Perspectives

In my teenage years, I was, without a doubt, a pessimist. Thankfully though, I also considered myself an idealist. This seems like a contradiction, but isn’t. When I use the term “pessimist” I mainly mean a lack of hope that things in the here and now will turn out to be good. By being an idealist, I believed that though things will inevitably fail for me in the short-run, things will be okay in the long-run.

In other words, I didn’t expect to win many battles, but in the long run I believed that the war would be won.

At least I wasn’t a pessimist and a nihilist: believing that I’d lose both the battle and the war. 

I want to focus on the pessimism aspect and juxtapose it with its opposite, optimism.  Which one is better?

People who think about perspectives from all different angles (like I try to be) seem to me to find more circumstances to make them unhappy. A lot of times, being too intellectual causes a person to become cold and lose hope in others and in the future. I think that is what happened to me.

It’s understandable too; right before my teenage years I learned that I would eventually lose my ability to walk. Being a typical pre-teen, my goal was to just “fit in” with the other kids my age. With this information, I believed that goal would be impossible.

Therefore, the future changed for me: instead of anticipating a land of unknown possibilities, it became more like dreading an inevitable death sentence. Maybe melodramatic, reading that now, but adolescence is a time for melodrama, I guess.

As a duck with clipped wings gets accustomed to life on the ground, I settled into my pessimism. For most people, noticing this from an outside perspective, it was the unfortunate but expected consequence of my circumstances: I surprised no one by retreating into pessimism. However, those closest to me (my family mainly) tried to halt my descent into a constantly gray-scaled view.

When they tried to talk to me about it, being concerned in my well-being, I did not make it easy for them to talk me out of my pessimism.

I countered any “Why don’t you be more positive?” type question with a response that with negativity as my constant outlook, I am never disappointed when things don’t turn out my way. I questioned why I should bother hoping for something good when I could get disappointed; so instead I should prepare myself for the worst-case-scenario.

And no one really had an answer for that, so they shook their heads and hoped that one day I’d see differently.

Nowadays, I consider myself more of an optimist than a pessimist. And I would like to counter the point made by me as a teenager.

Teenage me- you can’t always be negative and pessimistic quite simply because that is not the way humans are wired. Think of yourself: do you like to be around people who consistently bring you down? Why is that? I think it’s because hardwired into our human nature is the longing for hope. You can deny that it’s hardwired into us, but you can’t deny that you like to be around positive people. Make yourself become someone you’d want to be around.

Oh, and as for your never get disappointed claim. It’s b.s. You won’t ever get more disappoint over things you expected to turn out badly, but your entire perspective is one of disappointment. Instead of eliminating disappointment with your pessimism, you are living your life in constant disappointment. And, buddy, only you can alter that.

Hopefully that would get through to me. In my life thus far, I’ve discovered that optimism is no more accurate than pessimism – life is a see-saw of joy and pain – but choosing one or the other only affects you as a person. Choose the outlook that is most beneficial to who you want to be.

After all, the glass doesn’t have different amounts whether you see it as half-full or half-empty. The only difference is the attitude of the person.

Whether you consider yourself an optimist, a pessimist, an idealist, a nihilist, a sophist, a fundamentalist, an existentialist, a secularist, a Sunkist, a Sierra Mist, or a few or none, I hope your glass always is full enough.

Controversy and Love

“But now faith, hope, love, abide these three; but the greatest of these is love.”
1 Corinthians 13:13


Yep, I started out this entry with a verse from the Bible. So what follows is my take on it. Before I lose any readers who don’t feel quite obliged to follow Biblical statements, this post is not meant to convince of the Bible’s soundness or convince you that you should regard it as truth; that’s more of a class than a blog entry. This entry, then, will serve as food for thought about that verse, so whether you believe that one should believe in it or not, I think it’s good fodder for thought.


Anyway, you read this far. Might as well read the rest.


If you’ve been to any cookie-cutter Christian wedding, you’ve heard this verse before. This is the same reading where St. Paul states that if he is loveless, he is like some annoying percussion instruments, and he gives love some nice adjectives (i.e., patient, kind, etc.). This nice little passage ends with the verse that is at the top of this post.


I question why this verse isn’t more controversial.


Think about local religious authorities to you. Do they have a Facebook page. Most likely, the answer is yes. (Sadly, Facebook steals almost everyone’s personal information.) Look at people’s last five posts on Facebook. Are they about faith, hope, or love?  Almost entirely about faith, eh? Why is this so?


Make no mistake: faith is in no way bad. It is fantastic that information on faith is being shared on Facebook. However, if one is faithful to any type of Christian belief and his posts are only about faith, wouldn’t he be a clanging gong or a clashing cymbal? 


Maybe one could argue that posts on faith, like children in contemporary families, were conceived in love. Indeed, this would allow people to feel validated in their own opinions. However, the point of this blog (and moreover, the point of me) is to make one step back from his regular acts and thoughts and consider it as an outsider. 


For me, faith is considered belief and it is not only, but commonly, equated with religion, the history and philosophy of the types of believer. Hope, the sadly most elusive of the three, focuses not on the past, but on the future, and its outlook on the present. Love is the topic of poets and artists. Philosophers may shed great light on this topic, but seem (in my perspective) to focus more on intellectual pursuits. (In effect, choosing faith over love.)


These are three huge theological topics in my meek and grotesque nutshell. Feel free to chase me through town with torches and pitchforks.


My point of this topic is to relay that love seems really lacking in most religious leaders’ persona. Heck, mine included, if you want to look at me that way. (But for the sake of your soul and mine, please don’t!) I want to challenge any readers and myself on what drives most of our actions in the name of religion. If you choose not to go to a family members’ wedding because it doesn’t meet the Church’s standards, is that choosing faith or love? If your sister’s best friend, a known atheist, dies, are your comments compassionate or judgmental?


