Archive for April, 2007

Graces…

Wednesday, April 18th, 2007

I never thought of getting an ace in the lady poetess’ class.  The
most that I’ve had for an estimate was 1.5.  Months back, I thought I
must have waged an intellectual war with her.  From November to
February, I oftentimes end my saturday classes with momentary
heartbreaks… (until I attend the evening mass, teehee!)  Albeit my
abrupt silence, thanks for recognizing that am trying (way) hard to get
through the playful  words.  Thanks for my making my crude words of
truth survive.  Again, thanks for the flat one Ma’am Ophie.

And
thanks to lit majors classmates for the wonderful friendship.  (Ynna,
Carla, Anderson, Ma’am Tet, Sir Benj, Sherwin, Burns, Eman, Kim, Essel,
Cecille, Daddy Ben, SIR JACK etc.)  I love you all.  See you around guys. =)

To
Dr. Hornedo, just the same.  Thanks for seeing my effort to dismiss my
class in Arts and Letters early just to catch your lectures; and for
appreciating my report, despite my being hyperventilated.  Thanks for
the ace.  =)

The dream’s still alive.  Go for the gold na itu.  (woohoo)

A PRIORI: from epistemology to ethics

Monday, April 16th, 2007

So i shall have my last strike of vice before I get back into
writing.  After this, I’ll just have Levinas and Merleau-Ponty (and
occasions of sporting activities, that’s for certain).

A priori is a mode of knowing that comes before experience.  It obviously came from the word prior which means before.  My first serious encounter of the term was with Immanuel Kant in the Preface of the Critique of Pure Reason
where he extended this epistemic tool into metaphysics.  We know
numbers in an a priori sense, there is an immediate and internal
experience of "number two" if one says "two."  One does not necessarily
need two trees nor bananas to think of "two" — since this number comes
to the mind prior than its representations.  It means to say that when
we speak of a priori, we do not just speak of how one knows but what
one knows.  Phenomenologists took the term seriously, while referring
immediately to a kind of being that exists prior to experience.
Instead of focusing on traditional mind-mechanisms like anamnesis
(where one draws out what is essentially "his", i.e., had been
internalized), a priori becomes a mode of existence — a permanent and
independent one.  A good example of this is how we know about the
existence of our nape.  It takes a mirror, and not a direct
encounter/experience to realize that we have one.  Another would be the
things that we are deprived from when we are invincibly ignorant — we
may know, yet we do not have the chance to do so.  A thing is an a
priori insofar as it is — regardless of the knower, or of the mode of
experience.  Max Scheler, on the other hand, would talk of a priori
values or fixed virtues that we strive to comply with in order to put
up an ethical life.  This means to say that even if we live according
to experience, and according to our preferred order of values, we are
always called to make things right — to comply with an a priori, which
is in accordance to our nature as human beings. 

Traditionally
, an a priori becomes an a priori because of its being fixed — it is
there, and is bound to exist because of its telos - reason or
rationale.  This should be easy when thinking of plain concepts.
Epistemic products, plain mind-objects that are cold and abstract would
be amenable to the fixed character of the a priori.  However, this
becomes a big problem when talking of human experience.

Nailing a
friendship into a lifetime kind, for example, is putting a relation
into a stable and fixed state.  We could even say that friends who had
been struggling to be good and worthy for each other are meant to be
friends - the relation must have been fated — and despite all the
hardships, an implicit sense of commitment can always be seen that
makes the link PERMANENT.  For the thought that friendship shall last
forever, these two persons could always believe that the link shall
stay same — through thick and thin, no matter what happens and no
matter what they will.  For every error, there is forgiveness.  For
allowing the other to grow, there’s permissiveness.  For the holy name
of respect, there’s proximity — distance and space, while having in
mind that friends shall always remain friends, if they truly are
friends.  There is then an a priori sense of friendship.  Proof to this
are the following lines, "No matter what happens, we remain friends.
Regardless if you care or not, I would still accept you." (implicit:
do whatever you want, you’re a friend to me) OR "You’ll always be a
friend, regardless of what you say.  I shall never betray you anyway."
(implicit: you’re a friend to me even if i disappoint you).  Now I
think these lines serve as threats. 

