Technology: Salvation or Destruction

       The reason human are able to rule the world is that they know how to use tools and technology to help them. Technology is invented to help human. Although sometimes, it might has negative effect on economy and can kill many people in wars, the benefit it brings is immeasurable. It will be the salvation of human.

For example, in the history, civilizations were developed because of technology. All of the ancient civilizations, such as Roman empire, Egypt, Chinese empire, were powerful because they developed technology. It helped the food production, education, and improved people’s life. In 20^th century,America became the strongest country because they had the best technology. Technology is necessary for human to improve.

Secondly, without technology, there is no distinction between human and wild animals. Human are more civilized than beast because they have tools to help them. They know how to live by using their brains to think, instead of simply fighting. Without technology, all of the excellent characteristics or human disappear.

In the future, there are many things human need to improve. They can use technology to explore the outer space. They can improve the speed of traveling. They can make drug to improve human’s health. All of these improvements of the civilization are related to technology.

The improvement of human relied on technology before. And it needs technology to improve in the future as well. Technology will be the salvation of human.

Anger, Not for Long

Have you ever get mad at someone? I mean really really mad at someone and sometime you want to kill him, or just simply punch him in the face to unleash your anger. We all know this is wrong, but for me, is natural. Men are born meant to have anger in it. But also, anger to me is just a temporarily frustration, it will be gone just for a matter of hours, sometimes for me is just a matter of minutes!  Yes, I certainly believe that ‘anger’ is only for short period of time. My grandmother once told me, anger won’t change one’s thinking but I will change how one’s looked at you. She is also a Christian, when I was young, I’m very mischievous, and my grandmother always tell me to come to her room while she’s reading her Bible. She told my that Jesus is the creator of the universe, I must be a good boy in-order to go to heaven. And the foods we eat, like the rice we eat every single day, shall not waste any grain of it, or else Jesus will collect it and by the time you died, Jesus will force you to eat it. First I think is reasonable but slow I grew up. Although Science have prove many wrongs toward my Grandmother, but I still believes in him, I believe that Jesus was the creator of everything. So even today, I read Bible and my grandmother will give me a hour or so lecture about the Words of Jesus. There is one thing that influence me the most is the line my grand mother once told me:

“Do not let the sun go down while you are still angry, and do not give the devil a foothold. He who had been stealing must steal no longer, but must work, doing something useful with his hand, that he may have something to share with those in need.” (Ephesians 4:9)

This one little line give me the whole new thought of anger that I should not be angry for over a day. Instead of being angry, do something productive, and helpful. I think all this reasonable just simply because the line from the Bible, this line have remind me to stay calm and do not be angry for too long, is not good for me and the people around me.

Maturity

In other classes that are not the main subjects such as music, honors logic, and honors composition, I share the lessons with other students in a higher grade like seventh and eighth grade. In those classes, I always felt like a beginner and a little sister they would always look after for. I smile towards that situation, but in my heart, I pray for the equality between everyone of us. I am one of the top students in sixth grade, and I enjoy the feeling to be on top. When I got used to all of that, I just couldn’t take the pressure that put me under the rest in other lessons. I kept comforting myself with an unreasonable explanation: Maybe it is just be cause I am younger than them in a lower grade. Although I usually don’t accept these reasons, but I just went with it in one semester.

I really wish that they would treat me like a normal human being who’s capable of managing and sorting all the mess they made for themselves. Sometimes, the word ‘karma’ comes to my head. And I started wondering if it was because I was acting too mighty to other guys. I had just started my journey in the chess’s area. I won other people who learned it before me, but just didn’t play it a lot. I was proud, even though I know I could never follow up to Teacher Jonathan and Teacher Tom’s pace. I had heard about Samuel’s victory in games with them, but not completely out-chess them. I looked up to them, but still felt hurt when others said that I was a baby bird. I had my trials, practices, and exercises, and I had passed all of them. I understand that I’m no beginner, still, I felt like I had the right to say I just started.

“Please, don’t treat me like a child, I am a teenager now. I know what I am doing.” This is what I really wanted to shout to the whole world. I hope for the sound to go all the way to US, Australia, Antarctica, and the Arctic.

I am mature enough to know what I am doing.

