Korea Tour Afterthoughts

Looking back at my Korean tour, I noticed that there was a great deal of involvement from the diners when cooking the food. Unlike the other tours I had where the food is already completely prepared when served, the local Korean restaurants, more often than not, serve you raw ingredients.

There are certain advantages to this kind of method. First, and most obvious of all, the food is guaranteed to be cooked fresh (unless you don't know the basics of cooking). Next is that you can customize your food from how much spices you want to add to how well-done you want the meat cooked. Finally, a hands-on experience is one of the best way to appreciate the culture of a country and its people. Food is one of the objects that best reflects a culture. You get to experience an activity the people do on a daily basis. You witness not only their eating habits but also the creativity people pour into their cooking processes. The spices and flavors you taste can even tell you a lot about their preferences, the crops they grow and their necessities from which their culinary ingenuity was born. Having this unique chance to be behind the grill made me more open to and appreciative of the culture of Korea.

Philosophical Journey: Kant

The thing I like about Philosophy is that you can predict the style of writing by the nationality or cultural background of their respective authors. Americans are known to be organized and always conclude their works by repeating and summarizing what they've said. The French are notorious for being messy and seemingly having no direction at all (as in the case of Levinas). German philosophers write in a very systematic and straightforward manner. Sometimes, the work becomes too systematic that one can get overwhelmed by the degree of organization the author has invested in it (but I'll take the German philosophers over the French any day). This is exactly what I encountered when I studied Kant.

I'll tell you right away that reading Immanuel Kant was no walk in the park. That's because he kept mentioning terms like universalizability, Kingdom of Ends and categorical, which were all alien to me (I then realized that "categorical" meant "unconditional" and not used as a function of enumeration). It was only then later when I encountered his philosophy multiple times in other subjects that I was able to grasp his message, which turned out to be very simple. Immanuel Kant essentially advocates the rule of law, or more specifically, following your maxims. The core message of his philosophy can be summarized by the "Golden Rule": do to others what you would like to be done to you. And it is this maxim or rule that should be followed out of moral duty.

Despite the criticisms on Kant's philosophy for being very vague, his ideas on moral duty is what appealed to me the most. It is still my dominant guiding principle up to this day. It really makes a lot of sense because our duties give direction and meaning to our lives. It is what gives us reason to exist on this planet in the first place. More importantly, it is that sense of duty that drives us to get things done. It is the initiator and catalyst for a person's accomplishments. We do certain things in the name of fulfilling our duties.

Kant's ideas are very noble and chivalrous like that of medieval knights but they once again hit a snag. We now know that fulfilling our duties is a must but our duties are linked to our roles. And it is these roles or careers that we must find for ourselves first before we can determine our moral obligations. What are we called to do? Where do we fit in society? Are we called to be doctors, politicians, lawyers? These are the questions that I continuously struggle with and what helped me answer them came two semesters later when I studied Eastern Philosophy.

Philosophical Journey: Levinas

Emmanuel Levinas was probably the first and most difficult ethics philosopher I encountered. I remember taking up his philosophy right after studying Heidegger. My instructor, Ms Jacinto, said that Levinas' works were born out of his experience during the second world war as a P.O.W. They were also responses to Heidegger's philosophy. Unfortunately, it took me a while before I could appreciate his works since he's French and the French are notorious for being messy and chaotic with their compositions. I'm not joking on this one. The directions of his sentences were all over the place that I could not get the message of his articles.

In a nutshell, Levinas talks about responsibility and the other as an enigma. His concept of the human being as an enigma, or as a puzzle shatters the fatalistic image of Dasein in Heidegger's works. We are not simply beings going towards death. Humans are like puzzles or mysteries whom one cannot fully determine or reduce as an object. In other words human beings, or the others, are full of surprises. And this enigmatic characteristic of the other is the basis of his advocacy of responsibility. Being responsible for the other is a sign of respect. It is how an individual recognizes the other's subjecivity and the limitlessness of their possibilities. This sense of inexhaustible potential does not only lift the limits of what the other can do but also what the other can become. It gives a sense of chance, hope and belief in the growth of an individual. It recognizes the possibility that a criminal can change for the better or that a corrupt leader can be convinced to work for the prosperity of a nation. We have no right to objectify and box-in an individual because we simply cannot have a hundred percent certainty on what they are capable of. Unfortunately, Levinas is silent on how long before these changes could take place. It is not question of when but how.

The philosophy of Levinas is truly an attempt to criticize the works of Heidegger. Despite our common destiny of dying, it is not an excuse for us to disregard our relationship with the others and their personhood. Well, that finally restored my confidence in humanity but Levinas wasn't enough to repair the damage Heidegger did. It was just a shame that he said nothing about religion... at least, not in our lectures.

