(no subject)
Recently, I have picked up on the fact that I speak and write in a very exploratory manner. I am somewhat well-read, so I usually am not at a complete loss within my social circles. While most of the people I speak to understand this, most people in general may not. I have a tendency to take theoretical or philosophical sides that I may not necessarily agree with, but that I find interesting and containing some degree of merit. I'll speak strongly from that position, mostly to flesh it out and challenge another's position (quite likely one that I hold myself), but from the way some people who read this livejournal have responded, it seems that maybe people aren't used to people taking positions out of sheer curiousity and a desire to intellectually explore an idea. My recent posts on here have been inspired by one of the books I am currently reading, Richard Dawkins' The God Delusion, and that is a very sensitive and controversial issue. Sure, I like to be controversial, but I do not entirely agree with Dawkins. I'll say modern-day, organized religion has a lot of problems and causes a lot of problems, but that is true of anything that creates group boundaries and distinguishes between people on some boundary created by whatever is creating those group boundaries (whether it be religion, nationality, politics, whatever).
Today, I was working on the manuscript of one of my experiments and after writing the first paragraph, I couldn't help but think of all that I just said above. What I wrote was certainly accurate and true, but it could definitely be taken out of context and be viewed in a similar light as the works of Salmon Rushdie and Ward Churchill. The contents are certainly as inflammatory, but I say only a similar light because I am a mere graduate student. I enjoy thinking, writing, and speaking in that very curious manner, but eek. I need to go back tone down the beginning of the manuscript... at least until I no longer am in a position where I need to impress future doctoral programs and potential employers. Maybe even beyond that... but at least until that point.
One of my friends recommended an older movie to me and brought me a VHS copy of it. It stars a very young John Ritter and portrays him, the Tadpole, as a seeming 40-year old in the body of a 15-year old who is incredibly learned and fascinated by Voltaire. I watched it tonight and the movie intersperses some of my favorite Voltaire quotes and thoughts throughout. One of these quotes seems rather appropriate considering the theme of this post:
If we don't find anything pleasant, at least we will find something new.
- Voltaire
Today, I was working on the manuscript of one of my experiments and after writing the first paragraph, I couldn't help but think of all that I just said above. What I wrote was certainly accurate and true, but it could definitely be taken out of context and be viewed in a similar light as the works of Salmon Rushdie and Ward Churchill. The contents are certainly as inflammatory, but I say only a similar light because I am a mere graduate student. I enjoy thinking, writing, and speaking in that very curious manner, but eek. I need to go back tone down the beginning of the manuscript... at least until I no longer am in a position where I need to impress future doctoral programs and potential employers. Maybe even beyond that... but at least until that point.
One of my friends recommended an older movie to me and brought me a VHS copy of it. It stars a very young John Ritter and portrays him, the Tadpole, as a seeming 40-year old in the body of a 15-year old who is incredibly learned and fascinated by Voltaire. I watched it tonight and the movie intersperses some of my favorite Voltaire quotes and thoughts throughout. One of these quotes seems rather appropriate considering the theme of this post:
If we don't find anything pleasant, at least we will find something new.
- Voltaire