Understanding

Understanding a thing is never complete. You cannot ever tell someone your thought completely unless the one you  are talking to thinks the exact same thing as you. However, you never know how well a person understand you or how well you understand them, is only the matter of perspective of how you define whether or not you understand a particular things. Understanding a thing is like passing a story to one’s mind, and then you pass it to someone else. During the action of passing it, you might rephrase it to your own word just for your own comfort. By doing this action it have already corrupted one’s thoughts, therefore you cannot pass your thoughts to someone else completely. Likewise the word “Understand” is just a word with no definite meaning and sometimes it don’t even really exist. So never expect someone to understand you fully, even though you tell them you understand them. Also, even you mother and dad may or may not fully understand you, this can easily cause family conflicts. In order to prevent this type of conflict you must therefore tell them what you think, but don’t expect them to understand you. Or on the parent’s side, they might think that you are just making things up or you are really telling the truth, but you never know how well you understand your children. The nature of understanding is not understand it FULLY, but instead understand it briefly, or to know it. To knowing something is not just understand, therefore understanding is only the part of knowing something. Another example is a Math teacher who taught his student to understand how to work a formula out, instead of just listing to the teacher ‘completely’ students offend finds the best way to solve the formula. Therefore a man can’t never understand things completely

Borrowing from the Future

Imagine that your income is unable to support your current means, and every day only brings you further into economic downfall. Imagine having credit card after credit card within your wallet, all fully maxed out to pay the negative balances of the others. The words “VISA” and “Mastercard” float around in their blinding holograms whenever you reach for some funds, amassing together and mocking your desperate situation. Your bill statements would come back each month yelling, in bright scarlet capitalized letters, their need to be paid. Their shrieks pound and penetrate your mind daily, forcing you to pay vivid attention with blood-red eyes a problem that you cannot reasonably fix. Imagine having to walk into yet another bank, falsely invigorated to promote your status to the world, to plead them for a loan. Your lies about how you have a fantastic opportunity for huge profits, and how only the need for capital restricts your path, manage to convince them for yet another loan. What would you do? What could you do?
Most would believe that the prior example would lead one to conclude that the imagined person would be someone especially within the lower middle class or even perhaps below the poverty line. Of course, that would be a reasonable assumption; no reasonable adults would keep up such a charade, or live above their reasonable capability to provide. The only exceptions would be those who have an income that cannot provide for their most basic of necessities, hence the need to borrow. That reveals a troubling issue within our current economic systems as it were, but the model is not restricted only to singular individuals. No matter our age or economic status, we are all afflicted by the effects of this plague. The backbones of our civilizations are infected; our governments are being crushed underneath its weight.
For clarification, a simplified illustration to our debt crisis can be drawn. A man earns
$900 every month, and needs $1000 for his expenses, ignoring the question of exactly how necessary they are. In order to meet his expenses, he has to borrow $100 from a lender. By the time the month ends, he has his needs met but has a total income of -$100. For the the next month, since he would still be stuck underneath the same circumstances, he would have to owe at least $200, assuming an impossible zero percent interest rate. Being continuously unable to pay the loans back, he would have to keep increasing his overall deficit by taking up more new loans to pay for the expiring old ones and the current deficit between his revenue and his expenditure. Expand this by changing a few numbers, and increasing the number of cycles by a large number, and you would basically have the current US debt situation.
Loans, by all means, are fine. They provide both a way for individuals to increase their current savings as well as for the borrower to have the resources to work on some profitable project. This sort of investment is actually vital to the growth of our society – there are many prospective ideas and innovations ready to be had, and people willing to spend the time to research into them, but money is almost always a limiting factor. Loans, however, can be separated into two different portions: one being for productive uses (that will result in an overall gain) and one being used for consumption. One can provide, and another is just a way to ignore the true problem at hand, to off load our own waste for the future to handle. Meanwhile, we’ll just live in our bliss and elevated standards of living, uncaring about how each second we wait plummets our future generations even further into the abyss.
The American government has over $14.3 trillion USD in debt, and is continuously increasing. With a deficit of $1.56 trillion every fiscal year, we are forced to issue further more bonds – promises of future funds in exchange for a smaller amount of today’s currency. What kind of gift are we leaving our children and their ancestors? With each second, the weight upon their shoulders increases; the imminent collapse grows in scale. Every second that we waste, we are $50,000 further into debt. We have to stop the cycle now.
