Archive for the ‘Philosophy’ Category

Age and Love

Sunday, February 3rd, 2008

As you grow older, more and more things become perceptible to you. One of them is noticing how similar you actually are with your parents. I guess it’s because you have had more years to see and realize the similarities and because you are aging closer and closer to your parents when they raise you.

For many years, I have been aware of how similar my mother’s and my personality are. We are both very talkative, we can be bossy, we can be arrogant, we like attention, we like to be praised and acknowledged (though I have a fair bit more restraint and humility in that regard, I think ;-). These are the big broad strokes of our personalities.

But what I start to realize over the years is the smaller strokes, the details, the small mundane thoughts and views that really fill up the picture and make our painting of a personality complete.

For instance, my mother would always yell at us for eating before meals. Proper meals are very important. It means we are eating good healthy food. It means we are appreciating the food, in which she put so much hard work and thought. It means we are enjoying it together, as a group, as a family.

If you ate before a meal, then you don’t have that appetite anymore, and hence you are really no longer interested in sitting down and, well, eating. And this presents a catastrophe.

I have always been aware of my stern stand on “no food before meal”, whether it’s going out to appreciate a nice meal or a meal I have prepared. It’s always important to have that appetite. This I knew.

I never fully realized how much I inherited this belief until this morning. And what makes this realization complete was when I have gradually learned to give up this perfectionist idea, at least once in a while.

This morning, my sister/mom/aunt are supposed to meet my cousin Billy and his wife Eva for lunch, then we are supposed to go over to his place to play with his three-months-old toddler. My sister called me at 11:17 and told me she’s having breakfast. My mother’s teachings and my own annoyances flashed for a brief moment. I, unlike many times before, did not complain. I did not bitch and ask her why she had chosen to eat just an hour before we are supposed to eat.

So what changed?

I realize that even if she had eaten breakfast, and by her eating less at lunch. That’s unlikely to make everyone a lot less happier. You can think of this as economics as you wish. The happiness lost is really quite marginal and insignificant. But, on the other hand, having that perfectionist personality and its effect on others around me can be quite tiring and hard to live with.

And I learn that from being with my seven-months-sweetheart Sofie.

I have learned through spending time with her, doing things with her, and to really be with another person. That sometimes certain things we used to hold so dear and significant can actually be quite trivial. And at other times, holding on to them can actually be a detriment to the relationship.

So what if she ate some snacks before a meal, it’s just a simple dinner. What matters is us being happy, while being completely comfortable with each other. Not the perfect HK$300 dinner.

Perhaps this is the so-called “Love’s Knowledge” that Professor Martha Nussbaum aimed to expound in her book. There’s so much emotional content and understanding in love that can teach us to be more compassionate and to make better choices. Like the compassion to understand your sister’s hunger on a Sunday morning and the choice to not bitch at her for simply satiating her hunger.

Thank you Sofie for standing by me and giving me the chance to continually learn how to love you and treat you better, and allowing me to learn how to love and treat others around me better as well.

I love you.

Shoot

Monday, January 28th, 2008

Should I shoot less, compose more? I can’t help but wonder when I read that a fellow photographer had fallen “into the shoot more compose less trap” since getting his first digital SLR camera.

Perhaps I have also been fallen victim (or guilty) of the shoot more trap. Along with the splurge on the new camera equipment, I acquired two large capacity memory cards. I felt liberated that I am no longer constrained by their previously puny capacity. I was at first liberated from film as I got my first digital camera/ SLR many years ago. Then now I am liberated again from the small memory card capacity.

Now along this so called “liberation”… has it made me into a better photographer? have i grown less patient and basically aim for the “shoot more now, filter later”? is it related to the continual shortening of my attention span?

One solution would be to turn off the “continuous mode”. Which would allow me to shoot continuously for some 17 pictures in a row (raw file) at 3 pictures per second.. (so a little less than 6 continuous seconds) if i were to keep the shutter button pressed.

Back in the days when I was learning photography, more specifically learning how to shoot with Velvia, the slide film, I had to manual bracket. Which means I have to take the same identical picture three times. At the perceived correct exposure setting, and two above and below that setting. As a result, I would shoot quite a few rolls of film at each outing because the margin of error with Velvia slide film is much lower than others. However, this allowed me to get the picture I otherwise would not.

Now thinking back, despite the fact that bracketing allowed me to get a higher number of good presentable pictures, did manual bracketing make me a better photographer? Or did that merely cover up some of my mistakes, ignorance, and skills (or lack thereof)? Could the same be happening now with as I try to compensate by shooting more with bigger memory cards?

The philosophical underlying here goes back to the ironic concept of freedom and what good it does for us. This recurrent thought seems to carry more and more significance as time goes on. What other aspect of my life has freedom given me, or some or all of us, merely the perception of good?

And what of choices? There was a recent article in NYtimes about how in some areas, more choices actually lead to paralysis more than freedom or good or happiness.

Come to think of it, I recalled a discussion in class with a philosophy professor. He taught phil of law, mind and epistemology but before class we were discussing somewhat casually about the goods and evils of the two parties American system. While some detest the duopolistic system, he argues that more choices could potentially do more harm than good. If the political system is comprised of a myriad of parties, then the voters would get lost in the sea of candidates and their political believes. (Some suggest that in some such cases, these smaller parties would form a coalition. An alliance of sort that would bring forth political efficacy without sacrificing voters’ choices)