Does anyone else living in Sterling Alvarado have a terrible shower head? It’s like the water just drizzles out like a faucet. Ok, I’m exaggerating, but there really isn’t much pressure coming from my shower head.
So I was looking SDSU’s spring semester class schedule, and I noticed that two of my favorite classes will be taught again. They almost make me wish I was doing my undergrad again. If anyone is wanting to learn about something new and interesting for San Diego State’s 2014 Spring semester, maybe try these classes, eh? lol
PHIL 353 “Buddhist Philosophy”
prerequisite: Completion of General Education requirement in Foundations of Learning II.C. Humanities.
PHIL 508 “Existentialism”
I’m not sure if this fulfills any requirement (other than you need two prerequisite PHILOSOPHY classes which are needed to take this class), but it’s a superb class with an awesome professor (who happens to now be the PHIL Dept. chair too).
“To study the Way is to study the Self. To study the Self is to forget the self. To forget the self is to be enlightened by all things of the universe. To be enlightened by all things of the universe is to cast off the body and mind of the self as well as those of others. Even the traces of enlightenment are wiped out, and life with traceless enlightenment goes on forever and ever”—Master Dogen, 1200 - 1253 (via modernshxmxn)
So I’ve always been genuinely curious about something: I’ve met some Christians who claim that they dismiss organize religion and believe the Bible to be no literal; some proclaimed Christians (protestants and catholics) even claim to dismiss much of the Bible as being true, but they nevertheless believe in having a [personal] relationship with God and/or Jesus. I’m confused about something here: if one believes the Bible or any texts to be flawed because it was written by flawed men, then whence the basis for focusing on a relationship (or even a personal relationship) with God. All that we’ve known (the supposed concrete characteristics of God) come from being taught from the holy texts. If we dismiss those because we dismiss the whole text as being flawed, how does one have a relationship with something that is unknown. How could I have a relationship, or a personal one for that matter, with a stranger in a different state who I have never met or talked to? Different people speak of this stranger from a different with different attitudes; this stranger has many characteristics, but no one has ever seen, heard, or talked to this stranger. We’re just told that this stranger is real and a big deal. And when we feel really good, we think of that stranger, and we connect the feeling to the stranger every time (which strengthens our desire and passion for our ideal version of that stranger). How is one suppose to have a relationship with that stranger? How is one suppose to have a personal relationship with it if one does not get their perspective or beliefs from a text? Rethinking my question, it might seem possible to develop a feeling of having a relationship to something unknown, but without any concrete attributes, I do no know who I am referring to but an abstraction. I can only give it characteristics based on who I a feel about him/her/it. But what is it that I am dressing with attributes? I am calling something good, loving, just, and merciful, but what is it that I give these properties to? I guess my question really needs to be broken down, but it was just something I was thinking about.
that. this. it. the empty. the full. the whole. the one. the many. stuff. thing. a mix. a blend. such and such. suchness. substance. what it is. what IT is. what it IS. what-ness. the nameless. unable to grasp. unable to find. vague. arbitrary. abstract. You. the Other. other-ness. to whom that I see. this something. this feeling. this thought. mind. self. to be. being. Being. being in. becoming. the clearing. the desert. the real. the good. awareness. the word. the logos. god. space. time. everything. nothing. static. silence.
Hello tumblr is there a name for the state which underlies these symptoms below:
-never wanting to get out of bed -waking up then going straight back to sleep for the next half a day -not wanting to move -wanting to do nothing but not move -eating everything and still feeling hungry -finding that sleepiness is legitimately the reason no work progress is made -going to bed for no reason other than that everything else is pointless
do i just need a big dose of ‘wake the fuck up you are twenty-one and responsible for your life’
because so help me lord somebody write me a prescription as i am just NOT GETTING IT
"For the INTP, emotions are seen as something mysterious and as uncontrollable as they are unalterable. Hence, the root of the fear of emotions is the fear that they cannot be controlled. Hence, when an INTP does finally respond emotionally to something, his emotions are indeed left uncontrolled, raw and open. However, when witnessing the emotional response of another person, the INTP intensely resists any similar emotion of his own. An example of this is when watching a ‘weepy’ cinema film in which some heart-wrenching scene is being shown. The INTP despises the attempt by the filmmaker to influence his emotions and is more likely to sneer than cry. This response has nothing to do with arrogance, however. Rather it is the INTP defensively avoiding exposing what he knows to be his weak point. Where an INTP may experience his own emotional response during a film is when he has had the chance to consider consequences of a element of the film. Hence, emotional response to media input usually occurs with a certain independence of will, which could appear enigmatic to others.”