Another year has passed us by. While 2009 felt like something that needed to be weathered, 2010 felt like the first chapter of a new book. Sure that can be said about any moment in time, but this past year seemed to mark the beginning of significant things to come.
For me the year started off both good and bad. The end of 2009 had shown me the signs that things needed to change otherwise I would be stuck in place. Like many changes, this came with a lot of pain, but in the end it was necessary to make some forward progress. So by the time the first of the year actually hit I had already been given all the information I needed to start something new. So on the first day of 2010 I both physically and emotionally ended a decade long relationship so that I could be free. This was the key to everything else. Mentally accepting the fact that I no longer needed to concern myself with someone else I could make the leap towards something new, and hopefully better. Thankfully I had a lot of support along the way.
Much like 2009, this year felt like more things were happening around me than actually to me. It feels like that, but quite a lot happened. To start it off I moved away from a place that felt more and more hostile to me. I returned back to a place where people actually seemed to be interested in me. I left a job that was intent on grinding up its employees until there was nothing left. It took most of the year to find a job to replace it and when I did, I found not just one, but a second that was even better than the first. This year also marked the end of apparent free fall through societal responsibilities. That is both good and bad. I now have expenses again, but have the means to pay them. I have to pay taxes for the first time in three years, but that means I've made enough money that the government wants their cut. There are times when it feels like I took a three year vacation from my own life and have finally come back home. Right now I'm in the process of dusting off everything and getting back into the routine of things. As I've mentioned with vacations though, they often point out the things that we'd like to escape from or possibly run towards.
Like any year there is a lot that happens over the course of 365 days. My family experienced some drastic changes. Some would say they were a long time coming, but they were no less unexpected or drastic, even if we saw them from a ways away. Lessons were learned about the consequences of our actions. They always seem to blindside us when we're getting comfortable. While in the moment it can feel larger than it is, but eventually, like everything else in our lives, it too will be another moment that fades into the past and shapes our future. My brother had such a moment and is still feeling the effects to this day. While I wish he could have avoided the method in which the lesson was given, I hope that he takes the good from it all because without that single event there is no saying how the year would have ended for him. As it is now, from that moment he can change the course he was on and move towards something better. Both of my parents are now faced with going through the world in a different way. They say that we only really appreciate the adventures after we've gone through them. While we're on them they may not seem like much fun at all. In some cases an adventure may just seem like a trial we have to endure. That may in fact be true. I think though that both my parents are ready to start their lives in ways they may have not expected or even wanted. 2010 was only the starting gun. The actual adventure is still to come. They, like the rest of us, just have to be willing to go on it.
New friends were made. Old ones went away. With technology being what it is the ability for all of us to connect or reconnect with those people from our past. Many of the people around me had to redefine themselves. Jobs were gained and lost. The limitations of the human body were discovered at the worst possible times. The gift of new life was given to both parents and those who wished more than anything to become parents. As with any year there was death. People close to us and people we know of in name only. This year didn't feel like it was a rampage to claim as much as possible before it closed. I'm sure to those who lost loved ones that point could be argued, but this year didn't seem as vindictive as the one that came before it.
2009 was the year that needed to be survived. 2010 felt like the year of freedom, both wanted and unexpected. Even if that freedom came from a seemingly terrible event. It marked the beginning. Like I said at first, 2010 felt like the start of something. Maybe that's true for every year or even every day. Looking back it seems like this last year was just a preamble for what comes next.
Friday, December 31, 2010
Wednesday, December 29, 2010
On Purpose
There was a show once that had an episode where everyone in the world not only believed in past lives, but remembered them as well as they remembered yesterday. The main character of the story was the only person who didn't know his own history. In the end he helps people forget their past lives so they could move forward with their current one. I had a similar story idea where instead of past lives, people knew exactly what they're true calling was. This might seem like a good thing because there are many people out there who feel lost. They don't know what they're supposed to be doing and a little bit of guidance would go a long way. The problem with knowing though is that maybe your true calling wasn't something awesome. Maybe it was something you were meant to do, but at the same time it felt wrong because it wasn't something you or those around you hoped for. Instead of being a great musician, you are a seamstress. Much like the show about past lives, the main character would help people forget their calling and just experience life as it came to them. That meant there was a chance at going through life without always having a clear sense of direction. A past life or a true calling, they both could be viewed as a sort of destiny. Destiny can imply there is a lack of free will because it's meant to happen regardless of what we do to prevent or enable it.
A true calling is an interesting idea though. It would mean that each of us has a purpose in this world. Only a few get to figure out what that purpose is though. And it's hard to say if we ever really know our true purpose in this world. Is it really our calling or just the one that we've created for ourselves? Maybe it comes down to belief. If we believe that we're living up to our real purpose then maybe that's all that matters. We've all heard stories about someone who was great at something who at one point could have made a different choice. The writer who could have stayed as a carpenter and may have been entirely happy with that choice, but wouldn't have gone on to write the great American novel. I suppose it brings up the question of by which standard is someone's true calling really judged? To the outside world it may seem like the author has found what he was meant to do. To the author's family it could seem like a frivolous way to make a living. To the author himself there could be the longing question of 'what if' that sticks with him, regardless of how successful he has become. Just because we're good at something doesn't mean that's what we're supposed to do with our lives. Sometimes our talent towards something is just that. I don't believe that people are singular in their abilities. We're all multifaceted. Sometimes in ways that even we don't understand.
It also got me wondering about what other people know. When you meet someone for the first time you may not know what they know. In fact in most cases you can only have a partial understanding of everything they have experienced. The person you passed on the street could be a geneticist or a computer programmer working on artificial intelligence or a mind blowing artist. On the surface they may be very similar to you or me. They watch television or laugh at funny pictures of cats, but they have a deeper understanding of something you may never fully comprehend. Thing is that in a lot of cases the same could be said about you by someone else. We tend to take for granted the knowledge we've acquired. The lifetime of experience we've gathered up serves as reference for everything we will do. The question is though, does that knowledge always serve to lead you towards your true calling, if there is such a thing?
Are we put here for a reason or are we just the eventuality of cosmic chance? Given the size of the universe and its age, it's hard to really comprehend how all the complex things must be in a specific order for each of us to be born. Life as we know it could be considered a miracle since for as far as we can see out into the abyss, there is only us. That's not to say there aren't others like us out there, we just haven't been able to find them. Could be that somewhere out there is another miracle. So if our life is by some sort of design that would mean we each have a purpose in this world. If that's true then how come only a few of us ever really figure out what our calling is? Could it be that our purpose is to search our entire lives for it and not find it, so that those who do find their purpose have it mean that much more to them? Seems like a really inefficient ratio of undefined purposes in the world. This gives more strength to the argument that maybe there is no grand design to the universe. That everything and all people are guided by nothing but chaos. Those that do find their true calling are more fortunate than they can imagine because they are the exception. Maybe there is no such thing as a true purpose, only the purpose that we create for ourselves and those around us. Maybe we define our own route through the universe, regardless of if there was ever a plan for us or if it's all just a collection of random events colliding with each other.
A true calling is an interesting idea though. It would mean that each of us has a purpose in this world. Only a few get to figure out what that purpose is though. And it's hard to say if we ever really know our true purpose in this world. Is it really our calling or just the one that we've created for ourselves? Maybe it comes down to belief. If we believe that we're living up to our real purpose then maybe that's all that matters. We've all heard stories about someone who was great at something who at one point could have made a different choice. The writer who could have stayed as a carpenter and may have been entirely happy with that choice, but wouldn't have gone on to write the great American novel. I suppose it brings up the question of by which standard is someone's true calling really judged? To the outside world it may seem like the author has found what he was meant to do. To the author's family it could seem like a frivolous way to make a living. To the author himself there could be the longing question of 'what if' that sticks with him, regardless of how successful he has become. Just because we're good at something doesn't mean that's what we're supposed to do with our lives. Sometimes our talent towards something is just that. I don't believe that people are singular in their abilities. We're all multifaceted. Sometimes in ways that even we don't understand.
