17 And Up

I think these are the most important things I learned in high school

Sun, 15 Jul 2012 22:40:00 -0400

1. Lying to yourself gets you nowhere.
2. Good character comes from good intentions.
3. Being right is never as important as doing the right thing.
4. Always give without the expectation of receiving.

New Years Resolution, 2012

Sun, 01 Jan 2012 16:47:23 -0500

1. Become more critical of myself and less judgmental of others.
2. Call my mom while I’m at college.

Uchicago essay

Tue, 13 Dec 2011 00:53:00 -0500

A mother buys her 5-year-old son, Socrates, an assorted set of Play-Doh from the local toy
store. One week later, Socrates enters the room of his teenage brother with an interesting
proposition.
“I CAN MAKE ANYTHING!” Socrates announces.
“Really now? Prove it.” Glaucon replies skeptically.
“Alright, ask me to make somethin’.”
“Um…how ‘bout a stapler.”
“You got it!”
Socrates scurries back to his room to take up his brother’s challenge and three
hours later, he returns triumphantly.
“Here ya go, a brand new stapler!”
A grin of accomplishment spreads across his face as he proudly raises his new
creation. Annoyed, Glaucon snatches up the misshapen mass into his hands and studies it.
“That’s not a stapler. It’s just Play-Doh…”
“Noooo, it’s definitely a stapler.”
“No. It’s Play-Doh…”
The sequence of “No’s and Noooo’s” persists until Socrates finally makes his own
demand.
“Fine. How ‘bout YOU show me a stapler then.”
Glaucon reaches into his drawer and pulls out his pocket stapler.
“Here. Look.”
Socrates takes the stapler into his hands and examines it carefully, upon which he
confidently declares,
“This is not a stapler!” (Nor was it a pipe for that matter.)
“What are you talking about? Here, look…it staples.”
Glaucon hands his brother the paper which he had just stapled.
“So?”
“So it’s a stapler…”
“It’s too small!” Socrates declares, “plus mine looks more like a stapler. Yours is all
funky and stuff.”
“What are you talking about? This IS a stapler. Your Play-Doh can’t look more like a
stapler than an actual stapler,” Glaucon replies matter-of-factly.
“Noooo, some guy made that thing just like I made mine!”
“Yeah, but—
“It’s not like that one’s the first one ever! You’re just jealous ‘cause my stapler’s
better!”
Socrates storms out of the room with his nose held high, marching away with what he is
convinced to be the pioneering stapler of all stapler-ness.
Following the argument, Glaucon sits at his desk a while, contemplating what his
brother had said moments ago. Maybe he’s got a point, Glaucon thinks. He picks up his
stapler and examines it, fingering the plastic casing, then opening it to examine its inner
functions.
“What makes a stapler a stapler?” he inquires aloud.
For while what in front of him was most certainly a stapler, his brother’s words had
an odd air of truth to them. There was no certainty in the statement “This is a stapler”—only
a mere association between the word “stapler” and the general characteristics of paperbinding
contraction. Thus, Glaucon began to question. He wondered, who invented the first
stapler? Could there ever be a first stapler? Or was any physical stapler just a manifestation
of the original idea of a stapler? As he continued to think, Glaucon realized that Socrates’
Play-Doh stapler had more in common with his handy pocket stapler than he had originally
thought. For both Socrates and the industrial designer had simply molded staplers based
on their own conceptions of “staplerness”
They’re all just copies, Glaucon thinks, manifestations of the essence of stapler-ness.
Growing more and more tired, Glaucon finally places his “stapler” back into the drawer and
falls asleep.
That night, Glaucon has a dream, and in it, both he and Socrates are years older, sitting in a
stone building, and engaged in dialogue. In the exchange, Socrates is explaining the human
condition: how we are somehow trapped in a metaphorical cave and unable to escape—
unable to see the sun. Looking to his side, Glaucon notices another person sitting with them.
He is a younger man, eager, listening, and vigorously scribbling down notes.
“Who is this man?” Glaucon asks.
“Oh, that is my pupil, Plato. He will be taking notes on our discussion today.”

The Dalai Lama’s 18 Rules For Living

Fri, 18 Nov 2011 00:51:44 -0500

At the start of the new millennium the Dalai Lama apparently issued eighteen rules for living. Since word travels slowly in the digital age these have only just reached me. Here they are.