Philosophical Journey: Heidegger

Among the first philosophers I met was Martin Heidegger. I can immediately say that my encounter with his philosophy was very unpleasant. Sure, I learned a lot of life's truths from him. Like how we are alone, how we are thrown into this world, how dependent we are on time and how we are given life only to lose it in the end. I became more aware about these inescapable facts. Unfortunately, these truths were so depressing that it awakened the emo in me.

Heidegger's discussions on death made me realize how limited my time is on this planet. What's worse is that all the things I do here would amount to nothing since I'm going to die in the end with a hundred percent certainty. If that is the case, then what is the point of living? What is there to hope for? It is so tempting to sit in a corner and wallow in depression since death is going to waste us all anyway.

Death is the ultimate mystery and I can't deny that Heidegger came up with many good points about it. First is about how one's death really shows the individuality of a being. He argued that each person's end is really their own experience because they cannot share it with someone in anyway. This pointed out to the fact that we really are alone.

Second is about how people try to make the most out of what they can in life. They pursue happiness whether it may be earning material wealth, gaining knowledge or deepening their faiths in an almighty Being. He said that people engage in these activities only because they want to distract themselves from the anxiety brought about by the fact of death. This was the point that got me thinking about my faith. What if Heidegger is right all along? What if people are simply engaging in religious activities because they want salvation? Doesn't that self-serving drive degrade the value of faith? And that's not all. What if religion was merely another creation of mankind (Dasein) to distract themselves from death. After all most, if not all, religious teachings preach about an eternal afterlife. There is no empirical proof about an afterlife. All we hold on to is our faith.

It's no wonder I got depressed after every PH 101 class. Heidegger created a big dent in my faith and almost made me throw it away. His discussion of individuality and death made me feel very alone. It made me lose all purpose in life and extinguished all hope I had. Life became a curse because all people are forced to face the great unknown of death.

Damn you Heidegger.

Philosophical Journey: The Introduction

Philosophy was a subject that used to be so alien to me. I never understood its purpose and objectives. I used to think that it's another academic hurdle that I need to overcome since unfortunately, my school was one of the few, if not the only university in the country, that made the subject compulsory. Whenever I entered Ms. Jacinto's class, I had this feeling of isolation from everything else as if I'm encased inside a shell. It felt like the lessons are disagreeing with me and that my brain is refusing to process the lectures. I felt no progress and spent most of the class time staring blankly into space since I could not keep up with the pace. I kept trying my best to review the lessons on my own but to no avail. Everything seemed absolute gibberish.

Every session, I kept wondering if there was something wrong with me. I just found it so difficult to understand why those philosophers could not construct formal paragraphs and sentences to express what they want to say. Why do they invent their own words and add "ness" to those nouns and adjectives? Why do they keep on asking questions and leaving them unanswered? What made things worse was the feeling that I'm alone in this struggle. The rest of my peers seemed to have no trouble absorbing the lectures. I still remember my classmates who kept looking down at their notebooks and writing feverishly as if they are taking down every single word the teacher was saying. Nobody had any questions and if they did, it would be so advanced and insightful that I could not grasp it.

I hated philosophy at that time. Like all of my other minor subjects, I never saw its importance in my life after graduation. I really felt that this subject was going to be my downfall. Philosophy felt like a ticking time bomb since the semester was half way done and I still could not understand anything. Fortunately, Ms. Jacinto was lenient enough with my performance and my grades. I can say that I was just really lucky for surpassing that ordeal but it will take two whole semesters before I really learned to appreciate the discipline.

After Four Years...

After waiting four years, which seemed like an eternity, our Ateneo High School yearbook is finally out. To be honest, I actually forgot the existence of this book since it took so long for it to be published. And I find it unfair that some alumni who went abroad won't be able to claim the item that they PAID for.

So... is all that wait worth it? I really can't tell. Why? Check out the photo below. No, I didn't make a mistake of taking a picture of the book upside down. I want you to pay attention to the small label on the cover...

3 days? WTF?!?

When I finally open the book and benefit from its contents, I have actually waited 4 years + 3 days. Is this a way of having a last laugh on us after making us wait for so long? What the hell? Will the pages disintegrate when the book is taken out of its plastic cover within 3 days? Maybe they are hiding some subversive material printed on the book and it will take 3 days for that content to disappear. It sounds crazy, but I don't want to take any chances. My damn imagination is getting the better of me again...

Aphrodisiac Anonymous: Is Love Selfish?

Probably the most difficult question to answer is, "Why do you like her?" or "Why are you so attracted to him?" And at least once in our lifetime we encounter that question with no immediate and clear answer.

