Preface

For a while now, I have planned to convert my blog into a book; now that I've written almost enough material to complete this project, I thought it appropriate to write the preface- so here it is:

The Holy [Christian] Bible, or any major religious texts for that matter, are treated as divine and with utmost respect. Yet, if one reads it/them face-value, the writing can and will contain inconsistencies and contradictions. To clear up these discrepancies, we must first realize that truth can only be understood after taking everything into account. Furthermore, nothing can exist without and opposite by which to define it (i.e. good cannot exist without evil- if evil did not exist there would be nothing to judge good by). This particular issue is acknowledged by Paul in Romans 4:15 "For if those who live by law are heirs, faith has no value and the promise is worthless, 15because law brings wrath. And where there is no law there is no transgression." and in Genesis it's personified in the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Well, (all things considered) this is actually dependent upon a certain factor, which so happens to also be the one that determines ones response to the classic hypothetical question, "If a tree falls and nothing else is around, does it make a sound?" If you believe that the tree does make a sound, you would probably also say that good does not need evil to exist. This would also mean that most, if not all Christians agree that the tree does make a sound. Or rather, to not believe such would be inconsistent. (The Bible clearly states that God cannot coexist with sin; In its basic form, sin would be defined as imperfection- which (of course) is the opposite of God.)

You'll find a lot of tangents like the one above throughout this book- hopefully they will ensure that your interest is held. This should be the case since, after all, it would make variety inevitable, as well as allow your mind to wander more freely, rather than being confined to the given topic being addressed. If I were to be honest, however, the tangents were (and are) not planned in the least. I have decided to keep them both as a personal trademark and in the hope that it will provide further insight into my character- which is the secondary priority of this book. The first priority, if you have not guessed already, is to server as a guide to life and instill inspirations regarding the many aspect of life and the confounding beauty thereof. Getting back on topic: upon realizing that truth can only be realized after taking everything into account, we should read the Bible under that "everything" is found therein. In other words, the Bible is inconsistent and contradictory because it takes everything into account. If one reads the Bible like a novel (which is only truly understood when read as a whole) they would be one "step" closer to the truth.

It is my desire (and I suggest it be yours) that you read this book in that same way. This is a natural necessity if you wish to experience the full flavor and effect possible, after all. I have also integrated details about (and when I say details, I mean everything!) because (1) I feel that to properly convey to you what is intended, you must first know and understand who I am; and (2) this book was originally an online journal (in the form of a blog), so it would be a pain to have to sort through it all. Upon finishing this book in its entirety, I would highly recommend you read through it again. I guarantee you will discover something new each time, given that your mind is open enough to find it.

Living Contradiction

When I think about myself, I am quite amused- I see all the contradictions that are myself:

1. I'm a very sociable person, But I have no friends.
2. There is nothing I am afraid of, but I rarely ever go outside (except for work).
3. I reveal everything about myself to everyone in the world (via this blog), but even those that spend every hour with me know very little about me.
4. I have maturity that exceeds what most people have in their lives, but I am only 19.
5. I strongly prefer spending time with others, and yet I spend nearly all my free time glued to the computer.
6. I'm constantly humored by the smallest of things, but anyone who didn't know better would say I had no sense of humor.

Then, there are of course other unique qualities:

1. I usually don't (consciously) put any thought into what I say before I say it, but always say exactly what I intend to.
2. Several times per day, I become aware that I am thinking about a lot of things without consciously knowing what those things are.
3. I get deja vu constantly, and especially while watching video content.
4. Meditation comes natural for me, and I frequently make use of it. (In fact, I habitually meditate every time I take a shower or go on walks)
5. As far as I can remember, I have never been fully aware of my thoughts (only partially aware)
6. I lack the ability to visualize anything, be it old memories, or split seconds.
7. I completely lack jealousy.
8. There is no one in this world that I feel negatively about.
9. Everyone in the world is of essentially equal value to me, regardless of my relationship to them.
10. I am not afraid of death.
11. At my young age, I am completely satisfied with how I have lived my life, and would not have any regrets if I were to die right here and now.
12. I can sing songs I know perfectly without being aware of what I'm singing. In fact, I sing songs better when this is the case. It's usually involuntary, but [now that I know the catalyst] I can also do it on cue.
13. I have the ability to break down my environment in real-time (and analyze it), and I make regular use of that ability.

There are probably other unique qualities and "living contradictions", but this will do for now.

Betrayal

Although I will probably edit it later on, for the time being I will keep this post in it's raw form, which is the email response I sent today. the email contents are generic, so this shouldn't be a problem.

