So I initially started writing a post about my thoughts on Channing Tatum’s breakup with his wife. It bothered me not in the telenovela sort of way – cuz I could care less about these celebrities – but it brought out bigger concern I had – a more existential one. So I decided to blog about it instead.
With much reservation, I have to admit the conservatives seemed to have got it right as far as the issue of marriage (and separation) goes. The prospect of divorce, or the “moral justification” (for lack of a better term) of any mode of separation in general has led to the trivialization of concept of marriage.
And again, I point this out not to make a moral argument – but to point out a more existential concern. That the “meaning of life” (or something that approximates it) really lies in the responsibilities we take. And how things like this put that in jeopardy. Read More
I was watching a lecture which discussed the Pareto Principle, otherwise known as the 80-20 rule – and it does have some depressing implications.
First is that the goal of “equity” – that is equality of outcome (not to be confused with equality of opportunity) seems to not only be a futile endeavor, but could be dangerous one too. We want to strive for the latter, not the former.
The short of the principle is that 80% of something will be distributed to 20% of the population that’s vying for it. And this phenomenon manifests itself so reliably – that it can practically be considered as a natural/physical law.
I found the article below to be a good read:
How to Talk About Your Religious Beliefs (Without Being a Jerk)
This seems to have been written by an agnostic at ‘best’ (depends where you’re standing) – but nevertheless, he makes a very good point (about not being right no matter what stance you take), and it’s one that’s never lost on me when I talk about these sorts of things.
For those who aren’t familiar with the posts on my perspective section, you know that the purpose of my posts are to shed light on why I think the way I do. I guess in context of the linked article, it would be “my story” – and the posts are more to explain why my reasoning is the way it is – so that people who don’t agree with me, at least understand why I’ve arrived at my conclusions. And I think when you at least have that (proper context) any debate, argument, turns into a proper and meaningful dialogue where I get to learn about others as much as they learn about me. Read More
The more I read about the different angles on the whole Meloto issue (and just so we’re clear, this post will not be about the Meloto issue), the more annoyed I get with all this “PC” (politically correct) bullshit.
I never liked the concept of being PC – as I was always of the mind that getting used to that will just make people more and more anal about every goddamn thing to the point that you can’t fucking say or do ANYTHING anymore. Read More
Now that the “issue” is out in the open, I guess I now can do what I intended to do since the story broke on my end.
There’s a certain benefit of making one’s position public – not so much as to shame or hassle any party, but to at least acknowledge the elephant in the room.
It’s important because to me, certain people seem to be getting away with murder simply because they feel it’s an issue that people would be too uncomfortable to discuss – and at the end of it all, it’s just one of those things that will “pass.”
Sometimes, there are crimes that shouldn’t be allowed to “pass” so easily. Sometimes at the very least, some criminals ought to be reminded that they aren’t fooling anyone, that we know, and that everyone knows. And if they don’t, well then they will know after this.
But most importantly, its so I don’t have to put on some stupid facade to anyone. That while other people may be fine with being non-confrontational, I want to be honest with my feelings: and I personally feel that just being angry about it doesn’t cut it.
So this is part of the “steps” I’ve taken to make myself feel better… and it was supposed to be an open letter, but I was asked to keep it under wraps until the issue was known by the whole group – and since that seems to be the case now, then here’s the letter in its entirety with the names edited out – but not so much as to be vague to those who actually know the people involved – I want to be clear about what issue I’m addressing, and I feel the letter will speak for itself.