the only easy day was yesterday

Monday, July 30, 2007

Remembrance of Posts Past

I was just thinking about the post I made a few days ago about being what oneself feels is an ideal and good human or being what will lead to the bettering of humans as a whole even if that compromises your morals and contradicts how you want those people to act if they were to listen to you when I saw that commercial about the ballet kid and the dad that was bored; these two questions are intertwined, if not, they are the same question, one simply being a physical example of the problem I've tried to describe. The strange thing is that I seemed to get more diverse and less precise answers to the latter of the posts because it was a more general statement - I got more of a 'you need to be both' vibe for the more recent post, but it really comes back to the same question, and I think that in things like these you can laugh with yourself if you know that you yourself are confident in why it is funny to you - in the end I don't really think the lack of appreciation for what his daughter chose to do with her time is acceptable or funny, except if the parents forced the child into it, but that is an unfair assumption, so I didn't think it was funny in the end in case anyone was wondering.

Before I dive back into this subject I just wanted to mentin Cal Ripken Jr.'s Hall of Fame induction speech where he took his time to thank the "mothers and policemen', etc, for making the world a better place - this rubbed me the wrong way; I don't like when people who do nothing different or don't change anything get credit for making the world better (is this possible?). Mothers are called mothers - and the idea of a housewife unfortunately pops into my head as I'm sure it does with so many other media-brainwashed people - because they are of a certain archetype and adhere to that, therefore changing nothing and making no difference in the world. The same goes for police, they help other people accept other peoples morals and laws, or else. Cal, stick to baseball - oh, you're retired, huh? - then shut up and stop making all the people who listen to what you have to say even more of idiots then they already are.

Anyway. The first thought I had reminded me of something else I was thinking of before that I think deserves a post. I was thinking about how drinking (alchohol) is such a cultural staple - it becomes all people think, talk about, and do (it seems to be that a beer and a woman are interchangable it an adolescents mind) - and how it becomes such a narsicisstic activity - people do it because they want to chill out if they've had a bad day or whatever, they drink for themselves, not others - but is still seen as a social activity. Somewhere in that possibly nonsensical thought process the thought came to me that it connected with acting for the peole and acting for oneself (acting as you see fit for a person to act vs. acting towards the masses to be as you see fit for a person to act even if it causes contradictions with your very same morals). It ended up that I've added another reason why the consumption of alchohol by humans is wrong to me; it promotes the validity of the "group intelligence", sort of like Americans who think that cops make the world a better place because they push one set of morals and MAKE them right (or else), drinking is another social activity that puts the opinion of our culture (which ends up being the companies who want you to buy their alchohol) as the correct thing to think, so that what others say becomes what is right - therefore it is further burying the concepts of intellectual individuality, e.g. it is excellent to get drunk with other people (if others say it's right, it's right), but it's wrong to get drunk by oneself, it makes you anti-social and un-respected (if you want to go off by yourself, or think for yourself, or act for yourself, it is wrong) - BUT it is still an activity for the self, despite the seeming sociality of the situations; people seem to be having fun, but they are drinking and joking on safe terms, safe gay-bashing jokes, and safe fun games like beer pong; these people have their own thoughts, but they are afraid to share them. All of them. It's a disaster created by the group social mentality of our culture and capitalism as a whole, which breeds companies who create advertisements of a hyper social reality. These people drink for their own feeling of sociality because these advertisements tell them that that is what sociality is. So my conclusion is that drinking has yet another mark on it's record, it is yet another thing barring the youth from thinking for themselves.


The W said...

On the notion of drinking becoming "all people think, talk about, and do" it seems as if (based on recent personal experiance) it demeans personal relationships by making them revolve around a common selfish indulgence. Example. At work everyone drinks (and smokes weed), the next day most conversation has to do with that subject, then proceeds to go on to planning the next drunken escapade. These people are all brought together by a common summer job and a common hobby (intoxication). Personally i dont really know that much at all about the kids at work because most of what they talk about is drinking smoking and sailing (occasionally). God knows that there is at least a shread of intellegence within these peoples' minds (beyond weed smoking techniques and sailing), however I cant imagine a situation where these people would come together for such an intellegent pursuit.

A problem that i see that leads to this is also the archetype of fun in the teenager/college student's mind. The common responce i get when i give people the slightest hard time about what they do is "don't worry, im having fun". To what extent is the fun that was sold to them at a very young age (through ads) or a version of the "form" fun i cant possibly know. Surely memories of a "crazy" childhood will be made, but i cant imagine this is a good thing.

A possibility for the social acceptance of alcohol is that people are constantly putting themselves in positions where they are around people they cant possibly relate with in any other way but "fun" intoxication. If people all the sudden found themselves capable of forming real friendships/relationships then the reliance on alcohol would subside. Intoxication becomes the common denominator in our culture as everyone can do it and everyone is reduced to a similar mental level through it.

I agree with your group intellegence assesment, however i am not convinced completely on your narsicisstic assertion. To an extent it seems true, however i feel there are plenty of situations where a newcomer (to a group) or someone who wants to fit in will drink alcohol for the sake of the group, with the narssicism only setting in after he or she is a seasoned drinker (possibly as soon as after the first time).

As a side note: Does anyone know why alcohol is forbidden in Islam?

Jasper said...

Last things first, I'm not 100% behind my idea of it being totally true all of the time, just to play devils (or jaspers, in this case) advocate I'll make an attempt to support it in efforts to figure out if I actually believe it or not. First of all, when some one is introduced to a group they are trying to fit in for themself, but this may be a weak argument because it is in line with whatever the system of thought is that says that there is no possible way for a person to be selfless, that anything they do is motivated by self interest - which still is a valid thought. So I don't really know right now and I'm feeling rushed because dinners ready, but please refute I'd like to get to the bottom of this.

On a last note to go along with the concept of fun in a kids mind is also the concept of what a kid is supposed to do; kids will be kids, kids are supposed to get drunk and be "mooks". No time to complete the thought I'll try again later...