Spectrum

Did you know John has a foot fetish?

Theresa takes it up her ass.

Albert loves the ineffable flavor of eating a woman out.

It seems foolish not to enjoy the taste.

But Alex and Phineas don't.

Robert actually prefers to get off on hand jobs,

and Katie prefers to get off with sheep.

Landon jerks off in his sock so many times a day his penis starts bleeding.

He likes the pain.

Ann has a hygienic aversion to giving head,

but Britany slurps down cock smoothies like freshly squeezed orange juice

(the really good kind, of course

none of that Simply Orange bullshit).

Penny seems prudish, but she's just making sure she really likes him.

In another month or so she'll stick her finger up his ass.

Nina squirts when she comes.

It's quite beautiful, the tangible shower of pleasure.

Did you know Kris likes to be held down?

Wes and Clara don't like to talk,

Tim is horrified by how vocal Michelle is,

and Hideki and Linda both scream when they fuck.

Terrible racket for the renters upstairs.

Doug likes to pull out and come all over his girlfriend's stomach.

You wouldn't know any of that, though.

But you know if someone's a sexual deviant.

the bar

I sit at the bar, drinking my cold fermented grain

slight inebriation taking hold as I survey the room

it's dark, but I don't need to see

I know all the people who are here

of course I don't know any of them

but I hate them.

Tom Sawyer - Rush

While doing some homework tonight, I've been listening to Rush, one of the more underrated classic rock bands in my opinion. I'd forgotten how brilliant their lyrics are. I've decided to dissect the lyrics of Tom Sawyer...

A modern day warrior
Mean, mean stride
Today's Tom Sawyer
Mean, mean pride

>> The song is a story about a young man who rebels against societal norms.

Though his mind is not for rent
Don't put him down as arrogant
His reserve, a quiet defense
Riding out the day's events
The river

>> The young rebel won't let his mind be consumed by any of society's ideas - he is creating his own meaning in life. Obviously, the second line states that this is not an arrogance, but simply a decision to carve out his own path in life. Events in his life are taken in stride, as he "rides them out" quietly. This suggests a sort of stoicism in his acceptance of life's path.

What you say about his company
Is what you say about society
Catch the mist, catch the myth
Catch the mystery, catch the drift

>> "What you say about his company is what you say about society" may be one of the greatest lyrics ever written, in my opinion. The rebel is carrying an existential burden, creating meaning in the world. Existence precedes essence, so his actions determine the essence of humanity. What you say about his company (his actions) are what you say about society (the very nature of humanity).

The world is, the world is
Love and life are deep
Maybe as his skies are wide

>> The purpose of our existence in the world is to love and live life. The depth of the love and life experienced in the world are defined by how wide of a worldview man takes.

Today's Tom Sawyer
He gets high on you
And the space he invades
He gets by on you

>> This stanza suggests the importance of human solidarity. The man gets through life by his interactions with you (and other people) and the circumstances he inhabits. Ultimately, the most important thing in life is to enjoy your company and environment.

No, his mind is not for rent
To any god or government
Always hopeful, yet discontent
He knows changes aren't permanent
But change is

>> Great lines - the man's mind will not be taken hostage by religion or politics. He cannot be fed any opiates or agendas. He is hopeful for humanity and the world, yet also sees the current evil that humans inflict on one another. This is the source of his overall discontentment. While no change is permanent, change is the only constant in our world.

What you say about his company
Is what you say about society
Catch the witness, catch the wit
Catch the spirit, catch the spit

>> Same as before - man's actions define the essence of man.

The world is, the world is
Love and life are deep
Maybe as his eyes are wide

>> The slight change in these lyrics also leads to a slightly nuanced interpretation. The world's love and life are as deep as the man's eyes are wide - man's perceptions of the world define reality.

Exit the warrior
Today's Tom Sawyer
He gets high on you
And the energy you trade
He gets right on to
The friction of the day

>> As the man exits the world, his life's meaning is still defined by his interactions with other people. Still haven't decided exactly how I want to interpret the lines about energy transfer and friction of the day - something about the power of life/death maybe...

