|
SubscriptionsSites I Read
|
|
|
|
| it is 2 am. I am actually reading because i WANT to read and to EXPLORE this sudden intellectually curious spasm. I read this from Korsgaard, and it inspired me to think back to that pot luck party at Charles’s house.
Science isn’t everything. I always thought that, but I always had difficulty in conveying my thoughts in a coherent manner.
Well, I guess i am probably going to leave more blurbs here.. that may even sound MORE incoherent, but nevertheless, let me have a go:
we cannot have scientific explanation as our absolute conception of what is and what is not.
“It presupposes that what science gives us a perspective-independent way of conceptualizing the world. That is, it seems to presuppose that what science gives us is knowledge of what the world is really like.”
Science is a mere perception, and ONE perspective, ONE conceptualization that a majority can understand, but what about people who see colour not as colour, but as sound?
how do we carve objectivity, is that our primary goal in understanding moral obligation then?
Let’s say i see a tree, and i perceive that it is green. Person B may perceive it as a triangle. Colour for them is in shapes. but at the end of the day, we are BOTH effectively and actively looking at THAT SAME OBJECT, that tree. although we may diverge in our conceptualization of the object, we are both perceiving the same thing, and in effect to some extent, our perception does converge. We just expressed it differently.
Wow, I feel like i am going back to CS Lewis’s mere Christianity. ( you have to back on a few entries, if you are interested).
Okay so we are talking about some external and objective standard of right and wrong that exists, but how do we encompass “mistaken belief”-to be more specific, how do we account for change in social morality, and I am particularly thinking about cases like homosexuality. We used to persecute homosexuals, and now, we don’t. What has brought about this change, how do we know when a change is warranted? HOW DO WE KNOW????
HOW DOES HUME’S SENTIMENTALIST CONCEPTION OF MORALITY ANSWER THIS????????
ok it is now 2:20 am, i think i will retire for now.
any thoughts please comment!!!!!
( uh by the way, this is a very scattered blurb of my ideas/thoughts, please forgive incoherencies !) | | |
| Unprivatized..
Tonight was good,
i finally had the chance to reconnect with Iran.
Since being in London, and especially at LSE, i haven't had the time to write meaningful updates to my friends, and even my family. If you are reading this, i am very, very sorry I have not written back yet, or called, please don’t take it personally, i am honestly just overwhelmed with a LOT of work.
I promise I will write back, just give me some time.
Tonight, we listened to a song together, and there is always something emotionally intimate about sharing a song together. With a loved one, like your best friend. I felt safe again. Safe with a pillar in my life that I know I will always have, even if we are so busy in our own lives. As she listened to it with me, I felt the lyrics emotionally overcome me, and finally, give me the courage to realistically look at my situation. Sometimes, I think we are so scared of losing something, but really, we have moved on, and are instead, afraid of seeing this new change, and coming to terms with it. I am not sure how to reconcile this slightly different Elizabeth. This was not why I came to London, but at the same time, i am not completely discouraged, because so far in my life, although i dont believe in God, I do endorse some form of kierkegaard’S virtue of the absurd, and I think that .... my life has worked out pretty beautifully so far.
Everything has its reason, if you have faith, and i mean an unshakeable, and pure faith like that of Kierkegaard’s Knight of Faith. That is what I strive to find in myself in this stage of my life.
And here are the lyrics we breathed in together:
I really thought I was okay
I really thought I was just fine
But when I woke this time
There was nothing to take me back to sleep
To take you off my mind, this time
And I keep saying
Over and over and over and over again
Let it rain, let it rain
Over and over and over and over again
Let it rain, let it rain
I need to hide within a storm
So have the lightning come
Bring the winds that scream
And spill the fog all over town
Hold me in your standstill ground
And I will sink down
And you’ll be washed away
You’ll be washed away
*
I had an amazing 7 years.
I hope that we can both mature emotionally and physically in the future, and if the virtue of the absurd brings us together again, then so be it.
But for now, I think i need to pave this way alone, and i think you do too.
| | |
| I talked to a friend, more like my big brother, and he said to me,
DanielWang says: (6:42:01 PM)
yes...if u don't want to choose, that means u don't wanna live
DanielWang says: (6:42:09 PM)
you decided to live, meimei
But why do I still try to rationalize my choices with maximum self-interest, where self-interest is defined as having security of the self, security of an other, and security of intimate passions.
Where do you draw the line of rationality, and live for you, and no other? | | |
| It hit me today.
What is ethically "right" may create much more worst outcomes.
So, to what standard do you judge a situation?
I am not advocating an utilitarian point of view in assessing a situation, but what is there to gain if everyone is going to be unhappy if I were to do the ethically "right" thing?
| | |
|
Self Portrait
Fondly thinking about Summer, but alas, it is Fall.
| | |
|
