since i really don't enjoy writing so much as thinking the thoughts, i shall endeavor to make this quick and to the point. i'm slowly figuring out the why's of questions i hadn't even thought to ask years ago, and i'm trying to apply these ideas to some kind of application. to be clearer, i've decided 'why' is the only real question that drives me these days, and since i don't lead a terribly exciting life, i gotta make some sense out of it. the biggest why for me deals with my taste in the arts, and the people in my life's taste. where does it come from, what do we look for, so on and so forth, those all stem from the big question, why?

this is the toughest part. because then you run in to a large roadblock called the truth. doesn't sound like so much, but when you look closer at it, the truth is a slippery thing. there are bigger truths that i don't think are changable, truths that deal with the interactions between humans. for example, don't kill, don't lie, so on and so forth. i'm sure there are many negotiable traits that could fall under the scrutiny of absolute truths, and that's fine, i'm not here to explore that. however, i will point out that we all apply truths to our taste. we listen, read, watch so many things, over so many countless hours of our day, that we develop our patterns, our preferences, our likes and dislikes. we do this by developing rules of acceptable truths. we believe in the things we perceive, simply because we naturally assume we are right. nothing wrong with that, how else could you live? it'd be impossible to live your days, not being sure of the reality of things. we have to rely on our senses. but when it comes time to judging things using our judging capacities, we are hampered by the fact that we can only judge using the things we know. inevitably people make mistakes simply because of lack of information. i say this because it applies to our tastes. we judge things by the amount of information we have, how that sits with our genetic chemistry, and how that applies the the perceived object. you hear a new band on the radio that is being hailed as being "original," and not having any prior knowledge of music, you assume that this criteria is true, and you like the song, or you don't. however, the same thing is played in the stereo of someone who listens to music all the time, thinks the song sounds like one they've heard years ago, thus finds the song derivative and displeasing. both people see this judgement as a truth in their mind, but yet the end result is that neither agree on the song. so why is it that truth, something that sounds so easily distinguishable ends up being so murky? in the end, truth could be compared to wairing contact lenses. depending on the pair that you're wearing, your idea of truth changes. not to be obvious, but if we as people could learn to recognize the prejudice of we're always right, then we might just be growing.

anyway, so yeah. just thought i'd put that out there.

frivved up by Matt at 5:54 PM