The meaning of life.

We are the size of spores in this universe. To think that our life has any ability to keep the cosmos intact would mean that our planet is one small but necessary cog in the big machine. Even then, there are 6 billion of us, and a hundred thousand get killed everyday regardless of age, race or gender. So I suppose the meaning of life, in the broadest spectrum, is purpose. Every aspect to the meaning of life stems from having purpose.

  Every emotion felt, be it love or hate, humor or angst, happiness or anger, comes from a sense of purpose, or lack thereof. To have purpose is to have people who depend on you. Even if it's just yourself, sometimes that's enough. 
 I have people if life who love me. My parents, my friends, family members, etc. I know that while they could probably go on without me eventually, their lives would be significantly altered for a long period of time. And even if I didn't have those people around me, I still have an interest in life. I depend on myself to stay alive so that I can experience life. 
 Emotions are based on whether  purpose is felt or not. Elation and happiness ensues when it is felt, depression ensues when it's missing,  Relationships with other humans creates a sense of purpose inside of us. Having that sense motivates us to procreate, and make new generations that depend on us.
  But even if that interdependence is missing, even if those emotions aren't felt, that self dependence must be felt for there to be meaning. If able to depend on oneself, then that Nirvana of life meaning can still be  achieved. 

This will be my blog post for the week, I guess.

I'll be out of town this week, so just in case I figured I would write this for class. I haven't been getting a ton of page views, so I don't think anybody will read this. You never know, I guess.

  
I don't know what the prompt this week is supposed to be, but I have a lot of stuff to get off my chest. I'm not sure how I will process a lot of those things yet, so I'll start with the basic stuff. I've been reading a lot lately. I just finished the book "Mother night" by Kurt Vonnegut. It was great. It made me sad, but laugh really hard too. It's a good philosophy book, I suppose. It made me look at public perception differently.

 Without giving too much away, the main character, Howard Campbell, was an undercover Nazi during WWII, and relayed messages to the American soldiers via radio broadcast. After the war, he returned to New York and lived quietly until he was caught by a group that brought ex-Nazi's out of hiding.  [Spoilers ahead]

 Howard lives a life of utter confusion. The only people who love him he has disdain for, and the people who hate him, he can't really fight back against. His life is being beloved by those he hates, and hated by those he understood. Howard doesn't really seem to care, since he lost his wife in Germany, but the problem is that he may be guilty despite his double-agency. 

  The question arises, what would he have done if America had lost? Would he continue his life as a nazi, or would he fight back until he died? The fact is, Howard would've stayed a nazi. He is not even a secret hero. He is subconsciously a coward, who find a way to play for both sides.  In the end, he hangs himself. I guess he knew.

  I don't see myself as weak, but I have a hard time publishing my opinions in front of people I don't know very well. Apart of this is just courtesy, I don't want to just fight people. But there are some instances where I realize that when it comes to just going with the flow or standing for my beliefs, I usually choose the former, and regret it about an hour later.

 For example, in my trip to Germany last summer, I encountered some Neo-Nazis. No joke. There was no swastika, but that's only because it's illegal in Germany. They did the goose step, they had the chants, and they had the blanket on the steps of the train station. I was 15 and scrawny, there was no way I could take them. I just went on my way. 

  I guess I can justify this all I want. If it were a large party trying to take over my country, surely I would rebel in a more strategic way. I couldn't do anything because they would've destroyed me. It's not my country, I have no say in the matter. The list goes on.

 But the fact is, in the face of evil, I looked in the other direction and walked away.

I don't plan these things out ahead of time, so that last sentence kind of gave me a lot to think about. Thanks for reading, or whatever.

Don't do the crime if you can't finish the blog.

The question of whether or not Candide's punishments fit his crime goes deeper than just the book,
so I'll get the literal answer out of the way first.
 Yes. In a book, the reader needs to see that retribution is given out in some way. Candide-a murdering, enslaving, violent man- goes through a lot of pain to get what he desires. He is beaten, attacked, and put through hell. This shows us, the reader, that we can't get away with causing people pain. Lesson learned, we all become better people because of this book, right?
 Wrong. In the real world, bad people don't always get retribution. There are bad people who just get to be bad, without facing the consequences. There are also good people who suffer most of their lives. In my opinion, if Candide really existed, he would probably be able to get away we all the things that he's done.
   In short, I don't believe in karma. I think everything happens at random. But in a book, the writer is able to play god, so in his world, he is able to make karma exist.
 I don't know how to end this one, so, um, bye.

I don't know anything.

  I may not always be funny, but I do know what funny is. That is to say that I've studied comedians for about 5 years now, and I know what gets a laugh out of people. There are three things that are gold in stand-up comedy: Those three things are honesty, emotion  and having a certain brusque to their act.

 

  Honesty, I learned by listening to Louis C.K. I've listened to him all through high school. And he is probably the most honest man on the planet. He talks about why his divorce makes him happy, how he can love and hate his kids at the same time, his fear of death and his hatred towards half his audience all in the same act. I began to notice this in him after seeing a video entitled "The evolution of Louis C.K." At the beginning of the video, it shows him making the same joke at several different venues, over a number of years. They were essentially street jokes, which aren't exactly beloved and respected by other comics. Next, is an interview with him in which he talks about George Carlin, his Idol. Louie talks about how big of a loser he felt, when Carlin told him he did a new hour of comedy every year. He talks about how he wanted to make a change. He said in his next show, he opened up with "I hate my kid. She's selfish." And that got a mixed reaction, but Louie said being honest and getting reaction was the best feeling he ever had on stage. He now has a new hour every year. 

  Emotion, I learned from Bill Hicks. Hicks is widely considered to be one of the greatest comedians of all time. I began listening to him after Louis C.K. I like C.K. more, but Hicks is so emotional about the things he believes, that even if he says things that his audience doesn't believe, they will still laugh and applaud because of how well he articulates his emotions.

  Brashness. This is my least favorite option. This is the easiest area of comedy. People like Daniel Tosh, Dane Cook, and Carlos Mencea try to go as over-the-top as possible to get a reaction from their audience. It's not very respectable, and doesn't really work for much more than a year. I learned this by listening to interviews of real comedians, who have little respect for people Like Tosh and Cook. Mencea actually has to go to therapy because of how much he is hated by other comedians. That's it.