useful for understanding Ateneans, it is necessary to point out that not all of these hypotheses apply to particular Ateneans (I have tried to nuance with words like “most” or “a few” where I thought it was appropriate). They may not even apply at all to some sections of the population (I wonder about scholars, for example, with whom I have not had extensive contact). While I am pretty confident I got the broad themes right, I am very much open to nuancing some points even more or even re-considering some points altogether. That is why I consider these hypotheses and I place the occassional “(?)” to indicate higher degrees of uncertainty.

I have always wanted these hypotheses to be validated by various sectors of the University: by administrators, staff and faculty to see if the hypotheses help them to understand their experiences with Ateneans, and with students themselves to see if the words and sentiments I express here are their words and their sentiments. I can't emphasize enough that putting these thoughts down on paper was done precisely for intelligent discussion and not to generate sensationalist stories. I hope that if you get a copy of this document you will exercise discretion when quoting from it (thus this long intro) and when passing it on to others.

I didn't have enough energy to articulate what can be done which is not to say that nothing can be done. Of course I think a lot of the “doing” has to come from the end of school personnel which may begin with a sincere desire to understand Ateneans and listen to their concerns, no matter how contrary these may be to our own values and our sense of what we are currently doing.

I had the option of releasing these hypotheses anonymously but I do want to know if these hypotheses are valid precisely because they have implications in terms of the way we live out cura personalis with our students. The disadvantage of acknowledging who wrote these hypotheses is that it might prevent people from giving feedback, for one reason or another, knowing that the thoughts came from me. I hope that if after reading these hypotheses you have reactions, comments, suggestions, or any other feedback, you would be kind enough to write to me at ldelacruz@ateneo.edu. I would also be happy to discuss these things personally with you, a meeting we can arrange after making initial contact through email.