It also got me wondering about what other people know. When you meet someone for the first time you may not know what they know. In fact in most cases you can only have a partial understanding of everything they have experienced. The person you passed on the street could be a geneticist or a computer programmer working on artificial intelligence or a mind blowing artist. On the surface they may be very similar to you or me. They watch television or laugh at funny pictures of cats, but they have a deeper understanding of something you may never fully comprehend. Thing is that in a lot of cases the same could be said about you by someone else. We tend to take for granted the knowledge we've acquired. The lifetime of experience we've gathered up serves as reference for everything we will do. The question is though, does that knowledge always serve to lead you towards your true calling, if there is such a thing?
Are we put here for a reason or are we just the eventuality of cosmic chance? Given the size of the universe and its age, it's hard to really comprehend how all the complex things must be in a specific order for each of us to be born. Life as we know it could be considered a miracle since for as far as we can see out into the abyss, there is only us. That's not to say there aren't others like us out there, we just haven't been able to find them. Could be that somewhere out there is another miracle. So if our life is by some sort of design that would mean we each have a purpose in this world. If that's true then how come only a few of us ever really figure out what our calling is? Could it be that our purpose is to search our entire lives for it and not find it, so that those who do find their purpose have it mean that much more to them? Seems like a really inefficient ratio of undefined purposes in the world. This gives more strength to the argument that maybe there is no grand design to the universe. That everything and all people are guided by nothing but chaos. Those that do find their true calling are more fortunate than they can imagine because they are the exception. Maybe there is no such thing as a true purpose, only the purpose that we create for ourselves and those around us. Maybe we define our own route through the universe, regardless of if there was ever a plan for us or if it's all just a collection of random events colliding with each other.
Sunday, December 26, 2010
On Under the Sun
It's been said that "This has all happened before, and it will happen again." That can be kind of a strange concept for some people because we'd like to believe that our lives are distinct and what we're doing isn't something that's been done before. The thing is though it's entirely possible that there is nothing new under the sun. If you think about it everything we do now is influenced by what we've done before. I'm not just talking about a single person, but the whole of humanity. It's next to impossible to escape the influence of not only our world's history, but our genetic history as well. If that's the case then could it be there are no more truly unique ideas left to be had?
Now don't get me wrong, I'm sure for the person who is out there right now dreaming up things the world has never seen before it must seem like no one else has had the same thought. There are close to seven billion people on the planet and each of us has a entirely exclusive view on the world. So while each of us experiences the world slightly differently than the person next to us, the law of large numbers implies that there is a small chance that somewhere out there someone may be thinking exactly what you're thinking right now. Granted that person may have already thought of it long before you were born or they could be a baby at this moment and will grow up to eventually have the same exact thought that's going through your mind at this moment. If that's possible for one person and a single thought, then wouldn't that mean every thought or idea can also fall under the same concept? Is everything we do, say, or think just a derivative of what's already happened before?
Do you remember the first time you fell in love? Maybe you had heard about it before or even seen it with people around you, but it wasn't until you experienced for yourself did the notion really take hold. Depending on your age it could have felt like not only were you experiencing it for the first time, but no one else in the history of the world felt what you were feeling at the time. The thing is though, people were falling in and out of love for thousands of years before you caught up to it. At the time it was the first moment you ever felt anything like it and for some of us every relationship is just a variation on that initial feeling. Even our idea of love is guided by how we felt the first time. If that's the case then can love be a new feeling or just a recap of our first experience?
There is an old myth about a patent office commissioner, who on the eve of 1899 becoming 1900 said that everything that could be invented had already been invented. That there was nothing left to discover or create. Humanity had reached its apex. It's an old story told usually to prove that no matter how far we think we've come, there is still more to discover. I don't disagree that a hundred years from now people will see and experience things we couldn't even dream of. The people a century from now may look at those wonders and take them for granted, in very much the same way we regard email or traveling thousands of miles in a matter of hours. Those things are commonplace to us now, but there was a time when they were only dreams. Still an email is just a message from one to another. The means of delivery have changed, but not much else. Those boys were the first to have controlled and powered flight and flew over a hundred feet. Within ten years airplanes were delivering packages. Within twenty years there were commercial flights for those willing to pay. The Wright Brothers are given the credit for being the first and many took their ideas and went to the next step. Still the Wright Brothers weren't the first to conceive of the idea of human flight. That had been dreamed up long before they got around to their tests.
There is an idea about the universe known as eternal return. The general idea is that the universe is made up of a finite amount of matter. The matter has a limit, but time itself is unlimited. From this the universe has no starting or ending state, because the matter that makes up the universe is constantly changing its state. Since the number of possible changes is also finite, eventually the same state will recur. This really all means that time is not linear, but it's more cyclical. All that is a complex way of saying that the universe is in a constant state of recurrence. What has happened will happen again given enough time. The whole thing can call into question the idea of free will. If everything has already happened or been done before by someone else under similar circumstances then are our choices really our own or just a matter of eventuality? Then again maybe it doesn't matter if it's all been done before and will all be done again afterwards. For us, at this moment now, it's new and unique. Maybe that's the only thing that matters.
Now don't get me wrong, I'm sure for the person who is out there right now dreaming up things the world has never seen before it must seem like no one else has had the same thought. There are close to seven billion people on the planet and each of us has a entirely exclusive view on the world. So while each of us experiences the world slightly differently than the person next to us, the law of large numbers implies that there is a small chance that somewhere out there someone may be thinking exactly what you're thinking right now. Granted that person may have already thought of it long before you were born or they could be a baby at this moment and will grow up to eventually have the same exact thought that's going through your mind at this moment. If that's possible for one person and a single thought, then wouldn't that mean every thought or idea can also fall under the same concept? Is everything we do, say, or think just a derivative of what's already happened before?
Do you remember the first time you fell in love? Maybe you had heard about it before or even seen it with people around you, but it wasn't until you experienced for yourself did the notion really take hold. Depending on your age it could have felt like not only were you experiencing it for the first time, but no one else in the history of the world felt what you were feeling at the time. The thing is though, people were falling in and out of love for thousands of years before you caught up to it. At the time it was the first moment you ever felt anything like it and for some of us every relationship is just a variation on that initial feeling. Even our idea of love is guided by how we felt the first time. If that's the case then can love be a new feeling or just a recap of our first experience?
There is an old myth about a patent office commissioner, who on the eve of 1899 becoming 1900 said that everything that could be invented had already been invented. That there was nothing left to discover or create. Humanity had reached its apex. It's an old story told usually to prove that no matter how far we think we've come, there is still more to discover. I don't disagree that a hundred years from now people will see and experience things we couldn't even dream of. The people a century from now may look at those wonders and take them for granted, in very much the same way we regard email or traveling thousands of miles in a matter of hours. Those things are commonplace to us now, but there was a time when they were only dreams. Still an email is just a message from one to another. The means of delivery have changed, but not much else. Those boys were the first to have controlled and powered flight and flew over a hundred feet. Within ten years airplanes were delivering packages. Within twenty years there were commercial flights for those willing to pay. The Wright Brothers are given the credit for being the first and many took their ideas and went to the next step. Still the Wright Brothers weren't the first to conceive of the idea of human flight. That had been dreamed up long before they got around to their tests.
