Lebowitz’s statement relates to the reality (‘life’) that confronts the individual or society when it cannot have recourse to anything else (‘sleep’). Society and individuals ‘sleep’ when they blame others or external situations, are distracted by material obligations or ambitions and when they ignore the common world that is shared with humanity. However, reality or life is not simply the result of not being distracted. Indeed, such distractions are a part of life that contributes to the growth of the individual or society. On another level, Lebowitz could be asserting that in some way, the soporific state, sleep, is in some way superior to the hard reality of life and when we cannot sleep, we are force to face it. In a broader sense, life may be seen as a continual process in which slep is of universal benefit.
The distractions available to Western society are numerous. Mp3 players, gambling, leisure time, the internet and the like all provide escapes from the obligations or responsibilities we may face in life. Perhaps the beneficial nature of these diversions lies in the opportunity to find oneself. The time one may have to reflect on prior events or mistakes can be a vital time in growth and maturity. However, excessive ‘tuning out’ especially in young people is concerning parents and experts who worry that some people are addicted to leisure devise., such that they are totally out of touch with reality. In another sense, one’s willingness to direct blame at others or situations may lead to stagnations in personal growth or career choices. This perspective is a little narrow for the essence of Nachman’s statement, and can be viewed as having deeper insight.
Life and therefore time passes inexorably such that every thought, experience or action is constantly modifying one’s outlook and the ability to realise one’s potential. The growth potential in distractions may well appear later in life when one have the chance to reflect. What is important here is that individual s and society create their own destiny and realities which relates to that old adage of one reaping what one sews. To extend this metaphor of sewing further, the fruit of what one sews can be re-interred to produce even more fruit. Hence, society and individuals are continually impacted upon by their past choices. The notion of the ANZAC is revered in the Australian psyche, for example, such that it is an irrevocable part of the Australian identity that has a self-perpetuating legend. Hence, the result of our actions in any event, whether in ‘sleep’ or fulfilling our responsibility contribute to who one becomes.
Sleep is not superior to life but its importance for life is an interesting and widely studied event. Once is refreshed and renewed and without it, one would ides. People often are amazed that dictators who perpetrate terrible crimes can sleep and know nothing for brief periods. It is therefore clear that sleep has its place in life that is often wondered at.
To conclude, the diversions from reality are not an absence of reality or life, but a choice in creating one’s destiny. Therefore, ‘sleep’ is important on a physiological level as well as one of destiny.
PS
This one kinda died in the arse right at the end, rambling factor quite high!
Thursday 8 March 2007
“Nothing fails like success”- G. Nachman
Nachman’s statement examines the treacherous and uncertain nature of success. In this sense, failure relates to not realising one’s personal goals in spite of the effort that is made. Success can come in many forms, there is materially successful people, academic success, success in relationships and sport. The variety of success that can be realised in life indicates that although some success can be treacherous, it would be better seen as existing along a continuum of results or consequences of success. A broader perspective on this assertion is the societal angle, in which the collective success of people can be a blessing or a curse.
Material success can enable an individual to realise many of life’s dreams and ambitions. However, it would seem that material success does not automatically equate to satisfied people. Perhaps then, the steps taken and sacrifices made to realise incremental success is more likely to bring happiness in the form of a sense of achievement. On the other hand, materially successful people could well develop a variety of negative attitudes towards other and stagnate in their dreams. Moreover, material success of the pursuit of it could make people failures in their relationships, possibly neglecting spouses, friends, siblings or children to realise such goals. It is quite clear then that success or too much of it can fail an individual. Nevertheless, there are many other aspects to this concept that must be noted.
Success in life will not automatically or eventually cloud one’s judgement to the extent that other important things are neglected. What is central is the attitude we adopt to the situations or our achievement in lief. Winston Churchill once stated that “success is going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm…”. This seems to highlight the intertwined destiny of success, the opposite being failure. However, some forms of success such as the academic generally leads to an embellishment of the individual. One particular perspective on this is that the more one discovers or learns, the more they realise how little they know. In this regard, therefore, success in learning is more likely to dispose individuals to an even more open attitude to the world individuals to an even more open attitude to the world., which could be viewed as a realisation of the original purpose. The crucial point here is the light individuals see their achievements in. Thus, success does not necessarily equate to certain failure, but it does lead to altered perspective on a personal level. This perspective also applies to the society nad how they respond to realised goals.
