When I know I can afford not to make a certain decision, then I must not. In life, there are parallels; sometimes you will be doing things which are objectively useless, but it would appear to you that you are progressing, or doing something useful with your time. Obsessive compulsive shopping or any hobby inflates itself beyond its natural limits falls into this category, as are all those activities that give an illusion of being busy. The other side of this is the real, and objective, progress and action, which comes from asking yourself what you would lose if you didn’t make a certain decision. If what you lose is serious, not making that decision is the ticket to the other parallel.
What does the rose know that makes it smile without having to smile? An inner peace and happiness which can be attained and maintained by simultaneously avoiding those we can’t be nice to (note how roses have thorns), and also generally being as nice as possible—that is being nice in a natural way like roses, and not for the sake of being nice so people can like us! I have realized that exactly because I was not trying to be nice but because being nice was a part of my personality that people treated me warmly (of course this doesn’t apply to enviers, idiots and psychopaths who saw in me an enemy although I harbored no evil at all to anyone and had even forgiven those enemies that didn’t require revenge). It has dawned on me that as I went beyond age of 30, and became worried that I might actually die unexpectedly (no one has guarantees, death can come any time), that I realized so much of our frustrations are useless, that we can only do ourselves a favour by being good, and by avoiding undesirable people, that friends are our true treasures, that we must not fuss over work, pay, conditions, and other people’s alarmisms, and simply go on with a quiet, calm, nice and ethically sound life, patiently bearing hardships, rejoicing at our successes but not to the point of conceit, and working hard and smart despite the hanging sword of death.
For a long time I had been wondering about the reason for the creation of Mosquitos. The objective truth should be far too many reasons than I can even fathom, but today, when some mosquitoes were busy making my life difficult it dawned on me that when the mosquito stings and is full of blood, it also becomes heavier, greedier, and stupid. Minutes within their feeding frenzy I killed them all with relative ease. This can act as a visceral lesson for us, humans, that if we are relentlessly pursuing greed, or feeding ourselves from sources we shouldn’t (illegal, unethical sources) then we will, too, be wracked for it. Another lesson here is paying attention that, if we achieve success in life, we should not be dizzy and arrogant and careless like the well-fed mosquito so that we don’t fall into the abysmal well of blunders.
Ideas that can make us slightly better in various areas converge and become a collection that is more meaningful the more we insist on acquiring and implementing them.
People get angry according to five situations: arrogance, weakness, ignorance, modeling, and psychophysical pressures. Arrogant people consider it their right to be angry: they put on a show of anger so that they remind themselves that they are masters. The weak get angry because they can’t decisively do anything tangible about a situation: their anger allows them to put on a show that at least they are doing something; the ignorant get angry because they see the world through a very limited frame of reference: accordingly whatever they see or experience annoys and angers them; some people whom we can call the most average Joe/Janes (because they don’t want to deviate from social standards) don’t know how to respond to a situation: they model their behaviour on movies and soaps, and accordingly get angry as a learned behavior in unacceptable circumstances; majority of other people may succumb to anger under conditions of hunger, cold, lack of sleep, futility of efforts, repeat harassment, helplessness, lack of human empathy, financial and marital stress, illness and so forth. However, anger is a symptom, not a solution, and remedial and/or preventative solutions should be administered minus anger because anger clouds judgement and a clouded judgment cannot reach decisive solutions.
To hold that science is perfect is self-contradictory: there is always better science and simply because we have not reached it doesn’t validate our present state of science as perfect or infalsifiable. Moreover, science can only explain how or what but never why. So much for its perfectness.
Mathematics, trigonometry, geometry, algebra, calculus, and logic—the tools that can manipulate abstract ideas at levels that are physically impossible to do; the resultant discoveries can be applied to the physical world, but this doesn’t mean that the primary functionalities of these pure sciences are for practical purposes only. Their primary functionalities concern the discovery of higher truths from simple computations and rules that were derived from most intuitively sensible short-cuts. Thus it is possible to imagine that no higher-order abstract thought that is not rooted in intuition and subjected to basic logic should be acceptable simply because “it is too hard to understand or intuit”. In this regard, thus, both Samuel Johnson and George Berkeley were wrong. Berkeley’s esse est percipi (to be is to be perceived) covers only half of the truth (and half-truths are like half-doctors), while Johson’s kick (he kicked a rock to prove Berkeley was wrong and matter DID really exist) is a typical dogmatic refusal of Scientifc truths of a higher order.