There is an idea about the universe known as eternal return. The general idea is that the universe is made up of a finite amount of matter. The matter has a limit, but time itself is unlimited. From this the universe has no starting or ending state, because the matter that makes up the universe is constantly changing its state. Since the number of possible changes is also finite, eventually the same state will recur. This really all means that time is not linear, but it's more cyclical. All that is a complex way of saying that the universe is in a constant state of recurrence. What has happened will happen again given enough time. The whole thing can call into question the idea of free will. If everything has already happened or been done before by someone else under similar circumstances then are our choices really our own or just a matter of eventuality? Then again maybe it doesn't matter if it's all been done before and will all be done again afterwards. For us, at this moment now, it's new and unique. Maybe that's the only thing that matters.
Saturday, December 25, 2010
On Christmas
As a kid Christmas was my favorite time of year. Looking back it was more about how the world around me was transformed into this magical world where everything twinkled with colorful lights than it was about the presents. Don't get me wrong though, I loved presents. Even to this day seeing a wrapped gift brings me back to those Christmas mornings, even if it's only for a moment. As I've gotten older and spent more and more time away from family some of that feeling has faded. I wouldn't go so far as to say that I've lost my spirit of Christmas. That's the kind of thing that happens in holiday movies where the spunky kid or animatronic reindeer reveals the true meaning of Christmas and we get that little glow in our chest from how sappy it all is.
Going back to when I was a kid. School let us out about a week or so before Christmas so we could be with our family. I think really though it was just that teachers didn't want to try and control a few hundred children heaped up eggnog and candy canes that at any moment could go berserk waiting for the chance to tear into their presents. It was during this week that everything came together though. Grandma would send her annual package of delicious cookies. I remember my father and I standing in the kitchen with the box freshly opened and we were stuffing our faces with all those amazing treats. My mother and I also had our own tradition of going out and looking for new decorations. Every year I was tasked with finding at least one new decoration for the tree. As I've mentioned before, as a kid I had a really hard time with making a decision when presented with so many options. Still that was part of the fun, just looking at all the new decorations and finding the ones that needed to come home with us and fill our tree.
Speaking of tree, we had a fake tree, which in my opinion is better than a real tree. As far as I know we never had a real tree. This fake tree was one that you can to assemble. So every year before Christmas there was an expedition down to the crawl space where all the holiday decorations spent their time when it was December. The tree was in a huge cardboard box that was overflowing with branches and pieces. Right now I can remember exactly how it felt to push that box towards the opening of the crawlspace. The branches were attached to base of the tree with twisted metal rods. Those rods had an uncanny way of poking themselves against unprotected parts of the body. Still even with all the pain and work that it took to bring the tree up, I knew that it meant Christmas was really here. That was the official start of Christmas in our house. These days Christmas decorations are on sale before Halloween. I'm all for preparation and understand the need for businesses to make money on the holiday seasons, but it's ok to enjoy the moment without immediately moving onto the next thing before the afterglow has faded.
Christmas time is also a special time of year where parents get to torture their children by letting them know that gifts are in the house, but cannot be opened until almost the end of the month. As a kid I never really thought about the semantics of buying, wrapping, and hiding presents from a child who was like the Terminator when it came to finding out what he was getting. Presents would arrive from relatives and go under the tree. This would be when my inner detective would kick in and I would try to determine what could be inside based on size, weight, and sound it made when shook. I was a little CSI when it came to wrapped presents.
It used to be that the only day I would wake up early was on Saturdays. Back then they had cartoons on early in the morning. Starting at 5AM the Smurfs would come on and for a few hours there was nothing but cartoons on. Since we only had about three channels, it was kind of a big deal and a very good reason to skip sleeping in on the weekend. Christmas morning was very much the same way. Trying to go to sleep on Christmas eve was an exercise in futility. Eventually I would pass out from sheer exhaustion, but my eyes would pop back open sometime in the middle of the night. Well I should say morning. I remember many times being awake and starting at the clock that said 3:37AM. I would be forced to wait until the reasonable time of 6AM before I could roust my parents out of bed. Now this didn't stop me from "quietly" creeping into the living room to see what Santa had brought. After a few years of me being unable to contain myself and waking my parents early it was decided that not only would we have a set wake up time, but I was in charge of making breakfast for the family. This would give me something to do for the two extra hours I was awake. I got really good and working out the timing so that food was on the verge of being done just moments before I had to go wake everyone up. I still think my parents were milking it though by insisting on slowly drinking their coffee or getting the paper. Finally after the mandatory pictures were taken, we were allowed to ravage our presents and get on with the day.
It's been at least ten years since I spent Christmas with my family like that. Had I known that would be the last one like that I would have put more effort into remembering the finer details of it all. As it is I couldn't really tell you what I've done for Christmas for the last decade. Some years it was treated like any other day. There were occasional times when I spent time with friends exchanging gifts the night before. While some years were better than others, it was hard to live up to the memory of Christmas past. Still now that I've gotten older it just means I've started thinking about what future Christmases will be like. I'd like to believe the best is still to come even if the ones behind me were great.
Going back to when I was a kid. School let us out about a week or so before Christmas so we could be with our family. I think really though it was just that teachers didn't want to try and control a few hundred children heaped up eggnog and candy canes that at any moment could go berserk waiting for the chance to tear into their presents. It was during this week that everything came together though. Grandma would send her annual package of delicious cookies. I remember my father and I standing in the kitchen with the box freshly opened and we were stuffing our faces with all those amazing treats. My mother and I also had our own tradition of going out and looking for new decorations. Every year I was tasked with finding at least one new decoration for the tree. As I've mentioned before, as a kid I had a really hard time with making a decision when presented with so many options. Still that was part of the fun, just looking at all the new decorations and finding the ones that needed to come home with us and fill our tree.
Speaking of tree, we had a fake tree, which in my opinion is better than a real tree. As far as I know we never had a real tree. This fake tree was one that you can to assemble. So every year before Christmas there was an expedition down to the crawl space where all the holiday decorations spent their time when it was December. The tree was in a huge cardboard box that was overflowing with branches and pieces. Right now I can remember exactly how it felt to push that box towards the opening of the crawlspace. The branches were attached to base of the tree with twisted metal rods. Those rods had an uncanny way of poking themselves against unprotected parts of the body. Still even with all the pain and work that it took to bring the tree up, I knew that it meant Christmas was really here. That was the official start of Christmas in our house. These days Christmas decorations are on sale before Halloween. I'm all for preparation and understand the need for businesses to make money on the holiday seasons, but it's ok to enjoy the moment without immediately moving onto the next thing before the afterglow has faded.
Christmas time is also a special time of year where parents get to torture their children by letting them know that gifts are in the house, but cannot be opened until almost the end of the month. As a kid I never really thought about the semantics of buying, wrapping, and hiding presents from a child who was like the Terminator when it came to finding out what he was getting. Presents would arrive from relatives and go under the tree. This would be when my inner detective would kick in and I would try to determine what could be inside based on size, weight, and sound it made when shook. I was a little CSI when it came to wrapped presents.