As another expansion of the current problems, our social welfare systems are crippling us as well. They rely on the current population’s taxes to pay for the previous generation’s welfare, and those that are paying today will have to rely on funds provided by the next few generations. For example, one would pay $10 out of his salary every month for his future welfare. This $10 would then be distributed among the current retired population, in exchange for the promise that a similar amount would be available in the future. Once retired, one would then get the funds assigned to him, paid by the new generation. Of course, there are benefits to implementing this system. Assuming that the elderly and retired stay low or negligent in proportion the younger working populous, the incoming taxes would leave more than enough for the sustainment of the welfare program. This is because though many pay continuously for the promise of welfare in the future, few will actually cash in, leading to an evident surplus that could then be used in numerous applications. These can range from severely economically starved areas such as education and medical systems to the building of new beneficial infrastructure – economic and societal growth can be accomplished. Especially if used in raising the average salary per annum with no change in purchasing power parity, and decreasing unemployment, the effects can compound to create an even larger surplus.
This design is outdated, however, as medical advancements extend lifespans further, and luxurious standards of life push down the age of retirement. In addition, the average birth rate has decreased by nearly 50 percent in the last 80 years. This results in a exponentially growing ratio between retirees and the young population, as fewer babies are born to supplement the steadily aging previous generations. The problem underlies within the system’s need for a steady ratio between the old population and the younger, which reveals a necessity for the birth rate to continue increasing. For example, a small country has 200 elderly and 1800 workers, an optimistic start when compared to the current situation within the US. There about 56 million beneficiaries of the Social Security System this year, and only 158 million inserting funds into the program. Assuming that there are required at least three payees (workers) for each recipient of the fund, it is required that the next ‘generation’ be at least 5400 people. The situation would then become 1800 recipients, and 5400 workers. Following on, the next generations would have to have a population about 16200. The number will grow exponentially, and though they may seem meager at first – 16200 persons is a relatively small number, especially when compared to the 316 million that are currently living on US soil – it will grow. 20 phases and one would need to have a 10 digit population. It is an unsustainable pyramid scheme, where the lower levels are forced to pay the benefits of the generation above them, in hopes that the level after them would provide. They have to fall at some point, leaving a shattered system, and the only method to prolong its existence is to further raise taxes, borrow funds from an already heavily indebted government, or reduce payouts to an already impoverished selection of people – the system keeps roughly 40% of elderly out of poverty.
We are living beyond our means. We are alcoholics who have for far too long drunk their accursed syrup, penniless in truth but still continuing on the illusion in fear of what may happen outside of it. In reality, there are only two possible methods to save our children and grand-children’s generations. We can either completely give up (default), or we can cut spending and increase taxes. Both are uncomfortable decisions, one will shatter our economy and another will devastate our standards of life. But as our forefathers had fought and died for us, for the freedom of the generations after, shall we not sacrifice our comfort for the sake of the prosperity of our own children?
Imagine what could happen if we did cut spending on less ‘crucial’ endeavors and raised taxes to protect the others. Imagine paying a few percent more for the goods that you buy, and receive slightly less than what you had previously earned every month. Prices will increase as government subsidiaries disappear; those on welfare will be forced to rely on fewer resources for their daily survival as the government eases from the pyramid scale design to an actual depositing and reserving of the taxpayer’s funds, or perhaps even leave welfare to private organizations. We will suffer, that is certain. We face this onslaught of pain, however, for a cause we know to be true and worthwhile; our children and the generations beyond them. We shall carry on underneath the new burden of having to pay for our actions, so that our children can live free and follow their dreams without being pulled back by the steel ropes of our ‘gift’. It is a burden that we must absolve, regardless of the pain that it causes us. We teach to make up for our wrong, to bring justice to a world of chaos; what are we if we do not follow the very moral principles that we yearn towards? We must, for to do otherwise would be contradictory to ourselves.

Human Cloning: The Wrong Step

Human cloning is an extremely controversial issue, and is regarded as both the greatest medical breakthrough of all time as well as a trespass into territory that is otherwise related to the infamous human experiments conducted by the German Nazi’s in WWII. Both sides present, at a first glance, valid arguments for their own opinions. The two are striving for what they believe to be the eventual betterment of mankind, through radically different lenses. The ones arguing for its development look towards the improvements in the standards of life that could occur, and the ones corroborating for its complete and utter ban claim the value of human life, of the clones especially, to be far superseding any benefit that we possibly gain from them. Some have put it that it is basically a standoff between religion and scientific advancement – it is the point at which humanity chooses whether or not to limit its skies or decline into depravity. This is where we decide whether or not to follow the serpent’s path, or stand tall protecting the values and morals that we have striven and died for in the past.

