Before today I spent the last 3 and 1/2 days in my apartment.
The first and second day were Christmas-Eve and Christmas respectively. The last day I was isolated by a torrential blizzard of 40+mph winds and over 2 feet of snow. If you have never experienced something like this and you would like to, I suggest you have your friend grind up the remainder of your ice-tray into the margarita maker and throw the remnants into your face. Imagine that 60x over for every minute you dare to venture outdoors.
I eagerly anticipated the 2 days off for Christmas. I didn't have anyone here; all my good friends have left, and I just wanted some peace and quiet to enjoy what I enjoy.
Alas, 48 hours of talking to old friends on the phone and researching interesting topics leaves you with...well, it leaves Me with a sense of "Okay. But who wants to talk about it"?
The third day was bad. I was left alone to my own thoughts for too long. I noticed that I love to think deeply about things but without feedback from my friends and family I am but a negative energy consuming my own life-force: I am self-destructive.
After this realization I couldn't wait to get back to work today. I had a rush of energy unlike what I typically feel after a weekend. I wanted so much to perform my job to perfection: And I did. And it didn't amount to shit.
I was removing snow for 3+hours and I had 2 customers I worked with for 6+ hours combined and nothing came from it. Aside from the snow removed it was an abject failure.
But I learned something very important. I would rather fail constantly while trying to succeed than never try at all: I'll even die early for it.
Sitting at home and doing nothing is no longer desirable to me as it once was.
Perhaps it took this isolation to consolidate that perception. Whatever it was, even if I'm paralyzed from the waist down, I'd rather die young than be scattered to the dust without making an attempt at impacting the civilization that I owe so much to.
Tuesday, December 27, 2016
Friday, December 9, 2016
Nobody Cares
Most people are complacent.
I don't begrudge them entirely. Modern westernized society is a society of abundance. Considering that people of these societies no longer have to worry about being eaten by bears they have a lot of time and resources to pursue a life outside of bear-trap making.
The reality of nature has escaped most people. The nature of man for most is now just a will to exist unmolested in its consumption.
Most people in Western countries don't think about the rest of the world or the dynamics that are forming their reality. They are constantly distracted by what they need to purchase next. Once their lives become difficult or the true nature of existence smacks them in the face, they will quickly turn their heads and ignore the reality in an effort to avoid the inevitable feelings of displeasure - and thus action against the offending party - by consuming more.
Think of the expression "From rags to riches to rags". Because of the riches accumulated by our fore-fathers' blood, we are able to live in a society of abundance.
Abundance breeds weak men.
In a sea of zombies primordially motivated to acquire new trinkets it's nice to see the occasional glimmer of intelligence searching for knowledge.
Unfortunately, like a mirage after a hundred mile trek through the desert, most of those glimmers turn out to be just an illusion.
Regardless of IQ most people in the west have such deep-seeded indoctrinations that no level of facts or statistics can sway them from their firm belief on certain observable and provable topics.
So you find yourself in a spat with a smart idiot. Again and again and again. How many glimmers will you visit until you find your Oasis? How many can you suffer before you die from mental-dehydration?
I don't begrudge them entirely. Modern westernized society is a society of abundance. Considering that people of these societies no longer have to worry about being eaten by bears they have a lot of time and resources to pursue a life outside of bear-trap making.
The reality of nature has escaped most people. The nature of man for most is now just a will to exist unmolested in its consumption.
Most people in Western countries don't think about the rest of the world or the dynamics that are forming their reality. They are constantly distracted by what they need to purchase next. Once their lives become difficult or the true nature of existence smacks them in the face, they will quickly turn their heads and ignore the reality in an effort to avoid the inevitable feelings of displeasure - and thus action against the offending party - by consuming more.
Think of the expression "From rags to riches to rags". Because of the riches accumulated by our fore-fathers' blood, we are able to live in a society of abundance.
Abundance breeds weak men.
In a sea of zombies primordially motivated to acquire new trinkets it's nice to see the occasional glimmer of intelligence searching for knowledge.
Unfortunately, like a mirage after a hundred mile trek through the desert, most of those glimmers turn out to be just an illusion.
Regardless of IQ most people in the west have such deep-seeded indoctrinations that no level of facts or statistics can sway them from their firm belief on certain observable and provable topics.
So you find yourself in a spat with a smart idiot. Again and again and again. How many glimmers will you visit until you find your Oasis? How many can you suffer before you die from mental-dehydration?
Monday, December 5, 2016
"B..B...But, That's Not True"!
I sell things.
I'm not yet an expert, but I can read people well. I can portray myself to a person's liking with very little understanding of their cultural background.
You may perceive that as dishonest. I disagree. I see that as adapting to a situation. Ask any military brat that had 9 different schools and they will tell you that without adapting, you will die. Starting with a positive first impression is key to making anyone like you.
