I need a Girl (Part 2)

When your soul is pregnant with so much emotion, what is the correct path? Do we correct ourselves by the self-medicating offerings of drugs and alcohol? Or do we then finally see the purpose of art? Is it then the purpose of art to be the wastepool of the soul’s emotional excrement? Is this the true destiny of the arts, to be a festering pool of emotional excrement?

I don’t know.

Response paper psy610. Comments appreciated.

This paper is on animal research. I’m too lazy to polish it up any further. Hit me up with comments.

***

Response to Debate on the 8/11/2009

            Though the opposing team did not bring any substantial points to the debate, I believe that the discussion highlighted many points that should be relevant when searching for middle ground. Regardless of my side in the debate, I am staunch supporter of animal research. However, with that said, I believe that both sides of the issue need to be taken into consideration to understand why this debate is relevant.

                I am a proponent of the evolutionary argument; whereby we are the most evolved of all species, and by this I mean that we dominate every other species on this planet, and are therefore entitled to the exploitation of other species because our interests outweighs theirs. However, this argument cracks under further scrutiny– as is demonstrable by the Nazi argument. The Nazis believed that they were dominant over the Jews, and that Jews were nothing better than animals. Furthermore, they acted upon this and subjugated the Jews. This is similar to the case of our current debate, and I will draw a comparison between these two examples.

                How were the Jews subjugated? Subjugation was the result of Nazi popularity amongst the non-Jewish masses. Nazi power stemmed from support by the non-Jewish masses.  This power was sufficient to oppress the Jews, as the Jews were a very small minority in the German population. If we draw a comparison to our current debate, we can make an analogy that our intelligence has granted us power to oppress animals. As numbers gave the Nazis power to oppress the Germans, intelligence has given us to oppress animals. Did the Jews have power? A pithy amount, perhaps. But that is the demarcating factor that defines everything. Power.

However, if we could find another demarcating factor that differentiated us from animals, would that factor would be grounds for a more compelling argument?

Consider this; what the Nazis believed about the Jews – that they were sub-human etc.- was ridiculous.The Nazi belief was easily refuted by the fact that the only difference between humans of Jewish descent and humans of German-Nazi descent was  genealogical. Why the Nazi belief was easily refuted and why racism is conceptually illogical, is that as humans, our differences are entirely aesthetic. Under the color of our skin, the practices and norms of our culture – we are all undeniably, biologically human.

If differences between us and animals were based on something more decisive, other than aesthetic differences (There are some that argue biological differences between species are just aesthetic -  we are all similar organisms that require the same biological processes to subsist) – we could be arguing on a different plane. For this matter, I would like to use the point of consciousness. If we can successfully argue, and show, that animals do not have the consciousness that we possess, perhaps that would be grounds for a decisive difference between us and them as species.

 Though consciousness itself isn’t defined yet, if we take the capacity to suffer emotional torture, emotional pain, mental torture, mental pain, physical torture, physical pain etc. into the definition of consciousness, it then becomes exceedingly clear that human interests outweigh animal interests because we have this consciousness and they do not. This in effect makes the evolutionary argument much stronger. But of course, the caveat is that the validity of this point is contingent upon whether animals do or do not actually have that definition of consciousness.

Invariably, this debate will then branch off into what consciousness actually is. But until we solve this problem of consciousness, or whatever it is that truly differentiates us, the evolutionary argument will not hold strong. And lastly, on a more general note, I hope this debate over animal research will continue to remain relevant.

la foule

When I first came to the U.S, I remember being severely intimidated by the American accent. It sounded so new, so foreign. Especially since it was the NY accent – an accent more vast than the familiar quintessential Woody Allen one. Fast-forward almost 4 years later, and I find myself especially comforted whenever I hear someone go ‘Oh NO you di-int!!’. Fast-forward almost 4 years later, and I find myself saying shit like ‘mwall’, and ‘swauce’, and ‘cwall’. Fastforward almost 4 years later, and I find myself slowly understanding what rap is all about.

All true American institutions, despite what some people might say. Happy Birthday America.