The reasons for human cloning can be separated into two major categories: Utility and Freedom.

Utility would include the more emphatically known benefits such as medical advancement and as a form to create the perfect human. It is the more material of the two, and, for the most part, presents benefits that would be advantageous the entirety of society, or at least the limited portion of which that has access to the resources needed for cloning. Particular persons can be quoted as saying: “It is the next step [towards the betterment of the human race].”

One large sub-category underneath Utility would be medical advancements. One point underneath this broad category may include further understanding about the characteristics and processes of human embryonic stem cells. These are one of the best choices for stem cells, as they can not only differentiate into almost any other kind of human cell, but can also self-multiply almost infinitely in a laboratory environment. Other alternatives are usually either more difficult to obtain, especially when one considers amniotic stem cells – which are only available through the amniotic fluid that is ‘ejected’ during the birth of an infant – or are limited to only a few specific types of cells. A hematopoietic stem cell (blood-forming cells located within bone marrow), for instance, cannot form other types of cells, such as nerve cells within the brain. Being the cells from which a new born infant is formed, human embryonic stem cells naturally have the capability to form any needed organ or tissue without the need for potentially damaged genetic material from the patient. Possible uses range diversely from a cure to baldness to the ability to grow organs or other specialized cell tissue. Doubtless, its introduction would bring great benefits to the standard of life and care to most individuals.

Embryonic stem cells, however, present a difficult issue. They require the destruction of a potential fetus, as they require the isolation of the inner cell mass of a human embryo. For the most part, it can be assumed that the genetic data for the fertilized embryo would be natural or free of any debilitating or life-threatening genetic deformities, as that would affect the produced organs or tissues as well. Under natural conditions, the embryo can be reasonably expected to develop into a fully formed and healthy infant. This fact that the fertilized embryo must, at the very least, be considered as a potential human being is the main struggling point between ethicists and the scientists promoting its use.

The human fertilized egg should be considered as a human being, though perhaps applicable to a more specialized set of rights due to its physical and mental capabilities at this point in its development. It is not simply capable of creating a human being – sperm cells and female eggs are both individually also capable of developing into a born infant – but is instead in the process of creating a human being. Given the right conditions, the fertilized embryo will result in a human being. Just like the development of infant into children, children into adolescents, and adolescents into adults – starting from the fertilized embryo, life, human life, has begun its process.

Doubtless, there will be accidents and failures that occur, but the fate of the fetus is not to be decided by any human power. Similar to how we embrace individual rights and freedoms for the mentally incapacitated and newly born infants, the same must be applied to the fetus. In addition, however less effective they are, there are alternatives to embryonic stem cells. There are large possibilities that we could learn some valuable information from how the human body reacts to pain and other data through vivisections or torture, but we dare traverse to that extent, do we? There is a developed principle that scientific research should not cross the point of which we would be degrading ourselves to savages. The same should apply should apply to any human being, including a possible one. The one that exists naturally as a consummation of love and devotion by two oppositely gendered individuals – the fertilized embryo.

Another benefit that revolves underneath the category for medical advancements would be a genetically-modified child, whose DNA may come from a combination of sources. Some argue that this would present many benefits, including giving infertile parents a chance at one of the most fulfilling of experiences in life, and other parents a chance to give their child a brighter future, themselves having genetic material that may or will result in defects and abnormalities within their child. The type of human cloning that is required for this particular purpose is currently extremely unstable, and not only within the relatively untested area with regard to humanity.

Even animal cloning is currently devastating in its failure rate. For an illustration of this, there were 273 failures in the attempt to create Dolly. In addition, there were a large number of “defective” clones. If we switch the terms around, and perhaps lower the numbers a bit as an optimistic look at our development of technology, there will still be a number of clones- humans – that will be born and will experience abnormalities. And since they are classified as human beings, without any debate, they will suffer through life.

Even for the ones that do come out physically and mentally healthy, there’s an extremely likely chance that society as a whole will reject them. History teaches us that we have discriminated those who are different. Racism is a horrendous example that one can only hope would be self-explanatory. But even in our modern society, aside from racism, there are social standards. There exist extensive amounts of bullying in schools, especially against those who are otherwise considered as not part of the norm.

