I think I've just completed some kind of strange cycle or spiral*.
I came to Bali in 2002 a pretty naive, innocent, innocuous boy amongst mostly people older than me. I didn't really comprehend everything that was happening. In fact, I don't think I had a clue. I couldn't read people, I couldn't tell what they were thinking, feeling or what they wanted. I was armed with a very basic set of assumptions about the world, which with hindsight, were great. I was the quintessential country bumpkin with deep sense of curiosity. I absorbed what I could identify, I was excited by it all, but ironically I think I thought it was all a bit immature but I also recognised that maybe I was a tad serious and that this was part of why I was here - to let go a little bit, to be a bit more fun.
Nine years later, I feel like I have completed a loop of the spiral. I learnt to really appreciate the moment during uni and to have fun. I physically realised during honours and in getting a job at PwC that your own expectations can be limiting. I nearly didn't. I learnt at work a bit about people, finally. Previously I thought if I treated people how I wanted to be treated that is what would happen. I thought 'Management' as a subject was a waste of time. Not always. Eventually I learnt a bit about girls, but it took a long time. They still astound me on a regular basis and my stupidity probably still astounds them sometimes. I learnt all through this a little about being more open minded, to love and express feelings, to thank my dad and take care of my mum. I met amazing people and I wanted to be like them.
Now, sitting in Bali again - trying to be like the amazing people I know, I feel like I might be losing touch with the open-mindedness and I may have forgotten that first lesson a little bit - How to have fun and appreciate the moment. I think this because I look around me and instead of seeing innocent, ignorant or naive (20 yo) boys who really know how to appreciate the moment, I see drunk obnoxious louts and girls who should have more sense than to like them. Most of them are Australian.
* Why does 'Spiral' have downward or negative connotations? A spiral could be upward or downward right? I actually meant an upward spiral - to what I'm not sure but the upwardness in my mind signifies progress. Even though I don't believe in teh virtues of heaven, hell or the corporate ladder, up is strangely still the way to go.
Showing posts with label philosophy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label philosophy. Show all posts
Friday, 30 September 2011
Thursday, 14 July 2011
Australians - Who are you now?
Do you feel like Australia is over-regulated these days? Do you lament that the iconographic image we built of our-selves through the blood, sweat and tears of the Diggers and the integrity and determination our international sports stars during the 80's and 90's has been lost? I do and I hope you do to.
The image and identity of Australia as a land of larrikans, opportunity, fairness and a place where we work hard and play hard is important to me, because I'm Australian. When I meet people overseas and tell them I'm Australian it colours and tints their perspectives and judgements of who I am and can massively impact on my life.
When I was contemplating this trip I heard reports from some Poms and Aussies returning from London that we worked just as hard, if not harder in Sydney than they do in London. Including longer hours. I was appalled. It ruined my mental projections of Aussies abroad and probably put a few cracks in the rose tinted glasses I know I wear when thinking and analysing Australia. This is one of the reasons why Morgan Parkers post struck such a chord because he has returned to Sydney after a long period away and about 6 months travelling by motorbike through Asia, and it seems he got a bit of a shock.
I wonder, what will Australia be like when I return? Will it have changed as much as how I look at and conceive it? Historical foreign policy choices are certainly starting to have much more of an impact on my thinking.
Monday, 20 June 2011
Doing what he said without even knowing it.
I feel compelled to draw attention to this quote provided by L in a comment on another post. The reason I was compelled to do so was because without knowing it, this explains exactly why Jakarta was so fascinating:
"Anyone who wants to know the human psyche will learn next to nothing from experimental psychology. He would be better advised to abandon exact science, put away his scholar's gown, bid farewell to his study, and wander with human heart through the world. There in the horrors of prisons, lunatic asylums and hospitals, in drab suburban pubs, in brothels and gambling-hells, in the salons of the elegant, the Stock Exchanges, socialist meetings, churches, revivalist gatherings and ecstatic sects, through love and hate, through the experience of passion in every form in his own body, he would reap richer stores of knowledge than text-books a foot thick could give him, and he will know how to doctor the sick with a real knowledge of the human soul."
Carl Jung
For those that still doubt the relevance to their world, especially those living a cosy, secure life, I suggest otherwise if you consider that your world is a purely pyschic world, as Jung did:
"All comprehension and all that is comprehended is in itself Psychic, and to that extent we are helplessly cooped up in an exclusively Pyschic world."
Dili has its own challenges, its own way of confronting the senses, the conscious and I assume the unconscious and i'm still grappling with the right words to describe it. More later.
"Anyone who wants to know the human psyche will learn next to nothing from experimental psychology. He would be better advised to abandon exact science, put away his scholar's gown, bid farewell to his study, and wander with human heart through the world. There in the horrors of prisons, lunatic asylums and hospitals, in drab suburban pubs, in brothels and gambling-hells, in the salons of the elegant, the Stock Exchanges, socialist meetings, churches, revivalist gatherings and ecstatic sects, through love and hate, through the experience of passion in every form in his own body, he would reap richer stores of knowledge than text-books a foot thick could give him, and he will know how to doctor the sick with a real knowledge of the human soul."
Carl Jung
For those that still doubt the relevance to their world, especially those living a cosy, secure life, I suggest otherwise if you consider that your world is a purely pyschic world, as Jung did:
"All comprehension and all that is comprehended is in itself Psychic, and to that extent we are helplessly cooped up in an exclusively Pyschic world."
Dili has its own challenges, its own way of confronting the senses, the conscious and I assume the unconscious and i'm still grappling with the right words to describe it. More later.
Thursday, 16 June 2011
Loving and leaving
I liked what Jung had to say about trying to define and describe Love:
“If he [who tries to define love] possesses a grain of wisdom, he will lay down his arms and name the unknown by the more unknown, 'ignotum per ignotius' – by the name of God.”
For Jung, according to my interpretation, God was a label for the unknown. So within this context, knowing that which I do not know and can not describe, I ask you – which of following scenarios would you prefer:
1. You meet a handsome traveller and bungee madly and ecstatically into the pit of love with him, enjoy the thrill, feel more alive than ever before in your life, suddenly understand your purpose in life and how the world is supposed to be and then watch as he cuts the cord that ties you together and leaves you to dangle over sharp rocks covered in poison envy. All of a sudden your legs feel like they are made of jelly and it seems someone just removed your stomach and replaced it with a bucket of ravenous tape worms swimming in acid.
2. You meet a handsome traveller, knock down just enough of the walls to your garden of eden so that he can smell and see the roses blooming but can't touch them. For a while you feel safe, comfortable, satisfied and sleepy – as if you just ate two servings of mums lamb roast with baked potatoes, pumpkin, carrots and turnip with peas and gravy soaked up with fresh bread rolls covered in butter (and no garlic Mary!). Then he leaves and your sad in a way similar to when you eat too much and regret not trying that new dessert that didn't smell quite right but everyone told you to have a piece of because it was aaaaamazing, even though they all got belly-aches after.
3. You meet a handsome traveller, smile and indulge your imagination in thoughts of “I wonder how long he is here for” and “Did he just return my smile, no he couldn't of and if he did he is probably a man whore.” Then he leaves and you get hit by a a grandma on a mobility scooter who drives faster than you in a car and you die peacefully from internal bleeding, massively high on the huge amount of morphine the doctor gave you because he was sick of your whinging. You die wondering “Did he really smile at me”. But hey, at least you didn't feel any pain.
