...and he's Back!
The first thing I want to say is that one of the hardest things about being back in Utah is having no internet connection at my house. As a result, I cannot update as often as I might like... and I'm obviously not on AIM as often as I would have been if I had had it throughout the school year. So, bad planning on my part.
Still, I made it back alright, my birthday came and went as I like it... with no one, including me, really noticing. Nineteen, and I still feel like I'm sixteen...
I have few plans for the summer- I'll probably get a job and I'll probably spend time running in my old haunts, I'm planning on learning latin (I already have two books, so that should be enough, right?) and studying Japanese. I'm taking a calc class from Doc. Stone- and those of you who read this and don't know him are missing out. Wow, that looks like I'm going to be really busy.
I was really surprised, coming back to Utah, how much I felt like a stranger even though nothing had really changed. There's an electronic bulletin at the high school now, and a few more stores on fifth west. Not much, but I still feel older and... I don't know, more tired, I suppose, than nine months away should make me feel. And I'll spend three months or so here and then go back- to new living arrangements, new classes, and a new group of freshmen. Sometimes I think I'm splitting in two.
Then I consider that, really, I haven't lost anything by changing- I still remember quite vividly all the good times that I had in both places. My appreciation for my friends remains, even when I'm away from them. Is that enough?
Sometimes I selfishly wish that I believed more in Descartes' solipsism- that the only thing I can be sure of is my own mind; then there would be no doubt that my thoughts are enough to be a good life, but then what would be the point? I'd be lying to myself- and other people are so much cooler than my thoughts, anyway.
Anyway. I'll try to head down to the library to update as often as I can.
sad, sad news of moral degradation
So...
I have a thing against secondary communication, except when absolutely necessary. I know I've talked about this before, and I don't know how I can say this without sounding like a hypocrite.
I now have AIM.
But, I have no buddies. :(
So, if you're interested in talking to me... let me know your screen name... and... I don't know, I'm new at this, okay? This is hard!!
yeah.
Mind? No Matter. Matter? Never Mind.
One of the problems that humans have is their inability to seperate themselves from themselves. I am becoming less and less certain that we can be objective about anything. Everything we take in, everything we consider, all of it is screened against a filter of our past experiences. The way we see the world is the only absolute thing we have, and though it may change, how would we know the difference if it didn't allow anything outside of its rigourous conditions to come into our head? We look at other people and consider their actions in terms of what we know- and when we assume these things we lack the fundamental empathy of having their experiences and ruminations to draw upon.
I could go into how even science is unable to really give any proof of being objective- ideal scientific inquiry perhaps, but since when is there ideal anything?
It's distracting to me to try to be impartial when learning something when I know that I am taking it only because I can assimilate this into what I already know. But I hate it even more when people don't even realize they do it. The best example is English class- we read these works of literature and people agree or disagree with them off the top of their heads. They don't appreciate the days put into these works because they have already assumed that their world-view is the correct one, or at least that their view cannot be assailed by other people because it is their point of view. Arguing with these people is especially frustrating because you can go over the same points again and again and they can always retreat back to "the way I see it..."
But if we cannot escape from being subjective, how do I know that they are not in the right? Is there any purpose for me to look for transcendental truths if I cannot work outside of my own head? What is the dividing line between fundamental philosophy and psychology?
If I cannot be sure of finding and being sure of proving objective truth, then I can at least look for subjective truth- the idea that what people consider fundamental tells more about them than it does about actual fundamentals. But is this a mere cop-out to humanism?
Even now I am subjecting my decisions to my sense of rightness. Why should I consider fundamental truths to be more important than human truths? Because I have assumed, from study and from custom, that they are.
If understanding was the reason why we are here, then we fail miserably.
So, my quest for knowledge has become simply a game I play. I hope that it still yields rich results. I hope that people will hear of me and say, "Well, at least he thought." But I am a little saddened by my loss of naievity.
