Samwise
Sometimes TV gets it right. I caught the end of Law & Order tonight. L&O is one of my favorite shows. It's about the only show I can watch endless reruns of and stay interested. Tonight's episode was about a family whose Pitbull attacked and killed a jogger. It turned out that the dog's owners had been tormenting the animal in order to make it more fierce. The episode ended with the couple going to prison for 3 years, and the dog being put down. The quip at the end was "makes you wish the sentences had been reversed." Absolutely.
The biggest part of a dog's personality, regardless of breed, is due to his owner's training. People that do this to their dogs do a great disservice to dog-lovers everywhere. I hold them in the lowest esteem, along with people that abuse children. I'm no believer in animal rights, but cruelty for its own sake is immoral.
My Sammy is half Pitbull, and it really shows in his physique and personality. He's one of the most affectionate and loving animals I've ever known. He watches every move I make, follows me from room to room, and generally keeps his guard up. As long as he senses that I'm comfortable, he's a perfect gentleman with other dogs, children, and other people. When I see parents rein their children in with a look of fear in their eyes directed at my Sammy, I don't hold it against them. They're acting rationally within the context of their knowledge. It's the people that gave them good reason to be afraid that I blame. I wish I could make them believe that the worst thing Sammy would ever do to their children is kiss them to death.
Monday, November 29, 2004
Saturday, November 27, 2004
et tu little children that sang "Another Brick in the Wall?"
This is a travesty....
But of course, given that Pink Floyd has long been something of an advocate for socialism, or at the very least anti-corporatism, then they sort of helped to bring it on themselves.
But of course, given that Pink Floyd has long been something of an advocate for socialism, or at the very least anti-corporatism, then they sort of helped to bring it on themselves.
Love, Actually
I just finished watching Love, Actually for the second time. It's a movie that appeals to my strongest romantic emotions.
I haven't blogged in awhile, but that's because I've had a blog I've been struggling with, but some of it is so personal that I wasn't sure I wanted to post it. Love, Actually has inspired me to post it and my concerns be damned!
"I am no superman
I have no answers for you
I am no hero yeah that's for sure
But I do know one thing
Where you are
Is where I belong
I do know
Where you go
Is where I wanna be"--Dave Matthews Band, Where are you going?
This lyric sums up a powerful emotion I've been having about a woman that work's on my floor. C. is short, slender, with thick dark curls framing her face. She has a bright , cheery disposition that is both magnetic and contagious. She seems to take pleasure in taking pleasure in life. I find her captivating.
She has a boyfriend, but that doesn't really matter to me. It's unlikely I would pursue her anyway. There are two basic reasons for this: love in the workplace is just asking for trouble, and that horrible quaking awkwardness that overtakes me anytime she's around. Neither of these issues are insurmountable--but for right now I'm happy with where things are: glowing adoration on my end, and complete unawareness of my existence on hers.
To me she is what Ayn Rand called a "pin-up girl of the spirit." Insofar as I know nothing about C., save her name, her sense of taste and style, and her sunlit personality, she represents the ideal of femininity; she serves as a living symbol of my capacity for adoration; she is a concrete reminder of the reverence I feel for experience of romance. In the worship of all she represents to me, I both confirm and celebrate that part of me that longs for romantic love.
If I don't find another romance for awhile, then I may decide to approach C.. The risk involved in that is far more than simply a wounded ego: I risk that she may show herself to be unworthy of the adoration that I feel for her. This consideration alone is not justification to stay my advances; but considered in the context of the other obstacles, this is reason enough to continue my adoration from afar, without making any attempt to get to know her better.
I think that I'm beginning to see why it is so hard for me to approach women in general. I do not have low self-esteem, and it has long confused me why I feel such anxiety around women I admire. My hypothesis as of tonight is that my anxiety is caused by a fear that I will be disappointed in her. I want so desperately to meet a woman that can appreciate me for the reasons I wish to be appreciated, a woman with the perception to discern the subtleties of my expression, to see the passion enmeshed in an otherwise apparently impassive glance. In all of my relationships with women in all my life, I have never been understood or appreciated on my terms. I think that on an emotional level I'm so convinced that it's not even possible that in most cases I'd rather not confirm it. Call it a "malevolent romance premise."
