Explored Melbourne CBD tonight with Mike, and found all these little hidden places (cafes, restaurants, pubs) in these little narrow alleys. Didn't end up rediscovering the pub with the limericks on the wall that we stumbled across one time when half-drunk. In particular, we saw no signs of The Croft Institute, which as I recall was situated at the end of a blind alley, through about 100 metres of turns and corners in unlit and cardboard cluttered alley. But it's truly amazing how some of these places are known to others, and can become so popular that they're packed and overflow onto the street.
A lot of the Chairman's game was played during my trip in Adelaide. It seems to me that there are 2 phases to the game - one, when people are learning about the basic rules, and the 2nd where people start pondering about player produced rules. And it seems to me that it is when all players are up to this second stage and start on even territory, that things become more interesting.
And it was during these sessions that I first noticed that a person's personality might possibly start to show in the way they play and interact. One of the problems that can arise during gameplay is 2 conflicting rules that people make up. To make it worse, each person does not know what the others' is, nor which specific details they interact with and how they are worded. The other problem is that sometimes there may be mistakes in how a person has put their rule, and questions of their validity may be called upon. Thus conflicts, debates, and full-out arguments have arisen.
Some will, with their very first reaction, assume that their interpretation of someone else's rule is correct, and either stop game play entirely sitting there with an incredulous look on their face, or accuse the maker of the rule of making a mistake (either in being consistent with their own rule, or their rule being legal). Others might outrightly say that 'no', something is incorrect according them, and won't back down any time, and refuse to be corrected even with arguments and reasoning to the contrary. Some may break rules and then correct themselves, incorrectly, at the last minute, but so often so that one feels guilty penalising them all the time - yet going to the stage where one also questions having the rule there in the first place if no-one is going to enforce it. And others are perfect gentlemen, who play by the rules, take their own penalty cards in their own stride, and cause havoc and mayhem with relatively simple rules.
I of course would like to describe myself with this last sentence, but it is not the case. I found myself quite consistently with my emotions boiling up, irritation by my side and even anger not far under the lid. Most of the time it would be over disputes over my own rules, and which I felt I should not back down from (which naturally most of the time I was right about, dammit). But on the other hand, I kept in mind that in a way I was the unofficial host of the game, and so for the interests of keeping the game running (and our friendships intact), I found that I would postpone the argument to a later stage where some of the rules may become more apparent to all. The most beneficial thing for me by playing the game, apart from enjoyment value in watching other people suffer under my tyranny, was to observe my own reactions, and in addition to this to see if I could modulate the natural progression of my feelings. And I found, to an extent, I could, which I felt happy about. I have a feeling that tolerating the errors of others (and my own) will be a skill I'll need in the future.
Friday, July 29, 2005
Wednesday, July 27, 2005
Adylaissus
Had an trip over the last weekend (Thursday 21/7 - Monday 25/7), where we went up to visit Pete, and explore South Australia a bit. Spent a day at the wineries, and a day at Hahndorf (a German settled town), with lots of lounging around and relaxing. Met up with some people (who all turned out to be Med) after lunch in the German town, and visited Adelaide city, which was largely deserted. Through the trip, we were lucky enough to be housed at Pete's place, with his parents kindly spoiling us with all sorts of food.
One thing I was going to mention was toilet paper. In particular, toilet rolls in bathrooms. It is by no means the first time I've seen this, but it had just prompted my memory. Usually at home, I have my rolls positioned thus:
One thing I was going to mention was toilet paper. In particular, toilet rolls in bathrooms. It is by no means the first time I've seen this, but it had just prompted my memory. Usually at home, I have my rolls positioned thus:
It was past dusk by the time we were approaching Melbourne on Monday night, and I noticed something interesting. Michael had made the comment previously, when driving towards Adelaide, that we were (slowly) riding towards the sunset. This had the effect of increasing the time we witnessed the sunset, as we were travelling west. Going home, I was therefore surprised to see that even after I thought the sun had gone down for a while, I could still see a ruddy glow through the clouds. Though this was quite a bit darker than that of a normal very late sunset, I thought it could have still been possible that the sun was still meekly shining through. It was only as we approached the outskirts of Melbourne, where the glow was getting brighter, that I realised that it was actually the glow of the city and its lights. The surprising thing that I found, was that all this was visible even a few hundred kilometres away, even when we were beyond Ballarat.