Similarly, many would state that they would like their own personal clone, but they themselves would not wish to be the clone. Already, at the very least, we believe there to be an evident difference between the original human and the clone – seeing as the opinions of both are not equally interchangeable. Therefore, it can be reasonably estimated that clones would be affected harshly by these circumstances, drowning in depression by their outcast status and intense media popularity.

One final benefit of clones within the Utility category would be for mass-production means. Through modifications and selective picking of genetic material, the perfect human can be made for multiple applications. These can range from menial labor to even mass warfare, and would increase the productivity of our world dramatically. No longer would we, the original and natural humans, be subject to the lesser work that has plagued us for millennium – we could just create a new work force that, with the proper reeducation and discipline, could become essentially mindless slaves with no opinions of their own. If one can see the evident wrong within the last statement, one can also see the problems that exist within cloning for means of doing a job that we would otherwise not enjoy doing. By doing so, we have inadvertently placed ourselves as a superior being than to the slaves, which is something that is perhaps the complete opposite of what we try to achieve within our post-modern world; equality.

Even for the creation of the perfect being, we are then acknowledging that there is some vital flaw within our current beings that forces us to wish to create something more superior, and to believe that it is the cure for humanity. Although our current state of civilization and technology seems to be advanced, there are still many mysteries unlocked about the effects of changing certain portions of DNA. We have only scratched the surface, and should we tamper with the DNA, we cannot accurately estimate the exact effects of such changes. There is much media and literature in regard to this, and though they usually exaggerate the possible effects, they paint an accurate picture. We, sincerely, do not know what we are tampering with when we alter the very code that is our existence. We cannot both acknowledge this and still create clones – there is a high opportunity for not only failure, but also an introduction of something that we do not even know or realize.

The other category for the benefits of human cloning is freedom. It is mainly the belief that, due to our cherishment of the autonomous society where all individuals are free to make their own choices, the simple banishment of an act should not be allowed. Instead, consequences should be made accordingly to the danger of that act. No third-party should be allowed by itself to determine what is right and what is wrong for its citizens or a specific group of people – they may be allowed to educate and present evidence proving their own conclusions, but cannot immediately assume that all the people underneath their legislation will agree. Therefore, they cannot enable legislature to force their conclusions.

This by itself presents many faults. Firstly, it would quite actually mean a lawless world. Education, religion, and, for now, general beliefs of society can help shape an individual’s beliefs to wish to benefit both themselves and the community around them. Inevitably, however, as humans as a race are naturally susceptible to their natural urges and education systems are usually underfunded, there will be a small population whose opinions would otherwise be considered as harmful to the society around them. An example of this could include a belief that any path to the fulfillment of a desire is justified.

Illustrations of this can apply in many serious scenarios, such as rape, murder, or narcotic intoxication. All otherwise destructive or self-damaging behavior. Currently, this group of people is kept to minimum through the safe-keeping of the government – it introduces legislature that present a specific standard of justice in order to protect its innocent and correct (or remove) its more damaging bodies. Should this upholder of previously argued and proved justice be removed, one can accurately imagine a world spiraling down back into the barbaric men from whence we came. There will be persons who will contest all the previously established regulations, and arguing underneath this autonomy, those pillars of greatness shall crash to the ground. Everything shall be allowed, and as more and more fall victim to the more physical desires, we shall lose everything that we’ve striven for. There will be rapes, murders, thefts, and other hideous crimes, though on a much greater scale. Our race shall end.

In addition, it is a self-contradictory belief when placed into the context of human cloning. We have defined the starting point for human life as the fertilization of the embryo. As such, since that point, a human has its own autonomy, and therefore should be given to opportunity to decide for itself whether or not it wishes to sacrifice its life and provide risky opportunities for therapeutic purposes. It is recognized that this is otherwise impossible, as that human does not, at that stage, have the sufficient capabilities to fully understand the entirety of situation and communicate its answer. Therefore, we cannot justifiably allow human cloning, as it would mean that we should clone with the knowledge that there would be a multitude of deaths, far outweighing the potential humanitarian benefits that anything could achieve.

In summary, human cloning is unjustifiable. The few benefits of Utility that do occur cannot possibly outweigh the loss of human life. In addition, it would degrade the dignity and value of human life, as it would suppose that material benefits could be truly compared to a human life. The arguments under the category of Freedom do not put up any true support at all, being weak and, overall, destructive to civilization if allowed. There is simply nothing that can compare against the sacred quality of humanity, and possibly justify destroying one of its members. The question is whether or not we can choose the path of justice over the cliff of depravity. The choice lies with ordinary citizens like you – what shall we value more: ignorance, or the truth?

