I wrote two posts before on:
– the tragedy at Stanford about May Zhou
– the tragedy on Virginia Tech

What provoked me to write today is that Mercury News from yesterday provided an update on May Zhou’s incident where they find her death palpably caused by an overdose of sleeping pills, making her death palpably a suicide. I said “palpably” because I’d still like to pay my condolence and respect for her father, who is still pursuing his private investigation…

Disclaimer: The following statements are purely speculative and not intended to provide any “truth” about the incidents. Please read with your own discretion.

Contradictingly, this makes me feel and perceive even MORE of the pain and solitude, which is definitely unimaginable, that May was experiencing. And ultimately, this is where I draw the parallel with the Virginia Tech student, Seung Hui Cho.

Despite the great disparity between the two’s situations and backgrounds, I sincerely believe that both faced the same internal struggle – a sense of loneliness due to others’ lack of understsanding of their true feelings and mentality, as society and others around them are quick to forced upon them pre-judgement and labels. In May’s case, she’s judged to be successful and happy because how she is so very accomplished and of great scholarship. In Cho’s case, he’s quickly identified as weird, queer, “keep-to-himself” most likely because appearance, backgrounds, and association with “mental problems.” Whatever it is, there is this pre-established “lens”, which others ALWAYS perceive them through that is the main cause of dis-communication. These lenses then become an automatic barrier that prevents May and Cho from being understood and communication on a deeper level. As their days go by with such continuance, pain accumulates and the degree of loneliness increases and finally gets to a point when they’re unbearable…

While May’s case requires no “solution”, let me point out how the Virginia Tech panel has just concluded from investigation into Cho’s case, they will not implement “solutions” that involve arming the school with more securities, adding locks on the classroom doors, offering of more mental health facility, etc. Note how this is not the only time that people come up with such “solutions” followed similar incidents.

Ah, their so-called solutions.

All the while, what we need is more compassion amongst ourselves, amongst human beings. What I see is a clear neglect of that in today’s society. We seem look so far and wide and through all these “complications”, then conclusively think by implementing these fancy, superficially sounded solutions will prevent such problems from happening again, meanwhile not understanding the most basic needs of people in general, at a very simple human level.

This, I think is the source of many problems.

Call me naive or foolish, but I think if someone, anyone has provided true regards to May and Cho’s feelings, and genuinly talk to them without prejudice, knowing that we’re all the same human beings, both tragedies could have been prevented.

I see solutions in nothing fancy. Just basic kindness. Just simple compassion.

Originally posted 2007-08-25 17:04:42. Republished by Blog Post Promoter

Our attitude toward life has a direct relationship with our own perspective.

Our attitude and perspective in turn have a direct influence on our behaviors, our relationships with all things exist, and our ability to react to situations in life.

In other words, capability to see from a high level of perspective allow for balanced human behaviors, harmonic relationships with all things exist, and appropriate reaction to situations in life.

An analogy for the effect of difference in perspective can be the comparison of the view of a caterpillar and the view of a butterfly metamorphized from the caterpillar stage. If you ask a caterpillar to talk about the view of a butterfly, he will not have a single clue.

In regards to perspective for mankind, I find it silly that we have neglected our potentiality for ages. In fact, we undermine it more and more. By that I mean, we are free and capable to adopt many levels of perspective, unlike cartepillar and butterfly and many other insects and animals, and yet we fail to develop it for our own good for the reasons stated above. Our education system does nothing in terms of developing perspective and enforces mere teachings and memorizations of patterns.

A possible break up and definitions of the levels of perspective could be:
Individual — Family/Friends — Local community — State — National — Multi-national — World human population — Earth level (including all organism) — Planetary — Cosmic

The difficulty in communication is that when someone is stuck in a lower level of perspective, good luck trying to tell him about ideas from the higher perspective. You can also have a blast boring the hell out of someone if you try to convey an idea, say, in the national level, when they only allow themselves to see in individual level.

The emphasis is on “they only allow themselves to see” from whatever perspective they want. You cannot force someone to understand unless that person wants to see from a different perspective.

