Gusto kong tanungin sa mga taong nakakasalubong ko na "how are you feeling?". Wala lang para kung sad sila maga-make happy ko sila. Ayun lang. Kahit sa maliit na bagay.
-------
Ksi mukhang hindi ko matukoy kung anong nakakapagpaligaya sa akin ngayon kaya wala akong direksyon. Yun bang, wala akong isang bagay na excited na ikagising. Sa nakalipas na isang taon alam ko kung ano yun pero ngayon kasi e yun pa rin ang nagpapagising sa akin na excited araw araw. Pero ayoko na ganun. Basta ang point e gusto ko makahanap ng isa pang ikagigising ko araw araw kasi.. ano ba? Ewan ko. Kasi siguro hinihingi ko na sa kanya yung hindi naman siya. Ayokong magbago siya dahil lang sa gusto ko kasi. Ewan ang labo ko.
--------
I'm an honest jealous girl.
Thursday, December 21, 2006
Friday, December 15, 2006
Sinasabi ba talaga ang totoong dahilan kung bakit gusto mong makipagbreak sa isang karelashon?
Palagay ko hinde. Dahil unang una, hindi mo talaga alam kung bakit mo gusto makipagbreak. Nararamdaman mo lang yun. Parang yung pakiramdam kung bakit gusto mong maging kayo in the first place -- wala kang matukoy na iisang dahila kung bakit.
At sakaling mapunta ka sa isang sitwasyon na masasabi mong "gusto ko makipagbreak dahil....(at may masasabi ka sa loob ng parenthesis na ito)", palagay ko hindi ka talaga makikipagbreak nun dahil ayun na e. Natukoy mo na ang dahilan kaya naturally, makahahanap ng solusyon dyan. Communication, yan yata ang tawag dyan.
Alam ko ang dahilan pero ayokong sabihin. Ito kasi yung mga tipo ng bagay na kailangang tanggapin kasi package deal e. Isa lang binili (at niligawan) mo pero maraming hidden charges at hidden purchases ka na palang nagawa.
Kahit na sabihin sa akin na "hindi naman kasama yan e" -- oo alam ko pero sana ipakita mo sa akin na ganun -- o ewan ko, baka nga mas magandang yung package deal na yun. Ewan ko. Ewan ko..
O baka pagod lang talaga ko.
Palagay ko hinde. Dahil unang una, hindi mo talaga alam kung bakit mo gusto makipagbreak. Nararamdaman mo lang yun. Parang yung pakiramdam kung bakit gusto mong maging kayo in the first place -- wala kang matukoy na iisang dahila kung bakit.
At sakaling mapunta ka sa isang sitwasyon na masasabi mong "gusto ko makipagbreak dahil....(at may masasabi ka sa loob ng parenthesis na ito)", palagay ko hindi ka talaga makikipagbreak nun dahil ayun na e. Natukoy mo na ang dahilan kaya naturally, makahahanap ng solusyon dyan. Communication, yan yata ang tawag dyan.
Alam ko ang dahilan pero ayokong sabihin. Ito kasi yung mga tipo ng bagay na kailangang tanggapin kasi package deal e. Isa lang binili (at niligawan) mo pero maraming hidden charges at hidden purchases ka na palang nagawa.
Kahit na sabihin sa akin na "hindi naman kasama yan e" -- oo alam ko pero sana ipakita mo sa akin na ganun -- o ewan ko, baka nga mas magandang yung package deal na yun. Ewan ko. Ewan ko..
O baka pagod lang talaga ko.
Wednesday, December 13, 2006
If my Physics serves me right, H20 has a given boiling point. But reaching that boiling point depends on the quantity of water and the amount of heat applied. Thus, given the amount of heat applied, two liters of water will boil faster than five liters of water. Reverse this condition, given the same amount of water, if heat A is greater than Heat B, then Heat A will boil the water faster than Heat B.
If we construct an abstract verbal model and refer to the boiling point as a function of violence, the violence depends on the quantity of water and the heat applied. Quantity of water pertains to Human tolerance and heat applied pertains to stress as a stimulant. Thus, Violence is equal to human tolerance over stress as a stimulant.
Human tolerance depends on two functions namely personality of formation and personality of revelation. When stress as a stimulant is introduced, the responses of the said personalities, in theory, are always parallel. Meaning, if formation acts on the stimulant, revelation will also do the same. And if formation reacts on the stimulant, revelation will also do the same thing. But what happens when the relationship is inversely proportional?
