Trying to figure out whether or not I want to go to China for six months has taught me a lot about myself and the way I reason.
To many of you, no doubt, the answer to the question "Do I want to go to China" is very clear. Some of you would do it without hesitation; others would not even consider it. I'm pretty much right in between, though - I lean in no particular direction.
The more I dissect the question, the more questions I come up with. For instance - one reason I would want to go is that it's something I could be proud of afterwards. "I had this experience" would be something that would make me a little more special, a little more interesting, a little more worthy of love.
See what I did there? You cut a little in the question, gently remove the ligaments one by one and suddenly, you discover you've accidentally cut up another question entirely. Why would I need to do something to be a little more worthy of love? Isn't that a pretty unhealthy viewpoint? Either it is, in which case it shouldn't be a contributing factor, or it actually isn't and it's just normal human reasoning, in which case I've just discovered that my desire has a base root, no more ephemeral or sophisticated than the desire for food - making me not so special after all. The desire to be special, by definition, means that you're not actually special. It creates a sort of interesting paradox, which I've been pondering as a bit of a tangent to the main question.
This is by no means the only contributing factor; I've considered very many reasons to go. I pretty much only have one reason to stay, but it's a pretty convincing one: I like it here. Sometimes I think that's a good enough reason. Sometimes I think it isn't.
And so, I continue to cut my mind into smaller and smaller pieces, hoping that somewhere I can find an indivisible argument, the atom of choice, a fundamental building block of my own psychology. I don't seem to be able to find one.
12 kommentarer:
Wow. I had the exact same mental argument some thirty minutes ago. Co-in-ci-dence...
Anyway, choosing between do and don't, always, everywhere, no exceptions: do.
I agree with David. Besides if you hate it over there, then you can always come back.
If you don't go you might end up wondering about what you missed. It's not a nice feeling.
One other thing, this place won't go anywhere. We will not likely go anywhere either, so go.
I'm with David and Madde on this. I have this eery feeling that if you choose to stay too many times, you end up loosing momentum. You get comfortable and start thinking that this is a pretty good life, and in the process forget about all ambitions you ever had and end up... well - like your parents?
Well, the main point of this post isn't really about do or don't, actually. It was meant sort of more as a reflection upon the underlying mechanisms - I'm not wondering whether I should or shouldn't so much as I'm wondering why I should or shouldn't.
Of course, 'why' is the most dangerous question of all.
I feel like I should comment on this just to play the devil's advocate but I think that that might be misinterpreted so I won't.
So are you or are you not? I'd say you should go only if you want to. Try to change your T in the Myers-Briggs-test to a F, and trust the gut-feeling!
Though, you should know that the chinese exchange program runs every year from february to july, so if you 're really hesitant, there's always another chance to go to china the year after. And honestly, China won't go anywhere neither!
Had the same dilemma on whether I should go or not. Really know what you mean by being fascinated of how one reason..
Sorry for ruining the argument: the original one was worth having. Is social safety the atom of choice? I'm with Maslow on this one: up to a point. Until you have it and grow absolutely confident it won't go away (At which point you start looking for other things, which China may be able to provide). Which has been implied by other people: "we won't go anywhere".
Of course, I promise you I definitely will go somewhere :) My friendship won't though, that's the point. You don't need to be more interesting. There are bigger needs.
Now go to China!
Interesting idea; the atom of choice can't be detected independently. It's almost like Schrödinger's Cat - you don't know what it is you want until you look at what the development turned out to be.
By that reasoning, I both want and don't want to go to China simultaneously, and the function won't collapse until I actually go there.
Kinda like most things in life. When deciding if I wanted to go to Hungary I based it mostly on fear of missing a great experience. I guess that if I had been more afraid of it turning out the way it did, I would have stayed home.
Rik: Interesting parallel. I think quantum mechanics might make a great complement to Maslow :) (no, I'm serious).
Kristin: There's psychological theory of motivation (incidentally very useful in interrogation) that people are predominantly motivated by a)fear of losing or b )thirst for winning. You seem firmly placed in the former camp?
My son,
If I were wise I would have given you the best advise here. Now I can only tell you that doubt is the best way of being sure the decision is right. This is valid both in the "yes" and "no" cases.
Regarding Schrödinger's cat I'm not in favor of a free will. I believe nature is an excellent observer, and that there's no need for an oogling scientist.
"When Death met the philosopher, the philosopher said, rather excitedly: "At this point, you realise, I'm both dead and not dead. [...] [Death:] A CAT IN A BOX IS OFTEN MENTIONED.
"Oh, yes," said the philosopher.
GOOD, said Death. He got to his feet as the last of the light died, and smiled.
I SEE YOU..."
-Terry Pratchett, Death and What Comes Next
Skicka en kommentar