Contentment : Powered by memories and Kentucky Fried Chicken

The day the author felt true contentment was on a mildly sunny early afternoon. One had found himself returning to the outskirts of his living district, dressed plain in a oversized shirt, shorts and slippers. Fashionably accompanied only by his  unshaven chin and hair, hardly combed. The goal? One had woke up in the early morning to collect some tropical creams from the National Skin Center of Singapore but a much more meaningful and unexpected adventure was to take place that no one would ever know of other than the author and well, now you...

One was walking home and along the way had actually walked far enough that he had found himself in front of the local Kentucky Fried Chicken (KFC) outlet. The aromas of the fried culinary dishes and scientifically enhanced fries usually do not capture the author due to his stingy nature to spend on food if his fridge at home is still full but on this day, his resolve was weakened. The Gods had decided to leave a exceptionally full restaurant with a wide empty booth in plain sight, this stopped one in his tracks and in  a moment of action that seemed to be not of one's will, one found himself lining up behind 3 people. Life's most important question at the moment : "Do I want original or crispy?"

Having too little time to decide, one had given into indecision and had ordered from a wholly underpaid young teenager one of both types of fried chicken along with a small 7UP and a upgraded cheese fries. With a meal that resembled a little piece of heaven and having his small tray of chilli sauce, careful not to take too much as that would be excess, one was pleasantly surprised that the wide booth was still available for one to occupy and afforded one a clear view of the people in the local square going about their business. Having seated oneself, one did a silent prayer to whichever God existed to his agnostic nature and went on to clear his palate with a big gulp of 7UP  and went on to take the first bite of his 2 piece chicken meal. The first bite came in a wave of ecstasy and nostalgia. One's frontal cortex burned with the memories of when one was a child, excited at the fact that back when the author was a  wee boy, MacDonalds and KFC had just opened in Singapore and to enjoy its meals was only on special family outings. Each bite of chicken and cheese with mayonnaise soaked fries was as enjoyable as any, a glowing pretentious food critic gives a dish in a five star restaurant. The whole time, one had no worries in the world due to a lack of media and enjoying nothing less than watching people young and old enjoy nothing more than a piece of fried chicken and what seemed like each others company, just like when one was a child before knowing the sins of the world.

The meal ended and the author went on to dump the remains of his tray into the bin and a addition of good feelings came when a staff member walked over and said thank you for the act of clearing the tray from the table. The feeling being so good, as on that day, we both did something that made someone else's day just a little bit better. Along the way home, one started to ask the question. What does contentment mean to me? Of which the answer came in quick succession. " It doesn't matter you Fucktard, just enjoy the moment God gave you for once."  Giving a quizzical look to no one in particular, one accepted it and walked home with no thoughts in one's head about worldly issues or problems but only a belly full of satisfaction, good feelings and a smile ear to ear.

Till next word...

Walking away: A efficient trait generalisation of Asian Philosophy

(The author's brief thoughts on generalisation is listed below today's main topic*)  The de facto generalisation of Western and Asian culture is that Western culture tends to stand up against what they feel is wrong and argue the idea into you till you agree and its Asian counterpart tends to just follow what is the status quo and goes with the majority. The important difference here is that the Asian philosopher (in generalisation) literally walks away from the disagreeing party rather than argue it. Confucius, Mencius, etc. wandering China rather than implanting themselves in one spot hostile to their teachings to preach being an example. This particular trait and its positive qualities will be the topic of discussion for this post.

The standard thought of today's world people is no doubt mostly Western and with a whole internet of information as 'evidence'. Anyone can literally argue any point and believe in its righteous nature. Thus in essence, one is going to meet more people in this current world that would be less likely to change an opinion even after a convincing discussion. And to that end, it can be argued that one might as well never had that discussion and just taken that time to do something more productive.

This being said. the author is not implying non discussion, rather he is taking a position of efficiency. For example, debating a point with someone who has already a biased position is equivalent to listening to a person who is complaining about a situation that has already past. The result equates to nothing achieved and nothing solved. Your presence is just there as a tool for this person to finish a sentence and feel better about their own person. The efficient thing to do, either talk about a way to improve/solve the problem, move on from it or just leave and not listen to the problem.

