I've been taking an intro to philosophy course, so I admittedly I'm a complete knoob when it comes this stuff. However, we've been learning about Socrates's quest for defining what justice is. For Socrates, the truth was out there but it is something that could not be found. With that said, it is better to know that you do not know rather than to be ignorant that you do not know.
In the Republic, Plato tries to define what justice is and how a just society should operate. However, to me, his society and so called justice system sucks.
Thus, we come to Thrasymachus's argument that:
Justice is nothing more than the advantage of the stronger.
Granted Socrates refutes this definition, Thrasymachus still raises an interesting point. There is no such thing as universal justice, and so we cannot define it.
My question to you guys is, is there such thing as a universal justice that we can define? If so, what is it?
The brain is like a computer with cell processor. You got like a 100TB Hard drive.The stuff you learned are the software you installed. Your senses are the input devices screaming at the brain about this and that. The opposite sex is a virus that will always try to infect your system. Anything you do is obsolete since anti-virus/firewall never works, but you should be fine as long as you don't toss your computer out the window.
Putting the spotlight on just the girls wouldn't be fair...soo, guys this is your chance to prove that you don't just look for hmmm... looks. What traits do you find most attractive (and yes looks can be in there) in a girl? These traits...prbbly like the girls' won't be the same as what our parents' generation was looking for. No longer is the story of the princess and the frog a story for just girls...maybe guys are now looking for good looking frogs too!
So, let's also shoot for a top 10 list! I hope we don't disgrace ourselves and just stop at the two that came first to my mind (and i'm sure is repeated in many guys here)...brains and brawn. hehe
People should leave their 10 items in the comment section, if you do not want your identity revealed please posted under No ID. I will eventually tally up the comments and stick it up for the guys...girls are just more controlled =P. And finally...results are out!
Top 10 List
1.) Trustworthy/Committed is our most voted for quality!...no playas plz, leaf that to the people who dunno how to spel
2.) Smart...we want the girls who can spell!
3.) Artistic...dunno, they voted for it so i'm putting it up
4.) Playful...not as in poking...virtual or otherwise, but genuinely fun to be around.
5.) Funny...Everybody's a comedian...
6.) Self-Confident/Self-Respect...if you dunno what this is go listen to arethra franklin
7.) Pretty/Beautiful...Odd, not hot but pretty or beautiful
8.) Creativity...Add some spice into everyday Life
9.) Caring...A hint of softness under that creatively decorated, funny, good-looking exterior
10.) And our number 10 (it was tied with many other ones) is Social...so you can ask us out on the first date (at least that's what i think the boys voting for it were thinking...)
Thank you for participating, I am sure it has dramatically changed the lives of many women...
So, for the guys out there, ever wonder what girls are looking for in a guy? Well here's your chance to find out...if the girls will step up =P.
Why don't we shoot for a top-10 list of what girls are looking for the most in their "prince of shining armor" or maybe their looking for just a Matt Damon...who knows...
If you have a suggestion (and you're a girl...please just go right ahead and add your suggestions to this article, don't bother commenting...that's for the enlightened guys =P)
Top 11 List
1.) loyal/faithful
2.) confident, but not cocky!
3.) intelligent/talented (not in video games!)
4.) witty, but not a smartass!
5.) caring/thoughtful
6.) ambitious/adventurous
7.) mature/respectful
8.) athletic/fit
9.) romantic/sweet
10.) good looking/cute
11.) not possessive, but a little jealousy is cute
I heard an interesting thing in Economics a few days ago that when polled, 80-90% of the population think that they're "above average" drivers. Same results for looks. Supposedly, they look around and say hmm, "well i know i'm no brad pitt or sarah pallin"...but I'm pretty decent. Obviously 80% of people can't be above average.
Odd that our confidence levels seem to be so high according to these tests...almost doesn't seem to stick with what we know about people. Now, I think that these two things are hard for people to self-inspect because people rarely get people telling them how "beautiful/ugly" they are. For drivers, bad drivers just say that they're "aggressive" and not unsafe, while the unbearably slow drivers just claim to be "safe". There are also no ways of quantifying either of them (tickets/horn beeps might, but people justify more tickets with time saved on the commute...so not poor skills but a conscious trade).
Instead, what about intelligence? Would people generally say they're above average when they know they're a C or a B student? Would be interesting to have people comment anonymously with a number between 1-10 with how smart they think they are COMPARED TO THE WORLD. I think we have pretty high average, seeing how this is an "intellectual" blog haha...and it'll be interesting to compare that number to what happens in the next post.
So when you're sitting in chem lectures, your mind will often wander off into space. Not that chemistry is particularly boring...
As my attention span dwindled for the duration of the lecture, my eyes spotted the periodic table of contents, and then I realized...hmmm wouldn't it be nice to spell words with the elements? Yah, I know...stupid idea...but I gave it a try and I thought it was kinda of funny. Take this for example:
Phosphorous Peroxide.
What does the molecular formula spell? I know general chemistry was ages ago, but I encourage you to find out ^^. In addition, if you're feeling a stupid as I am, I'll also encourage you to make your own compound :)
Yup it's that time again, midterm season when students try extra hard to be good students and write long lists of what they want answered to teachers. Then, since we're so excited, we stay up all of test day eve, and in the mornings... there are the tests! One for each of us, and if we're lucky, two!
Well for those of you who are also celebrating test-mas hopefully this will bring a lil cheer to a busy week :).