Postulate One, if the relationship between the formation and revelation is directly proportional, then human tolerance is high. Thus, given stress as a stimulant, a character constructed under this condition tends to exhibit greater control over violence.
Postulate Two, if the relationship between the formation and the revelation is inversely proportional, then human tolerance is low. Thus, given stress as a stimulant, a character constructed under this condition tends to exhibit less control over violence.
Postulate Three, what happens when the relationship between formation and revelation is indirectly proportional? What happens to the character and his or her control over violence? When two elements are indirectly proportional, one assumes that there is a third element involved that connects the two principal elements. So in this case, what do you think is the third element?
Postulates 1 & 2 refer to man or woman as a person who exercises free will. The relationship between formation and revelation is directly or inversely proportional to one another. Thus, there is no obstruction or filter between the two elements. On the other hand, when a third element is involved, there is a filter or an obstruction that either influences or exercises power over the two principal elements.
Given the provision above, if the relationship between formation and revelation is indirectly proportional, then violence is defined by the third element. Meaning, if the third element acts on the stimulant, the first and second elements will do the same. Thus, given stress as a stimulant, a character constructed in this condition tends to exhibit no control over violence.
If a man belongs to the first postulate, given a certain amount of marital stress as a stimulant, it will take a lot of inciting incidents before he will act on or react on the marital stress as a stimulant. But, if it will take a lot of inciting incidents before he acts on or reacts on the marital stress as a stimulant, is the amount of violence when released greater or lower?
We go back to the boiling point. If H2o has a fixed boiling point, then human tolerance also has a fixed amount of violence. This is true if we are dealing with H20 as the type of human tolerance. But what if we substitute H20 with peanut oil whose boiling point is lower than water?
Stress affects the boiling point in this case. Given a character that exercises greater control over violence, control becomes a function of tolerance over stress. If tolerance is greater than stress, then the amount of violence increases because one must gradually increase stress until it reaches the breaking point of tolerance resulting to violence. The gradual increase in stress becomes deliberate, thus if the relationship is directly proportional, violence is also deliberate. And the more deliberate the violence, the more it is cerebral than emotional.
On the other hand, if tolerance is less than the stress, then the amount of violence decreases because stress remains constant. The breaking point of tolerance, is this case, is quick and impulsive. Thus, if the relationship between revelation and formation is directly proportional, violence is deployed quickly and by impulse. And the more impulsive the violence, the more it is emotional than cerebral.
Postulate two operates in a different way. If tolerance is greater than stress, then the amount of violence increases because one must gradually increase stress until it reaches the breaking point of tolerance resulting to violence. The gradual increase becomes deliberate, but because the relationship between formation and revelation is indirectly proportional, violence is deployed quickly and by impulse. And the more impulsive the violence, the greater the neurosis.
On the other hand, if tolerance is less than the stress, then the amount of violence decreases because stress remains constant. The breaking point of tolerance, is this case, is quick and impulsive. Thus, if the relationship between revelation and formation is indirectly proportional, violence is deployed deliberately. And the more deliberate the violence, the less the neurosis.
Postulate three revolves around the relationship of the conduit with tolerance and stress. If we manipulate the variables outside the conduit, the violence attacks the conduit. For example, the conduit is a Christian Value of "Thou Shall Not Kill", if we manipulate the variables outside the conduit, decreasing external tolerance or increasing external stress will neutralize the equilibrium of the conduit. On the other hand, if we manipulate the variables inside the conduit, the conduit disrupts the external equilibrium. Thus, the Christian Value neutralizes itself.
Practical applications of the postulates determine the direction of a material. Postulates 1 and 2 project vertical storytelling. Wherein postulate 1 is more vertical than postulate 2. On the other hand, postulate 3 projects horizontal storytelling. Combining 3 and 1 produces diagonal storytelling while combining 2 and 3 produces an ellipse.
If we follow the stated postulates together with its provisions, postulates 1 and 2 are character driven materials in terms of violence as a core value. In postulate 1, violence is an action. While in postulate 2, violence is an activity.
When violence is an action, it has a physical and emotional or cerebral components. On the other hand, when violence is an activity, it only has a physical or cerebral or emotional component. This makes the violence enigmatic. We can see the physical manifestation of violence but there is no clear meaning or there is no meaning at all. Writing a material in this construct is challenging because the enigma as it moves away from the abstract becomes more concrete despite of the absence of its function. The reverse is also possible. An activity may have meaning but it has no form. So, violence becomes a mystery. You feel the violence but you can not see it. Thus, the violence is more emotional or cerebral than physical. And as it moves away from the physical, it becomes more abstract despite of the absence of its form.