Label them as you will, I feel I'm definitely a Number 1. And no, its not because I'm a CA.
“If he [who tries to define love] possesses a grain of wisdom, he will lay down his arms and name the unknown by the more unknown, 'ignotum per ignotius' – by the name of God.”
For Jung, according to my interpretation, God was a label for the unknown. So within this context, knowing that which I do not know and can not describe, I ask you – which of following scenarios would you prefer:
1. You meet a handsome traveller and bungee madly and ecstatically into the pit of love with him, enjoy the thrill, feel more alive than ever before in your life, suddenly understand your purpose in life and how the world is supposed to be and then watch as he cuts the cord that ties you together and leaves you to dangle over sharp rocks covered in poison envy. All of a sudden your legs feel like they are made of jelly and it seems someone just removed your stomach and replaced it with a bucket of ravenous tape worms swimming in acid.
2. You meet a handsome traveller, knock down just enough of the walls to your garden of eden so that he can smell and see the roses blooming but can't touch them. For a while you feel safe, comfortable, satisfied and sleepy – as if you just ate two servings of mums lamb roast with baked potatoes, pumpkin, carrots and turnip with peas and gravy soaked up with fresh bread rolls covered in butter (and no garlic Mary!). Then he leaves and your sad in a way similar to when you eat too much and regret not trying that new dessert that didn't smell quite right but everyone told you to have a piece of because it was aaaaamazing, even though they all got belly-aches after.
3. You meet a handsome traveller, smile and indulge your imagination in thoughts of “I wonder how long he is here for” and “Did he just return my smile, no he couldn't of and if he did he is probably a man whore.” Then he leaves and you get hit by a a grandma on a mobility scooter who drives faster than you in a car and you die peacefully from internal bleeding, massively high on the huge amount of morphine the doctor gave you because he was sick of your whinging. You die wondering “Did he really smile at me”. But hey, at least you didn't feel any pain.
Label them as you will, I feel I'm definitely a Number 1. And no, its not because I'm a CA.
Wednesday, 11 May 2011
Carl G Jung and the unconcious in Jakarta.
Found a book on Carl G Jung today – “Memories, Dreams, Reflections”. It is a combination biography / autobiography. Decided that reading it would be a good way to bring my entertainment budget back under control! Plus, had a quick flick through and noticed a few sections on the unconscious and the ego, a few pet topics of mine.
Reading through some of it has made me realise that these guys were really going out on a limb with some of this stuff. They were pioneers in an academic (and also practical) sense sometimes. I haven't come across any reference to crazy wacky experiments in this book so far, but from what I know of elctro-shock therapy the basis for that treatment (which I heard is being revived in a modified and more humane sense in teating depression) was some pretty far-out experiments.
From what I've read so far, some of Jung;'s early work on the unconscious was based on his own dreams. The thing that got me most was that these guys were developing real theories that are still in play today, and they were doing it from scratch, not off the back of a 'How to' book but a synthesis of a massive amount of wide and diverse information.
In the current age we are so gifted with easily accessible information and yet it seems we do not use it often enough. How many of us have considered the works of Jung, Freud or Neitzche and wondered what lessons lie in modern psychology that might help us with our day to day problems, or more importantly – in making our lives better and happier? Not many, because instead we go to a self help book on positive psychology. How much of the original work has been lost in translation? I don't know, but I've read a few positive psychology books and nothing as poignant as the following statement of Jungs has jumped out at me before:
This understanding apparently helped Jung arrive at the central concept of his psychology: the 'process of individuation'. More on that later – once I've read about it! What it helped me understand was that these days when we talk about disaffected and disadvantaged youths we often refer to the 'environment' that they are raised in and we accord it a portion of blame for the way a person acts. We often refer to characteristics of this 'environment' such as the socio-economic back ground or living standard of a persons child-hood, or the education level they receive or the social intelligence of our parents. Whereas now it seems to me that it is those experiences derived from the environmental characteristics which are captured in the process of the unconscious and how the ego influences those experiences that really determines how we think and ultimately how we act.
Environmental characteristics are obviously very front of mind over here in Jakarta. The poverty and class divide is pretty obvious, not to mention the much more frequent interaction here with 'underworld' figures such as touts, drug dealers and prostitutes that rarely happens (to me anyway) in Australia. The relationship with these underworld figures here is also much trickier - because pretty much everyone here is an entreprenuer of some sense, a drug dealer will be just as happy to sell you a tour (or pick up a commission selling you a tour) as they will be fixing you up with a 'nice girl' or selling you drugs. Being as objective as I can, it seems to me that these underworld figures are much more acceptable to me here in Jakarta then they would be at home. This may be because they also seem much more humane and more like 'real people' rather than 'underworld' figures in a sense. I put that down to the way the environmental characteristics have impacted them as they grew up and how it is affecting my unconcious now that I'm here in the middle of it.
So, must admit I'm having trouble keeping the emotions in check some-times, but hey, thats what feeling alive is all about, right? I Hope I'm not scaring anyone off from visiting Jakarta, one thing I haven't felt at any stage is physical threat. I'm pretty sure even if you got mugged here they would do it with a smile, a "Mr" and probably even offer you a ride home in their Rojak.
Reading through some of it has made me realise that these guys were really going out on a limb with some of this stuff. They were pioneers in an academic (and also practical) sense sometimes. I haven't come across any reference to crazy wacky experiments in this book so far, but from what I know of elctro-shock therapy the basis for that treatment (which I heard is being revived in a modified and more humane sense in teating depression) was some pretty far-out experiments.
From what I've read so far, some of Jung;'s early work on the unconscious was based on his own dreams. The thing that got me most was that these guys were developing real theories that are still in play today, and they were doing it from scratch, not off the back of a 'How to' book but a synthesis of a massive amount of wide and diverse information.
In the current age we are so gifted with easily accessible information and yet it seems we do not use it often enough. How many of us have considered the works of Jung, Freud or Neitzche and wondered what lessons lie in modern psychology that might help us with our day to day problems, or more importantly – in making our lives better and happier? Not many, because instead we go to a self help book on positive psychology. How much of the original work has been lost in translation? I don't know, but I've read a few positive psychology books and nothing as poignant as the following statement of Jungs has jumped out at me before:
“ I realised that the Unconscious is a process, and the psyche is transformed or developed by the relationship of the ego to the contents of the unconscious” Carl Jung.
Picture curtesty of http://www.16-personality-types.com/
Environmental characteristics are obviously very front of mind over here in Jakarta. The poverty and class divide is pretty obvious, not to mention the much more frequent interaction here with 'underworld' figures such as touts, drug dealers and prostitutes that rarely happens (to me anyway) in Australia. The relationship with these underworld figures here is also much trickier - because pretty much everyone here is an entreprenuer of some sense, a drug dealer will be just as happy to sell you a tour (or pick up a commission selling you a tour) as they will be fixing you up with a 'nice girl' or selling you drugs. Being as objective as I can, it seems to me that these underworld figures are much more acceptable to me here in Jakarta then they would be at home. This may be because they also seem much more humane and more like 'real people' rather than 'underworld' figures in a sense. I put that down to the way the environmental characteristics have impacted them as they grew up and how it is affecting my unconcious now that I'm here in the middle of it.