The Decline

As year after year passes, as we journey further and further into that apex of knowledge, though unbeknownst to us whether or not we have just pierced the crust or are already within the fiery heat of the core, I must wonder if we have changed in the millenia that have passed since the start of the recognizable civilizations documented within our textbooks, or even the start of the archaic era. Have we not been able to destroy that wretched layer of pure particular desire with the countless millions of hours of contemplative thought and writing that have passed? It can be argued that ‘intelligent’ propaganda and manipulation of our innermost (and sometimes most depraved) desires have led us to this ever steeper incline of self desire. Joseph Goebbels, an eccentric propagandist under the command of Hitler, admitted that he was simply toying with the lowest instincts of the German people. Horrifyingly, he achieved great success and managed perhaps to debase even previously revered figures. All using exploits of our inner selves and emotions. A figure once described his effectiveness, “He drove his listeners into ecstasy, making them stand up, sing songs, raise their arms, repeat oaths – and he did it, not through the passionate inspiration of the moment, but as the result of sober psychological calculation.”

We have placed material objects as sources of our own ‘happiness,’ and claim that they can fulfill our desires through our very wanting of them. Do women not buy and use makeup for the sake of being more attractive to the other gender? Do we not buy that horrendously expensive new TV to make ourselves seem more superior (to ourselves), subconscious symbols that have been placed there by marketing and cleverly placed images? Where do you think we received the concept that makeup and other ‘useless’ cosmetic products resulted in beauty, or at least one that would be appealing to the ever hungrier male? By simply putting naturally beautiful women near pictures of cosmetics, they have connected the two. Of course, a skeptic may suspect that this would have no real effect if shown only once, and I would agree. But the connection doesn’t simply exist within cosmetics. It exists everywhere. Oh how funny you are, my fellow society, how much you wring us through and then later complain of the pain of the wringing – do you forget, when yourself not feeling the pain (for it is delayed), that you are indeed us, and us you?

I’ve shown prior to this that even within our much beloved Disney films, we have repeatedly shown to our mentally sensitive children what is to be expected of others and themselves. But let us examine other illustrations, shall we? Barbie, and perhaps any other sort of doll that promotes fantastical beauty, shows perhaps the insanity that we have lunged towards. We may claim that it is harmless to allow a small child to play with it, and under different circumstances and in a world void of harmful media influence, I would agree. It would only provide the basis for further manipulation, but by itself it isn’t too much. But when we add in females on media that are dressed to an almost naked fashion, and use makeup and other techniques to stimulate their beauty, and the supposed arguments in most media that guys basically only like such girls (as seems to be evident from the monopoly that they have), it is inevitable that the females of our generation be left with an attempt to grasp that beauty and the security that comes along with it, as men are said to enjoy the beauty of  females in such a way that it can dramatically change his feelings towards his wife or move his affection towards another female (perhaps one wearing even less clothing, and using further amounts of makeup).

Something is horrendously wrong with our world. Writers of the mid 1900s predicted horrifying dystopias in which we lose our senses of morality and emotion, replacing them with useless pratter and conditioned responses. Huxley and Bradbury were two such authors, excellent writers that predicted what would have seemed in their time impossible events. It is terrifying to see how many commonalities our post-modern society has with the descriptions within these books. How far will we go to be satisfied and permanently live within the illusion of happiness? We will abandon our individual thoughts and rights, as well as any chance for true happiness, in exchange for the fools gold? After all, it is shiny.

Say “Good Bye”

Saying ‘goodbye’ is sometimes hard for someone to do because, what if you are saying good bye to your family? Yes, you may say it out loud, but you do not necessarily mean that your mind is genuinely thinking that. However, what if the hardest thing to say is not ‘goodbye,’ but something that perhaps we lack the confidence to say the thing we’re really wanting to say? You know, something like “I love you.”

To say those three words takes a lot of confidence, especially if you highly revere those words. I suppose many say these words with confidence but lack care or sincerity at the profundity of the words. Furthermore, those who say it casually never consider the consequences of their words. But I regress. Or else, what if the idea of loving is difficult for a person. And, to combine these two ideas, to not say “I love you,” while at the same time having to say “goodbye.” The prospect is overwhelming.