For the third postulate, violence is either negative or positive. When it is positive, it becomes a healing agent or an inviting event. If it is negative, it becomes a disturbance or inciting incident. In both cases, the said conditions disrupt either the conduit internally or tolerance and stress externally.
In the midst of domestic violence directed to women, the said postulates offer us a glimpse in terms of the behavior of the material as reflected by the story, plot, genre and characters. A man who belongs to postulate one has the tendency to employ violence as an act. While a man who belongs to postulate two employs violence as an activity.
Postulate three defines domestic violence as either the internal breakdown of the conduit or the conduit neutralized by external variables. Marital Vows, as a collective is a good conduit that defines a husband's tolerance over stress. If the conduit disintegrates internally, marital violence is due to the breakdown of marriage as an institution. But if the conduit is neutralized by external variables, marital violence is due to the breakdown of the man-woman relationship. Thus, the first case suggests that marriage as an institution defines the relationship, while the second case, the relationship defines the institution.
The postulates presented in this article are approximation of character behavior in terms of personality formation and personality revelation. Violence, as a core value of any material, is affected by the dynamics of the said personalities that occupy a single space. As stated before, violence depends on human tolerance and the amount stress applied. Manipulating these variables affects the character in terms of its attitude towards violence and how the character employs it in its immediate physical and emotional situation.
If we construct an abstract verbal model and refer to the boiling point as a function of violence, the violence depends on the quantity of water and the heat applied. Quantity of water pertains to Human tolerance and heat applied pertains to stress as a stimulant. Thus, Violence is equal to human tolerance over stress as a stimulant.
Human tolerance depends on two functions namely personality of formation and personality of revelation. When stress as a stimulant is introduced, the responses of the said personalities, in theory, are always parallel. Meaning, if formation acts on the stimulant, revelation will also do the same. And if formation reacts on the stimulant, revelation will also do the same thing. But what happens when the relationship is inversely proportional?
Postulate One, if the relationship between the formation and revelation is directly proportional, then human tolerance is high. Thus, given stress as a stimulant, a character constructed under this condition tends to exhibit greater control over violence.
Postulate Two, if the relationship between the formation and the revelation is inversely proportional, then human tolerance is low. Thus, given stress as a stimulant, a character constructed under this condition tends to exhibit less control over violence.
Postulate Three, what happens when the relationship between formation and revelation is indirectly proportional? What happens to the character and his or her control over violence? When two elements are indirectly proportional, one assumes that there is a third element involved that connects the two principal elements. So in this case, what do you think is the third element?
Postulates 1 & 2 refer to man or woman as a person who exercises free will. The relationship between formation and revelation is directly or inversely proportional to one another. Thus, there is no obstruction or filter between the two elements. On the other hand, when a third element is involved, there is a filter or an obstruction that either influences or exercises power over the two principal elements.
Given the provision above, if the relationship between formation and revelation is indirectly proportional, then violence is defined by the third element. Meaning, if the third element acts on the stimulant, the first and second elements will do the same. Thus, given stress as a stimulant, a character constructed in this condition tends to exhibit no control over violence.
If a man belongs to the first postulate, given a certain amount of marital stress as a stimulant, it will take a lot of inciting incidents before he will act on or react on the marital stress as a stimulant. But, if it will take a lot of inciting incidents before he acts on or reacts on the marital stress as a stimulant, is the amount of violence when released greater or lower?
We go back to the boiling point. If H2o has a fixed boiling point, then human tolerance also has a fixed amount of violence. This is true if we are dealing with H20 as the type of human tolerance. But what if we substitute H20 with peanut oil whose boiling point is lower than water?
Stress affects the boiling point in this case. Given a character that exercises greater control over violence, control becomes a function of tolerance over stress. If tolerance is greater than stress, then the amount of violence increases because one must gradually increase stress until it reaches the breaking point of tolerance resulting to violence. The gradual increase in stress becomes deliberate, thus if the relationship is directly proportional, violence is also deliberate. And the more deliberate the violence, the more it is cerebral than emotional.
On the other hand, if tolerance is less than the stress, then the amount of violence decreases because stress remains constant. The breaking point of tolerance, is this case, is quick and impulsive. Thus, if the relationship between revelation and formation is directly proportional, violence is deployed quickly and by impulse. And the more impulsive the violence, the more it is emotional than cerebral.
