Its not everyday that two pleasant surprises turn up at your work place.
Its not everyday that your able to laugh.
But it is because these don't occur everyday that you acknowledge the unique and rarity of such occurrences.
Paratrooper - A person who uses backdoor methods to get into a certain position, whether it be employment, society or royalty.
In this day and age, 'paratrooping' is a common occurrence. So much so that a modern phrased has been coined - 'its not what you know but who you know.' It appears that paratrooping has become an accepted means of action throughout society. However, where is the line drawn? When is it paratrooping acceptable? One could argue that paratrooping is never acceptable. Others would contest that paratrooping is acceptable provided it is merely to get your ' foot in the door' so to speak.
Myself? I prefer the latter reasoning. Once a foothold is in the door, one should rely on their own merits and strengths to further progress. Any further actions of paratrooping would more likely evolve into .... say an all out air assault. One should rely on their own abilities and staple those sheets, copy those papers and run those errands.
Clip for today
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lot60xevN0k
It features Goo Hara.
Aigo cute right ^^
Pe3 Jay
Where footprints in the sand are never alone
Saturday, June 19, 2010
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
Proximity
Sometimes all it takes is a slight bit of proximity to give rise to something greater. Whether it be relationships, business or string theory.
Personally, proximity can be likened to the effect of gravitational pull. Given sufficient proximity to a body of some kind, one can find themselves unequivocally and uncontrollably being drawn in. The question then becomes if the force drawing one in is either substantial or sufficient.
Arguably, sufficient is adequate threshold. Consider this is the context of relationships, whereby certain people are attracted to others auras, personality, looks or concepts. Arguably in such a case, sufficient 'pull' exerted by a person would give rise to mutual relationship. Contrast this to substantial 'pull'. In such a instance, its common to see the relationship develop from a friendship into a more intimate relationship. The question that then remains relates to proximity.
What is sufficient? Is sufficiency adequate? Or the higher threshold of substantial proximity required? Proximity of the heart and mind pertains to be elusive. Whilst it remains unclear the level of proximity to ones heart, that is required, one thing is for certain. That is, physical proximity is not the same as emotional proximity. Unfortunately, activities of the heart and emotion is beyond logical analysis and comparison. It is times like this, that 'trial and error' becomes and an accepted method of testing.
Whether one can show the success of proximity, at this stage is unclear. But like everything else in this area, anticipation is pointless.
Ramblings of
Pe3Jay
On a side note
Sometimes, especially this semester, I wonder why I go to university. Sometimes I wonder if I am capable of studying the course I am. And then I see this, and realise that maybe not all is lost
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dyk_OsmUg7s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XarrlxBTHJY&feature=related
Personally, proximity can be likened to the effect of gravitational pull. Given sufficient proximity to a body of some kind, one can find themselves unequivocally and uncontrollably being drawn in. The question then becomes if the force drawing one in is either substantial or sufficient.
Arguably, sufficient is adequate threshold. Consider this is the context of relationships, whereby certain people are attracted to others auras, personality, looks or concepts. Arguably in such a case, sufficient 'pull' exerted by a person would give rise to mutual relationship. Contrast this to substantial 'pull'. In such a instance, its common to see the relationship develop from a friendship into a more intimate relationship. The question that then remains relates to proximity.
What is sufficient? Is sufficiency adequate? Or the higher threshold of substantial proximity required? Proximity of the heart and mind pertains to be elusive. Whilst it remains unclear the level of proximity to ones heart, that is required, one thing is for certain. That is, physical proximity is not the same as emotional proximity. Unfortunately, activities of the heart and emotion is beyond logical analysis and comparison. It is times like this, that 'trial and error' becomes and an accepted method of testing.
Whether one can show the success of proximity, at this stage is unclear. But like everything else in this area, anticipation is pointless.
Ramblings of
Pe3Jay
On a side note
Sometimes, especially this semester, I wonder why I go to university. Sometimes I wonder if I am capable of studying the course I am. And then I see this, and realise that maybe not all is lost
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dyk_OsmUg7s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XarrlxBTHJY&feature=related
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
Hypocrisy
Hypocrisy and double standards.
The abundance of these in society implies it as an essential part of human nature. It can be found anywhere and everywhere. From politics to law, from economics to education. At the root of all of this is are the individuals. Individuals who subconsciously categorise and subjectively test.
Never an exception, I too have come to realise my double standards. I like many others in an English speaking country, have a certain disposition towards the disregard of basic grammar in the English language. For instance when people say your or ur when the actually mean you're, or the use of an absolute along with a definite.
That is unless you speak English like this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFol7Vna3l8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9oNtDktQNg
No not really more like this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xv61M0YC_gg&feature=player_embedded
Love myself some engrish
The abundance of these in society implies it as an essential part of human nature. It can be found anywhere and everywhere. From politics to law, from economics to education. At the root of all of this is are the individuals. Individuals who subconsciously categorise and subjectively test.
Never an exception, I too have come to realise my double standards. I like many others in an English speaking country, have a certain disposition towards the disregard of basic grammar in the English language. For instance when people say your or ur when the actually mean you're, or the use of an absolute along with a definite.
That is unless you speak English like this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFol7Vna3l8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9oNtDktQNg
No not really more like this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xv61M0YC_gg&feature=player_embedded
Love myself some engrish
Sunday, June 13, 2010
Obsession
It starts off innocently, as it always does. Its simply an interest, a method to help pass the time.
Yer that's what it was suppose to be >0<
Now it's like an obsession. A day can't pass without it. In all likeliness the time isn't sufficient to be called a day. More like a moment.
And just when I think I am beginning to grow out of it, something like this comes along.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WE0BwYfLzkA
And like that the obsession begins again.
Yer that's what it was suppose to be >0<
Now it's like an obsession. A day can't pass without it. In all likeliness the time isn't sufficient to be called a day. More like a moment.
And just when I think I am beginning to grow out of it, something like this comes along.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WE0BwYfLzkA
And like that the obsession begins again.
다시 만난 세계
Whether it will blindly white lights with a ominous silhouette, or simply the dawn of a new day.
It has begun.
It has begun.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)