Now, I sincerely believe, for us to get anywhere in solving any world issue, we need a good chunk of people, at least the ones in power, with the understanding and capable of seeing from the “world human population” level at least. The answers will be apparent to those. Until then…

It is very apparent that currently, most people with power and influence at best can see from the “multi-national” level on occasion. Let alone the fact that many of these people and many others are operating for the benefits for the individual level at a high frequency.

I offer no solution to make people see with higher level of perspective. Like I said, you cannot make them. It can only happen when they genuinely seek to see and understand on their own. The trick lies in the foregoing of the belief and ideas from the previous level of perspective before you rise to the next.

So the initial question maybe, how far and wide do we let ourselves see?

The real question, what belief and ideas are we willing to abandon? (abandon not meaning to condemn and forget completely but instead, meaning not letting it to restrict)

People who seek spirituality and enlightenment are really seeking the cosmic perspective with an indescribable understanding that in so far as interconnectedness and relationship goes, there universe is everything including us and thus we are also the universe. To get it, you basically abandon all ideas, including the words that may lead you to get it. Truth is, when a person is restricted by no idea, he is free to see all ideas.

The Chinese goes,

For academic learning, you gain each day.
For understanding Tao, you discard each day.

Another saying we have is that “true love can save the world.”

Now I say, true love arises out of the knowing (allowed by high levels of perspective) that another organism is a part of me as much as my heart is a part of me because our hearts exist as a part of us as much as we are a part of our hearts.

That is because, do you think we can walk around without our hearts?

Originally posted 2010-05-22 23:06:43. Republished by Blog Post Promoter

These days you open the financial news section, there isn’t a whole lot of good news going on in the section.
You see news about people losing their homes to foreclosures, due to “unforeseen” results of lending.
You see news about financial and investment companies losing their pants due to the subprime heap of mess.
You see news about toys recalls and decrease of quality in other products, due to cost cutting.
You see news about people’s booty falling into piles of credit card debt.
You see news about boomers retiring with inadequate savings, due to…I really don’t know, probably a bunch of reasons (excuses).

In turn, people write and argue in the media about what methods to fix each of those problems, and in some cases, bailing out those people. I’d like to say people have gotten it all wrong. I say those problems are just symptoms of a rampant issue in society. By implementing method that solve each of those problems will only provide solutions in the short term. On the long haul, they will come back to bite us once again, and probably with a vengeance.

I say the main issue is greed and irresponsibility. People are so drugged up with greed that lead to a lot of the problems we see today. Profits, profits, profits. And with only profits in mind, people took actions in order to make profits while ignoring or denying the fact that they will be responsible for the consequence later, as is happening in the market these days. As for individual consumers, they have been irresponsible of their own financial matters and future, buy junks and luxury in the cost of future.

Hence, instead of solving those individual problems, I would urge people to put a tap on their greed and blatant ignorance to responsibility. If only people can learn to exercise self-control, maintain a clear mind, practice some discipline, understand responsibility… but those don’t sound very fun. Such boring mumbo-jumbo.

Making quick money is so much more fun!
Having all these things is so much more exciting!
Oh right, eating junk food is so much more fun too!

Perhaps I should shut up, as I appear to be the insensible one here. Or not?

Originally posted 2007-11-21 23:49:29. Republished by Blog Post Promoter

The question of the day is, do we need more advertising? Is more growing advertising revenue to be?

I have already given up on TV a long time ago. Not only were there few shows that are enjoyable, the ever more increasing commercials during a program has made my decision firm. I think there is one day where commercials take up more minutes than the program itself. Perhaps we are there already? I don’t watch enough TV, can someone tell me? :P

The one show I do still watch now is Daily Show (kudos to Jon Stewart), and I have been watching it online for awhile. During this time, I observe a trend. Between segments, it went from 15 seconds commercial, to 15/30 seconds commercial break, to now, 2-3 10/15/30 seconds commerical break.

Is it just me or are we simply gradually transferring the television advertising method to online programs? What happened gradually to television programs is happening to internet programs. It will be the same beast with another skin.

What is next? What is the next medium of “information watching” where we can avoid commercials before it gets overtaken by commercials? Can there be a next thing after internet? I don’t know.

Originally posted 2009-10-11 22:16:24. Republished by Blog Post Promoter