This could be a major breakthrough for me. If I'm right, then for the first time in my life I'll have a weapon against that anxiety: that weapon being the knowledge that it is possible to be appreciated the way I want to be, that it doesn't matter if this or that particular woman doesn't "get" me, and that epistemologically, any woman is going to need time to develop that kind of understanding and appreciation--just as I will need time to develop it for her.
I haven't blogged in awhile, but that's because I've had a blog I've been struggling with, but some of it is so personal that I wasn't sure I wanted to post it. Love, Actually has inspired me to post it and my concerns be damned!
"I am no superman
I have no answers for you
I am no hero yeah that's for sure
But I do know one thing
Where you are
Is where I belong
I do know
Where you go
Is where I wanna be"--Dave Matthews Band, Where are you going?
This lyric sums up a powerful emotion I've been having about a woman that work's on my floor. C. is short, slender, with thick dark curls framing her face. She has a bright , cheery disposition that is both magnetic and contagious. She seems to take pleasure in taking pleasure in life. I find her captivating.
She has a boyfriend, but that doesn't really matter to me. It's unlikely I would pursue her anyway. There are two basic reasons for this: love in the workplace is just asking for trouble, and that horrible quaking awkwardness that overtakes me anytime she's around. Neither of these issues are insurmountable--but for right now I'm happy with where things are: glowing adoration on my end, and complete unawareness of my existence on hers.
To me she is what Ayn Rand called a "pin-up girl of the spirit." Insofar as I know nothing about C., save her name, her sense of taste and style, and her sunlit personality, she represents the ideal of femininity; she serves as a living symbol of my capacity for adoration; she is a concrete reminder of the reverence I feel for experience of romance. In the worship of all she represents to me, I both confirm and celebrate that part of me that longs for romantic love.
If I don't find another romance for awhile, then I may decide to approach C.. The risk involved in that is far more than simply a wounded ego: I risk that she may show herself to be unworthy of the adoration that I feel for her. This consideration alone is not justification to stay my advances; but considered in the context of the other obstacles, this is reason enough to continue my adoration from afar, without making any attempt to get to know her better.
I think that I'm beginning to see why it is so hard for me to approach women in general. I do not have low self-esteem, and it has long confused me why I feel such anxiety around women I admire. My hypothesis as of tonight is that my anxiety is caused by a fear that I will be disappointed in her. I want so desperately to meet a woman that can appreciate me for the reasons I wish to be appreciated, a woman with the perception to discern the subtleties of my expression, to see the passion enmeshed in an otherwise apparently impassive glance. In all of my relationships with women in all my life, I have never been understood or appreciated on my terms. I think that on an emotional level I'm so convinced that it's not even possible that in most cases I'd rather not confirm it. Call it a "malevolent romance premise."
This could be a major breakthrough for me. If I'm right, then for the first time in my life I'll have a weapon against that anxiety: that weapon being the knowledge that it is possible to be appreciated the way I want to be, that it doesn't matter if this or that particular woman doesn't "get" me, and that epistemologically, any woman is going to need time to develop that kind of understanding and appreciation--just as I will need time to develop it for her.
Tuesday, November 09, 2004
Coming for the Covenant
I went out to lunch today and picked up my copy of Halo 2. My co-worker out-geeked me though and went to Wal-Mart before work this morning to get his copy. Apparently there was an elderly woman in the Wal-Mart electronics department that was quite bemused by the whole thing.
Monday, November 08, 2004
The Incredible Truth
"How do they reason it's owed them?"
She shrugged. "Because someone from the palace said so. Said they were entitled to it. Said all the people were. Some . . . believe in it. . . So they sit and wait, to be given, to be taken care of, instead of seeing to their own needs. They fight over who should be given the gold first. Some of the weak and old have been killed in those fights."
--Blood of the Fold, Terry Goodkind.
I've got a lot on my mind today. My poli-sci class always gets my political ire up a bit. I started my day thinking about two things: a quote from Ayn Rand, and a cutie in my class. The quote from Ayn Rand concerns the cutie in my class.
"The corollary of the Big Lie is the Incredible Truth." --Ayn Rand
That's the quote. It's packed, and I do mean packed with meaning. A corollary is a self-evident truth arising from a previously accepted truth. As such it must be accepted if the first truth is accepted. The "Big Lie" refers to any idea or set of ideas that is a) false, and b) so widespread, so pervasive that it has ceased to be truly controversial and settled into the status of conventional wisdom or "common sense." The "Incredible Truth" refers not only to the actual truth opposing the "Big Lie," but also that those that espouse the truth are regarded with pity, or as deluded, misguided, crazy, fanatical, zealouts, or heretics. The actual truth is so unbelievable as to be not believed.
