This is an extract of a mail I wrote to an old friend, who confronted me with my current life style. It turned out that my life style was not the subject of my reply, rather the (constructed) faith-science divide.
I post this for the sake of feedback: am I wrong? Am I missing something?
Here goes:
"I think it is self-contradictory to write the line "believe the Bible is the litteral Word of God ... it can be easily proven... beyond any shadow of doubt." Belief is not proven as they address two different spheres of existence. I have no doubt that God can interfere with the physical and natural laws of nature but to despise scientists because they do not operate on the basis of belief in God is ludicrous! Observation > hypothesis > experimentation > thesis is the only way to do science! How can you do maths if you do not assume (on the basis of observation) that 2+2=4 because of some archaic notion that God will always provide 5000 loaves and fish from 12 of each. At some point, charismatic Christians are going to have to accept that description is not contrary to revelation because it never claims to be (except some fanatics in the other ditch). I really don't see why God would create a world only to contradict it, in other words: if nature is God's handiwork, of course we can describe it to discover the recurring patterns and underlying dynamics. Consequently, I doubt that Genesis' intention was a detailed description of creation, but rather a poetic rendition of God's insanely awesome power of structure and imagination!
I've found that there is no contradiction between faith and science. Science's only goal is to describe and hypothesise about the physical - to describe. Faith's role is not to explain that which is left unexplained, but rather to describe that which cannot be described, explain the inexplicable, fantasize about the unfathomable, poetically describe the indescribable God and His works. There is a grander, greater reality behind warring science and knowledge. Don't shun opportunities to realize God's Kingdom in all of your social relations as they are always a choice between Love and Hate, closeness and distance!
..whoa, this really is a big "can of worms" ;) I won't pretend to have answers but I'm in a process and in this process I find it almost crazy to shun knowledge and explanations because of the fear of doubt. Albeit banal, I liken it to growing up being seasoned into the belief that Earth is flat and not accepting knowledge or explanation in fear of it being wrong. Banal, yes, but still fear of explanations seems.. -yes, dumbing!"
26 June, 2009
03 May, 2009
Journey to Love
I seldom realise that I have been on a journey until I look back and realise that I moved. It is good to be on a journey. We are not meant to stand still. We are meant to move - ourselves and others. But if you have never moved, you cannot move others. How good it is, then, that we all move.
But for some reason moving frightens us. I guess we attach ourselves to our familiar surroundings, routines and most of all fears. I do not think that we fully realise how much of what we do and do not do is determined through our fear. Then we abandon natural friendship with our dream and trusting naïvety for a constant, never alarming cohesion with fear, thus keeping our enemy too close.
The inconveniently (for us who have befriended fear) convenient (for those of us seeking freedom) reality of fear is that it is a very fragile thing. Actually, its not even "a thing". Well, actually fear is nothing. We just don't know it. If this were an American movie the old man guiding the main character would say, that "fear's only in your head."
The only thing keeping fear alive is us. It is, so to speak, a man-made construction. To make it worse, its a construction based on linear time. (I'm not really sure what I'm getting myself into here, but I've thought about it for a long time - might still be wrong, but if no one tells me, I'll probably never know.) If we didn't ascribe value to our past "hurts", we wouldn't fear their being repeated in the future. Which would leave us engaged only in our present.
If we were only engaged in our present, there would be nothing holding us back from: Love. Unity.
And finally I arrive at the thought which sparked this long mental exercise: Love is not an effort or will to unify. Love is to not dis-unite in the first place.
But for some reason moving frightens us. I guess we attach ourselves to our familiar surroundings, routines and most of all fears. I do not think that we fully realise how much of what we do and do not do is determined through our fear. Then we abandon natural friendship with our dream and trusting naïvety for a constant, never alarming cohesion with fear, thus keeping our enemy too close.
The inconveniently (for us who have befriended fear) convenient (for those of us seeking freedom) reality of fear is that it is a very fragile thing. Actually, its not even "a thing". Well, actually fear is nothing. We just don't know it. If this were an American movie the old man guiding the main character would say, that "fear's only in your head."
