getting hyper

Monday, May 31, 2004

I suppose that it is advantageous to believe in God in reference to your question, as I neither like to envision Star Wars occuring nor can think of another explaination for why it wouldn't. However I think the concept of the universe itself is an incredible area of reflection. Paticularily this rises the issue of whether or not life exist elsewheret than earth.

Humanity knows nothing for certain. Science migh claim to have laws...things that are test and "proven" to be true. Yet just as theories are prone to disproof, it may be that even the laws have exception. With that said, scientific discoveries and "facts" are still very much the center of what we know to be true, and believe to exist in the world.

Science has discovered little of what could be the universe. Yet the minute amount discovered is still imensly large. Even given the restraint of what has been found, it seems almost impossible to envision that life could not exist elsewhere. Logically and mathmatically (though I couldn't do the figures I'm sure), it is just more probable that life would exist somewhere out there, than not. Even if life took an entirely different form such as not being based on carbon or something like that...it is still extremely likely that it is not so.

Yet the negative arguemet still nags in the minds of many. One reason for this is rooted in religion. Genesis claims that God created the world and and doesn't give any references to other "worlds" or other life. Yet it does not explicity say that this did not occur. Hence the crux of human doubt is arrogance. Humanity recieves a degree of comfort and reslolution in the notion that we are the dominatnt species of the only place anywhere that contains life forms.
posted by Marianna Monday, May 31, 2004

Saturday, May 29, 2004

If the universe was infinite, and things were completely random, then would not every possible occurrence imaginable have already happened, is currently happening, and would happen in the future? I find that incredibly unlikely, as although the movie Star Wars was a great one, I cannot fathom that actually happening a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away. I'm sorry, avid fans. So if the universe is not passing through time in a completely random fashion, then what is regulating it? I'd certainly say God, but for those nonbelievers, I challenge you to either:

Explain how the universe is not random
or
Admit that Star Wars actually happened.

Of course, if the universe wasn't infinite, then that makes this a moot point. But just consider...
posted by Anonymous Saturday, May 29, 2004

Friday, May 28, 2004

"In days of prosperity be joyful, and in the day of adversity, consider; God has made one as eell as the other."

-Ecclesiastes 7:14

Perhaps this is one one of those quotes or blurbs that embellish a common debate of philosophy. Does God have a specific plan for the universe and all that is in it, or are things totally left to random chance, with an occasional nudge or hand of the Divine? More thoughtful reflection brings to surface additional meanings. Perhaps the message is not to view each day or occurance as either prosperous of perilous. Even if the challanges we face in one day do not improve who we are, or teach us something about ourselves, as they so often do, each day might be designed for a specific purpose beyond our conception. Perhaps if adversity inflicts pain on a given invdividual one day, it is a test of courage for her or him, while a gift of grace to another. To keep the world in a state of equilibrium the good might require the bad in order to qualify it as good. Hence without the bitter components of life, each individual will slowly begin to loose touch with reasons to rejoice. Hence life might progress so as to alternate between which individuals have joyful days, and which are tested. In such a manner no one grows too tired of either venture so long as faith in change, and the divine understanding is preserved.
posted by Marianna Friday, May 28, 2004

Tuesday, May 18, 2004

Well, you opened yourself up for some time of insult along the lines of commenting how many people would actually read your posts? But, I will refrain from such, mainly because I am a loyal reader of them, and I just might be the only one who is. So instead, I'll concede your point. :-)
posted by Anonymous Tuesday, May 18, 2004

Sunday, May 16, 2004

It's actually quite a possibility. However, how is that different than any other weblog? It is entirely possible that I'm speaking to a set of "fans" who regularily read this blog, though do not contribute. One can not post to the internet and be posting entirely to themselves unless their blog is not open to public acess....which this one is.
posted by Marianna Sunday, May 16, 2004

Saturday, May 15, 2004

I wonder if I sit here and not post, if you'll just start talking to yourself. :-P
posted by Anonymous Saturday, May 15, 2004

Friday, May 14, 2004

Hmmm....not much for reflection here but as of this morning at 7am, I have only 6 more weeks in NZ. This is good and bad as many friendships will be ended or at least stretched to very distant levels while at the same time I am eager to return home. Homesickness is a terrible thing, for one wishes it to leave so that they can enjoy unique and distant experiences, yet it remains like a plague. Yet 6 wks is realatively short and thus, I'm quite optimistic as to enjoying the remainder of my stay.
posted by Marianna Friday, May 14, 2004

Thursday, May 13, 2004

How's does one deal with a flatmate whom is pretty ignorant about the cause of disease, yet somehow manages to have every known or imaginable ailment, and can diagnose in you any ailment that you don't have?

