Today, I happened to be involved in a conversation about the phrase "forgive and forget." This is in relation to when one is crossed by a close friend or relative. Disclaimer: This in no way relates to any recent occurrence---just a chance conversation.
The person on the other end of the conversation made the argument that forgiving someone who doesn't deserve forgiveness requires indifference, which means you are able to progress without any attachment at all to that person. Indifference is the worst thing you can offer a person who you no longer care about, because to dislike or hate him is too close an emotion to love.
I've never been secretive about the fact that I've written a few people off. Sometimes people do things that can't be forgiven. My personal belief on the matter of "forgive and forget" is that a person can forget about something they couldn't forgive (forgiveness in these cases could be interpreted as "it's okay that you hurt me," when it isn't and serve to open you to further insult/injury). Indifference here is that I don't invest enough care in the situation to bother forgiving it. It is about not wasting the time trying to forgive something one could more easily forget. Indifference, also in this case, becomes the least one could ever offer that person while forgiveness would be the most. Of course, this is reserved only for cases where one would refuse to see the person socially again.
Odd how the central theme of indifference brings two different outcomes. Anything to add?
Thursday, September 6, 2007
Wednesday, September 5, 2007
She's As Svelte As That Super Skinny Fly!

As was reported all over the news a couple weeks ago, researchers had identified a virus that causes stem cells to develop into fat cells. Of course, the natural reaction was to question whether getting rid of the virus would cause the host person to begin losing weight? I didn't see the answer to that question among the articles I read.
This week, researchers are proud to announce the discovery of the "skinny" gene, which they have undoubtedly been searching for since it occurred to them to do so. The corresponding obvious question is whether or not you could make a drug that would cause fat regulation the same way this gene does. What I find interesting in the article was how it shows that the focus is on how to make people skinnier, but that most of the research is on the already skinny.
Here is an explanation related to flies: “In times of plenty, these super skinny, sleek and fast flies can easily get away from predators,” Graff adds. “But in times of shortage, they don’t make it.” I guess that's just more evidence that the svelte won't make it through the next ice age.
Lastly, here is another article that talks about a fat gene. Do we have both? And the final question is, why do we (and Americans in particular) think that any problem can be made to go away with the simple swallowing of a pill?
Tuesday, September 4, 2007
Scientology---Who Needs It?
That may be what the Belgians are asking. According to this article, the Belgians have been building a case against the Scientologists for 10 years.
In a previous post, Tangling With Tom, I linked and discussed a related article in which Germany was putting its foot down on Scientology---a battle I believe it has lost, since Tom Cruise will be starring in the debated movie. But the Belgians seem to be taking a bit more of a legal approach to the matter. The "Church" will be facing charges of fraud and extortion and probably a myriad of others (I imagine whatever they can conjure up).
I actually hope it works out and they can prove the illegality of something the "Church" is doing. I mean, there are almost 7 billion people and only 10 million of them think stealing money from brainwashed people is okay. Wait, I forgot all the lawyers, governments and their employees, unions, communists, and looters there are out there. Adjust numbers accordingly.
In a previous post, Tangling With Tom, I linked and discussed a related article in which Germany was putting its foot down on Scientology---a battle I believe it has lost, since Tom Cruise will be starring in the debated movie. But the Belgians seem to be taking a bit more of a legal approach to the matter. The "Church" will be facing charges of fraud and extortion and probably a myriad of others (I imagine whatever they can conjure up).
I actually hope it works out and they can prove the illegality of something the "Church" is doing. I mean, there are almost 7 billion people and only 10 million of them think stealing money from brainwashed people is okay. Wait, I forgot all the lawyers, governments and their employees, unions, communists, and looters there are out there. Adjust numbers accordingly.
Monday, September 3, 2007
Failing To Understand
In this article posted on MSN today, we are informed as readers and would-be consumers that there are even more "green" cars out there than we know of. And why don't we know of them? Because we don't live in California. Apparently, the government won't allow automakers to sell the ultra green cars outside a few states---California, New York, and a couple others.
It isn't the fact that I can't get my hands on one of these cars because they aren't available here that bothers me. What does is that they aren't available here because the government won't allow them. Why won't they? It actually boggles my mind---we could be driving our zero-emissions cars up here too, helping Portland's other-than-pristine air conditions (and also put a stop to the SUV hypocrisy). Further, the car manufacturers could sell their product wherever they had a customer base...which I think would encourage them to produce more clean cars. In this case, they are doing two things at once---forbidding a manufacturer to sell a product, and forbidding a consumer to buy it. It leaves a bad taste in the mouth...
It isn't the fact that I can't get my hands on one of these cars because they aren't available here that bothers me. What does is that they aren't available here because the government won't allow them. Why won't they? It actually boggles my mind---we could be driving our zero-emissions cars up here too, helping Portland's other-than-pristine air conditions (and also put a stop to the SUV hypocrisy). Further, the car manufacturers could sell their product wherever they had a customer base...which I think would encourage them to produce more clean cars. In this case, they are doing two things at once---forbidding a manufacturer to sell a product, and forbidding a consumer to buy it. It leaves a bad taste in the mouth...
Sunday, September 2, 2007
Corner Vendors
Here is what The Onion has to say about Portland's counterfeit market. Apparently, trafficking toothbrushes here is on par with watches, handbags and the like in LA or New York. Were it not reported on The Onion, I would actually believe it could be true, that and I've never seen any sort of counterfeit vendors in Portland. But I find it exceedingly funny when Portland is the subject of humor articles, be they true or false.
Saturday, September 1, 2007
Now I'm REALLY Nerdy
While perusing around, checking out actors I would put in my movie if I were making The Fountainhead, I stumbled upon this quiz (which you can take by clicking at the bottom). How you may ask did I happen to find it? I was looking up the guy who played Wash in the Firefly series because I think he could do a good Howard Roark. Next thing I knew I was at the myspace page of the guy who played the captain. (No, I don't really understand what the percents mean...)
Your results:
You are Malcolm Reynolds (Captain)
Click here to take the Serenity Firefly Personality Test
Your results:
You are Malcolm Reynolds (Captain)
| Honest and a defender of the innocent. You sometimes make mistakes in judgment but you are generally good and would protect your crew from harm. |
Click here to take the Serenity Firefly Personality Test
"I Mean To Misbehave"
I bought the collector's edition of "Serenity." You may remember me mentioning it before in a post called "Firefly, Serenity." I never get tired of that show, and since I'd only seen the movie from about the half-way point till the end, I decided I better see it again.
I haven't checked out all the special features yet. Though I mean to soon.
Here are some links to related information:
Review of the new release edition
Sequel? Joss' Post is a good click.
Whedon interview
Is it odd to get attached to something and wish there were more of it? Apparently not. Even, and especially, Whedon feels that way. In fact, I can definitively say that if I were super rich, I'd invest in getting the show back on the air---there are a lot of fans out there who would also like that. But that's me...
I haven't checked out all the special features yet. Though I mean to soon.
Here are some links to related information:
Review of the new release edition
Sequel? Joss' Post is a good click.
Whedon interview
Is it odd to get attached to something and wish there were more of it? Apparently not. Even, and especially, Whedon feels that way. In fact, I can definitively say that if I were super rich, I'd invest in getting the show back on the air---there are a lot of fans out there who would also like that. But that's me...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)