The only thing keeping fear alive is us. It is, so to speak, a man-made construction. To make it worse, its a construction based on linear time. (I'm not really sure what I'm getting myself into here, but I've thought about it for a long time - might still be wrong, but if no one tells me, I'll probably never know.) If we didn't ascribe value to our past "hurts", we wouldn't fear their being repeated in the future. Which would leave us engaged only in our present.
If we were only engaged in our present, there would be nothing holding us back from: Love. Unity.
And finally I arrive at the thought which sparked this long mental exercise: Love is not an effort or will to unify. Love is to not dis-unite in the first place.
02 February, 2009
Challenge
I haven't been challenged on my person, my character, for a long time. Tonight, though, is one of those challenges. And it isn't fun, growing. I stand between the choice of dwelling in the pain, turning my frustration onto that which is outside my control or dealing with my reaction, my frustration, inside myself.
In these situations I find it helpful to map out which areas within a relationship is my responsibility and which is not. The area within my sphere of control, my responsibility area, must be dealt with by myself, must be addressed by me. If I don't assume control of this area, it assumes control of me by turning into an area of bitterness, darkness. And so, when coming across this area, I will always feel pain (and eventually numbness) if I don't assume control of it.
The areas outside of my control are interesting as well, as they are the actions of others. This is essentially the same as the circumstances which I find myself in. I can't control these - only react to them! It is this reaction which is within my control and this I must control.
But its hard as it isn't solely a mental exercise ("don't think about pink elephants!") but a searching of the soul, not allowing the soul to dwell on the pain or in the darkness but continually bending my entire being, my entire perception of 'reality', towards Good - maintaining an intent focus on Beauty, Truth and Life. Letting myself be infuriated with my weakness and then letting go of Past and Future and letting myself exist now: I am the Ivan of the Present. Past is what I allow it to be, Future is never Present: I am Now. I am never Ivan the (past/future) Failure for I cannot cease to exist outside of this naked and time-independent Present.
In these situations I find it helpful to map out which areas within a relationship is my responsibility and which is not. The area within my sphere of control, my responsibility area, must be dealt with by myself, must be addressed by me. If I don't assume control of this area, it assumes control of me by turning into an area of bitterness, darkness. And so, when coming across this area, I will always feel pain (and eventually numbness) if I don't assume control of it.
The areas outside of my control are interesting as well, as they are the actions of others. This is essentially the same as the circumstances which I find myself in. I can't control these - only react to them! It is this reaction which is within my control and this I must control.
But its hard as it isn't solely a mental exercise ("don't think about pink elephants!") but a searching of the soul, not allowing the soul to dwell on the pain or in the darkness but continually bending my entire being, my entire perception of 'reality', towards Good - maintaining an intent focus on Beauty, Truth and Life. Letting myself be infuriated with my weakness and then letting go of Past and Future and letting myself exist now: I am the Ivan of the Present. Past is what I allow it to be, Future is never Present: I am Now. I am never Ivan the (past/future) Failure for I cannot cease to exist outside of this naked and time-independent Present.
09 December, 2008
Perspectives on Aid
When 16, my parents took our family to Indonesia to do aid-work. It was then I was first faced with the complexity of trying to help: what signals does it send? Does it imply to the receivers of aid that you (and the rest of the world) view them as powerless? -and that you (and the rest of the world) have all power to change them? How do you avoid the total dependency of the community, on however large a scale, on aid? What is the west's motivation? -is it guilt money? The problems continue to form a very, very long list.
Its been long since this has been on my mind, but through podcasting "Speaking of Faith" I listened to an interview with an African journalist, Binyavanga Wainaina, who is a recognized voice on this issue. In satirical style, he wrote an article as a tip-sheet for wester journalists on how to write about Africa. Here's an excerpt:
"Broad brushstrokes throughout are good. Avoid having the African characters laugh, or struggle to educate their kids, or just make do in mundane circumstances. Have them illuminate something about Europe or America in Africa.
Describe, in detail... dead bodies. Or, better, naked dead bodies. And especially rotting naked dead bodies. Remember, any work you submit in which people look filthy and miserable will be referred to as the ‘real Africa’, and you want that on your dust jacket. Do not feel queasy about this: you are trying to help them to get aid from the West.