Leland Dela Cruz

3 October 2007

25 Hypotheses

For Ateneans (and their parents), the central source of anxiety is whether or not they will be able to achieve a lifestyle comparable to or better than the lifestyle of their parents after they graduate. For many, this is their principal inordinate attachment. What is inordinate about wanting this? The attachment or just the extent? I can understand how some people would think others are too preoccupied with achieving a certain lifestyle, but I think it's perfectly reasonable to want a certain lifestyle, however extravagant or hermit-ish it might be. Don't you want a certain way of life for yourself as well? Why did you teach? Don't tell me, though, that you teach just because nobody will hire you. Now, THAT is sad. Teaching is a way of life as it is a labor of love. I assume that's what you did. So understand how other people would have this "inordinate attachment" and see that it is not, in fact, inordinate.
Families have a very high expectation of what an Ateneo education can do for their children in achieving a lifestyle which will be comparable to or better than the lifestyle of the parents. This is why parents pressure the students to study hard. Wrong again. Are you a parent? I know of a few parents that are very ready to disown their children should they fall below their standards of human existence, yes. And some, worse, who would not have no for an answer in any way. But mostly, this is out of concern for their children. For the most part, parents just don't want their children having to suddenly having their lifestyles abruptly changed because they couldn't pay their bills. Worse, what if their children start to neglect their health, or their overall wellbeing simply because they couldn't afford what their parents could? This would be heart-breaking for a parent. So, understand this from the view of a parent. That is, parents don't pressure kids to study hard just to achieve a certain standard of living. Parents do that to assure themselves that their kids will be self-sufficient.
As our tuition increases, the population of students get richer, thus the lifestyle goals are higher and the pressure is greater. Wrong again. Obviously, you are only looking at the top 20% of the Atenean population. Many Ateneans are quite the common tao. Of course, not as common as your hoi polloi, but many Ateneans are quite simple in their lifestyles, and this is beacuse they are NOT rich. Just because you can pay the tuition means you're rich. It just means you have enough money to do it.
The choice of Ateneo as the place to study is part of the strategy to achieve the goal of attaining a lifestyle comparable to or better than the lifestyle of their parents. Nobody enters the Ateneo because they want to be men and women for others (and increasingly also not because it provides Catholic education). Who does? Did you know about being men and women for others prior to entering the Ateneo? Ang galing mo naman...Point is that NOBODY cares about this until they hear about it...It's not a school identity, it's a school aspiration. And as such, people don't necessarily share it. I went to Ateneo High School because people are nicer there than in my old school, so I thought maybe it could also improve my character. Then I went to ADMU for college because I like the Ateneo. I think those are noble enough reasons. Understand that this is representative of only a small group, and you can spot them very easily.
The choice of course is a central part of that strategy because the course determines the steepness of the future trajectory of the students/ the ease with which the students will achieve the goal of achieving a lifestyle comparable to or better than the lifestyle of their parents. (For the students and their families, there is such a thing as a good strategy or a bad strategy when it comes to choice of course). Thus there is a hierarchy of courses[2]. For once, you said something remotely correct. But again, wrong basis. I do not have much respect for course hierarchy, but I wll admit that in the back of my mind I do have this. That is, I have courses whose students I admire, I have pride in my own course, and there are others that I just don't have as much admiration for. But I base it upon two things: intellect and drive. I just think that there are courses that are inherently harder than others, so it either takes more brain power or more heart to pass these courses. And some others, I just think that they just want to slack off or coast. There are a few, though, who also go into these less challenging courses because the content of those course is what they want to do also, that I can respect.
The goal of education for most Ateneans is to obtain an Ateneo diploma and not primarily to learn. OK, I'll give you this one. But isn't this true of all schools? I think you just stated here how human Ateneans really are.
By the time they reach college, and after the first few weeks of freshman year, most students become jaded about the possibility of learning anything in a classroom setting. Wrong again. You must really think poorly of the Atenean...Me, even into my last sem, I was enjoying my studies very much because I was finally learning a lot of the meaty juicy parts of engineering (BS ECE, batch 2006).
What students look for in class is practical mastery (to help them achieve the goal of attaining a lifestyle comparable to their parents?) and they do not appreciate the value of conceptual mastery. Most teachers on the other hand emphasize conceptual mastery. (Like the rest of society, students do not have high regard for faculty because they did not get far in achieving goal #1). Well, I don't know about this one, because the conceptual mastery in engineering finally made sense in the last year, turned out how practical they really were. Maybe you're talking about some course that, sadly, ultimately has no bearing in the real world. As in, it doesn't help the world, it doesn't help anyone better their lives or their persons, so ultimately it doesn't help its students because it is so detached from reality to the point that its concepts have no reality in them anymore, thus no practical mastery. Understand this: true conceptual mastery by itself becomes practical mastery. If it doesn't, then it's no mastery at all.
For most Ateneans, Ateneo education is not difficult. Teachers are tagged as kayang bolahin at hindi kayang bolahin (and there are very few of those), A-able o hindi. Most work to obtain a C-average, except those who feel and are capable of getting into the Dean’s List. “Academic excellence” is a term used by those who designed TACSS. Change that to “Academics” and it would still be tops. Academic excellence is not a value for most students. Many students just want to be Dean's list once in their entire college career. What is TACSS? I do not understand your understanding. OK, this may be the case, but so what? Why do you bother us with some point that NOBODY cares about?
Honesty in terms of academics is not valued by many because academic work itself is not valued. Besides, many students commit acts of academic dishonesty and are not caught by teachers. It disheartens the honest ones when the dishonest ones pass or even get honors. There is an underground value for those who are switik[3]. Again, you are using your own words. Do not use words that will not be understood, because NOBODY will care about your understanding. That aside, only those who cheat themselves value anybody else who cheats.
In general, female students work harder than male students, probably because they believe that in the world out there, they have a natural disadvantage over men so they have to gain any advantage they can. A few women with socially-valued physical assets (or economic assets), however, do not work as hard because they think that those physical (or economic) assets can work for them when they are in the real world. You obviously do not understand the power of the human body. Although I agree, the fact is that sometimes, these assets actually help. People are more naturally drawn to more attractive people. It actually gets them somewhere, just not that far most of the time.
Students are preparing themselves for the big leagues, the world out there and that is why most do not care to excel in their studies. Again, the value of Ateneo education for most is the diploma (#6) and it does not take that much to obtain an Ateneo diploma (#8). What are these big leagues? Who are they? Do you know the names of these big leagues? Because I haven't heard of any of them. If you can't produce a single name, then this is just shaky fudge.
The only power the students recognize in school authorities is the power to pass/fail and the power to grant a diploma. Relative to the big leagues they will face after they graduate, the school is seen to be in a subordinate position. Its power is limited to a brief period in one's life. Therefore, aside from the power to pass/ fail and the power to grant a diploma, students do not have much respect for school authority, which is reflected in the way they dress. This is also reflected in the behavior of parents during graduation. Again, WHO ARE THESE BIG LEAGUES? WHY DO YOU MAKE SHAKY FUDGE AFTER SHAKY FUDGE? You are obviously writing by feeling and not by thinking. That aside, the real reason why students only respect the pass/fail authority is because that is the ONLY authority the school has. PERIOD. They have no legislative, executive, or judicial powers. They do not even have financial power sometimes. So unless you can produce some list of authorities that the school has, you are only making SHAKY FUDGE.
On the one hand students feel the pressure to get the diploma but on the other hand, they are not motivated to jump through the hoops teachers throw at them. Hindi nila niyayakap (at matagal na nilang hindi niyakap) ang kanilang pag-aaral. And you did? Do you want to be a student all your life? Learning and education is not limited to students. Try working in the real world. There is much to learn about the world and yourself in the working world out HERE.
Students sometimes cope with this duality (#14) by resorting to behavior regarded by some as dysfunctional like drugs, parties and sex. The barkada acts as a herd/ support/ outlet but it is not reflexive. It merely reinforces both the pressure and the feeling of uselessness of education. What is missing from the barkada is a questioning of values they live by, especially the value stated in #1. #1 is a very powerful impulse that must not be underestimated and which is reinforced by University structures and teachers (despite the rhetoric to the contrary). Since you were a participant-observant, does that mean you took part in these drugs and sex parties? I will not look at teachers the same way again because of you.
Parties (and drinking and (for some) drugs at parties) are part of the college experience. Wrong. Parties are a part of life in general. Long after college, you will still be attending parties. Wedding receptions are some of them. Family reunions are some of them. And these parties do not have to have drinking and drugs. You must have a party animal in your college days. My college days were full of studies and org activities. Not much partying going on there....
Students recognize the authority of school administrators to impose rules but consider these as impositions of cultural arbitraries by traditional authorities. The school experience, no matter how liberal (ex. no uniform), always has traces of a cloister that one has to go through to achieve the goal stated in #1. Rules such as a dress code, smockets, and id wearing are cloister concerns that they just have to live with. Some people who initiate dress codes in their own school who want it to spread to the whole of the Loyola Schools just do this as a way of trying to get whatever little respect from his students that he can never get from them otherwise because he just doesn't deserve it, in spite of his position and all....
Students are not as inherently committed to traditional moral values. They experience very little guilt when it comes to matters such as (casual) sex and drugs. Why are you looking at only the opposite sides of the bell curve? LOOK AT THE MIDDLE!!!!!
The increase in sexual activity among students can be attributed to many things:

· The increase in the student population. Student cohorts have been having sex for years but with the increase in student population, more are being caught. Most students who became teachers were prudes when they were students.

· MTV, Cable TV (even local TV), glossy magazines (and even newspapers!) which fuel sexual appetites and the influence of media and the internet. Sexual tension is more intense than it has been before.

· More physical room for sex because there are more dormers living around Katipunan, more parking lots, more spaces around campus, more affluent population who have financial resources (to go to Boracay) or physical assets like cars. (Note: more dorms also means more “house” wear in school; the school is literally an extension of the house).

· More liberal parents (?) who had their share of sexual exploits when they were young. Less parental supervision.

· To a lesser extent, globalization and exposure to the international youth scene.