Stagnant communities, rather, communities that don't receive many outsiders are mentally stunted in their ability to adapt to new scenarios. Sure, they have to occasionally adapt to economic issues, but rarely new faces and cultures.
Much like facial and physical gestures of "thank you" or "I'm sorry" are noticeable among all languages, the emotions and motivations are noticeable to the perceptive empathizer.
If, for example, you come to buy a car from me but you protest that the price is too high, my body language and tone of voice will subdue and I will show you competing prices in the region. I do this subconsciously. I am understanding your emotions and empathizing with you while maintaining my integrity by offering transparency.
Once you realize the complexities of this unspoken language you start to pick up on some disturbing things. People fucking lie.
It happens ALL THE TIME. It happens face-to-face. Someone wants you to believe something about themselves because that will temporarily improve their social status or a plethora of other reasons. Fret not, these people are easily rooted out. If they lack the means to move themselves they will be shunned by the community. People that are genuinely dishonest don't last long in communities where they say outright lies to people's faces.
Online in text, though? There's an odd disconnect. Otherwise honest people feel obliged to link distracting, false or otherwise incomplete articles and then state them as a matter of fact. They have no problem not even linking this sites and concluding what the headline told them to. If they were to have a discourse in person I imagine they would be much less bold in their assertions.
But they do it anyway. There's an odd line that I think is blurred between truth and narrative online. People believe what they want to believe and then look for sources to reinforce their narrative. They don't take any time to fact-check these narratives. They only espouse from "trusted" sources what they are so damn sure was the truth without having seriously looked into it.
Unfortunately, though my empathy and inter-personal skills are high, I guess more often than not that a person's objectives online are simply to win an argument. There is no intention to learn, to share, to emote: If there were, a dialogue instead of an insult/reframing war would ensue.
The ultimate response for people that won't respond to your logical arguments is to respond in whatever way they chose to attack you. Snarky comment followed by innocuous article? Link the Onion and call them a Cunt.
Whatever you do, don't let a person that is being obviously dishonest leave the table thinking they have won the minds of anyone. Call out their bullshit, don't let them bait and switch and most importantly, don't let them de-rail any valid point you've made with a dismissal and a shitty link.
I'm not yet an expert, but I can read people well. I can portray myself to a person's liking with very little understanding of their cultural background.
You may perceive that as dishonest. I disagree. I see that as adapting to a situation. Ask any military brat that had 9 different schools and they will tell you that without adapting, you will die. Starting with a positive first impression is key to making anyone like you.
Stagnant communities, rather, communities that don't receive many outsiders are mentally stunted in their ability to adapt to new scenarios. Sure, they have to occasionally adapt to economic issues, but rarely new faces and cultures.
Much like facial and physical gestures of "thank you" or "I'm sorry" are noticeable among all languages, the emotions and motivations are noticeable to the perceptive empathizer.
If, for example, you come to buy a car from me but you protest that the price is too high, my body language and tone of voice will subdue and I will show you competing prices in the region. I do this subconsciously. I am understanding your emotions and empathizing with you while maintaining my integrity by offering transparency.
Once you realize the complexities of this unspoken language you start to pick up on some disturbing things. People fucking lie.
It happens ALL THE TIME. It happens face-to-face. Someone wants you to believe something about themselves because that will temporarily improve their social status or a plethora of other reasons. Fret not, these people are easily rooted out. If they lack the means to move themselves they will be shunned by the community. People that are genuinely dishonest don't last long in communities where they say outright lies to people's faces.
Online in text, though? There's an odd disconnect. Otherwise honest people feel obliged to link distracting, false or otherwise incomplete articles and then state them as a matter of fact. They have no problem not even linking this sites and concluding what the headline told them to. If they were to have a discourse in person I imagine they would be much less bold in their assertions.
But they do it anyway. There's an odd line that I think is blurred between truth and narrative online. People believe what they want to believe and then look for sources to reinforce their narrative. They don't take any time to fact-check these narratives. They only espouse from "trusted" sources what they are so damn sure was the truth without having seriously looked into it.
Unfortunately, though my empathy and inter-personal skills are high, I guess more often than not that a person's objectives online are simply to win an argument. There is no intention to learn, to share, to emote: If there were, a dialogue instead of an insult/reframing war would ensue.
The ultimate response for people that won't respond to your logical arguments is to respond in whatever way they chose to attack you. Snarky comment followed by innocuous article? Link the Onion and call them a Cunt.
Whatever you do, don't let a person that is being obviously dishonest leave the table thinking they have won the minds of anyone. Call out their bullshit, don't let them bait and switch and most importantly, don't let them de-rail any valid point you've made with a dismissal and a shitty link.