Life and Complaints . . .

After some contemplation, I still haven’t an sufficient answer for why Daru said he wouldn’t take the guy to prison. Thinking about the more “life” oriented question why do we complain? It’s somewhat related to the way we deal with stress. Everyone has some sort of coping mechanism. I suppose talking about it, “complaining” if you will is one of the outlets we have. There are lots of other socially acceptable outlets, art is one of them, another one could be, what seems to be happening more and more, which is finding a form escape like (foremost of which is referenced) alcohol, drugs, some sport of sorts, and more recently the internet. It is rather easy to lose oneself in the internet; the plethora of information at one’s fingertips is astonishing. Though back to complaining, complaints are probably the easiest of outlets because we don’t have to do much, just open our mouth and say more or less what’s on our minds. No investment of time, or emotions needed, and it also is an emotional outlet because we can voice (literally and figuratively) all our frustrations. In that sense it’s probably not considered productive because you don’t really “make” anything (like with art, or say constructing something) but at least it’s an outlet that is easy to do and you can do it anywhere (say for example your emotional outlet is hiking or skiing or even something as simple as model-making, it’s not something that you can do everywhere you go). Also it’s socially acceptable and non-destructive; say for example your venting process requires adrenaline to flow through your system, a really easy way to do that is to just go steal something (now granted this is only one example there are many other “unhealthy” outlets some that are literally unhealthy and others that can become not so good for oneself and there are lots of “healthy” outlets as well). Well there are issues with that, for one it’s illegal in most places, the consequences can be severe depending on where you live and of course you might even end up with extra stuff you don’t even want but end up having it. Something that I guess is also not really considered is that complaining about something can be a good conversation starter.

As Alex had pointed out, at work sitting down and complaining with your coworkers is a sort of a social bonding because you can relate to your coworkers. There’s also the added benefit of hearing other people complain and you can sympathize with their plight and in some cases get to feel better about yourself because their situation is worse than yours (though this is probably not very good for the one person who has the worst situation, unless the group ends up arguing over who’s more pathetic). Though that makes me wonder what it’s like for someone who is a CEO (Chief Executive Officer or Managing Director) who really can’t go complaining to his “co-workers” because almost everyone is under him except for maybe a CFO (Chief Financial Officer or Finance Director). When put into perspective though even CEOs answer to the board of directors (which would answer to the investors). Maybe they complain to their friends that are CEOs as well? Or maybe they don’t really complain much because they have to keep up appearances almost no matter where they go, even if it’s the hospital (the mental/physical health and personality/ideology of CEOs greatly affects the worth of companies) even conversations in passing can be framed and pulled out of context in the same way that media celebrities are followed around by their respective paparazzis.

Back to complaining, it definitely seems to be a social mechanism. When we complain we actually are able to do several things at once. We’re able to vent our frustrations/difficulties, get people to pity our plight, and communicate that there’s something wrong. Venting about our hardships tend to make us feel better. Getting people to pity our plight actually does 2 things for us, it makes someone feel sorry for us, but it also gets them to sympathize and in some cases even get them to help us. That’s probably the most powerful thing about it, is if we complain enough we can probably change our situation or even get help in some form. Sometimes complaining isn’t really just complaining it’s a voicing of the fact that we’re in such a difficult situation that we really can’t handle it, and it can be the first sign that something is really wrong. It’s also a better way of saying “I can’t do it,” in a corporate structure that’s probably not a good idea, but if one were to say something like “you know I’m so swamped with ______ and you want me to do _______” it may help the situation and it’s a rather elegant way of saying “I can’t do it.” I say elegant because the actual words one is using don’t suggest incompetence at all, whereas saying “I can’t do it” could communicate blatant incompetence which saves a lot of face.

Considering we’re social animals, communication is very important to us. We have many ways of communicating, oral being only one of them. Non-verbal cues however tend to be more telling of a person’s situation. If one were to over the time of working at a new job say; become more pale (well more pale than whatever their natural complexion is), have duller hair or other slight changes THAT would be a pretty prominent sign of genuine dissatisfaction of their work or some other change in life. There are a lot of more subtle signs the aforementioned actually are all linked to health and may not always show up but will definitely show up if it gets to a real low. Some of the more telling clues could also be about what we complain about, or even the way we act at work.