I never said I did not want to be your friend. I said that you cannot be my friend- which, although you have made clear you cannot comprehend the difference- at least in my mind there is. it's very simple- you feel a bond between us, and feel a sense of loss because we have been out of contact.

recently I have found an even more convincing proof that you could not possibly be my friend. yesterday I realized that friendship requires that friends be more important to each other than anyone else- or, rather- friendship is only possible at that point. I believe that, although I have not ever felt the bond or loss, I have at one point had people that were more important to me than others- in fact, many people. However, as of now this is not the case- which is why you cannot be my friend.

you're continuing to misunderstand- it's not that I don't want you to be my friend- it's just that I have no choice in the matter. you of all people should know that friendship cannot be forced, it can only happen naturally. In the same way, if friendship between us truly existed, for me to say "we are not friends anymore" would be a lie, unless we had been going downhill for quite sometime. Of course if that were the case, for me to make such a statement would not be surprising to you.

the truth is that I have no choice in the matter. don't blame me- blame nature. or I guess blame God if you wish. I can probably make the change later on, although I doubt we would be friends even then, because it's likely that at the point I would have no reason for you to be my friend, since that was never the case in the first place.

from the very beginning, like it or not, I was using you. that is the reason why I thought it would be in both of our best interests. If you think about it, after taking away the psychological bond, and add to that your lack of importance to me, that's all that is left, right. there is nothing that I trust or reveal to you that I would not anyone else, and you are no more important to me than anyone else would be.

you also should understand that this is also something that I can not control- friendship and individuals being important to each other are strictly natural occurrences- I could not force you to be important to me even if I wanted to.

thanks to this email of yours though, I was able to to gain more insights hinting at the source of the problem. for example, I think that it's far more likely that the lack of bonding and loss is actually caused by me lacking people important to me. This being the case, the root of the problem might be that no one is important to me than any others.

at the times that there were people that were important to me, I can easily confirm that I lacked both the emotional maturity and biological development to be aware of psychological bonding and the associated loss. to add to this, wikipedia clarifies that most people are not aware of the bond until after they experience the loss. being thrust into chaos and still young, it's only natural that I would not be aware of it, or- even if I was, the memories would be either forgotten, diluted, or incomprehensible.

on those grounds, I think the most likely possibility would be that one or more events occurred at some point that inadvertently resulted in me treating everyone else as having equal importance- which resulted in me neglecting to hold onto my friends, including those that I would make later on. In the original craigslist ad by which we met, I expressed concerns about not having friends. It would be a safe guess that this was the point at which I finally realized the dilemma.

Most likely, I changed to make everyone I knew as having the same importance to deal with issues at the time. In other words, those who were important to me betrayed me, and I underwent psychological change in order to cope with it.

I guess it might be ironic, but thanks again for your email. (see if you can guess from what I write below what exactly about your email is (ironically) helping me)

I have, in the course of this email (with help from my best [productive] skill- which is deductive reasoning. the source of the problem is that my aunt betrayed me. although I did not realize it until now, I underwent change to cope with her betrayal by setting an unsaid law in my mind that no one is more important to me than any other. that this is the case is a bit disappointing though (I was optimistically hoping that it was more proof of me being biologically evolved, lol) - bu seriously: thank you very much for sending me this email (although you had no clue as to how helpful it would be to me, of course.)

if you wish, I can continue to "use" you until I have used this "newfound" knowledge to solve the problem.

if you think about it, you would have never known if I did not tell you because these kind of things can only be determined on an individual basis. I could have continued forever like that, but- as you well know- my honesty does not permit me to have such a friendship under false pretenses.

It's all up to you.

Hypothetical Answers

A while ago I started writing original hypothetical questions that each have the aim of revealing information about those who answer that could not be obtained otherwise (although this is actually the purpose behind all hypothetical questions in general- I tried to make mine as character-defining as possible.) The goal was to create 21 questions, and then create an OkCupid test with a pun ("The 21 hypothetical questions test"). However, I stopped at 8 questions, and never got around to finishing it. As such, I will only give 8 answers for the time being, and follow each answer up with my reason why. Naturally, this will reveal information about myself that I could not adequately express otherwise, thus serving the purpose of the questions.

1. Q: which is more beautiful, a human falling in love or an AI (artificial intelligence, i.e. android)?
A: An AI
why: Because an AI falling in love would be a novelty, and very unlikely. I haven't really thought farther than that, but my feelings tell me that an AI falling in love would be the most beautiful, and also something I really would like to see happen.