On a completely unrelated note, I’ve been listening to Edith Piaf nonstop for the last 6 hours. I believe I can now almost understand what this beautiful woman is saying.

bang bang

there’s something definitely that has to be said about tarantino films. yes they are cliched. yes they are ripped-off older films. and yes, it’s usually glorified violence. but you know what? they’re awesome films. and if you don’ t notice it already – all tarantino films (usually) are thematically very complex.  it is an active, complicated process for the viewer to deconstruct the images and dialogue in his films, consume it frame by frame, and then to repiece it in their heads in order to figure out the subtext layered underneath all the gory visuals and cool dialogue.

if youre wondering – i just rewatched both kill bill – both volumes. and can anyone wait for inglorious basterds? i can’t. it’s been way too long qt, way too long.

half-wrecked prejudice leaped forth

mall food is so bad for you. ergh.

a response to miyachan

miya Says:
January 28, 2009 at 9:19 am e

ur love story plz

***

Hi miyachan. I wrote many love stories a long time ago. But these are the ones that I could find. If you want to read more of my love story, you should go through my old blog.

http://jerm-the-germ.blogdrive.com/comments?id=242

http://jerm-the-germ.blogdrive.com/comments?id=231

http://jerm-the-germ.blogdrive.com/comments?id=185

I know. Even I shrink with disgust when I read these blog entries. Gosh.

Edit:

Also check out; http://www.fictionpress.com/u/425848/jerm-the-germ

Mind you, these stories were written a long long time ago.

a response to al anon

al anon Says:
January 27, 2009 at 6:15 pm e

You are part of the “in-between” generation, not 100% Asian and not 100% western. How do you reconcile your identities? Do you ever feel discomfort when in the presence of all Asians? or when they exhibit what westerners perceive as “rude” behavior? or in times when they seem to shrug off the social norms and common practices of western society? On the other hand, do you ever feel like the “outsider” when playing to a western audience? Do you ever feel that western society judges you by the color of your skin as opposed to the content of your character? Do you ever feel different and try harder to fit in?

Society compartmentalizes individuals into one group or another, where do you feel you belong?

****

I am not aware of any sociological treatises of culture within multi-ethnic countires, such as Malaysia. If anything, if we are to make comparisons to other multi-ethnic countries, it becomes undoubtedly clear that Malaysian culture is an anomaly.

As sociological literature already suggests, culture is inherrent to identity. Logically then, we can assume that environment and identity are invariably linked. The quintessential Malaysian environment is a hodgepodge of conflicting cultures and values. Thus, likewise, can assume that the quintessential Malaysian is a hodgepodge of conflicting cultures and values.

How then do we reconcile these conflicting variables?

Of course, there are distinct arbitrary differences amongst individuals as to how they reconcile these different cultures. However, ultimately to me, you are either more western or more eastern (in my case, asian). Reconciliation goes as far as adapting to your environment, but there is always an intrinsic cultural identity that you subscribe to.

As for me, I’m predominantly western. I have never really experienced overt racial discrimination in any sense, but I am very skin-color conscious should I be the only Asian kid on a ferry that has mostly 99.99% white people.  But that is only because of how racially-conscious Malaysians are. Skin color is superficial, really. But I tend to attract alot of Asian people for some weird reason.

visions of johanna

I don’t really like people who think they have it all figured out. Figuring it all out is like scoffing and spitting in fate’s face, despite her warnings that she will be throwing a whole bunch of kinks into your path.

Plans never go according to plan.

perverted philosophy #1: stealing

I am aware that this will inevitably lead to a discourse on morality. But oh well.

I have a two-part question; Is stealing wrong? If so, is Robin Hood ultimately wrong?

Another question; would it be wrong to steal from large corporations (Walmart, Target etc.) that factor shoplifting into their profit calculations?

–

Stealing, in a moral sense, is wrong. But I believe Robin Hood isn’t wrong, only because I believe current morality, which is defined and governed by the Judeochristianic tradition, is a flawed institution. However, that doesn’t mean I don’t believe in it. My main problem with it (for now) is that it doesn’t account for subjectivity.

But yeah, I haven’t read into this deeply and that’s why I’d like any input before doing so