Wednesday, July 20, 2005
fable
Mum was saying the other day how i should clean up my pile of clothes on the ground, as things like spiders could crawl into them, and then who knows what might happen. I was originally going to clean it up too, before she mentioned anything, but after that, I didn't do it cos I was told to. Anyway, lo and behold the next morning, I wake up and go to the kitchen, where I see a little bit of tissue. As I go to look at it, mum says 'I found that in our shower this morning!' - and I see there's a white tail spider (dead) nested in the tissue. And of course mum was saying, 'See? I told you! It's dangerous to leave stuff lying on the ground' - without actually saying it. I guess that little spider proved that our house must be totally infested with spiders, just waiting to come out at opportune times like these. Or perhaps they are under the back and call of my parents, just waiting for a chance to prove me wrong. Stupid spider.
Weirdness factor:
rarity: 7 (seeing we only get whitetails about once or twice a year)
awareness: 2 (i'm damn sure my parents were looking out for one the second they mentioned that stuff like that could happen)
control: 9 (the spider came out on its own, despite my own paranoid beliefs)
Total: 18/30
Weirdness factor:
rarity: 7 (seeing we only get whitetails about once or twice a year)
awareness: 2 (i'm damn sure my parents were looking out for one the second they mentioned that stuff like that could happen)
control: 9 (the spider came out on its own, despite my own paranoid beliefs)
Total: 18/30
Tuesday, July 19, 2005
photos
Lately, mum has really been getting into photography, taking photos, and working with Photoshop. Apart from upgrading the old digital camera (5 megapixels) and buying a newer and even bigger one overseas, she's also started taking portraits and doing photoshoots at home, by converting the lougeroom into a studio with a black screen and all. Surprisingly (for me) the results have been quite good, and so some of them have even ended up framed, and are around the house now.
Anyway, the other day I got to thinking why people take photos, and of course, why I do too. When I went travelling, I think the main motivation for me was to have a record of what I did, where I went to, and with who. I've found that it's actually been really difficult to remember many of my previous vacations with my family, and especially those when I was a lot younger. I might remember the names of the places I've been to, or one or two spots or occasions during a trip, but for the most part, I wouldn't have much vivid recollection of what happened. That way, I find that for my latest trip, in taking pretty much as many photos as I possibly could (thank God for digital cameras), that it's much easier to remember the things that happened around those times. I can just flick through the album, remember what happened in the scene, and then the rest of the day would also flow out from my memory eventually. This, I assume, is what happens with most people.
Another reason I had taken photos, was to capture beauty. There were many places that I had visited that may have had an aura of calmness to it, or perhaps it was just that moment when everything seemed right, or that a view was simply stunning. In either case, I think that it is the memory of the feeling of that particular place, or the emotion that it generated, that I had tried to capture. This of course is interpreted by different people looking at the photo in different ways - it'll generally mean less to people who have never been there, especially when looking at a small 4x6 photo in your hand. It just isn't the same as being there - though I guess the art in photography lies in trying to capture all that in this little piece of paper you have.
Another reason still, is purely for the sake of documenting a scene, or taking a shot purely for the information that you can obtain from the picture. When we were walking on some of the bushwalking trails, we encountered the little information boards talking about this and that. At first, we would stop and have a quick read, but after a while, finding this a bit tedious, we thought to take a photo of the board, and read it on the camera later. I guess this would be an example of that (though we never did go back and read them at the time).
The final reason I encountered on my trip was for a trophy. Here, we would find people going up to famous landmarks, doing various poses with various combinations and permutations of the people in the group, and then leave. Of course, I wasn't immune to this either. The annoying thing (as a friend exaperatingly pointed out) were the people there who flocked to these places, ran to the monument, took a few trophy shots, and then left again - all without actually enjoying the place or looking around at anything else. Later, we assumed, they would go back to their friends and family and brag at all the lovely places they've been to - without actually getting to know whether the place was that good or not. It seems rather pointless to do this, and it calls into question what the point of a trip is, but the thing is that this phenomenon didn't seem that rare. Hopefully, we didn't commit these same sorts of atrocities, at least not too much.
Anyway, the other day I got to thinking why people take photos, and of course, why I do too. When I went travelling, I think the main motivation for me was to have a record of what I did, where I went to, and with who. I've found that it's actually been really difficult to remember many of my previous vacations with my family, and especially those when I was a lot younger. I might remember the names of the places I've been to, or one or two spots or occasions during a trip, but for the most part, I wouldn't have much vivid recollection of what happened. That way, I find that for my latest trip, in taking pretty much as many photos as I possibly could (thank God for digital cameras), that it's much easier to remember the things that happened around those times. I can just flick through the album, remember what happened in the scene, and then the rest of the day would also flow out from my memory eventually. This, I assume, is what happens with most people.