Animals, on the other hand, must be treated as well rounded, complex characters. They speak (or grunt while tossing their manes proudly) and have names, ambitions and desires. They also have family values: see how lions teach their children? Elephants are caring, and are good feminists or dignified patriarchs. So are gorillas. Never, ever say anything negative about an elephant or a gorilla."
Read the full article here.
Listen to the one hour-long, in-depth interview from here.
Its been long since this has been on my mind, but through podcasting "Speaking of Faith" I listened to an interview with an African journalist, Binyavanga Wainaina, who is a recognized voice on this issue. In satirical style, he wrote an article as a tip-sheet for wester journalists on how to write about Africa. Here's an excerpt:
"Broad brushstrokes throughout are good. Avoid having the African characters laugh, or struggle to educate their kids, or just make do in mundane circumstances. Have them illuminate something about Europe or America in Africa.
Describe, in detail... dead bodies. Or, better, naked dead bodies. And especially rotting naked dead bodies. Remember, any work you submit in which people look filthy and miserable will be referred to as the ‘real Africa’, and you want that on your dust jacket. Do not feel queasy about this: you are trying to help them to get aid from the West.
Animals, on the other hand, must be treated as well rounded, complex characters. They speak (or grunt while tossing their manes proudly) and have names, ambitions and desires. They also have family values: see how lions teach their children? Elephants are caring, and are good feminists or dignified patriarchs. So are gorillas. Never, ever say anything negative about an elephant or a gorilla."
Read the full article here.
Listen to the one hour-long, in-depth interview from here.
06 November, 2008
Check this out
A friend of mine from theology (study) just started blogging - so if you're any good at Danish (and you need something to reflect upon) check it out at www.neutral0000.blogspot.com (trancendental name, yah?).
16 July, 2008
en france
I'm in France. Getting used to an English keyboard (only slightly different than a Danish but my own insufficiency never fails to frustrate me). More exactly I'm in Villefranche-sur-Mer just east of Nice (southwestern coast of France - the Riviera). Its absolutely stunning here. The old part of the city is breath taking, and seeing 'for sale' signs outside the most charming apartments is driving me mad. I want to move here, but my choice of studying theology (low pay) has pretty much killed those dreams. Actually it hasn't killed the dreams as much as the prospects.
The other night we went drinking. Got unusually drunk by the harbor with the owner, staff and friends of a bar we stumbled into that evening. I've never had a hang over like that one / spent one full day sleeping, drinking water and eating salts and sugars to try and re-hydrate. -unsuccessfully so, cos I had a headache until next (this) morning.
I'm here with my family except my older sister and her hubbie (she likes to call him that). My mom is absolutely taken with the riviera stretch. My dad, usually the great saver, is being unusually large about gas, living and holidaying expenses. I've gone on my usual spending spree (bought an expensive jacket in Monaco) and my younger sister (steph) is craving for shopping. My parents and her went to Nice yesterday, so she must've gotten it settled.
This place is beautiful. Full of good people (this is the foreigners' hangout) and I wanna get a job here. I should probably wait with such plans until I've got my bachelor (2 years) but I wanna do it now! -dang! Maybe I should come here for a summer. Dunno.. I had a good talk with the new owner (Chris - English fella) and I reckon I could land a job here. But no, better not think about it.
I should go now. Left my brother at a table. Plenty of pix coming up on my myspace profile in a week's time or so.
The other night we went drinking. Got unusually drunk by the harbor with the owner, staff and friends of a bar we stumbled into that evening. I've never had a hang over like that one / spent one full day sleeping, drinking water and eating salts and sugars to try and re-hydrate. -unsuccessfully so, cos I had a headache until next (this) morning.
I'm here with my family except my older sister and her hubbie (she likes to call him that). My mom is absolutely taken with the riviera stretch. My dad, usually the great saver, is being unusually large about gas, living and holidaying expenses. I've gone on my usual spending spree (bought an expensive jacket in Monaco) and my younger sister (steph) is craving for shopping. My parents and her went to Nice yesterday, so she must've gotten it settled.