There's are psychological observations buried in this statement, for both the believer of the "Big Lie" and the "Incredible Truth." Believers in the "Big Lie" have no reason to question it, and are therefore appropriately skeptical of anything that comes along to challenge it. Believers in the "Incredible Truth" should expect to be greeted with skepticism and develop a degree of epistemological finesse and personal patience with people when challenging the conventional wisdom.
How does this relate to the cutie in my class? She gave me homework. A few weeks ago we were assigned to debate whether or not federal legislation should be passed banning smoking in all public places on the grounds that secondhand smoke causes lung cancer and heart disease in non-smokers. I argued against such legislation on the grounds that it should be up to each business owner whether or not to allow smoking in his/her own establishment. I further argued that there is no evidence linking secondhand smoke to the diseases mentioned. I challenged my fellow students to look this information up for themselves.
A week later, the cutie in my class brought me three newspaper articles on the effects on SHS Second hand smoke). I pointed out to her that none of the articles had any actual data in them, that they were simply collections of quotations from scientists claiming ill effects from SHS, but nothing to prove it. I pointed out that the articles gave no other sources of documentation, did not identify whether or not the organizations the scientists quoted belonged to were political activist groups, etc.. I promised to bring her some real information.
In my mind I called this my "hottie homework." I described this to my friends as homework she had assigned to me, but in reality this was homework I was assigning to her. I wanted to know how she was going to respond to the information I gathered. Among other things, I pointed her to this article and this study. I gave her these materials last week just before our test. Given that our teacher lets us leave immediately after we've taken our tests, I didn't have time to talk to her after the test.
Today knowing I was going to see her, I thought of Ayn Rand's quote. I was unprepared for the response I got. She didn't say she had a problem with the study I have her; nor did she say that she had accepted the conclusions reached by the study; neither still did she say that she didn't have enough information to come to a conclusion on the issue, and that she would continue to research it further. See, these ideas were my optimism in humanity. I was already impressed that she had bothered to do the research to find the articles she had given me; I had convinced myself that this meant that she took ideas at least somewhat seriously: I was wrong.
What she said was: "I think it's all just subjective, just a matter of who you want to believe."
... Stunned silence ...
It was on the basis of this "subjective . . . who you want to believe" feeling that she wanted to enact legislation telling business owners what they can and cannot do with their own property. She has admitted that her position has no objective value, and that she refuses to defend it on those terms. I began to argue with her--just barely; then I realized that I was wasting my time. Her standard for what she believes is that she wants to believe something. Even if I brought her to my side on this issue, it would be for the wrong reason. Objectivity, to her, doesn't exist. She has renounced even the desire of it. Bringing those articles in to me was not an attempt at reasoning, but an attempt on voting on the truth: "If enough people believe like me, it must be alright to believe like me even if I don't have good reasons."
Disgusting.
It's amazing how quickly a woman who only a few moments before quickened my pulse at merely the thought of her, could cause me to feel utter revulsion. I felt dirty that I had spent any time thinking of her at all.
Then class started and we started discussing the role of the Supreme Court. My teacher likes to give these assignments where we all get into groups and argue some point or another. Tonight my we were all tasked to decide whether or not various Supreme Court decisions were examples of judicial Activism or judicial Restraint. After debating Brown vs. The Board of Education for awhile, I decided that the whole issue of Activism vs. Restraint was irrelevant. This is how people get caught up in the Big Lie in the first place: by getting bogged down in meaningless minutiae. The Supreme Court is Activist and Restraining. But it doesn't really matter: what matters is what agenda they are pushing, and whether it is for or against Individual Rights, Life, Liberty, and Property.
Okay, rant over. On to better things--tomorrow is the day that Halo 2 comes out. I'll be busy playing that this next week. :) Thanks for listening...
She shrugged. "Because someone from the palace said so. Said they were entitled to it. Said all the people were. Some . . . believe in it. . . So they sit and wait, to be given, to be taken care of, instead of seeing to their own needs. They fight over who should be given the gold first. Some of the weak and old have been killed in those fights."
