I'm currently in a class about different methods of reducing stress, and today's topic was meditation. The color technique is easy to learn and carry out without several years of living in the Himalayas.
The idea is to, sitting comfortably and with eyes closed, imagine oneself to be surrounded by a red sphere. After thinking a while what that feels like, imagine an orange sphere, then yellow, and all the way around the color wheel.
It's no secret that we humans associate certain emotions and sensations with different colors, and going around the wheel can help give insight into how one's day is going emotionally. I felt particularly happy today when thinking about yellow.
Tuesday, November 25, 2014
Sunday, November 23, 2014
The Essay Writing Process
I've had a number of two-page essays to do the past several months, and I've developed a certain routine for completing them:
1. Format word document and gather information
2. Spend several minutes pondering first sentence
3. Write introductory paragraph, making sure that the last sentence of the paragraph states the thesis.
4. Take a short break
5. Write the rest of the paper, following the outline laid out in the first paragraph
6. Spend several minutes pondering last sentence
7. Save and go do something else
8. Proofread and print next morning
It's worked out reasonably well so far.
1. Format word document and gather information
2. Spend several minutes pondering first sentence
3. Write introductory paragraph, making sure that the last sentence of the paragraph states the thesis.
4. Take a short break
5. Write the rest of the paper, following the outline laid out in the first paragraph
6. Spend several minutes pondering last sentence
7. Save and go do something else
8. Proofread and print next morning
It's worked out reasonably well so far.
Saturday, November 22, 2014
Version 1.4
I've been posting here for just over a year now (November 20), and with that as a motivator, I've added new ways of finding posts of a particular sort. The new categories are academics, food, games, rants, and the inherently pretentious writing about writing. My next mission is to change the background.
Friday, November 21, 2014
Don't Throw The Apple
As my many boxes of hot pockets can attest to, college living involves a lot of unsupervised choices. Being able to act healthily takes willpower, something that I think can be trained like many other skills.
After each meal at the cafeteria, I usually pick up an apple or pear on the way out to eat later. These fruits fit the hand well, like a baseball, and during the ten-minute walk back to my dorm, I repeatedly think, "I wonder if I could hit that tree with this apple," or, "Wouldn't it be fun to toss this apple in the air and catch it?" The urge to throw is great, and that's the point of the test-- I'm not allowed to toss the apple.
It's a pretty easy test - I've been hardwired to not be careless with food - but thinking about throwing the apple makes me consider the other decisions I have to make throughout the day. Do I get up early and get work done, or do I sleep in and turn in a lower-quality assignment? It's easy to decide to "work hard this semester," but the actual choice comes at a thousand different points. Not throwing the apple is a constant decision.
After each meal at the cafeteria, I usually pick up an apple or pear on the way out to eat later. These fruits fit the hand well, like a baseball, and during the ten-minute walk back to my dorm, I repeatedly think, "I wonder if I could hit that tree with this apple," or, "Wouldn't it be fun to toss this apple in the air and catch it?" The urge to throw is great, and that's the point of the test-- I'm not allowed to toss the apple.
It's a pretty easy test - I've been hardwired to not be careless with food - but thinking about throwing the apple makes me consider the other decisions I have to make throughout the day. Do I get up early and get work done, or do I sleep in and turn in a lower-quality assignment? It's easy to decide to "work hard this semester," but the actual choice comes at a thousand different points. Not throwing the apple is a constant decision.
Thursday, November 20, 2014
Niche Jokes With Benjamin: Taxonomy
Why did the botanist throw away the basket woven out of rushes?
Because it was a piece of Juncus.
What did the botanists do when they saw the large, perennial grass?
They began to Panicum.
Which island has the most papyrus?
Cyprus (Cyperus).
Because it was a piece of Juncus.
What did the botanists do when they saw the large, perennial grass?
They began to Panicum.
Which island has the most papyrus?
Cyprus (Cyperus).
Wednesday, November 19, 2014
Talking About Weather
The sudden drop in temperature here has provided a conversation starter for countless citizens: "Wow, it's cold, isn't it?"
It's an interesting thing to say, when you think about it. It can be assumed that everyone already knows that its cold, so commenting on it doesn't communicate information as much as it communicates a desire to connect, if just in a small way.
It's a way of reaffirming that we're in the same boat, if only because we're under the same sky. It's probably some sort of rule that conversations start with common ground, and weather is about as common as it gets.
It's an interesting thing to say, when you think about it. It can be assumed that everyone already knows that its cold, so commenting on it doesn't communicate information as much as it communicates a desire to connect, if just in a small way.
