Sleep is necessary for everyone. A good night's rest can recharge a person to prepare them for the following day's activities. A lack of sleep can hinder every action that a person may need or want to do. We are all taught these truths from a young age, but are they true? Is it sleep that has an effect on us, or is it all in our heads? Since we are taught so much about sleep from such a young age, do we allow those "truths" to manipulate our body?
Let's say it really is the sleep that messes with our body. In that case, the amount of sleep that we allow ourselves to get is vital. Scientists have suggested that eight hours of sleep every night is the best. Some people are able to function on less without feeling any negative effects; however, some feel that eight hours is not enough to perform everyday functions. Regardless of how much sleep someone needs to function properly, a lack of sleep will mess with anyone. We have all pulled an all-nighter only to regret it immensely later that day. But, as weird as it may sound, too much sleep can do the same thing. But we already knew this, right? We have known it since we can remember, but what if that is our problem?
What if it is our mind that messes with our body by using sleep as a nice cover up. Since we all know that our parents have told us that a good night's sleep is necessary, we accept it as a universal truth. But what if the way we feel after sleep is manipulated by our minds and what we have always been told? If we know we are only going to get five hours of sleep, we expect ourselves to feel awful upon waking; what if this is the true reason for our disposition? Perhaps we need to stay neutral when it comes to sleep in order to make the most of what we have instead of expecting a certain outcome.
Currently listening to The Beatles and TLC.
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
relative
We have an easy time looking at the world through out own perspective, that is a given, but that is nothing special to commend. So what is praiseworthy? Trying to break free from a limited perspective that we witness everyday is what we as humans who interact with those who differ from us should strive for.
It is easy to see when someone is attacking you if you are the victim, but what if you are biased towards the attacker? What if you actually take a neutral position? It will always be easy to see the position that you naturally side with. Staying ignorant to the other side will keep people desensitized to how other feel.
Let's take a recent well-known event as an example. On September 11, 2001, nineteen pious men hijacked planes and ran them into buildings in Washington D. C. and New York City, and to Americans, their acts of violence were wrong. As a result of these attacks, we waged war on Iraq. Most of the country was behind the war and found it acceptable that we were attacking Iraqis. Since we were the ones attacking, it was acceptable because we saw ourselves as the victim. Our attitudes would have been different if we were the target of a world power's vengeance, but we were the world power seeking revenge. We saw our actions as justified because that was our position, but the citizens of the Middle East found their actions just as justified. Why such a difference in perspective? Americans didn't bother to open their minds to the opinions of their opposition; this simple action could have prevented such a drawn out battle; a battle that won't be won because neither side will see it from anything but their own view.
We need to keep living nescient to different viewpoints. As humans, we need to accept that we aren't always right just because that is our personal position. If an act is wrong, isn't it equally as wrong when we are the victims? Of course it is, but it may take some time for all of us to accept this viewpoint. After all, it isn't how we currently view this position.
Currently listening to the Olympics.
It is easy to see when someone is attacking you if you are the victim, but what if you are biased towards the attacker? What if you actually take a neutral position? It will always be easy to see the position that you naturally side with. Staying ignorant to the other side will keep people desensitized to how other feel.
Let's take a recent well-known event as an example. On September 11, 2001, nineteen pious men hijacked planes and ran them into buildings in Washington D. C. and New York City, and to Americans, their acts of violence were wrong. As a result of these attacks, we waged war on Iraq. Most of the country was behind the war and found it acceptable that we were attacking Iraqis. Since we were the ones attacking, it was acceptable because we saw ourselves as the victim. Our attitudes would have been different if we were the target of a world power's vengeance, but we were the world power seeking revenge. We saw our actions as justified because that was our position, but the citizens of the Middle East found their actions just as justified. Why such a difference in perspective? Americans didn't bother to open their minds to the opinions of their opposition; this simple action could have prevented such a drawn out battle; a battle that won't be won because neither side will see it from anything but their own view.
We need to keep living nescient to different viewpoints. As humans, we need to accept that we aren't always right just because that is our personal position. If an act is wrong, isn't it equally as wrong when we are the victims? Of course it is, but it may take some time for all of us to accept this viewpoint. After all, it isn't how we currently view this position.
Currently listening to the Olympics.