It's an interesting and delicate balance actually. The second party is forced to listen to the ignorance heavily present, smile secretly within, and then argue gently back. In the study of such cases it has been observed that sharp or whitty objections to false information lead to violent contradition from the first. Also denial of existance of any purely "imagined" disease only leads to diagnosis and recommendations for further treatment for further "imagined diseases."

The likely conclusion has been the following. The later individual is best to carefully avoid voicing complaints of any kind at an audible level, sighing subtly, or elluding to fatigue or frustration. All of these actions kindle ridiculous labeling of infectious disease by the all-knowing-but-missinformed first individual.
posted by Marianna Thursday, May 13, 2004

Tuesday, May 11, 2004

Yesturday I went to a discussion session on "Who is God for You." While I don't think that I exactly answered the question, I did get much out of the session. For example, we examined several Biblical metaphoric descriptions of God. Here are a few:

Potter
Gate
Women in Labor
Mother Eagle
Water
Wind
Fire
Rock
Sheperd

Well there were many more but I don't have the list with me at present. However I will comment that it inevitable for humanity to describe God through such metaphors. Since we can not describe him in an entirely tangible way (as we would say a tree) we must resort ot more poetic measures or images. The goal is to define God individually by some image or set of images, record these, and then sit back and analyze them. This is an interesting exercise as perceptions of God may differ from what has been taught about God or known to be true. Hence an individual's image of God at any given time might indeed be dependent upon their emotional, physical, and spiritual stage in life.
posted by Marianna Tuesday, May 11, 2004

Monday, May 10, 2004

I don't have time to post a long message. I am in Cincinnati now, though. Jibba jabba.
posted by Anonymous Monday, May 10, 2004

I actually find that I disagree with the Bible phrase I posted on several accounts. Perhaps this is because even failure can be important as long as the attempt filled with spirit and will.

On a slightly different note, I am beginning to realize that there are few things in life that do not offer a valuabel addition to our future progress. Failure, though among the most painful lessons available, teaches of the importance of effort, reveals weakness, or simply can serve to clarify goals. Yet in a sad sort of way it seems impossible to face the potential of failure with such an optimistic approach. Personally I know that I fail regularily in living without fear of failure as it is indeed among my greatest fears. This comes from self presure and an inevidable proclivity toward perfectionism. This is a very destructive attitude to possess toward both society and one's self.

posted by Marianna Monday, May 10, 2004

Friday, May 07, 2004

Some some respects, yes. A popular phrase I recall as a child from my teachers comes to mind. Whenver a small fight would occur, the first thing one would say when being reprimanded is "he/she started it". Sometimes, a wise response from the teacher would be, "yes, but who ended it?" So I'd agree with that quote. But surely, there are exceptions which I do not wish to think about right now.
posted by Anonymous Friday, May 07, 2004

Wednesday, May 05, 2004

Alright...this is rather annoying...

I posted here yesturday but apparently it has been erased or never appeared.

I lack the energy at present to recreate a poem as I wrote yesturday but here is a thought to ponder:

I was reading Daily Guidepost when tomorrows Bible phrase caught my eye. I don't remember the exact wording but it it was something like this:

"How something ends is more important than how it begins."

Is this the case?

posted by Marianna Wednesday, May 05, 2004

Monday, May 03, 2004

Ok, you attempt to contradict my previous arguments by pointing out minute exceptions. In the case of athletic ability, I'd guess that 99% of sporting events are dominated by males. Furthermore, 100% of countries have a most popular sport in which males dominate, soccer being the most prevalent one. As for your list of comebacks, they are all merely roundabout ways of saying exactly what I mentioned earlier. So in a way, you agree with me about stubborness and taking forever to make up their minds. You just have an alternate view of the path taken. Still, the results are the same, and they are very annoying results indeed.

I concede the hair color argument. I just used that to annoy you, and I see it succeeded.

But, cute is not for 3 year old girls. As a matter of fact, if you poll all males in America, I'd bet the majority would say that their girlfriends are cute, and they would not want it any other way. If you have a problem with my thinking you are cute, then I do not know what to say to that. But an opinion is an opinion, and I have my own. That's that.

Maybe we should end the arguing and transform this blog into something not aggressive. After all, it has become seemingly only our own. It should be put to a beneficial, growing use. Not a destroying use. Let me know what you think about this proposal.
posted by Anonymous Monday, May 03, 2004