The world is not perfect though and sometimes people will argue with you, whether you like it or not. In some cases, even with hostility in mind or action. And it was after discussing about one such hostile argument with a friend that he pointed out a very Confucian idea and solution to the issue : Just walk away. It was not meant literally in all cases but for example, sometimes, just agreeing with a biased person and ending the conversation is better than continuing to discuss it with him/her as it leads to the same result. The person still ends up only believing in their own point of view. Confucius and the like knew this and with the knowledge that there was literally a world of people willing to discuss/teach/learn about their issues better, why then stop at a dead end of a biased argumentative person when there is so much better to be had by just taking a step beyond said person.

In conclusion, one's life is so limited and the truth is we all do not know for sure what happens to us after death, thus life should be spent as efficiently as possible. To give an example, with a time limit, would you rather use a sledgehammer to pound down a brick wall or use one's untrained fist.

Till next word...

*Mencius (Mengzi**) taught that a man who tries to gather all knowledge will end up knowing nothing. Thus it would be clear to say that sometimes a person is forced to make generalisations to make sense of a world he can never fully understand. This being said, when generalisation is used as a discussion point, the importance comes in the fact that the user knows he is generalising and takes that point into account. 

To be fair, there are those that prove such a generalisation wrong for today's post. Such as the life of Western philosopher Nietzsche***, leaving for a life of seclusion when others did not take to his philosophies well at the time. Thus the reason, generalisation is used in today's post is as a tool to help most get into the core idea of the post faster than if one was to write a long thesis length piece and thus certain liberties have to be taken.

**The link is to a animated list of Mencius core works (those with Book 1A, etc) told with English subtitles.

***A short documentary on Nietzsche's life and the application of his basic philosophy of hardship to everyday life.

The danger of the Inspirational word : A momentary orgasm of the mind

In the internet age, phrases/stories of inspiration are cheaper than a dime a dozen and nowadays anyone with any form of formal education tend to have the linguistic ability to even form their own. This situation allows the normal person to achieve what most normal person could not do before, gain constant acceptance/praise for doing nothing. The danger of craving this short burst of pleasure with little real world result is the topic of today's dicussion. 

The truly inspired or inspiring are simple to spot as when they say or tell the inspirational phrase/story, you can truly see them representing the virtue told. One can also feel that in time they will achieve the desired result they aim for or importantly, even if they don't, you know they have tried their best. For example, the Dalai Lama, who has been trying to achieve the freedom of Tibet for decades and failed but still gives inspiration to countless many. 

The opposite of the truly inspired or inspiring are those who have a tendency to need constant positive attention from others. They read or tell a inspirational phrase/story and instantly places the good aspects of the tale upon themselves and in fact, have a amazing ability to feel they are educating others with their own perceived inspirational qualities. For example, in a documentary the author saw about the poorest in India*, the daughter of a multi millionaire was interviewed at a socialite party to raise money for the poor. She admitted to never being close to a slum in India but continued to say how she understood the pain and suffering of the poor. When one watched that scene, one can only feel disbelief at her comment and truthfully disdain at the fact that off camera, she probably would rather spend her large monthly allowance on herself than give it to the poor she so truly 'understood'.

Now that the examples have been defined above, the dangers of being falsely inspired will be explained. Firstly, the vast optimism that can comes from these inspiring phrases/stories. They can set one's mind to see situations they might encounter with a skewed  sense of reality which can end up with disastrous results. Such as a person wrongly betting on his perceived ability versus his real ability to win over better opponents in a boxing match. All because he was inspired to work out once per week due to watching a documentary on Muhammad Ali.

Another problem arises for the falsely inspired in the form of the glaring inability to see one's own flaws and instead paint them as one's own talents due to mental gymnastics. Such as seeing one's arrogance as confidence and perceiving any advice to improve as sabotage due to jealously. This will result in the person not being able to improve and instead lead one to decrease in ability rather than increase due to narrow mindedness.

In conclusion, the author has nothing against being inspired or inspirational phrases/stories but rather takes exception to the way they are used. One feels that in the end the result is what matters and one good action is worth more than a whole internet of false inspiration. 

Till next word...

(*The author gives a sincere apology for not being able to give a clip on the documentary due to the lack of one's memory. All one can remember is it is from the BBC and it's premise was about the host living with a poor family in a slum in New Delhi.)