There’s this mentality that life is composed of work and play (I’m not entirely sure where this mentality came from or how it came about but I know that at least here in the US it’s a fairly common sentiment). Work is something that is never enjoyed and play is . . . well play is play. Work is also a means of feeding oneself (on a most basic level), and in a more expanded capacity to afford the luxuries that we feel we need/enjoy. Some people like to combine work and play by taking something like a hobby (or something they enjoy) and make it into work. This sometimes works for some people, more often though the sentiment (at least here in the US) is that once it becomes work it’s no longer enjoyable. Though to be honest I think that it comes down to the fact that when someone does whatever it is they enjoy they can take their time, do it at whatever pace they like and ultimately control when they do it. If they have to do it on a professional level, deadlines become very important and then stress creeps in, and we’re back to complaining or trying to find some other outlet. I’m not entirely sure how to make it so that we’re satisfied with work; I think it really depends on one’s goals. For many people happiness/satisfaction is linked with success but sometimes when we get to where we think we want to be, we realize we don’t actually want it. In my case, I’m only taking 3 classes and I’m auditing a class I’ve already taken (because the first time around I really didn’t understand much) and I’m also doing a research project (I’m a math major). I’m not actually working so I guess I’m kind of spoiled in that sense, but that also makes school assignments my “work.” I remember actually running into someone I hadn’t seen in a while and they said they wanted to switch to their major to get the exact same degree I’m close to obtaining. Thinking back, I’m never really satisfied with my assignments because they never seem to be good enough. I enjoy most of my classes and when I work on them can be . . . annoying. To put that into perspective one of my classes (this semester) takes up a minimum of 20 hours a week just on homework assignments (in actuality it’s near 40 and throughout the semester there was only one assignment I was fully confident in . . . and a number of my classmates think that I'm one of the 'smart kids'). Most of the assignments are something along the lines of given a statement, prove it’s true. In a way it is a lot like an English class, you make a claim (your thesis) and prove it’s true (writing the body of your essay). I remember my first reaction to this person telling me they what they had planned (about changing degree goals) was “It’s hard.” I told the person it’s hard, which I realized I never would have said about 3 years ago. Thinking back, all the grueling time spent trying to get things done, it takes up so much of my time and I remember my girlfriend telling me one time that when she tried to wake me up when I fell asleep I started actually babbling math to her (I have a feeling it was actually pieces of the proof of a statement that I was having trouble proving). I’ve learned a fair amount, but for the most part I’ve never been truly dissatisfied with any of the assignments given (only dissatisfied about the answers I provide). They mostly have been very interesting questions, or relate to some rather interesting things. Am I dissatisfied? I’ve no idea. So yes I would say it’s hard . . . and I’ve got hard path ahead but I’m not sure if I’m truly dissatisfied or even satisfied for that matter.

Objectivity

To me being objective means trying to rid ourselves of the biases that we possess. That doesn’t sound very well defined but I think that it should include trying to not colour all of our thoughts and impressions based off of our opinions, feelings, and to a certain degree to put our preconceived notions to the side before we judge people or situations. It’s practically impossible to be entirely objective because if you think about it, we make sense of the world by comparing it to our ideas of how we think it should be. Every time we learn something new, we try to link it back to what we already know.

Looking at it this way, I’m not a very objective person. I tend to not speak my mind until I’ve talked to a person enough to have an idea of how they think. Doing this affords me the leisure of being able to have discourse with the person using their own logic. That is how I like to interact with people, get to know them, and learn a little about how they think. Afterwards see if I can understand their point of view and relate to them and just see what happens. Though there are many times when I can’t afford to do this, after all being entirely socially awkward until maybe after spending about 30 hours or so picking at someone's brain is no way to make connections much less even just meet people. One such incident that I remember, I wasn’t even sure what to make of it, I still don’t know what to make of it today.

I remember this female who at the time I knew she was a classmate of mine, but I had never spoken a word to her or even had any interaction with her until that day, the Thursday before finals started. I remember they were talking about homosexuality. I interjected with something that I had read about 3-5 months back about semi-recent study on homosexuals. The study had mentioned about how they had found that most homosexuals were homosexuals because of social/environmental reasons. I had mentioned that personally, I think of homosexuals as two groups, those who are born as “men trapped in a woman’s body” or “women trapped in a man’s body” and those who become homosexual for some reason or other. Because the former group’s preferences seem to be from birth it would suggest that their preferences stem more from genes than other factors, and I consider them to be true homosexuals. She looked at me in an odd way and said that she didn’t believe that homosexuality came from our environment, nor does it come from genes. She then said to me that it came from within us. I thought about it for a moment, and pretty much said that things that affect our development either come from our environment, or our genes. The term environment is used in a broader manner it includes our living conditions, parents, family, friends etc. She insisted to me again that it’s from something within us, and not affected by the environment but not from our genes. Entirely confused I tried to press her for her thoughts, just to have her elaborate on “it comes from inside.” She didn’t and so I just gave up because there was no point in pressing her for more information when it seemed futile. She went back to studying for our Proofs final, and I went back to trying to work on a proof and that was that.