Take into account that great love and great achievements involve great risk.
When you lose, don’t lose the lesson.
Follow the three Rs:
Respect for self
Respect for others
Responsibility for all your actions.
Remember that not getting what you want is sometimes a wonderful stroke of luck.
Learn the rules so you know how to break them properly.
Don’t let a little dispute injure a great friendship.
When you realize you’ve made a mistake, take immediate steps to correct it.
Spend some time alone every day.
Open your arms to change, but don’t let go of your values.
Remember that silence is sometimes the best answer.
Live a good, honourable life. Then when you get older and think back, you’ll be able to enjoy it a second time.
A loving atmosphere in your home is the foundation for your life.
In disagreements with loved ones, deal only with the current situation. Don’t bring up the past.
Share your knowledge. It’s a way to achieve immortality.
Be gentle with the earth.
Once a year, go someplace you’ve never been before.
Remember that the best relationship is one in which your love for each other exceeds your need for each other.
Judge your success by what you had to give up in order to get it.

"I thought menopause was a pokemon."

Fri, 05 Aug 2011 23:31:50 -0400

“I thought menopause was a pokemon.”

Photo

Mon, 11 Jul 2011 15:33:47 -0400

Is it not pleasant to learn with a constant perseverance and application?

Mon, 11 Jul 2011 15:33:00 -0400

For one who learns with no urgency nor intention of application falls to the point of pure mediocrity.
The idea of learning has become stale in the eyes of us adolescents. Schooling has mutilated the institution of knowledge from its previous state of unbounded curiosity to its current state as a chore. That is not to say that we must certainly forget its true form.
“Constant perseverance” is the idea of keeping the drive. Having the thirst for knowledge - voraciously consuming every opportunity given to the individual. The drive is essentially the “quantitative” element of learning. Without it, no amount of knowledge gained would be worth mentioning.
“Application” is essentially as is shown. Knowledge is only as good as how it is used, correct? Whether the application be for the furthering of one’s career in academia or so on the morals and principles of the individual, “application” is essential and the essence of learning itself. For this it is the “qualitative element.” No matter the amount of knowledge obtained, that which lacks substance to one’s essence is essentially useless.
Learn with a drive. Learn to apply.

Maybe

Sat, 09 Jul 2011 20:19:00 -0400

The best way to live life is to be accepting of the world as it is.
Nei Gu Wai Hua my dad tells me. Inner firmness outer melting. It means to keep your principles firm, but adapt to your environment - to keep your foundations strong while opening your mind to new ideas. To learn how to understand others and become one with their existence - with the world’s existence. I mean, I believe most of all, people want to be understood.

Thoughts

Sat, 25 Jun 2011 23:52:02 -0400

When I ask a question, what is it that goes on in my mind? If I am genuinely oblivious to a matter of fact, then my mind should be blank. If I am asking for an opinion my mind should have no expectations. If I am seeking further truth, I should rid myself of my preconceptions.

If I am asking a question, I should be willing to accept an answer.

If Admissions Are

Fri, 24 Jun 2011 08:05:00 -0400

Looking for tiger kids with the 12 AP’s they didn’t want to take. If they are looking for the kids who joined the badminton “varsity” team, slapped on a couple hundred hours of bullshit community service, and “played” a musical instrument for 12 years for the sake of that ridiculous piece of paper they have in their hands, then Fuck College.
Why should I respect an institution that doesn’t value the will to learn above all else?
I mean wasn’t that the fucking point?
Wasn’t the point to broaden our horizons? To give the opportunity of growth to those who sought after it?
That’s what it was for. Not for that fucking company job. Not for the Name. Not for that 100k+ annual paycheck but for that thing called Knowledge. About the world. About you. About what you believe. About what you think. About life beyond this superficial skin that has wrapped around our very minds. Maybe it’s just me. But

That’s what I thought it was about.

Knowledge.

If however I am not the person who belongs to that higher class of intelligence, then it is my fault. Either way, I will belong where I ought to belong.

Do you support music?

Wed, 22 Jun 2011 15:12:00 -0400

I realized some time ago that the notion of pirating music is one that is somewhat confused.
“It’s a testing booth,” they say. True, the option of trying music is often unavailable with a lack of resources (record stores) and whatnot, but consider this: in a record store, the action that follows the listening of a band (one that raises one’s interest) is the buying of the band’s album, subsequently providing financial support to the artist one enjoys.
With pirating however, it seems that although both the steps of the listening and the satisfaction are fulfilled, the third action becomes somehow optional. What about buying music makes it optional?
Is it optional to allow a band one enjoys to continue making music? Is it optional to promote a label that will potentially produce artists one will come to enjoy as well? The answer, honestly, is yes. Depending on your relationship to music, It is quite optional. Should it be optional to you? That is up for the listener to decide.
The idea of music not being significant sounds absurd, however it is in fact reasonable given our current environment and resources available, namely, the ipod, the internet, the computer, etc. For upon close examination, we find a rather logical progression to reach such a conclusion.

