N~~~~~~e and My Brain

Let's talk a little bit about me.

Yesterday I was talking to a friend of mine about how I have nothing going on in my life. Crappy job. Failed out of school. No relationships to even joke about. In short, if you took off your shades, my future would still not be bright. Being a generally positive person, I tried to think of something that may be good about the future. I thought to myself, "Self, what are you good at? Let's maximize that potential." So, what am I good at? That's a good question. Let's break it down a bit:

1) I am good at nothing.

Now, this isn't to say I am bad at everything. I'm actually a bit better than passable at most things. However, being good enough at pretty much anything is not nearly as marketable as being very good at two things. Now, to be fair, I am damn good at listening to music. I'm also brilliant at having opinions. The problem is, I don't like contention. Therefore, I don't really argue for my opinions in most situations. (Excluding Phil Collins and Apple. I'm convinced those are two points on the trifecta of hell, mayonaise being the third point.) So, while it would seem that those two skills make me perfect for a music critic, I don't like the part where I talk things down. What else am I good at?

2) I am good at nothing.

We talked about that, remember? Quit rehashing previously discussed material. Let's ask the more pertinent question: What am I passable at? Most things, so that answer is irrelevant. The real question is, what do I like doing? That is the question for the ages. I don't have any idea.

I think I might enjoy being a writer, except that I have nothing to write about. Which brings us back to where we started, with Nikolle. Or Nickolle, or Nicolle or however you spell it. I told N~~~~~~~e that I might like to be a writer, but I dont' know what to write about. N~~~~~~~~e found this inspiring. She said she thought it was so fascinating to see what is going on in the brain of someone who is free flow writing the despairing futility purposelessness. A nice thought, don't you think? I do. But it says a lot more about N~~~~~~~e than it does about me. She is a positive, upbeat person with a uniquely inquisitive take on the world. Whereas I am just like every other 20-something, single college dude with nothing to do. I want to think that this apathetic and aimless complaining I'm doing is due to some profound journey of self-discovery. In reality, if I were to be totally honest with myself, it is more accurately just a symptom of my inability to accomplish anything. This wandering and wondering can mostly be traced back to the fact that I don't have the drive to actually do any of the things I want to do. For example:

I would love to be one of those intellectuals who can talk to you about philosophy, and has read whatever it is you're talking about. I would love to actually read those Scientific American's I am receiving instead of just piling them on the back of my toilet. I would love to be one of those people who watched Pan's Labyrinth for more than the visual effects. I didn't even know that movie had a point until I watched the commentaries. I would love to be any of those things, but I'm not. And here's the kicker; I have the time to do all that. I just don't. However, I am pretty dang good at this game.

All this rambling brings us now to the fun part of my brain slewage. What do we blame for this? I'm sure as hell not going to blame me. However, I would like to blame the fact that I have nothing to look forward to. There is nothing in my future, so there is no reason to get there. As far as I can tell, next year will be exactly like this year, but my body will have broken down a little. Which is fine. I don't really care. And there's that problem again.....

Now, I didn't write this to complain. I wrote this because these are the thoughts I am thinking, and I does me good to discuss them, even if it is just with myself. Especially if it is just with myself. After all, I am a pretty good conversationalist.




This post written while listening to this.

Which Came First? The Nerd, or The Dice?

I spend a lot of time in the nerdier parts of the world. I am myself a nerd. And I have the privilege of associating with and observing many other nerds. Before I dive into my thought, I would like to take a detour to discuss some social stigmas.

As a general rule, people are defined by their activities. This is not an all encompassing rule, but it pretty much holds true. Play sports, you're a jock. Act in a play, you're a thespian. Nerds also are defined by their activities, of which I will list a few: Dungeons and Dragons, any form of online gaming, video games in general, Magic: The Gathering, role-playing of any kind, etc. Engaging in any or all of these activities identifies a person as a nerd. And most of these activities are dubbed by society, anti-social or weird. I do not wish to argue the weirdness of these nerdtivities. I don't care. But I have noticed one thing; all of these activities are escapist. They all allow the participant to be someone or something else.