There are groups in society that assert that the more successful we become, the more responsibility society has to its weaker members. There are still other groups stating that materially successful societies become increasingly self-seeking and collectively more narrow minded in their outlook. The first point would constitute failure if society ignored the disadvantaged whereas the second notion states that progressing societies already fail in an by themselves. This difference is indicative of the continuum of failure that surrounds success. That is to say, to attempt to do something is to allow failure, but to do nothing is to have already failed. Thus, societies’ obligation shed some light on the series of events that constitute failure.
It is clear that in some forms, success is treacherous and detrimental to those who do not view it as part of the growth and toil of humanity.
Material success can enable an individual to realise many of life’s dreams and ambitions. However, it would seem that material success does not automatically equate to satisfied people. Perhaps then, the steps taken and sacrifices made to realise incremental success is more likely to bring happiness in the form of a sense of achievement. On the other hand, materially successful people could well develop a variety of negative attitudes towards other and stagnate in their dreams. Moreover, material success of the pursuit of it could make people failures in their relationships, possibly neglecting spouses, friends, siblings or children to realise such goals. It is quite clear then that success or too much of it can fail an individual. Nevertheless, there are many other aspects to this concept that must be noted.
Success in life will not automatically or eventually cloud one’s judgement to the extent that other important things are neglected. What is central is the attitude we adopt to the situations or our achievement in lief. Winston Churchill once stated that “success is going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm…”. This seems to highlight the intertwined destiny of success, the opposite being failure. However, some forms of success such as the academic generally leads to an embellishment of the individual. One particular perspective on this is that the more one discovers or learns, the more they realise how little they know. In this regard, therefore, success in learning is more likely to dispose individuals to an even more open attitude to the world individuals to an even more open attitude to the world., which could be viewed as a realisation of the original purpose. The crucial point here is the light individuals see their achievements in. Thus, success does not necessarily equate to certain failure, but it does lead to altered perspective on a personal level. This perspective also applies to the society nad how they respond to realised goals.
There are groups in society that assert that the more successful we become, the more responsibility society has to its weaker members. There are still other groups stating that materially successful societies become increasingly self-seeking and collectively more narrow minded in their outlook. The first point would constitute failure if society ignored the disadvantaged whereas the second notion states that progressing societies already fail in an by themselves. This difference is indicative of the continuum of failure that surrounds success. That is to say, to attempt to do something is to allow failure, but to do nothing is to have already failed. Thus, societies’ obligation shed some light on the series of events that constitute failure.
It is clear that in some forms, success is treacherous and detrimental to those who do not view it as part of the growth and toil of humanity.
Friday 2 March 2007
“You grow up the day you have your first real laugh- at yourself” - Ethel Barrymore
Ethel Barrymore promotes the need for all people to look inward. In this respect, to ‘grow up’ would be to become more mature and more aware of one’s real position among their fellow men and women. Such growth might result in a more open individual as is suggested. A key term is laughter, real laughter that puts things and events in their real perspective. The interpersonal benefits and growth potential would better be seen as part of a continuum of attributes that contribute to maturation. In a broader sense, too, as society forms its identity, the notion of self-laughter as a tool of revelation is an important indicator of growth.
The benefit of placing things in their right perspective, perhaps in a humorous way, is a tool for self revelation. To laugh recognises some inconsistency, some ironic or incongruent factor or aspect of our personality and behaviour. To view ourselves as inconsistent may well be a healthy sign that fewer things are absolute that one once believed them to be. This process suggests reflection from which learning and behaviour modification is likely to spring. It also leads to an acknowledgment that one shares a common society in which our own actions are on display to be judged and modified. In this light, self-laughter is one instrumental indication of an embellishment of personal character.
The maturity and growth of an individual does not rely on one factor alone, however. Moreover, our characters generally develop and vacillate throughout life via the constant presentation of other role models, situations or events. All such things have their role in contributing to an individual’s sum total of actions, emotions and experiences. While the revealing nature of laugher is important, it would be better seen as part of series of factors that alter our view of ourselves. One such example may be the observation of body language in an interpersonal situation that provide visual cues as to how another feels. It is a constant exposure to this and other things that modifies our own behaviour and reactions to various aspects of life.
