I grew up in a Unitarian Universalist church- it was interesting to revisit and re-educate myself about UU ideals.
A friend is collecting brief statements about how her friends’ brains work, to be collected into a book. This is my contribution.
I feel obliged to note that it is 21:00 on July 1st, 2009. The Michael Fogleman that is writing this is not the same as the Michael Fogleman that might write a similar essay a day, a year, or a decade from now.
I outsource the functions of my brain wherever possible. To-do lists, journal entries, mind maps, doodles and poems all encompass parts of me adequately and significantly. Perhaps this is a result of my fear of memory loss; I regret that I can’t remember (almost) everything. I also consider other resources, most notably the Internet and Google, a part of my brain.
As a child, I imagined God having a large database of all the information and statistics in the world, whether or not humans collected that data or not. I wanted to sort through this information and narrow it down as it was useful to me. I think we’re getting there. Needless to say, I don’t believe in God.
My brain works in patterns, loops, functions. I think at the age of eleven or twelve I realized that my brain would look for patterns in things. Although I pondered cataloguing them, I never attempted it, simply because I was only conscious of such patterns for a week or two before they disappeared into the dark, deep areas of my subconscious, to bubble up sporadically. One overlying pattern I’ve recognized is that between following the tech industry as a hobby and taking AP English, I sort things into concepts and trends and patterns. Society is going in certain directions, and works of art or entertainment are constructed.
My brain has been permanently altered by my interest in chess and debate. I think ahead and flow. Life is a game and conversation must be won.
Sometimes I think so fast in conversation that my tongue gets tied. I’m not sure whether it’s that I think really fast, or that the part of me that talks just can’t construct sentences fast enough. I’m going to be egotistical and assume it’s the former.
I used to attempt to catalyze my search for my own identity by researching and subscribing to various ideologies. I have recently recognized that this is a potentially dangerous shortcut, so for now I’ve narrowed them down to Love and Anti-fascism. It works. So keep love in your heart, and peace in your mind. No matter what.
| Sol: | Listen to me. The Ancient Japanese considered the Go board to be a microcosm of the universe. Although when it is empty it appears to be simple and ordered, in fact, the possibilities of game play are endless. They say that no two Go games have ever been alike. Just like snowflakes. So, the Go board actually represents an extremely complex and chaotic universe. That is the truth of our world, Max. It can't be easily summed up with math. There is no simple pattern. |
| Max: | But as a Go game progresses, the possibilities become smaller and smaller. The board does take on order. Soon, all moves are predictable. |
| Sol: | So? |
| Max: | So, maybe, even though we're not sophisticated enough to be aware of it, there is an underlying order...a pattern, beneath every Go game. Maybe that pattern is like the pattern in the market, in the Torah. The two sixteen number. |
| Sol: | That is insanity, Max. |
| Max: | Or maybe it's genius. I have to get that number. |
One trait I value in fellow philosophers: open-mindedness. Empathetic, accepting individuals are often providers of provocative, ideology-shaking ideas. I’ve often said that the first time I truly learned anything was when I questioned my values and beliefs: those who differ from your values and beliefs in a way you’ve never seriously considered before have something educational to offer you, even if you don’t ultimately agree with them.
I can’t say that this is advice I always follow: for one, my stubborn nature causes my arguments to become aggravated or aggravating quite easily. I also have several biases and axioms that can encourage close-mindedness (i.e. I reject most religious or spiritual belief systems at first glance for their general reliance on faith and superstition instead of reason). This does demonstrate my point though: most instances where a religious person attempts to advocate to me their particular faith, I shrug them off and they cannot provide any insight or growth for me. In these instances, it is best to assume a simultaneously skeptical but calmly accepting mindset. That does not eliminate the possibility of growth, but compromises to encompass reason instead of complete, naive acceptance.
What do you place stock in, reason or emotion (including faith, “gut feelings”, trust, etc.)? Do we need a healthy balance?
Further reading:
- Judge Not [The cons of judging in terms of growth]
- Coming Out of the Broom Closet [How it feels to be judged]
- Why Argue Values? [Values in argument]
- Overcoming Disagreement
Interesting exploration of religion, applicable to other life choices too. Very fascinating.