So, must admit I'm having trouble keeping the emotions in check some-times, but hey, thats what feeling alive is all about, right? I Hope I'm not scaring anyone off from visiting Jakarta, one thing I haven't felt at any stage is physical threat. I'm pretty sure even if you got mugged here they would do it with a smile, a "Mr" and probably even offer you a ride home in their Rojak.
Monday, 3 July 2006
Normalacy
Nobody is fu*ked up anymore,
everybody is normal now.
The problem is,
normal is fu*ked up.
Society accept so much today that its hard not to be normal.
Anonymous.
Tuesday, 27 June 2006
Politics
Wow - this blog is almost at teh stage where it drives itself! Cool! i admit not to adding much recently, but hey, otehrs lives are more interesting anyway! Thanks for the post from South America Ange!
Politics seems to be generating a little bit of heated debate, although i know mick is a passionate person sometimes I think he just loves to throw his vocab around! Quite impressive.
i think Australian Politics is very interesting at the moment, and has been for some time. being a business person I do appreciate that Costello is possibly one of the best treasureres we have had and that under the Howard regime the economy has done very well. However, Allan Greenspan was claimed to also be one of the US reserve banks best chairman and he still managed to fall from graces with some terrible choices, particularly throwing his weight behind George Bush endorsed tax cuts to the wealthy. It cost him his job.
Similarly, Costello and Howard have made some choices which I believe go against the best interests of the majority of Australians, especially in regards to tax cuts which favour the upper middle class, and especially in the last year. Also of concern are the AWA's and the anti-terrorism laws which infringe on citizens privacy. International disasters and threats should not be used for political leverage and as such, should create common ground between political parties - we have not seen that in Australia.
I jsut wanted to touch on these topics and invite people to express their opinion of what they think Howard has done well and waht Howard has done bad. Personally I think his worst mistakes have been made in regard to immigration and environmental policy - and it extends beyond refugees to things like security, but most importantly our sense of national identity. Whilst I do agree with restricting immigration to 'acceptable' applicants, the definition of acceptable is definately debatable not to mention the process.
As an aside, I'm going to go see Coldplay tonight! Thanks to Mick and his great forward thinking!
Politics seems to be generating a little bit of heated debate, although i know mick is a passionate person sometimes I think he just loves to throw his vocab around! Quite impressive.
i think Australian Politics is very interesting at the moment, and has been for some time. being a business person I do appreciate that Costello is possibly one of the best treasureres we have had and that under the Howard regime the economy has done very well. However, Allan Greenspan was claimed to also be one of the US reserve banks best chairman and he still managed to fall from graces with some terrible choices, particularly throwing his weight behind George Bush endorsed tax cuts to the wealthy. It cost him his job.
Similarly, Costello and Howard have made some choices which I believe go against the best interests of the majority of Australians, especially in regards to tax cuts which favour the upper middle class, and especially in the last year. Also of concern are the AWA's and the anti-terrorism laws which infringe on citizens privacy. International disasters and threats should not be used for political leverage and as such, should create common ground between political parties - we have not seen that in Australia.
I jsut wanted to touch on these topics and invite people to express their opinion of what they think Howard has done well and waht Howard has done bad. Personally I think his worst mistakes have been made in regard to immigration and environmental policy - and it extends beyond refugees to things like security, but most importantly our sense of national identity. Whilst I do agree with restricting immigration to 'acceptable' applicants, the definition of acceptable is definately debatable not to mention the process.
As an aside, I'm going to go see Coldplay tonight! Thanks to Mick and his great forward thinking!
Wednesday, 14 June 2006
Something to think about?
I think the blog is becoming a little to much I this, I that... And besides, Nick has been complaining he isn't getting enough stimulating conversation these days. Apparently thats why he's heading to Europe where we know all they do is play soccer, eat good food, drink expensive grog and have kinky sex. I guess he is banking on the pillow talk stimulating something!
------------------------------
Have you ever considered what makes you change your mind? Are there patterns to it? Does the same thing make you change your mind all the time? I'm not talking black cats and ladders, but what about price, quality, appearance, how much you had had to drink, mood, presentation, the list goes on and on, but I wonder what is the most predominant. Lets call these things 'Alpha Characteristics'.
It depends. It depends on a lot of things like; what your buying, how much you need it, how much time you have, Whether its a luxury or necessity, if its high value or low value, and on and on. Lets call these things 'Beta Characteristics'.
There are millions of factors of many different things that our mind takes into account before we even realize. Namely Alpha Characteristics and Beta Characteristics. These characteristics are conditional upon each other and they grow together - the more Alpha charachterisitics, the more Beta Characteristics.
Where am I going with this? I don't know. But, does everyone appreciate this would not be a linear equation? Its exponential (I think), as the independent variables (Alpha & Beta Char.) get bigger, the dependent variable (Total) increases by an increasing rate.
Sooooo, if your making a decision anytime soon, just give up trying to analyse all those factors and accept the idea that your brain has already done it for you. But because you never listen to it (your brain) anyway, it has to tell your gut, to tell your brain, that your gut feel is Cola flavoured toothpaste is wrong, even if you do get a free stomach pump with it.
------------------------------
Have you ever considered what makes you change your mind? Are there patterns to it? Does the same thing make you change your mind all the time? I'm not talking black cats and ladders, but what about price, quality, appearance, how much you had had to drink, mood, presentation, the list goes on and on, but I wonder what is the most predominant. Lets call these things 'Alpha Characteristics'.
It depends. It depends on a lot of things like; what your buying, how much you need it, how much time you have, Whether its a luxury or necessity, if its high value or low value, and on and on. Lets call these things 'Beta Characteristics'.
There are millions of factors of many different things that our mind takes into account before we even realize. Namely Alpha Characteristics and Beta Characteristics. These characteristics are conditional upon each other and they grow together - the more Alpha charachterisitics, the more Beta Characteristics.
Where am I going with this? I don't know. But, does everyone appreciate this would not be a linear equation? Its exponential (I think), as the independent variables (Alpha & Beta Char.) get bigger, the dependent variable (Total) increases by an increasing rate.
Sooooo, if your making a decision anytime soon, just give up trying to analyse all those factors and accept the idea that your brain has already done it for you. But because you never listen to it (your brain) anyway, it has to tell your gut, to tell your brain, that your gut feel is Cola flavoured toothpaste is wrong, even if you do get a free stomach pump with it.
Friday, 26 May 2006
The next time you stereotype, think external validity.
External validity is a measure of how readily youc an generalise a statement or research. High external validity implies you can make a very broad statement.
Technically we would say you have high external validity if you are basing your statement on a large number of observations. For example, if the caravan you buy from a pikey doesn't make it out the gate, and its the only thing you have ever bought from a pikey, and you claim that all Pikeys are thieving dishonest con artists, your statement has very low external validity.
On the other hand a consumer report which collected a sample of 1,000 customer satisfaction reports from people who bought caravans from pikeys would have a much higher external validity.
So the next time you stereotype or generalise (as we are all [especially me] prone to do), think of exactly how many observations you have and consider your external validty.
Technically we would say you have high external validity if you are basing your statement on a large number of observations. For example, if the caravan you buy from a pikey doesn't make it out the gate, and its the only thing you have ever bought from a pikey, and you claim that all Pikeys are thieving dishonest con artists, your statement has very low external validity.