Vengeance, a everyday tool

Talk about vengeance and one instantly thinks negatively on the subject matter but think about the common world's justice system and one can logically say that the basis for any justice is vengeance. That one has committed a wrong against another and vengeance/justice should be cast upon the guilty party. That if one wants to commit a crime, beware, as vengeance will be waiting. Applying vengeance as a way to help improve oneself will the topic of today's discussion. 

Vengeance to be used in everyday life is simply a way of treating another based on a negative feeling accorded to the person displaying the bad behaviour (This treatment does not have to be at the moment of the bad behaviour). A example, in the author's University life, he had met two people, who he at first thought were sincere friends but having dealt with said persons over the length of years in Australia, he found that these two people were selfish, morally degrading and on more than one occasion, openly using others to further only their own personal gains or pleasure. Upon returning to one's own country, the author thus devised that, the right way to treat such people was like a mirror, to apply their own said policy to them, This being, unless singularly to the author or mutually beneficial, one will never help them freely. One believing that forgiveness and trying to interact with said individuals with a 'open mind/heart' will only result in a bad situation for the author as before. And sometimes, there is simply no changing 'bad' people. 

This being said this application of vengeance to others in one's life also means one should expect the same for oneself and this has great implications. For the fear of expecting retribution for one's bad behaviour is just as believable as passing it out to one who displays it. Thus, a self policing code of conduct is always omnipresent in oneself. Adding to such a policy, once a person who believes in such a application of vengeance has done a deed worthy of vengeance, he should not expect forgiveness. If it is given, he/she should be grateful and work towards repaying such a debt but if not, one can only try to gain it as it is said person who opened the door for the vengeance and should logically accept it's consequences even if unintentional.

In conclusion, vengeance is a strong emotion and nowadays negative emotions are usually told to be cast out and ignored. It is one's view though that if the negative feeling is present from the development of evolution, it must be there to help one survive and to ignore it would be to ignore a tool that has been given to improve oneself. One is not telling others to give in to feelings of vengeance excessively but merely to temper it with good reason and use it to come to a good strong stand or result. For vengeance produces motivations just as strong as those from inspiration.

Till next word...

You can't blame a person for belief, only opinion

Many a year ago, the author sat in a Philosophy Professor's room and heard one of the most profound sentences he had ever heard in his short ignorant life. It went: "You can't blame a person for belief, only opinion." Strangely that line led to more self contemplation than even the initial topic that had led one into the Professor's room. The discussion of belief versus opinion will be the topic of today's discussion. 

A simple foundation of belief for this post is that it is something that comes naturally and more importantly instantly to one's thoughts in a given situation, the person might find themselves in. The belief being a thought process that comes from the amalgamation of the person's life, formed by both his genes and living experiences. A good example of the above topic comes in the act of stereotyping (The author does not condone stereotyping but is merely using it to explain the discussion topic). The initial thought one has of a person due to whatever features they posses is belief. These beliefs being the first natural thought from a collection of data that forms due to the natural survival instinct every person has to deal with every situation. Stereotyping existing to a certain extent because the stereotype existing more often than not on that group even if it does not represent every person of that group accurately.

Opinion on the other hand is a natural thought that has had time to settle in reason and evidence based on the person's reasoning. To continue with the stereotyping example, opinion is how one acts towards the person of certain feature, be it race or otherwise. It is on this point a person can be blamed for opinion over belief. The author himself does admit to having what many would consider racist thoughts at times but it is because one can differentiate that the instant natural belief is not grounded in reason that one can act counter to it based on good reason in action that prevents his person from doing what would be considered a racist act. Opposite to this was a post one saw on Facebook whereby the person did not differentiate between belief and opinion and merged the two. The person happen to have coffee at two places and had decided that the second coffee house being inferior but went on to comment it was due to the one staff that had made the coffee's ethnicity, being from a poor country and the person not possibly having a good education. The initial argument on which serves the best coffee being lost as one staff member does not constitute the coffee house and a race of the coffeehouse staff, a good coffee is not based on.

To put it into perspective, just as one will not blame a person for being mentally unstable and pushing you to the ground, one cant blame a person for literally having a thought. On the other hand, one can blame a stable person of sound mind who pushes one to the ground because he perceives your race deserves it even after time to reason and 'justify' that thought.

In conclusion, belief is the instant reaction of defense to being attacked, there is no foresight to it. While opinion being the boxing match a person chooses to fight with forewarning to its consequences. As many a good man or woman has said in many a way. You make your own choices and have to live with them the rest of your days.

Till next word...