This place is beautiful. Full of good people (this is the foreigners' hangout) and I wanna get a job here. I should probably wait with such plans until I've got my bachelor (2 years) but I wanna do it now! -dang! Maybe I should come here for a summer. Dunno.. I had a good talk with the new owner (Chris - English fella) and I reckon I could land a job here. But no, better not think about it.
I should go now. Left my brother at a table. Plenty of pix coming up on my myspace profile in a week's time or so.
12 December, 2007
review of blog-entries (procrastination)
Blogging's great for someone in their teens through to their twenties. -not that it isn't for older and younger too, but it definitely is for someone my age. I just re-read a heap of my old entries from '04 when I was in high school and its a great catalyst to get the memories going.
I was at an entirely different place then in all aspects of life: faith, relations, family. (no, not economically.. sigh) So kids out there: get a blog and start writing!
I've got exams coming up - hard ones too: oral greek, oral philosophy and an assignment in new testament. So naturally, I can't pull myself away from my computer here at home. Oh, to those who haven't found out, I've started putting my songs up on myspace! Please do comment 'cos its really hard to be objective about one's own songs. Link is:
www.myspace.com/ivansaaby
Okay okay, I'll go study now. Maybe breakfast first but then study! Tonight I'm hanging out with some of the guys from college who're great. One of them got married Saturday so we're going to his new place to hang out and watch Champions' League.
..this is just ramble, yes. I haven't written here for so long that I've lost the mojo. I'll start again now, tho.
I was at an entirely different place then in all aspects of life: faith, relations, family. (no, not economically.. sigh) So kids out there: get a blog and start writing!
I've got exams coming up - hard ones too: oral greek, oral philosophy and an assignment in new testament. So naturally, I can't pull myself away from my computer here at home. Oh, to those who haven't found out, I've started putting my songs up on myspace! Please do comment 'cos its really hard to be objective about one's own songs. Link is:
www.myspace.com/ivansaaby
Okay okay, I'll go study now. Maybe breakfast first but then study! Tonight I'm hanging out with some of the guys from college who're great. One of them got married Saturday so we're going to his new place to hang out and watch Champions' League.
..this is just ramble, yes. I haven't written here for so long that I've lost the mojo. I'll start again now, tho.
01 October, 2007
religious pluralism
I don't know what to make of religious pluralism. Really, I debate this often with myself and deliberatly shy away when the subject is raised by self-proclaimed non-religious people, who ask if I don't think 'we all are looking at different doors to the same room.'
But tonight I watched a show by an outstandingly sharp and witty, Danish journalist, Clemen Kjærsgaard, with Desmond Tutu, nobel peace-prize winner and archbishop (I think?) of South Africa. Initially I was alarmed when he employed the elephant-metaphor (blind men touching an elephant, one saying that an elephant is comparable to a snake because he is holding the tail, the other saying that the elephant is rather like a tree because he is touching a leg) and my inner alarmbells were screaming 'pluralism'.
I don't know if it is me or the emphasis of my childhood church, but I've grown up thinking in terms of right and wrong decisions, thoughts and yes, faiths, that Moslems don't have the right faith, Jews have some of the right faith but aren't redeemed because they are missing the new covenant (Jesus) and Buddhists don't even have a faith but some truth-wise inconsequential philosophy. It's 'us and them' and it's about getting 'them' onto 'our' side.
So here's Desmond Tutu blowing my socks off saying that God is more interested in people willingly going to hell than being forced into heaven! But I think he has a point when he says Truth in plural.
If God is good and good is God (which I do believe), then people are learning about God when they are learning good. Also with love. There is no religion who can contain all the Truth about God and so I should be able to accept the truths in Islam and Buddhism without it being subvertive to my faith about God revealed through Jesus. God is revealed in all things good.
This is pretty controversial to many and the implications of this thinking can be massive. So what's your take on this?
But tonight I watched a show by an outstandingly sharp and witty, Danish journalist, Clemen Kjærsgaard, with Desmond Tutu, nobel peace-prize winner and archbishop (I think?) of South Africa. Initially I was alarmed when he employed the elephant-metaphor (blind men touching an elephant, one saying that an elephant is comparable to a snake because he is holding the tail, the other saying that the elephant is rather like a tree because he is touching a leg) and my inner alarmbells were screaming 'pluralism'.