As stated in #12, students are preparing for the big leagues and a large part of their preparation is a lifestyle preparation. Again, this is SHAKY FUDGE THAT NOBODY CARES ABOUT. You have not identified yet these big leagues. WHO are they? WHERE are they? Until then this is just out of feeling and not thinking at all.
Material possessions (especially cellular phones and cars) and the social processing of the body (ex. clothes, make-up, accessories) are an indication of the location of individual students in social hierarchies and there are hierarchies. A few (?) students upgrade cell phones once in a while, for example, as a(n unconscious) symbol (and reassurance to themselves) of their general upward direction in life. I switched to a camera phone so that I could take pictures of moments that are right there in my face without having to have a camera. I do not care about social hierarchy.
By and large (but at a slightly declining rate), Ateneans are good people. While they are concerned about goal #1, they have a sincere desire to help which after theology 141 becomes guilt. But very few will translate that into a lifelong commitment because it gets in the way of goal #1. That is why Ateneans end up being very good donors. And donating is a bad thing? Or is donating deemed inadequate, below tha standards of the Ateneo? News flash, the Ateneo and Ateneans are two very different things...I am very sorry you feel Ateneans are starting to undo their nature as good people. I am very sorry for you indeed. Who did it to you?
For most students, faith is not central to their lives. For most Filipinos, faith (even when it is central to their lives) is equivalent to a prayer for safe journey sa patuloy na pag-asenso. OK, you crossed the line. Sino ka para sabihin para sa aming mga Atenista kung ano dapat ang faith? If you really went to a good philosophy teacher, you would know that faith is a movement of the will. Faith is out of love. You are saying, therefore, that Ateneans are devoid of love. Kumbaga, love is just a way to Atenistas' base ends.
Students have very little self-worth and confidence because they tend to define self-worth and confidence in terms of their achievement of goal #1 sometime in the distant future. The family does not help in this regard because it tends to merely reinforce #1. Teachers do not help because they are not sympathetic to the problem stated in #14. The fact that faith for them is not personal also does not help. You are out of touch with reality.
There is very little room in the University for Ateneans to discuss what's really on their minds. They censor themselves a lot because they might say something wrong that will get in the way of obtaining their diploma or they feel the school will judge them. They feel that they cannot freely talk about #1, #7, #8, #10, #16-19, and #21. The clampdown on the vagina monologues and the occassional clampdown on naughty Matanglawin issues are for them indications that the school does not want to hear certain things coming from them and would rather not have certain things openly discussed. Well, after hearing what you have to say, I can understand why. That's because kinahon niyo na kaming mga Atenista. And by doing so, you totally elude all chances of truly understanding us. Your very attempt has made all 25 of your points moot and academic. You represent very well a reason why faculty doesn't understand Ateneans.

[1] The following background information about me is provided to get a sense of where I am coming from. AB Development Studies, 1993; faculty member (Economics (until 2005), Development Studies) since 1993; OSA Director 1995-1999; Sanggunian Moderator 1995-2000; Development Studies Director 1999 to the present; Executive Officer of Pugadlawin (genuine democracy advocates) 2005-2006; Coordinator for Faculty Social Involvement 2006 to the present.

[2] There are many insights in these hypotheses inspired by two readings: Pierre Bourdieu and Jeane-Claude Passeron, Reproduction in Education, Culture and Society (with Jean-Claude Passeron, 2000 re-print and translation of the 1970 book) and Bourdieu, Homo Academicus (Bourdieu, 1988). These include the concept of strategies, trajectories and hierarchies in hypothesis #5, the concept of practical and conceptual mastery in #8, the concept of leagues introduced in #12 which is my “translation” of the concept of field, the use of reflexivity in #15, the concept of cultural arbitrary in #17 and the concept of social processing of the body in #21. The value given to the switik in #10, the effort made by women described in #11, and the concept of asenso in #23 are also inspired by Bourdieu but not directly derived from him. For me Bourdieu provides a language for thoughts I have had even before I read him.

[3] I apologize for this and other code switches. I use the language which is more expressive.

Name meaning (got the idea from zo...)

2007-10-07T10:29:36Z

Luis Antonio

Having great personal charisma you attract many admirers and are usually surrounded by friends and loved ones. You are very much a people person enjoying conversation and much social activity. A natural leader and gifted in communication you may be drawn toward the fields of writing, speaking or public life. You are a person who needs freedom to move and a constructive outlet for your creative ideas.

half-empty, half-full, a very nearly senseless question

2007-09-03T23:17:12Z

"Is the glass half-empty? Or is it half-full?"

This is one of the questions that, I have come to realize, I absolutely hate. I hate it because it inspires that mentality of "having only the right answers", a mentality that breeds intellectual frivolity and a very shaky holier than thou air in people who think they've "got it" because they think they "have all the right answers." Well, to those who immediately say "Half fulll!", I say to you, "Shut up, you snot-nosed suck up....."

I think this is a beautiful place for the application of phenomenology.

The question is composed not only of the question itself, but also by the person looking at the glass and the inherent truth that the glass is, in fact, both half-empty and half-full at the same time. So obviously it is not a question of intelligence, but rather of inclination. That is, given a situation or a premise, do you more instinctively see the good or the bad? And why is it a virtue to always see the good? Well, for the life of me, I really don't know why, but I do make sense of it in terms of opportunity. That is, where there is calamity, there is bound to be an opportunity. Think of me as an opportunistic, capitalist bastard, but hey, remember this. Every time you need something done that you can't do yourself, somebody has seen the opportunity in that, and they're the people you pay good money for doing exactly those things. Can't cook? Somebody will for you, or they'll show you, but they'll surely make money off you. But you're willing to pay, right? Remember every time you were hungry and went into the nearest fast food. I'm not such a bastard now, aren't I?

Anyway, I digress......

Here's the thing. Actually, whatever you say, half-full or half-empty, you will actually be correct, but that's not what counts. What counts is that you say the correct answer, which is half-full. That being the correct answer, yes, I understand. I get it. But what I don't get is why you should instinctively come up with that answer upon the presentation of a vessel with fluid enough to hit at a level half of its total volume. I simply don't get it.

The fact is that a half-empty/half-full glass of water means nothing to someone who sees it when it's already half-full/half-empty. Why? Simply because that person has not seen it totally empty or totally full.

What I'm getting at is that the question misses one vital element: the looker seeing the initial state of the glass.

Think about it. Would you think the same way if you had just seen the glass empty before? Or full?

The initial state also affects the instinctive response.

If the glass was presented to the looker as initially empty, then later presented again as half-filled, anybody would instinctively say that the glass was half-full. Why? Emptiness is an absolute state. There is no gradient to emptiness, it just is. That is, empty is void of all. Once there's the slightest amount of something in it, empty ceases to be because void is no longer there. Instead, the totality of the void has been entirely replaced by that speck of dust.