--Blood of the Fold, Terry Goodkind.
I've got a lot on my mind today. My poli-sci class always gets my political ire up a bit. I started my day thinking about two things: a quote from Ayn Rand, and a cutie in my class. The quote from Ayn Rand concerns the cutie in my class.
"The corollary of the Big Lie is the Incredible Truth." --Ayn Rand
That's the quote. It's packed, and I do mean packed with meaning. A corollary is a self-evident truth arising from a previously accepted truth. As such it must be accepted if the first truth is accepted. The "Big Lie" refers to any idea or set of ideas that is a) false, and b) so widespread, so pervasive that it has ceased to be truly controversial and settled into the status of conventional wisdom or "common sense." The "Incredible Truth" refers not only to the actual truth opposing the "Big Lie," but also that those that espouse the truth are regarded with pity, or as deluded, misguided, crazy, fanatical, zealouts, or heretics. The actual truth is so unbelievable as to be not believed.
There's are psychological observations buried in this statement, for both the believer of the "Big Lie" and the "Incredible Truth." Believers in the "Big Lie" have no reason to question it, and are therefore appropriately skeptical of anything that comes along to challenge it. Believers in the "Incredible Truth" should expect to be greeted with skepticism and develop a degree of epistemological finesse and personal patience with people when challenging the conventional wisdom.
How does this relate to the cutie in my class? She gave me homework. A few weeks ago we were assigned to debate whether or not federal legislation should be passed banning smoking in all public places on the grounds that secondhand smoke causes lung cancer and heart disease in non-smokers. I argued against such legislation on the grounds that it should be up to each business owner whether or not to allow smoking in his/her own establishment. I further argued that there is no evidence linking secondhand smoke to the diseases mentioned. I challenged my fellow students to look this information up for themselves.
A week later, the cutie in my class brought me three newspaper articles on the effects on SHS Second hand smoke). I pointed out to her that none of the articles had any actual data in them, that they were simply collections of quotations from scientists claiming ill effects from SHS, but nothing to prove it. I pointed out that the articles gave no other sources of documentation, did not identify whether or not the organizations the scientists quoted belonged to were political activist groups, etc.. I promised to bring her some real information.
In my mind I called this my "hottie homework." I described this to my friends as homework she had assigned to me, but in reality this was homework I was assigning to her. I wanted to know how she was going to respond to the information I gathered. Among other things, I pointed her to this article and this study. I gave her these materials last week just before our test. Given that our teacher lets us leave immediately after we've taken our tests, I didn't have time to talk to her after the test.
Today knowing I was going to see her, I thought of Ayn Rand's quote. I was unprepared for the response I got. She didn't say she had a problem with the study I have her; nor did she say that she had accepted the conclusions reached by the study; neither still did she say that she didn't have enough information to come to a conclusion on the issue, and that she would continue to research it further. See, these ideas were my optimism in humanity. I was already impressed that she had bothered to do the research to find the articles she had given me; I had convinced myself that this meant that she took ideas at least somewhat seriously: I was wrong.
What she said was: "I think it's all just subjective, just a matter of who you want to believe."
... Stunned silence ...
It was on the basis of this "subjective . . . who you want to believe" feeling that she wanted to enact legislation telling business owners what they can and cannot do with their own property. She has admitted that her position has no objective value, and that she refuses to defend it on those terms. I began to argue with her--just barely; then I realized that I was wasting my time. Her standard for what she believes is that she wants to believe something. Even if I brought her to my side on this issue, it would be for the wrong reason. Objectivity, to her, doesn't exist. She has renounced even the desire of it. Bringing those articles in to me was not an attempt at reasoning, but an attempt on voting on the truth: "If enough people believe like me, it must be alright to believe like me even if I don't have good reasons."
Disgusting.
It's amazing how quickly a woman who only a few moments before quickened my pulse at merely the thought of her, could cause me to feel utter revulsion. I felt dirty that I had spent any time thinking of her at all.
Then class started and we started discussing the role of the Supreme Court. My teacher likes to give these assignments where we all get into groups and argue some point or another. Tonight my we were all tasked to decide whether or not various Supreme Court decisions were examples of judicial Activism or judicial Restraint. After debating Brown vs. The Board of Education for awhile, I decided that the whole issue of Activism vs. Restraint was irrelevant. This is how people get caught up in the Big Lie in the first place: by getting bogged down in meaningless minutiae. The Supreme Court is Activist and Restraining. But it doesn't really matter: what matters is what agenda they are pushing, and whether it is for or against Individual Rights, Life, Liberty, and Property.