I don't know if it is me or the emphasis of my childhood church, but I've grown up thinking in terms of right and wrong decisions, thoughts and yes, faiths, that Moslems don't have the right faith, Jews have some of the right faith but aren't redeemed because they are missing the new covenant (Jesus) and Buddhists don't even have a faith but some truth-wise inconsequential philosophy. It's 'us and them' and it's about getting 'them' onto 'our' side.
So here's Desmond Tutu blowing my socks off saying that God is more interested in people willingly going to hell than being forced into heaven! But I think he has a point when he says Truth in plural.
If God is good and good is God (which I do believe), then people are learning about God when they are learning good. Also with love. There is no religion who can contain all the Truth about God and so I should be able to accept the truths in Islam and Buddhism without it being subvertive to my faith about God revealed through Jesus. God is revealed in all things good.
This is pretty controversial to many and the implications of this thinking can be massive. So what's your take on this?
29 August, 2007
recording sessions
I recorded my first song tonight. I'm in Copenhagen staying at a childhood friend of mine and some guys from his band, campsite, and one of them's got some recording equipment. It wasn't the best of my songs (due to technical problems) but then I can't complain. When its done (and I'm happy) I'll put it up on myspace - just to have something out. Please, if you can and feel like it, feedback on it. [smile]
We should get around to recording some other ones. I think I'm gonna start doing more about my music - just to try it out and see how far it'll go!
We should get around to recording some other ones. I think I'm gonna start doing more about my music - just to try it out and see how far it'll go!
24 July, 2007
haughty solution - another of life's great problems
When I started studying theology at the university many warned me that it was going to be a great challenge for my personal faith in God as the Creator and Lord of all, Jesus as the Son of God and the Messiah and the Holy Spirit as God's Spirit, relevant to us in the spiritual and physical world.
But I do not see that it should be a challenge. The entire university has as it's aim to be strictly scientific in it's approach and as such there is a basic difference between the "knowledge of God" ["theology"] and actually knowing God. In my world there should be a constant, underlying rule that seperates fact and faith, as 'faith' per definition is a non-factual sphere of life and science is per se void of faith as it builds on scepticism; faith and scepticisme being opposites.
With this in mind it does not give me sleepless nights when I learn that for example modern science is quite certain that the city of Jericho (that Joshua and the rest of Israel marched around for seven days whereupon the walls collapsed) had not existed even close to the time when the Israelites allegedly were coming out of the desert, that a vast part of the Old Testament was probably written or at least radically edited under the exile in Babylon in the 6th century BC or that evolution seems more probable than creation. Is this supposed to rock my faith in God? No, because my faith in God does not rest upon how factual the Old or New Testament is or any such thing, for this would not be 'faith' but rather pseudo-science.
I believe that the proof of the saving and transforming power of Christ, the still mercy and grace of God and the furious violence of the same is personal. It must be not just be experienced, but known in the core of our being and consciousness; an area where fact, probabilities and scientific method lose relevance, for this is where only we individually and God can go.
But I do not see that it should be a challenge. The entire university has as it's aim to be strictly scientific in it's approach and as such there is a basic difference between the "knowledge of God" ["theology"] and actually knowing God. In my world there should be a constant, underlying rule that seperates fact and faith, as 'faith' per definition is a non-factual sphere of life and science is per se void of faith as it builds on scepticism; faith and scepticisme being opposites.
With this in mind it does not give me sleepless nights when I learn that for example modern science is quite certain that the city of Jericho (that Joshua and the rest of Israel marched around for seven days whereupon the walls collapsed) had not existed even close to the time when the Israelites allegedly were coming out of the desert, that a vast part of the Old Testament was probably written or at least radically edited under the exile in Babylon in the 6th century BC or that evolution seems more probable than creation. Is this supposed to rock my faith in God? No, because my faith in God does not rest upon how factual the Old or New Testament is or any such thing, for this would not be 'faith' but rather pseudo-science.
