the point of questions

i was reminded by brian that when you ask questions, you must be prepared to handle the answers. i quote him verbatim -- "you ask questions, but are not willing to accept the answers. you ask questions, but sometimes there are no answers."

he goes on to quantify the nature of anwers -- "answers are statements that we agree with. by asking questions till our last breath, never arriving at the subjective truth. does that mean that within ourselves we're searching for an objective truth?"

on how our consiousness affects the "truth" or answer we would like to hear, brian says that "our conciousness tells us to believe the truth that we agree with, but perhaps somewhere within the recesses and mysteries of our own anatomy, we know we're seperated from an objective truth. we just can't feel it when we're awake. just because you feel it, doesn't mean its there."

we always ask questions, but the point of questions is to elicit answers and arguably, to set us on the way to greater truth. very often we reject these answers, because quite frankly, the truth always hurts. over time, over-rationalising of our rejection of the truth would translate into pseudo cynism -- being cynical for the sake of it. this rationalising comes about because people like to justify what they are doing -- since for example, the whole notion of religion apparently does not allow the kind of debauched lifestyles that happens to be fun.

when this is coupled by being in an environment where the whole thing about having a "different" opinion is cool, and where the lecturers in that environment are different for the sake of it, you'll get a whole bunch of people who are constantly justifying their acts of short changing themselves. their rejection of God thus translates to nothing but superficial subconscious justification that is a result of left-over teenage angst and anger. remnants of their days gone by when we were all rebels without a cause.

you get a sense that what they espouse is nothing but a mere reproduction of what their lecturers and peers heap on them in their adolescence. their arguments are so flimsy that they can be refuted with utter contempt. but they thrive on such arguments because apparently things like historical evidence cannot convince them. things have to be always objective on every aspect. their voice stifled and drowned in the midst of everyting.

however, they fail to consider that pursuing objectivity for objectivity's sake is a lost cause. objectivity for objectivity's sake would distort the balance, rather it is the objectivity of methods that people should adhere to. this is a basic truth that all students of MEDIA should understand.

in simple english terms, when you want to start asking tough questions, you jolly well be prepared to handle the tough answers. because if u are not prepared, it will show up when you reject these answers and not care.

you ask questions because you bother and care about those cheem questions about life. when you don't care, stop acting like you do. and if you do really bother, then start showing that you do.