But, there comes a time when all fear of change  comes to an end and we have to be brave. We have to say “goodbye” to those we love and hope for a new “Hello.” This reminds me of an old Japanese folk-tale.  We all know that the capital of Japan, Tokyo, wasn’t the capital long before in Japan. Then there was a Japanese ruler who learned how to give up his land and castle and move the capital of Japan to south east part of Japan; namely, Tokyo. On the day the ruler was supposed to leave, he literally bowed down in front of the castle and said “Good Bye” in Japanese. The result of that action, gained that ruler a new ‘Hello’, just by saying good bye to the old capital. And, consequently, Tokay, the new capital, remains until this day. But, it will somehow be change sometime in the future, it is determined.

Good Things Come to Those who Wait

I walked into my classroom confident that I would make a good grade on the quiz I was about to take. When the paper was given, I looked it over and realized that I was not at all ready. I finished the quiz after some time and thought that I was bound to receive a terrible grade; my average would be greatly affected by this.

I then thought, ‘Maybe it’s God’s will that I didn’t do well today. Maybe you’re only permitted one bit of good news per day. No more or less, only one.’ Well, it wasn’t unreasonable for me to think this, and truly my life experience has shown me that this is generally the case.  

So, I proceeded through the day waiting for God’s good to come to me. And, finally, toward the end of the day, it reached me. I found out that I received BETA permission to play Counter-Strike: Global Offensive from Steam.

I know you’re probably thinking, ‘That’s kind of lame, man.’ But, I was very excited. Why? Because I have spent the past several months preparing for various exams and projects for schools and applications for new school that I’ve had no time to enjoy the things in life that give me a small amount of pleasure; for example, gaming.

You see, it was more than a month ago that I submitted my application to have BETA permission. I waited eagerly for their approval  week after week. So, when I received nothing, I basically gave up. But, amazingly, Steam cared about my feedback about the game. And now, a month later, they have given me access.

Now, I realize that access like this can hardly make up for a failed quiz. True. But, there was a good thing that happened despite the failed quiz. In the end, I learned that good things come to those who wait. But, sometimes waiting doesn’t mean passivity, though sometimes it does, but that we have to take our own initiative to set things in motion so we can attain the expected outcome in due time.

And for me personally, I think that God himself timed this to give me comfort on an otherwise pretty bad day. It’s a small example, but I think it can be applied more universally.

The Infinite Loop

Imagine you were omniscient. You had achieved such an accumulation of knowledge and understanding and came to a full realization of how the world worked; all the minute details of how nature and humanity worked. You knew about the people that inhabited it, their motives, their actions – how everything affected the path, or not. You knew about the pain and suffering of a large population, and the ignorant bliss of another. In short, imagine that you knew everything, and still actually retained a care or an emotion towards the human race. What would you do? Would you tell the world about all of the corruption, and put it onto yourself to fix it, or would you sit back and ignore the human race for whatever it was?

Some would choose to fix it, seeing what society had stuffed into them all their lives. Since our birth, comics, movies, and any other type of literature available to us professed a love for the righteous. A love for the one that would save the damsel in distress, the one that would swoop down from skyscrapers to save a single innocent life. “The Green Lantern”, “Superman”, “Batman”, “Spiderman”, and many other popularly known comics all picture a single person, or a group of people, attempting to help humanity after they had received certain gifts, be it wealth and intelligence, or supernatural powers. Those many hours that we laid on our beds, dreaming of what it would be like to swing from building to building on thin strings of web, or fly through the sky like a bird (and like a plane), to save some people from the evils that plagued the world and come home to immense applause and cheering. And when we finally took off those red and blue costumes and became absorbed within the tiny scribbles upon pieces of paper, the teachings did not stop.

In school, the recommendation to do what is evidently righteous becomes even more fanatical. Teachers continuously encourage their students to do what is good, but here is where things get a more complicated. Due to either the naivety or emotions of the students around this age range (middle school age), they are extremely susceptible to place in others’ definitions of what good is. To be fair, all people are fickle, and it’s not just teenagers that are particularly affected. But the general consensus seems to be that they are.

Now, there are only five sources from which these children can receive their picture of good or justice. One is their teachers, whom usually embrace the goal of intelligence and high marks, regardless of how many times they preach that grades don’t matter.