I utterly failed at being objective, but I also tried to understand her view, which I also failed at. Though I have to admit I’ve tried to figure out what she meant, and seeing her view is a bit hard for me because I subscribe to the idea that we can quantify and study things. I’ll admit, there are many things you can’t study, like ghosts, they kind of lie outside of the realm of science for the pure and simple fact that so far no one has been able to recreate an incident enough times to figure something out. I guess she could’ve meant the soul, though I’m not sure what the soul is, much less what can come out of it. From most descriptions the soul seems to be an integral part of the core of our personality, but our personality is heavily influenced by our surroundings, and I'm not sure what part is the environment and which part is the soul.

Favorite Song . . .

After a bit of thought I realized I don't actually listen to many songs. I listen to a lot of music, but not a lot of actual songs. It did occur to me though that of the few songs I listen to on a more regular basis, Mozart's requiem would definitely rank near the top alongside "Ode an Die Freude," though I do happen to like "Tentai Kansoku" and Bump of Chicken in general when I'm sick of hearing classical music played on the radio or something.

Mozart's Requiem all in all is about 50 minutes of music; depending on the conductor could be a few minutes longer. To be honest though I'm not even sure who performed the particular recording that I have, I have even forgotten how I came upon it. I am fortunate in that the recording I do have of it is a recording of the full piece, and not broken apart into its different sections. It also never occurred to me to look up the lyrics until I tried to write this blog entry. I never liked it because of what the lyrics mean, I've always assumed that they were in Latin, because I didn't know them until a day or so ago. I did manage to find a translation and it kind of was a surprise and kind of wasn't. The god of the book religions was mentioned several times was the semi-surprise, but a few seconds after delving into the stanzas I remembered that many artists during that time and earlier in Europe had to write tributes to religion. One of the first reasons I like this piece in particular, is that unlike almost anything else that W. A. Mozart wrote, it's not a "happy" piece. One of the things I hate about most of his works is that they’re all happy pieces almost as if the guy was on antidepressants all the time he was writing. Though its origin is not entirely clear, though it has Mozart's name attached to it, it's a well known fact that he did not write the whole song (it was posthumously unfinished). We do know that he wrote at least the very beginning, as to how far he actually did write no one knows. The other composer who finished it, no one knows how much he had taken from Mozart's unfinished notes and how much is entirely his composition.

One thing I guess that attracts me to this piece is possibly the complexity. A lot of popular music is rather simplistic in the sense that most of it is a standard form that can be described almost to the exact number of measures of each part. There is also the ridiculous amount of repeated melodic lines that have a different set of lyrics. I've always been attracted to complex things, like how I prefer Go over chess, or very clever things. Though I don't actually try to analyze it, I just listen to the melody. I love the dramatic crescendos that are in it. I don’t really know how it’s important to me; I didn’t grow up listening to Mozart. I grew up listening to Chinese opera, traditional Chinese music, romantic music and baroque. I was exposed to Mozart because pieces like “Eine Kleine Nachtmusik” (which is one of those pieces I hate from Mozart) are so popular and as I got older, I was exposed to his concertos and that was when I really actually started to listen to Mozart. With that in mind . . . I guess it’s important because I like the melodies and the layering in different parts actually now that I think about it seems to sound like counterpoint. I’ve always been amazed at counterpoint, it’s something that I absolutely admire about composers who are able to do it well. J.S. Bach was a master of the technique and I’ve always found it just astounding how composers are able to start melodies that are seemingly independent ideas that just constantly move forward but the harmony they produce is entirely connected. It’s also a composition form that I’ve always wanted to learn, but . . . well I’m not immersed in the world of music anymore. So Mozart's Requiem I guess would be a part of my past that's no longer alive which I guess is kind of fitting.





