Please tune in or come:
This Thursday, June 26, I'm tagging along with Karl De Mesa for an interview on RX 93.1 It'll be at 9pm.
June 27, friday, I'll be part of the Read Lit District, the monthly reading organized by the CW Committee of the DECL. The reading will start at 4 at the Vargas Museum. Emil Flores will also be reading his fiction.
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Saturday, June 21, 2008
inches away from murder
I stood at the MRT station this morning waiting for the train to arrive so I could get to a meeting. I, like everyone else at the station, had somewhere to get to. I feel that it is one of the primary failures and causes for bad behavior that people forget that everyone else there wants to get where they are going in the shortest amount of time as possible.
And so this lack of concern for other passengers and a focus on the self allows for treating all of the other passengers like crap. What's worse is that there is a total disregard for propriety, manners, or even being decent. The title of this entry is taken from the idea that earlier today, as the train slid into the station, I was pushed forward, almost straight into the train's path as it whizzed by. While death may not have been a sure thing if i had made contact with the MRT, something very bad would have happened to me. For what? because some asshole couldn't wait and had to push me in the way of the train so he could get closer?
There has to be some way to make a train ride, specifically the MRT ride, civil. Evidently all those signs aren't working at all. I saw a guy almost tackle a woman because she was trying to get out of the MRT and he wanted to get in. He just bowled over her. In no way can that be right. And we can assume that this person knows that it's wrong. So why did he still do it?
We know it's wrong to cut in line. And it saves us what, 20, 30 seconds when it comes to slipping your card in and getting out of the station. And still people do it.
I refuse to believe in some stupid idea that the Filipino lacks discipline. That's just us being racist against ourselves. It's a matter of us recognizing not the special qualities in ourselves, or as the school where I used to work loved to say ordinary giftedness. If we want this kind of behavior to end there has to be an acknowledgement of our belonging to this huge thing called the human race, and the small things we do as the things that define us, not to some god who will pass judgement, but rather for posterity, for when some civilization in the future finds us and says, man, is this what humans were all about?
And so this lack of concern for other passengers and a focus on the self allows for treating all of the other passengers like crap. What's worse is that there is a total disregard for propriety, manners, or even being decent. The title of this entry is taken from the idea that earlier today, as the train slid into the station, I was pushed forward, almost straight into the train's path as it whizzed by. While death may not have been a sure thing if i had made contact with the MRT, something very bad would have happened to me. For what? because some asshole couldn't wait and had to push me in the way of the train so he could get closer?
There has to be some way to make a train ride, specifically the MRT ride, civil. Evidently all those signs aren't working at all. I saw a guy almost tackle a woman because she was trying to get out of the MRT and he wanted to get in. He just bowled over her. In no way can that be right. And we can assume that this person knows that it's wrong. So why did he still do it?
We know it's wrong to cut in line. And it saves us what, 20, 30 seconds when it comes to slipping your card in and getting out of the station. And still people do it.
I refuse to believe in some stupid idea that the Filipino lacks discipline. That's just us being racist against ourselves. It's a matter of us recognizing not the special qualities in ourselves, or as the school where I used to work loved to say ordinary giftedness. If we want this kind of behavior to end there has to be an acknowledgement of our belonging to this huge thing called the human race, and the small things we do as the things that define us, not to some god who will pass judgement, but rather for posterity, for when some civilization in the future finds us and says, man, is this what humans were all about?
attempts to establish a new moral compass
I have found myself in recent days bombarded my impositions of faith, beliefs in some destiny guided by an invisible hand that has a grand plan. From people around to my own students who seem bent on getting me to believe in that absurd fiction known as Rick Warren's "Purpose Driven Life."
In reaction to these things I am coming slowly to the resolution to attempt to write about values in this blog. It may come as a surprise, but I do believe in values, and I do believe in morals. However, I see the need to redefine our sets of values.
Most of us base our moral compasses on religious beliefs. I have been feeling that the religious fervor can often lead to a loss of perspective. If you want a full chronicling of the negative effects of religion then look no further than Dawkins' The God Delusion.
I feel that this is a good time to try and reorient our moral compasses. But instead of religious belief being our north, I want us to focus on humanist belief. It's difficult to define this, I know. I would like the idea of the humanist belief approach to essentially mean that we make our decisions not based on the belief that there is something bigger out there we don't understand who dictates whether we get life eternal in paradise but rather that we make our decisions for the better of this world and for the advancement of the human race. I know it seems vague, but as I make entries reacting to various situations that attempt to make us reconsider our moral orientations then I hope that I too will be able to establish guidelines through situations and applications.
In reaction to these things I am coming slowly to the resolution to attempt to write about values in this blog. It may come as a surprise, but I do believe in values, and I do believe in morals. However, I see the need to redefine our sets of values.
Most of us base our moral compasses on religious beliefs. I have been feeling that the religious fervor can often lead to a loss of perspective. If you want a full chronicling of the negative effects of religion then look no further than Dawkins' The God Delusion.
