2005 August | Way of the Mind

Monthly Archive for August, 2005Page 3 of 3

The causes of love

Published

on August 10, 2005

. 10 Comments

(this is expanded from a comment I wrote in the entry below this one)

A lot of people believe that love is causeless. That it is unexplainable, that it has no rhyme or reason, that a person simply loves another and that’s it, that it’s impossible to say “I love you because…” or “I love you for your…”.

Many go even further and say that, even if it was possible to say that, it would be undesirable, because it would ruin the “purity” of love, that love should be causeless. That loving someone for something, that loving something in another, does, in some way, diminish the feelings, diminish the meaning of “love”.

Call me weird, but I believe feelings do have causes. You may not think about it consciously, you may not even be aware of those causes, but you fall in love with something (or things) in the other person. Their sense of humor, their intelligence, the way they make you feel alive, the special smile they have just for you, their passion for life, etc.. “Love without cause” is for teenagers , or for when both people are so “low” that they can’t find anything to love in the other… and yet they are OK with it, because they know there’s nothing to love in themselves.

“Opposites attract”?

Published

Pedro Timóteo

on August 8, 2005

in definitions, love and relationships

. 6 Comments

Yesterday, in a conversation, the other “party” said something to the effect of “opposites attract”. It’s certainly a common phrase, and a lot of people believe it to be true.

But it got me thinking. Which is always dangerous.

I’m not going to tackle whether opposites do attract or not, but, instead, what does “opposites” mean in this context.

Continue reading ‘“Opposites attract”?’

“Intelligent Design”

Published

Pedro Timóteo

on August 5, 2005

in intelligent design and religion

. 6 Comments

So, the controversy is on again.

What is “Intelligent Design” (ID)? It’s nothing more than a marketing plan to disguise Creationism as a science. Never mind that it doesn’t have anything to do with the scientific method at all - science is based on hypotheses, which are then tested and proved or disproved. But Creationism can’t be either. “Proof” would perhaps include God popping up and showing people how He did it; disproving it is ineffective, because, no matter what the observation of reality tells us, creationists will always reply by saying “God made it so”, or “God disguised His actions to test our faith”.

To creationists, it’s a question of faith. So far, so good - I don’t share it, I think it contradicts too much of what I see and I think it’s a “crutch”, but, fine, to each his own. Most Christians accept the idea that the Bible tells some stories as metaphors, and they have no problem at all with the idea of God creating a universe with Evolution. Creationists aren’t like that, though: to them, every word in the Bible is to be believed literally.

What really irks me is when they try to pass Creationism off as a science (by calling it “ID”), as an “alternative” to Evolution. And now, the guy who is probably the most powerful man in the world is doing it too.

Continue reading ‘“Intelligent Design”’

Computers and “real life”

Published

Pedro Timóteo

on August 2, 2005

in computers

. 3 Comments

Why do some “former” computer geeks tend, at some time, to blame their “geekness” (and computers in particular) for any perceived lack of social success - also known, in this case, as “having no life”?

It’s a strange phenomenon that I have observed several times in my life - there comes a time when, suddenly, a person “decides” that computers, and their interest in them, are to blame for having few friends, for not having a girl/boyfriend, for not being popular - in short, for not being “normal”, and socially successful.

So, they try to cut all ties to computers. Some sell or give away their PC(s), and afterwards boast to people about not having one at home (“I have a life, you know…”). If they have a computer-related job, they either change jobs, if possible, or, if that can’t be done, they begin to hate their jobs, they lose all drive to learn anything new about the subject - only the minimum required to be efficient at their job, and nothing more.

But, after doing that, do they become happier? Not according to what I see.

Continue reading ‘Computers and “real life”’

Alone by choice

Published

Pedro Timóteo

on August 1, 2005

in choices and loneliness

. 12 Comments

Being a part of society is a good thing, but sometimes people take it a little too far.

Case in point: apparently, a lot of people these days can’t conceive of someone being alone for a while by choice. They view being alone as a “social failure” - as if the only way to be alone at a particular time is if nobody in the world wanted your company.

This includes, but is not limited to, “romantic” company (or lack thereof).

I live alone, and have done so for several years now, so, while I enjoy any particular interesting company, I am quite used to be alone. And I am certainly not the only one.

But on more “social” occasions, such as a “night on the town”, even people who live alone seem to need some company - no matter how uninteresting, it appears. Several people have recently became shocked when I tell them that sometimes I go out at night alone. They reply with things like “oh, I’d never do that! how can you?”, or “you’re really weird!”, or “why didn’t you call so and so to go with you?”. They can’t imagine that, sometimes, I do like to be on my own (and I’d rather be alone than in lousy company, but that’s another story). Or, maybe, I would even have liked an interesting company, but none was available, and I went anyway, on my own, because I am able to have fun alone, because I enjoy the place for what it is.

Why are people so dependent on others? Why do they see being alone as a sign of failure?

Continue reading ‘Alone by choice’