Fullness, on the other hand, is not an absolute state. Fullness comes in gradients, and so fullness is as fleeting a state as it is coveted or desired. So if you showed somebody a full glass of water, made that person observe the gradual decrease in water over time, and then asked that person if the glass is half-empty or half-full, the instinctive reaction would be to say that the glass is half-empty. Why? Because the change from the initial state to the current state is the loss of water.

In other words, in the former premise, the state went from nothing to something. In the latter premise, the state went from having to losing.

However, it is in the latter premise where it would be perfect to ask the question in question. Why? Because of the change in state, there is a bias or inclination towards despair and bleakness over the loss of the water. Are we going to dwell on what was lost, or on what in actual fact still exists and was therefore retained? On what we lost, or what we still have? The learning experience is maximized, the lesson fully appreciated.

Compare that with having a half-filled glass shoved in your face out of the blue and being asked if it was half-empty or half-full. Where is the relevance? Why should you care? Here, neither in logic nor in will is there the slightest inclination either way, so the answer will be so arbitrary that it will render the question moot and academic.

So, to you who most readily answers, "Half-full!" in order to impress me or to exhibit your intelligence (which by the way only you can see), don't con me.....moron.......

luigicinco @ 2007-06-06T22:58:00

2007-06-06T14:59:05Z

Read my VisualDNA™ Get your own VisualDNA™

luigicinco @ 2007-04-20T19:38:00

2007-04-20T11:40:13Z

You scored as Fai. You’re kinda like Fai from Tsubasa! Flamboyant, charismatic maybe a little bit tricky, you don't like letting anyone get too close to you, but you have no problem playing around and having a good time. Generally, your intentions are good – or so you’d like everyone to believe, but it’s quite possible that you have a darker side to you that you have become extremely good at hiding.

Just remember that there are people around you that love you. More than you even know…

Fai

96%

Seishirou

88%

Kamui

83%

Yuuko

79%

Sakura

79%

Chii

71%

Hokuto

67%

Watanuki

63%

Kurogane

58%

Miyuki-chan

50%

Kero-chan

46%

Who is your inner CLAMP character?
created with QuizFarm.com

Just a bunch of nothing

2007-03-18T14:46:34Z

Well, this would have been higher if you asked stuff about what i do in my job....

....anyway.....

...that's all for now i guess.....

How something that seems bad can be good...and maybe the other way around

2007-02-15T17:01:22Z

天下皆知美之為美斯惡已
    Everyone recognizes beauty only because of ugliness
皆知善斯不善已
    Everyone recognizes virtue only because of wickedness
故育無相生
    Therefore life and death are born together
難易相成
    Difficult and easy complete each other
長短相較
    Long and short exhibit each other
高下相傾
    High and low determine each other
音聲相
    Sound and silence harmonize each other
和前後相隨
    And ahead and behind follow each other

                                                                           -Daodejing

Good things come with bad things, and bad things come with good things. An extremely nice car comes with a huge dent in your finances, and a steal of a bargain may bring less than what you bargained for. You can think of it as a tradeoff, or seeing opportunity in disaster, but for sure bad and good follow.

An example of something good coming with something bad.

"God is dead"

I forget which philosopher said this, but when he said this, he didn't mean that "God is, in fact, dead." Rather, God is dead in the minds of men today. Somehow, the idea of a perfect being really is hard to imagine as being real or existent. A singular God being three distinctly different persons. A being that is both ever-present and, almost conveniently enough, never seen. God seems more fairy tale than good news.

Or is that really the case?

"The way that can be walked is not The Way, a name that can be named is not The Name" says the Daodejing.

Is it really God who is dead in the minds of men? Or is it more the idea of God, an idea that we denote with the utterance of the word "God", which is dead? Does this not sound very much like why the name YHWH cannot be uttered? A name circumscribes that which it refers to, and whatever cannot be circumsribed by a name is instead cropped by it. In other words, calling God "God", attaching the label "God" to God, assigning the meaning "God" to God, it is all effectively an attempt at freezing, boxing, cutting off, molding a truly eternal and ever transcendent Being.

"God" being "dead" actually brings about good news, for man no longer has to recognize God through stringent measures, almost as if it was God's duty to men to prove Himself. With the death of the idea of God, God can truly be known, and more importantly felt, by men.

An example of a good's existence requiring something fundamentally lacking in goodness.

They say friendship more often displays unconditional love much more than family ties or even marriage. More interestingly, friendship is always compared to relationships of romantic love. It is almost a bipolar scale, a duality, between platonic and romantic relatedness.

But what makes friendship more tolerant, giving, and honest than a romantic relationship?

What makes it so is that very thing which romantic relationships require in hopes of achieving unconditional love: commitment.

Friends can come and go, as they say. In human existence, friends come and go often, yet this bond is rarely severed by the simple departure of one of them. This is because friends don't invest themselves. When you commit, you give yourself. You put yourself at stake, and when you do it is very easy to get hurt, and as such, expectations are imposed on the other party. A person's commitment to you then places much expectation on you. And usually, failure to meet these expectations come with the threat of departure, cutting off of the tie. Things in a commitment are done because or out of the commitment.   All this when it can all be avoided with a lack of commitment.

But friends forgive each other. Friends help each other without anybody asking to be helped. Friends do not require proximity or a regular affirmation to be yours. Friends do what they do purely out of volition. Commitments don't dictate what they do. Friends are friends.

So, unconditional love can only be true or can become real when there is a certain lack of commitment. People are not forced to fulfill expectations, so whatever they do, it is because of true love.

However, the rub is that to people, a commitment of love feels more real than unconditional but uncommitted love. Uncommitted love is the product of pure volition., but we people feel more loved when other people give up other things for us or to be with us, even if those other things were important to the people who love us.

In short, a person sharing his time and himself with other people does not feel as loving as someone who gives up her friends to be with us.

Nothing is purely good or evil. They come hand in hand, because they exist only because of the other.

luigicinco @ 2007-02-15T23:33:00

2007-02-15T15:33:49Z

The Five Love Languages

My primary love language is probably
Quality Time
with a secondary love language being
Physical Touch.

Complete set of results

Quality Time:		10
Physical Touch:		7
Words of Affirmation:		7
Acts of Service:		4
Receiving Gifts:		2

Information

Unhappiness in relationships, according to Dr. Gary Chapman, is often due to the fact that we speak different love languages. Sometimes we don't understand our partner's requirements, or even our own. We all have a "love tank" that needs to be filled in order for us to express love to others, but there are different means by which our tank can be filled, and there are different ways that we can express love to others.