The wider perspective on Barrymore’s assertion is that of society’s ability to ‘laugh’ at itself and how indicative this is of growth. Australian society is relatively young and some significant events illustrate its own informal and insouciant overtones. Indeed, various cartoons during the Great Depression reveal a more larrikin approach to life and such events developed notions that remained within the collective psyche. Other nations such as Malaysia intervene when it comes to political cartoons satirising the state of affairs, whereas in other cultures, the ability to laugh at its leaders in enshrined to an extent that when this is threatened, much controversy arises. Any legislation against ‘free speech’ as is broadly defined is broadly defined is often criticised on the basis of it leading to a stagnation of ideas. Hence, the laughter aspect is quite revealing politically and on a social level.
It is clear therefore that laughter may well provide the growth catalyst in many individuals. The plethora of events that surround us contribute to theses as well. Finally society has become divided on this very notion showing at least on laughter’s powerful revealing ability.
The benefit of placing things in their right perspective, perhaps in a humorous way, is a tool for self revelation. To laugh recognises some inconsistency, some ironic or incongruent factor or aspect of our personality and behaviour. To view ourselves as inconsistent may well be a healthy sign that fewer things are absolute that one once believed them to be. This process suggests reflection from which learning and behaviour modification is likely to spring. It also leads to an acknowledgment that one shares a common society in which our own actions are on display to be judged and modified. In this light, self-laughter is one instrumental indication of an embellishment of personal character.
The maturity and growth of an individual does not rely on one factor alone, however. Moreover, our characters generally develop and vacillate throughout life via the constant presentation of other role models, situations or events. All such things have their role in contributing to an individual’s sum total of actions, emotions and experiences. While the revealing nature of laugher is important, it would be better seen as part of series of factors that alter our view of ourselves. One such example may be the observation of body language in an interpersonal situation that provide visual cues as to how another feels. It is a constant exposure to this and other things that modifies our own behaviour and reactions to various aspects of life.
The wider perspective on Barrymore’s assertion is that of society’s ability to ‘laugh’ at itself and how indicative this is of growth. Australian society is relatively young and some significant events illustrate its own informal and insouciant overtones. Indeed, various cartoons during the Great Depression reveal a more larrikin approach to life and such events developed notions that remained within the collective psyche. Other nations such as Malaysia intervene when it comes to political cartoons satirising the state of affairs, whereas in other cultures, the ability to laugh at its leaders in enshrined to an extent that when this is threatened, much controversy arises. Any legislation against ‘free speech’ as is broadly defined is broadly defined is often criticised on the basis of it leading to a stagnation of ideas. Hence, the laughter aspect is quite revealing politically and on a social level.
It is clear therefore that laughter may well provide the growth catalyst in many individuals. The plethora of events that surround us contribute to theses as well. Finally society has become divided on this very notion showing at least on laughter’s powerful revealing ability.
“That some should be rich, shows that others may become rich, and, hence, is just encouragement to industry and enterprise” Abraham Lincoln
The notion of a rich person is a weighted concept. Rich in this regard could be interpreted as material comfort and the ownership of possessions. The terms industry and enterprise promote the values of hard work and motivated planning that is likely to bring success. While Lincoln’s perspective relies on the existence and history of materially well-off individuals to be a role model for others, it should be acknowledged that in some cases, the desire and aims of the individual are formed in an environment that is not conduce to wealth creation and comfort seeking. In a broader sense, toon, this notion addresses social issues in which some nations become rich while others struggle to adopt.
The application of sound planning and goal setting could be seen as indispensable tools for wealth creation. Indeed, countless ‘self-help’ books recall the determination of various individuals who in some way ‘make it’ in the world. The crucial point here is that the environment and the network of people provide the setting in which one can succeed. The requirement to be industrious and apply innovative thinking acknowledges basic realities of Western economics. That is, realities of value creation and the non-existence of a ‘free lunch’ according to Milton Friedman. It is for this reason that various funding pathways exist to enable those who have innovative ideas to create value or solve existing problems. However, not every individual is adopted to entrepreneurial or business activity, and so the exhortation to work hard requires the general adult public to craft themselves into valuable ‘products’. Hence, not only does the individual have a reason to work hard based on the success of others, but he or she must work to sustain a relatively comfortable life.