On the other hand a consumer report which collected a sample of 1,000 customer satisfaction reports from people who bought caravans from pikeys would have a much higher external validity.
So the next time you stereotype or generalise (as we are all [especially me] prone to do), think of exactly how many observations you have and consider your external validty.
Sunday, 21 May 2006
Life as we know it
Its been a very interesting 2 weeks and I'm sure it'll be one of those periods in a persons life that changes who they are.
I wonder how people go about becoming who they are sometimes. I admit i have a habbit of being a bit pushy on the whole ambition front, and at times hypocrytical. I guess everybody has stages of high motivation and low motivation, times when they want to be a world changer and times when they would rather just live in a shack on the beach and go surfing everyday.
I have a little system that helps me keep changing and I hope improving who I am and providing me with challenges and incentives. Every now and again, when I'm day dreaming and looking at my wrold map (best present ever!), I'll write my daydream down on a scrap of paper and put it in an envelope. On the envelope I write a suitable title depending what the daydream was, for example; "Open this on completion of university" or "Read me when your sick of Sydney" and even "Thinking of having kids? Read me first!". Hehe.
In the last two weeks, I haven't written any new ideas down, but I got the feeling it might be time to open a new envelope, find a new direction. I'm still waiting for some pieces to fall into place in what could be described as an autobiographical infinity piece puzzle, but at least i think I've got the edges!
Moral of the story; I'm going to be out and about a bit more! So give me a call and I'll make more of an effort to catch up with you. I've been dissapointed by the disspersion of my friends, but I intend to make amends.
Hope you have all had a good weekend!
I wonder how people go about becoming who they are sometimes. I admit i have a habbit of being a bit pushy on the whole ambition front, and at times hypocrytical. I guess everybody has stages of high motivation and low motivation, times when they want to be a world changer and times when they would rather just live in a shack on the beach and go surfing everyday.
I have a little system that helps me keep changing and I hope improving who I am and providing me with challenges and incentives. Every now and again, when I'm day dreaming and looking at my wrold map (best present ever!), I'll write my daydream down on a scrap of paper and put it in an envelope. On the envelope I write a suitable title depending what the daydream was, for example; "Open this on completion of university" or "Read me when your sick of Sydney" and even "Thinking of having kids? Read me first!". Hehe.
In the last two weeks, I haven't written any new ideas down, but I got the feeling it might be time to open a new envelope, find a new direction. I'm still waiting for some pieces to fall into place in what could be described as an autobiographical infinity piece puzzle, but at least i think I've got the edges!
Moral of the story; I'm going to be out and about a bit more! So give me a call and I'll make more of an effort to catch up with you. I've been dissapointed by the disspersion of my friends, but I intend to make amends.
Hope you have all had a good weekend!
Tuesday, 2 May 2006
Patent pending part pwo:
Following on from the previous conversation, I received a lesson on the brain:
I'll arrive at reality one day. says:
Do you know how the brain records stuff?
Magda- i Finpan says:
well, we put everything we see in categories and store them first in our short-term memory, or working memory as the researcher like to call it now. Some things can end up in several categories, that leads to spreading activation. If u think of cat u think of either something in the same category like cat food or the opposite category like dog
I'll arrive at reality one day. says:
right...
Magda- i Finpan says: If you stored something after seeing it 5 times, that would be a study technique, and it would store unnecessary things like, mr larsson lives next to me, and there is 1987 trees on my way to uni etc. Plus, if u "force" the brain to store things after u've seen it 5 times, your long-term memory wolud be full so fast
I'll arrive at reality one day. says:
mmm, not much long term memory hey... I'm not so sure we would remember useless stuff if our brain had a capacity problem... because we seem to have a great nack of discarding useless stuff over time and remembering important things... and its all relative. My brother never knows where his matching socks are, but he could fill you in on the philosophies of Hercules or theories of Einstein no problems.
I'll arrive at reality one day. says:
Well, I guess if the process is efficient enough, you wouldn't need to store anything in your brain... you sure would be screwed if you lost your portable web-brain though! Hehe
I'll arrive at reality one day. says:
Do you know how the brain records stuff?
Magda- i Finpan says:
well, we put everything we see in categories and store them first in our short-term memory, or working memory as the researcher like to call it now. Some things can end up in several categories, that leads to spreading activation. If u think of cat u think of either something in the same category like cat food or the opposite category like dog
I'll arrive at reality one day. says:
right...
Magda- i Finpan says: If you stored something after seeing it 5 times, that would be a study technique, and it would store unnecessary things like, mr larsson lives next to me, and there is 1987 trees on my way to uni etc. Plus, if u "force" the brain to store things after u've seen it 5 times, your long-term memory wolud be full so fast
I'll arrive at reality one day. says:
mmm, not much long term memory hey... I'm not so sure we would remember useless stuff if our brain had a capacity problem... because we seem to have a great nack of discarding useless stuff over time and remembering important things... and its all relative. My brother never knows where his matching socks are, but he could fill you in on the philosophies of Hercules or theories of Einstein no problems.
I'll arrive at reality one day. says:
Well, I guess if the process is efficient enough, you wouldn't need to store anything in your brain... you sure would be screwed if you lost your portable web-brain though! Hehe
Patent pending
I was struct by a molecule of enlightenment whilst procrastinating from doing my presentation paper tonight... It may be best understood in the following MSN conversation: (Cause I can't be bothered writting it out again!)
I'll arrive at reality one day says:
I like learning... but i wish it wasn't so hard!
I'll arrive at reality one day says:
I just had an awesome idea that would make loads and loads of money if it was possible! Our brain is essentially just a storage device right?
Magda- i Finpan says:
aha...
I'll arrive at reality one day says:
we have the ability to recall information, theories and memories instantly, if we remember them... From whatever we remembe, we add other bits of information we have in our head... and voila, you have a new idea or the solution to a novel problem...
Magda- i Finpan says:
right, so?
I'll arrive at reality one day. says:
We go through a very long learning process to get all that stuff inside our head right... so we can recall it instantly... when we need it.... wherever we need it....
Magda- i Finpan says:
yeah?
I'll arrive at reality one day. says:
So... really the world wide web, is like a massive brain, except it can't recall things instantly, and it doesn't sort our ideas for us... its an inefficient brain if you will. What we need... is a portable storage device... which has all the information on the web contained within it.... and we need to be able to connect it to our brain so that whenever we need a piece of information, our brain can sort through everything on the web, and provide us instantly with what we need. The best part is: Once you have got that piece of information, its in your brain -not on the web, kinda like a really big internet history! hehe. Of course this web-brain storage device would have to be wireless so you can update your brain with all the new ideas other people are coming up with.
Magda- i Finpan says:
aha! but how r u gonna do that?
I'll arrive at reality one day. says:
Well, teh brain is just a whole bunch of electronic nodes right? We just need to overlay the brain with a fine mesh which can transmit electronic pulses...
Magda- i Finpan says:
If we're gonna keep everything that comes in wouldnt that result in big giant heads since the brain grows to fit information?
I'll arrive at reality one day says: Hmm... but don't we not use like 80% of our brain? No - only store stuff you have used.... or maybe it could be two way - your brain is temporary storage, and if you use one piece of information more then say, 5 times - it gets stored! As I see it the problem is not connectivity, its compatability. How do we make the data on the web compatible with our brain...
