Welcome to Gaia! ::

1/26/11 - 8:45PM

Caught between two popular philosophical views on life. One, where you dont think too much about life. "Go with the flow", relax and "Let life happen" not to over think anything, just "Keep moving forward" and enjoy life. Two, always make sure to put your life into perspective. Look at your life from another point of view to figure out if your really happy, and do this regularly so as to not lose your ground.

Both philosophies make very good points of course (seeing as how popular they both are), and I know many who try to follow both (not at the same time, but many who follow one or the other). Im caught between the two.

I have tried both, and honestly, I found the first one made me feel happier. I let life happen and tried not to think about it too much. After a few weeks or so, I tried looking at my life from anothers perspective. I really went down and analyzed it. I realized I was just getting really tired of blocking out thoughts, and trying to just leave things alone. It wasnt working for me. But then again, neither was. If I didnt analyze life, I had to work at not over thinking but would go into a state of sort of blissful happiness - but looking back on the day, would I really be happy? Would I really feel like I achieved anything if I just slapped on a happy face for everyone?

Id tried analyzing life for a bit, but the more I do it, the more I realize Im not happy. And it makes me sad. I realize I have to change it -- but what do I do to change it? The unhappiness in my life takes over when I think about it, and then I can never think about what I can do to change it. Just pick up and leave all my friends? I almost wish I could. Then it just makes me want to switch back to letting life happen to me.

So which one to live by? Maybe do a mix of both? Honestly, I dont know. But if I find out, Ill let you all know.

1/29/11 - 11:24PM

Id just read a post (where and who shall remain anonymous) of someone asking whether they were pretty or not. She had a very beautiful picture up, one that was soon revealed to be a fake and easily copied from Google Images. When asked about it in the thread she had made, she stated something along the lines of: you guys didnt fall for it, its not me. (she describes herself briefly) people really think that its me. After that, she made no more posts and seemed to mysteriously disappear. The first thing that came to my mind was that she was just using to forum for a quick confidence boost, that probably wouldnt have lasted long anyways, since she didnt actually use her picture in the first place. She would know that the compliments on the hair or face or the eyes, etc. werent really for her, but the girl in the picture, so the fleeting feeling of self assurance would have been very short-lived. The fact that she didnt post up her own picture could have (but not definitely) meant that she is very insecure about herself and her looks, which would explain the wish for a quick confidence grubbing as well. The strange thing to think about is, this girl might not even know this. While making the post, if she had realized it, the question of "why dont I just post up my own picture?" would have crossed her mind and she may have either changed it or just deleted the post. Since she went through with it, it most likely (but again, of course, not definitely) means that she is in denial of her insecurity.

What people need to learn is that "pretty" is a relative term. Pretty is something different to everyone. For some, yes, its the big boobs and skinny body, but that really wont completely satisfy if you dont have a good, real connection with someone. I know others that like a little meat on their partners bones, and many who really (by this I mean sometimes secretively) have versatile opinions to what beautiful is, but hide it to be "just like everyone else". For the good guys, its whats inside that counts anyways.

1/29/11 - 11:52PM

I always have my best revelations at night.

2/1/11 - 8:40PM

Today I realized something strange. In honors classes, there are two types of people (at least in mine): The kind of more popular, almost more charismatic kids that are just naturally smart and learn quickly. I believe thats where brilliance lies, as long as they use it right. Then there are the kids who have no life, and nothing else to do but study. Those are usually the dorks or nerds, but they do show some good determination. There is one girl I know who worked her way up from SPED class in elementary and is now in all my honors classes. No one particularly likes her, as she has the mind of a child almost. Shes loud and doesn't quite know when to stop talking and even I, raised to be very tolerable towards many kinds of people, find her quite annoying. Thats very inspiring and very good of her to raise herself up to the honors classes, but is that true brilliance? Or did she just have nothing else to do? What would anyone else do in her situation?

2/11/11 - 1:18AM

So Ive just come across this guild, thats whats really got me thinking. Just reading their extremely long homepage will really make you think. Some of its really quite interesting, all of its very well worded. Take a look - Truth Seekers - Truthers

One of the first paragraphs begin with this: "Your birth certificate makes you the property of the government and the moment you receive it, you are forever in debt. Have you ever noticed how the governments all over the world, herd people with nomadic and aboriginal life styles into the cities?" talking of how we are born slaves to the government, and how theyre trying to collect more. This brings an interesting point up that at first seems to be correct. But with further thought, I came up with a completely different view to theirs. I see it as: the government almost looks at it like a game. All the different governments are competing for larger population, more land, more money. They dont necessarily want us as slaves to pay for everything for them, we have to remember that they do do work too. They just want MORE. They want to be the best with the most. They later go into how we have to pay the system to live, like for food and shelter, etc, which I do agree with.