It used to be that the only day I would wake up early was on Saturdays. Back then they had cartoons on early in the morning. Starting at 5AM the Smurfs would come on and for a few hours there was nothing but cartoons on. Since we only had about three channels, it was kind of a big deal and a very good reason to skip sleeping in on the weekend. Christmas morning was very much the same way. Trying to go to sleep on Christmas eve was an exercise in futility. Eventually I would pass out from sheer exhaustion, but my eyes would pop back open sometime in the middle of the night. Well I should say morning. I remember many times being awake and starting at the clock that said 3:37AM. I would be forced to wait until the reasonable time of 6AM before I could roust my parents out of bed. Now this didn't stop me from "quietly" creeping into the living room to see what Santa had brought. After a few years of me being unable to contain myself and waking my parents early it was decided that not only would we have a set wake up time, but I was in charge of making breakfast for the family. This would give me something to do for the two extra hours I was awake. I got really good and working out the timing so that food was on the verge of being done just moments before I had to go wake everyone up. I still think my parents were milking it though by insisting on slowly drinking their coffee or getting the paper. Finally after the mandatory pictures were taken, we were allowed to ravage our presents and get on with the day.
It's been at least ten years since I spent Christmas with my family like that. Had I known that would be the last one like that I would have put more effort into remembering the finer details of it all. As it is I couldn't really tell you what I've done for Christmas for the last decade. Some years it was treated like any other day. There were occasional times when I spent time with friends exchanging gifts the night before. While some years were better than others, it was hard to live up to the memory of Christmas past. Still now that I've gotten older it just means I've started thinking about what future Christmases will be like. I'd like to believe the best is still to come even if the ones behind me were great.
Thursday, December 16, 2010
On Back in the Box
Have you ever opened your mouth and said something only to immediately regret it? It seems to be something that we're almost compelled to do, even if we know that the outcome isn't going to be good. In the heat of an argument our rational mind may take a back seat to our emotions and unchecked aggression may come pouring out of our mouth before we have a chance to hold it back. Now granted it may not even be when emotions are high, there are just times when something seems ok to say and it's only when it's out there in the world that we realize how wrong we were. It's at those moments that we wish we could rewind and put those words back into our mouths. We see the mistake after the fact and by then the damage is done. It makes me wonder though how this same type of thing can happen on a much larger scale, far beyond just simple words.
When the first atomic bomb was detonated, Oppenheimer quoted the Hindu Bible by saying "Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds." He knew at that point what he had helped create was more terrible than could be imagined. He knew this and yet it didn't change anything. Atomic technology was now out in the world and couldn't be taken back. Often that's how it is with things. Once they are fully realized, it's too late to take them back. Now I'm no scientist or doctor so maybe it's different for them when they get caught up in the excitement of discovery and experimentation. Still you have some of the smartest people in history running headlong towards something, not noticing the fact that what they're creating may be one of the most devastating things ever conceived by man. Then again, maybe they don't care or they simply believe that humankind will overcome its short sightedness. Granted the creation of the atomic bomb was a direct result of the anticipation that the German or Japanese were also potentially creating a super weapon that would help them win the war. It's hard to say if when the neutron was discovered that anyone could have guessed where it would lead.
I imagine that for some things it's just a natural progression from one to the next. The neutron was discovered. Then uranium bombarded with neutrons after that. Using neutrons to split the nucleus of an atom followed that. After that the ideas kept coming, tumbling over the top of each other and building momentum. As we've all learned, it's not always a single event that can change things drastically. It's the culmination of events leading up to it that creates an overwhelming surge of change. So when we're in that argument with someone it's the build up that's more important than the actual trigger. The trigger only ignites what was already there.
When I was in high school I had a chemistry teacher who told us that we stopped going to the moon because we had lost the technology to do so. All those German scientists that had come over after the war were either dead or retired. With them gone, the technology they created was gone too. It was a strange concept to accept because it's not like forgetting to bring your notes to a math test, this was NASA and you would have to imagine that someone somewhere wrote down the necessary information to recreate what was done before. The explanation given to this argument could be that someone like Einstein could hand you his notes on the theory of relativity, but most people wouldn't have any comprehension on what to do with it. Sure you may be able to follow the formulas that were already spelled out. That wouldn't necessarily prepare you for making the next leap in logic, using what was written down to move to the next idea. So while NASA had the means to create the lunar lander and a rocket that could propel it out of our atmosphere, did they have the ability to create what was next? I think they did. That's where the space shuttle came from. Most likely we stopped going to the moon because it was cost prohibitive and at the time we felt we learned all we could from physically being there. Plus the world now knew that we had the technology to leave our own planet. I guess the question is why after over forty years hasn't anyone gone back or made a real effort to leave the planet? Back in the 60s the technology didn't exist and had to be created. Now nearly anyone can find out what was done back then on the internet or a museum. So how come no one has taken the next step? Do we lack the drive or the ability?
The whole thing brings up the idea that maybe it is possible for us to lose the technology. It's just assumed that once an idea is out in the world then it can never be lost. The Antikythera mechanism is thought to be 1500 years ahead of its time. Does that mean it was created and those who used it or created it never shared the technology with anyone else due to some strange circumstances? History is full of incidents of leaps forward and setbacks. Our own world is very precarious and it wouldn't take much to disrupt what we take for granted. How many of us know how a CD really works or if forced to, could recreate the technology to produce them again? The same with computers. You may have put together a computer from parts already made, but most people who use computers on a regular basis couldn't tell you how to build a computer from scratch. So in that regard it's entirely possible that technology could be lost or at least seriously setback. It also makes me think about how specialized the world has become. Sure with enough training just about anyone could do my job. I could probably go be a farmer if needed. We all have the potential to do nearly anything, but we've settled into our roles among society almost without a second thought. Food will be at the market. The phone lines will work when we pick up the ringer. Government will continue to maintain the status quo. Even if there was a serious disruption to what we know, it would take a long time for us to forget what we could do. In that regard could anything ever really be put back in the box?
When the first atomic bomb was detonated, Oppenheimer quoted the Hindu Bible by saying "Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds." He knew at that point what he had helped create was more terrible than could be imagined. He knew this and yet it didn't change anything. Atomic technology was now out in the world and couldn't be taken back. Often that's how it is with things. Once they are fully realized, it's too late to take them back. Now I'm no scientist or doctor so maybe it's different for them when they get caught up in the excitement of discovery and experimentation. Still you have some of the smartest people in history running headlong towards something, not noticing the fact that what they're creating may be one of the most devastating things ever conceived by man. Then again, maybe they don't care or they simply believe that humankind will overcome its short sightedness. Granted the creation of the atomic bomb was a direct result of the anticipation that the German or Japanese were also potentially creating a super weapon that would help them win the war. It's hard to say if when the neutron was discovered that anyone could have guessed where it would lead.
I imagine that for some things it's just a natural progression from one to the next. The neutron was discovered. Then uranium bombarded with neutrons after that. Using neutrons to split the nucleus of an atom followed that. After that the ideas kept coming, tumbling over the top of each other and building momentum. As we've all learned, it's not always a single event that can change things drastically. It's the culmination of events leading up to it that creates an overwhelming surge of change. So when we're in that argument with someone it's the build up that's more important than the actual trigger. The trigger only ignites what was already there.
When I was in high school I had a chemistry teacher who told us that we stopped going to the moon because we had lost the technology to do so. All those German scientists that had come over after the war were either dead or retired. With them gone, the technology they created was gone too. It was a strange concept to accept because it's not like forgetting to bring your notes to a math test, this was NASA and you would have to imagine that someone somewhere wrote down the necessary information to recreate what was done before. The explanation given to this argument could be that someone like Einstein could hand you his notes on the theory of relativity, but most people wouldn't have any comprehension on what to do with it. Sure you may be able to follow the formulas that were already spelled out. That wouldn't necessarily prepare you for making the next leap in logic, using what was written down to move to the next idea. So while NASA had the means to create the lunar lander and a rocket that could propel it out of our atmosphere, did they have the ability to create what was next? I think they did. That's where the space shuttle came from. Most likely we stopped going to the moon because it was cost prohibitive and at the time we felt we learned all we could from physically being there. Plus the world now knew that we had the technology to leave our own planet. I guess the question is why after over forty years hasn't anyone gone back or made a real effort to leave the planet? Back in the 60s the technology didn't exist and had to be created. Now nearly anyone can find out what was done back then on the internet or a museum. So how come no one has taken the next step? Do we lack the drive or the ability?
