As you can probably tell from the title, I am not in a great mood. I think watching that philosophy lecture yesterday got me in a philosophical mood. So this morning I had a half hour of time to just sit and think and that's what I did. My usual philosophical crap. So now I'm not in a positive mood. Joy. I made a list of questions about life that I left at my room and I will add when I get back. I just wanted to start writing this out now while I'm in lab and Saumen hasn't arrived yet.
To add to this crappy mood, no colonies grew, AGAIN!! Well one of the plates has like 2 or 3 colonies on it but nothing substantial. I just don't get why they won't work. I don't know how anyone puts up with this work. I know for fact that I do not want to work with cells. It is way too annoying for not that much payoff. I would rather deal with flies at least I can see them before the last step of the procedure. But they are also prone to not following directions, that's why I am a chemist and not a biochemist. I just want stuff to actually work. This phrase has a double meaning in my case, conveniently.
And there goes the philosophy again. My major question on the paper back at my room:
Why am I cursed with thought and awareness of my life?
This may apply to other humans, animals, beings in general, but I do not know for certain. Regardless, I will apply all my questions in a personal frame do to my uncertainty of others' thoughts in the area.
I have been thinking about this a lot in the last year. Why do I need to be cursed with such an ability? Why can't I go about my life not thinking about anything? Why am I a thinking thing? Why do I exist? Is this my sole purpose? Does thinking make any difference? Why am I concerned with making a difference? Is there a reason for me to make a difference? It's to be remembered, isn't it? Why do I wish to be remembered? Do I need assurance that my life wasn't a waste? But how can I know that my life isn't a waste? I don't do much at all, why is this not a waste? Or is it? Am I just wasting my life? But what is life really? If there is an afterlife, why live at all? Assertion 1: There can't be an afterlife, it's too easy. Making this assumption, then I must live. But what is the purpose of living? Assertion 2: To learn, to know everything. I have a purpose. But what if that purpose does not work? What if it cannot be fulfilled? What if I waste my life and do not fulfill this purpose?
I cannot answer that question... If I do not fulfill my goal, I did waste my life, didn't I? What if I make a second purpose? Can I have two purposes? Can one being be living for two reasons? Assertion 3: Second purpose-
*********************************************************************
Just found a site with points identifying the thinking of Existentialists:
1. they are obsessed with how to live one's life and believe that philosophical and psychological inquiry can help. CHECK
2. they believe there are certain questions that everyone must deal with (if they are to take human life seriously), and that these are special -- existential -- questions. Questions such as death, the meaning of human existence, the place of God in human existence, the meaning of value, interpersonal relationship, the place of self-reflective conscious knowledge of one's self in existing. CHECK
3. Note that the existentialists on this characterization don't pay much attention to "social" questions such as the politics of life and what "social" responsibility the society or state has. They focus almost exclusively on the individual. CHECK, kinda
4. By and large Existentialists believe that life is very difficult and that it doesn't have an "objective" or universally known value, but that the individual must create value by affiriming it and living it, not by talking about it. CHECK
5. Existential choices and values are primarily demonstrated in ACT not in words. CHECK, though I could do it more personally
6. Given that one is focusing on individual existence and the "existential" struggles (that is, in making decisions that are meaningful in everyday life), they often find that literary characterizations rather than more abstract philosophical thinking, are the best ways to elucidate existential struggles. not sure what they mean, but I don't think so
7. They tend to take freedom of the will, the human power to do or not do, as absolutely obvious. Now and again there are arguments for free will in Existentialist literature, but even in these arguments, one gets the distinct sense that the arguments are not for themselves, but for "outsiders." Inside the movement, free will is axiomatic, it is intuitively obvious, it is the backdrop of all else that goes on. CHECK
I think I am an Existentialist. At least as far as this characterization goes, I am for the most part, all of the above (minus #6). Interesting. Good to know where I stand in my philosophical endeavors. Though I am certain this is not the only school of philosophy with which I am involved. This is very interesting to me.
**********************************************************************
A nice side note for once. Well now that I lost my train of though I guess I will stop for the moment. At least while I am here in lab. My mood has marginally improved since this morning. I will probably commence writing later in the day. I hope to be able to get the a store called County Market to check out if prices are any lower than Walgreen's. It would be nice if they are. Although that would mean that I need to walk 2 miles to get there from my dorm and 2 more back with groceries. I may start using the buses if that is the case. Well regardless. Have a philosophical day.
No comments:
Post a Comment