ixoye's Xanga

GTGs - "The Ratio"

Fri, 10 Oct 2008 03:18:52 GMT

When I was a freshman, it was 6:1. Now I hear it's almost 2:1, which is pretty good.
Wonder what these guys are crying about.. :)

Loved this video

Thu, 28 Sep 2006 15:23:48 GMT

I'm not a big web blogger, by any means, and there have been years (literally) that have gone by with me not even looking at this page.. ...so it's rare for me to come across something that evokes a response of "I should share this on xanga"... but here it is.

Does this film resonate with you as much as me? I can identify with this kid, right up to the TV that he has in his house. (I had the same exact TV as a kid)

I found myself smiling the whole time watching this, even though it's kind of long. Enjoy.
(you need the DivX web player to watch this, but it is a quick download)

Is this movie awesome?    [ ] no
    [x] yes

Friday, November 11, 2005

Fri, 11 Nov 2005 09:03:35 GMT

man, haven't even touched this xanga page in a long time... but here's what awakes me from my xanga hibernation. This is one of the most impressive and funny things I've seen in a while.

click here for your enjoyment (scroll down a little after loading this page)

The sad thing is that most people under the age of 21 will not experience the sheer sense of joy I experienced while viewing this video clip. *sigh*

Can anyone name all the different "songs" / "dance re-enactments" listed? I think I count 6 different "songs"

Monday, December 01, 2003

Mon, 01 Dec 2003 13:32:05 GMT

Some comments by others have prompted me to post the following...

Logic and Truth

3 logical operations that can be done to IF-THEN / CAUSE-EFFECT statements that I run across often in my Computer Science studies:

Given: IF x THEN y

#1: Negative - IF NOT(x) THEN NOT (y)
#2: Transitive - IF y THEN x
#3: Contrapositive - IF NOT (y) THEN NOT (x)
--------

(#3 is kind of a combination of #1 and #2)

Well, out of these 3 operations, only #3 preserves logical consistency. Here's a quick example:

LET x = 2 + 2, LET y = 4

so the given is IF 2+2 THEN 4 (or saying it another way, the cause 2+2 will always produce 4).

This statement, being the given, is logically true 100% of the time.

#1: the negative - if NOT (2+2), then NOT (4). (when you don't have 2+2, then you will never produce the effect/result: 4).

As you can see, this statement is not true 100% of the time. you can have 1+3, or 5+-1 or other combinations and it will result in 4.

#2: the transitive - IF 4 THEN 2+2. (the 4 = 2 + 2. While this statement again is possibly true, it is not absolutely true. Again 4 = 3+1, 4 = 5+-1 are possible statements.

#3: the contrapositive - IF NOT(4) THEN NOT (2+2). (If the cause is not 4, then the effect can NOT be 2 + 2.) This is an absolutely true statement. If you don't have 4, then you can never have 2+2, since 2+2 will always result in 4. (the given)
-----

The reason I'm writing about all this is because when we read the bible, we use logical functions in order to really dig into the principles that are in God's word. Since we use logic to interpret the words of scripture, it's important that we are careful of committing logical fallacies.

One particular logical fallacy that is prevalent among christians is taken from the verse in James 2:26 - Faith, without deeds is dead.

Constructed another way: (1) IF (No Deeds) THEN (Faith is dead)

The problem is that this is often interpreted as "I need to DO more to show/prove that my faith is not dead. Again this statement can be constructed like this:

(2) IF (deeds) THEN (alive faith)

Statement 2 is simply Statement 1 with the NEGATIVE function applied to it this making it a logical fallicy deriving Statement 2 from Statement 1.

A sound logical function of Statement 1 would be:

(3) IF (alive faith) THEN (deeds)

or in otherwords: true faith RESULTS in deeds.

Now I'm not making a big deal about this merely to be nitpicky, but because of logical fallicies such as this which result in an incorrect understanding of our lives of faith, we are caught in bondage. We choose to live our lives trying to perform deeds in order to show our faith, but because that's not how God meant it to be, we are left with failure with no other alternatives but a life of frustration. I believe this is the reason why so many Christians go through the "cycle" of Spiritual Highs and Lows. Because they believe incorrectly that their faith depends on deeds, and when the deeds are there, you're on that high, but then eventually you grow weary, so you're back to the low.

We can break out of that bondage by recognizing the truth, that good deeds are fruits of our faith. They are not causal agents, but results.

Man, there is so much more to say about this, but my thoughts aren't organized enough to write them down, so I'll leave it at this.

"Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free"
-Jesus (John 8:32)

Sunday, May 25, 2003

Sun, 25 May 2003 16:11:43 GMT

Weblogging =~ Pornography?

My thoughts on the Xanga craze phenomenon.

People are so into this Xanga thing that it's borderline addiction.

One thing I've noticed is that they are WAY too open and vulnerable with their posts. They use Xanga to reveal feelings and thoughts that they would not share in person. In essence, people feel like they have at last found a low-risk outlet to "share" their intimate feelings/thoughts.

Problem #1: Xanga does NOT protect you from you.

I think the illusion of safety comes because when you're sharing in person, you have to deal w/ their reactions (ie: rejection, acceptance) right away, but w/ Xanga, you can post and not have to worry about rejection as much. I found out not too long ago what eprops were, and it's funny, yet sad how people crave these eprops. I know a few Xanga'ers who constantly check their own posts to see if comments or eprops have been given. (I guess it kinda shows just how much people crave encouragement in their lives) The illusion of safety comes because people aren't going to reject you if they don't like what you shared... they're just gonna stop reading what you posted. And since you don't know who read your posts or not, you are "safe" from rejection.

True, you might be safe from rejection, but let me point out that there are other things to protect besides your sense of acceptance.

A principle I learned that really shook my views on "dating" relationships is the principle of emotional adultery. Many people who are "saving" themselves for marriage are really bent on keeping themselves physically pure for their future husband/wife. The common phrase spoken to each other in dating relationships - "I don't believe in sex before marriage, so let's make sure we don't cross that line."

Well, emotional adultery takes that same principle of sexual purity and applies it to your emotions. I believe that there are certain things reserved for marriage. Sex, yes. But also there are certain emotions and there is a depth of sharing and vulnerability that should ONLY be reached w/ your marriage partner. So if you say to your dating partner - "no sex before marriage" yet you confide in him/her as you would to your spouse, then I believe that you are committing emotional adultery.

That's a whole topic of discussion in itself, but the reason why I'm sharing this is because there are Xanga webloggers who because of the illusion of safety share things with the whole digital world feelings and thoughts that shouldn't be shared. I feel that in a way they are committing emotional adultery with the whole world. It's as if you were posting pictures of yourself naked or having sex... but in an emotional sense.

ok, ok... I know that's a little too harsh and I AM going a little overboard... but I really wanted to make my point that Xanga does NOT protect you from sharing more than you should be sharing.

...More to come on my Xanga page on the evils of Xanga....

(hehehe...)