Sunday, May 31, 2015

Sometimes People Don't Want Pies

Sometimes people just don't want things.

But it seems like it's a really big deal when everyone want that particular thing and you don't, because NONSENSE! Why would anyone not want those things?

Like,
some people don't want pies.


It's not that they don't like pies. They're not against pie or anything. Or hate pies. Or in Anti Pie Movement. They just don't want pies. But in the world where the existence of pies are legitimated by the law, supported by the norm, encourage by religion, wanted by majority of society--it seemed that people can't not want pies.

(Even though there are a lot of other food available to eat. To be wanted.)

In that world, people are allowed to want other food, but they still have to want pies.

I don't understand.
Pies are just... food, right?

Sometimes people don't want them because they have reasons. It can be fundamental nor silly, but it's enough for them to not want pies. Like, maybe pies are against a particular religion or tradition. Or they're full for what might be a long time and have no room for pies. Or they're allergic to pies in general. Or I don't know. I guess people are free to not want pies for no reason. I mean, just because everyone wants them, doesn't mean you want them too, right?

Wrong.


Say I'm that person. I don't want pies. And I said:
I don't want pies. I don't think I need pies. 

But no, they said. You don't understand. Pie has sugar in it. You need sugar to live! Sugar is important for you! That's why you should want pies.

But I'd say, yeah... Sugar is important. But donut has sugar in it too. 

Then they would say, yeah, but THAT'S DIFFERENT. That's not pie. It has different things that pie has!

Obviously. I guess, but I think I'd survive eating donuts instead of pies.


Will they accept that I'd just need donuts and rice and other sweet stuff to survive? Without pies? Nah. They most likely won't. They like pies and enjoy pies and even though donuts have that important thing pies have it's not suffice because donuts aren't pies, you see?

Well, I guess when everyone wants something, and have everything around them saying that it's good for you, and that it's delicious, you would want that. It's possible that you initially don't want them, but as the time goes and you see everyone is eating pies and happy and satisfied with their pies, you'd want them then. But can't people just take it that people might not want it, be it for now, or for forever?

But no. No. No. No. No.

It would be just me, not old enough to understand how I'd need pies and how essential pies are for life.
Me, being weird for thinking that pies can be replaced by some other food that more or less has the same ingredients. And even if I don't want pies, I'd still have to have pies. Because if I don't have pies, my parents will be sad and I'd live a very sad life for not having pies. People would talk how I don't have pies and how I'm bad because I don't have pies.

They won't understand when I said that I don't want pies, because, who doesn't want pies? They say.
People can't possibly live with just waffles and pancakes. They need pies!



So.

That's tough isn't it. Not wanting pies.

3 comments:

arutaki said...

I'm sure this is not about pies :v

Anonymous said...

Because people think of eating pies as being truthful?
Because people go on polarizing things by whether it's correct/incorrect?
Which irks me to ask,
what is 'truth' to you?

chop said...

@arutaki: It isn't, but it can be! And it can also be anything else :v The core principle was sometimes people just don't want, uh, things.

@talewhisperer: Yeah! You're right. If what you meant by truthful is that eating pies is what is "correct" for one to do, yeah! I guess that's pretty much the case. And it gives a lot more reason for people to push others to do so, since "it's the right thing to do" according to whatever things they're referring (people can be very inconsistent about that).

This might be Hegel-ish, but for me the actual truth is something too far away to actually be found/seen/acknowledge and should be put in the end of history. Universal truth, that is. But you know, I guess what is perceived as "truth" now is a mere belief. Not belief as in religion or principle, but belief as in things you hold because of the reality you experience. Reality, is relative. It comes from the being (yeah this is so phenomenology but) and one cannot be held right or wrong regarding that reality--no one knows what that reality is besides the person/thing that experiences it, right? But are those really "truths" when they differ from one to other? It is in a way, but is it universal? No.

It's kinda contradictory, and I might have to think more about this (since I never really think about it until you asked me) but when I'm talking about universal truth, I'm taking a point of view that we really are a speck of insignificant being with nothing unique whatsoever in the face of universe. It's a unified experience without recognizing one as one (like rani as rani or Mitton as Mitton), but all as one being (like rani and Mitton and everything in the world is one being). Thus why it's 'universal'. It's naive to think that we (that extremely tiny part of being) can actually know the truth of the being, because it's obviously beyond us! Probably not impossible (probably!) but certainly will take a very very long time.

But on the other note, saying that personally-perceived-realities is truth is taking into account that anything in the world doesn't see things from the outside. We don't see things the "same". We don't even know if my red is the same as your red. What one deemed important is also different that what everyone else deemed as important, but those things doesn't make it any less true for the person, right? So I agree that it's truth too, in a way. Since we don't live by ourselves and learn through interactions with each other, it can also be understand why people can share the same realities.

I think the problem comes from trying to see what those baby truths have in common and deemed it as universal truth so it has to be that way for everything, when it was never the case. In the first place, those personal realities or what is perceived as truths is NOT universal truth since universal truth is not in reach (at the very least for now). Just because there are a lot of people share the "same" reality and believe that it's the TRUTH, that it's what it should be, and what is correct, they think it's ok for it to force to others when the others don't really share that. And that's what sucks, I guess.

So yeah. That. HEHE (Does this even make sense though? I really think I need to think about this further) (OH! And is this even the kind of 'truth' that you're asking? Or is it another definition of truth? Idk hahaha sorry if it's digressed :p)