The whole thing brings up the idea that maybe it is possible for us to lose the technology. It's just assumed that once an idea is out in the world then it can never be lost. The Antikythera mechanism is thought to be 1500 years ahead of its time. Does that mean it was created and those who used it or created it never shared the technology with anyone else due to some strange circumstances? History is full of incidents of leaps forward and setbacks. Our own world is very precarious and it wouldn't take much to disrupt what we take for granted. How many of us know how a CD really works or if forced to, could recreate the technology to produce them again? The same with computers. You may have put together a computer from parts already made, but most people who use computers on a regular basis couldn't tell you how to build a computer from scratch. So in that regard it's entirely possible that technology could be lost or at least seriously setback. It also makes me think about how specialized the world has become. Sure with enough training just about anyone could do my job. I could probably go be a farmer if needed. We all have the potential to do nearly anything, but we've settled into our roles among society almost without a second thought. Food will be at the market. The phone lines will work when we pick up the ringer. Government will continue to maintain the status quo. Even if there was a serious disruption to what we know, it would take a long time for us to forget what we could do. In that regard could anything ever really be put back in the box?
Sunday, December 12, 2010
On the Memory of It All
As I get older the more I remember and the more I forget. There is comfort in the old memories, even if fresh ones aren't that bad. I was fortunate to have a pretty good childhood, although I'm sure while I was in it there were several times when it seemed worse than it really was. For some reason though I can't remember those times when things were bad. Sure there are some lingering memories of things, but lately my mind has been reaching out for those times I remember fondly. It makes me wonder what my brain is really trying to do. Like when we're cold we reach for a blanket because it brings us comfort. Do we remember in the same way in order to bring comfort to our mind?
We like to hold onto places and keep them how we remember them. In some ways those locations represent a physical link to our past, which we may otherwise never have again. As of right now there is no way to go back and experience those moments. They are lost in time and we're only left with our memories to know that they did in fact happen at all. Sometimes it can be scary to think that all the moments and events in our lives will be forgotten given enough time. People who lived a thousand years ago are dust. Most of the things they saw are gone, with only a few pieces left to show that they existed. The thing is those few artifacts only represent a fraction of their lives. Think of everything you own right now. Now take five items at random and try to build a story about your life from that. That's essentially what's being done today when archeologists dig something up. Sure they've gotten pretty good at figuring out what they can from a few pieces, but can a clay pot or some broken trinkets ever really reveal the nuance of the person that created it?
I think this is why we try to preserve things for as long as possible. They provide us with a sense that what we've done matters. That even after we've left this place that something will remain behind for others to see. One could argue that by holding onto the past we don't allow for growth in the future. That could be true. An old building may be a landmark, but its existence could prevent something new from being built. That landmark was new at some point and whatever was there before it had to be removed before the landmark could be there. A few years ago I went back to where I grew up. It had been several years since I had been back home so I wasn't all that surprised that some things had changed. Still I wasn't prepared for some of the little changes.
When I was really little we had a single grocery store called Market Basket. It wasn't a great store or anything, but it was our store. It used to be that inside the store you could be liquor. It was sectioned off, but still inside the actual store. Eventually laws changed and the liquor store had to be moved outside the store. I don't know when this actually changed. For me there is a memory of it one way and then all of a sudden it was different. After awhile the store changed names and we got a mall-like addition to the store. Again I have no memory of the change in process, only a switch from one to the other. The store was now called SuperValu and it was where I got my first job as a bag boy. I only worked there for three months, but in that time I got to see the store in a different way. While I worked there I was able to look behind the curtain at something that was normally mundane. Granted while I worked there it was just a job. When the summer was done I moved onto other things.
So when I was back home my mother was going to the grocery store and I wanted to go because it had been awhile since I had seen the old place. In the years that I was gone it was changed from SuperValu to Safeway. The store I had fond memories of wasn't there anymore. Sure the building was still there, but everything was different. Now don't get me wrong, I like Safeway stores in general, but they tend to all look alike. In fact they tend to be almost generic. The home to all those memories was gone and at the time it felt like my connection to them was lost. I'm sure there are people who remember the store as it used to be. Some people who live there now may have never known it in the various ways I remember. And in some cases there may be someone like me, who is working there now and years from now they may look back on that seemingly generic store with affection because for them it was special.
Our memories and experiences help define who we are and guide us towards our next destination. For a lot of us though we can't quite remember all the finer details of the past. What we've done before is a template for what we're going to do next. So if we can't remember where we've been then what does that do for where we're going?
We like to hold onto places and keep them how we remember them. In some ways those locations represent a physical link to our past, which we may otherwise never have again. As of right now there is no way to go back and experience those moments. They are lost in time and we're only left with our memories to know that they did in fact happen at all. Sometimes it can be scary to think that all the moments and events in our lives will be forgotten given enough time. People who lived a thousand years ago are dust. Most of the things they saw are gone, with only a few pieces left to show that they existed. The thing is those few artifacts only represent a fraction of their lives. Think of everything you own right now. Now take five items at random and try to build a story about your life from that. That's essentially what's being done today when archeologists dig something up. Sure they've gotten pretty good at figuring out what they can from a few pieces, but can a clay pot or some broken trinkets ever really reveal the nuance of the person that created it?
I think this is why we try to preserve things for as long as possible. They provide us with a sense that what we've done matters. That even after we've left this place that something will remain behind for others to see. One could argue that by holding onto the past we don't allow for growth in the future. That could be true. An old building may be a landmark, but its existence could prevent something new from being built. That landmark was new at some point and whatever was there before it had to be removed before the landmark could be there. A few years ago I went back to where I grew up. It had been several years since I had been back home so I wasn't all that surprised that some things had changed. Still I wasn't prepared for some of the little changes.
When I was really little we had a single grocery store called Market Basket. It wasn't a great store or anything, but it was our store. It used to be that inside the store you could be liquor. It was sectioned off, but still inside the actual store. Eventually laws changed and the liquor store had to be moved outside the store. I don't know when this actually changed. For me there is a memory of it one way and then all of a sudden it was different. After awhile the store changed names and we got a mall-like addition to the store. Again I have no memory of the change in process, only a switch from one to the other. The store was now called SuperValu and it was where I got my first job as a bag boy. I only worked there for three months, but in that time I got to see the store in a different way. While I worked there I was able to look behind the curtain at something that was normally mundane. Granted while I worked there it was just a job. When the summer was done I moved onto other things.
So when I was back home my mother was going to the grocery store and I wanted to go because it had been awhile since I had seen the old place. In the years that I was gone it was changed from SuperValu to Safeway. The store I had fond memories of wasn't there anymore. Sure the building was still there, but everything was different. Now don't get me wrong, I like Safeway stores in general, but they tend to all look alike. In fact they tend to be almost generic. The home to all those memories was gone and at the time it felt like my connection to them was lost. I'm sure there are people who remember the store as it used to be. Some people who live there now may have never known it in the various ways I remember. And in some cases there may be someone like me, who is working there now and years from now they may look back on that seemingly generic store with affection because for them it was special.
Our memories and experiences help define who we are and guide us towards our next destination. For a lot of us though we can't quite remember all the finer details of the past. What we've done before is a template for what we're going to do next. So if we can't remember where we've been then what does that do for where we're going?