Don't get too caught up in the spirit of the season and forget what life is really about.
To my devoted readers:
It has been far too long since I last penned an essay dealing with the social troubles of our time. I must apologize for the lack of correspondence. I will endeavor to appease my readers’ massive hunger for intellectually stimulating discourse with a topic close to my heart: that of sexism.
I began contemplating this issue when talking to a dear friend of mine. The double standard inherent in dress codes had caught her attention, and her fiery temperament (truly a thing to fear, if you be a misogynic lout with little or no manners) had immediately erupted. “What the hell? I am sick of the tan lines on my upper body. Guys get it easy. If they want to get rid of their farmer’s tan, they can just walk around without a shirt.” The grim line of her lips informed me that this was a situation that did not agree with her. She immediately expanded on her thoughts. “Also, what’s with the dress codes at schools? Like the schools that have their own uniforms. Guys wear slacks and a white shirt with tie. Girls are given skirts that either go down to the ankles or barely cover the thighs. Who designs these things?”
Well, being the helpful and understanding friend I am, I suggested that my friend show the world that she was a free woman by stripping off her shirt (as well as everything underneath it). She threw me a glare that would have rendered most men impotent. “You,” she stated. “Are a pig.”
Let us examine this issue from a different perspective. Why exactly is it that we forbid full or partial nudity in women but only full nudity in men? What are the social pressures that force us to avoid nudity when our European cousins have much laxer rules on the subject? What exactly is responsible for this disjoint, the simultaneous aversion and attraction to breasts?
Why exactly am I focusing on breasts? Because of all the paradoxical feelings about nudity and female organs, this seems the most problematic. One could say that in polite society we ought not to wave around sexual organs. However, even if we accept this as true, there seems no reason for us to ban bare breasted females. Mammary glands produce milk for our young. They serve no “natural” sexual function, and do not constitute sexual organs.
A biologist with an affinity for relational studies might propose that men find the mammary glands attractive because firm, fairly large breasts suggest that a woman would have no problem feeding a child, thus protecting the well being of our as of yet unborn offspring. A Freudian might imply that our subconscious memories of feeding on our mother’s breast lead us (in an odd twist on the Oedipus complex) to find breasts that imitate our mother’s attractive. A boor might intimate (between slurps of beer) that breasts are “God’s gifts to men’s hands.”
I must disagree with the biologist on several points. Firstly, the image of what is “attractive” varies from generation to generation. There was a time when people thought a full set of curves was the way to go. If I was to judge women based on the “Barbie complex” as set forth by popular television today, however, I might be aroused by women who were so skinny as to be almost skeletal, despite the fact that my unborn offspring would never flourish in the womb of a woman who eats nothing but salad. Secondly, though there might be an attraction to mammary glands, there is no reason that this attraction be sexual. Why can’t we love women with healthy mammary glands platonically? We, as humans, find certain aspects of a person to be “attractive” without being sexual. “Healthy mammary glands” would fit nicely with “nice smile” and “firm handshake.” Though a female may want to have sex with a man who has a “nice smile,” she does not have to see the “nice smile” as sexually arousing.
Freudians have always provoked feelings of disgust in me. Perhaps it is their obsession with sex, or their greasy hair and fat lips. Maybe it is those hands, always sweaty—but I digress. The claim that we find breasts attractive because we sucked on our mother’s breasts when we were a child is utter nonsense. It disregards all sorts of background influences. If a child was to find an issue of Playboy underneath his father’s bed, who knows what he might grow up to desire in a woman. Or maybe a baby was not breast fed. Does that baby grow up to be utterly insensitive to the social pressures that dictate “sexual normality?”
As for the boor, I cannot say that I disagree with his statement. I do, however, disagree with the sentiment. I have always found it odd that even as we anthropomorphize objects like our sexual organs and hair dryers, we continue to objectify women as objects of sexual pleasure.
To get back to the main point, dress codes also attribute to this objectification. The truth of the matter is that it should not matter whether or not mammary glands induce sexual arousal. If men can walk around bare-chested, it is only fair that women be allowed to as well. I might (and this is purely hypothetical) find a man with well formed pectoral muscles to be sexually attractive; this does not prevent him from jogging without a shirt. The fact that women cannot do the same suggests that we have a problem with our own sexuality, and that women with bodies that stimulate should be ashamed to compound on our sexuality. Nothing could be unhealthier. Women are not creatures of pure carnality, wantonly flaunting their assets, and they are not beings that exist purely to please men: women are sacrosanct, vessels of life, and above all women are human.
A final word of advice: sexual intercourse is exactly what it sounds like. It is intercourse, not a singular action by a lone person. Too often men are inconsiderate lovers (if I can even use that word) plunging for the “goal” like a horse who has forgotten that someone is riding him. Men, I promise you, if you listen to a woman, you will learn things that you never thought possible. Don’t let your sex life be another victim of the objectification of women.
[Many thanks to Etienne in convincing me to post this]
This prefaces George Orwell's novel Keep the Aspidistra Flying. However, it is not the verse that people know. It is instead adapted to his novel, so it's been changed.
I thought it was hilarious.
"Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not money, I am become as a sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith so that I could remove mountains, and have not money, I am nothing. And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not money, it profiteth me nothing. Money suffereth long, and is kind; money envieth not; money vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, doth not behave unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil; rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.... And now abideth faith, hope, money, these three; but the greatest of these is money."
-I Corinthians xiii (adapted)
Hope you found it funny as well.
Posts
