Philosophically speaking...

Legally speaking

2009-09-16T11:45:00.003+08:00

Self-proclamation, be it directly or indirectly expressed, or implied, either through verbal expression or non-verbal implications such as gestures, eye signals, or any body language suggesting such implications, is or should at times, which, depending on the context of the circumstances involved, be construed as a basic human tendency to explain and justify oneself and by human, it is intentional to mean any reasonable creature in rerum naturae, in the light of ignorance about both the objective as well as the socially-constructive reality of the matter, the knowledge of such reality in the self-proclaimed being irrelevant, is sometimes seen, depending on the circumstances by which the self-proclamation took place, as a contravention of rare and unconventional psychological readiness to resist such a temptation.

Land Law

2009-09-12T21:15:00.002+08:00

Today is my first class of Part One of LLB. We learn Land Law today. The subject is very hard! And very working world-like. It is filled with words like "fee simple", "fee tail", "adverse possession", "testamentary" "mortgage" (which I heard before but don't really know what it is), "reversion", etc. And then half way through the class, it all suddenly sounded like a Trust class with so many "trustees". It is extremely hard to follow the concepts because to know what is going on, one have to know what the previous concept is first. So all my blurness in this matter started to kick in and I was blur for almost the whole class. Somemore tomorrow would be tougher it seems. Don't know how...although was very excited to start class today!

2009-09-10T22:24:00.003+08:00

False solution?

2009-09-08T18:53:00.003+08:00

The statement "this statement is false" is a paradox because it would be false to say that the statement is true despite the subject in which the statement is referring to is true, while it is equally true to say that the statement is false because it falsely describe the truth of the subject matter. Therefore unless a statement can co-exist in both falsehood and being true, this statement would be an invalidity.

It appears that the statement exists in two different dimensions if it were to be logically non-fallacious. First, the statement "this statement is false" interpreted unto itself with its own universe of logic. Second, the statement "this statement is false" as a holistically detached form of arbitrary with no significance in meaning. Then again, the second requirement does not seem to fit in with the contradiction of the matter at stake, thereby creating an inability for a categorical assessment of statement to pose a paradoxical problem. If it were to have a meaning on its own, then it would have intertwine with the first dimension, leaving the paradox unresolved.

What about this interpretation: The main statement is true to say that the statement being referred to in the main statement is false because the subject matter being referred to is true. But it would be false to say that the statement being referred to in the main statement is true if the subject matter being referred to is true. Hence, it is false to say that the main statement is true when it says that the statement being referred to in the main statement is true if the subject matter referred to in the statement referring to the main statement is true.

Is the problem solved in my context, or have I fallen into its fallacy yet again...

2009-09-03T22:31:00.003+08:00

Do you think we should live by the past, in the now, or for the future?

'The Interpretation of Murder' talks of such a consideration in its very first page. To me, there is no one right answer to this question, nor do I humbly think that one can live all three planes of the fabric of time. At some level or another, we are all inclined towards a certain lifestyle that both characterised us as a person as well as reflecting our past experiences.

'We should look ahead and think far'. This propaganda is often advocated by those who tend to live for the future. In a sociological way, it would not be entirely accurate to consider them as 'delayed gratificators'. Proponents of this way of thinking tend to believe in the corporeal, material world- and what can be possibly, physically achieved. Therefore from this point of view, it would not be worth living by the past since it would lack the 'directness' in corelation of past events directly affecting future ones. Neither do they seem to think that living in the now would bring any reward, since life would appear to be stagnant in one moment of time. People thinking this way tend to lead a 'preparatory' life that some would feel that they are missing out the 'moments' of life, only reaping what they sow that they missed the process of 'sowing'.

They are the ones who live in the now. Usually, these are the ones who appreciate what they have- not what they would have. Sometimes, I would think that this seems to be the 'right' way to live by most standards. This is because we do not know what lies in the future whilst the past more often than not cannot be changed. Therefore, we should be grateful for what we have before things change, because the truth is, things always change.

Those who live by the past tend to invoke past events as soundbites and as a way to further improve conditions than things previously were. But sometimes, people get stuck with the past, so much so that they cannot move on in life to traverse what lies ahead in the future, nor in the now for that matter. A complete opposite with those who live for the future, those who live by the past often believe that the past does matter despite it being 'happened already' and the whole saying of 'there is no point crying over spilt milk'. People make ammends based on past history and that's how we ironically do not get stuck in the same cycle of events equivalent to a person who lives on lost memory.

I think that at the end of the day, all three timelines play an important role individually in shaping who we are as a person today and who we will be in the future. But if I were to choose one timeline I would consider for myself, right now I would say that the best way is to live in the now. I strongly believe that we should all appreciate what we have now- the people around us, our possessions, and experiences we had thus far acquired. Because at the end of the day, nothing seems so certain to be worth 'preparing' for, while there is nothing so 'thoughtful' to be worth looking back at, unable to progress through life, hence missing the whole point of life. Therefore, we should be grateful for what we have, inspired by what has been, and hope for the best in the future, rather than becoming an extremist in either timeframes.

'The Interpretation of Murder' tells us that the past creates meaning in life while the future leaves us with the existence of hope. But in my opinion, neither matters so much as the things we currently have in the now and we should therefore appreciate them.

2009-08-29T20:50:00.002+08:00

Emphaty.

Sometimes, putting oneself in others' shoes tells us alot. More so when we further consider their variables. Life variables. It is a position and place where we are exactly at that particular spot for once. Then, it all becomes painful.