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
freedom
America is called land of the free, but are we really allowed to be as free as we please? I know that Americans as a whole are some of the most privileged individuals in the world, yet it seems as if my everyday life is trying to be dictated by regional norms and what is socially acceptable.
I'll start with politics. Most people who live in the United States fall pretty close to the middle of the spectrum with a few extreme ideas sprinkled in. This is acceptable in the public's eye, but a few too many radical thoughts are frowned upon. Also, depending on the area, certain political viewpoints won't be accepted. For example, it will be harder for someone who is very liberal to be vocal about their opinions in a red state. Political radicals who identify themselves with either the far left or far right won't be accepted as normal in everyday American life. They may simply feel unwelcome or face verbal opposition; but if their ideas are those that align themselves with Communism, Socialism, or Fascism, the backlash will be greater. These terms have such a negative reputation and connotation in common language to begin with. Since humans don't like people interfering with the status quo, these people are often purged to keep things normal. How ridiculous of a nation are we that don't allow people the very freedom that we promise for them to hold their own beliefs? Are we afraid of the radicals overtaking the nation? If the true majority is more centrist than radical, then our country will stay centrist. That's the power of democracy. So why do we undermine those who have a different opinion than us in the political realm?
This occurs not only in politics, but also with religion. America is predominately Christian with about 80% of its citizens identifying with that religion. With this obviously being the norm of the country, a person who observes a different religion or no religion is looked down up. Christians in America are pompous individuals who must snuff out anyone who thinks differently than them. Islam is seen as the general enemy of the United States; certain fundamentalists have declared a war against Atheists and Agnostics. But why does this nation feel the need to silence any difference? Perhaps they don't want anyone who strays away from the general opinion that may cause them to question their own faith. But doesn't it state in the first Amendment of the Constitution that there will be no established religion in this nation? As of right now, there is no such thing. So then why do we see the United States leaning more towards the idea of one predominant religion?
Many issues are this way in the self-proclaimed "greatest nation on Earth," but the two previously mentioned are the most severe. I see a false freedom that protects those individuals who identify with the socially acceptable norms of the nation but no one else. Why is this? Are we afraid of upsetting what is seen as normal? It sure seems like it. Radicals and non-believers are citizens also, but they see less freedom than centrists and believers. As a Communist Atheist, I find it very hard to enjoy my life because of the inalienable right to freedom that is being denied to me and slowly fading away.
Perhaps we need to shift perception away from the way we are treated, and look at the minorities. How are we treating them? Citizens who don't fit in to the cookie cutter image of the normal American are being oppressed beyond what anyone is willing to admit. We, as a nation, need to observe true freedom to individual thought instead of telling people who they are supposed to be.
Currently listening to Panic! at the Disco and Incubus.
I'll start with politics. Most people who live in the United States fall pretty close to the middle of the spectrum with a few extreme ideas sprinkled in. This is acceptable in the public's eye, but a few too many radical thoughts are frowned upon. Also, depending on the area, certain political viewpoints won't be accepted. For example, it will be harder for someone who is very liberal to be vocal about their opinions in a red state. Political radicals who identify themselves with either the far left or far right won't be accepted as normal in everyday American life. They may simply feel unwelcome or face verbal opposition; but if their ideas are those that align themselves with Communism, Socialism, or Fascism, the backlash will be greater. These terms have such a negative reputation and connotation in common language to begin with. Since humans don't like people interfering with the status quo, these people are often purged to keep things normal. How ridiculous of a nation are we that don't allow people the very freedom that we promise for them to hold their own beliefs? Are we afraid of the radicals overtaking the nation? If the true majority is more centrist than radical, then our country will stay centrist. That's the power of democracy. So why do we undermine those who have a different opinion than us in the political realm?
This occurs not only in politics, but also with religion. America is predominately Christian with about 80% of its citizens identifying with that religion. With this obviously being the norm of the country, a person who observes a different religion or no religion is looked down up. Christians in America are pompous individuals who must snuff out anyone who thinks differently than them. Islam is seen as the general enemy of the United States; certain fundamentalists have declared a war against Atheists and Agnostics. But why does this nation feel the need to silence any difference? Perhaps they don't want anyone who strays away from the general opinion that may cause them to question their own faith. But doesn't it state in the first Amendment of the Constitution that there will be no established religion in this nation? As of right now, there is no such thing. So then why do we see the United States leaning more towards the idea of one predominant religion?
