I Can’t Get No Satisfaction
Alot of us like saying the phrase "Take me as I am", and are empowered by it. And I cannot resist the temptation of asking: But who is "I" [sic]? What exactly do we refer to when we say "I"? Or what characteristics of ourselves do we refer to when we ask people to accept us for what we are?
Granted that the same people who like the cliche would have no problem enumerating their personal pro’s and con’s which they want people to accept, I still feel that something somewhere might be wrong with that line of thinking. The main issue with it is that in effect, it creates an "esssence" of one’s self and there by limiting that self. For example, if by "taking you as you are" we mean accepting you for being goodlooking but stupid, or vice versa, do we not then define and limit ourselves to definition? Are we then conceding that we will forever be proverbial "dumb blondes"? Or are we then encouraging complaceny and hindering self improvement?
Of course in the end, this is probably a false dilemma. Maybe we just like saying it whenever we feel bad about our shortcomings and flaws. I guess the key then is to ask people to accept not everything that you are right now, but just the fact that everyone is a perpetual work in progress. To make reference to an overused joke, just because no one’s perfect, doesn’t mean you don’t keep on practicing.
And lest we think that this is too masochistic a mantra to follow, it is precisely because we love ourselves and more importantly, others, that we then constantly want to become better human beings. Contentment and satisfaction should NOT be equal to stagnation.
November 18th, 2006 at 5:51 pm
four things:
1. i always believe that there is this practicality in labels, in definitions. we call this as this, para madali. and however i try to argue against the inappropriateness of that act, that all-too-human practice, wala rin. dahil i myself benefit from it.
2. labels/definitions (we associate with ourselves) are limiting, but we can change it whenever we want to.
3. the “progress” and “improvement” one makes are also, ironically, definitions, and thus limited and limiting (not to mention biased): evident in them is this belief that the only direction one follows is forward, that there is only one line towards success.
3a. i know, progress connotes a certain dynamism within the process. pero think of it this way: nadapa ako, babangon, madadapa muli, at babangon muli. pero lahat yon naganap sa isang diretcho, tuloy-tuloy, at mahabang landas na tinatahak ko sa paglalakbay patungo sa aking sarili.
4. we make use of definitions, sadly, because there’s no other option. we define ourselves because there is no other option: not defining ourselves is also, ironically, definitive.
5. wag ka na sa friendster blog. korni dito, walang customization. mag-blogger ka na lang. dali! now na.
November 20th, 2006 at 12:38 am
This is so POWERFUL indeed!
Nobody can ever make you feel average without your permission.
Ingratitude and criticism are going to come your way;
they are part of the price you pay for leaping past mediocrity.
When you make your mark in life you’ll ALWAYS attract erasers!
Never surrender your dreams to noisy negatives!
From The Enemy Called Average
yup. i believe.
November 21st, 2006 at 6:43 am
To ie, first of all hello. kamusta ka na?
Good points. It’s oh-so-philosophy-of-language of you to bring those issues up.
I’d just like to clarify that I am not attacking labels per se.
In fact I agree that they are inevitable and that they can benefit us immeasurably. You are also right that while they may be limiting, we can change those labels any time we want. Which is precisely my point.
Granted that the human mind functions with definitions,
by saying “Take me for what I am”, I feel that we limit our choices of labels and definitions, our meta-labels if you will.
Point is, I don’t think that this should be an epistemological or linguistic argument in the sense that we point out that everything is a label anyway, so that they are all equally “evil” and therefore equally “good”.
There will be points wherein we must limit ourselves or strive towards ideals which we deem worthy-whatever they may be. But let’s not make matters worse by limiting ourselves before we even get there. And if you’re ALREADY there, and have no desire to change or improve, then I congratulate and envy you.
November 21st, 2006 at 1:03 pm
i also don’t believe you’re attacking labels. ikaw pa, eh given na sa’yo ang limits of language.
probably everything has label. i’m not so sure. and i don’t think i will assert that. what i want to emphasize is the limited-ness of human understanding, the struggle to understand the world around him, the desperation involved in it, and the resort to a crooked language.
ewan, siguro between you and me, you’re the optimistic (not to mention goal-and-progress-oriented) one. and no, i’m not ALREADY there. in fact, i think i’ve been stuck in the same spot for a few months now.
November 22nd, 2006 at 1:02 am
Halluu Carl! Interesting entry. Let’s talk about it sa sunod na bonanza. I miss the lowlahs. Hmaaaahh! From Deka