Thursday, December 9, 2010
Wednesday, December 8, 2010
On Phobias
I have this fear of ladders that I can't really shake. I don't have any traumatic experiences with ladders that have forever scarred my psyche so that the very sight of ladders puts me in a cold sweat. It's just that every single time I've been on a ladder I've felt very uncomfortable. So much that my body wants nothing more than to get off of it, regardless of direction. Now the strange thing about this is that I don't have any problem with heights. I also don't have a problem with climbing things, such as trees or cliffs. I wouldn't say I'm exactly clumsy or bumbling, however, in recent years I've found that my clumsy factor has increased greatly. Still, there is no chance that I'll be mistaken for a ninja (fictional or otherwise). You put me on a ladder and my mind, which is taking its queues from my body, immediately realizes that I'm not even in the same zip code as my own element and begins that exceptionally fun process of freaking out. A couple years ago I decided that I would man up and face my fears head on. So for every day over the course of two months I would make a point to climb a ladder. Now granted I really liked being on the roof so I could look around, so there was some incentive. They say if you face your fears you can overcome them. Sometimes though when you face your fears you realize that they are justified for a reason.
The whole thing got me wondering about fears in general and why certain things scare us when they are nothing to worry about for someone else. If you get struck by lightning or nearly drown then it's understandable for a person to be afraid of thunderstorms or water. There are fears that don't have any sort of trauma associated with them that are just as strong in terms of fear. There is this term that I've heard before called Arachnid Reaction. Basically it's the reason why a lot of people are instinctively repulsed by the alien nature of spiders. Some people believe it's some old programming from our prehistoric brains that are attempting to warn us that spiders are not our friends. This reaction isn't limited to spiders though. Each of us has seen or experienced something where our brain knew something was very wrong. When that happens there is an overwhelming desire to be away from whatever it is. Now this could all stem from the fact that certain things like spiders or snakes can be venomous so throughout the course of evolution we've created a built-in warning mechanism that gets passed along throughout the generations. The question I have with that though is while some spiders may be poisonous, very few of them are actually dangerous to humans. This could be because their venom isn't strong enough to do more than ruin our weekend. Plus with the advances in anti-venom even those spiders who are dangerous can be countered with immediate attention. So how come some people still have this irrational fear of them?
Now not all fears are irrational, but there are phobias that override logic and reason. In those situations the brain is locked into a specific idea and simply can't break out of it. Part of me wonders if it's somewhat related to the same thing that causes obsessive compulsive behavior. For people with OCD they have to have things a specific way or they may not be able to function. People who don't have OCD may think that it's just a matter of not washing your hands five times before being able to start your day. Maybe it is that easy, but as I've talked about before, the mind is very powerful. Trying to convince it of something it doesn't want to believe would be about as easy as trying to bend a steel girder with your bare hands. Someone who is afraid of tight spaces, or heights, or mice may seem silly to a person who finds all those things to be enjoyable. Each of us have our own fears. If we wanted to explore why we have them and where they come from we might be able to move through the world a little easier. That is to say that at least we would understand why, but it may not stop the actual fear. A person who fears being alone may have figured out exactly why they are afraid of people abandoning them. It might come down to just accepting that the fear will always be there. At least by understanding it they may be able to cope with it better.
I think fear can be a good thing because it often serves as a warning for us. When I was four years old I went to my grandparents farm to visit. While I was there I ran headlong into the woods without a second thought. The world was mine to explore and the only reason I stopped tromping around was because my grandmother would call me back for dinner. About five years later I went back and it was a whole different story. The woods were this scary place to me, especially after dark. Now the forest hadn't changed, but I had. I was nearly twice as old as I was before and that meant I had more experience in the world. I knew there were potentially things in those trees that could hurt me. Plus at that age the world can be kind of a scary place because we have just enough knowledge under our belt to think we know what's going on. Skip ahead to another five years later and I laughed at my nine year old self for being afraid in the first place. Those same things that I needed to be careful of were out in the woods, but they weren't as overwhelmingly scary as they had been before. When I was four I didn't know I was supposed to be afraid. Up until then the world had been a pretty good place for me. They say we fear what we don't know or what we don't understand. I think that can be true. I also think that we can be afraid of what we think we know. So going back to the question of why some people are afraid of some things while other people aren't. Is it because the person who is afraid simply doesn't have enough information? This could be more than just mental knowledge. It could be genetic information. Their bodies could still be running on old information that mice are a threat of some kind and should be feared, not put on your lap and petted. Then again maybe people with certain fears have more knowledge than people without them. Much like my four year old self, maybe some of us don't know that we should be afraid.
The whole thing got me wondering about fears in general and why certain things scare us when they are nothing to worry about for someone else. If you get struck by lightning or nearly drown then it's understandable for a person to be afraid of thunderstorms or water. There are fears that don't have any sort of trauma associated with them that are just as strong in terms of fear. There is this term that I've heard before called Arachnid Reaction. Basically it's the reason why a lot of people are instinctively repulsed by the alien nature of spiders. Some people believe it's some old programming from our prehistoric brains that are attempting to warn us that spiders are not our friends. This reaction isn't limited to spiders though. Each of us has seen or experienced something where our brain knew something was very wrong. When that happens there is an overwhelming desire to be away from whatever it is. Now this could all stem from the fact that certain things like spiders or snakes can be venomous so throughout the course of evolution we've created a built-in warning mechanism that gets passed along throughout the generations. The question I have with that though is while some spiders may be poisonous, very few of them are actually dangerous to humans. This could be because their venom isn't strong enough to do more than ruin our weekend. Plus with the advances in anti-venom even those spiders who are dangerous can be countered with immediate attention. So how come some people still have this irrational fear of them?
Now not all fears are irrational, but there are phobias that override logic and reason. In those situations the brain is locked into a specific idea and simply can't break out of it. Part of me wonders if it's somewhat related to the same thing that causes obsessive compulsive behavior. For people with OCD they have to have things a specific way or they may not be able to function. People who don't have OCD may think that it's just a matter of not washing your hands five times before being able to start your day. Maybe it is that easy, but as I've talked about before, the mind is very powerful. Trying to convince it of something it doesn't want to believe would be about as easy as trying to bend a steel girder with your bare hands. Someone who is afraid of tight spaces, or heights, or mice may seem silly to a person who finds all those things to be enjoyable. Each of us have our own fears. If we wanted to explore why we have them and where they come from we might be able to move through the world a little easier. That is to say that at least we would understand why, but it may not stop the actual fear. A person who fears being alone may have figured out exactly why they are afraid of people abandoning them. It might come down to just accepting that the fear will always be there. At least by understanding it they may be able to cope with it better.
I think fear can be a good thing because it often serves as a warning for us. When I was four years old I went to my grandparents farm to visit. While I was there I ran headlong into the woods without a second thought. The world was mine to explore and the only reason I stopped tromping around was because my grandmother would call me back for dinner. About five years later I went back and it was a whole different story. The woods were this scary place to me, especially after dark. Now the forest hadn't changed, but I had. I was nearly twice as old as I was before and that meant I had more experience in the world. I knew there were potentially things in those trees that could hurt me. Plus at that age the world can be kind of a scary place because we have just enough knowledge under our belt to think we know what's going on. Skip ahead to another five years later and I laughed at my nine year old self for being afraid in the first place. Those same things that I needed to be careful of were out in the woods, but they weren't as overwhelmingly scary as they had been before. When I was four I didn't know I was supposed to be afraid. Up until then the world had been a pretty good place for me. They say we fear what we don't know or what we don't understand. I think that can be true. I also think that we can be afraid of what we think we know. So going back to the question of why some people are afraid of some things while other people aren't. Is it because the person who is afraid simply doesn't have enough information? This could be more than just mental knowledge. It could be genetic information. Their bodies could still be running on old information that mice are a threat of some kind and should be feared, not put on your lap and petted. Then again maybe people with certain fears have more knowledge than people without them. Much like my four year old self, maybe some of us don't know that we should be afraid.
