This week I've been wondering what's up with Lent. And I've also been wondering what's up with me sitting at a desk all day looking at a computer screen only to come home, sit at my desk, and look at a computer screen.
But back to Lent. Actually, I don't have any thoughts about Lent to share. Several people at my office mentioned it, and some talked about what they're giving up for Lent. I thought, hey, I could give up sweets and candy, lose some weight, and fit into all my clothes again. Somehow it didn't seem appropriate to do that in the name of Lent, so I've decided to do it just because that's what I decided. And thankfully, I didn't decide with a time limit, so a newer decision---such as "eat sweets and candy"---will override that one.
I started organizing the books on my shelves. I made it through alphabetizing my fiction and reference books, but haven't made any more progress. I'm supposed to be working on it right now, but I decided to redo my blog instead. Though I did add a list of books I have in my library that I haven't read yet. And I didn't even include the language books that I want to study. Memorizing a new vocabulary unfortunately takes more than one read-through.
In hunting for some good GRE study books, I've discovered that Barron's is superior to Kaplan. At least that's what the Amazon customer reviewers think. Princeton's was mentioned, but not discussed. Speaking of Amazon, I've also started compiling a massive wish list of books I'd like to read some day. Most of them I don't know much about other than that they sound interesting to me.
Enough procrastination! To the shelves I go!
2.21.2007
2.06.2007
History
While researching some university history departments, I observed that some institutions of higher learning catalog their history department under humanities whilst others lump history with social sciences. Soon my observation became a question: why the heck do they do that?
This launched me into an inner debate over the meaning of history and the purpose of studying it. For me to continue writing, I have to note that I'm not trained in the study of history, or at least, I haven't applied myself to the processes of history and historiography to come up with my own philosophies of history. Perhaps that's what I'm doing right now.
A class I took in undergraduate, which many of you have heard me discuss if you've talked to me more than once, included a discussion of history. We read War and Peace, discussing the questions Tolstoy asked about history. What drives human history? What moves events? Is it the action of individuals? How do the lives of individuals work within the larger framework of great rulers, wars, the rising and falling of nations? Do men make history happen? Or, maybe, do our actions make history happen? Do events, such as war, plagues, famines, etc., determine our actions?
These are the questions that put history under humanities. They involve discussion of the nature of man, his relation to nature (events, at least natural ones), his relation to humanity and history.
Do we study history to understand humanity? to attain a deeper understanding of our humanness?
* * * * * * * * * *
Today I heard the statement: To move forward, we have to come to terms with the past.
This understanding of history (which I think would fall under Henry Ford's assessment, "History is one damn thing after another.") pushes history under the social sciences. As a society, we must study our past so that [fill in the blank] "we don't repeat the past" or "we don't make the same mistakes" or etc.
This approach demands that certain other questions be answered. What is "forward"? and who determines the direction "we" want to move? What are mistakes? Who decides what a mistake is?
* * * * * * * * * *
From my current understanding, I don't see any point in studying history as a "social science." If a society does not agree on fundamental questions, primarily dealing with the "Who," no one can measure if "progress" is "made." And if someone does measure it somehow, the next generation is likely to call it a mistake.
So, you may be asking, what is the value of knowing man? Well, practically, I don't know. But it sure is a heck of a lot o' fun!
[Humanities are worthwhile studies, but I'm not articulate on my reasoning, and I'm being lazy.]
This launched me into an inner debate over the meaning of history and the purpose of studying it. For me to continue writing, I have to note that I'm not trained in the study of history, or at least, I haven't applied myself to the processes of history and historiography to come up with my own philosophies of history. Perhaps that's what I'm doing right now.
A class I took in undergraduate, which many of you have heard me discuss if you've talked to me more than once, included a discussion of history. We read War and Peace, discussing the questions Tolstoy asked about history. What drives human history? What moves events? Is it the action of individuals? How do the lives of individuals work within the larger framework of great rulers, wars, the rising and falling of nations? Do men make history happen? Or, maybe, do our actions make history happen? Do events, such as war, plagues, famines, etc., determine our actions?
These are the questions that put history under humanities. They involve discussion of the nature of man, his relation to nature (events, at least natural ones), his relation to humanity and history.
Do we study history to understand humanity? to attain a deeper understanding of our humanness?
* * * * * * * * * *
Today I heard the statement: To move forward, we have to come to terms with the past.
This understanding of history (which I think would fall under Henry Ford's assessment, "History is one damn thing after another.") pushes history under the social sciences. As a society, we must study our past so that [fill in the blank] "we don't repeat the past" or "we don't make the same mistakes" or etc.
This approach demands that certain other questions be answered. What is "forward"? and who determines the direction "we" want to move? What are mistakes? Who decides what a mistake is?