Another reason I had taken photos, was to capture beauty. There were many places that I had visited that may have had an aura of calmness to it, or perhaps it was just that moment when everything seemed right, or that a view was simply stunning. In either case, I think that it is the memory of the feeling of that particular place, or the emotion that it generated, that I had tried to capture. This of course is interpreted by different people looking at the photo in different ways - it'll generally mean less to people who have never been there, especially when looking at a small 4x6 photo in your hand. It just isn't the same as being there - though I guess the art in photography lies in trying to capture all that in this little piece of paper you have.
Another reason still, is purely for the sake of documenting a scene, or taking a shot purely for the information that you can obtain from the picture. When we were walking on some of the bushwalking trails, we encountered the little information boards talking about this and that. At first, we would stop and have a quick read, but after a while, finding this a bit tedious, we thought to take a photo of the board, and read it on the camera later. I guess this would be an example of that (though we never did go back and read them at the time).
The final reason I encountered on my trip was for a trophy. Here, we would find people going up to famous landmarks, doing various poses with various combinations and permutations of the people in the group, and then leave. Of course, I wasn't immune to this either. The annoying thing (as a friend exaperatingly pointed out) were the people there who flocked to these places, ran to the monument, took a few trophy shots, and then left again - all without actually enjoying the place or looking around at anything else. Later, we assumed, they would go back to their friends and family and brag at all the lovely places they've been to - without actually getting to know whether the place was that good or not. It seems rather pointless to do this, and it calls into question what the point of a trip is, but the thing is that this phenomenon didn't seem that rare. Hopefully, we didn't commit these same sorts of atrocities, at least not too much.
Sunday, July 17, 2005
learning
I've been reading Netters more and more the last few days, and I've come to realised how good the book actually is. I've also started to regret why I never looked at it in the past, as it would have made things so much less painful.
The key to the ease of learning here are the pictures - they are by far the fastest way to learn, for me. In addition to this, they've also just put in the right amount of detail at each panel, so there isn't too much to digest each time. When the information does start to increase as you progress through the chapter, it also does so by building on previous concepts, and reiterating them. This way it becomes easier to retain, and also allows you to better understand the relationship between the structures, especially the new on the old. Lastly, the order in which things are presented also makes sense, as it examines the bigger picture, before delving in to the details on each section.
In summary, I think I have extracted 4 key learning principles that this book has incorporated into itself.
Firstly, a picture speaks a thousand words. This is especially true in anatomy learning, as in each panel I can immediately map out what I'm seeing and where they are.
Secondly, adding a small number of new ideas each time. I've read that we generally can only absorb 4-5 new ideas easily each time. Of course, I'm sure we could do more, but then it really starts draining the brain - its all about the functional capacity of our working memory - that's just the way we are.
Thirdly, it reiterates. This increases the chance that an item will be stored to a more permanent memory store, and therefore be able to be retained in the future. The other benefit is that by adding new ideas with old, you can fit the new into an established framework of interrelationships.
This leads on to the fourth principle, that of starting with the big picture, before focussing on the small. By doing so, a framework can be established at the start, so you konw generally what is there and what is not. Then by adding in different elements, you can always get a perspective on what they are by going back to the original big view and seeing how it all fits in.
I think from this point on though, there may still be value in reading a text based book like Lasts, but only after I've had an good understanding from Netters first, or perhaps reading them in conjunction. The value in the text based book would be the author's perspective on what specific relationships between the structures are important, which you might have to guess from the atlas. It might also have clinical surgical aspects of the anatomy that may otherwise be missed when learning on your own.
The key to the ease of learning here are the pictures - they are by far the fastest way to learn, for me. In addition to this, they've also just put in the right amount of detail at each panel, so there isn't too much to digest each time. When the information does start to increase as you progress through the chapter, it also does so by building on previous concepts, and reiterating them. This way it becomes easier to retain, and also allows you to better understand the relationship between the structures, especially the new on the old. Lastly, the order in which things are presented also makes sense, as it examines the bigger picture, before delving in to the details on each section.
In summary, I think I have extracted 4 key learning principles that this book has incorporated into itself.