Soon they get into how we are fooled into believing we have freedom by giving us just enough to convince us. They say that we "are allowed certain liberties and thus they [they=we, sorry different tenses] imagine that their [our] governments 'protect' their [our] freedoms." Well, Im pretty sure that no one should be allowed complete freedom because then that makes it so that one can violate someone elses freedoms, thinking that they have the freedom to do whatever they want. If one person has complete freedom, then whats stopping them from murder, claiming ownership of something not belonging to them [can be land, anything, basically stealing] which would in turn, violate what would be the other persons "freedoms". So anyone living in groups would need some kind of law or limit of rights, and a judicial system, which our government provides.

One last thing that I glimpsed in the homepage, I didnt mean to but it just kind of struck me, is that they said "They [the government] constantly divide the people by race, religion, culture, social status and more." Well, in the beginning, yes I suppose the government had a part in dividing race, genders, social status, etc. but remember, the government started out with pretty much regular people. Social status is a difficult thing, something that happens almost naturally within nature. You have the social statuses in high schools, theres always the "leader" or "favored" person in the clique of friends, from teens to adults. Even in monkeys, which remember has no influence from the government, has social statuses, like the "lead" ape, theres always one in the group that is respected by all. Aside from statuses, religion, race, etc, we all divide ourselves. People decide what to believe in and to go against other religions, they just get really passionate about ridiculous things. Though the government had a hand in how humans divided initially, and may still have a small hand now, doesnt necessarily mean that theyre all to fault.

Sometimes I think people who think like that are just looking for someone else to blame for the terribleness of their own lives, besides themselves, and the government, who is very influential, just seems like a good target.

I will probably be poking around that guild a little more and finishing to read the homepage tomorrow, so, later.

2/26/11 - 2:18PM

People are too lazy to come up with real comedy these days, so instead they try to create drama, throw in a few one-liners, and call it a comedy tv show.

3/13/11 - 10:56PM

So today I was really thinking about life. I know there are people out there who dont think much of it, think they dont have anything to live for. But lives support each other, they build on each other. One simple life can hold up anothers, which in turn would hold up anothers, and maybe even another two, and when that one life dies, the whole support ladder falls. I tried to think of someone, just make someone up, whos death wasnt on the support ladder. Someone whos life didnt mean anything to the world. Who didnt support anyone else. So heres what I came up with: someone who didnt go to school, grew up on the streets begging for food or money, no friends, no family, never regularly talked to anyone. No job, no money, no happines, no life. What would he have to live for? Nothing. Looking through his eyes, no one cares about him. His dissappearance or his death wouldnt even be investigated. It would barely be noticed. But what if there was a little kid across the street? The man walks down the street every morning, from his little hovel to the park, where he begs, and almost every day a little boy looks out the window for him to pass by. The little boys parents abuse each other all the time and his two siblings count on him, the youngest, to give them the support to keep going. If he can live with it all, then they can too. Their parents feed off of their children as their will to live, because without their children, theyd feel useless. Well that youngest boy looks out the window at that poor homeless man and thinks, he, who has nothing, no friends, no family, still has the will to live. As long as he can still find the will to live, I will too. But the homeless man does not know that. He thinks he holds no value to the world, and kills himself. Who would notice? When the little boy on a particular day looks out that window for support, the man isnt there walking by. Nor is he the next day, when the boy looks out the window with his fresh black eye. So the homeless man had found no reason to live anymore? Now neither could the boy. He kills himself. Now hows his older brother and sister going to handle this? They were counting on him. The brother gets into drugs and stays at his friends house to shoot up and the sister runs away to sell herself on the streets. And now the parents. They have no other reason to live together anymore, the kids are out of the house, though they are still too young, but they cant do anything about it. The children may have only seemed like a minor reason to stay in the house together, but without them to take their anger out on, there was no reason. Mother moved in with a long-time friend and ended up beating her instead. Father moved in with his brother, who got him jobs in the mob. So did that one meaningless life of the homeless man really mean nothing?