Ocassionally, the human species tend to be altruistic. A sudden disregard for oneself to riskily venture into a stressful domain. Voluntarily. In common terms, we say we feel for that someone. Of course without said, that trandscends the limit of verbal expression.

Is it more stressful to be stressful, or, can watching others being stressful be equally so? Quite clearly, I think everyone would agree that there is no such distinction, nor should there be anyway. After all, one is stressed either way.

Everyone out there please take care of yourself. Everyone is falling ill. Not much could be done, and it seems to prolong that way. I pray for this scourge to end.

2009-08-11T14:18:00.004+08:00

“The reality remains that I am a law fanatic…but I seem to have undergone a series of “truth-revelation” mechanism of the insight to life that I was certain I have been somewhat socially influenced into what seem to be an eternal an cyclic world of sociological thinkers.”
July 9 2007

“Michelle was like eating all the way and for some reason, the atmosphere was very much "economical" in the sense that most of them were actually talking bout 'econs', which, to me, was a total surprise because we use to talk nonsense during break.”
July 11 2007

“But she immediately got up when I told her that she could be electrocuted when the train is coming! Haha..u should see how fast she got up!”

“We saw a man fishing on land by the way!! Haha!!”
July 14 2007

“Abandoned in my "like that" world is the feeling of boredom in anticipation of i don't know wat.”
July 16 2007

“So i helped them to balance and move on ice (the basics) but one stupid fact was that i was too light to guide them (i almost fell with them when i'm supposed to guide them hand in hand!).”
July 19 2007

“As for me, some teachers were like, "Oh..you doing law ah".”
July 22 2007

“Venue: MidValley, Timesquare, Sunway Pyramid (president's discretion)”

“The pig then crap too much and thus Homer throw a tank of pig's crap into the river which polluted it severely.”
August 1 2007

“I actually anticipated that the process would be more fun- gathering infos and discussion and stuffs like that- but it all turned out differently, causing breakdowns and arguments as well as momentary serious conflicts that threatened to jeopardise our friendships at that time.”

“Lastly, i hope everyone who came to play for our club enjoyed themselves because that is what this club is all about- to inspire people to play bowling and to become bowling addicts..haha.”

“I was constantly blaming the balls and my thumb but in actual fact, i just wasn't good in bowling..i suck at it. So much for being the club's secretary somemore...so malu oni...haha.”
August 3 2007

“I wanted to read my econs notes but i couldn't bring myself to do it..haha..what an excuse..”
August 5 2007

“A thing is something,

Something isn't nothing,

Therefore, a thing isn't nothing.

The above should be a valid syllogism by applying the substitution formula:

A chicken is an animal,

Animal isn't plant

Therefore, chicken isn't plant.”
August 8 2007

“My usual score was usually in the 40's and as such, i was really astonished by my own performance!”
August 10 2007

“It seems to me that i have to sacrifice one hour of my day every single day just to travel.”
August 11 2007

“After all, like he always tell me, Alevels is too short a time of our lives to enjoy so we should appreciate all the time we have.”
August 12 2007

“I tend to disappoint people and feel that they made a mistake getting to know me as a friend because i always turned out to be not the "ideal" friend.”
August 16 2007

“We started off with two games because it was already 3 pm and the management thought it would be safer to play 2 games first in case we played until 5pm then the rate is different. Later, the remaining 5 came and we all played, though in different lanes. After the two games, as usual, we add another one because it was still not 5pm yet. So in total, some of us played 3 games while the others played 2. Sounds so complicated right...hahaha..”
August 17 2007

“Then we head to the souvenir shop where i found this book called "The Way to Happiness".”
August 21 2007

“We played four games in total and Ming Wai was the surprise there as he claimed to be the longkang king but scored an average of 100++!”
August 22 2007

“And they even sang the birthday song to Tok Badak!!”

“I actually slipped and fell side ways to my left and kicked off the “Caution. Wet Floor” sign.”
August 23 2007

“I really enjoyed the game, though i have to admit i felt a little bit akward and couldn't really express well in the game today as i have previously done before in the past few days of our practice of 20 games in total.”

“I wanted to read econs but i think i'll leave that for tomorrow.”
August 25 2007

“I don't really know what i think i thought i know.”

“...but i don't know whether i'm really had it controlled or it is already controlling me to think that i had it under controll.”
August 27 2007

“Not only it requires alot of sociological thinking and interpretation, it also involves alot of sociological language which is sociologically confusing because sociology is a social science that is very sociological in nature.”
August 28 2007

“The only reason law is considered is because when i took part in debate during secondary school, the whole process was so fun and exciting. In a way, it's so me to argue facts and sometimes, convince people.”
August 29 2007

“So let's leave these days out of my life as if there is less days in a week.”

“There's no law class today due to a major power failure in Brickfields. Somehow, things come true went we say it.”
September 5 2007

“No comments on the game as i was too ambitious to assume miracle when i started trying hook.”
September 7 2007

“On a personal level, inward, outward whatever and wherever it's coming from, it's awfully sour and disappointing.”
September 10 2007

“I wish i had a scholarship too. But i did not even try to apply for any, just hope the letter come flying into my mail box. If it were that simple.”
September 12 2007

“The May/June 2003 econs paper was the one i disliked and that one was "coincidentally" chosen for us to do. Then, there is the Oct/Nov 2002 paper which we never attempted before.”
September 14 2007

“And, bawanie, i got no idea to come up with a story of the two "Tok"s and the "Seri" currently.”
September 22 2007

“Well done, i supposed, to the dominant group out there in imposing such a solid and concrete, airproof structure that is generally killing some individuals living in the socially constructed world of "yours".”
September 23 2007

“My phone rang in the sardin tin a few stations after that and i didn't know how to take out my phone.”
September 24 2007

“Well, if life is like an organic entity with the natural ability to regulate itself to cope with changes in internal and external conditions (homeostasis), would it apply to the real world?”
September 25 2007

“Seem childish, however, it makes me reminisce about the times when i was a kid, waking up early excitedly on weekends to watch Dragonball.”
September 27 2007

“First up is the selfish, profit-maximising subject: Economics. Next up is the over-socially complicated subject: Sociology. And lastly, it's the technically legalistic and backwards memorising subject: Law.”