1. With the internet, entertainment has become data or, information.
2. The internet continues to grow, consequently increasing the accessibility of information
3. Causes inflation in regards to amount of music available for listening/keeping for free.
4. The monetary worth of the music therefore becomes lessened in the mind of the consumer because of inflated pool of music in library (album becomes not one in fifty of a collection, rather, one in several hundred.)
5. That which does not have worth does not then require credit for an exchange to occur in the mind of the one receiving. (obviously disregarding legal action, this is a conflict in the mind)
6. Music does not have worth because of the inflated pool, and therefore requires no credit for exchange in the mind of the listener.

The conclusion suggests that the human mentality has made another shift in the grand scheme of music listening. Let me summarize the progression:
In the beginning of advanced music theory development (around the time of JS Bach), music was played mostly for the church. As time progressed however, royalty and nobility became the main audience, and as time furthered on, it eventually reached the masses, or, the general public. Now what is the difference now from back then? Middle A was around 442 Hz, and the C major scale upheld the same blank key signature correct?
The answer lies in the accessibility; for music was, back then, a rarity, a delicacy, a treat for the ears every couple of months if one was financially well off.
You didn’t listen to it on your morning jogs, in your bed before you went to sleep. You listened to it in a potentially cushioned seat, with your eyes to the stage and your ears wide open.
You paid close attention.
You paid attention because it was worth something to you.
What a foreign idea though. Listening to music. Nowadays, out of all the music ingested by our ears, it is fair to say that a good 99% of it is through a pair of speakers, a set of headphones, or out of the computer. Consequently, the quantity and availability have increased exponentially, the listening of music is/has become an activity unable to stand alone, and with this increase not only has the monetary worth diminished in the mind, the artistic worth has as well. Why though? How does spending more time on music lessen the impact of music on the soul, the artistic worth in the mind of the beholder?
A does not lead to B if the music listening is focused (say 10 hours spent on 2 albums). It lessens when we download ten albums in two hours and listen to a couple tracks on each while surfing the internet, chatting on facebook, sometimes even singling out a chorus or two.
Good music was not meant for mass consumption.
Good music was not meant to be eaten like a bag of jelly beans. A little of this, a little of that.
Good music was not meant to be a shallow experience floating above us while we engage in our daily activities.
I don’t think an artist would like to perform to an audience minding their own business, texting, and surfing the internet.
And because we as Generation Z have been brought up with the internet, we do exactly that. We go to the candystore. We pick out a little bit of everything. We brag about our varied tastes. We neglect to go deeper. We consume it as it were a bunch of jellybeans. And we continue to enjoy and continue to neglect the maker.
So is buying music optional? To the real listener - the lover of music, no. For receiving something of value deserves something of equal value in return (dictated by the artist or record label in most instances). For the one who’s mind has been shifted to our generation however, the answer is yes, for the music has lost it’s original essence: it’s meaning - the significance lost in the transition of our culture.
Pirating is illogical in a society that can uphold its laws, but the sheer vastness of the internet today prohibits any means of apprehending the entirety of online criminals. Because of this the judicial component of pirating is all but ruled out. Because of this, the mental conflict of pirating has been introduced and explored. Although the question might seem to be “Is it right to pirate?” the real question is, “Is music worth anything to you?”

Thoughts

Sat, 18 Jun 2011 04:02:00 -0400

Does it seems as if the very act of liberating a group from discrimination brings another wave of prejudice towards another? Open-mindedness is often mistakenly narrowed to one worldview nowadays… I guess if one believes the microcosm to be the world, this is acceptable, but Ignorance is only bliss until reality takes a nice smack at ones face.

Mumford & Sons Fleet Foxes :)

Thu, 16 Jun 2011 17:15:42 -0400

~~Mumford & Sons~~ Fleet Foxes :)

Thoughts

Wed, 15 Jun 2011 02:37:00 -0400

The low tide follows the high, for equilibrium remains ever constant.

Should the height of such a wave be lessened in exchange for stability then?

Is the depression of a low worth the high?

There seem to be two paths: one grounded with the firm stones of maturity, and the other blooming with the colors of youthfulness and forced ignorance.

True to oneself or indulgent in the ways of a very human human.