Magda- i Finpan says: Hehe but listen, if it gets stored after seeing it 5 times, that would be a study technique, and it would store unnecessary things like, mr larsson lives next to me, and there is 1987 trees on my way to uni etc
PART 2 coming to a mentally unstable person near you soon!
I'll arrive at reality one day says:
I like learning... but i wish it wasn't so hard!
I'll arrive at reality one day says:
I just had an awesome idea that would make loads and loads of money if it was possible! Our brain is essentially just a storage device right?
Magda- i Finpan says:
aha...
I'll arrive at reality one day says:
we have the ability to recall information, theories and memories instantly, if we remember them... From whatever we remembe, we add other bits of information we have in our head... and voila, you have a new idea or the solution to a novel problem...
Magda- i Finpan says:
right, so?
I'll arrive at reality one day. says:
We go through a very long learning process to get all that stuff inside our head right... so we can recall it instantly... when we need it.... wherever we need it....
Magda- i Finpan says:
yeah?
I'll arrive at reality one day. says:
So... really the world wide web, is like a massive brain, except it can't recall things instantly, and it doesn't sort our ideas for us... its an inefficient brain if you will. What we need... is a portable storage device... which has all the information on the web contained within it.... and we need to be able to connect it to our brain so that whenever we need a piece of information, our brain can sort through everything on the web, and provide us instantly with what we need. The best part is: Once you have got that piece of information, its in your brain -not on the web, kinda like a really big internet history! hehe. Of course this web-brain storage device would have to be wireless so you can update your brain with all the new ideas other people are coming up with.
Magda- i Finpan says:
aha! but how r u gonna do that?
I'll arrive at reality one day. says:
Well, teh brain is just a whole bunch of electronic nodes right? We just need to overlay the brain with a fine mesh which can transmit electronic pulses...
Magda- i Finpan says:
If we're gonna keep everything that comes in wouldnt that result in big giant heads since the brain grows to fit information?
I'll arrive at reality one day says: Hmm... but don't we not use like 80% of our brain? No - only store stuff you have used.... or maybe it could be two way - your brain is temporary storage, and if you use one piece of information more then say, 5 times - it gets stored! As I see it the problem is not connectivity, its compatability. How do we make the data on the web compatible with our brain...
Magda- i Finpan says: Hehe but listen, if it gets stored after seeing it 5 times, that would be a study technique, and it would store unnecessary things like, mr larsson lives next to me, and there is 1987 trees on my way to uni etc
PART 2 coming to a mentally unstable person near you soon!
Sunday, 30 April 2006
Policy Choice: its what you want it to be.
Sorry to all those who have seen this at noodlum or the old blithe blithering (its too memrable John) but since my full name came up with the same as nick: master of story telling, and my first name was: smelling of turnips at all times, I thought i'd proxy name choice for possible accounting policy choice to provide you all with an analogous idea of what earnings figures can look like:
Nomad Odyssey -- [adjective]: Visually addictive 'How will you be defined in the dictionary?' |
Tuesday, 4 April 2006
Cirularity
A few of you may recall that I often claim that Dictionairies rule the world. I bought one the other day. It was on special. It cost $8. Its worth... $8.
Dictionairies are essentially a massive cirular reference. If you look up the definition of a particularly tricky word, you oft have to look up a word used to define the original word you where researching. Dictionaries use words to define other words. If you didn't have a vocabulary already (you know no words) a dictionary would be useless to you. How do we then learn our first word?
Lets make a romantic assumption that the first word we all learn is 'mum'. There are essentially a couple of ways we could learn it, the most likely in my mind, is by sound association. We learn of the object 'mum' through experience and then we associate the sound 'mum' with the object that feeds, cleans and takes care of us. From the sound association we eventually learn to spell the word 'mum' and vola, we have our first word.
A more likely example is 'aaaaaarrrrrrgggwhaaawhhaaaa' which we associate with the possibility of getting fed, or cleaned, or not-being-held-in-that-particular-way-that-makes-my-nappy-go- right-up-my-bum. of course we wouldn't know any of this right? It would more likely be an association with x, y, z. Where x, y, z represent those things. Do you see the problem here?
Unless we have some innate ideas when we are born, we are not going to know anything. We will not know what hungry is, we are not going to know what x, y, and z stand for. How do we even know to go 'aaaaarggggghhhhwhhhaa?'
Dictionairies are essentially a massive cirular reference. If you look up the definition of a particularly tricky word, you oft have to look up a word used to define the original word you where researching. Dictionaries use words to define other words. If you didn't have a vocabulary already (you know no words) a dictionary would be useless to you. How do we then learn our first word?
Lets make a romantic assumption that the first word we all learn is 'mum'. There are essentially a couple of ways we could learn it, the most likely in my mind, is by sound association. We learn of the object 'mum' through experience and then we associate the sound 'mum' with the object that feeds, cleans and takes care of us. From the sound association we eventually learn to spell the word 'mum' and vola, we have our first word.
A more likely example is 'aaaaaarrrrrrgggwhaaawhhaaaa' which we associate with the possibility of getting fed, or cleaned, or not-being-held-in-that-particular-way-that-makes-my-nappy-go- right-up-my-bum. of course we wouldn't know any of this right? It would more likely be an association with x, y, z. Where x, y, z represent those things. Do you see the problem here?
Unless we have some innate ideas when we are born, we are not going to know anything. We will not know what hungry is, we are not going to know what x, y, and z stand for. How do we even know to go 'aaaaarggggghhhhwhhhaa?'
Monday, 3 April 2006
Identity obscured?
Hi Alvin and the Canada Crew!
To carry on the identity/success debate:
I think mum is right in a lot of respects. The focus of the previous post and the ensuing comments was a little too materialistic orientated. What I was trying to get at was the existence of those people who identify their personal success in life with some degree of success at work, measured in part by their personal work ethic, achievement of firm goals and objectives, personal recognition within the firm, and other factors which could describe 'a job well done'.
However, as before, this all needs to be tempered in light of materialistic influences as well, which is why management accounting is so problematic! Their are just too many variables and too many paradigms to describe the relations between those variables.
As for the working to pay the bills idea, I'm sorry, but thats only for suckers stuck in the rat race (Which if you are one, don't worry, their are plenty of other people with you). Plenty of evidence exists to indicate that motivation of highly skilled and highly paid employees is not determined predominantly by money (Surprising hey!) and that once an employees personal 'comfort thresh-hold' has been reached they will no longer be motivated by pecuniary compensation. Makes you wonder why these CEO's get so many stock options, don't it!
What is a persons comfort-thershold? I'm not sure, but is basicaly a point in life or level in income at which they are no longer concerned with money for survival. Money essentially becomes an object of luxury. So, for all those people in the rat race, its probably half way through retirement when your living on the income of your offfspring. It changes between individuals and varies a great deal and is predominantly lower for disadvantaged famalies/countries. It is hypothesised to have something to do with the reason why poorer society is so often easily satisfied in comparison to western countries (ie no history of consumption or luxury).
As for the body image, I think Magda is correct. Our society is rife with people who achieve a high authoratative status because of their body image. By Authoratative status I mean that they exert an above average influence on society. Eg. Hollywood.
As for body image in the workplace, I wonder if it is a more agreeable theory if we consider it in terms of poor body image. Its unlikely a person with (very)poor body image will achieve a position of authority at work. Yes maybe your boss is overweight, but are they obese? Keep in mind the ideal Body image changes across cultures, Eg. Budha.
