pineapple chunks, taco?, fries, grape juice

it's like a drug-constant motion.

woke up this mornin, and found out i missed the reset. did some read up on jean kilbourne's feminist piece. seems she really hates guys. did bring up a good point bout how objectification of anything leads a greater compensity of violence towards it. after all, that how people treated other races like animals an such. also, i find it easier to get angry at a thing than a person.

to philo, which i have decided to not do my philo thing anymore. will take the big hit, but nail everything else, if plans turn out right. camus has become my new worst enemy now, right next to gravity, and the sun.

lunch was short in order to cram for my finance test. haven't been to class fer a couple of weeks. wanna get this done and stave off the next weeks in sleep.

took the test. wasn't very phased that much, cept i had to make up some story about mortgage rates.

burned my fingers twice today, once at lunch with taco cheese and at night class with cocoa. gon fin a forensics case, and sleep good tnight fer the rush tmr.

===================================================================

tday, we're starting on camus and the myth of sissyphus. the premise of the writing is based on two questions that struck me. is life worth living and why not suicide? along those lines, the subject is absurdity and suicidal nihilism, which is positing that since there is no ultimate purpose in life, then to suicide is best. well, to answer those questions, one needs to define the terms and keep them in context. so let's get to the first question: is life worth living?

the first thing that came to me was that in to ascribe a worth, one has to put value on something. the next thought was worth in the context of alternatives. worth would mean that it was the best considerable option, given other alternatives. in the case of nihilism, the alternative is no life or in other words, death.

what's funny about that question is that you have to be alive to ask that question. also you need to assume that dead people cannot ascribe worth to anything, nor compare themselves to a living organism. furthermore, who is to say what life is? guess that camus has to assume a non-human non-physical being, like a spirit or metaphysical state. it's very messy what i'm saying, but essentially, one has to be alive to question if death is a better alternative. and if life as, perhaps human, is not worth living, then what form of life, if camus even meant non human, that was worth living?

camus also kinda screwed up in asking the second question: why not suicide? rationally, if that were the case, then the person who asks that question must die immediately, lest they run the risk of living the absurd life. is suicide a rational choice, and the living irrational? are we assumed to be rational beings?

the answer is yes, but we all do irrational things that aren't coherent with our internal logic. there was this bit i heard from NPR asking people two questions. if there was a lever that you could pull that would save 5 people from dying by killing 1 person, most people would pull the lever. however, if you could save those same 5 people by pushing the 1 person off a cliff, most people would say no. same actual result in terms of numbers, but there's a moral sense that contradicts this seemingly simple logic.

screw you camus.

===================================================================

planning makes me sad. the best experiences i've had in life came at the moment. no calendars, no events, no agendas. guess that's the way it's meant to be fer me.