Firstly, a picture speaks a thousand words. This is especially true in anatomy learning, as in each panel I can immediately map out what I'm seeing and where they are.
Secondly, adding a small number of new ideas each time. I've read that we generally can only absorb 4-5 new ideas easily each time. Of course, I'm sure we could do more, but then it really starts draining the brain - its all about the functional capacity of our working memory - that's just the way we are.
Thirdly, it reiterates. This increases the chance that an item will be stored to a more permanent memory store, and therefore be able to be retained in the future. The other benefit is that by adding new ideas with old, you can fit the new into an established framework of interrelationships.
This leads on to the fourth principle, that of starting with the big picture, before focussing on the small. By doing so, a framework can be established at the start, so you konw generally what is there and what is not. Then by adding in different elements, you can always get a perspective on what they are by going back to the original big view and seeing how it all fits in.
I think from this point on though, there may still be value in reading a text based book like Lasts, but only after I've had an good understanding from Netters first, or perhaps reading them in conjunction. The value in the text based book would be the author's perspective on what specific relationships between the structures are important, which you might have to guess from the atlas. It might also have clinical surgical aspects of the anatomy that may otherwise be missed when learning on your own.
Friday, July 15, 2005
Nadir
My parents went away this monday to wednesday. I had the house and car to myself again. Woo hoo! Organised a LAN at my place, managed to rearrange the furniture in the house and get it back again without my parents noticing. Missed out on pizza, or even getting anything from the shop because we were so caught up that we only realised we should have dinner 15 minutes past midnight - when everything had closed.
Had drinks on wednesday night, with a whole bunch of people I've been meaning to catch up with. There were some others that I hadn't expected, as well as some people who said they would come who didn't. Such is life. The main problem I found was it was difficult to really catch up with individuals, with such a big group of people. There must be some most efficient size of a group of people - but I have yet to work it out yet. Maybe next time, I'll aim for fewer people, and split them up into smaller more managable sizes.
I went out and bought some extra textbooks the other day. The original plan was to buy them this financial year, so I could get some tax reduction thingo, but according to the seminar I attended, I need to be working or at least have my contract first. Oh well. I bought the books cos I felt I should get into gear and start taking initiative on doing some work. My usual plan during semester holidays is to get myself so bored by doing fun stuff that I have nothing else better to do, and get myself the motivation to do some pre-emptive study. I think it is the feeling of being able to do what you want, when you want with no pressures, until you get to the stage where there is nothing left you feel like doing. In this way, I get annoyed when I'm asked to do chores and things around the house which have inevitably built up over the exam period. Parents expect no excuses once you're not busy, but for me I feel like I need to get all the stuff I want to do out of the way first so I feel free. That's why it is the normally the case too where I do more housework spontaneously when my parents are away on holiday.
Just yesterday, I think I finally managed to get to that stage. I had just been diabloing for a while, no-one else was on to play with me either - so I sat looking around my room and stared at the wall. I sighed. I fiddled around for a while,, but nothing really interested me. I looked at my new bookshelf, at the unopened package of Netters. I sighed again. And then I decided to unwrap my book, have a look at it, and then proceded to study. Looks like it wasn't a waste of money after all.
Had drinks on wednesday night, with a whole bunch of people I've been meaning to catch up with. There were some others that I hadn't expected, as well as some people who said they would come who didn't. Such is life. The main problem I found was it was difficult to really catch up with individuals, with such a big group of people. There must be some most efficient size of a group of people - but I have yet to work it out yet. Maybe next time, I'll aim for fewer people, and split them up into smaller more managable sizes.
I went out and bought some extra textbooks the other day. The original plan was to buy them this financial year, so I could get some tax reduction thingo, but according to the seminar I attended, I need to be working or at least have my contract first. Oh well. I bought the books cos I felt I should get into gear and start taking initiative on doing some work. My usual plan during semester holidays is to get myself so bored by doing fun stuff that I have nothing else better to do, and get myself the motivation to do some pre-emptive study. I think it is the feeling of being able to do what you want, when you want with no pressures, until you get to the stage where there is nothing left you feel like doing. In this way, I get annoyed when I'm asked to do chores and things around the house which have inevitably built up over the exam period. Parents expect no excuses once you're not busy, but for me I feel like I need to get all the stuff I want to do out of the way first so I feel free. That's why it is the normally the case too where I do more housework spontaneously when my parents are away on holiday.
