Voltaire and Camus's vote goes to...

Even though Voltaire is not discriminate in his satire of the world, he would probably dislike Mitt Romney based on Candide. Voltaire satirizes religion and the aristocracy (wealth). He definitely would not vote Romney if he wrote a sizable portion of the book satirizing those two things. See, Mitt holds a view that we should have government cut off help to  people who haven't "earned" it. His argument is that we do not need to do that because America is the land of opportunity, and anyone can build up something if they work for it. Voltaire would satirize Romney because I'm pretty sure the Mormon religion calls for selfless giving which is the opposite of what he wants to do with the government. Obama would be an easier choice for Voltaire. Sure, there are some things Voltaire would disagree with, but he would be better than Romney. But maybe, Voltaire will stop thinking of which candidate to choose but actually implement the things he agrees with, in each Candidate, to the best of his abilities.

For Camus, he would definitely vote for Gary Johnson. To be honest, he would probably think, "I don't like either of the two major candidates. Should I vote still? YES, I WILL! Yeah, I like Ron Paul, but he's not running so I'll vote for Gary Johnson. Hm, my vote is meaningless, but I still will vote to revolt in this two party system." Yeah, that's exactly how it will go.

Our Stranger Meaning.

At this moment of time, I am thinking about how enormous our universe is, and how what we're doing here is so insignificant that, if the Earth were to just disappear today, nothing would be truly affected. Then, again, I see, how out in the vast cosmos of space, we seem to be the only planet to produce and sustain something truly unique. We are either something truly beautiful and rare, or we are a petty thing that the universe barely glosses over.

Maybe, we do have a higher meaning, and we should strive to reach at least something close to fulfilling that meaning. On the other hand, there is absolutely no meaning to our existence, and everything just stops mattering. To be honest, I don't trust anything that seems too solid or absolute like these two philosophies anymore.

This is why I really like Camus's philosophy. There is most likely no meaning to our existence. We are probably just a tiny-micro-spec in the meaningless scheme of it all. BUT. We must revolt against this and engage in finding a meaning in it all. I mean, it's kinda romantic and admirable. We still go forth even though it is futile.

Now, so what should be the meaning to our meaningless life be? Why not, love? I don't think you could go wrong with love. Love encompasses understanding, acceptance, tolerance, etc. Strive for love, do some self reflection more than a few times, and never stop growing. Really corny, but I think it is the true only thing that will quench our thirst for purpose... in a purposeless life.

Candide's Punishment fit his crimes?

I will argue that Candide's punishment did fit his crimes. If someone is living under my roof and feeding off of my wealth, his defilement of my daughter is an insult to my hospitality. It is a very reasonable punishment. Does it actually matter if Candide and Cunegonde were ignorant to what they were doing? No, it does not! Does it lessen the evil, of an act, if a man kills twenty people because he thought he was freeing them from a life of misery? I don't think the judge or jury would think so. Would a person's, who thinks that the punishment is not fitting, opinion change if Candide had intercourse with Cunegone? It should not. From a small kiss to intercourse, they both take advantage of the baron.
The real question is, "Do we consider all evil the same? Or are they at different magnitudes?" I think all evil is the same. Why should we discriminate in our punishment if the perpetrator is of different age, race, condition, gender, etc.? Stealing is stealing is stealing is stealing. I don't even know why I'm arguing this. I don't believe in this. I'm writing because of word count. Everyone is writing about how the punishment is not fitting so I decided to be devil's advocate. I can already see the flaws in this. "How about if they were stealing bread to feed starving families?" Bla bla bla: Life has hard choices.

How Do I Know What I Know?

Sitting here, I struggle to find something to write about. Trying to find out how I know what I know, I found out that I don't actually know anything. Do I know if there is an afterlife? I don't know. Do I know there is not an after life? I don't know. Every time I seem to find something solid, it is convincingly challenged, and I find out again that I still don't know. When I was young, I thought that being a nice was a valued thing for girls when going into a relationship. I learned this from my movies and my parents. Movies told me that the nice guy always wins the girl. My parents encouraged that thought also. After some experience, I realized  that being nice was far from a girl's priorities. If you're nice, you get whipped, used, and friend zoned. You kind of have to be a jerk to get a girl to be attracted you. Then, again, is the girl worth it if she is only into jerks? Is it worth going through the whipping, getting used, and friend zoning for a girl who sees the good qualities you exhibit? I have no idea. It all comes with discernment. I don't think there's one way you can treat everything. Yeah, why not? Be an asshole sometimes. Be a nice guy the others. That's my answer. My "half-knowledges" come from the testings of what people have taught me through my own experience.

