My Theory
Suppose, as an example, that I were to walk down the street and stop to enjoy a quick sip of Jack Daniels out of the bottle. If someone arrives in attire that was designed so that it appeared significaant or important, and yells a command (this person is often called a "police officer" in Western society) indicating that you I should stop, am I obligated .
Am I a philosopher or an etymology theorist or both??? Similarly to the case of police officers, consider that we are supposed to punctuate very precisely in describing our speech, such that you would include three punctuation marks to indicate that three options had been given and you, just as I asked in the previous sentence. Should you attach three questions marks to indicate that three questions had been asked? Yes, and that makes sense because I am indicating that there are three objects to choose from: "philosophy", "etymology theorist", and "both". (this is referred to as an "answer").
Consider also that the "bold" punctuations I used above are used to help guide your eyes back up to them as your target of focus.
What I have been doing this entire time, in analyzing the words "police" and "punctuation", can best be described as theorizing about "etymology". I believe that the word etymology is commonly understood as "the origins of a word," in which "origin" manifests in the readers' mind as the outline of the borders of a country, like how it is drawn on a map. Words are meant to manifest ideas within our minds, but most of us skip over these ideas quickly in an attempt to read at the pace that your school requires you to. In reading at this pace, we are often racing through reading assignments like each passing second is a precious but quickly vanishing resource, as if we were going to die.
This is to say that we are all in a hurry, but we don't have to be anymore. Perhaps, now that we are expanding our life expectancy to levels never seen before in history, we are evolving into a species that slows down and ponders things, rather than racing by each passing idea as an attempt to stay away from certain death, which is what our scurrying friends called ants do all day. They race around and try disparately to stay alive in a world where humans have nearly taken over completely.
I challenge you to ponder the means of each of the subjects I traversed: . This line of reasoning has led me to believe that medicine is the most valuable area of study because it further helps to slow down our thought processes, letting us develop and expand our ideas in such detail that we have nearly infinite capacity to survive as a race, thus fulfilling our ultimate destiny as a race to populate the universe for as long as time can see into the future.
Such a human destiny has already been depicted in the famous moving videos (movies for short) called Star Trek and Star Wars. Unfortunately, this is far FAR in the future for humans. I only hope that it isn't so far forward that we have perished in a self-made inferno (Global Warming), that may now be reached by our primitive self-destructive behavior in which we attack other human beings and animals in order to survive.
Thankfully, our evolved tenacity for self-preservation outweighs our tendency to kill one another, and so we have not destroyed the world with nuclear weapons yet. Trust me: we will not let nuclear weapons or global warming block the way of our collective survival as a race. We're clearly at the top of the evolutionary food chain, and I don't predict any other animals to surpass us on the food chain consistently, save for the event that the ice caps melt and our civilization is swept away.
This is called "Armageddon". Perhaps we will be wiped out by a terrible disease that has a 100% mortality rate among humans, leaving the next most evolved creature to have free reign over the earth. I submit that this is what killed the dinosaurs: a massive plague, which launched apes on their way into evolution's current champion and proven best survivor, in the form of the almighty human.
Shouldn't the ultimate focus of study in academia be the study of evolution and how we got to this state in human culture? The domains of explanation vary from Psychology, Etymology, and even Religion. These are commonly united under a common roof and called a university. These are all small schools of thought that reach towards this overarching goal, to answer the Great Human Quandary.
The term "the Great Human Quandary" requires quite a bit of elaboration. One can depict the Great Human Quandary be the Chinese tale about a wise man on a mountain who knows the true meaning of life. The wise man on the mountain had not yet zeroed in on the true meaning of life, so he had no answer. Thusly, we have finally defined the "Great Human Quandary".
Are you ready for something exciting? I think I figured it out, and it is not quite as difficult as we were led to believe. It is the core idea of everything that makes our worldwide culture so diverse and explains why the subject of evolution is gaining acceptance in society. What we see in our society is that being educated in academia is improving people's lives dramatically over non-educated humans. Academia is the most highly evolved to promote flourishing. We have, in the past, been so confused by the words "person" and "people", and this quandary (called the Great Human Quandary) will surely leads us to the answer.
Yes, right now we are. Even if we weren't the most fit-for-survival form of life on this planet, this provides us with the hope that life on Earth will continue to prosper into the future, regardless of which life form has taken dominance.
I just hope that it spawns from us humans. Judging by the enormous lead in proliferation that we hold over all the other species, it probably will be us. That makes me particularly happy!
I consider myself to be further advancing this thought of evolution that Charles Darwin excelled at describing to a level of clarity that we do not often see in our society. As a result, I am now considering the notion of switching my major focus in college to Philosophy, which I believe is the overarching subject of Philosophy. That said, this will require me to stay in school for a year after my expected graduation date, and would change my career goals in life considerably from computer science (Informatics is an evolved Computer Science, now called "Web 2.0") to continued academia at a University.
Another possibility, is that I complete my Informatics degree and apply as a graduate student in Philosophy, if that is in compliance with University rules. Any advice on this tough decision are welcome. Now, I realize that it is possible that I could potentially convey my views on life and evolution clearly without ever bothering with a University, so perhaps I should just pursue my career in Informatics as a way to fund my survival enough so that I may publish my thoughts on whatever environmental sustainability (which I define as "overall flourishing") truly means to me.
Eagerly awaiting any reply that indicates that you have so graciously read all the way to this point.
7 comments:
Hmmm... Philosophy. This will, no doubt, open your eyes further. However, it is still seen by many as washout subject. Personally, I was interested in Biology, in particular Zoology. I studied Darwin in depth, and became interested in Evolutionary Psychology.
Good luck with the Philosophy!
Ahh, yes. While I agree that there are many other subjects that are very interesting to investigate in detail, my feeling is that we do so without understanding the overarching values in our society.
Darwin was a philosopher at his core, but his study of Biology and Zoology are what gave him the insight into describing the grand theory of evolution, which is a philosophic theory.
In addition, I forgot to point out that those lesser subjects are entirely necessary to our survival as well. Just as ants have developed worker ants, warrior ants, and queen ants in order to survive, humans have developed many professions, and each of these is entirely necessary for our survival.
Can you come up with a way to explain to mom that her investment in your education is now null and void because of your sudden interest in philosophy? IMO, I think you better stick with informatics and double major in philosophy... By the way, history is also an interesting topic, but should you major in it? Can you find a job that relates to your area of study that pays well enough to support yourself, let alone a family? It's possible, but likely? And while in school it may sound like a good idea to study what you are most interested in, but after graduation and 8 months of unfruitful job-hunting and mom-hounding, you may regret your decision... With that said, the decision is yours and you already know that...
A Philosopher has basically two main options in career: teach or write.
I will stick with Informatics, but only because the Internet is a much better medium for distributing ideas than is wood-pulp (paper) and formal academic communities.
You'll make a living at whatever you do because you're not a retard. Don't let economic concerns guide your decision unless they are actually your paramount concern.
If money > philosophy for you, then get to work fucktard.
But I think you're saying philosophy > money. That's cool, go with it.
i like the idea of sticking with informatics because you CAN always go to a grad program or other interests later in life. maybe you can even fit in a philosophy class into your undergrad as well. its important that you don't overload yourself, though. take a few classes at a time and focus on them. and enjoy it. my grandma said something like that the other day.
Post a Comment