Just yesterday, I think I finally managed to get to that stage. I had just been diabloing for a while, no-one else was on to play with me either - so I sat looking around my room and stared at the wall. I sighed. I fiddled around for a while,, but nothing really interested me. I looked at my new bookshelf, at the unopened package of Netters. I sighed again. And then I decided to unwrap my book, have a look at it, and then proceded to study. Looks like it wasn't a waste of money after all.
Saturday, July 09, 2005
inertia
I went out shopping the other day. I normally find this affair rather tedious and tiresome, and I get rather bored rather quickly. We were running around trying to find a lamp and a bookcase, and so of course one of the places were went through was a furniture shop. In the past, I could only at best view these as a place where I could receive some respite from all the walking and take a seat, but this time it somehow seemed different. Perhaps it was from my plans to move out next year, or my growing forboding sense of increased independence, or even me having played hours of The Sims 2. The thing was this time I had much more interest in what I was seeing - the style, the size, the comfort, (the price) and I started wondering how things might look in a new place I would sometime call my own. And after starting to care, I also started to have more opinions on what I liked and preferred. What would look good? What sort of style would I want? What sort of mood do these items convey? And, I suddenly realised, just how much variation there was out there. Pretty much anything I could dream of, I could have - given the right amount of money of course.
As silly as it seems to me, I have a tendency to go against change. Rationally, I think that is the only way to go about improving the current state, but there is always that feeling of wanting to have things as they are. Why should this be?
I supposed that maybe I was comfortable as I was, and didn't need anything more. That to an extent is true i feel... Why add something when there's nothing wrong? But on the other hand, if you stick by this too much, you may come to a state whereby you follow this idiom because there is something about the change that you may not like. Projecting forward, there will eventually be a point where a change is less harmful than staying as you are. There is a Chinese saying, that goes a short pain is better than a long one - that is, you may as well get it over and done with now, rather than wait, and have to deal with the issue, as well as the anxiety leading up to it.
Is it the fear of failure? If I try, and don't succeed at doing something, does it say something about my character, my worth? I don't know if I do this myself, but I hate it when other people don't try because of this fear. For example, if in a game, they might give in the middle, because they are not doing well. This in effect devalues the worth of the game, for a message that this sends across to the other people is that 'you didn't win because you were good or you tried your best, but only because I didn't try - I let you win'. This of course brings us back to the way we value games in general - what does it mean to win (is it a test of your capability?). Of course, this kind of thinking (I won't try because i'll just fail) falls in one of the features of a depressive - they probably shouldn't be a part of healthy thinking and attitude.
Is it the effort involved? What is the estimate of what I need to do? How accurate is it? If I find that I get to a point where I can't be stuffed - what does it mean? In essense, it may even boil down to - what is the point? Life, living, it is all one big effort. What does it mean to give up trying in the little things?
As silly as it seems to me, I have a tendency to go against change. Rationally, I think that is the only way to go about improving the current state, but there is always that feeling of wanting to have things as they are. Why should this be?
I supposed that maybe I was comfortable as I was, and didn't need anything more. That to an extent is true i feel... Why add something when there's nothing wrong? But on the other hand, if you stick by this too much, you may come to a state whereby you follow this idiom because there is something about the change that you may not like. Projecting forward, there will eventually be a point where a change is less harmful than staying as you are. There is a Chinese saying, that goes a short pain is better than a long one - that is, you may as well get it over and done with now, rather than wait, and have to deal with the issue, as well as the anxiety leading up to it.
Is it the fear of failure? If I try, and don't succeed at doing something, does it say something about my character, my worth? I don't know if I do this myself, but I hate it when other people don't try because of this fear. For example, if in a game, they might give in the middle, because they are not doing well. This in effect devalues the worth of the game, for a message that this sends across to the other people is that 'you didn't win because you were good or you tried your best, but only because I didn't try - I let you win'. This of course brings us back to the way we value games in general - what does it mean to win (is it a test of your capability?). Of course, this kind of thinking (I won't try because i'll just fail) falls in one of the features of a depressive - they probably shouldn't be a part of healthy thinking and attitude.
Is it the effort involved? What is the estimate of what I need to do? How accurate is it? If I find that I get to a point where I can't be stuffed - what does it mean? In essense, it may even boil down to - what is the point? Life, living, it is all one big effort. What does it mean to give up trying in the little things?