I move that we should not
be complacent with these wonderful a prioris.  Sure I won’t betray, but
by my own doing I can always be turned away from.  I can’t keep human
relations, and in this given example a wonderful friendship, just on my
own.  Being tired, feeling wounded and useless for being not listened
to are heavy responses to complacency, because "friendship will always
yet just be there — no matter what".  While a priori refers to the
"relation" — it cannot totally cover human experience.  I am keeping
not a linkage of ideas but of lived persons.   Unfaltering love and
concern does not mean "just being around", it means keeping up, saving
things and values not because it allays my heavy heart within this
particular moment but because it is slowly creating me as a person who
is up to what is good.   I think we should be reminded that flexing a
priori to human experience
calls for a sort of maintenance.  We keep things that are fixedly good
through an active sense of commitment.  We are now called again to
weigh, to understand values as how they come.  To clear, this is not
objectification, but a proper way of understanding a person in way he
makes himself. 

By friendship, we understand that there are
things that we can always nail as fixed, hail as a priori or even
fated, yet we may easily lose.  Even if thought of, feelings may always
make it slither away.  And with that, one has to be careful.  At this
stance, we are not just dealing with concepts nor of cold commitments.
We deal with reality. 

            

the ironic part about making things right (a cross-post)

Saturday, April 14th, 2007

This had been a lingering (though hopefully not perpetual) complaint.

To make everything straight and perfect, bleed to finish a degree
earlier than expected, to live by (and die for) your principles… to
remain true, to be a real good friend, to pray hard not just for
yourself but for others, to dream for your family, to aim high, to risk
everything in order to prove that you can love…

…only to get
hurt, to be left on the side because you are thought of as
self-sufficient, to be approached only on times when you are needed, to
forgive at all times albeit the non-stop emotional throbs, to put your
head above your emotions BECAUSE YOU ALWAYS OUGHT TO UNDERSTAND, to be
pressured to remain strong and perfect because you’re on the right
track…

… in exchange of nothing but affirming nods, smiles,
handshakes; only to find out that they will be leaving you after you’ve
rendered what they need.  You get what you deserve, but you only get
what they think you need.  Extras — there’s none.  Compensated?  Yes.
It always had been fair, just, well-computed.  But how about the extra
juice of life that I dream of tasting?   

Isn’t it strange that
there are other people who are actually not doing anything to get the
things they enjoy?  I am not saying that they do not deserve it, but I
could just empathize with the non-prodigal son.  He did nothing to
break his father’s heart, but he never had the best treatment.  Perhaps
I am just feeling the same. 

During the past week, I’ve battled
with God due to this highly Catholic issue — preferential option for
the poor.   Not that I want to confiscate all the comforts that these
undeserving people get but I would like to know how on earth do they
have a great taste of all of them.  I did not get a straight answer
from Him, but am praying for the time that I’ll get to understand what
it truly means.  Shame on me and my scholarship, I wrote an MA thesis
on the Hermeneutics of the Poor of Yahweh, but I find it difficult in
my heart to swallow the lessons that I’ve chewed in my research.
Having a heart for the poor would be fine, but how about those who
became miserable because of their own doings?  Preferential options for
the brats and damsels in distress, anyone? 

I probably need the
grace of humility, yes… in order for me to admit that I am also
yearning for things that I might have come too tired to compute or
estimate.  Yes people, despite all of these…  I am in dire need of
something I can’t even see for myself.

And what could that be?  I dunno.  Real friends would prolly just know.

Sorry, emotional fluxes.

a good find

Monday, April 9th, 2007

THE OLD PLDT-JVP AD

PLEASE CLICK THE HYPERLINK ABOVE.

now i believe in serendipity.
the last time i saw this was in gradeschool or perhaps early highschool.  this is an old pldt ad, a part of the "people can make a nation work" series that featured jvp and had "Awit ng Paghahangad" as its musical score.  i remember some people from the BukasPalad Messageboard who collectively thought that they once encountered an ad that had the vespers version of the aforementioned song.  Having found this, I conclude that the speculations are right.
the video is not just heart-warming, but melting.  napatitig ako sa kawalan.  hehehe.
galeng.  cheers!

we shall shatter this artificial world

Sunday, April 1st, 2007

    The title of this entry originated from a part of Tracy’s "note of
thanks"  (that’s how we call our valedictory speech in UST).  She’ll be
saying it proud later, but she and Amiel gave me a sneak preview of
their speeches as early as two weeks ago. 

    Tracy had been
told to change the word, "shatter" because it sounds heavy plus the
fact that it could just appeal to the philosophical community. Amiel,
perhaps for the inclusion of Fr. Ferriols, "ilundag mo beybe" safely
passed the jurors.  Probably, they found the phrase cute, but am not
sure if everyone will have a grasp of what it truly means.
Nonetheless, he was also adviced to reduce the metaphysical undertones
of his address of petition (and that’s the thomasian way of calling
"salutation").
    