To carry on the identity/success debate:
I think mum is right in a lot of respects. The focus of the previous post and the ensuing comments was a little too materialistic orientated. What I was trying to get at was the existence of those people who identify their personal success in life with some degree of success at work, measured in part by their personal work ethic, achievement of firm goals and objectives, personal recognition within the firm, and other factors which could describe 'a job well done'.
However, as before, this all needs to be tempered in light of materialistic influences as well, which is why management accounting is so problematic! Their are just too many variables and too many paradigms to describe the relations between those variables.
As for the working to pay the bills idea, I'm sorry, but thats only for suckers stuck in the rat race (Which if you are one, don't worry, their are plenty of other people with you). Plenty of evidence exists to indicate that motivation of highly skilled and highly paid employees is not determined predominantly by money (Surprising hey!) and that once an employees personal 'comfort thresh-hold' has been reached they will no longer be motivated by pecuniary compensation. Makes you wonder why these CEO's get so many stock options, don't it!
What is a persons comfort-thershold? I'm not sure, but is basicaly a point in life or level in income at which they are no longer concerned with money for survival. Money essentially becomes an object of luxury. So, for all those people in the rat race, its probably half way through retirement when your living on the income of your offfspring. It changes between individuals and varies a great deal and is predominantly lower for disadvantaged famalies/countries. It is hypothesised to have something to do with the reason why poorer society is so often easily satisfied in comparison to western countries (ie no history of consumption or luxury).
As for the body image, I think Magda is correct. Our society is rife with people who achieve a high authoratative status because of their body image. By Authoratative status I mean that they exert an above average influence on society. Eg. Hollywood.
As for body image in the workplace, I wonder if it is a more agreeable theory if we consider it in terms of poor body image. Its unlikely a person with (very)poor body image will achieve a position of authority at work. Yes maybe your boss is overweight, but are they obese? Keep in mind the ideal Body image changes across cultures, Eg. Budha.
Tuesday, 28 March 2006
Benefits
Some interstin' ideas thrown about in class today. Nothing really to do with accounting so you can read on! Hehe, Wusses!
First thing was the imapct that working for big firms, and tertiary and secondary education has on a persons identity. Particular focus was the work environment. The question raised was: Why do people work so hard, and do so much overtime?
The simple response is ambition, money, and peer group pressure.
The complex response is that people define themselves within a working context. People evaluate themselves in regards to their performance at work, given a particular work environment.
This plays down into society, especially materiality. In the context of an accounting firm, Life success is subtly played out as partnership, but the fast car, the beautiful wife, big house, sexy boat and blonde mistress (Sorry its a fact majority of partners are male!) are all part of the picture painted, and accepted by workers. There is more to this simply saying success is measured in terms of money, its a influence that runs deeper then the hip pocket and often gets to people without them noticing.
This can be extended even more into politics... I just forget what the link is. More on this topic soon.
First thing was the imapct that working for big firms, and tertiary and secondary education has on a persons identity. Particular focus was the work environment. The question raised was: Why do people work so hard, and do so much overtime?
The simple response is ambition, money, and peer group pressure.
The complex response is that people define themselves within a working context. People evaluate themselves in regards to their performance at work, given a particular work environment.
This plays down into society, especially materiality. In the context of an accounting firm, Life success is subtly played out as partnership, but the fast car, the beautiful wife, big house, sexy boat and blonde mistress (Sorry its a fact majority of partners are male!) are all part of the picture painted, and accepted by workers. There is more to this simply saying success is measured in terms of money, its a influence that runs deeper then the hip pocket and often gets to people without them noticing.
This can be extended even more into politics... I just forget what the link is. More on this topic soon.
Monday, 20 March 2006
Variability
Just read and covered an interesting article by Kothari, Laguerre and Leone which analysed the relative degree of uncertainty of future earnings attributeable to current R&D investment, compared to current Capital expenditure.
The key finding was that R&D investments generate more uncertain future earnings then other capital expenditure. Not that surprising really. However, considering the majority of studies focus on the impact of investments on share price or return, its a little unusual.
Risk plays a large part in the buy/sell/hold decision of investors, and the uncertainty of earnings plays a large part in determining the riskyness of a project or prospective investment.
Does Risk play a part in evaluation? Do we consider risk when we consider the value of an item, or is it a completely seperate factor? I believe it is interrelated.
If a company is not providing a satisfactory return for its inherrent risk, a rational investor will sell his/her shares in that company.
How could I incorporate a similar analysis of a major accounting cost driver or cost centre intot eh evaluation of a company. Just as an aside, are investors really concerned with the inherent risk of the company they are invested in or the risk that they are missing a better alternative investment. (ie. cost of capital or opportunity cost)?
The key finding was that R&D investments generate more uncertain future earnings then other capital expenditure. Not that surprising really. However, considering the majority of studies focus on the impact of investments on share price or return, its a little unusual.
Risk plays a large part in the buy/sell/hold decision of investors, and the uncertainty of earnings plays a large part in determining the riskyness of a project or prospective investment.
Does Risk play a part in evaluation? Do we consider risk when we consider the value of an item, or is it a completely seperate factor? I believe it is interrelated.
If a company is not providing a satisfactory return for its inherrent risk, a rational investor will sell his/her shares in that company.
How could I incorporate a similar analysis of a major accounting cost driver or cost centre intot eh evaluation of a company. Just as an aside, are investors really concerned with the inherent risk of the company they are invested in or the risk that they are missing a better alternative investment. (ie. cost of capital or opportunity cost)?
Thursday, 9 March 2006
What's in a theory?
Crazy smart people win prestigious prizes for coming up with amazing theories... so what's in a theory? What is it about theories that gets so many people worked up, frenzied and excited?
"A Theory is a coherent set of propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena, assumed to hold throughout a broad range of specific instances"
What does that mean? I dunno, sounds more like the definition of a paradigm to me! Read Kuhns "The structure of scientific revolutions". Its actually interesting. Explains how irrational scientists really are!
Anyway, my guess is the purpose of a theory is to provide a foundation from which it is possible to predict when phenomena will occur, understand why phenomena occur and what they are.
Apparently we all use theories everyday. If you look out the window, and its cloudy, what do you think? Hmm, maybe its going to be cold. I guess thats a theory of kinds, but iof you put it like this; its an argument right?
(Argument 1)
Its cloudy today.
Its cold when its cloudy.
Therefore today will be cold.
2 propositions and a conclusion. Looks like an argument, smells like an argument, it is an argument. So are arguments and theories the same? I doubt it. Maybe theories don't have conclusions? Maybe when you actually make the prediction, it becomes an argument. That would make sense, because we know from my posts last year that their is a difference between arguments and explanations, and that difference is?
An argument makes a claim, an explanation does not make a claim. Ok, so a theory is just the propositions behind an explanation, with alternative conclusions depending on the phenomena that is observed?
(Explanation 1)
Its Sunny today
Its cold when its cloudy
that's why it is warm today.
Notice the subtle difference. Good. Yes I'm schitzophrenic. Hi me! Your sexy! No - you are! oh shush, your making me blush! Your girlfriends hot. Why thankyou!
Same premises, different observation, but we used the same theory (albeit the first example was an argument) in the background to determine the conclusion. So despite my best efforts, the theory remains an implicit thing within these examples... The theory is essentially the background method, framework or thinking used to arrive at the conclusion given an observation(phenomena) and set of premises.