Take the quiz

firefox experimenting

2007-01-07T08:05:45Z

I wonder if this thing will work...hmmm...

I haven't gotten this kind of reading in the longest time...!

2006-12-09T16:00:33Z

Your Aura is Red

You have a high level of emotion. This can mean passion, but it can also mean rage. Usually, you don't take these emotions out on others. You just use them as motivation - and it works! The purpose of your life: embracing all the wonders of the life, lots of travels, and tons of adventures Famous reds include: Madonna, Marilyn Monroe, Jennifer Lopez Careers for you to try: Dancer, Boxer, Surgeon

What Color Is Your Aura?

Spiritual

2006-12-03T04:01:10Z

What is spirit? Is it the same as soul? Is it the half of a being, the other half being the physical?

For the most part, i really find that I cannot believe in "the substantial spirit or soul", or what most people call ghosts. Besides, believing in that type of metaphysical theory does nothing for our lives today. It takes our minds from here and now to some distant place somewhere, someday, that may not be there in the first place. I do know that there is such thing as heaven and hell, but golden glorious gate sitting on top of cumulo-nimbus formations, or a jagged landscape of red cliffs and canyons engulfed by flames? I don't think so. And even if the case were like that, how does that help me in my life today? It's like the knowledge that things are made of atoms...okay, but so what? Does that knowledge translate into greater monthly income for me? Does that knowledge even enrich my life? No it doesn't.

So, obviously I'm trying to steer away from a metaphysical elucidation of what the spirit or the soul is, because that's not what I wanted to get at in the first place. My question isn't "what is the spirit?", it's "what is spirit?"

Take all possibly widely known usages of the word spirit..."the Holy Spirit", "spirit of the law", "[s/he] is quite spirited", "spirituality"...and when I think of these things, one thing comes to mind: movement.

They always told us at school that the Holy Spirit is "that thing" which inspires you and you know that it's God. And when you're inspired by God, you just go to lengths you don't normally go to do things you don't normally do, like help little children or visit and listen old lonely people in hospitals. Movement.

Spirit of the law is what the law was, like, "intending". That is, the law is an abstraction of how things ought to be, and this abstraction comes from the fact that how things are and how things ought to be are not the same thing, so man makes laws to get "how things are" closer to "how things ought to be", so there is a movement from how things are to how things ought to be. Movement.

When someone is spirited they're very lively and energetic. Even in the physical domain, the effect is the same. Movement.

And spirituality. Spirituality is how your being moves about in life. In you every day of existence, this is how you move. Spirituality is how your will moves about life.

How about spirits as in liquor? ... I don't drink so I wouldn't know, but as liquor in its early stages of ingestion makes people happy and giddy, and have you seen giddy drunks? Movement.

Spirit is movement.

And how does this relate to the Dao?

The Dao is a certain movement about you. And sometimes this movement takes you with it, it surprises you, pleasantly or otherwise, and you can't do a thing about it. But that doesn't mean it automatically kills you, because if you ride the motion, not only can you survive the Dao, you can even be happy with its motion, and soon enough, if you ride the motion of the Dao you come to know its fluidity and motion, and you follow its motion. So soon your motion is as the motion of the Dao, so when you do something you are unstoppable.

It's just like the Holy Spirit. If you follow the Holy Spirit you end up following the will of God. And your will become's God's will. You work in the direction that God planned, and when things come your way this way you can only be happier.

This is the way.

More important, this is my way.

The more you try, the more you fail pt 2 (?)

2006-11-26T12:05:31Z

Ya, I think this is my second post on this topic.

I have always been the one who would try to explain how things are, how things came to be, or how they really aren't in the first place. And until recently when someone pointed out to me that I'm bad at explaining why certain people were likeable (the first time since high school have I heard this), I really thought I was very good at articulating things.

It seems that I have actually lost the ability to articulate very subjective/philosophical stuffs. Hmm...I wonder if I can still pull off a good orals exam or fool a philo teacher that I know what I say I know...maybe not....because the difference is now in my situation it's ok for me not to know these things, so I can admit to myself that I don't know...

...and yet, no matter how I feel that I don't know, it seems still when I talk to people, that I in fact do know...because they tell me...and I can see for myself that they don't know what I know or what I'm talking about...

Things have become very abstract, to the point that when I try to use words I always falter. I always end up saying something that I don't know or I don't believe to be true or fact of the matter. The problem isn't my mental articulation, because I know what I want to say. But it seems that I have lost the ability to say what I mean and actually believe what I'm saying, because though nothing has changed in my verbal skills, it's just that the minute the words leave my mouth, I become skeptical of them, because they came out different from what I meant. And the more I try with words, the more I fail to actually communicate what I want to say.

And in fact, the more I try to roll the words in my head, the more I fail to come up with words to say that I feel I will actually believe once I say them.

The more I try to seize the truth, the more I lose knowledge of it. In the end, I only know my own thinking. But the more I try to sort my own thoughts and my own thinking, the more I see outside myself....but the minute I acknowledge that I go back inside my head.

The more you try to win, the more you lose. But the more you try to lose to win, all the much more you lose. But when you don't even try, the more you do not even think of letting it be and not trying, the more it actually comes to you.

But does this in fact support the position of no resolution? Non-committance, yes. But non-resolution? Deciding is willful, but having resolve, is it the same?

Before, perhaps I would have said, yes, it means to have no resolve.

But now, now that I can express what I want to express with not just words but within, perhaps not so...there is still the reality of having a person who is righteous, that when he does something you can feel the effect of a totality of that person, a certain wholeness. This is perhaps the mark of having resolve, whatever "having resolve" means....

...but the truth is this: I am hungry, and I wanna eat...LOL

luigicinco @ 2006-11-26T19:29:00

2006-11-26T11:29:11Z

You are The Fool

The Fool is the card of infinite possibilities. The bag on the staff indicates that he has all he need to do or be anything he wants, he has only to stop and unpack. He is on his way to a brand new beginning. But the card carries a little bark of warning as well. Stop daydreaming and fantasising and watch your step, lest you fall and end up looking the fool.

What Tarot Card are You?
Take the Test to Find Out.