    Amiel and Trace made highly existential
speeches, close to being metaphysical but is very much meaningful.  I
am proud of the way these two (and the other 30ish) brilliant minds
absorbed philosophy.  As their welfare under my "loving" custody is
coming to a technical close, I could but pray that they will carry on
with their quest for meaning.  I’ll miss them sitting in my class,
raising good questions  — nodding, even if I know that they’re already
half asleep (thanks for the support guys).  Benjo reciting in class
while converting everything to Lacan or Levinas.  Kris Martus or
Voltaire getting my microphone because I talk low and slow, and I need
to be heard because we always talk along a "process".  I shall miss
them lurking around AB and at the eccle library, because of their
research work, or in the case of the matronas — sightseeing
a few good philosophers.  TGR and the boys’ team complaining about the
popularity of eccle’s wonder twins.  Perhaps not at YM, but I will
surely miss these kids’ actual company –  pulling me out of the
Faculty room for some short talks and hearty laughs.   Robert, dropping
me off in front of sir bob, Rommel sharing his all-time hit jokes, JP
harassing Peter and Peter talking of Wojtyla.   The girls tracing
friendster-dot-coms among themselves.  The guys dreaming of becoming
champions in basketball, and in engaging the lower years in their
"philosophical" games.  I shall miss everyone trying to have a grab of
the microphone (during videoke sessions) with Tracy and Levi as the
usual winners.  The good talks, Kali’s "new beginning" and many
others. 

    I am so proud of what these kids have become, and
Trace and Amiel’s speeches will simply reveal.  I am praying that they
will always be spurred by the same interest for truth and meaning that
they have right now.  I am praying that their idealisms will never
falter.  I am so proud that they are able to recognize that philosophy
is not but a rite of passage to another degree, to an occupation or so
- but to a better self, and to better decisions in life.  When
requested to remove the term "shatter" from her speech, I advised Tracy
to disobey and retain it, and she said that she also intends to do so.
EVERYBODY DESERVES THAT HEAVY WORD.  Having heard that, I was so happy
– this call for an authentic experience deserves to be heard.  And
yes, the call could only come from a philosopher — an authentic
philosopher.

    True enough, we need to shatter accidents in
order to arrive at meaning.  And at times, we need to jump from our
comfort zones.  The things that used to numb our thoughtful sensibility
to and for life, needs to annihilated.   We are all confronted by a
complicated world, the human challenge is to find ourselves in its
midst and to conquer the world through decisions that we can die for.
It is true that we dwell in the world, but it is also true that we have
to act upon that same world.  More than history and perhaps anything
else, the most sovereign entity in this enterprise is man who grabs his
life’s steering wheel and determines the path he wishes to tread.  This
man is always entitled to his choice of path, but reason and the drive
for authentic existence could just lead him to the truth and good –
and of course we talk not of those we carelessly dictate, but of the
objective and authentic ones.  To shatter, nonetheless, implies a kind
of rebuilding.  It is the moment where we identify ourselves apart from
what we do not essentially need.  In this stage, decisions can’t be
made just for pleasure, fun or perhaps because it’s cute or gay.  To
shatter the artificial world means to choose for what is right and to
die for it, to succumb into the difficulty, not because suffering makes
an act noble, but because it is the only way to conquer the obstacles
to an authentic life.  It happens when we choose to give up the things
that we could be entitled to, but are nonetheless unimportant to what
we intend to become.  To shatter means to sacrifice, for the sake of
something higher.  It means intentionally going beyond, because staying
in the usual cage would only lead to a creation of endless and
pointless circles. To shatter means to grab the chance of soaring high,
not because what’s up there is cute; but because through shattering,
one becomes free.

    This teacher, this intellectual midwife, or
perhaps mother, is proud to hear her children speak of their thoughts
and hearts that had been crystallized by four meaningful years of
academic discipline.  I am so proud, truly proud.

    I have to
warn you my beloved that life wouldn’t be as easy as how it had been in
college. (uhhm, had it been easy for you guys anyway)  But you’re
fully-packed, very much loaded, it’s just a matter of carrying on with
the battle.  With what you have right now, soar high and make us
prouder.  Continue your pilgrimage.  Should you come back, you’re
forever welcome.