"A Theory is a coherent set of propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena, assumed to hold throughout a broad range of specific instances"
What does that mean? I dunno, sounds more like the definition of a paradigm to me! Read Kuhns "The structure of scientific revolutions". Its actually interesting. Explains how irrational scientists really are!
Anyway, my guess is the purpose of a theory is to provide a foundation from which it is possible to predict when phenomena will occur, understand why phenomena occur and what they are.
Apparently we all use theories everyday. If you look out the window, and its cloudy, what do you think? Hmm, maybe its going to be cold. I guess thats a theory of kinds, but iof you put it like this; its an argument right?
(Argument 1)
Its cloudy today.
Its cold when its cloudy.
Therefore today will be cold.
2 propositions and a conclusion. Looks like an argument, smells like an argument, it is an argument. So are arguments and theories the same? I doubt it. Maybe theories don't have conclusions? Maybe when you actually make the prediction, it becomes an argument. That would make sense, because we know from my posts last year that their is a difference between arguments and explanations, and that difference is?
An argument makes a claim, an explanation does not make a claim. Ok, so a theory is just the propositions behind an explanation, with alternative conclusions depending on the phenomena that is observed?
(Explanation 1)
Its Sunny today
Its cold when its cloudy
that's why it is warm today.
Notice the subtle difference. Good. Yes I'm schitzophrenic. Hi me! Your sexy! No - you are! oh shush, your making me blush! Your girlfriends hot. Why thankyou!
Same premises, different observation, but we used the same theory (albeit the first example was an argument) in the background to determine the conclusion. So despite my best efforts, the theory remains an implicit thing within these examples... The theory is essentially the background method, framework or thinking used to arrive at the conclusion given an observation(phenomena) and set of premises.
Monday, 30 January 2006
What Philosophy do you Follow?
| You scored as Existentialism. Your life is guided by the concept of Existentialism: You choose the meaning and purpose of your life. "Man is condemned to be free; because once thrown into the world, he is responsible for everything he does." "It is up to you to give [life] a meaning." --Jean-Paul Sartre "It is man's natural sickness to believe that he possesses the Truth." --Blaise Pascal
What philosophy do you follow? (v1.03) created with QuizFarm.com |
Friday, 20 January 2006
Faith, Pomo, Truth, Existence, Life, Etc (Continued)
I know it has been a while since I touched on these topics and this site was alive with debate about any particular topic (Mike, Rhian, Sze Zeng, Susy and others I need help in this department!). However as Mike and Rhian discovered some months ago (read about it here), a lot of debates return to common themes. Nick and Samir are considering the idea of a website devoted to these and other themes which I think is a totaly terrific idea.
To get back on track, a few people may remember when I made a post in comment to another Blog site operated by The Agora (Refresh your memory) and some comments by a Dr leong which made for interesting reading in regards to faith and postmodernism. That post drew some interesting comments and I have since received some interesting emails, of which I am now going to attempt to reply too - you can read the comments on the link above. The thing that most interests me in these discussions is of course faith in god, and the alternative ways of life (ie. Pomo).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------
Dr Leong's post was the origin of this debate, and as The Hedonese has suggested, his intent was to discuss ways of sharing the gospel and 'employing insights from pomo to dismantle the enlightenment project' and then explaining the flaws of Pomo (Pomo being Post Modernism - most associated with opinions of the like of Nietszche and Foucault - See previous posts for what those views actually are!). The major flaw of pomo that was pointed out was the contention that it is 'unliveable'.
As The Hedonese (TH) suggested, 'liveability' could be consider a criteria of the purpose to life or even truth. The idea being that the more 'liveable' an idea is, the more plausible it is as a 'world view'. This idea is similar to that of Ockhams Razor (or however you spell his name) which is a theory applied to evaluate other theories, where the simplest theory or explanation for an observation is the best theory. By world view, I'm guessing TH means a kind of mass purpose to life - a purpose to life that can be adapted by everyone. Certain religions would then be considered as 'World Views' - ie Christianity.
Now I'm exposing my poor understanding of religion to take a stab at the underlying 'world view' inherrent in Christianity - that is very basically to get into heaven. Be a good person - go to Heaven, live happily in eternity. According to Christianity Heaven is the end result of leading a good and proper life full of servitude to God, faith and love.
So, TH (And Dr leong) claims this world view is more 'liveable' then that of a Pomo 'world view'. Here we hit a problem, as I find it very hard to outline what exactly the Pomo World view is - much harder then that for Christianity. (An aside - this difficulty in itself should not be considered an affirmation that Christianity is more plausible then Pomo, its simply a lack of skill and knowledge of Pomo on my behalf).
"Postmodernity is first and foremost a disenchantment with the brassy confidence of the modern world—confidence in reason, science, progress, equality, individuality, and freedom". On this general level it seems very plausible, but when you delve into the details and the more fanatical beliefs it becomes a little more of a stretch of the imagination. For instance is Nietszches infamous claim - All claims to Truth is a will to power, then considers Foucaults claim that Truth does not exist or is too much for us to handle, and I get confused. Both of these guys would like us to live in a world of lies, to live under the umbrella of protection that ignorance can offer. Not my idea of a fantastic way to live, but their claim is that it is a better way to live then the modern way - which is an eternal search for truth and knowledge through science, reason etc.
What TH does agree is that Dr leongs argument is not trying to prove that in the event Pomo is unliveable, it "doesnt by default lead us to the Trinitarian God." Or any specific God of any religion for that matter, but God is still an alternative. Personally I find this some what depressing, because it brings us to the crux of the discussion: Is God just an excuse? - Is God just another alternative which is provided because the existence of an omnipotent being is arguably by definition capable of solving all problems (he/she/it must be right, because they are omnipotent)?
TH and Sze Zeng both went to lengths to explain how Dr leong avoided this problem, and I'll try to recap them now. TH explained that because liveability was a criteria of plausibility, and Christianity fitted that criteria better then Pomo, then it must be a better explanation. That seems logical to me - Now we just need to prove that it does fit the criteria better then Pomo - which is where Sze Zeng comes into the conversation.
Sze Zeng Recaps Dr Leongs definition of faith with an example “without faith we cannot live. Though you would not walk into a building you have reasons to believe is unsafe, when you do walk into one you do so by faith as you cannot be sure that it will not collapse. The same goes for the food you eat everyday, and so on."
So Faith as I understand Sze Zens definition of it is not essetially a religous belief at all. This definition of Faith basicaly encapusulates everything we do in the existence of doubt. Where doubt exists and a person acts in the face of that doubt or uncertainty, faith exists. I disagree. Take for instance the building example - Whilst I cannot be 100% sure an unsafe building will not colapse when I walk into it, I can take precautions to ensure it does not colapse whislt I'm inside. I can have an engineer examine the building, I can reduce the uncertainty - does that reduce the amount of faith I employ?
As for the food we eat, again we cannot be 100% sure that it is healthy, but our decision (I can forsee a freedom of thought debate coming up!) is based on observation. I may have eaten food from the same place a number of times before and it was ok, or everytime I have bought green Bananas they have been unripe. Uncertainty certainly exists (Haha) and whilst Faith may be realted to it, I think a better definition of Faith would encapsulate the conscious decision required to 'have faith,' it cannot merely exist without conscious consent. The examples provided describe a more pesonal conviction. It is possible to convince yourself that the building is stable because you have read the engineers report, does that mean you have faith in the engineers report? Faith, Trust, Conviction, Confidence - they are all similar words, but similar is not the same. This needs more work.