Monday, December 6, 2010
On What's Next
Have you ever found yourself thinking about what comes next? The answer is most likely yes. This could be anything from what you're going to do after work. What's happening next weekend. What your next project is going to be. What's next for your career. Who are you going to sleep with next. I think it's a natural thought process to wonder about what comes next. As a species we're somewhat forward thinking. Well at least some of us are. There are those people out there who are perfectly content with right now. I kind of envy them because for some reason my mind can't find contentment with the present very often. I'm always thinking about the future or what I'm going to be doing. To quote that little green guy; "All his life has he looked away to the future, to the horizon. Never his mind on where he was. What he was doing." That's me exactly and I wish sometimes I could break the habit.
It's entirely possible that by focusing on what's next you've essentially let the present get away from you. We've all heard phrases like "Seize the day" or "Make every moment count". Those are all great ideas, but they're not always practical because if you think about it, that type of mentality would be exhausting after awhile. Some days are better than others. Sometimes you put forth more effort into right now than you do in other cases. I'm not sure there's anything wrong with allowing yourself to just coast. For some people though coasting is almost the same thing as wasting time. If you're not moving towards something or figuring out what you're going to do next then you're sitting idle. For them being idle is about as close as you can get to being dead while still having a pulse. Now I'm not that fanatical about my time, but I do find myself watching the metaphorical clock of life. It's ticking away and every moment spent in a situation that doesn't feel right is a moment lost forever.
Maybe it's not as common as it used to be, but there was this idea that if you paid in advance now then eventually you would be rewarded for your efforts later. Eat your vegetables and you can have dessert. Problem was that sometimes you were too full for dessert because the vegetables filled you up. If you were like me, that didn't stop you from eating the dessert anyway because you earned it and it would be stupid to not take what you worked for. That same general idea comes into play with working for over thirty years until you're eligible to retire and then you can go enjoy yourself. Sure along the way you can take vacations or holidays so it's not like you've spent every day trudging towards your reward. Still by the time you make it to that promised land of retirement you're much older than when you started out and in some cases the options you once had are no longer valid. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that everyone who retires is too old to enjoy it, but maybe we've created a situation where we spent most of our best years working towards what's next rather than actually enjoying it.
It doesn't really matter how good your situation could be. Sometimes it can't be helped to think about the next thing. Monday comes and thoughts of Friday start filling our heads. The week itself may be filled with various events, both good and bad or maybe just bland. The circle of thought has already started though. If on Monday we think about the upcoming Friday, then it doesn't take a large leap on Friday to know that Monday is just around the corner, in which case we've created a trap for ourselves where the present is always taking a backseat to the future. By doing that can we really ever enjoy either?
Some people are happy with their current situation. They enjoy the moment for what it is, because those moments are somewhat precious if you think about it. We don't know how many we're going to get. As I've mentioned, everything is fleeting so today doesn't necessarily equal tomorrow. These people could be fortunate enough that they've found what they're looking for or they simply don't worry about what comes next because for the most part they're in a pretty good place. Now that's not to say that people who are happy don't think about the future or the next thing. I'm sure happy people put forth a lot of effort to make sure that their situation is what they want it to be. There are probably situations where circumstances just fall into place for them so it takes very little effort. If your situation isn't quite what you want then it's probably natural to start wondering how you're going to get to where you want to be. I'm of the mind that if you're not happy with something then time spent that way is being wasted. Sometimes we have to do things that we don't want because the payoff later is worth it. That's just how life is sometimes. I get that. Still unlike some people I just don't want to accept something that in my mind is second best when I know what I really want may be just around the corner. I suppose the trick to it all is keeping an eye on what's next, but also enjoying what you have now. If someone figures out how to do that, please tell me how.
It's entirely possible that by focusing on what's next you've essentially let the present get away from you. We've all heard phrases like "Seize the day" or "Make every moment count". Those are all great ideas, but they're not always practical because if you think about it, that type of mentality would be exhausting after awhile. Some days are better than others. Sometimes you put forth more effort into right now than you do in other cases. I'm not sure there's anything wrong with allowing yourself to just coast. For some people though coasting is almost the same thing as wasting time. If you're not moving towards something or figuring out what you're going to do next then you're sitting idle. For them being idle is about as close as you can get to being dead while still having a pulse. Now I'm not that fanatical about my time, but I do find myself watching the metaphorical clock of life. It's ticking away and every moment spent in a situation that doesn't feel right is a moment lost forever.
Maybe it's not as common as it used to be, but there was this idea that if you paid in advance now then eventually you would be rewarded for your efforts later. Eat your vegetables and you can have dessert. Problem was that sometimes you were too full for dessert because the vegetables filled you up. If you were like me, that didn't stop you from eating the dessert anyway because you earned it and it would be stupid to not take what you worked for. That same general idea comes into play with working for over thirty years until you're eligible to retire and then you can go enjoy yourself. Sure along the way you can take vacations or holidays so it's not like you've spent every day trudging towards your reward. Still by the time you make it to that promised land of retirement you're much older than when you started out and in some cases the options you once had are no longer valid. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that everyone who retires is too old to enjoy it, but maybe we've created a situation where we spent most of our best years working towards what's next rather than actually enjoying it.
It doesn't really matter how good your situation could be. Sometimes it can't be helped to think about the next thing. Monday comes and thoughts of Friday start filling our heads. The week itself may be filled with various events, both good and bad or maybe just bland. The circle of thought has already started though. If on Monday we think about the upcoming Friday, then it doesn't take a large leap on Friday to know that Monday is just around the corner, in which case we've created a trap for ourselves where the present is always taking a backseat to the future. By doing that can we really ever enjoy either?
Some people are happy with their current situation. They enjoy the moment for what it is, because those moments are somewhat precious if you think about it. We don't know how many we're going to get. As I've mentioned, everything is fleeting so today doesn't necessarily equal tomorrow. These people could be fortunate enough that they've found what they're looking for or they simply don't worry about what comes next because for the most part they're in a pretty good place. Now that's not to say that people who are happy don't think about the future or the next thing. I'm sure happy people put forth a lot of effort to make sure that their situation is what they want it to be. There are probably situations where circumstances just fall into place for them so it takes very little effort. If your situation isn't quite what you want then it's probably natural to start wondering how you're going to get to where you want to be. I'm of the mind that if you're not happy with something then time spent that way is being wasted. Sometimes we have to do things that we don't want because the payoff later is worth it. That's just how life is sometimes. I get that. Still unlike some people I just don't want to accept something that in my mind is second best when I know what I really want may be just around the corner. I suppose the trick to it all is keeping an eye on what's next, but also enjoying what you have now. If someone figures out how to do that, please tell me how.
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
On Pirates
Ok let's start with the most obvious thing first. Pirates of the Caribbean was not a documentary. Most of the "pirates" in that movie were pirates in name alone. In most cases the worst thing they did was steal something that was already stolen by someone else or make a mean face towards the hero. It was sort of like watching a movie about cannibals who never actually eat a person. Don't get me wrong, the movies and more importantly, the rides at Disney are a lot of fun. Still celebrating pirates is a lot like building a ride around a group of terrorists and killers, which is what they were. Disney could probably make anything fun looking though. I'm still waiting for them to make a love story about two adorable scorpions.