The Unexamined Life is Not Worth Living? And Who is the Modern Gadfly?

The unexamined life is the life that chooses to be without struggle. Why does this seem like such a bad thing? If something seems absolute, why question it? Why give up that stability? Could absolute truth even exist in our reality?

I believe that absolute truths exist in our world. Finding those truths is extremely, unbelievably difficult. I think it's near impossible to find even one absolute truth. 99.9999999999% of us will, in my opinion, never get there. I do think that most of us can get close, and that's what we should all strive for. If absolute truth is out there, we must try to get there as close as we possibly can. To live the unexamined life is to give up on these truths. IT IS OUT THERE. To ignore it, you might as well be dead. I would like to think that we made a deal when we were given the gift to experience life. You can't have life without struggle or death. If you're not struggling with something, you're dead. Vice-Versa.

This ties in with perfectly with Gadflies. Some people think they have found their absolute truths. How can that be? In response to that notion, the Gadfly pokes holes in their "absolute" truths. Many people hate that their boat is being rocked and, in some cases, sunk. Who does this today?

Jon Stewart is the perfect example of the Modern Gadfly. On the famous his famous interview with Bill O'Reilly, O'Reilly tries to show a point that it is ridiculous that Common, the rapper, is even at an event in the White House. O'Reilly asserts this by saying that Common supports cop killers.  He says a guy like that should not even be invited out of all the candidates that could be chosen. Jon Stewart responds by first saying that he does not think, if he was Common, that he would support them for killing cops but, instead, support them because he thinks they are innocent. Then, Jon Stewart has the perception of a hawk. He starts to list people that should not be in the White House according to Bill's logic.Jon uses Leonard Peltier as an example to Bill, and Bill brushes it off as nothing. Jon, then, calls him on his bull and says it is the exact same thing. Jon lists Bono, Bob Dylan, and Springsteen (All have been to the White House). They were all people who showed some support of convicted criminals and murderers. Bill O'Reilly tries to say it is different because their songs did not directly say that they were innocent. Jon, again, calls him on his bull because it is the exact same thing. Then, Jon does the greatest burn in the world. He calls out the Fox network by saying that they are a selective outrage machine. If they are going to call out Common, they must also be outraged by all these other artists. Why do they call out Common? Is it because he's black? Is it because he raps? Well, that's left to the viewers to think. Yep, Jon is definitely a Modern Gadfly.

Eulogy of Jeremiah Ilao

Jeremiah, as a little child, was very peculiar. Unlike many children around him, the unexplored was not a frightening place for him; he embraced it. This was not always a good thing. Sometimes. it got him into some trouble. One time, as candy vendor was passing by his home, Jeremiah thought it would be a good idea to chase it. As he was running after it, he bumped into a group of thugs who almost through him off a bridge. He escaped only by his Grandpa being right behind him to scare off the thugs. Another time, he thought it would be a great adventure if his 4 year old sister were to put him in a suitcase once. After being locked in there for 4 hours, he realized that it was not as fun as he planned. Nevertheless, this ambition did separate him from others (in a good way). He would participate in things that other kids were too shy or too "cool" to do. This made his childhood much richer. He never grew out of it so he was always the goofy kid. He didn't take what others thought into account so the things that would spill out of his mind were kind of silly. Though, even if he were criticized for it, he wouldn't even care. He just loved to laugh. Though as he grew into high school, he was not as ambitious as he was then. Every now and again, you could see the twinkling of that ambitious youth come out of him.

Jeremiah established a foundation of what he stood for in elementary school. Through great teachers and role models, he came to an idea that would decide how he lived his life. The world was not black and white to him, and some problems in the world that his figures would present and challenge him with were not easy. He realized that some problems did not have absolute solutions to them. So what did he decided? He decided to strive for and struggle with it. He knew that if he ever settled; truth and righteousness would be lost.

Did he ever told you what his last name meant? Ilao, in the language of tagalog, means light. He was the light to kids who would have missed opportunities of adventure, laughter, and new experiences. He was torch passed down from his teachers and role models to continue their teachings and values into his life. Jeremiah Ilao was this light. If he didn't write this himself, he would be very flattered.