5 Months.

My last post (yes yes, I know, 5 months ago), I was reflecting on the nature of being and death.

More recently I have been reflecting on the nature of personality/temperment/individuality, etc. Specifically, what is it that makes two equally intelligent, equally educated people come down on such divergent sides of an issue: abortion/health care reform/theism/etc. I was sparked by the announcement that Carl Jung's book of dreams is about to be published. I find familiarity is his thoughts though they are actually foreign to me. What is it that sends some people down the same paths (myself and Carl Jung for instance) and others down completely divergent ones?

I am not at all claiming to be anywhere near the intellectual Carl Jung was, just that there is a way of approaching life that we seems to share. What is it that created that approach? Nature? Nurture? I feel like the answer lies mostly in nurture, but I do not dismiss the possibility of some genetic imprint.

Round 2

Yesterday I started blogging, but failed to post anything here. So, call this round 2. Sure, I could've not mentioned that this isn't the beginning, but what fun would that be?

For starters (or rather, not) I'm pondering the impications of my favorite play, "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead"

Rosencrantz: Do you think Death could possibly be a boat?

Guildenstern: No, no, no... death is not. Death isn't. Take my meaning? Death is the ultimate negative. Not-being. You can't not be on a boat.

Rosencrantz: I've frequently not been on boats.

Guildenstern: No, no... what you've been is not on boats.

So I suppose this is the not beginning. How auspicious.