Monthly Archives: September 2014

The only difference between a man and a woman is that a woman has the organs to carry and deliver a child. That’s what feminists try to emphasize.

The fact that a man is physically stronger than a woman is without question. It is a measurable ability, easily displayed and proven. There is no point to argue about which can do better in a purely physical activity when fully trained. It is why sports is pretty much played in single gender sessions. Nobody complains – it is the norm.

The fact that a woman is more beautiful than a man is without question. While this is not directly measurable, in a consensus both men and women can identify accepted forms of beauty in a person – it would be generally unanimous to define pleasant looking people. This is seen as an asset and everyone is comfortable with it.

Let’s now look at emotions. It is generally understood that a woman makes more emotional actions and decisions than men. There is much beauty in a decision making which doesn’t involve numbers and facts. In fact beauty on its own is purely a matter of pulling on those heart strings. We have unfortunately resorted to putting down emotions as generally glamorized or practically unimportant in terms of meritocracy. A person who is too emotional is considered weak, instead of being seen as a creative energetic being.

Can we really be equal genders? Are there not specific roles for us in society?

Science has taken over the world. It is in our lives in every way – our phones to communicate, our watches to tell us the time, our computers to make things more efficient, our television to bring us some entertainment. These major advancements could not have happened if it were not for reductionists – whereby each individual part is much more important than the sum of its whole. This is pretty much the opposite of holistic thinking.

It is important for a reductionist to take everything by its pieces. Cells, electrons, waves and individual symptoms are all fields of interest for such a person. A definition is the foundation of the principle and thus the science. He cannot move forward until he finds a place to categorize it – to lock it into its rightful place.

The question is, are we as humans just a very long essay describing our very nature of cells? Or do we have more than our grouped tissues and organs with a greater synergy capable of doing much more? Surely, it would seem easy to agree on the latter. Yet, the way we live has generally not reflected this thought.

The byproduct of living with reductionism is that we feel the constant need to judge, to blame and to isolate. We feel the importance of having to put a clear approval or disapproval on something, and to weed out the uncommon based on labels.

Technology has thus brought us up in terms of what we are capable of, yet has pulled us down when it comes to assessing a complete view of people, nature and the world. It is something that a machine cannot be brought to understand. A vision of emotions, energetic colour and a view of God in our life.

People are losing their way, we keep going round arguments that focus on reductionism, when we need to look back at things in a much more combined way. This will restore the energy in the world, and every one of us.

There is no longer a question of what social media is. It has invaded us and conquered our lives in many different ways. Unfortunately it looks like many are so deep into it they no longer see how they have already been transformed. Like the sheep following the shepherd.

It was coined social media for a reason – it is a form of public communication. It is also an article that has to embellish truth to garner attention.

A journalist has two separate tasks. The first is to dig deep to find as much facts as possible. Generally this isn’t as hard as before since Google came into the picture. On the flip side no doubt, there will always be people who will know more than you because of this – yet it does help for someone to put the pieces together and serve it on a silver platter.

The next step is to catch a reader’s attention. I did a short journalism course which explained how to write articles. The main idea I got from that is to start with the most interesting aspects first, then follow it up by the non-juicy details. Now unlike a book which has a fancy cover, an article needs to be interesting enough at the beginning to draw you to conclude it was any good. It also doesn’t help that our attention spans have dwindled with the passing time.

Now put social media into the mix and you have now nominated everyone as a budding journalist. People love to have as many likes as possible and so they put their best foot forward – only. What’s even worse with the short attention span, you will never get the details, just a short sentence, a picture or a video.

While an article needs to be fleshed out to have any credibility, social media doesn’t. It leaves you to imagine the facts of reality. Then you have that feeling like you “should” know this person because after all, he/she is your friend…