Anyway, here's a link to the song. Epic.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UsVCcytLsBA

Strange

Wake up

Every day my life makes less sense than my childhood

Been working really hard so I can work hard

Stoplight turns red

I needed that to slow down life

I’d probably waste the time anyway

So for now I sit

There was a girl in my passenger’s seat, today there’s not

I can’t fathom how far away Jupiter is

No matter, I’ll never leave this rock anyway

I know what’s waiting for me tomorrow

Because it will all be the same

I’ll feel however I feel, since society told me to feel that way

Maybe I should live like Thoreau

Will my mom still do my laundry?

Why do I clean my laundry?

I should get fat and smelly

I’ll be shunned, of course

Or maybe I’ve shunned your ideas

I wish I had the gumption to really do it

Well, get smelly at least

Somehow I can’t let go of love

No matter how much I read

Love is the greatest thing, isn’t it?

Really fucks with you.

Until you find a girl you can fuck for life

Of course you’ll both die

And I imagine that will be the strangest day of all.

Absurdism

After reading The Stranger by Albert Camus recently, it helped me to cope with some of my emotional angst. I didn't reflect (through writing) on what I read and synthesize it with my own worldview, however, and I think it's about time to do that.

Camus pioneered the idea of absurdism, not to be confused with existentialism. Existentialism suggests we create meaning in our life. Absurdism suggests there is no meaning to life at all. The next logical leap is, if there is no meaning, then why don't we kill ourselves? Camus's argument appeals to me: death makes no more logical sense than life. Therefore, we should live life, though it is absurd. (Absurdity is pithily defined by Camus as: "confrontation between human need and the unreasonable silence of the world.")

What is the purpose of living then? The Stranger seems to suggest a hedonistic, impulsive way of living. Happiness and "the moment" drive the actions of Meursault. He is also insensitive to "tragic" events, such as the death of his mother. So, by this calculation, Camus suggests that hedonism and stoicism are the best responses to an absurd life.

Stoicism has always appealed to me in concept, but I fail to practice it. The idea that you have little control over life suggests that you should only worry about what you can control. However, you cannot deny the deeply visceral. To a degree, stoicism and hedonism seem at odds to me: how can you feel happiness deeply when you deny yourself the depth of other emotions? Of course, humans are capable of feeling happy with something they have and then feeling no remorse when it is lost. But to feel the true depths of happiness with something, you develop a sense of attachment that makes stoicism almost impossible.

Upon reflection, it seems that what Camus suggests is not stoicism at all, but equivalence. When you lose something, you do not need to react stoically, because nothing has changed. Everything is equal to everything else. Whether you have a girlfriend or not...your life has not fundamentally changed. This is perfectly illustrated in two quotes from the book: when Meursault reflects that "really, nothing had changed." This is after his mother died. Most people would be grief stricken by this event, but Meursault feels ambivalent. Indeed, his mother's presence has little effect on his life. Whatever effect it might have had is easily filled with something else. Another good quote comes after Meursault's girlfriend has suggested they should get married. When he responds coolly, she suggests that marriage is important. He responds simply: "No." To get married or not to get married is equivalent.

So, though it seems Camus is suggesting hedonism and stoicism, he in fact is not a proponent for either of these worldviews. Equivalence in absurdity is not the practice of maximizing pleasure or accepting the uncontrollable. Equivalence as a response to absurdity is merely that life will continue on exactly the same regardless of what happens. We wake up, work, eat, go to sleep. Choices and events have no real impact on this absurd cycle.

Does this fit into my worldview? I think I'm too much of an emotional person for this to be the way I act all the time. However, it's something I can look to as an ideal. I believe in the basic tenets of absurdism - this life has no meaning, and our existence is literally absurd and repetitive. I think equivalence covers the same basic problem (with a different approach) as stoicism: if something outside of your control happens, it doesn't affect you. Equivalence also isn't hedonism, because that would suggest that different choices bring different levels of happiness. This makes sense as well: ultimately we have control over our own happiness. Certain choices won't bring us more happiness than others. Find happiness everywhere to combat absurdity.

Meal No. 1: Zours

Today marks the first day of my illustrious meal blog, which mirrors the Roediger House blog. I decided today to make some Zours, which are quite an exquisite meal.