Many issues are this way in the self-proclaimed "greatest nation on Earth," but the two previously mentioned are the most severe. I see a false freedom that protects those individuals who identify with the socially acceptable norms of the nation but no one else. Why is this? Are we afraid of upsetting what is seen as normal? It sure seems like it. Radicals and non-believers are citizens also, but they see less freedom than centrists and believers. As a Communist Atheist, I find it very hard to enjoy my life because of the inalienable right to freedom that is being denied to me and slowly fading away.
Perhaps we need to shift perception away from the way we are treated, and look at the minorities. How are we treating them? Citizens who don't fit in to the cookie cutter image of the normal American are being oppressed beyond what anyone is willing to admit. We, as a nation, need to observe true freedom to individual thought instead of telling people who they are supposed to be.
Currently listening to Panic! at the Disco and Incubus.
Monday, August 11, 2008
sex
How come sex dominates everything we as humans do? Perhaps it is because of instincts of our long past prehistoric ancestors that needed motivation to further the species; it could be due to the fact that sex appeals to the inhibitions people normally hold back.
If it is because of instincts, those feelings towards sex are embedded in us. We are unable to alter them. Look at some animals, they use sex as only a means of reproduction and not a combination of pleasure and reproduction. When animals mate, it is seen as natural order but not so much in humans. Is it the dynamic of pleasure that changes it for humans? We need to reproduce to spread just as much as other animals, yet society tries to undermine the significance sex has in our lives. It tries to say certain rituals or habits, like masturbation and fetishes, are taboo and socially unacceptable for people to indulge in. Is this our general way of trying to make sex merely a means of reproduction? Perhaps but what if the negative attitudes of sex is why we are entranced by it?
Even though sex is quite prevalent in the media, most Americans are outraged by the exposure. Maybe this backlash has had some effect on the appeal sex has. Humans are generally drawn to items they can't have, and if sex is extremely controversial and that controversy is seen, then doesn't the negative attitudes toward sex make it more desirable? If this is so, then would the silencing of anti-sex protesters make sex less wanted? Doubtful, because then humans would have an unbridled public image of sex and the pleasure that accompanies it.
Currently listening to The White Stripes and Modest Mouse.
If it is because of instincts, those feelings towards sex are embedded in us. We are unable to alter them. Look at some animals, they use sex as only a means of reproduction and not a combination of pleasure and reproduction. When animals mate, it is seen as natural order but not so much in humans. Is it the dynamic of pleasure that changes it for humans? We need to reproduce to spread just as much as other animals, yet society tries to undermine the significance sex has in our lives. It tries to say certain rituals or habits, like masturbation and fetishes, are taboo and socially unacceptable for people to indulge in. Is this our general way of trying to make sex merely a means of reproduction? Perhaps but what if the negative attitudes of sex is why we are entranced by it?
Even though sex is quite prevalent in the media, most Americans are outraged by the exposure. Maybe this backlash has had some effect on the appeal sex has. Humans are generally drawn to items they can't have, and if sex is extremely controversial and that controversy is seen, then doesn't the negative attitudes toward sex make it more desirable? If this is so, then would the silencing of anti-sex protesters make sex less wanted? Doubtful, because then humans would have an unbridled public image of sex and the pleasure that accompanies it.
Currently listening to The White Stripes and Modest Mouse.
Sunday, August 10, 2008
relaxation
Sometimes we need a break from the buzz of life, no matter how full or light our schedules are. A break from what defines our life: the people, places, events, and actions. A time to sit home and just relax.
A need for a mini-vacation came come suddenly, but why do these feelings overwhelm us? Perhaps too much exposure to a certain thing in too short of a time; perhaps humans just need a break in routine every now and again. People could just need some time to themselves, to do what they enjoy the most with no one judging them.
Whatever the cause, a day away can be refreshing, almost as refreshing as a cold glass of water on a hot day. This private rehabilitation may be vital to a person's mental health, but in today's world, it seems as if stopping is completely taboo. Fast paced and never sleeping is what society values, not taking time to center yourself. As a whole, humans need to reject the norms of society to preserve our personal needs and wants.