“Well, don't bother deciphering what that means if you don't get it- it's just one of the "My World" phrases.”
September 28 2007

“If we can decide what to decide, it'll be convenient too. If we can control our brains, then we don't need brains in the first place. True. So let's be robots, where we decide everything on our own.”
October 3 2007

“Apparently, the images emanating from the media box was far more tempting than lines of black and white alphabets.”

“Prediction after all is never accurate and bias.”
October 5 2007

“I have actually thought of doing something like that as Medical Law, seeing that i still like biology a little and i get to fuse both the arts and science elements in my carreer.”

“I suddenly felt a rush inside of me due to the exam thing. I guess this is the cue already to start...why this time come so late?”
October 6 2007

“First time though, travelling alone back for one hour at night all the way to klg.”

“The supposedly fresh morning has started off with me reading a note on "Sociological Theories: Positivism and Anti-positivism".”
October 10 2007

“Oh man...it was a wrong choice... The show was an aesop fables about the consequences of being greedy...”

“So i went to the bowling alley, and to my surprise, it was under renovation!!!! Wat the.......i was so ready to play...”
October 19 2007

“Actually i don't know what to blog today and everytime i blog i feel like i'm in a world of my own. Hahaha (i seriously find this very amusing)!”
October 20 2007

“But i'm no where superior to any of these stuffs. So it's not my calling.”
October 22 2007

“"Sociology is not the same as common sense. Discuss" [25]”

“Thinking back everything that had taken place from the first day of college, or should i say, reflecting back the past, i realised that something had not significantly changed.”

“and btw, not everything is exam and studies related. so there”
October 30 2007

“btw huiwen, today was our turn to be the professional photographers!”
November 1 2007

“Again, i couldn't really understand econs cause it's so econs.”

“the confusingly mind-twisting ECONS, the dreadful SOCIO and the untouchable LAW ...”
November 3 2007

“Delta rocks?”
November 5 2007

“Thus, my deduction is that sociology is an "elaborate fiction" which is never ending and there is no begining and a "thing" (social fact) whereby we strive to believe and will remain existent for as long as we are able to maintain this belief.”

“Maybe i was too exam mode when they weren't and when i weren't they were.”
November 17 2007

“It's the lak tiam and chit tiam hee.”
November 20 2007

“Guess i'm just to sensitive but the whole trip yesterday weren't like the first time me and my collegemates went to sunway together for the first time, although, i don't deny that this particular trip was enjoying for me as we managed to skate and bowl the whole day! That was the two things i really like to do..haha”
November 22 2007

“We talked and talked almost about the same topic. Life in INTI, Taylors, and stuffs...our progress...hahaha”

“And i realised that people changed alot.”
November 24 2007

“Even Angelina Jolie was in graphical form and they all look so real...”
November 26 2007

“And as most of my classes are in solely in the afternoon, it requires more motivation for me to get my ass on the ktm to brickfields, everyday.”
November 27 2007

“I did not read in advance and came in totally clueless of trade unions, supply of labour, and stuffs...it's the subject...juz couldn't get the hang of it even after AS.”

“The only drawback for me was that the jusco did not have a bowling alley or an ice-skating ring, though this is offset by the fact that they have a Greenbox Karaoke and a cinema as entertainment.”
December 4 2007

“So she was like a celeb there taking pics with us in Chicken Rice shop!”
December 5 2007

“We learn the tort of negligence and there was an activity during the class in which i was in the Tiger Woods group.”
December 6 2007

“The subjective questions were so difficult that i couldn't write enough words to fill up the empty spacing given.”
December 7 2007

“This clearly hit me on the fact that law was totally not in my mind at that very time as an option.”

“It's also ironic that i've been there several times on numerous occasions (in total seven times) but never, or at least, have not, yet, decided to enroll there.”
December 9 2007

“The total was Rm21.84 and i only had Rm21.00 with me!”

“No matter how many times he repeated the graph story because alot of us looked blur, i still cannot understand a single thing of what is goin on!”

“my mind tht time memang at other place d...hehe..thinkin of so many other things including the ushi ushi la!!!”
December 11 2007

“During Tort class, I was eating crabs!”
December 13 2007

“Everything becomes so subjective and value-laden that one day, everything might be nothing. Yet, nothing can ever be everything.”
December 15 2007

“Okla as the price was reasonably foreseeable and it was also reasonably delicious.”
December 18 2007

“After the show though, jian keep on ask me “So wat is in page 42 of the president’s book?” …I’m like “dono…its juz a show la. Mayb u can go find it in yr sejarah rujukan book!” ]]”

“So you can imagine 10ppl seating at one round table and eat chicken rendang and curry for dinner!!!”

“Supposed to meet them up at Teluk Pulai train station at 10.30am but, as usual, I left my house at 10.30.”

“Then in the train, kc was saying something about stem cells and placenta while Sow was telling me about how dangerous it is to rear a sausage dog because it’s too short and u will not be able to see it walking around in the house; might overstep it!”
December 26 2007

“I was juz panicking and i knew i had no choice but to go becos i had no choice. I had no choice becos i had to go. The other option was to go jail.”