If you notice a lot, if not all, of our answers have to do with something that benefits us. We often say, "I like him because he's popular", "I like her because she's drop dead gorgeous." No matter how emotional or non-materialistic our answers might be, it always seem to point back to ourselves and our preferences. "I want to be with her because she makes me feel complete", "I don't want to see him getting hurt."

We can't deny that a lot of us have ideals and "templates" of the perfect person we want to be with. Humans often fail to realize that we fall into the trap of being fixated on that ideal. When a person does not fit our template, that unfortunate individual is immediately scrapped like garbage. People fail to see the true identity or "spirit" of a person. What I'm saying is summed up, in a shallow way, in the maxim, "Do not judge a book by its cover" Some like popular people thinking that the fame will rub off on them. Some like people with good looks simply because they don't want their eyes to burn. These examples of shallow, inauthentic love is easy to understand. But what about the not-so-shallow ones?

There are those relationships that were born out of authentic emotions and serious deliberations. But can we say that the reasons behind those commitments are ultimately selfish even if the two people are not aware of it? "I committed myself to her because my heart yearns for her." "I want to be with him because he makes me feel complete." Aren't these typical answers simply tell us that people only love to satisfy the emotional emptiness that they feel? Again, there is this element of going back to the self. Even the heroic phrase, "I will die for you because you are special to me," is nothing more than an acknowledgement of a personal preference, right?

If love means offering yourself to another, is there a way to do it that does not involve you benefiting from it (or at least going back to you)? Is it possible to love with no selfish reason? Is it possible to love with no reason at all?

Probably it's time to recognize the true spirit of another. The only love that I can think of with no selfish reason is to simply love an individual for who he/she really is.

Fire? Where?

An unexpected incident suddenly disturbed the silence of the Rizal Library just this afternoon. A deep, loud and piercing alarm was heard throughout the building. The sound wasn't the kind you'd usually hear when school bells ring. It was more of like the sound of an alarm when a reactor is having a meltdown. You get the picture. At first I thought it was the fire drill. But then two things popped out of my mind. First, the drills were scheduled on a Wednesday. Today's a Thursday. Second, it's already 5:30pm. The drills were only supposed to happen from 8am to 5pm! After I saw some of the library officials frantically searching the nearby rooms and corridors of the library, it daunted on me. Holy crap this is for real!

We evacuated the building but fortunately, nobody panicked. In fact, nobody knew what the alarm was for and what exactly is going on. A lot of people even ignored it. If it weren't for the librarians who told them to evacuate, they would still be in their seats minding their own business.

I really don't know what happened back there. Maybe it was a malfunctioning alarm. Maybe it was a real fire. As far as I know, they didn't find anything there. Not even traces of smoke. After the alarm was disabled everyone returned inside. But I didn't want to go back in. I didn't want to take any chances.

Aphrodisiacs Anonymous: Introduction

It's the topic not everyone is willing to talk about openly. It's difficult to put it into words since it's the heart that rules the body and not the mind. Many have fallen in but few were able to get out. Yes, it's the ambivalent "L" word that is creating lives as well as destroying them.

Many, if not all, would rather talk about love vaguely and metapohorically rather than literally and up close. The reason being is that love is considered as something transcendental. It is even beyond emotions that simple words, rules and logic cannot fully comprehend this unique, yet strange, human characteristic. This is why love is expressed through poems and songs. If one tries to discover the true essence of love, he would probably not find any concrete conclusion or would go insane trying. After all, it's all about emotions, so why get the brain involved? Others would see love as a very personal affair. They would refuse to engage with the lives of others for the fear of being labeled as a meddler. This is why many would rather sit back and let it be - let love take over the mind and see what would happen next.

However, I refuse to be complacent to love because it is more than a feeling of emotional intoxication. I admit that love is transcendental but the problems that go along with it are not. There are more things that happen beyond that first kiss and beyond that engagement ring. Love doesn't always translate to a happy ending. If you believe that, you might as well live in a fairytale. Some hapless souls only see its addictive part making them vulnerable and unprepared to face its harsh reality. I want to ask questions about the various problems of love and relationships. I want to ask what brings two people together and what separates them. I am not trying to prove a point nor am I trying to reach a compromise. I'm not even assuming I'm correct with the tings I say here. I've had my share of bad relationships but I could still be wrong. But as I enumerate and criticize them, I hope to draw out some useful insights that may help people make the proper choices in dealing with these relationship problems. Relying solely on emotions can lead to your own demise. You need to ask and think once in a while.

*I don't intend Aphrodisiacs Anonymous to be a static post, so constructive replies from readers that will make the topic more meaningful are greatly appreciated*