2. Q: If you had a choice between infinite satisfaction and zero peace, or infinite peace and zero satisfaction, which would you choose?
A: Although this is probably biased by having already practically experienced the latter (human beings always yearn for what they don't have more than what they have) I would choose zero peace and infinite satisfaction.
why: I suppose probably because I'm curious of that which I have not experienced, and wish to verify my intuition which tells me that the latter would be much better, at least for me.

3. Q:Would you rather have a bad tempered God that you know everything about, or a nonchalant God that you know nothing about?
A: I would rather have a nonchalant God I know nothing about.
why: It would give me the power to live life as I see fit. Although I would want to know who God is, that knowledge wouldn't do me any good if God was bad-tempered.

4. Q: If a deity offered to let you reincarnate and live the life of your choice, but the price was to die at 40, would you do it?
A: I would agree.
why: according to studies, the intelligence peaks at age 27, so doing all that I wanted to would not be a problem; furthermore, whatever we have lived in our life so far is irrelevant (as proven by [a] we cannot go back and change anything we have already done, even though we remember is and [b] the memories of people can easily be manipulated or destroyed.) That being the case, this choice should be taken. After all, I might prefer to die at age 40 anyway :)

5. Q: Would you rather have a laptop that does everything instantly but crashes every 5 minutes, or a five year old laptop that lasts forever and never crashes once?
A: A laptop that does everything instantly but crashes every 5 minutes.
why: I'm a very impatient person, but one of the positive results of that is that I am very quick-thinking. I would want a laptop that could think as fast as I do, even if I had to reboot it constantly. For the things that take longer than 5 minutes (i.e. anime) I'll just use my desktop computer :)

6. Q: If your ideal mate said they would stay with you forever, but in exchange you must not have sex for the rest of your life, would you agree? (note this question may need tweaking to compensate for such variables as love.)
A: yes.
why: Even after going over it in my head countless times, my conclusion is that sex is not necessary, and the reason some people think it is only day that because they are addicted to it. I have considered myself a hopeless romantic (although this belief has been put on hold due to circumstances) but in either case, there is nothing in this world that I want more than love. that of course means that I would trade my well-being, or even the knowledge that I have gained thus far, if I would get eternal love (eternal of course meaning for the rest of my life) in return. Although love is not part of the original question, I believe that love is inevitable when people share enough strong memories- so it will come in time.

7. Q: Assuming you are in your early teens, if a man offered to sign a legal contract to pay you $1,000,000 if you place yourself into a coma for 20 years, would you do it? (all medical bills are reimbursed as well)
A: No I would not
why: although I would be able to accomplish my goals with that money, [a] that would have passed 27 (the age that intelligence peaks at) and would be too close to age 40 (I would want most of my current goals to be accomplished by that age). Also, as The Beatles would say, "money can't buy me love"- in a more general sense, all my goals have little relevance to money, so that money is essentially worthless to me.

8. Q: If there was a way to have any wish of yours granted, but there was a 50% chance you would pay for it with your life, would you take the risk?
A: No.
why: (1) I've gambled enough to know that I'm unlucky (especially at cards) so I would probably die if I did :) (2) even if I was lucky, I would prefer to make my wishes come true through my own power. Although having the heart's desire may appear to satisfy in the short run, most of satisfaction should come from achieving it on one's own. Human beings desire things so that they can achieve it. As such, having that which one did not achieve is essentially meaningless.

Truth

It is my firm belief that truth is fundamentally unknowable, and that the closest thing to truth that can be found is likely to be a middle ground or compromise between all perspectives and opinions in existence. This thought in mind, I have made it a priority to find the middle ground of all aspects of life, or more broadly, of the universe. With that information I aim to determine the relevance of these middle grounds to truth and reality. Of course, there are many different opinions and perspectives about many different things- infinite might be attributable to both. But I do not have these goals because I desire to achieve them, but quite wisimply so that I have the opportunity to work toward them. Now before you experience some unnecessary confusion, let me clarify: In one of my first posts titled Our Purpose, I remarked upon one of the greatest paradoxes of humanity, which is the need to have a purpose. Specifically, humans need to have a purpose in order to maintain the will to live. That is, if we do not have a purpose then we are not needed, and if we are not needed there is no reason for us to exist. As explained in the "Our Purpose" post, the irony of this is that (for the same reason) (a) we will never accomplish our purpose or (b) we accomplish it, or deny ever having one- both of which result in losing the will to live. This is likely the reason why many people choose to have children- the hope that their offspring will accomplish whatever purpose(s) they could/did not; a real-life application of the idiom "passing the baton".