“And so i was like a weird guy with short pants n slipper wondering aimlessly at d airport!!!”

“The three months flew past considerably long. It wasn't the usual "blink of an eye".”

“I was his "backpack" becos i was so small in relative to his huge size and he often carry me "piggy bag" style n play play!”

“I was d only one semi-bald in all 3 clsses i attended to!”

“All i can say is ns and col life changed me alot frm who i was last time. Its like a year of turning point for me in my own right and way.”
December 31 2007

“It’s paranoid, people say, to think of things. It’s naïve, people say, to assume nothing.”
January 15 2008

“There is no begining. There is no end. I might not have started. I might never know it has ended.”
January 27 2008

“"No testpad papers in between notes, no notes in between textbook, no folding notes and chuck 'em in the bag" were her requirements.”
February 13 2008

“Even if you get an answer, it might very well be a false one. And if you get a false one, then it is a false one. And when you get the real one, you will think it is the false one and so believe that it is false.”
February 21 2008

“At its peak, sometimes it almost impulsively causes that person to tell it all out from A to Z in an emergency-like sensation, OR, at its lower-end peak, scold people in anger that overly justifies itself.”

“I just don't see common morality that often.”
February 28 2008

“…if a person keeps focusing on the negative aspects of their lives, then the negativity will materialise itself, reinforcing the belief that live is all negative.”
March 12 2008

"Ideology is the process which happens behind people's backs" Louis Althusser

“At times i do wish i can return to those days where i would characterise it as the "holiday period" where i would enjoy the ambience of happiness sprouting in me.”

“At the end of the day, the perfectly socialised individual would seem to be the "right one" in society. Or is he fooled?”
May 2 2008

“We were known as the "Klangites" by our friends.”

“To me, it feels like a really long time as there were just so many things that happened in just a year and a half.”
May 6 2008

“…the reason this blog was created was because of this subject in the first place.”
May 27 2008

“We are living in an age of conspiracy where dominant figures may be simultaneously conspiring society whilst being conspired.”
July 16 2008

“Yet, beyond its superficiality is a deeply personal thing.”
July 29 2008

“As such, i could be dreaming that i'm typing now and when i've decided to slumber into a sleep and dream, i could be waking up from my dream of me typing.”
August 8 2008

“If i wasn't thinking about it, does that mean that it did not exist, only emerging to existence upon my induced mental calling?”
August 11 2008

“Why isn't up, down? Is it because both up and down cannot be both up and down?”
August 14 2008

“But when we are not able to understand why, that’s when we fall into the false belief that we do not care.”
August 20 2008

“I think it is therefore the root by which it is seen as an imperfect mechanism; because it is the creation of the powerful, more dominant class in society to legitimize their ideologies at the expense of those who fail to “press exactly the right button”.”

“Two years ago, we have been rebutted that once a wrongdoer had committed a wrongful act, it follows that his rights should have been forfeited in the light of “lawfully” receiving punishment of a corporal nature.”
September 2 2008

“Apart from the fact that there was ‘drama’ to not only behold but naively drawn into which, at the very least, relieved our boredom of awaiting the bus, this was really a foul experience to run into.”
September 20 2008

“I do not know whether i have completed the 'socially-internalizing' phase but I am now in another territory. One that would empirically challenge my socially-interpretative ways.”
September 23 2008

“So what is bad? Not good?”
September 29 2008

“Probably a less ill-fated curse to one of them, but then again, monotony isn't exactly dramatic, is it?”
October 6 2008

“Therefore, if there was a subsequent "But" to a "But", than the last "But" would take effect.”
October 24 2008

“There is no comparison to be made now between taking the bus and standing in a sardin tin.”
November 3 2008

“Living's like a past time. A hobby.”
November 6 2008

“How cruel the cause was. And is.”

“Self-inducement? How can one negate these beings into being the cause of self-inducement?”
November 14 2008

“In fact, I see the reason this rationale isn't always entertained because it has been so rooted in the core of society's logic that it has become part of a redundant form of common sense, so much so that an officious bystander would react to this thought with a suppressed "Oh, of course!".”

“The amazing characteristic of having numbers is that it is capable of legitimising any forms of behaviours, be it deviant or one that radically challenges the conceptual paradigm of human morality.”

“Should I say, therefore, that society is a neutral entity being constantly moulded anomalously into something "right", only to be "wronged" later.”
November 17 2008

“The end should not justify the means. The means should become an end in itself to be justified as well.”
December 5 2008

“It's not great to know that i know what i know because when i know that i know what i know, i tend to see things that i ought not to know because by knowing that i know what i know, i will tend to tend to see things that i ought not to know.”
December 12 2008

“Justice was always there, any belief to the contrary would either be a denial of its harsh existence or the ignorance of it.”