I feel that this is a good time to try and reorient our moral compasses. But instead of religious belief being our north, I want us to focus on humanist belief. It's difficult to define this, I know. I would like the idea of the humanist belief approach to essentially mean that we make our decisions not based on the belief that there is something bigger out there we don't understand who dictates whether we get life eternal in paradise but rather that we make our decisions for the better of this world and for the advancement of the human race. I know it seems vague, but as I make entries reacting to various situations that attempt to make us reconsider our moral orientations then I hope that I too will be able to establish guidelines through situations and applications.
Saturday, June 14, 2008
Running Apart from the Herd
Interestingly, the book I mentioned before, Zimbardo's The Lucifer Effect, has been offering me many insights about the things that I went through with my previous teaching employment. Lord knows some bad things happened to me there. I had asked a colleague to try and make a study seeing how learned helplessness and how that might factor into how the system changes people, makes them do things they know they shouldn't.
Knowing the way that the authority imposed its will oftentimes without the clear thought of logic to justify, I found myself opposing the authority many times. Sadly, as I opposed most others complied or stayed quiet, one reason why I was regularly in trouble or seen as a troublemaker. Here's some stuff from the book that causes one to think about things.
I also taught some lessons on the hive mind, on the ability of the herd mentality to impose itself on people, and for our tendency to get sucked into thinking the same as others without our noticing. According to Zimbardo: "Resistance creates and emotional burden for those who maintain their independence- autonomy comes at a psychic cost." Means that while compliance is easy, opposing is hard because you know you're going against the others. In real, measurable terms, it's hard to be the lone person, one against the world, etc etc.
And Zimbardo continues: "...other people's views, when crystallized into a group consensus, can actually affect how we perceive important aspects of the external world, thus calling into question the nature of truth itself. It is only by becoming aware of our vulnerability to social pressure that we can begin to build resistance to conformity when it is not in our best interest to yield to the mentality of the herd."
It's difficult to draw lines. Conformity, following the herd, in the workplace, could mean the difference between permanency/tenure and having to update your resume at the end of the school year. We have to make compromises, granted. But those few who are willing to bear the emotional burden of opposition sadly must suffer further from the intolerance of people who just want to keep things quiet and simple.
Where does this lead us? In our upbringings, in our development as rational adults, how often are we faced with questions such as these? And how many people will find in themselves resistance to the dominant paradigm? How many will subscribe to what is imposed?
It's a big 1984 question. If the whole world tells you 2 + 2 =5 how inclined are you to believe. The psychological studies reveal that in the majority of cases the individual will agree with what the majority of people believe, whether it is true or not.
Can you imagine the kind of emotional trauma Copernicus or Galileo may have had to go through as they knew that the world was wrong? Copernicus sat on his discoveries til his death and Galileo was persecuted by the church.
We have to ask ourselves now, how much are we willing to sacrifice to prove something right, or to oppose a system in the wrong?
Knowing the way that the authority imposed its will oftentimes without the clear thought of logic to justify, I found myself opposing the authority many times. Sadly, as I opposed most others complied or stayed quiet, one reason why I was regularly in trouble or seen as a troublemaker. Here's some stuff from the book that causes one to think about things.
I also taught some lessons on the hive mind, on the ability of the herd mentality to impose itself on people, and for our tendency to get sucked into thinking the same as others without our noticing. According to Zimbardo: "Resistance creates and emotional burden for those who maintain their independence- autonomy comes at a psychic cost." Means that while compliance is easy, opposing is hard because you know you're going against the others. In real, measurable terms, it's hard to be the lone person, one against the world, etc etc.
And Zimbardo continues: "...other people's views, when crystallized into a group consensus, can actually affect how we perceive important aspects of the external world, thus calling into question the nature of truth itself. It is only by becoming aware of our vulnerability to social pressure that we can begin to build resistance to conformity when it is not in our best interest to yield to the mentality of the herd."
It's difficult to draw lines. Conformity, following the herd, in the workplace, could mean the difference between permanency/tenure and having to update your resume at the end of the school year. We have to make compromises, granted. But those few who are willing to bear the emotional burden of opposition sadly must suffer further from the intolerance of people who just want to keep things quiet and simple.
Where does this lead us? In our upbringings, in our development as rational adults, how often are we faced with questions such as these? And how many people will find in themselves resistance to the dominant paradigm? How many will subscribe to what is imposed?
It's a big 1984 question. If the whole world tells you 2 + 2 =5 how inclined are you to believe. The psychological studies reveal that in the majority of cases the individual will agree with what the majority of people believe, whether it is true or not.
Can you imagine the kind of emotional trauma Copernicus or Galileo may have had to go through as they knew that the world was wrong? Copernicus sat on his discoveries til his death and Galileo was persecuted by the church.
We have to ask ourselves now, how much are we willing to sacrifice to prove something right, or to oppose a system in the wrong?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)