Often, nerds are single, struggle to make friends, and don't usually follow the standard rules of appearance. In my observations, nerds nerd because they don't have anywhere else to get their feeling of accomplishment. One thought is that nerds nerd because they are single.

And this leads me directly to my question. Do nerds nerd because they are single? Or do they nerd because they are seeking solace. It's a bit of a chicken and egg question, but I still think it warrants a few minutes of our attention. Are nerds participating in these nerdy activities because they are single and are seeking something to fulfill them? Or do the activities themselves assure the continued single status of the nerds who participate? Now, I realize that this is not a foolproof paradigm. I know many people who participate in nerdivities, who are not nerds of the stereotypical variety. But still, that doesn't change the fact that there are so many out there who really are nerds, that I am certain you all know what I am talking about.

So what is the answer? Why are most nerds alonely? Is it because of the nerding? Or do they nerd because of the aloneliness. I don't know that I will ever know the answer. But, considering my current life trajectory, it may well be in my best interests to find out. Soon...

The Science of Religion

It has been some time since I have written a post. It has been some time since I have had any thoughts worth writing. But last night I was privy to an interesting discussion. In my wanderings about Provo, I came across a book club discussion. They were discussing a book written by a prominent atheist whose name I didn't quite catch. The discussion wandered around for a little, touching on various ideas from the text, until finally they settled into a longer discussion of morality, intellectualism, atheism and religion. The discussion was centered on morality, namely, "where does your moral standard come from if you have no religion?" As they talked, it became apparent that many of the group did not feel that religion was very important. They felt it necessary to separate their religion (if they had one) from their intellectualism. As they did this, I noticed that they began to take the good qualities from religion and attribute them to whatever intellectual ideal they pleased.

One of their main points can be described by this sentence, attributed to some philosopher: "Christianity was the boat that got us across the river. It has given us its moral standard. Now that we have crossed the river, as it were, we have no more use for the boat." This sentence saddens me.

I hardly think it needs to be said that I was put into a thoughtful mood by this discussion. As I stood outside the house absorbing the exquisite winter evening, my friend Louis also stepped out of the house, and said something I thought profound. Although I can't remember his exact wording his thought was something like, "Discussions like that are the equivalent of building an intellectual labyrinth around yourself, and it very easy to lose yourself inside that labyrinth." How right you are, Louis.

Do we need religion to maintain a high moral standard? Are the atheist countries of Denmark and Sweden on the forefront of human societal evolution? These were the questions being discussed by the book club. But there were some other thoughts that they seemed to have forgotten. I would like share a couple of my ideas I feel were left out last night.

1) Religion is a human need. Every society on Earth, in every part of history, on every part of the globe has had a religion. Now, these religions come in different forms, but they all give their followers something to believe in. Religion cannot be separated from academic life or done away with. It exists outside humanity.

2) Though there is some variance, morality exists across boundaries and cultures and is largely standardized. It is interesting to see how very similar morality is described in different parts of the world. In my experience, morality often consists of some sort of personal sacrifice, a lifestyle free of addictions, consideration for other people, and some set of rules governing procreation. The worldwide and historical prevalence of these moral qualities seems to suggest a common root. A common religious ancestry.

3) Any religion worth its salt should permeate the believers life. If you are truly a believer of a religion, it should be found in every part of your life. It shouldn't be a garment you where when its convenient and cast aside when you wax intellectual.

I will end with this final thought. Intellectualism is not, of itself, bad. Neither is religion. But if one does not reconcile both in his own life, this is when the labyrinths go up. When the balance is lost and you swing too far to one side or the other, you begin to lose focus. You begin to lose a part of yourself. So, be careful. Balance yourself, be happy, and live up to whatever moral standard you subscribe to.