What's the latest trend? What's the hottest gossip? What's the most recent fad? Have I been watching the TV lately? Who won the the American Idol? Why does it matter to me? Does it affect my life? Am I finding it meaningful because I deem it to be so on my own accord? Or have I been trained from young to internalize meanings that have already been around? That everyone around seems to be doing the same so that if I don't I might feel a little out of place? And to such extent that I must accept the meaning unto myself to keep up with my peers? Why must there be a 'standard'? Can I create one for my own and on my own? Must others know? Why should it matter if they don't? Can I come and go without the scrutiny? Can I simply do as I please?
Once upon a time, there was a little boy and once upon a time there was a teacher who asked that little boy to draw a man. And the boy did draw a man - he had long hair, wore a dress, had eyeshadows and thick lipsticks. In his glee was the final work presented but was torn in two by the teacher accompanied by words of guidance only a teacher could give, "That be not a man you draw, little boy, but a woman. Draw a man proper and proper he should be with short neat hair, a nice suit and a black briefcase." The boy returned to his desk, pencil in hand, determined to gain the teacher's approval where once he failed. And, indeed, the little boy produced the drawing of a man 'proper' with short neat hair, a nice suit and a black briefcase. It met the teacher's eyes and earned him her approval along with her lasting words, forever etched into the mind of the impressionable little boy, "See, little boy, you have done a great job creating a picture of a man all from your very own efforts! That'll be an A for you plus this very special star-shaped chop as an additional reward for your creativity."
I remembered a Math lesson I had when I was very young. I was given a list of prices in one column eg. $1.50, $2, $3.70 etc... and told to fill the corresponding empty columns with pictures of coins that add up to the prices stated. I remembered clearly there wasn't any mistakes in calculation and that I ought to be getting everything correct. I was wrong. I got wrong for all of them despite having the calculations correct. Wanna know why? I drew using the likes of 30-cent, 15-cent and 55-cent coins. To this date, I still cannot fathom the power of stupidity stemming from narrow-minded conformity.
The Problem of the Perfect Individual:
For the one who speaks and thinks about everything that is agreeable by all and that is the truth and strives to better his life according to such ideals, he, unlike others, experiences everything as going wrongly for him. It is not that he is in the wrong but that the wrong lies in those around him. That he is able to envision the kind of utopia in his mind and realize more parts of it, if not all, in his own reality than everyone else has allowed himself to advance beyond the ways of the common while those who indulge in the common know only of the word and of the meaning of 'utopia' but are unable to envision or realize enough of it like the only one who does. The way of the common entails much flaws and contradictions that plague lives and jeorpadize situations, yet without this 'common' the many cannot survive as they lament and cry to be rid of what they actually need - flaws. But for the one who has mastered his flaws and found within himself the secret (which has never been a secret) of what is to be rid of the many problems that constitute the way of the common has ironically encountered his final problem - he is the only one.
Just had an interesting conversation with Ker Jyn. Started from his number prediction and frequency distribution for gambling/toto (I think). According to mathematicians, every trial is an independent trial and therefore does not take into regard past events or trials which are thought to have no relevance or relation to the present trial. But there is no proof for this theory. Then again, on the other hand, there is also no proof for the relevance or relation of past trials to the current trial as well.
As such, their absoluteness are still much clouded by doubt. As long something cannot be proven, not even theories can hold much ground.
For eg, if a coin was flipped 1000 times, we somehow know that it is impossible for it to land face down every time, even though we cannot find a proof for knowing this. During the 1000 times it is flipped, we all know there are probabilities of the coin landing both face up and face down. If what the mathematicians say about the irrelevance of past trials to the current one being conducted is true, then for instance the past 1-467th try would have no relevance to the next 468th try and it would be possible for the coin to land face down every time out of the 1000 times it is flipped. But we know that this is not the case even though we cannot be sure how we come to know about this.
Science has yet to cover many aspects of existence. There are such things as the supernatural, fengshui, chi energy, astrological waves and cycles and so on that is not known or confirmed, that are sometimes unbelievingly observed but yet uncapturable by science. Maybe it's irrelevant here, but it reminds me of Final Destination, of forces that we do now know but yet exist.