Zours come in several flavors, and I carefully prepared Sour Green Apple, Sour Blue Raspberry, Sour Watermelon, Sour Lemon, and Sour Cherry. They pleased everyone who decided to partake, but I was a little unhappy with how they turned out. Could have used a little more sour when I was making them. The highlight of the meal was, of course, the "Zour Zweat." Shane managed to break out a few beads of sweat:

Intestinal turmoil ensued after ingesting an entire box each, naturally.

This blanket

I’d rather have one less blanket on the bed

Since tonight, a blanket has taken your stead

I have the good pillow to myself again

And I won’t have to get up to turn on the fan

Sometimes it’s nice to just take care of yourself

And other times, it seems the worst level of hell

I’m not sorry that I can’t get over you still

I’ve been trying for months yet it remains uphill

I didn’t realize how much I loved who you are

The most beautiful person I’ve ever met, by far

No other woman I’ve found could ever compare

You didn’t take my breath, you’ve become my air

It wasn’t the fact that I felt so alone

It was the fact that you were no longer on the phone

I know now I fucked up, but I’m only a man

My life has no purpose without you in the plan

So I’m telling you now, from my inner most core

You made my life something it never was before

You are so beautiful, and you gave that to me

The fault was my own that I just couldn’t see

You consume my life now, every moment of each day

And each moment’s the same in this bed where I lay

You still have my full heart, and you will ‘til the end

But I fear that this blanket is my permanent new friend

Needless

If we are not needed

then what are we?

In this vast existence…that which is not needed seems absurd

and in want of need I don’t want to continue

for purpose is a word contrived and unanswered

Except perhaps in companionship

and when you are no longer needed

your only companion is loneliness,

which bitterly consumes both want and need

in a mire of depression.

A search for meaning yields no answer

So the answer begets a question

When we have no need, why go on?

The grim truth is plain

And needless to say, has been troubling my mind.

Charter Schools

In my thinking regarding American education, I always thought of charter schools as only slightly less problematic than private schools. However, while reading Whatever It Takes by Paul Tough on Geoffrey Canada and the Harlem Children's Zone, I think I've opened my thinking up somewhat.

My initial gripe with charter schools is that, similar to private schools, not everyone can attend them and they increase gaps in education. Public schools can't compete, and not everyone has access. It would be better to eliminate them to even out resources and the playing field.

However, the playing field in America simply isn't even right now. And eliminating private and charter schools would certainly even the playing field, but it might not fix the problem. Right now, black children are too far behind for this to solve the problem by itself.

The Harlem Children's Zone is taking a crack at fixing this problem by changing black culture regarding education. It's a good program - it immerses poor minority children in learning and produces results. But it's limited in the amount of students it can accept, and it isn't very reproducible (at a whopping $76 million operating cost).

But does it have to be reproducible?

If the Harlem Children's Zone works to close the racial and socioeconomic gap in American achievement, ultimately more kids will be getting out of poverty. You can't reach every kid right away, but if the program lasts long enough then eventually all of these poverty stricken families will have a shot at the program. The ones who are getting their shot right now should be lifted out of poverty, creating opportunities for others and creating gradual change.

So...charter schools are a temporary solution. If they close the achievement gap long term, then eventually they can be shut down and all schools can be equal again. But a culture of learning needs to be transmitted through such intense programs so that a level playing field will be played on by equal talent.

Not everyone can be admitted to these nice charter schools now, but hopefully over years and years everyone can be. Change takes time and a lot of effort. With charter schools, we can make charter schools obsolete again.

It might not be totally fair now. But in the long run...it might be.

Why are poor people poor?

The epidemic of poverty in America is a controversial topic, one with no true answer regarding its cause. Of course, am I going to take a stab at it on my blog? Of course.

If poverty in inner city areas is perpetuated by itself (a.k.a. poor people are surrounded by poor people so they don't have reason to believe they should change or that change is the norm), then how do you escape this cycle? The arguments that more government funding is the solution and the argument that no government funding is the solution are commonly thrown around. In my opinion, funding isn't the key issue. The issue is the creation of jobs.

When jobs existed for African American families (that didn't require higher education), a steady flow of income and the mixture of middle and low class families provided a stable environment for kids to grow up in. The employment rate for young African American males fell from 82% in 1965 to 58% in 1984. The employment rate for young white males barely moved from 80% to 78%. So what happened?

First off, it's clear that unemployment for young black males is a huge factor in the poverty cycle. Just to be clear. So how to fix it?