Again, I am not saying that faith or intellect is bad; just that love is better. Choosing a response based on faith, hope, or love is like the opposite of choosing the president. Instead of picking the lesser of two evils, we are asked to choose the best of three goods.


I’ve always been a “sentimental fool” according to my friends, so speaking on the topic of love is pretty easy for me. It’s funny for me how some people view that as a weakness of intellect. For me, it’s a complementary relationship.  But, I am wrong often.


I think it’s good for all of us to consider our motivations for all we do. Judging from our lives, if we follow St. Paul’s teaching, are faith, hope, and love all good? If so, which one drives us most?

Joy

My friend had the awesome idea of starting a community blog centering on the concept of joy. Check it out here (http://projectingjoy.blogspot.com/). Be sure to check out my little addition to it as well.

Disclaimer

I want this to be my first and last point because I think it’s so important: I am a seeker of Truth, not a keeper of Truth.


One of my most bitter annoyances on Facebook is when some people (perhaps unintentionally) use their authority to forcefully shout their opinions as facts. To disagree is unheard of; their word is infallible. We all know people like this: teachers without pupils who us Facebook as their classroom –


– Which would be not only okay, but greatly beneficial if those self-appointed teachers tolerated disagreements.


But many, sadly, do not.


Rather than discuss my opinions about other online post-ers, doubt in my own understanding leads me to write this entry. Instead of pointing my finger at others, I point it at myself.


At times, I will post entries that you (the reader) may not agree with. This is good. I hope that I breech Truth, but I don’t claim to own it. In fact, many times I post articles, videos, or quotes that I myself do not agree with 100%. The purpose of me sharing these is to add to the quest – please, comment with why you do or don’t agree with any post you wish. My number 1 request is that we be cordial.


That being said, many times I am not cordial; in fact, I can be a jerk. But, heck, I am trying to do better. You try too.


 Three types of people I tend to pick on show you the kind of blogger I am trying to be. Please, hold me accountable to this and call me out when I fail.


1. Rush Limbaugh. He made the mistake of glossing over research in order to make the facts fit what he wanted to say. Check out what I’m talking about here. I hope to never want to express my opinion so much that I look over the facts.


2. Stephanie Meyer. Now beyond the general crumminess of the literary value of the Twilight series is the real reason I dislike her writings. It’s not even the fact that she crippled the vampire mythology with glittery skin and such. No, my real issue with Ms. Meyer is that she used unrealistic romance and sex appeal to fuel her story. No real life guy will ever be an Edward. And the fact that Jacob became a sex symbol for women three times his age at 16 is …creepy. (Coincidentally, that actor agrees.) I never want to use gimmicks in order to popularize my writing.


3. Jimmy Swaggert/Fred Phelps. Read what my buddy Clive Staples has to say about this type here. These  people, assured of their rightness from God Himself, seem devoid of the possibility that there ways are not inspired. Piling heavy packs on other people’s shoulders is not my intent; I hope it never is.


It’s up to you, the reader, to keep me in check. Please, call me out if I am behaving inconsistently with this. Be cordial about it though; I’m fragile. 😉


This entry wasn’t that exciting, but necessary. Awesome things to come later.


I am a seeker of Truth, not a keeper of Truth.

Why a Blog???

As if the internet isn’t already inundated with useless ramblings of self-absorbed people who detail their every waking thought into a readable, online form, I introduce my blog.


The main question that any unfortunate reader (or I myself) am probably asking is “Why?” (More specifically “Oh God, in the name of all that is good, “Whyyyyyyyy?!?!”)


I’ll be the first to admit, some people need to wake up and realize that their interior thoughts DON’T in fact EVER need to be shared. I’ll also admit that I am and have always been a dreamer, so waking up is not one of my most prolific features.


More important than that though, my reason for making this blog is not for others’ benefit, but for my own. I saw a quote by my friend Ruth Diaz which said (my memory keeps me from getting it exact) “The reason I write is not so that others may read it, but so at the end of the day I am not alone in my head.” I’m not sure if she constructed this quote or found it. I’ll need to ask her. Ultimately though, therein lies my reason for creating this blog.


Also, I’m dismayed at many people’s use of the Nicotine of the internet, AKA Facebook. Many times, it creates a podium for lambasting, whether it be about politics, religion, or the trivialities (or drama) of the writer himself. And I am very guilty of this and I am ashamed. If social networking is becoming an indelible feature in our lives, shouldn’t the society we are building be a more enjoyable place? Is it a coincidence that those three topics are ideas seldom discussed with strangers until one knows them more intimately? If I kept any readers, do they like rhetorical questions?


Ah well, Facebook is becoming something I do not like. But that is a topic for another entry and, all in all, probably not that important.


On my first entry, I’ll close with a short introduction of me. Maybe some of these topics will be expounded upon in later entries. 


-I am 26 years old.
-I am a Cajun, born and raised in south-central Louisiana.
-I am a cradle-Catholic, taught about the Roman Catholic Church since I was born, but left that faith for a while and explored other options. This awesome coming-of-age journey led me back to the Roman Catholic Church, instilling in me deep respect for it but also sincere and honest admiration for other religions.
-I had to succumb to the use of a wheelchair full-time at 19 because at 12, I was diagnosed with Friedreich’s Ataxia, a genetic progressive nerve disorder.
-I graduated from ULL in 2008 with a bachelor’s in English, and from LSU in 2010 with a master’s in community counseling.
-My name is Matt.


Thanks for reading this much. See? verboseguy is an accurate name.