I believe that the proof of the saving and transforming power of Christ, the still mercy and grace of God and the furious violence of the same is personal. It must be not just be experienced, but known in the core of our being and consciousness; an area where fact, probabilities and scientific method lose relevance, for this is where only we individually and God can go.
21 July, 2007
broken
I've spent my early youth trying to mend my brokenness or at least evade it, to abate sinful acts. Now I am spending my late youth coming to terms with it. In preparation for dedication, commitment - yes, love in all aspects of my life - in spite of my brokenness.
Writing those two sentences is hard for me, for it represents my abandoning of youthful optimism in favour of tired realization of my own fall, my own commonness.
"But I've seen your flag on the marble arch and love is not a victory march, its a cold and its a broken Hallelujah."
In this lieu, life consists of brokenness and distractions from it.
Speak to me of brokenness and speak to me of the Ressurection. For I see now, that victory will not come from myself; only through an external force making me whole, but I haven't yet come this far in the process.
Writing those two sentences is hard for me, for it represents my abandoning of youthful optimism in favour of tired realization of my own fall, my own commonness.
"But I've seen your flag on the marble arch and love is not a victory march, its a cold and its a broken Hallelujah."
In this lieu, life consists of brokenness and distractions from it.
Speak to me of brokenness and speak to me of the Ressurection. For I see now, that victory will not come from myself; only through an external force making me whole, but I haven't yet come this far in the process.
13 March, 2007
our responsibility
Contrary to logic about any absolute, I find that people calculate the possiblitiy of faith being possible and valid as a lifestyle on the evidence of people around them who impersonate faith. Problem is that they seem to think that faith should be impersonated by anyone who professes to believe. And so personal failures by the professing believers have not only consequence to themselves but to these calculating spectators who seek confirmation that a lifestyle of faith is not possible or plausible, seeking it to confirm themselves that their own egocentric lifestyles are indeed 'good'.
Confirms Matt 5:13: "You are the salt of the earth but if the salt loses it power.."
I don't like it. Don't like the responsiblity.
Confirms Matt 5:13: "You are the salt of the earth but if the salt loses it power.."
I don't like it. Don't like the responsiblity.
02 January, 2007
on this
Truth is not subjective. And with truth, ethics and moral. It follows that we must not blame any lack of truth and ethics on our part on our circumstances with the excuse that we are products of our influences. We must not reduce ourselves to fortuitious links in the chain of cause and effect, indulging in the emotional pleasure of self-justification; no matter the greatness of spirit this may require of us.
Rather we must find ourselves on our knees in humble awareness of the fallenness of mankind and with this, the fallenness of our collective and individual world.
I was young and something that was mine had been stolen by force and so I went to my dad, the protector of my cosmos, sobbing with fury and indignation and explained to him the violation to which I had fallen victim. It was and still is unfair when all he said was, "Ivan, you need to be broken." But years later it taught me a lesson, that unfairness is to be expected; that being adamant about my rights is not the Way.
So I must lay down my rights and instil my heart on love for my fellow people and hope for the continual victory of what still is Timeless and True Good.
For I am part of a story, a tale that was before me and that will be long after my passing. I must not look to the short-term but rather look to steer with all I can the world onto the course of this Timeless and True Good. Partly and simply, in honour and reverence of those who've gone before, in remembrance us who are now and in love for those yet to come.
Rather we must find ourselves on our knees in humble awareness of the fallenness of mankind and with this, the fallenness of our collective and individual world.
I was young and something that was mine had been stolen by force and so I went to my dad, the protector of my cosmos, sobbing with fury and indignation and explained to him the violation to which I had fallen victim. It was and still is unfair when all he said was, "Ivan, you need to be broken." But years later it taught me a lesson, that unfairness is to be expected; that being adamant about my rights is not the Way.
So I must lay down my rights and instil my heart on love for my fellow people and hope for the continual victory of what still is Timeless and True Good.
For I am part of a story, a tale that was before me and that will be long after my passing. I must not look to the short-term but rather look to steer with all I can the world onto the course of this Timeless and True Good. Partly and simply, in honour and reverence of those who've gone before, in remembrance us who are now and in love for those yet to come.
a thought of africa
Hearing the list of the names of the dead,
hearing without understanding
the number of the score of victims
robbed of their rightful peace
their freedom
must in no way diminish
our love for each and every
of their beautiful souls.