An observation: east vs west culture

2006-11-01T15:15:46Z

This is just a very raw observation, so it is still subject to further investigation and such...but...I did notice something interesting in western and eastern (chinese in particular) culture, in disciplining in particular.

I noticed it when I heard on the radio that China was planning to bar minors from internet cafes. Apparently, the government thinks access to media that is offered by the internet has had an adverse effect on children. In particular, if my memory serves me right, they experienced an increase in juvenile crime rate (?) and students' grades were dropping.

And the rationale they gave was:

"We will cut off internet access so that students can focus more on their studies."

And my initial reaction was that it's not true...simply cutting off internet access does not translate to an increased opportunity to focus on studies.

And then it dawned on me...the way that the Chinese discipline, in fact groom, their kids is by restriction...cutting off certain liberties.

However, in the west, children are groomed by the assertion of added responsibilities that they would otherwise not naturally be inclined to do.

Studying, for example. Let's say a little kid loves to play some game, like let's say, Resident Evil...a typical Asian way of doing it would be to deprive the child the right to play it until let's say the kid perfects certain long tests in all of his subjects. Maybe some parents would enforce a study schedule, but i'm inclined to think that most other parents would leave it up to the kid to get the perfects scores. A typical western way of doing it would to enforce a study schedule on top of playing the game. Either that or temporarily restricting access until studies are finished for the day.

Or let's say the instilling of values...Asians very clearly outline the don'ts. And usually the kids would find the don'ts very restrictive, yet the do's would not really pose any problems. In western culture, the do's are clearly defined, and usually the kids would find the do's much ado about nothing, but the don'ts seem reasonable.

A sample of don'ts that I've heard from Asians:
1) Don't marry anybody who isn't your race (doing so has undesirable consequences)
2) Don't eat meat
3) Don't eat anything with garlic
4) Don't be wasteful

A sample of do's from the west that I've heard
1) Make sure you're marrying the right person for the right reasons
2) Eat your vegetables
3) Work off the calories (not related to garlics...)
4) Give your riches to the poor

But as to what this means or what should be done about it...don't ask me...i just thought it was interesting to note...of course there are examples of do's in the east and don'ts in the west too...but i just hear more "you can't" from Asians and more "you have to" from westerners...

Simple, Complicated, Complex, Simple

2006-10-18T14:11:52Z

It is ironic, is it not?

When you were ignorant, things were simple.

When you were being educated, things got complicated.

When you became educated, things were complex.

But when you finally understood and felt the bliss of enlightenment, things were simple again.

And what's more, you wonder why you thought it was so complicated!

Such is the flow of skill. Of learning. Of listening. Of many things we try to do in this world. Such is the flow of the Dao.

So, if you have real skill, will it be arduous for you?

No, of course not.

But beware, so many people in this world project the image of mastery and seek to awe us by showing us all sorts of words, things, and thoughts that we have never heard of before. Many people will show us how hard it is to do something, how much of a feat it is to do these things. And what is the purpose? Simply to say that they are capable of such difficulty.

But if they themselves deal with difficulty, how can they say they are truly skilled and enlightened?

Especially when we see someone do exactly the same thing, only the second person makes it look so easy and effortless!

It may only be a movie, but Li Mu Bai was right when he said, "True skill comes without effort!"

In fact, people of true skill would probably never even let on that they have such skill, because to them, they have no skill. They don't feel sorely impressed by their own skill because it's so easy for them!

Truly, one who is enlightened is 臥虎藏龍. No thoughts. No desires. Only calm and peace and letting be. And the Dao flows on...

Why do we do philosophy?

2006-08-25T12:35:49Z

I know if someone in particular was reading this she'd know where I'm coming from on this one, but anyway....

So for a friend's long test in philo, I helped her come up with an answer to their teacher's question: "Why do we do philosophy? What is the point of philosophy?"

Of course, knowing that this is academic philosophy, meaning the brand of philosophy where the real aim is the grade rather than anything really fruitful, I went along with their readings and just gave the answer, "We do philosophy because our minds are limited, de facto that there are things we know and don't know, and so insight brings us wonder, because we want to know about our world."

But is that really the case?

I think not.

I submit this assertion: we do philosophy because we're in a bad place at the moment.

Think about it?

When do we catch ourselves thinking, "why is this happening? Why is the world like that?"

Isn't it that we ask these questions only when we encounter negativity?

Or rather, would we ask ourselves these questions when we're happy?

No, we do not. We only do when we come into contact with unhappiness, and we would like to make sense of our own unhappiness, even if the negativity encountered is someone else's.

Otherwise, bakit pa? Masaya naman tayo, bakit pa tayo mag-iisip tungkol sa kung anuman ang nasa likod o ilalim ng kabalintunaan ng pagganap ng mga pangyayari sa mundo?

That's really the only reason.

And while I'm on the subject, I submit this assertion too:

"While philosophy class readings may say that philosophy is about reality, philosophy in class is not real philosophy, and so teachers who use such an assertion to conduct classes are nothing but charlatans and hypocrites."

Why?

Because in philosophy class, we are not philosophizing. We are not thinking of reality. We are thinking of someone's text about their experience of reality! That's twice vicarious, even before the teacher! And when it gets to the teacher, when he is conducting class he's not really about reality. He's more about selling his reality to his students, the effect of which is the typical mental rebellion of the students, because really the teacher is trying to drive something forcibly into their minds! And when something is being forcefully driven into something else, what does that sound like?

So really, philosophy teachers who claim to be doing real philosophy during class are really pulling off a mindfuck! Really!

Now of course, there are philosophy teachers who don't claim such things, they're allright, because they know that they're coming in with a collection of texts, texts that utterly take reality out of reality, and so what they're selling are viewpoints, nothing really philosophical.

And if philosophy is in fact like so, then the text is right. Philosophy is about reality, because it never hits in the first place!

So, never ever believe a philosophy teacher who comes in with a text that says philosophy is about reality. Even if the words after some thought turn out to be right, don't believe the teacher; what he's doing is not philosophy, what he's doing is screwing with you in your head. They say pleasure lies with the body, why, is the brain not part of the body? And if so, is it not possible to have intellectual hedonism?

So, what say I? Don't do philosophy in philosophy class, because academic philosophy is moot and, well, academic...

Is it the Man, or the Method?

