An Introduction
***
Writing here, has always been, in my opinion, a form of therapy, in which evidently I do nothing except to constantly ponder upon my true nature and motives, so that, time in time, a I shall do a comparison between what I am and what I should be.
It has always been a question of the self, that it constantly changing in nature, for example, perhaps towards being good, which must be attained not by embracing it as part of conformity or the agreement of the majority, rather, a much personalized goodness that in exclusivity of it, may arise of me wanting to be more moral. Lack of knowledge, is another thing, which I profess often make me stumble, and in frustration of not being able to find correct terms, I make up one of my own, and delude myself. Such endeavors may require long experimentation of the self, very long years before I finally start to move on and accept altruism as a human nature. In short, I need more time.
Which, brings into place, another problem, lack of subject. If the self is the only subject, than how long would it take for me to finally exhaust myself of current ideas and theories before I start finding a new one?
Not long.
So in regard of all of this, one might want to turn to a more varied subject, something that is similar to the self; a constantly changing nature. Something moving, and making impact, although not directly to the self, it may help the self to gain more knowledge, and henceforth can give arise to more definition and interpretations of the self. So what more brilliant a subject than worldly affairs?
These “worldly affairs”, because of it’s fluidity, may be subject to constant scrutiny. Because other things, such as history and maths, can be analyzed only to be understood, because they are ‘dead’ subjects. Once the self has gained complete understanding of them, he needs to revert to something else. Affairs, on the other hand, live up to their meaning, something that is not completely solved; an instability. A puzzle.
But there is always a problem of undertaking and writing of “worldly affairs”. There is always a stance to be taken, because in the end, people would want to know which opinion is more plausible. And which will be correct in the end (history). One cannot simply write of it without knowing the ending. One must first find an end goal, a choice;
Do I want to be good, or Do I want to be bad?
Should one go against a policy or should one advocate it?
Therefore, these “worldly affairs” should be reinstated as a nearly complete puzzle, in which all other pieces are assembled, except for one that requires the self to “finalize” it. Because he himself cannot be solved, he feels no need to solve other puzzles, and leaves the final piece for everyone else to solve.
But there might be a chance that he may come back to solve it himself (and hence reach a conclusion), but that may happen after a long time of contemplation. An affair might be solved by then, or become irrelevant (already history), that he might become disheartened to solve another affair.
The pure irony of it.
***
So uh, what I’m really trying to say is, I *might* want to start on caring about other people/affairs, because although I might sound aloof to most things, it doesn’t mean that I don’t listen and know about other things. Time to make more use of myself, I guess.
perkaraperkara 