Here is the First Video in a playlist:

Musings on Endtroducing

I don't really have a favourite piece, but I did notice a few things about the album. The motifs that are found in DJ Shadow's album are (to me) kind of odd, it almost reminds me of one of the looser definitions for music which categorizes music as “organized sound.” It feels odd (to me) mostly because he takes snippets of ideas from various different sources, a fair amount of those ideas hearken back to some jazz roots. There also seem to be some ideas that are taken from what sounds like baroque, classical music and voice recordings from TV shows or speeches or something. Some parts to me it feels like there's almost a disconnect of ideas. Some parts here and there (like at 1:40 or so in "Stem/Long Stem") it feels like he interjects a random idea almost like a person jumping into a conversation for a sentence making a few random comments and then runs off as the music continues more or less where it left off. That being said there actually is some structure to the album as a whole.

“Best Foot Forward” seems to set the environment that the rest of the album is framed. It is almost like a sampling of the different timbres that are going to be present. Most composers have some set of instruments instead DJ Shadow uses the recordings as his instruments for the composition. It showcases some spoken word sections, rhythms and the record spinning type sounds. The second piece, “Building Steam with a Grain of Salt,” I find to be of much more interest because a lot of the ideas that DJ Shadow puts in it, are developed throughout the album. The ideas I think that he develops throughout are the rhythm and repetitive melody. He almost takes the listener on a journey first, exploring the rhythm idea in “The Number Song.” Though the repetitive measures he puts in different sections of the music drives me nuts. It always feels like it is going to move forward but it doesn't and it repeats the theme (one such section is “Organ Donor”) for a while before moving forward. Though I have to admit I don't pick out rhythm or harmony as well as I do melody, but I think he does similar things with the rhythm too it just doesn't drive me up the wall quite the same. The album is rather interesting as a whole it reminds me of the variation form.

Thoughts on Plato's Cave

The first time I read the allegory of the cave, the underlying thought that kept popping up in my head was, “how do the prisoners even stay alive without food/water?” Reading it the second time, I tried to think about the story a bit more carefully. My impression after a fair amount of thinking is that the cave must represent the universe. Talking to Alexandra, it occurred to me, maybe the cave represents not so much the universe, but our life. It represents our life and what we see around us, and escaping the cave means that we realize something wrong, and then start moving in a new direction because we find something wrong, or a veil of ignorance is lifted from our eyes. Though there is something about this interpretation that bothers me. It’s the idea that while we escape from one cave, and get out, the next area might be outside, but it’s just a bigger cave. This interpretation seems a bit more in line with the interpretations offered in class, but still feels somewhat artificial to me, unlike my initial impression.

If the cave represents the universe, then there is a slight flaw because then escaping the cave might literally mean escaping the universe which would be weird. However after some contemplation, being out of the cave and under the sun might instead mean enlightenment. As Shakyamuni (also known as Siddhatha the first Buddha) became enlightened, escaping would be the journey he took to become enlightened, and seeing the outside of the cave would be the full enlightenment that he had obtained. Going back to talk to the others would be similar to how after he became enlightened he took on students to try to enlighten them. It's interesting though because one of the images in Buddhism that is painted is that we are all asleep. We see, but we do not because our eyes have not truly opened, but when we become truly aware of our senses is when we have awakened and have reached enlightenment. This is rather similar to the images that are painted by the allegory, the idea of the prisoners being unable to perceive beyond the shadows. Though this might be a narrow view, and also doesn’t account for some certain points given in the allegory. There are Bodhisattvas who, after reaching enlightenment, don’t move on to nirvana (or heaven) they choose to stay here with us on earth to guide others. It is a huge sacrifice and it also goes against Plato’s assumption that the escaped prisoner would reject their old way of life to never want to return. The Bodhisattvas specifically return and reject the outside of the cave to guide others along the way and not necessarily because they pity them.

It also occurred to me that maybe more encompassing would be the view that escaping the cave would be like following the steps of the first immortal (translated as immortal or fairy though immortal isn't quite correct), Lao Zi. With this view, then escaping the cave doesn't become quite enlightenment but actual escape from the world, so to speak, because being in the sun would be becoming a god and going to heaven. The escape process would then be the long period that one would train to become a god, slowly attaining the different steps until the final step is made. Being out of the cave would be when one has finally reached the end of their path and have finally attained godhood, and able to finally ascend to heaven. However then after being able to ascend they can choose to stay in heaven or leave as they please.

