My Needs are Socially Constructed.

I hate the system.

A Clean, Well Lit Place

In Earnest Hemingway's short story the older waiter struggles with the idea that there is nothing in the world and that man is also a nothing. There is no God and nothing awaits us outside of life, if life is even anything. The cafe he works at provides a sort of protection from the nothing that [is] the world. But wait, how can nothing "be"? Nothing by definition is a lack of anything and so there cannot be 'nothing'. This is absurd. He finds comfort in the structure, cleanliness, and light of the cafe which protects him from nothing long enough for the sun to rise and for him to be able to fall asleep. He too denies that any deity exists who is above all of the world. There is nothing, good or evil or significant. With this extreme idea of nothing there can be no hope for the future and thus despair must ensue. The only patron at the cafe, an old man, apparently attempted to commit suicide the week before. Is this because he shares the same vision of nothing for the world? Apparently he has lots of money and this does not make him content. Somehow something deeper is afflicting him. He comes to the cafe every night and becomes drunk. Somehow maintaining his dignity. What does he find in this cafe that causes him to return. Is the light a symbol of existence that draws him toward something he can know to exist, or at least percieve? Is the need to escape the dark of night the pull towards such a cafe? Is the disorder and mess found in bars too characteristic of a lack of order which must come with non-existence? The older waiter cannot sleep each night until the light of day streams into his window. Perhaps this light, either of the sun or the cafe, is the only real hope that there may be something more to come, or at the least at present there is something in the present, as insignificant as it may be.

Thoughts while writing an essay on this topic. Quite helpful actually.

There must be something, because for nothing to exist would be contradictory to the nature of nothing.

A Common Desire

As human beings I think that we all share a passion that is common to the human condition. That is to truly belong and be loyal to a specific group. Belonging to some faction or movement helps define who we are and if we can start to define who we are then it is possible to sort out some of the reasons of why we are living. To not stand for anything (apart from being mostly impossible) leaves little to live for and leaves a person with minimal drive. I, at least, have a need to belong to and fight for something. Perhaps this is why I cling so stolidly, at least try to, to the Mennonite faith. Even holding onto my GC subdivision seems to allow me to make more sense out of who I am and why I go on living. In the same way sports fans cling loyally to various sports teams representing the team and avidly watching and educating themselves about the success or failure of their team.
Although belonging so definitely to a group is helpful, it seems unrewarding to be only kind of a part of something. To halfheartedly claim membership to a group leaves one on the outskirts of that group and turned away by other groups because of one's part allegiance to the first group.
I want to proudly carry a banner, defining myself as part of something and apart from others who stand for what I don't.
(This separation can be problematic if one wishes to envision a united world.)

Freedom

If what we know determines what we can be and where we can go then knowledge is freedom. If one does not know what they believe they are securely imprisoned. If one does not know alternatives to what you believe you can hardly move forward. Therefore it is necessary to not only educate yourself on what believe but also on what you don't believe, so that you do in fact have the choice to believe what you do.

Luxury is the origin of war.
-Plato (The Republic)

War is the result of greed and the desire to have more than what is necessary. Or to feed an appetite that requires excessive materials. For example oil. Oil is used to create many items, some of which are necessary, many of which are not. Since the wealthy countries that use the most oil cannot sustain their use of oil war is necessary to take over countries that have oil. Other examples can be used such as gold, or diamonds and other luxuries.

If it was not for the desire to amass more possessions than the rest of the world there would be no need for war. It's too bad to think that the reason so many people die so unjustly is merely for a countries greed.

Without the presence of luxury all people could be satisfied with the resources available.

Is equality problematic

If we ever achieve a more complete existence of equality in our world, who will lead?

As it is now the rich rule the world. Wealth gets you a good job, good clothes, better seats on airplanes, status and respect from the poorer working class. To get into politics one must have a certain amount of wealth in order to even be eligible.

The same is true for knowledge. If you don't have extensive knowledge you cannot get a job with influence, nor can you receive a position that includes leading a large group of people.

If poverty is eliminated and all people are given equal opportunity for education how will leaders be chosen and selected? If this country truly becomes a democracy where anyone is able to run for government regardless of financial status what will stop multitudes of people from running.

If people have equal chance there will be no easy choice. Perhaps there will be leaders who are more qualified and who have fresh ideas for a old system.

(as I write this I am struck by the flaws in my thoughts and the quite obvious solutions. A response should be coming soon. )

The everpresent condition of philosophy

Until quite recently I was under the impression that although philosophy seemed to be connected to everything it only was attainable through a focused approach as in a philosophy course. However, after enrolling in an English course I am delighted to discover that it is essentially philosophy under the clever guise of literature. In addition sociology appears to be closely connected to philosophy as well although focused more specifically on the nature of society and how various parts of it relate to each other.
The only unfortunate part of this discovery is that the low level of concentration of this philosophy. Both English and sociology present a watered down version of philosophical ideas however, a deeper knowledge of philosophy will undoubtedly give one an advantage of some sort when analyzing and presenting the ideas that do occur in these two disciplines.
Thankfully, there will be a way to pursue my love of philosophy without focusing all of my energy towards it, as would be necessary for a minor.

Side note: (I love reading. Reading = more knowledge and more knowledge = better results for my money.)