It's a way of reaffirming that we're in the same boat, if only because we're under the same sky. It's probably some sort of rule that conversations start with common ground, and weather is about as common as it gets.
Tuesday, November 18, 2014
Contemporary Philosophy
I remember an annoying game I used to play where I would ask, "why?" after every statement made by whoever I was talking to. "Why do things fall to the ground?"
"Because of gravity."
"Yeah, but why does gravity work?"
"Because every time two pieces of matter exist, they attract each other."
"Why?"
I know I'm not the only person to have done this as a child, but such questions are also the focus of metaphysical philosophy. Many contemporary philosophers, building on the assumption that deductive logic is the only way to know truth (ironic), have followed this string of whys to the bitter end in a quest for absolute certainty.
A philosopher, born in 1967, called Quentin Meillassoux, has suggested the following:
"Our inability rationally to determine an absolute necessity or sufficient reason underlying things, properly understood, can be affirmed as a demonstration that there is in fact no such necessity or reason." (Hallward 132)
In other words, the argument is this:
1. Humans, being finite in understanding and knowledge, cannot prove that things must be the way they are (necessary). We have an idea, for example, that pushing a box causes it to move, but we cannot prove using deductive logic that it was the action of pushing the box that made it move.
2. This ignorance and lack of understanding, according to Meillassoux, is absolute proof that no necessity exists anywhere in the universe. The idea that humans are not omniscient disproves the existence of natural laws and causality itself.
This philosophy, called speculative realism, has other bad arguments, arbitrarily setting up non-contradiction and mathematics as the only things in the universe that are necessary, despite earlier saying that nothing is necessary. However, focusing on point 2, I'd like to dwell on how appalling this view is both for those who think logic has value and those who don't care about proving things.
Logically, 2 does not follow from one. Deductive logic is only valid when, given the premise (1), the conclusion (2) is the only possible result. Given premise 1, any number of results outside of 2 can be conceived. It could, for example, be that there is something in the universe transcendent to humans (God is the most obvious, but even pi is transcendent).
When logic is thrown out the window, Meillassoux has nothing to offer the world. There is no practical application of the idea that things might be otherwise. However good is defined, there seems to be nothing good that can come of this philosophy.
As a person with relatively little education in philosophy, I recognize that there could be redeeming aspects of speculative realism that I don't understand, but as I currently see things, contemporary metaphysics, when it assumes that humans are the highest form of existence, is insane.
"Because of gravity."
"Yeah, but why does gravity work?"
"Because every time two pieces of matter exist, they attract each other."
"Why?"
I know I'm not the only person to have done this as a child, but such questions are also the focus of metaphysical philosophy. Many contemporary philosophers, building on the assumption that deductive logic is the only way to know truth (ironic), have followed this string of whys to the bitter end in a quest for absolute certainty.
A philosopher, born in 1967, called Quentin Meillassoux, has suggested the following:
"Our inability rationally to determine an absolute necessity or sufficient reason underlying things, properly understood, can be affirmed as a demonstration that there is in fact no such necessity or reason." (Hallward 132)
In other words, the argument is this:
1. Humans, being finite in understanding and knowledge, cannot prove that things must be the way they are (necessary). We have an idea, for example, that pushing a box causes it to move, but we cannot prove using deductive logic that it was the action of pushing the box that made it move.
2. This ignorance and lack of understanding, according to Meillassoux, is absolute proof that no necessity exists anywhere in the universe. The idea that humans are not omniscient disproves the existence of natural laws and causality itself.
This philosophy, called speculative realism, has other bad arguments, arbitrarily setting up non-contradiction and mathematics as the only things in the universe that are necessary, despite earlier saying that nothing is necessary. However, focusing on point 2, I'd like to dwell on how appalling this view is both for those who think logic has value and those who don't care about proving things.
Logically, 2 does not follow from one. Deductive logic is only valid when, given the premise (1), the conclusion (2) is the only possible result. Given premise 1, any number of results outside of 2 can be conceived. It could, for example, be that there is something in the universe transcendent to humans (God is the most obvious, but even pi is transcendent).
When logic is thrown out the window, Meillassoux has nothing to offer the world. There is no practical application of the idea that things might be otherwise. However good is defined, there seems to be nothing good that can come of this philosophy.
As a person with relatively little education in philosophy, I recognize that there could be redeeming aspects of speculative realism that I don't understand, but as I currently see things, contemporary metaphysics, when it assumes that humans are the highest form of existence, is insane.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)