Currently listening to Leona Lewis, Mariah Carey, Train, and Matchbox 20.
A need for a mini-vacation came come suddenly, but why do these feelings overwhelm us? Perhaps too much exposure to a certain thing in too short of a time; perhaps humans just need a break in routine every now and again. People could just need some time to themselves, to do what they enjoy the most with no one judging them.
Whatever the cause, a day away can be refreshing, almost as refreshing as a cold glass of water on a hot day. This private rehabilitation may be vital to a person's mental health, but in today's world, it seems as if stopping is completely taboo. Fast paced and never sleeping is what society values, not taking time to center yourself. As a whole, humans need to reject the norms of society to preserve our personal needs and wants.
Currently listening to Leona Lewis, Mariah Carey, Train, and Matchbox 20.
Saturday, August 9, 2008
control
How is it that the littlest things usually change the way we feel the most? The minute details seem to have the biggest impact on out course of actions. If someone offers a compliment, you run on a slight high from those few simple words. A person's bitter tone can ruin a whole day. The littlest things seem to matter the most to humans, but why is this?
Perhaps it is because humans tend to focus on the here and now, which is defined moment by moment. Trying to make the most of the present, the details are what we focus on instead of the big picture. Seeing where you will be in ten years is hard no matter who you are, but hearing someone insult your shoes is quite clear. As I have observed in my life, even if something isn't aimed at you directly, another person's disposition can really alter your own.
It's amazing how we let other people affect us; however, humans are generally social beings that interact with others everyday. Letting others get the best of us might be due to this simple fact, but if this is true, why don't we learn from our past? It may be human nature, or we could just have our defenses down at the wrong times. Whatever the reason, we continue to be altered by others, and often it can have an impact on our everyday lives. Sadly, we as humans will probably not solve this downfall despite its grave consequences.
Currently listening to Gym Class Heroes, No Doubt, and Foo Fighters.
Perhaps it is because humans tend to focus on the here and now, which is defined moment by moment. Trying to make the most of the present, the details are what we focus on instead of the big picture. Seeing where you will be in ten years is hard no matter who you are, but hearing someone insult your shoes is quite clear. As I have observed in my life, even if something isn't aimed at you directly, another person's disposition can really alter your own.
It's amazing how we let other people affect us; however, humans are generally social beings that interact with others everyday. Letting others get the best of us might be due to this simple fact, but if this is true, why don't we learn from our past? It may be human nature, or we could just have our defenses down at the wrong times. Whatever the reason, we continue to be altered by others, and often it can have an impact on our everyday lives. Sadly, we as humans will probably not solve this downfall despite its grave consequences.
Currently listening to Gym Class Heroes, No Doubt, and Foo Fighters.
Friday, August 8, 2008
vital
Today I watched my little sister drive away in an unfamiliar truck; she was going on a date. While she left, my mom stared. When she finally decided to break the silence, my mom simply talked about how my sister just left. I could see that my mom was hurt by the whole situation, seeing as my sister is the younger one, but it still made me wonder.
Why do parents try to prolong what is inevitable? It seems as if they try to stop their kids from experiencing life. The moments I'm talking about are those that are vital for any adult to have gone through, such as moving away, going on dates, and spending more time away from home. Parents try to prolong these events because they don't want to see the day their kids don't need them anymore, thus they try to extend time until these events have to occur.
But does this really work? If they wait for their spawn to go through certain events, then won't it just hurt more when they finally have to cut the apron strings? From my point of view, it will hurt more that way.
I guess I'm just releasing my angst in a weird way and telling my mom to let me grow up, but someone has to tell all the parents.
Currently listening to Fiona Apple.
Why do parents try to prolong what is inevitable? It seems as if they try to stop their kids from experiencing life. The moments I'm talking about are those that are vital for any adult to have gone through, such as moving away, going on dates, and spending more time away from home. Parents try to prolong these events because they don't want to see the day their kids don't need them anymore, thus they try to extend time until these events have to occur.
But does this really work? If they wait for their spawn to go through certain events, then won't it just hurt more when they finally have to cut the apron strings? From my point of view, it will hurt more that way.
I guess I'm just releasing my angst in a weird way and telling my mom to let me grow up, but someone has to tell all the parents.
Currently listening to Fiona Apple.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