First of all, with more young adults going to college, jobs began to seek more educated employees. Jobs for high school graduates left cities, and jobs for college graduates came in. This created a huge gap.

This gap can still be seen today - it's because jobs are being outsourced! People around the world will do menial labor for cheaper, so the jobs are leaving America. These opportunities are dwindling. How can we fix that?

Bring back our jobs to America. However, the problem is that people won't do these jobs for the same low rates. Why not?

Because the standard of living in America is higher than in other places. Why is the standard of living so high?

Because we have an enormous wealthy elite that are living at levels way above everyone else. Simply put: the range of wealth in America is greater than most other countries. For example: China's poverty rate is 2%. America's is 12% (approx. 2009).

So here's the chain:

Enormous wealth disparity -> Disproportionate standard of living -> Outsourcing of jobs -> Poverty

You figure out what to change.

Education & Economic Ideologies

I just finished reading an excerpt of Grading Education by Richard Rothstein for class. In general, Rothstein is raising questions of school goals and accountability. I began thinking about the idea that schools bear the responsibility of educating children, and we expect them to fix society's problems. Some would argue that other issues, especially moral education, are up to the family (and community). Who is correct?

The argument could be made that these issues are separate. Educating children morally should be left to families, and schools should fix our society by providing academic tools. Right? Problem solved. Not that simple, of course...schools are going to teach children morals one way or the other. Even if it is merely by observation and behavioral conditioning, they are learning morals at school. So the problem cannot be so simply divided. Schools do have a moral responsibility.

I would argue that part of the problem is American economic ideologies that are in opposition to each other. Simply put: public education is a socialist goal, and private responsibility is a capitalist ideology. Are these two ideologies creating the disconnect between expectations of moral education?

I would say so. I've just begun thinking about this issue, so my thoughts are not well formed. But I think it makes sense. A purely capitalist society would oppose public education. We have conflicting ideologies in place: a socialist idea in a (mostly) capitalist society. So where does the responsibility fall? I would say it must come from both places. But that means schools do have a responsibility to educate morally.

This is probably one of the most amorphous, unclear blogposts I've had...maybe ever. All that is to say, if anyone is reading this (maybe you, Ray Jones? Brad?), PLEASE feel free to contradict what I'm saying and weigh in. Just thinking through some stuff.

Maybe my next post will be more concrete. Here's hoping.

Life

When we consider the meaning of life, as humans we are drawn to optimistic and positive interpretations. Stories that detail the importance of human relationships and the love we feel in life elicit deeply visceral reactions. Humans instinctively shun negative interpretations, because we don't want to think of life as hopeless and meaningless. However, in my experiences, many people are intrigued by negative interpretations of life's meaning, even if they are ultimately rejected.

I heard part of an argument against psychological egoism the other day that included the criticism that "good deeds don't need an explanation." In my opinion, good deeds and bad deeds do need an explanation. Even if humans aren't inherently good or inherently bad (in which case, the actions that are anomalies need explanations), actions of good and bad still need explanation. Acting for good in one instance and for bad in one instance is confounding - what is the motivation in each instance? Something motivates us to act the way we do, whether it is altruism or egoism. I think it's important to determine if we are inherently selfish or not, and the analysis of good deeds is imperative in this study.

How do those two paragraphs tie together? If psychological egoism is true, then it seems the world is a dark, selfish place. If humans tend toward altruistic acts, then the world doesn't seem so negative. So, is humanity actually good or bad?

Clearly I can't give a definitive answer in this blog post. But in my opinion, humans are egocentric creatures who have been conditioned to care for others. Our first instincts are what is good for us - this is evident from the cradle. We learn to function in society by caring about others, because otherwise society would fall apart. However, this does not change our basic nature: egoism. When you are asked to see a movie, do you not cringe at the thought of seeing a movie you thought looked dumb? Ultimately, you may defer, but your first thought was concerned with your needs. When you find out someone has a cold, our first instinct (though often made humorous) is to stay away from the other person to keep from getting sick. We occupy our thoughts with ourselves initially, and then with considerations for others. In Tolstoy's The Death of Ivan Ilych, all of his acquaintances wonder where Ivan's death will leave them in the world. Tolstoy's dark impression of humanity is that we care for ourselves primarily.