The idea of existence is an interesting one and an argument that I know infuriates some friends of mine (Hi Reid, Magda!) and Sze Seng is correct, it is not a view that we can realistically live with. However, again i would dispte the definition and example of faith taht was given. When we are young it could be said we have faith that our parents are indeed our biological parents. However, when we are young and innocent - it could be said we have no doubt, doubt does not exist for the innocent. They believe what they are told.
When we grow up, innocence slackens its grip, and many people may well question their parental connection. But we do not continue to blindly (Faithfully?) believe that our parents are our biological parents, we see birth certificates, we identify biological similarities, we observe and record information in the traditional modernist way - scientifically, logically, reasonably, and some of that information is undoubtedly assimialted unconsciously.
In contrast to this - the belief that any God other then the'God of philosophical gaps', the belief that a God of one specific religion exists is a belief based on faith, it is a belief with very little reason or observation to support it, it is a belief with a large degree of uncertainty.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow - this has turned into a mammoth post - I hope somebody comments on it!
TH = The Hedonese (Profile website)
SZ = Sze Zeng (Profile website)
TA = The Agora (website)
To get back on track, a few people may remember when I made a post in comment to another Blog site operated by The Agora (Refresh your memory) and some comments by a Dr leong which made for interesting reading in regards to faith and postmodernism. That post drew some interesting comments and I have since received some interesting emails, of which I am now going to attempt to reply too - you can read the comments on the link above. The thing that most interests me in these discussions is of course faith in god, and the alternative ways of life (ie. Pomo).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------
Dr Leong's post was the origin of this debate, and as The Hedonese has suggested, his intent was to discuss ways of sharing the gospel and 'employing insights from pomo to dismantle the enlightenment project' and then explaining the flaws of Pomo (Pomo being Post Modernism - most associated with opinions of the like of Nietszche and Foucault - See previous posts for what those views actually are!). The major flaw of pomo that was pointed out was the contention that it is 'unliveable'.
As The Hedonese (TH) suggested, 'liveability' could be consider a criteria of the purpose to life or even truth. The idea being that the more 'liveable' an idea is, the more plausible it is as a 'world view'. This idea is similar to that of Ockhams Razor (or however you spell his name) which is a theory applied to evaluate other theories, where the simplest theory or explanation for an observation is the best theory. By world view, I'm guessing TH means a kind of mass purpose to life - a purpose to life that can be adapted by everyone. Certain religions would then be considered as 'World Views' - ie Christianity.
Now I'm exposing my poor understanding of religion to take a stab at the underlying 'world view' inherrent in Christianity - that is very basically to get into heaven. Be a good person - go to Heaven, live happily in eternity. According to Christianity Heaven is the end result of leading a good and proper life full of servitude to God, faith and love.
So, TH (And Dr leong) claims this world view is more 'liveable' then that of a Pomo 'world view'. Here we hit a problem, as I find it very hard to outline what exactly the Pomo World view is - much harder then that for Christianity. (An aside - this difficulty in itself should not be considered an affirmation that Christianity is more plausible then Pomo, its simply a lack of skill and knowledge of Pomo on my behalf).
"Postmodernity is first and foremost a disenchantment with the brassy confidence of the modern world—confidence in reason, science, progress, equality, individuality, and freedom". On this general level it seems very plausible, but when you delve into the details and the more fanatical beliefs it becomes a little more of a stretch of the imagination. For instance is Nietszches infamous claim - All claims to Truth is a will to power, then considers Foucaults claim that Truth does not exist or is too much for us to handle, and I get confused. Both of these guys would like us to live in a world of lies, to live under the umbrella of protection that ignorance can offer. Not my idea of a fantastic way to live, but their claim is that it is a better way to live then the modern way - which is an eternal search for truth and knowledge through science, reason etc.
What TH does agree is that Dr leongs argument is not trying to prove that in the event Pomo is unliveable, it "doesnt by default lead us to the Trinitarian God." Or any specific God of any religion for that matter, but God is still an alternative. Personally I find this some what depressing, because it brings us to the crux of the discussion: Is God just an excuse? - Is God just another alternative which is provided because the existence of an omnipotent being is arguably by definition capable of solving all problems (he/she/it must be right, because they are omnipotent)?
TH and Sze Zeng both went to lengths to explain how Dr leong avoided this problem, and I'll try to recap them now. TH explained that because liveability was a criteria of plausibility, and Christianity fitted that criteria better then Pomo, then it must be a better explanation. That seems logical to me - Now we just need to prove that it does fit the criteria better then Pomo - which is where Sze Zeng comes into the conversation.
Sze Zeng Recaps Dr Leongs definition of faith with an example “without faith we cannot live. Though you would not walk into a building you have reasons to believe is unsafe, when you do walk into one you do so by faith as you cannot be sure that it will not collapse. The same goes for the food you eat everyday, and so on."
So Faith as I understand Sze Zens definition of it is not essetially a religous belief at all. This definition of Faith basicaly encapusulates everything we do in the existence of doubt. Where doubt exists and a person acts in the face of that doubt or uncertainty, faith exists. I disagree. Take for instance the building example - Whilst I cannot be 100% sure an unsafe building will not colapse when I walk into it, I can take precautions to ensure it does not colapse whislt I'm inside. I can have an engineer examine the building, I can reduce the uncertainty - does that reduce the amount of faith I employ?
As for the food we eat, again we cannot be 100% sure that it is healthy, but our decision (I can forsee a freedom of thought debate coming up!) is based on observation. I may have eaten food from the same place a number of times before and it was ok, or everytime I have bought green Bananas they have been unripe. Uncertainty certainly exists (Haha) and whilst Faith may be realted to it, I think a better definition of Faith would encapsulate the conscious decision required to 'have faith,' it cannot merely exist without conscious consent. The examples provided describe a more pesonal conviction. It is possible to convince yourself that the building is stable because you have read the engineers report, does that mean you have faith in the engineers report? Faith, Trust, Conviction, Confidence - they are all similar words, but similar is not the same. This needs more work.
The idea of existence is an interesting one and an argument that I know infuriates some friends of mine (Hi Reid, Magda!) and Sze Seng is correct, it is not a view that we can realistically live with. However, again i would dispte the definition and example of faith taht was given. When we are young it could be said we have faith that our parents are indeed our biological parents. However, when we are young and innocent - it could be said we have no doubt, doubt does not exist for the innocent. They believe what they are told.
When we grow up, innocence slackens its grip, and many people may well question their parental connection. But we do not continue to blindly (Faithfully?) believe that our parents are our biological parents, we see birth certificates, we identify biological similarities, we observe and record information in the traditional modernist way - scientifically, logically, reasonably, and some of that information is undoubtedly assimialted unconsciously.
In contrast to this - the belief that any God other then the'God of philosophical gaps', the belief that a God of one specific religion exists is a belief based on faith, it is a belief with very little reason or observation to support it, it is a belief with a large degree of uncertainty.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow - this has turned into a mammoth post - I hope somebody comments on it!
TH = The Hedonese (Profile website)
SZ = Sze Zeng (Profile website)
TA = The Agora (website)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)