We'll back it up a bit. Piracy is a pretty simple concept, which is basically robbery and/or violence at sea by a private party not affiliated with any government. Notice the last part about the government. If you acted on your own then you were a pirate. If the government sponsored your violence then you were just a privateer. Granted this was normally allowed during wartime because some nations didn't have a navy, including our own fledgling nation at one point. In a lot of cases sailors became pirates out of necessity and not out of some strange love for adventure. It's very similar to modern times where if your choice is to work forty hours for minimum wage or join a crew of people who can make ten times that in a fraction of the time, one might consider taking the more direct route to earning money.
It's pretty much assumed that for as long as there have been boats in the water there have been pirates of some sort. I'm sure that shortly after the invention of the wheel someone got the brainwave to use it to aid them in stealing from someone else. Admiring pirates also isn't a new thing, although it's recently become more popular thanks to both the movies and internet. During his time, Bartholomew Roberts was considered a hero by some and when he died it signified the end of the Golden Age of Piracy. While he was one of the most successful pirates of that era, he was still considered an outlaw by various governments. Roberts primary focus was capturing ships and disrupting sea trade, which was a big deal back then. It would be kind of like highwaymen hijacking shipping trucks along the freeways. Essentially it would grind commerce to a halt. You mess with people's money and they get really mean really fast. That dashing buccaneer doesn't look so great once you realize that he's just stolen the shipment of supplies that were meant for you and your colony. People find comfort in the laws of a civilized society and when they're tossed out the window the results can be explosive.
Strangely enough though many pirate vessels of that time adopted a democratic form of rule on board. The captain and quartermaster were elected by the crew, and the crew were appointed by ship's officers. This created a set of checks and balances very similar to our own government. Based on rank each member of the crew would receive a share of the captured bounty. This is also how modern fishing boats tend to divide up the profit from a haul. The whole idea makes me wonder if maybe it's not a bad form of dispensing compensation. We like to think that pirates stole treasure and buried it on some hidden island, but more often than not that treasure was just food, alcohol, weapons, or clothing. Sure they stole money when they could, but not all the ships in the ocean had a treasure chest of jewels in their hold. So pirates took what they needed, which could also include the ship that they just attacked, simply because it was better than what they were currently using. For a bunch of guys who were operating outside the law, they tended to create order of their own.
There is also this idea that pirates were bloodthirsty. Some of the raiders were probably more murderous than others and nearly all pirates were dangerous, with the exception of those from Penzance. Even still pirates tended to kill few people aboard the ships they captured. If the crew surrendered there was a good chance no one would be killed, at least not during the taking of the ship. Again this wasn't because of some sense of honor, but more about practicality. If it became known that pirates took no prisoners, then those being attacked would fight to the last man because they knew if they didn't, they would be murdered anyway. The whole thing would make victory very difficult and possibly not worth the cost in lives. The same tends to hold true today, where less than 10% of pirate attacks result in murder. Not being killed by pirates doesn't make the whole experience any less dangerous, just like being present during a robbery today could go either way based on the situation. Most pirates were and are more concerned with making a profit from the attack. If they kidnap the crew for ransom and kill them regardless of payment, then no one will pay, instead they'll just hunt them down with the intent to kill.
We like to think of pirates as these adventurous and clever rogues who make their own destinies. While there may be some out there that fit that description, a pirate vessel is more likely filled with a bunch of people who have come to the conclusion that it's more beneficial to steal from others than try to find so-called legitimate work on the rivers and oceans. Just like bank robbers and car thieves it may seem somewhat glamorous to live like Robin Hood. The reality is that it only seems cool until you notice the fact that their chosen profession is actually more work and more dangerous than that 9-5 job you've got, where you're safe in your cubicle. Plus there probably haven't been as many reported cases of scurvy. I'm not saying pirates are lame. They're mostly overrated, as many things tend to be when they become really popular.
We'll back it up a bit. Piracy is a pretty simple concept, which is basically robbery and/or violence at sea by a private party not affiliated with any government. Notice the last part about the government. If you acted on your own then you were a pirate. If the government sponsored your violence then you were just a privateer. Granted this was normally allowed during wartime because some nations didn't have a navy, including our own fledgling nation at one point. In a lot of cases sailors became pirates out of necessity and not out of some strange love for adventure. It's very similar to modern times where if your choice is to work forty hours for minimum wage or join a crew of people who can make ten times that in a fraction of the time, one might consider taking the more direct route to earning money.
It's pretty much assumed that for as long as there have been boats in the water there have been pirates of some sort. I'm sure that shortly after the invention of the wheel someone got the brainwave to use it to aid them in stealing from someone else. Admiring pirates also isn't a new thing, although it's recently become more popular thanks to both the movies and internet. During his time, Bartholomew Roberts was considered a hero by some and when he died it signified the end of the Golden Age of Piracy. While he was one of the most successful pirates of that era, he was still considered an outlaw by various governments. Roberts primary focus was capturing ships and disrupting sea trade, which was a big deal back then. It would be kind of like highwaymen hijacking shipping trucks along the freeways. Essentially it would grind commerce to a halt. You mess with people's money and they get really mean really fast. That dashing buccaneer doesn't look so great once you realize that he's just stolen the shipment of supplies that were meant for you and your colony. People find comfort in the laws of a civilized society and when they're tossed out the window the results can be explosive.
Strangely enough though many pirate vessels of that time adopted a democratic form of rule on board. The captain and quartermaster were elected by the crew, and the crew were appointed by ship's officers. This created a set of checks and balances very similar to our own government. Based on rank each member of the crew would receive a share of the captured bounty. This is also how modern fishing boats tend to divide up the profit from a haul. The whole idea makes me wonder if maybe it's not a bad form of dispensing compensation. We like to think that pirates stole treasure and buried it on some hidden island, but more often than not that treasure was just food, alcohol, weapons, or clothing. Sure they stole money when they could, but not all the ships in the ocean had a treasure chest of jewels in their hold. So pirates took what they needed, which could also include the ship that they just attacked, simply because it was better than what they were currently using. For a bunch of guys who were operating outside the law, they tended to create order of their own.
There is also this idea that pirates were bloodthirsty. Some of the raiders were probably more murderous than others and nearly all pirates were dangerous, with the exception of those from Penzance. Even still pirates tended to kill few people aboard the ships they captured. If the crew surrendered there was a good chance no one would be killed, at least not during the taking of the ship. Again this wasn't because of some sense of honor, but more about practicality. If it became known that pirates took no prisoners, then those being attacked would fight to the last man because they knew if they didn't, they would be murdered anyway. The whole thing would make victory very difficult and possibly not worth the cost in lives. The same tends to hold true today, where less than 10% of pirate attacks result in murder. Not being killed by pirates doesn't make the whole experience any less dangerous, just like being present during a robbery today could go either way based on the situation. Most pirates were and are more concerned with making a profit from the attack. If they kidnap the crew for ransom and kill them regardless of payment, then no one will pay, instead they'll just hunt them down with the intent to kill.
We like to think of pirates as these adventurous and clever rogues who make their own destinies. While there may be some out there that fit that description, a pirate vessel is more likely filled with a bunch of people who have come to the conclusion that it's more beneficial to steal from others than try to find so-called legitimate work on the rivers and oceans. Just like bank robbers and car thieves it may seem somewhat glamorous to live like Robin Hood. The reality is that it only seems cool until you notice the fact that their chosen profession is actually more work and more dangerous than that 9-5 job you've got, where you're safe in your cubicle. Plus there probably haven't been as many reported cases of scurvy. I'm not saying pirates are lame. They're mostly overrated, as many things tend to be when they become really popular.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)