Thanks for using me.

I've just spent the better part of two hours re-reading old blogs, on Myspace. My initial purpose in opening them was to export them into this current expanse of written thought, but alas there is no tool yet invented in which this can be accomplished (Myspace is an asylum). So, I'll merely reference them here, and suggest that further reading can be found there.

My other purpose, spawned and inspired from revisiting past thoughts and writings, is to practice some of my previous styles of writings in which I spent many minutes and hours composing just the right patterns to convey a certain meaning. I can see that that deliberate practice has now produced a certain unconscious behavior. The experience of writing, now, is rather passive, though the end result is still achieved. This may be akin to how a musician feels when transitioning from focused practice to playing without having to think about each component of the piece. In presenting it that way, the latter sounds more appealing; which is to say that thinking less is more appealing than struggling with something. I may be sadistic in this respect, but I prefer the struggle.

These previous blogs tended to focus upon one specific thought or idea. I would think of this idea and then connect it with other ideas and in a sense create a metaphor by applying it to something tangible in which I had experience. The title was also very important in that it presented a twist of information, or a dynamic layer to the rest of the writing. I tried to use words to create imagery through their association with our own personal experiences. For example, the word "tree" presents a common image as well as a personal image for each of us, but the tie that binds is the common elements of our images associated with that word, such as "leaves" "branches" "trunk". Using the common elements, I would link images together to create depth and layers and build upon the original idea to make it a solid, a structure. I can't recall if I was this thoughtful and direct in my original writings, but hindsight has a way of making things more clear, thus I can elaborate now on how I thought then.

I've had many arguments with myself and with others about the nature of relationships; relating with other humans. I specify humans because I want to exclude the relations that we may consider similar, such as those with our pets or with ourselves; relationship specifically refers to the relation between humans. These arguments tend to drift toward determining the purpose of relationships. From an evolutionary standpoint, I perceive relationships to be necessary for survival. Survival not only encompasses the present living generation but also the future generations; relationships are necessary specifically for survival long enough to achieve procreation and further the survival of our genes. In this respect, I am referring to relationships that are necessary for the survival of ideas, which is focusing more on the present need for the nature of relationships. (As an aside, the present need for relationships helps the procreation aspect as well, but that perhaps is a topic for another blog.) Ideas are similar to a seed in the proverbial growth of a plant, from seed to flower. Relationships nurture that growth, and prolong its life at every stage. An idea can occur from the thought of a single human, but the input from others experiences and perceptions tends to nourish the idea as well as takes on certain responsibilities. I personally have felt the experience of rooting the seed of an idea, but being involved in a relationship that did not water it enough to sustain its nourishment, as well as the experience of nourishing an idea through personal interaction within a fruitful relationship. Thus, relationships are necessary for our ideas to grow and to thrive.

Relationships are also selfish in this respect. Our ideas, in a sense, are personal property, and the request for input about a personal idea is the request for that relationship to shift in focus towards one's side. This "selfishness" in a relationship, of course, coincides with the over arching theme that inclusion in a relationship is, in the end, for one's personal gain; and for one's survival because of the added benefit of accomplishment and prolonged sense of worth that is so necessary to human survival. ( I should specify here that I am referring to ideas that would encompass the positive aspects of survival, rather than negative aspects such as fighting or lethal activities, which would ultimately decrease the likelihood of survival!) My ultimate argument proposes that ideas, as an extension of human existence, need human contact to survive. Whether or not that contact is "selfish" does not diminish its importance for any person involved in the relationship. We learn about ourselves through our interactions with others, and therefore need each other to live.