Neither must we let
our own souls be killed.
Must we not spend our freedom
that they may have theirs.
hearing without understanding
the number of the score of victims
robbed of their rightful peace
their freedom
must in no way diminish
our love for each and every
of their beautiful souls.
Neither must we let
our own souls be killed.
Must we not spend our freedom
that they may have theirs.
16 November, 2006
fiction
Thank you, Mark Stewart and ecthros for your encouraging words in the comments to my previous entry of self-annihilation.. In afterthought, I do guess one learns one's entire life (at least that's what I hear..) and this justifies opinion-making even at my early stage of learning.
Also, I realise that I probably cannot do without writing here as this space gives me opportunity to formulate thoughts that would otherwise just be absurd fragments in my mind when never forced into a (more or less) systematic exposition.
Another effect of formulating thoughts (especially when dealing with frustrations) is that I force myself to rationally face the facts of the reasons for my emotional outbursts. Its in this situation I often realise that I am not entirely justified in feeling as strongly as I do. Even though I try to advocate the idea of importance of validating the reasons that bring about strong feelings even though seemingly trivial as opposed to an overly 'humble' attitude of always thinking oneself is in the wrong and not wanting or daring to trouble others with one's own "probably insignificant" feelings.
Sooo, after having justified my online existence.. I had a small realisation and although its imbecile, really, I'll write it.
I used to read quite alot until the end of high school / college (pre-uni...) where I got so fed up with books. I've started reading some again (fiction, I mean) and I find myself getting so 'into' the story that I relate to and compare myself with the characters in which case I always find myself lacking their quick wit and ability to say all the significant things in everyday phrases. I've been thinking like this alot and found that I've had a tendency to 'choose' my friends accordingly - those who understand that 'layer of subtleties' are the ones I usually get along with (among other things as well, of course).
Until it struck me recently how moronic this way of thinking is that only causes me to regard 99.9% of the people around me negatively. Why isolate myself?! I simply realised that the author of the books (ie. the creator of the characters) had probably spent a long time formulating those lines compared to how long I have to mull over everything I say before I say it. Its like only ever reading poetry and therefore isolating oneself to only relating properly to people who can formulate themselves like Robert Frost in an sms while driving their car!
So now I'm having to re-learn some basic principles when relating to... people.
Also, I realise that I probably cannot do without writing here as this space gives me opportunity to formulate thoughts that would otherwise just be absurd fragments in my mind when never forced into a (more or less) systematic exposition.
Another effect of formulating thoughts (especially when dealing with frustrations) is that I force myself to rationally face the facts of the reasons for my emotional outbursts. Its in this situation I often realise that I am not entirely justified in feeling as strongly as I do. Even though I try to advocate the idea of importance of validating the reasons that bring about strong feelings even though seemingly trivial as opposed to an overly 'humble' attitude of always thinking oneself is in the wrong and not wanting or daring to trouble others with one's own "probably insignificant" feelings.
Sooo, after having justified my online existence.. I had a small realisation and although its imbecile, really, I'll write it.
I used to read quite alot until the end of high school / college (pre-uni...) where I got so fed up with books. I've started reading some again (fiction, I mean) and I find myself getting so 'into' the story that I relate to and compare myself with the characters in which case I always find myself lacking their quick wit and ability to say all the significant things in everyday phrases. I've been thinking like this alot and found that I've had a tendency to 'choose' my friends accordingly - those who understand that 'layer of subtleties' are the ones I usually get along with (among other things as well, of course).
Until it struck me recently how moronic this way of thinking is that only causes me to regard 99.9% of the people around me negatively. Why isolate myself?! I simply realised that the author of the books (ie. the creator of the characters) had probably spent a long time formulating those lines compared to how long I have to mull over everything I say before I say it. Its like only ever reading poetry and therefore isolating oneself to only relating properly to people who can formulate themselves like Robert Frost in an sms while driving their car!
So now I'm having to re-learn some basic principles when relating to... people.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