Friday, July 08, 2005
weirdness factor
I was at home studying with friends the day after watching 2046, walking around in our lounge room, when something caught my eye. Backtracking, and bewildered at what I thought I saw, my gaze eventually rested on what had alerted me. Sitting there, on the shelf, was 2046. My parents must have somehow gotten a copy overseas, but I had never noticed until then. What a waste of money, was my first thought, as the previous day a whole bunch of us had paid $10 each to see the movie. The excuses and ways I tried to soothe myself were that it was a great movie cinematographically, and well worth watching at the cinema. Also, now this would mean I could watch it again and perhaps make more light of the movie and its plot.
Thinking from my previous post (pellagra), I feel I need to elaboate on the idea of the coincidentality. Summarising from what Chi has mentioned, the factors that are important are: rarity, awareness, and degree of control. Perhaps there are more too - this will require more thought.
Rarity is the chance that each event will happen, or even that both will happen within a certain time frame of each other. The rarer the occurrences, the more weird the coincidence will be.
Awareness I think is the presence of a certain idea in your mind, and/or being on the lookout for more of the similar experience once you see the first one. I think one of the arguments I was trying to give in my earlier post was that most of the time things may occur, with equal rarity, but we may see a similarity in one situation but not another - and this is because we are looking for something. Using Chi's example, I'm supposing that there would be a difference in response if you saw a black cat and the stock market crashed, versus you seeing a black cat and the stock market having a boom (and assuming this holds equal chance of occurrence - rarity). In one, people may say that there was more than a coincidence in the first, whilst (even though the chance of occurrence was just as rare) in the second, this connection would go unnoticed. This is essentially because we are looking for something in one, but not the other - awareness.
The third is the amount of control we have over both events. The less in control of the events (or the less we seem in control) the more spooky it is as the outcome wasn't 'artificially' generated by you. Once again, Chi's other example is useful in that Vesna having milk for breakfast is out of your control, whilst you having milk is totally in your control. The less in control, the freakier the coincidence.
Well, with all this in mind, I have come to a plan of categorising any future situations in terms of these 3 factors, perhaps on a scale of 1-10 in each. 10 would be for the most rare, the least aware, and the least in control, in each of the scales respectively. From these, perhaps after addition or multiplication we should be able to come to a 'weirdness' rating for the situation. What application this has, I don't know. But at least we might be able to compare situations and see what really goes on in the world.
Lately, I've noticed what has started to become an annoying behaviour on my part. In the past, this action was always performed automatically and never given any thought, but now I've started to wonder about it. When someone asks me a question, my immediate response is to answer directly and straight away, more so if I'm put under a pressured situation. After reflection on my responses, I find that sometimes being direct is not the best option, nor perhaps even giving an answer. Using questions to the extent to demonstrate you've understood, or perhaps even talking about the issue without actually addressing the specifics of the question are other options amongst many more. As serious as this topic sounds, I'm not intentionally applying it to exam situations and the like - it holds true for social interactions for me. So why after all this time, do I still carrying on the way I do? I think all I need is some more awareness, and practice, and perhaps things will start changing.
Thinking from my previous post (pellagra), I feel I need to elaboate on the idea of the coincidentality. Summarising from what Chi has mentioned, the factors that are important are: rarity, awareness, and degree of control. Perhaps there are more too - this will require more thought.
Rarity is the chance that each event will happen, or even that both will happen within a certain time frame of each other. The rarer the occurrences, the more weird the coincidence will be.
Awareness I think is the presence of a certain idea in your mind, and/or being on the lookout for more of the similar experience once you see the first one. I think one of the arguments I was trying to give in my earlier post was that most of the time things may occur, with equal rarity, but we may see a similarity in one situation but not another - and this is because we are looking for something. Using Chi's example, I'm supposing that there would be a difference in response if you saw a black cat and the stock market crashed, versus you seeing a black cat and the stock market having a boom (and assuming this holds equal chance of occurrence - rarity). In one, people may say that there was more than a coincidence in the first, whilst (even though the chance of occurrence was just as rare) in the second, this connection would go unnoticed. This is essentially because we are looking for something in one, but not the other - awareness.
The third is the amount of control we have over both events. The less in control of the events (or the less we seem in control) the more spooky it is as the outcome wasn't 'artificially' generated by you. Once again, Chi's other example is useful in that Vesna having milk for breakfast is out of your control, whilst you having milk is totally in your control. The less in control, the freakier the coincidence.