The notion that industrious activity and focus automatically pays off may not apply in every situation. Indeed, an individual in a 3rd world nation may well desire to become rich or to sustain a comfortable life, but simply cannot work within the conditions of his or her country. Lincoln’s fundamental assertion here is one of opportunity and that it applies to everyone. However, the combination of wars, inflation, and political instability make this assertion inapplicable to all people. Instead, survival is a key goal in these situations. Hence, the encouragement to work and to plan in wealth creation should be seen as part of a continuum. At one extreme is wealth acquisition whereas the other extreme is survival. Recently, nations such as China and India typify this spectrum of survival. To advance their own economies, they rely on similar products that have presented opportunity to Western nations, namely that of oil. In the face of increasingly unsustainable consumption patterns, the promotion of equal opportunity should be viewed in a different paradigm.
To address this concept more broadly, societies become rich through the efforts of every individual who seek out their happiness in the various ways available to them. The example of Western consumption patterns, however, does not seem to be a viable goal for the world. Indeed, six planets would be need support such lifestyles of every human being. Moreover, the division of riches between nations is an aspect of geography as well as ethics. This means that although resources are continually used, world trade and IMF dealings would be better off redefining the real requirements for an equitable and ‘rich’ life.
It is clear, therefore, that opportunity is not equal to everyone to become rich. Thus the paradigm has shifted between survival and material comfort. All nations increasingly recognise this as the world opens up and accounts for the consumption and destiny of resources and talent.
The application of sound planning and goal setting could be seen as indispensable tools for wealth creation. Indeed, countless ‘self-help’ books recall the determination of various individuals who in some way ‘make it’ in the world. The crucial point here is that the environment and the network of people provide the setting in which one can succeed. The requirement to be industrious and apply innovative thinking acknowledges basic realities of Western economics. That is, realities of value creation and the non-existence of a ‘free lunch’ according to Milton Friedman. It is for this reason that various funding pathways exist to enable those who have innovative ideas to create value or solve existing problems. However, not every individual is adopted to entrepreneurial or business activity, and so the exhortation to work hard requires the general adult public to craft themselves into valuable ‘products’. Hence, not only does the individual have a reason to work hard based on the success of others, but he or she must work to sustain a relatively comfortable life.
The notion that industrious activity and focus automatically pays off may not apply in every situation. Indeed, an individual in a 3rd world nation may well desire to become rich or to sustain a comfortable life, but simply cannot work within the conditions of his or her country. Lincoln’s fundamental assertion here is one of opportunity and that it applies to everyone. However, the combination of wars, inflation, and political instability make this assertion inapplicable to all people. Instead, survival is a key goal in these situations. Hence, the encouragement to work and to plan in wealth creation should be seen as part of a continuum. At one extreme is wealth acquisition whereas the other extreme is survival. Recently, nations such as China and India typify this spectrum of survival. To advance their own economies, they rely on similar products that have presented opportunity to Western nations, namely that of oil. In the face of increasingly unsustainable consumption patterns, the promotion of equal opportunity should be viewed in a different paradigm.
To address this concept more broadly, societies become rich through the efforts of every individual who seek out their happiness in the various ways available to them. The example of Western consumption patterns, however, does not seem to be a viable goal for the world. Indeed, six planets would be need support such lifestyles of every human being. Moreover, the division of riches between nations is an aspect of geography as well as ethics. This means that although resources are continually used, world trade and IMF dealings would be better off redefining the real requirements for an equitable and ‘rich’ life.
It is clear, therefore, that opportunity is not equal to everyone to become rich. Thus the paradigm has shifted between survival and material comfort. All nations increasingly recognise this as the world opens up and accounts for the consumption and destiny of resources and talent.