Postulate two operates in a different way. If tolerance is greater than stress, then the amount of violence increases because one must gradually increase stress until it reaches the breaking point of tolerance resulting to violence. The gradual increase becomes deliberate, but because the relationship between formation and revelation is indirectly proportional, violence is deployed quickly and by impulse. And the more impulsive the violence, the greater the neurosis.
On the other hand, if tolerance is less than the stress, then the amount of violence decreases because stress remains constant. The breaking point of tolerance, is this case, is quick and impulsive. Thus, if the relationship between revelation and formation is indirectly proportional, violence is deployed deliberately. And the more deliberate the violence, the less the neurosis.
Postulate three revolves around the relationship of the conduit with tolerance and stress. If we manipulate the variables outside the conduit, the violence attacks the conduit. For example, the conduit is a Christian Value of "Thou Shall Not Kill", if we manipulate the variables outside the conduit, decreasing external tolerance or increasing external stress will neutralize the equilibrium of the conduit. On the other hand, if we manipulate the variables inside the conduit, the conduit disrupts the external equilibrium. Thus, the Christian Value neutralizes itself.
Practical applications of the postulates determine the direction of a material. Postulates 1 and 2 project vertical storytelling. Wherein postulate 1 is more vertical than postulate 2. On the other hand, postulate 3 projects horizontal storytelling. Combining 3 and 1 produces diagonal storytelling while combining 2 and 3 produces an ellipse.
If we follow the stated postulates together with its provisions, postulates 1 and 2 are character driven materials in terms of violence as a core value. In postulate 1, violence is an action. While in postulate 2, violence is an activity.
When violence is an action, it has a physical and emotional or cerebral components. On the other hand, when violence is an activity, it only has a physical or cerebral or emotional component. This makes the violence enigmatic. We can see the physical manifestation of violence but there is no clear meaning or there is no meaning at all. Writing a material in this construct is challenging because the enigma as it moves away from the abstract becomes more concrete despite of the absence of its function. The reverse is also possible. An activity may have meaning but it has no form. So, violence becomes a mystery. You feel the violence but you can not see it. Thus, the violence is more emotional or cerebral than physical. And as it moves away from the physical, it becomes more abstract despite of the absence of its form.
For the third postulate, violence is either negative or positive. When it is positive, it becomes a healing agent or an inviting event. If it is negative, it becomes a disturbance or inciting incident. In both cases, the said conditions disrupt either the conduit internally or tolerance and stress externally.
In the midst of domestic violence directed to women, the said postulates offer us a glimpse in terms of the behavior of the material as reflected by the story, plot, genre and characters. A man who belongs to postulate one has the tendency to employ violence as an act. While a man who belongs to postulate two employs violence as an activity.
Postulate three defines domestic violence as either the internal breakdown of the conduit or the conduit neutralized by external variables. Marital Vows, as a collective is a good conduit that defines a husband's tolerance over stress. If the conduit disintegrates internally, marital violence is due to the breakdown of marriage as an institution. But if the conduit is neutralized by external variables, marital violence is due to the breakdown of the man-woman relationship. Thus, the first case suggests that marriage as an institution defines the relationship, while the second case, the relationship defines the institution.
The postulates presented in this article are approximation of character behavior in terms of personality formation and personality revelation. Violence, as a core value of any material, is affected by the dynamics of the said personalities that occupy a single space. As stated before, violence depends on human tolerance and the amount stress applied. Manipulating these variables affects the character in terms of its attitude towards violence and how the character employs it in its immediate physical and emotional situation.
Friday, December 08, 2006
Nagbura ako ng mga testimonials sa akin, yung mga happy birthday at yung mga glittery texts.. then I realized nawala na pala yung mga sinaunang testimonials sa akin!!! Anyway.. wala na akong magagawa doon!
Pakiramdam ko nagpunta ako sa kasal ng isang tao sa aking nakalipas..Kaya hindi ko alam kung anong mararamdaman ko. Alam ko kung anong hindi ko nararamdaman pero hindi ko alam kung anong dapat kong maramdaman, siguro, sa tagal na lang ng mga bagay-bagay, at siguro dahil hindi ko naman talaga napag-isipan ang mga desisyon ko noon.. (parang ngayon e pinag-iisipan ko na ang mga desisyon ko)Ngunit isang bagay ang sigurado ako: Masaya ako at mananatili ang mga masasayang alaala ko sa iyo. Tulad nga ng nasabi ko na sa mahal kong si Mike, I'm never over a person. Forever may puwang sa puso ko ang mga taong nakasama ko na.
Oo nga pala, may dalawang sugat ako: ang aking unang papercut at yung sa legs ko dahil sa paghahanap ng table para sa dorm. Kasi dormer na ako.