Parents are also another source that teaches a similarly focused ideal, though not all are the same. Most encourage learning and studying, usually expending most of their child’s energy in either doing so or arguing against it, but some, driven by either their own previously learned examples or the simple case of their situation, teach a variety of things. Children are actually quite observant, even though people normally think that they aren’t and say that they do only for ‘encouragement’, and have an inert ability to learn from their observations, especially from those based on their parents. Monkeys also have a similar trait, younger monkeys being able to learn at incredible speeds just from observing and copying the actions that their parents or other prominent adults do, hence the creation of the Hundredth Monkey Effect. “Like father, like son” in its literal form.

For example, a family that regularly uses violence within its ‘communication’ with each other will result in children that are either terrified of the outside world, secluding themselves in where they can at least live in the illusion that they cannot be hurt, or they will themselves use force to create themselves in territory that is not otherwise conquered by another being. A family that continuously mentions the word money, obsesses over it, and uses it as a determining factor in the gifts of toys towards a child will create one that will worship it. I realize that these factors are almost impossible to avoid, and the child may not always turn out to be either loving or hating of money, but it’s very much possible. Toys, the key to a materialistic child’s happiness, is hindered only by this mention of the word money. Though most probably too young to understand what the word actually means, one can deduce that it must be very important. The child then seeks to have more of it or help his parents have more of it, since it would mean more toys. The phrases or syllables before the word hardly matter, especially if the child is still at an age at which he cannot understand them – it is the continual repeating of the particular tone that matters. And when he grows to a point at which he can understand it, all the other phrases are long gone. Only that one word stays, that one continuously forbidding word. There are, of course, many other examples from many other sources, such as from other students, sheer necessity, etc.

But one thing that one should notice is that this cycle is never stopped. So long as there is a lack of education that would otherwise prove the obsession or figure of righteousness wrong. For we all have this inert sense that the betterment of the group is one of the more important goals, but we are all fickle. We are able to ignore this, as most of us do every single day, but at least we understand that it is there, and that it is better that we should follow it. With a lack of education, however, there remains that this goal is not realized. For without education, there is no other source of information besides your peers, who are normally similarly uneducated. And as one keeps going on without education, and as this group keeps going on, the hole only achieves a greater span and depth. Knowledge gets corrupted and changed within a person’s mind, especially after disuse and the gaining of hatred towards a party – which would be typical in situations without much education due to assumed impoverishment. Have enough people believe in a mutated form of knowledge, and it may actually become considered to be contesting against the original truth. Have enough, and the original truth may disappear.

We live in a strange world – the ones with education and knowledge seek not to use it and instead hide beneath their illusions, and the ones without education and knowledge seek to have it but since they do not have it, other less viable truths become their own truths. The problem? We are all spiraling down into the depths, and there seems to be a reason why we enjoy doing so. Regardless of what the reason is, those who oppose it will perish.

Fixing it would a useless approach. That one person with their eyes opened to the world shall speak the truth, and get killed for doing so. Should he aim himself towards a group of people, that group shall wish to destroy him, and if not them then the next group over. For they shall wish to stay in power, and it is only through their own current power that they shall even be matters of attention to the one whom all has been revealed.

Some of the people may listen to him, and pay attention to the affairs and cry out when he has been found to be dead or disappeared, but due to our free speech laws, their voices shall be drowned out by the many above them. If he chose to target all, he would create a similar effect, but would most likely cause destruction in the process as people vented their own opinions and mutated his teachings to fit their own memory and perspective. In both cases, the truth in its original and pure form shall disappear and become unknown once again by man.

There is a third option, however. Should the man wish to write his teachings down, his effect and truth shall stay on forever. One can wonder, however, whether or not that would truly change anything. To write it down, he would have to stay away from more specific matters (which would most likely convolute the original message) to a general and direct teaching. But then, what would he have achieved that many before him hadn’t? The future shall still stay ignorant, and little shall have been achieved.

Not choosing to tell wouldn’t necessarily be a stupid decision, but it would accomplish nothing else nothing more than the other approach. Nothing more, and just a tiny bit less, but in reality just a single speck of dust within the great span of the universe.

We are stuck in this infinite pattern, forever rejecting the truth yet adoring it at the same time. Our mouths speak differently from what we think, cheering on the righteous but despising the actual following of the concepts all the same. The question is whether or not we can truly break out of this. Some refer themselves to religion, some to love, and others to science and pure rationality. But perhaps that’s not the real question we want to ask. The true question is whether or not we will even want the truth. Do we?