One thing that I’ve come to realize is that Plato describes the prisoner as eventually accepting the outside of the cave. Though what’s interesting is that if you look at most people, and put them in a place they’ve never been before initially there’s the reaction of fascination and awe. Later however they reject it, and want to go back the way things were. An example, well fictional one I guess, is John the Savage from Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World. John at first is taken by the Utopia, and he learns about them. Ultimately however, John the Savage rejects his new state of enlightenment and commits suicide. This point also makes me think of Muad Dib, the Kwisatz Haderach, in Frank Herbert’s Dune. Paul Atreides (Muad Dib’s original name) says “The Sleeper has awakened” and he’s referring to his new perception, in the story he changes so that he’s able to see the past present and future at the same time wherever her walks. However at first he sees the future and he feels he can change things. By the second book, he starts to realize he can’t change it, and instead by the end of it rejects the reality he created, and the future he sees. His response is that he exiles himself.

Quotes About Truth

There are a few quotes I like, for example: "Beware of the half truth.  You may have gotten hold of the wrong half." is one of them.  However I like the quote due to my initial reaction of amusement; not so much because of experience with situations that it may apply to.  The quote is probably a statement about lies of omission. 

Before I delve more into the discussion of the quotes I’d like to define the word truth for the rest of the dialogue.  So for the purposes of the discussion Truth will be the form and properties of objects, with respect to objects, and in terms of situations the actual sequence of events.  In terms of concepts, I’d like to define it as the most rigorous definition for example the color white, the most rigorous definition of white, is the absence of all pigment, or the reflection of all visible wavelengths (this accounts for the fact that some people are colour blind, and how everyone perceives colours somewhat differently).  With more abstract things, like beauty, I’d like to leave it as what is accepted by society (so what is beautiful say for an American may not be beautiful for the French).  The latter part this is not well defined because two people describing the same sequence of events could be very different eg. giving a bell as a present is okay in some cultures, however there is a culture where giving a bell is a metaphor for expecting the receiver of the gift to die.  So to keep it simple I would like to leave it at the actual sequence of events with as little interpretation as possible.

There is one quote I really like though, the quote from Robert Frost.  The first part: “Why abandon a belief merely because it ceases to be true?  Cling to it long enough and … it will turn true again, for so it goes.” seems somewhat nonsensical.  In terms of objects (as defined earlier) say if something is white, it will always be white.  However there is a certain amount of depth to this observation, because if one considers say eggs and how the medical community used to consider eggs to be good for health.  Later on with the studies done on cholesterol it was considered unhealthy.  However studies done more recently actually have shown a high correlation with eggs and memory retention at later ages.  So now the medical community considers eggs to be good for your health again. 

            The next part of his quote “Most of the change we think we see in life is due to truths being in and out of favor” I think shows even more depth from the poet.  As previously mentioned with eggs, this quote also applies though on a more historical level.  The concept of beauty, for example during the middle ages and later renaissance in Europe (not all of Europe I suppose but for a fair amount of Europe) described women with porcelain coloured skin, soft small hands, and a certain amount of plumpness.  As time goes by, if we look at say the US beauty was still the round face, and the white skin (look at Marilyn Monroe) and a certain amount of plumpness, though that amount of plumpness slowly starts to change.  Now however, beauty is the skinny, tanned women.  The older views dropped out of favor.  Much like what had happened in the world of chemistry and physics during the early 1900s, where the concept that atoms could not be split was first shown to be untrue, and consequently dropped out of favor.  The last example may seem somewhat esoteric but something much more relevant and of much debate is the fact psychologists and sociologists in the last 10 years have been forced to realize, and adapt theories, because of the fact that it is no longer true that one requires physical meetings with people to have a social network.  With the advent of the internet and faster computing, there are even now computer programs sophisticated enough that the electronic magazine ELLEgirl in 2002 launched an instant messaging program that worked with AOL Instant Messenger, and Microsoft Messenger that would contact teenage girls and interact with them.  It was sophisticated enough that it was close to talking to a real person and it gave lots of ELLEgirl magazine information.  The program actually described itself as a 16 year old girl with a list of hobbies, interests, favorite bands, books and even films and tv shows.  It was successful to the point that many teenage girls actually responded to the bot as a person (eg. the program would actually find articles on things that people say they liked and provide url links to articles in future conversations).  I digress, the main point was that not only is it not true anymore that one needs to even physically meet people for social interaction because of internet forums, chatrooms, and voice chat programs, but even more so (for some people) it’s no longer true that you may even form friendships with actual people.