However, I have found a different solution to the paradox of out purpose. It's both very simple and very complex; the simple part is the action- I reconcile it by not having any expectations. Though easy to grasp from the surface, the underlying meaning continue to confound me. There are several advantages to not having expectations- after all, they're completely unnecessary and are ultimately reap negative results. Nothing can be gained from expectations; even in the cases that they may seem useful, they are only useful to those lacking in maturity. A mature person would not need to rely on other's expectations, or issue expectations to rely on. After all, at that point one such individual could push themselves forward independently, and would not feel the need to interfere with other's lives.. With these thoughts in mind, I live my life with a purpose, but do not expect to achieve it. Instead of allowing myself to be concerned with such trivial matters, I just keep moving forward, savoring all that I can of the journey that is life. Getting back on the topic of this post (Truth) I would first like to ensure that "we are on the same page" (Which I am sure "we are not").

For starts, I'm going to inform you of my definition of some words, and explain my reasoning behind these definitions. I make a habit (or should I say "obsession") of not taking words for granted. Of course, words are simply a channel by which to communicate, and there are no set definitions. But I try to ensure that (a) that those I communicate with know exactly what I mean when I use certain words & (b) that as many perspectives are covered as possible when the word comes into play. The latter would be a prerequisite to knowing truth, after all.

Opinion- An entity's personal understanding of a given aspect of reality.
Fact- a guideline created by certain influences (determined as credible due to (a) political status (b) theistic value (c) reputation (d) democratic consensus (e) brute force - among other things. Facts do not equate to truth, but exist merely to help intelligent beings adapt and cope with an otherwise chaotic (disorderly and unpredictable) reality. For example, I believe that reality and truth are fundamentally unknowable, but to live life on that basis would be madness. Not only would I not be able to live peacefully, but I wouldn't know what to do in the first place. I would essentially be living my life "by the role of the die." Few people [if any] would desire such a lifestyle- which is why facts exist.

ps- if you regularly keep tabs with my blog (which you don't) you may have realized that IMO (In my opinion) facts are very similar to traditions in this respect (see Habits post). *Note- this would equate facts to "universally accepted opinions"

Concept- a collection of several (potentially infinite) perspectives and opinions of a given aspect of reality. As you might have noticed, concepts are the "middle ground" that I aspire to find. Come to think of it, this is also probably the reason why no concept can actually be defined (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concept )To further complicate things, there are potentially infinite amount of concepts- that is, anything can be a concept. For these reasons, concepts can only exist on an individual basis. (Each person's "concept" of a given concept is a little bit different). However, there are countless concepts that are universally accepted enough to be given names. In the same way, concepts also exist to make the differences of individuals' opinions and perspectives more manageable. For some time I have dedicated myself to becoming more knowledgeable of concepts, in particular of those that are universal. This is reflected in my blog, in that the majority of it is dedicated to explaining various concepts- notably relativity, adaptation, theology, philosophy, psychology, reality, and love. So I guess that would give me a "head-start" in my journey towards finding truth (not that it matters much, since I won't be able to find truth anyway) : - )

Habits

Throughout history, tradition has been a driving force in shaping society. Young people hate it, and old people love it. I myself at one time was passively rebelled against tradition...not to say I still don't, but now I have a better understanding of it, and can better appreciate its purpose. The reason I could not understand tradition is because I was not asking the right questions. I stubbornly focused on asking myself whether or not I should validate certain norms, when instead I should have asked why they exist in the first place. Only then can I evaluate and appreciate tradition for what it really is. Traditions are essentially universal habits that have been practiced for a long time. But asking "why?" results in the same insights for all habits. For example, if a person makes a habit of bullying, "just because they do" would not make such a habit right- and the consensus implies the exact opposite. But upon inquiring as to the reason why they bully (of course not by asking them- it's unlikely that most bullies could tell you *because they themselves do not usually know why they bully), you would realize that they are insecure and have low self-esteem. For this reason, they attempt to make others look pathetic to compensate for it. Having so much power over others gives bullies a social "high", and they are likely to continue with that as motivation, until it becomes a habit.

To truly understand the importance of habits, I will use computers for an analogy: Computers can operate normally without the hard disk, cache, or perhaps even ram. But if that was the case, no information would be stored, and every thing you did would have to be done from scratch. Come to think of it, this is precisely the case with the consumer calculator. Although working in such a manner is doable, it's very inefficient, troublesome and tedious. hard disks, cache, and ram exist to ensure that certain information is saved so that it does not need to be done again. In addition to preserving whatever information you put on there, the computer automatically saves the data that is needed the most, thus drastically improving the performance of the computer. In the same way, habits improve our performance- our brain collects information that (based on our living patterns) we need most, and leaves those things in an obvious and easily accessible place.