Okay, rant over. On to better things--tomorrow is the day that Halo 2 comes out. I'll be busy playing that this next week. :) Thanks for listening...
Sunday, November 07, 2004
Lazy weekend
Well, my weekend was what I had hoped it would be. I managed to watch all of Season 3 of Alias. It took half the season to resolve the cliffhanger from Season 2. They ended Season 3 on a cliffhanger as well, but I don't think the Season 3 cliffhanger was nearly as impressive.
I had a small dinner party on Saturday night which went very well. Bed, Bath, and Beyond ended up with a bunch of my money as I bought stuff for my table setting. As I get older and as my financial situation continues to improve, I find that I enjoy spending money and time on things I never cared about before. I don't wonder about this: I just remember a time when I had thought that I would be happy having as little as I had then, if I just didn't have to struggle so hard. It seems that my taste is growing in to my money.
I had a small dinner party on Saturday night which went very well. Bed, Bath, and Beyond ended up with a bunch of my money as I bought stuff for my table setting. As I get older and as my financial situation continues to improve, I find that I enjoy spending money and time on things I never cared about before. I don't wonder about this: I just remember a time when I had thought that I would be happy having as little as I had then, if I just didn't have to struggle so hard. It seems that my taste is growing in to my money.
Friday, November 05, 2004
These are my boys. The beagle is Toby, and other is Samwise. Toby is the more mischievous of the two--always nosing around in something that's not his business, learning to defeate child-proof cabinet locks, etc.. Sammy is more sedate and friendly of the two. He's also a bit more needy. They're my boys, and I love 'em. :)
Stone of Tears
I just finished Terry Goodkind's second book in the Sword of Truth series, "Stone of Tears." I didn't think it was as good as "Wizard's First Rule," but it was still a great fantasy novel. Goodkind is a much more serious author than many fantasy novelists. His books (so far) are filled with interesting ideas, heavy moral delimma's, and epic battle sequences. The main characters are extremely heroic, and their heroism is bound up in much more than simple physical or magical power--they use their brains. "Stone of Tears" started out a bit slower than "Wizard's First Rule," but it picked up the pace. Goodkind is building an immense, detailed, and itriguing world. I'll let you know how it goes as I read the next 7 books in the series.
Tonight I'm starting season 3 of "Alias." It's one of two shows that I refuse to watch on television, the other being "24." This is one of the few weekends when I don't have any homework or studying to do. I intend to finish "Moonraker," begin "Blood of the Fold," and get through as much of "Alias" as I can. This is my weekend to be regaled with brilliant storytelling. :)
Tonight I'm starting season 3 of "Alias." It's one of two shows that I refuse to watch on television, the other being "24." This is one of the few weekends when I don't have any homework or studying to do. I intend to finish "Moonraker," begin "Blood of the Fold," and get through as much of "Alias" as I can. This is my weekend to be regaled with brilliant storytelling. :)
Thursday, November 04, 2004
Reading
I'm currently reading "Moonraker" by Ian Fleming. It's the 3rd book in the James Bond series, following "Casino Royale" and "Live and Let Die." I am greatly enjoying these books--they are quite different from the films. In the novels, there is more of a focus on how James Bond thinks, and what his method of reasoning is. Don't get me wrong--I have enjoyed the movies (although the ones during the 70's were just plain cheesy)--but the movies are just action films with a few half-witticisms thrown in.
Another thing I like about them is that occasionally I come across an interesting footnote. In "Moonraker," Bond is thinking of how safe it would be to pilot some sort of ship, and Fleming leaves the following cryptic footnote: "Bond was wrong: Friday November 26th, 1954, R.I.P."
A quick google search has not turned up anything on what he is referring to, but I'm sure I'll find it later.
Ciao for now.
Another thing I like about them is that occasionally I come across an interesting footnote. In "Moonraker," Bond is thinking of how safe it would be to pilot some sort of ship, and Fleming leaves the following cryptic footnote: "Bond was wrong: Friday November 26th, 1954, R.I.P."
A quick google search has not turned up anything on what he is referring to, but I'm sure I'll find it later.
Ciao for now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)