“The human being is an agent created for the task of looking for a task to perpetuate the legacy that there never was a task in the first place.”
January 29 2009

“At the end of the day, politics is merely a means to an end. Why do we have to institutionalize it?”
February 11 2009

“For nature knows no difference between the scientific beings called humans.”
February 23 2009

“The times when i seem paranoid, i was proved to be so. And when i wasn't, i should have been so.”
March 28 2009

“You ask whether I have foresight and I would say no.”
April 2 2009

“Why should there be a presumption that nothing which can be proven to exist, never existed? Because that would mean that anything exists?”
April 21 2009

“I aslo had a strangely reflective holiday in Taiping and Seremban which I enjoyed so much till I can vividly recall the vacation!”
May 24 2009

“I wonder if that translates to the ordinary sense of "not having time for yourself" in living in a comparative lifestyle, or a sense of inferiority to the effect of not being able to settle with what I am, out of constant dissatisfaction with myself in relation to others.”
June 7 2009

“We don't get instincts out of nowhere, do we?”
June 12 2009

“Perhaps they chose to turn a blind eye, because they help to pursue one’s own interests.”
June 20 2009

“But when we fail to make our amends, or we thought we failed, we find it hard to commit to what lies ahead, the door of possibility still being open to the past, should success replaces failure sometime in the future.”
August 4 2009

"I"

2009-08-09T00:33:00.003+08:00

I'd like to thank this person for her mere presence in my life. For allowing me to confide in you during times where it seems like there is no solution, no hope and no future. There are times where it seems like you may not be listening. As well as those times where it seems like you cannot feel any less burdensome than you probably already are to take in more from me. But by just listening, and understanding- even without an utterance- had I felt so in sync with common morality, something I had once posted in this very blog- that I rarely come across such commonality. It is inevitable that countless claims, opinions, judgements and critics will abound, either reflecting pressured-comments, internalised-ignorance or even self-preservation. But neither matters, nor should they be at the end of the day, because far beyond the current considered matter are matters that really matter more than the matter that matters now. There are obviously obvious reasons why there is such an understanding, and I treasure our ties, but one that I had always hope to see in others other than you. And I have not.

Choice

2009-08-04T22:14:00.003+08:00

It's not about yes or no. It's not about one or zero. It's not about right or wrong. It's not about today or yesterday, last time, "that" time or now. It's not about "absolutely"s or "but"s. It's not about the calculable, the empirical or deliberate inconsistency.

It is about self-knowledge, intuition, natural compatibility and the needlessly verbalised sense of solidarity. It is unexplainable and should not seek to be explained.

Sometimes, we choose to amend what has been rather than what's coming up. We choose to look back and reflect, an afterthought that struck us as more important and which matters to us, more than the unknown ahead of the present. But when we fail to make our amends, or we thought we failed, we find it hard to commit to what lies ahead, the door of possibility still being open to the past, should success replaces failure sometime in the future.

And even if we don't, believing in our judgement wouldn't be any less skeptical anymore than it might have been. Because the past can be repeated, while the future left untold.

Which always has me in a stalemate.

Philosophical Introspection

2009-08-04T00:14:00.004+08:00

I don't have the thirst to know things

But why?

Because I don't have the thirst to know things.

An Era of Narcissism

2009-08-03T16:42:00.015+08:00

Perhaps Giddens has precisely described the era we are living in.

The "institutionalised mode of conduct..." has always been undergoing constant fragmentation and increased division of labour. But even within the social sphere of things, I suppose in a sociological way, an evolutionary shift of equilibrium can be traced. Perhaps this character is but a byproduct of nature's own way of securing the balance of society- an intended function. Or, could it any less validly be an unintended one?

I am referring to the post-modern culture.

As civilisation progresses, the bond of kinships somehow weaken. The reasons lie in structural and occupational explanations, triggering a string of adaptation not just in the economic sphere, but interestingly, the symbolic realm of interactionsim. Today, we had attuned ourselves to global diversity- something generally foreign in traditional times. But "diversity" has been developing ever since, an outcome of which threatens the cohesion that binds every fabric of society together due to intense pluralism to its extreme- multi individualism.

More succinctly put, Giddens calls it the era of narcissism. A time of ignorance, egoistical self-centeredness, and self-preservation. I think it would then erode the exclusivity of the concepts of dysfunctions, exceptions and known deviances so that the "diversity" label loses its sense of purpose.

Eventually, one could view the situation in two ways- a latent form of anarchy, or a less extreme reality of near-absolute relativity (in a social way). Viewed from a Marxist perspective then, capitalism in whichever form it manifests would not survive, will it? Since the controlling class loses its ideological dominance over its "commodities", who by then seek to (individualistically) perpetuate theirs. It wouldn't last long presumably, as Hobbes would put it: "...nasty, brutish and short..." even in a social context. Which means that a certain degree of interdependence must exist- yet this notion only conversely reflects the irony that a narcissistic society seems to offer.

Are we somehow conditioned to internalise this way of living? Or are we becoming more socially aware of our individual autonomies?

Social Residues

2009-06-20T00:21:00.004+08:00

What is the value of one man’s belief in a collectively consensual society going against that belief? None- he’s insane.

At least that’s what the population would think. But it’s not the least in significance such labels would pose. It matters what people think. As much as some would deny this importance or even feel for the person so labeled, no one can detract from the truth that subjectivity determines facts.

It is true that everything is subjective. Why then, do some garner more votes than others? Perhaps that is subjective as well? In this situation, how does one tell subjectivity from favourtism? It is in these social loopholes that people impose individualistic opinions whilst claiming to be under the veil of subjectivity, is it not?

In law, it is well settled that ignorance of the law is no defence- it is an irrefutable avenue that everyone would pursue. As I’d observed, the same enforcement cannot be seen in human behavioural ethics in a morally obligatory way, at least as strong in effect as this legal doctrine imposes.

Do people ‘see through’ these selfish endeavours? Perhaps they chose to turn a blind eye, because they help to pursue one’s own interests. Or that such a perception could easily be a projection of another’s subjective reality. Like I’ve said, it’s indiscernible. In modern civilization, it is not astounding to consider such a view as the human nature constantly finds its way to manifest its internal desires. In a more sophisticated manner, I would say.

Then again, it could all be absolutely fictional.

