Three orange thoughts

SUNDAY, 19 DECEMBER 2004

I. Why do some Christians sometimes “slide” back to their “old ways”? One possible reason is because they are not comfortable with their new religious identities – identities which they themselves did not define but that was prescribed to them. (Which gives me a new idea: given, chosen, and prescribed?)

II. Occasionally one comes across a reference to the proverbial “peasant” – and to be honest, I also find the label useful from time to time. How would one define this type of person? A “peasant” is someone who does not question what was given to him or her, and who spend their days eating, sleeping, working, screwing, and spending time with other “peasants”. Of course this is a simplistic caricature, as is usually the case with labels, even though one if occasionally tempted to employ it.

My problem with the “peasant” label is that many good people are painted with this brush – kind, generous people. Also, the caricature is apparently brainless. If he is not and he takes a break from eating, sleeping, working, screwing, and spending time with other “peasants” and think about things from time to time, is he still a “peasant”?

III. People sometimes refer to other people who are “full” of themselves. My question is, what are they full of – of what was given to them, or of something they themselves have accomplished? Also, what is the opposite of being “full” of yourself?

______________________

Insights on Friday, 17 December 2004 as they arrived

1) A woman walks out of a religious paraphernalia shop. I see she’s pregnant. I look at her face and reckon there and then she does not look too “academic”. I think: one option for a man who has his own ideas about life and who is not eager to water down his values and principles is to hook up with a woman he does not regard as his equal.

The condition for success in such a relationship is that he must be wealthy. He should be the “boss” in the traditional sense where the man is the head of the household, and also in the modern sense in which the person with the most money has the most say in how things are run. The woman in this case does not have to “know her place” as was the case in some communities fifty or hundred years ago; she does not have to stand around barefoot in the kitchen the whole day; and when she says she has borne enough children, the man will accept it without reservation. But he will be the “boss” in the sense that the household will generally be managed according to his ideas and opinions.

The other extreme – for the sake of getting to a more ideal middle ground – is exactly the opposite: a woman who is this man’s intellectual superior, his mentor, his provider …

In the middle is a woman he would consider as his intellectual equal; a woman with whom he can have meaningful arguments and with whom he will share equal responsibility and authority in the management of their household; a woman whose personal agenda and life philosophy will be consistent with his own; a woman whose emotional, physical and spiritual needs he will regard as his concern, just like she will regard his.

2) During class, a few minutes later, I am trying to teach the English names of a dozen vegetables to a group of five-year-olds. I ask a child – a new pupil – something in Chinese, and I reckon he doesn’t seem too surprised that a Westerner, not one of “his people”, can speak Chinese. I also think, “[to be continued]”

* * *

New insight! Is there such a thing as “Satisfied Given Self”? I believe it is a matter of degree of satisfaction, on a spectrum ranging from “absolute self-contempt, danger to self and society” to “convinced she is an incarnation of one or more gods”. (Interesting that in both cases the person has a good chance of being locked up in a mental institution.)

In the middle you get … shall we say, 99% of the adult population? The formula, Confront (accept, change), Define, and Become is therefore valid for more than nine out of every ten people!

Question: Information, options and possibilities still come from a particular source. What is this source? Mostly the Given Source, and in the case of a minority, from More Than Just Given Source.

Another question: What is your Given Source?

Last question: What is given? (Compile a list …)

* * *

(Back to the previous note)

So I thought: It is quite possible that this child expects that all adults can speak (at least) Chinese, for it is his given language, and so far he has had no reason to question the phenomenon of Chinese as absolute language.

When will he question the absolute value of the Chinese language? When he is confronted with, or when he finds himself in an environment where a different language such as English or Japanese or Spanish is considered by most members of the community as the dominant language.

It is at this moment, when it becomes clear what was previously regarded as absolute is not the only option that the sparks start flying on the work table of identity.

[Another example that can be mentioned is that of a young person who spent his or her formative years in relative isolation, who regards not only particular language but also particular religious frame of reference as absolute. What happens when this young person is thrust into an environment where a different language and other religious symbols are regarded as standard or dominant? Of course, personality and particular situation will play a significant role, but chances are that this person will then start to ask questions of people they regard as authority figures, and will ultimately develop a different identity than would have been the case if their lives continued to be played out in relative isolation.]

3) Next class I thought about some linguists who reckon children shouldn’t be taught a “foreign” language at a too early age, as in the case of English in Taiwan.

I thought, if English is offered from an early age as a given especially at home – the main source of givenness, it will not be questioned but wholly absorbed along with all other given data.

I then wondered what information parents – as primary givers of data – do in fact give their children, not only in terms of language, but in terms of moral values, behaviour, and especially for later use, possibilities for an adult life. Of course, a thousand voices will go up in a hundred different languages all giving different answers, or similar ones, with different details. My point, however, is this: change what is given, and you fundamentally affect the end result. (And do parents know what they give?)

Finally, I realised I did not receive all these informative snippets of data lying in bed or sitting at the computer. I got them in classrooms filled with noisy children, and out in the street on the way to the classrooms.

Conclusion? Outside appearances do serve a purpose, and in many cases act as stimuli for new views and insights.