There is an upside and downside to this: Because we can easily access that which we have made a habit, we are able to have excellent performance in the areas the habits affect. The downside is something similar to an addiction- in that (depending on the habit) it's very difficult to quit a habit, and after we do, there is a chance of cravings and withdrawal. It's also important to understand the reason for this- the brain is hit with recoil when we attempt to quit or change a habit, because we are forcing ourselves to adapt twice as much in the same time-frame- Once to get rid of the habit, and once to manually make decisions that were normally made automatically by the habit. The reason for cravings and withdrawal is that the brain, sensing possible overload, sends signals to the pleasure-center to compensate, and suggests returning to the "default settings" (the habits). Based on this deduction, it can be assumed that those who can adapt easier are also able to change habits easier- but of course this is only speculation.

All things considered, habits are an essential part of who people are. Nearly every personality trait in existence is a habit; it's hard for people to change who they are for the same reason that it's hard to change habits. The only difference is that most personality traits have been rooted deep by time, as well as frequent use. After all, the strength of habits is determined primarily by these two factors. A few years ago, I had determined that I should "be myself", because trying to change who I was at the time didn't work as planned. Now I realize that this was only because I changed half-heartedly, and didn't put enough time and effort into it. In most cases, depending upon the person's goals, a successful life is dependent primarily upon habits. I would even go so far as to say that when a person's life is destroyed or improved, the culprit in most cases would be their habits. Of course, it's not that simple- habits could not have done it without the help of countless other variables and factors. But still, the importance of this is something worth considering.

To add to this [literally- this is a last-minute edit], I think it's crystal-clear that habits are the key to success. That is, developing good habits and dodging bad ones are a prerequisite for anyone intending to live an exceptionally successful life. For example- an overweight person could have easily prevented being such, if they had healthy eating habits. While it is true that metabolism is to blame in most cases, that only means that those with slow metabolism should eat a lot less. Eating is arguably the easiest and most reliable instant gratification there is. This poses a problem for those suffering from depression- as they will seeking the quickest and easiest path to escaping from their problems possible. Unfortunately, eating is not meant for entertainment (as it seems the obese American society find it to be), but just as fuel and maintenance for life. It's somewhat important for food to be enjoyable (and in some cases- aesthetically pleasing)- but habits can make just about anything taste good eventually, utilizing the power of relativity. That's how people develop "acquired tastes", or how things "grow on you", after all. In other words, you just need to just used to it.

In the same way, by developing good habits, a person can stop worrying about everyday things, and concentrate all their energy towards living life exceptionally...This is why habits are so vital to success.

Confusion

In my Prodigal Son post, I had made arguments for myself that I felt would be sufficient to return to being a Christian. However, as I thought might be the case, it was not. Even though I can accept that it's the closest thing to the truth...and furthermore that regardless of what I choose it's probably a lie due to reality being unknowable; I seriously doubt that a logical consensus will be possible within my own mind. I am constantly ravaged by conflicts and contradictions, causing unceasing confusion and chaos. I have been getting headaches constantly- hardly "peace that surpasses understanding." Perhaps I will "experience God" or discover further insights into the true nature of things, but if God is benevolent, surely it is his will that I put these matters on hold until I can deal with them. It is my belief that truth, if it exists, can only be found after taking into account all perspectives, regardless of popularity (This of course includes that which might ordinarily be perceived as evil). Blaise Pascal contributed to decision theory with Pascal's Wager. Of course there were criticisms, notably by Voltaire, and one of the primary reasons was the possibility that God actually rewards disbelief and punishes belief- which is (of course) an inversion of the original wager. The premise is that "blindly" taking anything on faith could be characteristic of being morally lazy, irresponsible, and untrustworthy (among other things). If I were to be honest with myself, this would be closest to what I myself believe- which is likely why the conflicts of logic are causing so much trouble for me.

For a being to be our God, he must of course have common sense. So, assuming that God exists, he would not blame us for not believing in him, since, like it or not, that belief would be intrinsically irrelevant anyway. History has proven that I person's morality has nothing to do with what God(s) they believe in, or even if they believe in one at all. That itself doesn't even take into account the concern of whether we can truly count on anyone but ourself when it comes to determining the true nature of morality. If God were reasonable, he would not sacrifice his son to save us, and them feel compelled to sentence us to eternal damnation, regardless of our actual moral worth. Or, if God does, then he does not exist (the concept of God would require that God is not compelled to do anything). This is of course only hypothetical, but reserves room for concern.

to be continued...