Thursday 27 September 2007

(too mild a word, but) dislikes.

while playing rs i come across enough people who fall into the category of 'annoying and insufferable', two words (like surreal, for example) that i've found too much cause to use recently.

i never did find cause to hate them, though. i don't usually hate people. it doesn't quite seem possible.

only things i've actually ended up hating are ideas. subjects. disciplines. that sorta thing. (yes this is another rant, so you might like to bail now before the smoke gets thicker...)

in no particular order, these would be the things i despise, sometimes, some of them most times. (i'm not about to argue the usefulness of a subject, that's been drilled into me enough times. i may intellectually know it's useful, and has a point, but that doesn't mean i don't have the freedom to hate it.)

  • chemistry. particularly, atomic theory.
  • physics. why must you say precisely why this thing happens this way? it just is this way.
  • basically, branches of science dedicated to explaining the obvious, or predicting what doesn't need predicting.

  • locations aside, much of physical geography.

  • philosophy. i enjoy philo well enough, but when religion explains it all, and religion can't be brought in for religious purposes, all the theories and imperatives those poor guys spent years sweating over seem nothing more than glorified posturing. it's at those times that i don't think much of it, but it's more useful a tool than i could ever have imagined when faced with friends, people, who don't think much of religion, at all.


  • too many aspects of trigonometry.
  • statistics. accountancy. i don't know how accountants survive. even with excel those little numbers're enough to drive you over the edge.
  • basically, mathematical proofs that set out to prove the obvious, or topics (think, congruence, symmetry etc) that require you to prove the obvious.


  • scales. if they're meant to be important, why am i only forced to learn them the first time i take an exam? if i'd known that, i'd have told them they needn't have bothered. for a sheet of paper (fine, two sheets), it doesn't hardly seem worth it.

  • my mother tongue. (to go into specifics might entail being sued. it's possible. believe it or not.)

  • to those people who call "everybody's mother tongue" the most beautiful language because it's the language of their most treasured memories and innermost thoughts; amid answers like gaelic, french, chinese, greogrian, farsi, german...
    you obviously haven't been forced to learn this language. it also stopped being the language of my innermost thoughts a long time ago.

    to those who'd call me derrogatory names for a pro-western non-westerner...
    i've got news for you. being anti-my-mother-tongue ≠ being anti-asian ≠ being pro-western.
    heck, even anti-asian ≠ pro-western.
    i'm fine with every other asian culture, i'm fine just about every other culture, and every other language. besides english and that bit of german, all the other languages/bits of languages that i know are asian. i'd sooner learn korean and farsi (beautiful script) than another western langauge. don't you dare generalise to the point that you'd pin that on me.

    to those people who'll look scandalised at that revelation, and start spitting in outrage...
    i learnt to read, speak, and write the language before i could make the conscious decision to condescend to learn it. i would have condescended to learn it anyway, not least of all so those as inflexible and wont to judge a person by their culture as you would shut up. after all, it's people like you who simply cannot be less blind who drive me to despise this language in the first place. so bugger off.

    bearing in mind, again, that this is my considerably flawed opinion, incomplete in the sense that i dropped most (sadly not yet all) of these subjects as soon as i was able. and though i may know why i shouldn't have, and should not when i do get the chance, i'm not about to argue for the opposition. i also don't think much of those arguments at all.

    bearing in mind, also, that i wouldn't have hated those things if they hadn't been forced on me. so let them exist, but don't force me to have any unnecessary, overt contact with them.

    that's just superficial though, isn't it?

    what would count as something i'd genuinely hate is evil.

    hate's an ugly word. i was wondering whether it'd be right to hate evil, i googled it, and came across this. it's strange, really. the general message is hate isn't necessarily a bad thing. it's a matter of what you hate. that to hate someone that's gone beyond anything remotely decent or human; that would be the type of hate that ends wars.

    i don't know.

    it makes sense, and in a way, it doesn't. i'll stick by proverbs 8:13. "to fear the Lord is to hate evil".

    and in the meanwhile, i'll try to figure it out.

    4 comments:

    Vaskor said...

    Hate... Hate makes people blind, make them do things they will later 'hate' even remembering. Vicious circle. If you need to fight evil, do it with a cold head - you'll be many times more efficient.

    I have my own little theory, that there are a few emotions which are destructive and should be consciously avoided. These include: hate, jealousy, envy, resentment and anger. Every time I feel one of these things coming, I stop and ask myself: "Why? Do I want to feel it? No, I guess, I don't. Why should I and people around me suffer because of me feeling this crappy emotion? What is the real problem? What should I do to eliminate the cause of this situation?" Stuff like that. Logic against emotions I don't like feeling. Not suppressing emotions but looking at them from an objective and logical point of view. It works for me. I can't say I fight evil by doing it, but I do believe that it makes me and people around me a lot happier.

    aly. said...

    Mmm. That makes sense too. What about righteous anger though?

    It's just, I'd thought that sometimes it's right to be angry, though not irrationally so.

    Not fighting evil, per se. Just whether it's right at all to hate the concept of evil, in however many small ways it's manifested.

    Short of supressing emotions, too, I never did think there was anything wrong with feeling. Emotions can have logical causes, and can be logical in themselves. Emotion and logic aren't mutually exclusive.

    Of course, making things worse for people around you wouldn't be a good thing at all, but more's the time, if it's righteous anger, say, it'd be the cause of your anger that has the person who might be affected, affected at all.

    Hmm. I'm confusing myself. I'll post again later, when I sort it out?

    Vaskor said...

    Don't get me wrong, I am not saying my theory should work for everyone. It works for me and to be honest I don't know any other people who would fully agree with it. But, hey, if it works for me and my family, I'll keep doing it. I do believe though that if people start being aware about what they feel and why they feel, a lot less families would be broken, a lot less fight would occur.

    aly. said...

    Point taken :)

    Thanks!