Natural Instincts

2009-06-12T22:06:00.007+08:00

Let's ponder on the issue of Instincts.

Instincts are intuitions, some would say a natural phenomenon? But what is a natural phenomenon? What constitutes a natural phenomenon? In this context, are instincts biological or sociological in nature to amount to a natural phenomenon?

I guess they also call instincts hunches. Do people have hunches? Do people feel that something is amidst? In other words, are those feelings scientifically real, or are they merely psychological? If it being the latter, does that mean that we can control it? If it being the former, then people don't really have hunches in a linguistic sense, do they? In fact, there won't be such a thing as a hunch.

Instincts are the result of an assessment of a whole history of social interactions and the socialisation process that makes up that individual's identity. This implies that every person's instincts are not the same. While some instincts prove more accurate than others, they all naturally reflect a person's values and perceptions. To that effect, it may be considered to be sociological in origin.

But I continue to wonder if instinct is a byproduct of the complex neuro-calculations of our brain. Something that is not 'made up' so as to be psychological, but rather, a 'humanly' character. It is said that animals do have instincts as well, hence does that support the idea that instincts are biological in origin?

Then again, it is true that the external environment is the triggering factor of instincts in the first place. We don't get instincts out of nowhere, do we? That being the case, instincts seem to possess both a sociological and biological character in nature, since they are caused by the external dimension while being internally processed. Thus 'natural' covers both aspects, to be precise. But I find myself not being able to not mention the chronological argument that since instincts are triggered by external factors in which the internal process is based upon, wouldn't that make instincts sociological in nature? This brings us back to the earlier argument; the fact that animals have instincts themselves does not necessarily follow that instincts are biological in origin since it is possible that animals have their own socialisation process as well which caused the creation of instincts. But animal instincts are thought not to be the same as that of humans as they do not possess that 'humanly' character I was talking about. Do fresh-borned infants have instincts? The answer would shed much light on the debate at hand.

Either way, the consensus appears that instinct seems to be a natural phenomenon. It is difficult to categorise its origin as it may just be an existent in the rhetoric and linguistic sense.

Philosophical swings?

2009-06-07T01:19:00.004+08:00

I can't sleep. I've been thinking alot. Lately. From the relevant to the irrelevant. From the weird to the rational. From the probable to the self-generated. From reality to ignorance, and self-confessed philosophical thinking. I feel entrapped in my mind of out-of-no-where social realities that has kept me captive for so long. To some, it had them labelled as "unnecessary". To others, it has just been part of my philosophy. For me, it has been somewhat rewarding at times, but mostly torturing.

I feel consumed by a whole world of life out there and the conventionally unexplained. Not that I'm on a life-long journey to self-exploration but I may have unintentionally embarked on one. I feel immersed in people's lives and happenings around me that I've consistently lost my sense of Self in the sociological sense; both the I and the Me. I wonder if that translates to the ordinary sense of "not having time for yourself" in living in a comparative lifestyle, or a sense of inferiority to the effect of not being able to settle with what I am, out of constant dissatisfaction with myself in relation to others. The point is, I don't want to be rationalising these stuffs anymore you see, as the process just gets me nowhere near the exit of a "self-full", anti-social and lonesome life. I'm not enjoying the thinking for the most part, though I am able to explain things more subtly.

I'm still interested in philosophy anyway. The only thing I gathered about it is that philosophy makes you think and live in that thinking. Philosophy, in my opinion, doesn't contribute to one's living in the physical sense; it's more of a way of life that does not transcend beyond that grey matter.

Having said all that, I'm still doubtful I would ever change my ways, as momentarily determined as I occasionally use to be. I think I better get some sleep now. It's getting late already. I'll stop here.

The Ideal of Perfection

2009-06-01T21:30:00.005+08:00

The occasional halts in life is often misperceived as obstacles; burdenful obstacles that is unnecessarily happening in our lives. I use the article "is" to denote a singular tone as these obstacles, though often appear in different forms, are always regarded as stemming from the umbrella of negativities. They can be taken as soundbites that remind us once in a while that we are still living in a world of imperfections. Admittedly, these soundbites occur more regularly for some so that any flawlessness act as encouragement and consolation that the world is not entirely without its beauties.

To some, these halts seem to be more chronic that the well-being of a quality life has been hampered. It is at this point that these obstacles have ventured a distance far more than a mere stimulant of human resistance to daily upsets.

The world has shown to us that there never was perfection. This notion however, has proved to be far too general and simplistic to reflect accurately the realities of imperfection itself. Within this notion is a world more severe: there are various degrees of imperfections that the lowest end of the range would make the notion an understatement. Maybe it wasn't meant to be stratified further; they are still imperfections nevertheless.

Is there any truth that the better we are able to explain these obstacles and our lives, the closer to perfection will we reach? Or does it maintain a myth that one can attain perfection? Would there be such a notion of perfection then?

While we should not favour different levels of imperfections, the reality remains that we are imperfect beings ourselves.

The Legally Binding Effect

2009-05-24T13:45:00.004+08:00

After some grueling 2 months of revision, the exam is finally over. Apart from some grievous bodily harm suffered, I am happy to have come out of it. By 'it' i meant the tireless conscience that reminds you to keep it going even though you are out of breath, leaving me with a trace of cough which it always does in these conditions.

I am left with a pal whom I last met some one year ago during this period. I haven't quite had a great time with it back then, but I'm hoping it'll be a better company this time around. As always, the first semester was rough and hectic, so much so that this coming holidays seem alluring to me. I can finally do whatever I want at anytime at any place without the smirking stench of politics lingering around my face!

