Welcome to My Reality

[Veshtrusja]

24 January 2005

It's a new year. Perhaps it would be natural for one to also expect new thoughts. I, however, do not always believe that that which is new is always necessarily good. I want part of the old. Perhaps because I, too, am a part of what is ancient. Perhaps because there is something truley valuable in that which is ancient. At the moment, I imagine cathedrals in Spain and Italy and France. God! How old they must be! How much effort, strength, desire, and belief must have gone into having those great majestic buildings built. Of course, there was also blood spilled. But isn't there always blood spilled when great things come to be? Nevertheless... today, even in this new year, I admire those buildings. I admire the people who built them, and those who asked to have them built. Maybe I admire them because I see such strength reflected in their beauty. In fact, does it not show strength to have survived so long? Perhaps that is why I admire the ancient thoughts of those who were great and virtous, because there is strength in their beauty, because that which is beautiful never fades, not even when a new year comes....

[Veshtrusja]

24 Janar 2005 - afternoon

I'm not sure whether it was Rousseau or Sartre who said that "Society is what corrupts" the good, free man. I never believed this more than I do at this moment. Perhaps this is why some of the greatest minds in history wrote some of their best works in isolation. To get away from the influence of the majority. To get away from the need to conform so that you may fit in. To save yourself and remain free instead of bound to rules that change only because it is the will of the majority to do so. Why must I believe what you will me to believe?..... I believe man is good, this is what Sartre also believed, and that it is society that corrupts him. Let me be more precise: I believe people are good, it is society that corrupts them (men and women). It's interesting how one may consider one's self free when in fact they are bound in endless chains. Of course, they themselves cannot see the chains that society has thrown on them, but they are there....

[Veshtrusja]

24 January 2005 - evening

Socrates: "I enjoy talking with the very old, for we should ask them, as we might ask those who have travelled a road that we too will probably have to follow, what kind of road it is, whether rough and difficult or smooth and easy." (Plato, Republic)

How much pleasure I get from reading these words! You know, I am used to telling others that I have no friends except for those who are a part of my immediate family (all of whome are older than me), but lately I have made a new friend. Sure, he may be dead physically, but his spirit lives on, at least in me it does. I consider myself very lucky to find such a friend, one that can reason with me. There are times when I have thought that I was alone in appreciating the experience the old have to offer us, but I'm no longer alone! Sadly, now-a-days, it appears as though the majority believes it is always right. Then again, this, I have learned, is not a new phenomenon. Socrates, my dear friend, was sentenced to death by this majority. And what is, possibly, most shocking of all is that it was done in the name of Justice! What is Justice? Is it that which is determined by the Polis? My friend felt that he had to respect the "judgement" of the city, of the majority. I say: how can you respect that which is wrong? Can that which is just sometimes be unjust? Perhaps there is a difference between what "is" and what "ought to be"....Not too long ago, a girl I know called my friend an "idealistic old fool". I think he was a good-hearted genious. He made an agreement and he kept his word. "Most" thought he lost by being sentenced to death. He did not think so. "I go to die, he said, you go to live. Which of us goes to the better lot is known to no one, except the god." (Plato, Apology)

[Diabolis]

I'm not sure whether it was Rousseau or Sartre who said that "Society is what corrupts" the good, free man. I never believed this more than I do at this moment. Perhaps this is why some of the greatest minds in history wrote some of their best works in isolation. To get away from the influence of the majority. To get away from the need to conform so that you may fit in. To save yourself and remain free instead of bound to rules that change only because it is the will of the majority to do so. Why must I believe what you will me to believe?..... I believe man is good, this is what Sartre also believed, and that it is society that corrupts him. Let me be more precise: I believe people are good, it is society that corrupts them (men and women). It's interesting how one may consider one's self free when in fact they are bound in endless chains. Of course, they themselves cannot see the chains that society has thrown on them, but they are there....

Jean-Jacques Rousseau: people are born good, society is what corrupts
them

Cliché - I'm not sure whether - google.com

[Veshtrusja]

25 January 2005

Hegel:It is easier to discover a deficiency in individuals, in states, and in Providence, than to see their real important value.

I find myself repeating this quote constantly. It is easier to discover a deficiency in others... It is easier to discover a deficiency in others... Is it easier to discover a deficiency in others because we want to discover a deficiency in others? Why is it that some people find joy when they find fault in another? If human nature is naturally good, then why is it that we don't aim to help one, but rather we aim to kill one? Perhaps we would like to reassure our ownselves of our supposed knowledge by searching for faults in others...who knows. I confused Sartre with Rousseau but, in fact, they had the same idea going on. If Sartre did not say that society corrupts, then he said: Hell is other people* What's the difference? Whether one expression is used or another expression is used, what really matters is the idea, the meaning behind the expression..... Can a word or expression actually go out of style or out of date? What a sad world it would be if we actually felt or found ourselves limited to the expressions we use. I would feel as if I could not breathe if I could not say that which I felt at the moment. I would be frustrated. And I think rightfully so. There is such a thing as freedom of speech, after all! What do I care about style or fashion or what's out of date! I care about self-expression, about truth, honest feeling and sincere expression.

* Twenty Questions - An Introduction to Philosophy. Bowie, Michaels, Solomon. Fourth Ed. 2000.

[Veshtrusja]

28 January 2005

It isn't enough to have sight. You must also have light.

[Veshtrusja]

31 Janar 2005

eshte mjaft e veshtire per te kuptuar njerezit e tjere dhe gati e PAMUNDUR qe te behet nje gje e tille neqoftese ata nuk sqarojne vetevehten permes te te folurit.

Wise words, no? It is difficult to understand others, but it is almost impossible to do so if they do not explain themselves through speach, language. Obviously you cannot understand one who does not fully explain themselves. Now, can you understand one who cannot (and not does not) fully explain themselves? And, can you understand one who does not wish* to* explain themselves through language? And when you cannot understand another, what choice do you have but to suppose and interpret according to what you see and not according to what you hear (or what they mean for you to hear/see)? Are you to blame for supposing when one does not wish to, does not, and/or cannot express/explain themselves through words? And what happens when one knows exactly what they wish to say, they know exactly how to convey that which they want to say to another, but in fact they do not do so. They simply begin to provoke another? I wonder... what is the purpose of such dialogue...

[Veshtrusja]

2 February 2005

Some things are hard. Is it easy for others to reject helping someone in need? Why is it that I feel bad if I don't help when I know that I can? Maybe that's why it's hard for me to refuse to help someone. But sometimes it's necessary to refuse. When people see that you are willing to help, they don't always appreciate the help you give. They want more. More! MORE! Why do they always want more? Why do they take advantage of the goodness of others? Pse abuzojn me miresine?! And if people are never satisfied, then what is the point in helping them at all? ... I guess there are limits to everything. Sometimes you cannot always be good. Sometimes you have to make those limits clear so that people don't take advantage of you. Sometimes you have to be mean. I wish you didn't have to be mean... but sometimes you just "have to". Some things are hard.