Thursday, March 31, 2011

Perspectives on Death

In the light of the string of recent tragedies (Japan, Libya, that kid who died after winning a high-school basketball game), I have once again been thinking about how much life is worth.
It is clear to me that every life is inherently valuable, but is it possible or preferable to consider one life more valuable than another? And if so, what standards should we use to differentiate one life as more valuable with another?

I think the inherent reaction of the mostly unprejudiced individual is to say that all lives are equal. After all, it is a founding principle of this country that "all men are created equal". This is what I agree with. And yet, in practice, I have found that the opinion of many that I have encountered is implicitly discriminatory in the value of life. In the story of that kid who died after winning a basketball game that I mentioned earlier, I have found many people saddened by the event, people who, as I might add, are emotionally independent to far worse xor equal tragedies. While this personally doesn't affect me — I, for one, find dying after winning a basketball game a pretty decent way to die, even at such a young age — I do find myself more concerned about the multiple tragedies in Japan than any other disasters, both recent and ongoing. I feel worse for a Japanese person dying than any African child, though I should value them equally.

I find this inconsistency troubling. I would like to continue to believe that all lives are equal and therein be able to dismiss anyone trying to make me feel bad about the death of a famous person or a particular group of people as no more worthy of my grief than starving children in Africa or executed political prisoners or babies dying of SIDS. It is in this way that I can avoid feeling negative emotion for something that does not affect me. But this real concern I have for the Japanese people along with my desire to be unaffected would require a degree of cognitive dissonance that I am not comfortable having.

I don't know what to do about this but I hope a solution will come to me.

Friday, March 11, 2011

I cannot stand insipidity

I have a pretty high tolerance for annoying characteristics: I can bear the overly religious, argumentative, and even, to a lesser degree, boring. But I cannot deal with insipidity and hold my tongue for too long. It is simply not in my nature.

Some signs of insipidity:
Repeating things after they occur with marginally different wording in an attempt to make them funny.
Attempts to dismiss criticism through ad hominem attacks.
Prone to use catch-phrases. Sometimes uses quotes from popular media or memes.
They like to complain about their life.
They often talk about the lives of celebrities.
They give the impression of being extremely fake. This is largely a result for their desperate need to belong, which requires them to adapt to whatever is cool at the moment. For example, one such person recently was talking about how "ghetto" they were during her childhood.
They're really into bad music, such as '90s pop music and mindless hip-hop.
They're just really stupid.
So used to going unchallenged in social circles that they may overreact when called out.

If you see someone who displays these characteristics, you can recognize them for the empty-headed fools they are. If these describe you, stay away from me, or sooner or later, my words will siege you.

Friday, March 4, 2011

An Argument for Lazyocracy

I recently failed to vote in UT's local student election. It's not that I didn't want to vote. Even though I'm certain my vote doesn't matter and most of the candidates don't seem any worse than any other (with the exception of UT's secret society "The Eyes of Texas"-backed candidates), I make it a point to vote whenever possible. The more I vote, I figure, the more my demographic will be catered to by whoever is elected. It's the same reason that Jewish voters have a larger political influence than their population- A higher percentage of them vote.
   The reason I failed to vote in this recent election was that I was simply so busy that I forgot. Voting, for all the attempts that groups have made to make it not so, is just too inconvenient. I wish I could just wake up, and while I'm getting ready for school, I would be offered the option to vote.
If between breakfast and the time it takes me to get to class, I could have a radio program read me the candidates' names, their positions on the important issues, and their qualifications, and I could call in and vote; if when I got to class, during my lunch break, an announcement would remind me and the rest of the school that we could vote online or at any of the convenient polling places in our area; if when I got home, my TV show was preceded by an advertisement that reminded me to vote and provided a venue for doing so; these would remove difficulty from the voting process and leave out only those who do not want to vote for specific reasons.

There are, of course, logistical issues with all of these, and I am not saying that a transition from our current system will be easy or, at this point, necessarily cost-effective and worth doing at this time. But I believe that this is a goal we should work toward.


If it were as easy to vote as it is to see a movie, and if society said that voting was an important thing to do as a citizen in a democracy, that would make democracy more fair. This is lazyocracy and, I hope, the future.