* * * * * * * * * *
From my current understanding, I don't see any point in studying history as a "social science." If a society does not agree on fundamental questions, primarily dealing with the "Who," no one can measure if "progress" is "made." And if someone does measure it somehow, the next generation is likely to call it a mistake.
So, you may be asking, what is the value of knowing man? Well, practically, I don't know. But it sure is a heck of a lot o' fun!
[Humanities are worthwhile studies, but I'm not articulate on my reasoning, and I'm being lazy.]
2.03.2007
the new me
Through my church I am taking Dave Ramsey's Financial Peach University. Supposedly if I attend 12 of 13 classes, I graduate! I've always wanted another degree, so I guess I certificate won't be that bad.
Ramsey hates credit cards, which I have started calling ruin-my-life-debt cards. I decided to pay mine off and cancel them. It's funny, but I get the distinct impression that my credit card doesn't want to be canceled. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that there is absolutely no information regarding cancellation on the website, and when you call the 800 number, you have to go through 10+ button options to get to something that sounds like it might have something to do with closing the account. Then you are put on hold for the standard 20--30 minutes. tick. tock. tick. tock. tick. tock.
. . . wait . . . I've gotten through . . .
Hm. That was easier than closing my free AOL account back when I first got my computer.
Yay!
Ramsey hates credit cards, which I have started calling ruin-my-life-debt cards. I decided to pay mine off and cancel them. It's funny, but I get the distinct impression that my credit card doesn't want to be canceled. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that there is absolutely no information regarding cancellation on the website, and when you call the 800 number, you have to go through 10+ button options to get to something that sounds like it might have something to do with closing the account. Then you are put on hold for the standard 20--30 minutes. tick. tock. tick. tock. tick. tock.
. . . wait . . . I've gotten through . . .
Hm. That was easier than closing my free AOL account back when I first got my computer.
Yay!
1.26.2007
tardy
Ack! It's been way too long since I posted. And I still don't think I have anything to say that could be slightly amusing.
I've noticed this strange pattern in my life: when the high temp for the day stays below 45, I am surprisingly comfortable and non-cold. When the lows are in the 30s and the high are in the 50s or 60s, I'm insanely cold and miserable. Odd, don't you think?
Right now I'm trying to decide whether to learn Greek or Latin, whether to go to school and get debt or go to work and pay bills, whether to stay here or go there, whether to eat more or eat less, whether to make up my mind or dilly-dally, and whether to take a shower before bed or not.
And I'd like to report that I've had several delightful opportunities to use the phrase "hot-diggity" in the past several weeks. I don't desire frequency of occurrence, but instead find delight in the most appropriate use of the phrase, that is, finding an occasion for which the phrase is perfectly suited. And unfortunately the previous sentence does not call for such happy use of the phrase.
Words are delightful.
I've noticed this strange pattern in my life: when the high temp for the day stays below 45, I am surprisingly comfortable and non-cold. When the lows are in the 30s and the high are in the 50s or 60s, I'm insanely cold and miserable. Odd, don't you think?
Right now I'm trying to decide whether to learn Greek or Latin, whether to go to school and get debt or go to work and pay bills, whether to stay here or go there, whether to eat more or eat less, whether to make up my mind or dilly-dally, and whether to take a shower before bed or not.
And I'd like to report that I've had several delightful opportunities to use the phrase "hot-diggity" in the past several weeks. I don't desire frequency of occurrence, but instead find delight in the most appropriate use of the phrase, that is, finding an occasion for which the phrase is perfectly suited. And unfortunately the previous sentence does not call for such happy use of the phrase.
Words are delightful.
1.09.2007
Here I am at my desk.
This morning occurred in a series of misfortunes. First my alarm sounded. And I hit snooze. However, the misfortune is not that I failed to wake up in a timely fashion but that I did get out of bed, take my shower, eat my breakfast, all in good time and still managed to be late to work.
Somewhere in the midst of all that I blew (or is it "flipped"? anyway, all the kitchen appliances and lights went off) a breaker, brewed the worst coffee known to man, put my eyeliner on crooked, picked out clothes that don't match, had to finish my microwave oatmeal on the stove, and burnt my toast.
The worst part is that my hair has acquired this phenomenal capability to absorb and disseminate the most obnoxious smells I encounter. It's not going to let me forget that burnt toast until I chop it off.
sigh
Somewhere in the midst of all that I blew (or is it "flipped"? anyway, all the kitchen appliances and lights went off) a breaker, brewed the worst coffee known to man, put my eyeliner on crooked, picked out clothes that don't match, had to finish my microwave oatmeal on the stove, and burnt my toast.
The worst part is that my hair has acquired this phenomenal capability to absorb and disseminate the most obnoxious smells I encounter. It's not going to let me forget that burnt toast until I chop it off.
sigh
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)