Well, with all this in mind, I have come to a plan of categorising any future situations in terms of these 3 factors, perhaps on a scale of 1-10 in each. 10 would be for the most rare, the least aware, and the least in control, in each of the scales respectively. From these, perhaps after addition or multiplication we should be able to come to a 'weirdness' rating for the situation. What application this has, I don't know. But at least we might be able to compare situations and see what really goes on in the world.
Lately, I've noticed what has started to become an annoying behaviour on my part. In the past, this action was always performed automatically and never given any thought, but now I've started to wonder about it. When someone asks me a question, my immediate response is to answer directly and straight away, more so if I'm put under a pressured situation. After reflection on my responses, I find that sometimes being direct is not the best option, nor perhaps even giving an answer. Using questions to the extent to demonstrate you've understood, or perhaps even talking about the issue without actually addressing the specifics of the question are other options amongst many more. As serious as this topic sounds, I'm not intentionally applying it to exam situations and the like - it holds true for social interactions for me. So why after all this time, do I still carrying on the way I do? I think all I need is some more awareness, and practice, and perhaps things will start changing.
Sunday, July 03, 2005
The Android
Had a few of my exams last thursday and friday, turned out to be easier than expected. Well, not really, since I didn't really all that much for them. Some of the questions were way fluffier than we've had before though, and I ended up making up several stories in my answers - because that's what they wanted. The art to that is risking enough detail to put in your script to make it sound realistic, but without going overboard so it sounds ridiculous. I think I managed to blend in the right amount of superfluous description, without the examiners wanting to try and base a film on my answer.
Incidentally, someone mentioned that these were the last set of written exams we would have in our undergraduate career. Wow. Of course, I note that these will continue if we wish to pursue further study.
Ended up going out for lunch and dinner on friday after our exams, and also seeing a movie, 2046. I have to admit that I really enjoyed this - apart from just the cinematography, but also the ideas, characters and themes they had in the story. In particular, I felt I could identify with some of the traits and behaviours of some of the characters there. For example, one of the observations the writer in the story made were that some he knew had 'delayed reaction'. There, he was trying to explain why someone acted the way they did. The thing that affected me was that after watching that, and have him point it out, I could also see some similarity in me. Of course, thereafter, I've started to question myself - why do I do it? Am I afraid of making decisions? Is it the interaction that I'm unfamiliar with? Am I scared to show how I feel? As yet, I still don't know, but at least I'm aware of it now. Perhaps next time I will react differently.
Recently, or maybe not so recently, I've noticed a discrepancy in my standards, financially. In some areas, for example with a mobile phone, I might be worried costs and weigh up the choice of phoning versus texting, and whether it is worthwhile going to a computer where I can text for free. On the other hand, I'll go to the pub, buy beer, and not worry about the cost there (well, technically, not entirely true, as I seem to know where the specials are and at what time). But the point still stands: Although I might try and cost save in whatever particular area of spending I'm engaged in, there are still interarea differences in standard of how I value cost and money.
Incidentally, someone mentioned that these were the last set of written exams we would have in our undergraduate career. Wow. Of course, I note that these will continue if we wish to pursue further study.
Ended up going out for lunch and dinner on friday after our exams, and also seeing a movie, 2046. I have to admit that I really enjoyed this - apart from just the cinematography, but also the ideas, characters and themes they had in the story. In particular, I felt I could identify with some of the traits and behaviours of some of the characters there. For example, one of the observations the writer in the story made were that some he knew had 'delayed reaction'. There, he was trying to explain why someone acted the way they did. The thing that affected me was that after watching that, and have him point it out, I could also see some similarity in me. Of course, thereafter, I've started to question myself - why do I do it? Am I afraid of making decisions? Is it the interaction that I'm unfamiliar with? Am I scared to show how I feel? As yet, I still don't know, but at least I'm aware of it now. Perhaps next time I will react differently.
Recently, or maybe not so recently, I've noticed a discrepancy in my standards, financially. In some areas, for example with a mobile phone, I might be worried costs and weigh up the choice of phoning versus texting, and whether it is worthwhile going to a computer where I can text for free. On the other hand, I'll go to the pub, buy beer, and not worry about the cost there (well, technically, not entirely true, as I seem to know where the specials are and at what time). But the point still stands: Although I might try and cost save in whatever particular area of spending I'm engaged in, there are still interarea differences in standard of how I value cost and money.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)