____________________

Point and the questions – messy process

MONDAY, 13 DECEMBER 2004

11:26

The point is to live for something, so that when we die, we will know our lives were not in vain.

11:36

The question then is, what do you live for?

Many people will say, “We live for our children.”

I ask: What does that mean? You live for your children, they live for their children … at some or other point someone will have to live for something else, whether they have children of their own or not!

I think it’s ill-considered, even dangerous to say you live for your children. It feels right. You truly love your children, and you will literally take someone’s face off to save your children, so … it can only be right to declare: “I live for my children! And for my wife … (or my husband).” Isn’t that true?

No! It’s something that feels noble and right – and it looks noble and right on paper, but in actual fact one generation simply replaces the next with no proper understanding of the value or possible purpose of their lives, other than, “I need to have children.”

Does anybody else hear alarm bells going off?

THURSDAY, 16 DECEMBER 2004

A somewhat messy process

CONFRONT (yourself)

… Accept (what you cannot change)

… Change (what is within your abilities to change)

DEFINE (who you want to be)

BECOME (who you have defined you want to be)

Naturally the three steps do not neatly follow on each other. You are trying to BECOME something or someone. You realise it is not what or who you want to be. You CONFRONT yourself … although you already did that when you realised you did not want to become what or who you were BECOMING. You were also already subconsciously DEFINING yourself when you realised you did not want to be who you were in the process of BECOMING. You continue with DEFINING while you CONFRONT yourself. And because your life does not stand still for a second, you are busy BECOMING throughout this process of CONFRONTING and DEFINING.

______________________

Travel packages for life

THURSDAY, 9 DECEMBER 2004

Travel packages for life, note I

1) Settle down or keep roaming?

2) What do you do before you settle down?

FRIDAY, 10 DECEMBER 2004

Travel packages for life, note II

In an earlier note I mentioned that people either settle down or they keep roaming; also that necessary preparations must be made before you can put roots down somewhere, if that is your choice.

I myself spent five years at university and obtained three qualifications – things that normally qualify as good preparation if you had wanted to settle down and establish yourself somewhere.

These preparations were however not enough for me. Of course I did not know ten years or even five years ago what I know now … even though I had this idea if I could only get this or that done I will be ready to settle down somewhat.

What I know now is that “The Personal Agenda of Brand Smit” weighs more in terms of preparation than five years’ worth of so-called professional qualifications did ten years ago.

What I am therefore saying is that I don’t want to keep roaming …

* * *

All I am saying is that a lot of things I had wanted to say, many questions I had wanted to at least formulate, that I had wanted to find answers to if possible, do not have to be said, or formulated, or answered again.

Many things are still being written and will be written in the future. Nothing, however, can take anything away from the fact that a lot has already been said …

Incidentally, the very students to whom I had said a minute ago, Excuse me please, I just want to quickly make a note, just told me in all seriousness that they never talk to themselves. Is this even possible? How can you have a proper Consciousness of Self if you don’t talk to yourself?

SUNDAY, 12 DECEMBER 2004

Travel packages for life, note III

Continue roaming or settle down, right? The image of the Wanderer is often of someone who doesn’t have access to significant financial resources, who does odd jobs here and there for a paltry, irregular income, and who then drifts off once again to look elsewhere for his salvation, or for new excitement.

Now imagine an affluent wanderer.

Also take into account that place, or rather a home, serves a purpose. Besides being where you feel safe, it is where you give aesthetic expression to your uniqueness and your particular experience of reality. What if you do not experience the latter need as intensely anymore? What advantages are there to a nomadic existence?

MONDAY, 13 DECEMBER 2004

Travel packages for life, note IV

Another word for “wanderer” is “drifter”. I don’t like the implications of that – someone going from point A to J to C to P to X to E, not knowing where he’s heading. A better word is “traveller”.

Travel packages for life, note V

17:06

Does a Traveller have a home? Sure. A Drifter does not have a home – it is implied, just as the word “drift” implies aimlessness and lack of direction.

17:20

A Traveller travels from place to place, but the understanding is that he is following a certain direction or that he at least has a final destination in mind – and also that he has a reason why he travels, that he may even have an agenda that he serves or wants to serve.

17:52

So, the question should be: are you are a Drifter/Wanderer/Nomad, a Traveller, or a Settler?

[Or perhaps all three at different times in your life? Circumstances also change. Maybe you start out as a Traveller. Then you decide to settle down. After twenty or thirty years you become a Traveller again, but you end up as nothing more than a Drifter.]

______________________

Math and science – questions start

SATURDAY, 11 DECEMBER 2004

To possess the right math and science

Many people like to say that life is not just math and science. I believe it is – we just don’t have all the formulas yet.

Two thousand years ago all matter also consisted of atoms – most people just did not know it yet. A thousand years ago people also had the intellectual capacity to design a rocket and put someone on the moon – they simply had not yet mastered the necessary math and science.

SUNDAY, 12 DECEMBER 2004

When the questions start

We know what we need to know in order to function more or less successfully at least half of the time. As soon as our needs change, or as soon as we become aware of a problem in how we function, we start asking questions, and we start looking in other places for better answers than what we had been reciting up until that point in our lives as our own, or that we had reckoned over the years up until that moment to be our particular versions of the answers that had been given to us.

______________________