Excited akong makita si Mike. Pag nagkita kami hindi ko alam kung saan maguumpisa ng kwento.
Pakiramdam ko nagpunta ako sa kasal ng isang tao sa aking nakalipas..Kaya hindi ko alam kung anong mararamdaman ko. Alam ko kung anong hindi ko nararamdaman pero hindi ko alam kung anong dapat kong maramdaman, siguro, sa tagal na lang ng mga bagay-bagay, at siguro dahil hindi ko naman talaga napag-isipan ang mga desisyon ko noon.. (parang ngayon e pinag-iisipan ko na ang mga desisyon ko)Ngunit isang bagay ang sigurado ako: Masaya ako at mananatili ang mga masasayang alaala ko sa iyo. Tulad nga ng nasabi ko na sa mahal kong si Mike, I'm never over a person. Forever may puwang sa puso ko ang mga taong nakasama ko na.
Oo nga pala, may dalawang sugat ako: ang aking unang papercut at yung sa legs ko dahil sa paghahanap ng table para sa dorm. Kasi dormer na ako.
Excited akong makita si Mike. Pag nagkita kami hindi ko alam kung saan maguumpisa ng kwento.
Thursday, December 07, 2006
Naka-isang paragraph na ako sa pagsusulat pero binura ko. May mga bagay na tama nang naikwento na sa isang tao. Thanks Mitch.
Last night i had dinner sa Kublai's with Sec Zam at kasama nya yung dalawang security people nya. Kumusta naman.
Today will be a slow day kasi halos lahat ng tao dito sa office (Nitz included) nasa Subic for some churvanesses na I'm so glad hindi na ako kasama.
I have class later at parang tinatamad akong pumasok. Gusto kong matulog lang sa dorm dahil dormer na ako. Pero papasok ako.
I'm happy for Mike kasi marami syang Christmas gifts ngayon. =)
At yun nga napapaisip ako... lahat nga ng bagay may trade-off.
Last night i had dinner sa Kublai's with Sec Zam at kasama nya yung dalawang security people nya. Kumusta naman.
Today will be a slow day kasi halos lahat ng tao dito sa office (Nitz included) nasa Subic for some churvanesses na I'm so glad hindi na ako kasama.
I have class later at parang tinatamad akong pumasok. Gusto kong matulog lang sa dorm dahil dormer na ako. Pero papasok ako.
I'm happy for Mike kasi marami syang Christmas gifts ngayon. =)
At yun nga napapaisip ako... lahat nga ng bagay may trade-off.
Tuesday, December 05, 2006
Do I really want to maintain a blog? Parang hindi na. Someone is a witness to my life already. I love him.. But then again, I don't want him to be my everything. I'm afraid of getting heart booboos.
Sige na nga.. This is therapeutic so I will.
Fickleminded is who I am.
And selfish.
--------------------
My first dorm is somewhere in Katipunan. Yes, after "graduation" I now can and may not sleep at home. My roomate is Mika, and I find her nice -- that is, I find everyone nice except for Nitz. hahahah.
I'll be meeting Kuya tonight so I'm leaving the office early. Hello toys!! I miss him so much. And his righteousness.
Two weeks ago I started going to class. And My Italian teacher looks like Santa Claus!!! Brilliant teacher. After the one week or should I say 21 hour class in a week intensive classes under his guidance, the class decided to dvd-hunt for him. Fun fun fun day! Fun fun fun week!
Last week the storm Reming was in the Philippines -- and this is all I can say about it. I should be more socially aware. I should be socially, politically, and other churvanessesly aware of the things happening around me.
---------------------
Sige na nga.. This is therapeutic so I will.
Fickleminded is who I am.
And selfish.
--------------------
My first dorm is somewhere in Katipunan. Yes, after "graduation" I now can and may not sleep at home. My roomate is Mika, and I find her nice -- that is, I find everyone nice except for Nitz. hahahah.
I'll be meeting Kuya tonight so I'm leaving the office early. Hello toys!! I miss him so much. And his righteousness.
Two weeks ago I started going to class. And My Italian teacher looks like Santa Claus!!! Brilliant teacher. After the one week or should I say 21 hour class in a week intensive classes under his guidance, the class decided to dvd-hunt for him. Fun fun fun day! Fun fun fun week!
Last week the storm Reming was in the Philippines -- and this is all I can say about it. I should be more socially aware. I should be socially, politically, and other churvanessesly aware of the things happening around me.
---------------------
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)