2006-08-04T16:59:36Z

In the martial arts, people are very concerned with being effective. The reason is obvious. If that time comes that you really need to get away from an encounter alive...let's just say that it would really make your day if you knew something that worked, that you could depend on to save your behind. So people are very concerned with what works.

However, in the martial arts, there is not one method. No. There are several methods. And they all claim the same thing: that they work.

Now comes the problem. If you have two methods, one that works and one that doesn't, it's obvious that the one that works will prevail. However, if you have two methods that both work, this begs the question...which will prevail? Well, it's obvious...the better method will prevail. Now, extend that to all methods...now you have a battle royale...all styles claiming to work, and all now claiming to be the best method.

..or at least, that's how one school of thought thinks.

The other school of thought thinks otherwise. This other school of thought didn't come out until Bruce Lee came out with his Jeet Kune Do and its singlemost difference from the other methods...the idea that the martial art does not reside in ways or methods, but in the soul of each individual.

So it's obvious...the alternative thought pattern is that whether you survive an encounter is not in the style you use, but it's in you. And the common conclusion is that therefore you don't need style. Because, hey, whatever works, right?

And yet, the same school of thought is using that same exact reasoning to effectively claim that they're the ultimate school...the ultimate method...so in the very end, it reverts back right to a question of method...

And we cannot deny that there are just some phonies out there in the martial arts world who teach things that just don't work, stuff that will just get you killed, methods that are just no good, methods that prove that there are superior methods.

So, is it the man or the method?

To this question, I propose the analogy of a race. There are good drivers, and there are good cars, and there's such a thing as fine tuning. These three factors all have an effect towards the victory of a particular entry. Why? Because a race is not just the cars and the drivers, but also the track. Let's say you had a Lambourghini Gallardo, driven by an average rac car driver, and then you have the world's best race car driver in a Honda Civic. Who will win?

Depends on the track.

If the track is just a straight path, then no matter how good you are, the Gallardo will always beat the Civic.

But if you had a winding path, then the Civic could win, given the better driver. And it's been known to happen that Civics beat higher powered cars simply because of its handling.

Depending on the track or the event, the world's best driver can do nothing against a faster car. Or the fastest car can do nothing against a superior driver. It all depends on the track.

So it's neither man nor method, but rather the successful combination of both to the situation at hand. If you're an average Joe with a superior system, then you can handle yourself pretty well in civilian encounters. But don't dream you can take yourself to war. Same thing, if you're a Navy SEAL, with your superior conditioning simple methods will serve you well, but don't dream that you can just use it in civilian territory like it was WW3, or the justice system will put you behind bars.

That is the Way.

luigicinco @ 2006-07-27T21:51:00

2006-07-27T13:54:03Z

You scored as XIX: The Sun. This is the happiest card in the deck. It is full of joy and optimism, everything is right with the world. We are as innocent children playing in the fields without care. The Sun brings success, well-being and happiness in all spheres - material, emotional, spiritual -wherever our desires lay.When this card appears in a Tarot spread it indicates success, joy and happiness. Obstacles will be overcome, goals achieved.When badly aspected, it can indicate a stagnation through over-indulgence, too much of a good thing.

XIX: The Sun

81%

I - Magician

69%

II - The High Priestess

63%

XIII: Death

63%

IV - The Emperor

63%

X - Wheel of Fortune

56%

0 - The Fool

56%

XVI: The Tower

56%

VIII - Strength

56%

VI: The Lovers

44%

XI: Justice

31%

XV: The Devil

25%

III - The Empress

13%

Which Major Arcana Tarot Card Are You?
created with QuizFarm.com

luigicinco @ 2006-07-20T19:39:00

2006-07-20T11:40:48Z

If You Ruled the Land . . . by wackyweasel

Your first name:

How you gained your rule:

Your title is:

You Sexy Thang

Your symbol is:

a crown, because, um, you wear one

You rule from:

a great, golden, gem-studded palace

At your side is:

your Royal Chocolate Carrier

Your enforcers, troops, and guards are all:

centaurs! They should NOT be so hot . . . oh well!

Your most popular law is:

No-pants Fridays

Your least popular law is:

Hot people register for draft; hey, your guards get old

Your worst enemy is:

a poorly-chewed pretzel

Your popularity rating is:: 57%

Your chance of being overthrown is:: 6%

Quiz created with MemeGen!

The Wise Man Is Silent, The Fool Is Noisy, and other such sayings to the same effect

2006-07-11T14:50:36Z

I am not really so big on Confucianism, because I do not really like the idea of a magic formula for how to behave accordingly to or with society, but its roots in Daoism still give it some good points.

And one such is the saying that the man who keeps talking is not wise, the man who is wise does not talk...and for one reason or another, I never really got the point of it or why it was so, or even if it was so or simply if it should have been, until now....

See, one who does not know will really talk so much, and why? Since he does not know or "get it", he will rejoice at every moment that he discovers something new or gains some insight...and the feeling of obtaining that piece of knowledge will make him crave for more (because he feels good about himself), so he tries to process it by extension, so he will ramble and ramble...either that, or he is so happy that he wants to share this singular insight with the rest of the world...and this euphoria will be fuelled really not by the piece of knowledge but by the thought of "I was ignorant before, and now I am wise!", not considering that a singular insight sticks out in such a manner is reflective of the immense lack all around it, much like a singular dot on a pure white sheet of paper...

But, for one who "gets it" and is therefore wise, seeing these things happen is of no consequence, because it is expected. There is no compulsion for jumping up and down in a jubilant manner...instead of ecstatic euphoria, what you have with the wise man is nothing but a silent nod...and the affairs of the world do not concern him much. But for a fool, a singular happening in the world will trigger the rationalizing mistake of extension...or the ever present unsolicited preaching of the good news...

luigicinco @ 2006-07-09T10:53:00

2006-07-09T02:54:02Z

COMBAT CARDS 2.0

watch luigicinco fight

view children

view parent

CREATE YOUR CARD

On How Little Things Can Change The World...or at least yours...

2006-06-27T13:58:25Z

Well...perhaps not the world...just the understanding of a little part of it...but as you'll see, it might as well have been the world...

Things are the way they are...there's no doubt about it...even if the appearance is dubious, it doesn't matter...things are the way they are...whatever way we may think them to be...