“Everyone has the obligation to ponder well his own specific traits of character. He must also regulate them adequately and not wonder whether someone
“Everyone has the obligation to ponder well his own specific traits of character. He must also regulate them adequately and not wonder whether someone else’s traits might suit him better. The more definitely his own a man’s character is, the better it fits him.”- Cicero
Cicero provides two clear insights in this passage. The first is the promotion of knowing oneself and owning the person one recognises. The second insight hones in on the common world humanity shares and the varity of attributes prestn in our neighbours. Although the exhortation to know oneself has many benefits, knowledge and emulationof those around us can be a useful and necessary tool in adapting and growing. Hence the obligation is better seen as part of a continuum in which the gamut of attributes benefits the groups of individuals. To address this issue more broadly, the identity of nations, cultures and societies also impacts on the way it carries itself.
Knowing oneself promotes honesty and evaluation. The process of reflection on decisions or interpersonal clashes is likely to engender a more benevolent and open outlook to life. To own one’s identity is also important in that sense of self, as it will engender responses that are both unique and honest. Otherwise, individuals risk acting outside of their own interests and may well tend to exploitation. Hence, a variety of perspectives abound in humanity that arises from various experiences and periods of reflection. In contrast, to own one’s identity or to be wholly focused on the benefits of an individual’s character may lead to mediocrity and a self-satisfaction that could be destructive or detrimental to growth. Hence, the existence of other people allows individuals to continue to modify their behaviour and learn.
The exhortation own oneself or the potential benefits of learning from others exist at two ends of a spectrum. Perhaps Cicero refers to the jealousy or the lack of decisiveness that may arise from individuals constantly wondering whether another’s responses were superior to their own. Definitely within interpersonal interactions jealousy abounds, but this may reside from a deeper dissatisfaction of self, for example. Hence, there may be wisdom in discerning what attributes suit an individual and what attributes could be damaging our ability to relate. The common space we share is also a space of characters in which there are many overlaps and accessions. This process leads to a mosaic of traits that also implicates society and its identity.
The identity of a society is likely to spring from its internal culture as well as the culture from surrounding influences. Australia for example gradually stopped seeing itself as a component of the British Empire and has currently adopted its place among the many Asian nations. This divide is ven seen within suburban city life wherein different geographical regions express different value systems. Hence, society owns its identity insofar as the individuals within it adhere to it, and this is affected by copious shifts in people, ideas and values.
Cicero provides two clear insights in this passage. The first is the promotion of knowing oneself and owning the person one recognises. The second insight hones in on the common world humanity shares and the varity of attributes prestn in our neighbours. Although the exhortation to know oneself has many benefits, knowledge and emulationof those around us can be a useful and necessary tool in adapting and growing. Hence the obligation is better seen as part of a continuum in which the gamut of attributes benefits the groups of individuals. To address this issue more broadly, the identity of nations, cultures and societies also impacts on the way it carries itself.
Knowing oneself promotes honesty and evaluation. The process of reflection on decisions or interpersonal clashes is likely to engender a more benevolent and open outlook to life. To own one’s identity is also important in that sense of self, as it will engender responses that are both unique and honest. Otherwise, individuals risk acting outside of their own interests and may well tend to exploitation. Hence, a variety of perspectives abound in humanity that arises from various experiences and periods of reflection. In contrast, to own one’s identity or to be wholly focused on the benefits of an individual’s character may lead to mediocrity and a self-satisfaction that could be destructive or detrimental to growth. Hence, the existence of other people allows individuals to continue to modify their behaviour and learn.
The exhortation own oneself or the potential benefits of learning from others exist at two ends of a spectrum. Perhaps Cicero refers to the jealousy or the lack of decisiveness that may arise from individuals constantly wondering whether another’s responses were superior to their own. Definitely within interpersonal interactions jealousy abounds, but this may reside from a deeper dissatisfaction of self, for example. Hence, there may be wisdom in discerning what attributes suit an individual and what attributes could be damaging our ability to relate. The common space we share is also a space of characters in which there are many overlaps and accessions. This process leads to a mosaic of traits that also implicates society and its identity.
The identity of a society is likely to spring from its internal culture as well as the culture from surrounding influences. Australia for example gradually stopped seeing itself as a component of the British Empire and has currently adopted its place among the many Asian nations. This divide is ven seen within suburban city life wherein different geographical regions express different value systems. Hence, society owns its identity insofar as the individuals within it adhere to it, and this is affected by copious shifts in people, ideas and values.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)