Many would argue against this interpretation of humanity for the same reason they believe life has meaning: the alternative just doesn't feel good! Heart warming stories fill our minds with happiness, and we want to keep the negatives out of our minds. Nobody wants to believe that our life is meaningless. However, there is nothing outside of the earth that is provable or knowable. So, our lives on earth are defined only by our lives on earth. What is the point, then, if everyone ultimately dies? When the sun burns out and humans become extinct, what was the ultimate point? The argument of making the world a better place for the future will burn out at some point in time. And if we are all individually going to die, then what is the purpose of living? I can't claim to know. Maybe there is none. Maybe it's just hedonism. Of course, Aldous Huxley would disagree with that (read Brave New World!). You can't know. You should define it for yourself, I think. But the point is: think about it. Just because it seems hopeless doesn't mean it isn't the truth.

We don't like to think about the negatives in life. We don't want to think humans are egoists, and we don't want to think life is meaningless. But that doesn't mean these aren't facts. Hiding from the truth will not diminish it. The most important task in all of life is thinking through life. Don't hide behind rose colored glasses. Perhaps when we determine what really makes humanity human, we can better determine who we want to be, as I think Sartre and Nietzsche suggested. Take a walk on the dark side. It is lighter than you think.

Disney & Parenting

Last week I went to a seminar my sister and another teacher did at Governor's School West. It was about Disney and the family values communicated to us through Disney.

Bethany and Carrie seemed to focus on the absence of a mother figure in Disney movies, which I found interesting. But even more intriguing was the lack of other types of families, these two for example:
-same sex parents
-interracial parents
What Disney is doing by leaving these families out of movies is normalizing heterogeneous, all white relationships. Anything else is not even portrayed as weird: it isn't portrayed at all. This implies that it doesn't even exist as a true family.

Another point of the seminar was how prevalent Disney is. Kids learn by processing information, and the omnipresent Disney is teaching them through popular movies. It might not be explicit, but it is there: Disney is telling the next generation what to think about families, and same sex and interracial marriage aren't included. Kids who aren't exposed to this idea as OK won't think it is OK. It isn't "normal" to them.

Maybe this is a bit extreme, but pay attention to what Disney is putting in their movies. Disney might not be explicitly teaching kids that same sex and interracial families are wrong, but they certainly aren't putting in a word for it. The rest can be put together through implication - a powerful tool for children.

All I'm saying is, make sure what you put into your children's heads matches what you want them to learn. If Disney isn't teaching your kids the morals you want them to learn, be wary.

Undergraduate Graduation

Well, I haven't written in my blog for almost 2 years. I just finished up my undergraduate degree at Chapel Hill, however, and I feel I should revisit the blog (especially with my girlfriend's recent blogging activity). I think if I begin to use this regularly again, it will be a good place to sift through my philosophical musings. Writing things down has always been helpful to me in reaching conclusions regarding my own thoughts. It's good for me to organize my thoughts and progress them, even if I don't necessarily reach a conclusion. I should probably do some more thinking regarding the issues of meaning in life, race, homosexuality, and good/bad. I'll try to work through those 4 issues this summer.

OK that's enough of that for now. My undergrad career is over, and I'm starting at Wake Forest in 3 weeks. I've moved in with my brother, which is exciting. It also means I won't have to pay much for rent, which is nice with a $500 monthly stipend. I'm going to start budgeting more carefully, being more responsible, and weighing the effects of my actions. It's time for me to become an adult now that I've graduated. That means I need to be more careful with my money, be a better roommate, eat healthier, keep a regular exercise routine, read regularly, waste less time, and judge long term vs. short term rewards of my actions. Many of my actions are focused on the short term, and I need to think about the repercussions of what I do more carefully. Often instant gratification will lead to long term remorse for me. I hope that I am patient in my relationship with Emily, and we remain together long term. She's a good girl, and I'm grateful for her. Let's see how this whole being an adult thing goes. I hope that I become more responsible, knowledgeable, and mature. I need to focus on becoming a teacher and a valuable member of society.

It's hard for me to focus on this because the Bulls-Heat game is in an hour. I apologize for any redundancies in this post (to whoever stumbles upon this)...I didn't proofread.

Go Bulls!