So, if you have a friendship with someone, well...if you follow the logic it won't work...

Again...take two...

So, if you THINK you have a friendship with someone, then chances are things are pretty good between the two of you...otherwise you would not be friends, right?

But how do you know that things are good between the two of you? Well, if youb follow the logic, you won't, you never can nor will know, but you can judge for yourself...and what will be the basis of that judgment? You will base it on the things you see, and most often that's enough...

However, as all things are Yin and Yang, shown and hidden, the flip side to that is this...the things you see, you see because you are shown these things...in other words, if there is a secret negative comment you have for your friend, but you never show it to him/her, then he/she will never see it, thus that person will think things are good between the two of you...

However, that which is hidden can be found...obvious things cannot be found, only hidden things can be found...because to find posits something missing or unseen...you never look for things that you already see (albeit things in front of you ocassionally being out of your sight...)...or at least they can be stumbled upon...

So sometimes you don't see certain things, and then, probably either because lies and secrets have a way of surfacing, or because the Dao shows it to you, you suddenly see these certain things...things that your friend keeps from you...of course there are certain things people keep to themselves naturally because it is their business and theirs alone...but sometimes you find out certain things like how your friend thinks of you, or how your friend treats you sometimes without your knowledge...these are things that we are involved in simply because we are the object, and these things our friends keep from us...

To my mind, a vital pillar of friendship is trust...a very special trust....perhaps the kind of trust that would allow you to place your life in someone else's hands...(or something to that effect...) a friend only shows us good things, even if it hurts us like criticisms or the brutal truth...and as such you'd think friends don't keep things from you, especially when it concerns you...but when these are kept secret and found out, there is a betrayal of this trust, and suddenly the friendship that you'd stake your life on is no more...and in fact never was...and so it's not so much this person ceased to be your friend, it's more like this person never was from the beginning, because it was in that person's character to keep this kind of things from you... it changes everything, especially if you have trusted the person to a rather disproportionate extent simply because that person showed you that s/he is worthy of that trust...

...and soon, all your friends you realize could be keeping secrets from you...and all of a sudden you have no friends from the beginning...a world of trust has been replaced with a world of doubt and cynicism...and all because of one little betrayal that your friend committed...

...and yet, the minute you realize the process of what just transpired...another process kicks in, and suddenly, while you're friend may still be no friend at all, the world no longer seems bleak at all...in fact it looks bright and hopeful...for some obscure reason...but it is...

...things are the way they are...just let things be and the Dao take its course...

That is the Way.

Path of the Dragon and Its Survival

2006-06-22T15:07:06Z

The Dragon is ever elusive...for it only shows itself to those whom it wishes to...

A man who follows the Dao is like the Dragon...He only shows himself to those he wishes to reveal himself to...

What does this mean in real life?

Well, a person has many roles in his life. He is somebody's son. He works for someone else. He pays taxes and has duties to his counrty. He is a friend to many. He may be someone's love. All these are relationships man has to maintain, and each one has expectations man must fulfill, some of which may be contradictory with the expectations of another relationship.

Many men choose to deal with this "multiplicity" this way - they set up an identity that would differentiate them from the rest so that they would know what or who they are, the result of which becomes the basis for compliance or non-compliance with those expectations. Typically, people of this type would say, "I am X, so you can't expect me to do Y..." (eg, an Opus Dei weirdly enough given the job of flipping the switch of an electric chair...) But basically, the strategy here is to as much as possible have those expectations adjust to the person. But here is the mistake: the result of that may be conflicts between the person and unyielding expectations backed by equally or more unyielding people...so then it becomes a game of brinkmanship, and if you happen to be the weaker one, you will just tire yourself out reaching the inevitable end: you won't get your way anyway...that, and not to mention the fact that it's so hard to find the combination of circumstances that perfectly fits you in reality...but don't laugh...most people do it this way...

Another way is quite the opposite...to fulfill all expectations, no questions asked. This is great, except for one thing...it hurts horribly...why? Because without a certain ingredient, what you would have is a drone...a mechanical man, without a binding element to tie his soul together...yes, to follow the Dao, the "I" must not exist...but to follow the Dao means to flow with the Dao and to live, be vibrant and lively...a mechanical man has no life...a mechanical man is a doll, not a soul...there is no "I" to say "the 'I' must not exist"...no"I" is not "no I"...no "I" is "I" deciding not to be an "I"...why? Because this "I" is a name, not a verbal name, but an intellectual name, and therefore it is not the eternal I..."no I" means not even the eternal I exists...

This is a duality...where lie the answer of the Dao?

If you know the flow of the Dao, you know it lies with no duality...duality is simply a silly illusionof man's mind and its limited perspective...so where lies the Dao?

Here is an alternative perspective...I develop myself...I cultivate myself...my thoughts, my actions, my skills, me...I cultivate me...to the point that I am in control of my thoughts, my actions, my skills, me...and when there is an expectation, I do not let my thoughts get in the way of what has to be done, instead I follow the agenda of the edeavour, and with my control over my skills and thoughts, I act in the way that is most expedient and fulfilling to the agenda...and that usually comes in the form of following the flow of the agenda...extend that meaning and what you have is a sea of expectations all around you, and it becomes a significant part of your life...so effectively it becomes following the flow of the Dao...in this manner even if the "I" ceases to be because of the compliance and conformance, the eternal I is resilient...

But one thing I must say...it is difficult for a working man to retain his center. The "I" always changes shape, and since I know myself only through the "I", sometimes I ask "who am I?"...but at that moment, I always find myself centered once more...not because of the answer or the question in a direct fashion...I find my center by realizing that by asking "who am I", I come to realize that it is the start of the process of delineating the "I", making a rigid identity for myself...which is ultimately not me...so therefore when I ask "who am I", I instantly know that I'm about to walk the wrong and chaotic path...

...perhaps this is the reason people say that sometimes it is your fiercest enemies that really know who you are therefore the only ones who can come to respect you in the most truthful way...why? Because animosity is one relationship you do not have to pretend in to keep. Anyway, the enemy already hates you for who you are, and you're not looking make the relationship any better or worse, so you just behave uncontrolled, uninhibited, and you really feel completely being yourself, the self you cannot hope to show and at the same time keep your dear relationships...so if they will respect you, you can be sure that it is really you and not your projected image that they respect...