This reminds me of Spirited Away. Like I've came out of the other side of the tunnel, leaving behind an illusory world of oddities, albeit for a temporary period of 3 months. By the way, I watched Angels and Demons already! The whole theme of the story was interesting; religion versus science. Rethoric versus reality? I believe that rethoric is also the reality.

On another note, I had to say that the first semester of LLB was entertaining, particularly three events. The first was college prom night which I had a blast. I aslo had a strangely reflective holiday in Taiping and Seremban which I enjoyed so much till I can vividly recall the vacation! It's mentally dramatic, yea. It's sort of like the Genting trip I went with my college mates after my Alevels exam in 2008.

There's so many things to say, yet they would all mean nothing if they were to be said. If they were left unsaid, then they only mean something to me, which I don't want to be meant with! It's meaningless!

The Necessity of a "Feeling-Detector"

2009-04-21T18:46:00.003+08:00

If only there exists a "feeling-detector" which measures maturity, sincerity, understanding and intuition. At least that would clarify alot of things and say alot of our current positions without the need to prove them. This begs the question: why do we need to prove them?

Is this so called "need" the remnants of an inherently human nature in the Hobbes sense? Or a faintest reminder that the almost biological character of humans is still lurking somewhere beneath the veil of civil progression? Is materialism embedded in the post-modern culture? If so, it seems to suggest that there are indivisible basic features of society which run across the dimension of time. These features seem to possess the quality of energy: imperishable and unperturbed by the thoery of relativity in the sociological sense. They take various forms across social epochs with the condition that its true functions remain intact. In my opinion, this condition will last for as long as the population is being organised in the conventional way called society.

This argument raises another question which could diminish the need to answer the first one: does this "need" exists at all to begin with? As my socialisation process used to tell me, it could all just be a state of mind. Which may be rightly so, since I could never prove its existence. Then again, nor could I prove otherwise. Why should there be a presumption that nothing which can be proven to exist, never existed? Because that would mean that anything exists? But that does not necessarily follow that what cannot be proven to exist, does not exist, does it? The presumption may only be justified by the mere reason that scientists will not be faced with an infinite amount of possibilities. But this would mean that the human species may never discover the unthinkable-because they never existed as far as the presumption is concerned.

Presumptions aside, the question remains: assuming that the "need" did existed, what is the reason behind its existence? I come to a teleological conundrum in interpreting the "need" from a functionalist argument: it exists only because it must have served a function, yet it serves a function because it existed. I noticed a fallacy though, in this tautology: it seems impossible that it is capable of existing because it served a function; a function cannot be the reason for its existence-existence in essence should be the antecedent of function. But this would undermine the function in the objectively-existent sense being a lesser form of existence than existence itself. The argument runs.

From another angle of what my socialisation process constantly tells me (this view often being the more dominant one) is that the "need" exists to further the agenda of a massive conpsiracy at operation (here we go again, i know!) This is the most irritatingly paranoid view that constantly questions everything. But to adopt such a view would mean that altruism is merely a farce. Is that really so? At times it appears that way. But that doesn't mean that it really is that way just because it appears so, does it?

I find myself reluctant to answer the question that I've unnecessarily came up with. On the one hand, it would seem that there is a need to prove them to be acknowledged. On the other, there may be no answer to it since the "need" may not exist in the first place. If the latter prevails in truth (and I meant the objective truth-if it ever existed), than there would be no need to have a "feeling-detector"; the only need being mental rest.

Who Am I?

2009-04-07T22:31:00.002+08:00

Who am I?

"I'm Spiderman"

Feeling "Time"

2009-04-02T00:06:00.003+08:00

I am almost feeling time in a tangible way. You ask whether I have foresight and I would say no. But one do not need the foresight to know that this is really last minute work now but hopefully I'll manage to do this last bit of work! I haven't read miscarriages of justice, jury and judiciary and, prima facie, I got all of them mixed up. And ADR too of course, not to mention that mentioning this topic reminds me that I've not started on my research assignment. So much coming in so little time to prepare for it coming like tonnes of gallons of wave water rushing down the shore! Then again, it all goes down to the hope that I must soak it up too.

The Politics of Everything

2009-03-28T01:20:00.003+08:00

This is what i felt today. Totally detached. I've discovered alot to the theory of life that i have started pursuing since alevels. Though i know this is a life-long process that is almost infinite and will never end till i die.

I used to convince myself that my thoughts are always probably playing tricks with me, being constantly brainwashed to believe that i am extremely paranoid with everything! Not that i'm disagreeing with that, then again i've been internalised to believe that way, how could i see the bigger picture?

The times when i seem paranoid, i was proved to be so. And when i wasn't, i should have been so. Plain naive and being stepped all over the place. Then again, i might just be paranoid again, right?

I have nothing else to say. my theory of life continues...

Colours

2009-03-19T21:22:00.002+08:00

Gushes of water splashed its way to his face from a waterhole. He embraced it like he never felt water for days. It felt tranquilizing. Refreshingly solitary. Absent from the chorus of unbearable hype, his senses amplified a thousand folds. He could better gauge the source of discontentment.

Life of the Seemingly Unworldly

2009-03-03T15:36:00.002+08:00

Thoughts are always meant to give one an out-of-proportion calibration of things. Things in life. Simple things. Like the tastiness of food, the sound of a bullet, insulting comments, public speaking, condition of working experience, trust in friendship, fear of loss, paranoia, etc.

Or at least, it seems to be that way. Most of the time.

