Did curiosity really kill the cat?

So it didn't kill the cat after all. A video that made me feel good about myself and my seemingly never ending questions! Reminded me of that time when my high school chemistry teacher said to my mom in a parents teachers conference, “Your daughter is very inquisitive,” in addition to pointing out something about me asking questions in all cases: when I do or don't understand the content covered (or something around that meaning).

It's something that could act to my benefit, or in some rare cases go against me. Although, asking questions is more helpful than it is futile, in that it helps human beings better understand the world around them. If it wasn't for the curiosity and wonder naturally carved into our minds (almost as natural as having an eye or a nose), we wouldn't be in the level of advancement we are in today.

The video also reminded me of the Theory of Knowledge course I had to take during the course of my two years doing the International Baccalaureate program. Unlike standard academic disciplines, the theory of knowledge course uses a process of discovering and sharing students' views on “knowledge issues” (an umbrella term for “everything that can be approached from a TOK point of view”), so “there is no end to the valid questions that may arise”, “there are many different ways to approach TOK”, “the sheer scope of the TOK course is daunting” and “teachers and students need the confidence to go a little—not too far—outside their traditional comfort zones.”[1]

I have to say the course was a really interesting one and I actually really miss the discussions and umpteen arguments we've undertaken along the way. Oddly enough the teacher who taught it was that same one who made the remark about my inquisitive nature: my chemistry teacher, he taught the TOK course as well. I very much appreciate what he has brought to my plate. Though it was a course he was teaching us, to me it was far more than just that. I was being taught life lessons, most notably the art of intelligently questioning the world around me to get to the bottom of matter. It was very personal because first, we always had to relate the knowledge issues under discussion to our own real-life experiences and second, because I myself am quite fascinated with the whole idea of exploration - whets my always questioning appetite. TOK is like 15% philosophy and the remaining 85% is based entirely of questions, put simply. The most central of these is “How do we know?” Surrounding this central question arises a whole chain of complexly interrelated aspects such as the inquiry into different ways of knowing and into different kinds of knowledge. One of the most valuable lessons it has ultimately taught me is to be mindful of the interpretive nature of knowledge, and of personal ideological biases that are involved with these interpretations.

That being so, the Tunisian historiographer and historian Ibn Khaldun has ignited in me invaluable inspiration in this regard too, so credit goes to him as well! “Basically, I have been compelled by curiosity.” Mary Leakey

Happy Doer

I don't know whether the conscious feeling I experienced the very moment I saw this picture was/is truthful or not. Disregarding the ambiguity, I know for a fact that it was acceptance, contentment, and indulgence in the current chapter of life I'm in. Alhamdul'Allah.

Life is Simple...

People make it complicated. Imagine the world without people. Just animals, trees, mountains, seas. Sounds peaceful right?

Since the dawn of time, war has been a way of life for this world and I don't think it will ever stop. It's not because the people of that country want to have it that way; that is most certainly not the case. I don't think people are born with an urge to be in war, to fight in war, to suffer in war. People are brought up in such a way, and in such an environment that it's as if they've been machined to think, say, and act the way they do (socializm). I'm sure some, if not all, of those soldiers fighting out there, whether it be for or against justice, are doing it not because they have a specific intention, mentality or personality. Yes, there are people with the certain nature that wants to slaughter a man's head alive a day, and stab the hell out of another the next, but that would most probably mean they're sick. Literally. Unless someone's born with such a diseaese, I don't think they want to be put under any such circumstance. And one thing's for sure: people have different beliefs and perspectives of this world, think of it and what happens in it in various ways, and have deviating aims and missions in it. However they most certainly share a common interest: achieving peace. The majority of them at least. So since the majority seeks and wants it, how come we never have it? Why doesn't it exist in this planet?

My answer to this is the lack of negotiation between individuals and groups of individuals. "Individuals" is ambiguous here. It could be applied to countries, couples, siblings, etc. This obviously implies a relationship is present, and that war is a result of disagreement. When insufficient negotiation happens, the conflict develops and gets aggravated to a more serious problem; and if not dealt with, results into a crisis.

The next stage is open to pretty much anything. But nothing really pleasant. Ongoing, abstruse dispute. Divorce. Unhonorable competition. Uncalled for violence, injuries, and deaths. The lost benefits of what could have been a healthy positive relationship. The list of what could happen in this stage is endless. No one but a pshyco finds joy in what could happen here (which i will touch in more details in another post). This conflict could last for years, and badly affects the people involved in it. Yet people continue to their ways of perversity and dispute.

Of course, a little disagrement and conflict is healthy in all sorts of relationships, but the downside is when this gets overly out of hand. Oh well, "C'est la vie" as the french best put it.