If some of these were to be definitively captured by science and quantified or measured etc... then all the things that we have known and lived by mostly may become obsolete. Sometimes, predictions are made out of certain feelings rather than anything from logic or reason. These predictions may well come true but to a person of complete reason, there will be nothing to these so-called extraordinary events but mere chance and coincidence. But how definite can we be on what is or what constitues chance, coincidence or error? What if one day someone came up with a way to definitively quantify things such as coincidence, error, chance, feelings, supernatural and what-have-you? What if one day we can find explanations for the unexplainable?
For such discoveries, there may be certain ramifications on the way we currently organise our lives. Science has always or at least mostly been based on pure reason and logic where emotion and psychic forces have no or negligible relevance.
For eg, at a certain university, tests had been conducted whereby there are cases of people having greater likelihood to roll a number they desire on a dice, say number 5, more often compared to those who do not have any desire for a number in mind.
A person of strictly pure reason and logic would surely say, "I will never be able to predict what the number will be on the next roll because I simply cannot predict the future."
A person who relies on such things as gut feelings, emotion, psychic thoughts or whatever it is that at least currently defy logic or reason would for instance desire the number 5 and actually get that number on more rolls.
Is there an explanation for such things? Can any definite understanding be made from such occurrences?
Next, comes a grievance which I have learnt from the U, that at earlier times, science was in the interest of furthering knowledge for knowledge's sake, for simply understanding the world better and this is called Mode 1 Science - science as an endless frontier. But now, we are mainly living in a world that mostly revolves around Mode 2 Science which is science as an endless transition, meaning that new discoveries are made only with economic and pratical interests, to create wealth, profit and so on. By subscribing too much to Mode 2, a great deal of potential discoveries become closer to becoming unrealized or delayed, discoveries of new things beyond that which we understand today. While it is understandable that Mode 2 Science, being for practical reasons, is a more feasible mode for most industries, organization and countries, especially small ones like Singapore, and that Mode 1 is mostly impractical, I shall not condemn people for being too money-oriented but I still say it's just too bad there are more things to know for the sake of just knowing but not enough effort being put in to further such fields of knowledge.
Finally, I'm also forced to question some of the ways of life, beliefs and things I have picked up from my studies and things I have read and been subscribing to not very long ago... things like the duality or distinction between emotion and logic, for instance, which is a popular 'paradigm' in the world of western science and philosophy. I shall now put up a disclaimer for myself here and now professing that I am treading into unfamiliar grounds such as mathemathical theories and currently unexplainable phenomenons, but at the same time intertwining these with things I already have some knowledge of such as certain philosophical knowledge. Since I do not major in Philosophy, I also do not know that very much, so I'll simple speak about all these from the position of a curious dabbler. I have a very simple question in mind right now but I know it cannot be answered - can faith and belief be as real or solid as logic and reason then? Yes, I may be driving at religious beliefs but I'm not saying that every religious belief is valid even if the 'power' of faith and belief can be as credible as the 'power' of logic and reason. Anyway, I find all these pretty damn interesting.
A change in outlook... with a theme taken from the Dungeons & Dragons arcade game, Shadows Over Mystara.
With my exams' end, the past two weeks have seen an excessive, if not obsessive, immersion on my part into the world of Baldur's Gate 2: Shadows of Amn & Throne of Bhaal so much so that I became detached from my own reality. As much as I deign to revel in this fictional fantasy once again, I feel an overwhelming sense of emptiness immediately after its completion not one day ago. The cathartic experience I had undergone following its gripping storyline had been of such significance that I am now left feeling dry and empty. Such an overwhelm of thought and sensation has not surfaced since I read the Dragonlance Chronicles so many years back and, as before, I am feeling delusional now from a great epic's end but hope the loss of interest in my own reality is merely temporary. Or perhaps it is the emptiness from my reality rather than the story's end that has made me feel so, that perhaps it is the gripping storyline of the game itself that has augmented the intensity of this already existing emptiness? Either way, I'm both sorry and happy to say I have no choice but to agree that this 'fictional reality' that was in the game and that ended with the game's end has provided me with something more fulfilling and, in a way, more meaningful than reality itself.
My cheers to Baldur's Gate 2... my cheers to good fictional reality.