Far from its actual reality of things, it follows that the favour is on the non thought-induced to blame the other for any disproportions in their assessment of a given situation. In this scenario, one can merely accept (albeit with defiance at times) the ego-shattering fact of his own inexperience.

The truth is, gravity is dictator. But so are thoughts. Thoughts that ought to defy gravity often emerge from the ridiculed. Yet, they induce confidence and exude optimism.

At the end of the day, who are to judge one’s thoughts? Or life principles? Even if those thoughts and principles are thought to be inexperienced? Is not that a thought that is likely to be an out-of-proportion one as well? Are not those merely typical life standards? And is not typical standards doesn’t always equate to a legitimate one at the exclusion of other degrees of standards?

This only means that while inexperience is still possibly existent, the legitimacy of one’s thoughts is inherently relative.

Complexities ought to be simplified. Yet, thoughts have always been known to be out-of-proportion from its actuality. Or, it is made to appear that way. A condition that gives way to underweighted justifications.

Life should not be a race. Yet many have fallen prey to the contrary. Destroying lives, only to realize what matters at the end of the day.

Is this realization an inexperienced one? Then again, does it really matter?

Nature's Prerogative

2009-02-23T22:26:00.002+08:00

It may not qualify as a socially constructed institutional discretionary authority. Yet, it needs no approval of a general consensual level as to its dictation of the "natural workings" of things. Politics and prejudices are but mere human traits that characterise the "humanly" counterpart of nature's prerogative, relinquishing the latter from such value-laden tendencies which restrict it from existing beyond the human culture; the seemingly impossible state of absolute objectivity.

Even in the absence of any cosmic mechanism of check and balance, there is no such thing as an arbritary abuse of power. For nature knows no difference between the scientific beings called humans. It also isn't driven by any particular goal so that a particular means employed may be deviated from to suit any particular perspective that is somehow always justified. Ultimately, what is justifiable is the fact that its decision need not be reviewed because naturally, it is its prerogative.

The Mask of Anarchy

2009-02-11T03:12:00.003+08:00

Much of society’s secret agenda has yet to be unraveled. Every individual is playing their own game of politics. How does one unearth all of them and bring it to the fore? Then again, the question seems to be: why does it matter? Well, obviously if it affects one’s social well-being, then there seems to be a socially justified reason to interject this flow of political continuity. Doesn’t it?

Consequently, the terms "social well-being" then appears to need a definition. There seems no particular arrangement of words which can succinctly define these terms given its conceptual character. Put in another way, it conversely means one’s own political agenda itself. Thus, everything would be political in the field of politics for there to be an actual social justification that is externally justified in itself. It is only a blame game which inevitably culminates to a deadlock of political morality.

So how do we escape the gravity of this field? To explain ourselves outside this framework of political bickering? Or political involvement? Is that even a possibility? As the functionalists have it, we are all interdependent to preserve the survival of society by means of a social consensus. After all, no one can or should live in vacuum, exiled from the status quo, even if it is somehow politically driven.

At the end of the day, politics is merely a means to an end. Why do we have to institutionalize it?

Is there no other way out? “Out of what?”, one would ask.

The End of Life

2009-01-29T14:43:00.002+08:00

No, it’s not when you’re medically certified to be ‘brain-stem’ dead.

There’s a reason why it is called the end of life. Otherwise we might end with a beginning. Which breaks the law of chronology, I suppose.

Life is just an everlasting battle for an end which never arrives. Nor would this understanding cease to exist. My pluralistic-rationalizing tendency often fails me when it comes to deciphering the philosophical conundrum of life- leading me to the only realm of thought in my sociologically Marxist mind. Can’t help in thinking that everything seems to be a conspiracy. Maybe the conspiracy of life is that there is no conspiracy. Maybe that‘s the meaning of life for me. To discover the overly-paranoid fact that life was never a conspiracy.

If life was a “real life” battle, I think it should be pretty obvious to anyone now (that includes me) that there never will be a winner. It is rooted in a fallacy which is incapable of yielding a winner; everyone is and always will be the loser. So we strive for an unattainable end, which is rightly so. Justice was always there, any belief to the contrary would either be a denial of its harsh existence or the ignorance of it. Yet, the living soul called ‘human being’ unquestionably continues to seek for it. Only to meet an end which never was.

So maybe the meaning of life is to discover this fact. Or the denial of this fact. A human creation of purposelessness that internalizes in us all a purpose. I came across a tautological philosophical opinion once. It claims that the meaning of life is to search for the meaning of life because that would give us a meaning to our lives. But the question runs: since the meaning of life seems to lie in the search itself, then we will never find the meaning of life, because life would be meaningless once we found it, will we? But if the meaning of life is the search itself, then we will never get to see what we are searching for, until it all ends. By which time we will never get to see it either, if there is, that is.

The human being is an agent created for the task of looking for a task to perpetuate the legacy that there never was a task in the first place. Or that there was but it never was created to be completed. Like wasted lives which serve a higher purpose, a benevolent one?

Some people tend to think that this belief has only a negative connotation. That it is held by those who only feel that way. They rationalize this belief into a relativistic way to say that what is at the end of the day is really what you take it to be, to say the least. If we were to succumb to human nature (in Thomas Hobbes’s context), what do you think will be the desired end and meaning to life? Is there really a pre-determined end for us to discover? Or that there really isn’t one because we choose what our ends are? Doesn’t the latter have a negative connotation as well, since we helplessly submit to a relativistic thought in the failure to discover the “real” end, if there ever was?

OR,
It might just be another episode of my imagination conspiring against me to think that way, as always.

Maybe there never was a battle or an end to begin with. Am I destructing all possibilities?

Or am I hypothesizing?