All Facebook Posts Pre-2019

Updated: Mar 6

Dec 28, 2018

I am afraid of people who say they are nice. They tell others to be compassionate and to improve themselves. These compassionate self-righteous kinds can blindly ruin entire societies. These are extreme religious groups, like those extreme Christians that preached on the drill field every once a while. These are protest groups like Black Lives Matter, feminazis, anti-speech groups, "I am offended" kinds, "free stuff for the poor" kinds, "be nice to people" kinds, "proud to be fat" kinds, etc.

Blinded by ego and self-righteousness, these guys are unstoppable when they get power. They don't realize that they are blocking the way they thought they were going to make (because they are drunk in self-righteousness) until it's too late, until they mess up big time

In fact, we are the same people who caused, ignored, witnessed, or opposed the revolutions we read about. We are the people who accepted Hitler and Napoleon as our leaders. We are the characters in the Mahabharath and the Ramayan. We are the people who voted to kill Socrates and Jesus. These are not stories of people who lived a long time ago, but of an everlasting present.


Throughout my little experience of life, I have rarely seen an unemployable person. Even those with limited mental abilities and even animals seem to have an edge over machines. Whenever I study neuroscience, I wonder at the insane abilities of this machine called the human brain. The number of neural structures that the brain has far outmatches the most ambitious AI. Also, some areas of the brain are highly plastic, almost as if nothing is impossible for the human brain. Yet somehow, machines and animals have become more employable. We have service dogs, therapy dogs and what not! It is not that humans can't do what machines do. It rather seems to be the case that human capital is heavily regulated, driving its price artificially higher. I am tired of people saying "government needs to create more jobs" when in reality, it needs to get out of the way.

Dec 22, 2018

He who argues, struggles, and fights with you is your friend. He who quietly walks away thinks you aren't worth the struggle. Beware of the sweet talkers.

Dec 21

To play to play and to play to win are really not two different kinds of play. One is play. The other is not. The former is play. The latter is to defeat or get defeated.

In general, to do is to do for doing it, not to get somewhere with the doing. The moment the consequence is thought of, it is no longer doing. Hence, a man who has always done things to get somewhere has probably not done anything at all.

Dec 18

"Mind your own business." & "Why doesn't anyone care about me? Why am I invisible?"

"Don't say this/ that to me." & "No one talks to me. I guess, no one likes me."

"Leave me alone." & " Why am I always left alone?"

"Don't be so nosey." & "Why is everyone so indifferent, so insensitive?"

"Don't tell me what to do." & "Only if someone had told me about it, damn!"

Lately, it has occurred to me, quite objectively, that people themselves have fed into most mundane problems they face. They ask others to be insensitive, not to care, but also wonder why others are insensitive. Every time you rewarded insensitivity and punished/ignored sensitivity, you programmed people to be insensitive. That's behavior modification on a large scale.

Dec 14, 2018

One reason why it is pointless to find people like yourself to be friends with and marry is the mere impossibility of it. Do you just want to have the same place of belonging, or the same eating habits too, or the same religion, too, or the same occupation, too? You see where this is going. There is no end to it until you get to your clone. And guess what, you'll be terribly lonely with your clone because it is no different from being with yourself.

This entire similar to me/dissimilar to me game is kind of an ego chase, which has no endpoint. I see people perpetually stuck in it. How you define yourself determines who's similar to you? How you define yourself is your ego. The more ego you have, the more you define yourself in fixed ways, making you artificially different from others.

If you truly want to understand and befriend others, give up your ego. The more of it you lose, the more you'll find yourself in others, the less bothersome being with different kinds of people will be (whatever that means).

Dec 13, 2018

Put people into groups and they have an incentive to be good/nice. An individual living in a far-off cave probably does not care about good and bad. However, in a group, insecure people uphold all sorts of moral codes to try to be the nicer ones, the better ones. This is partly the cause of insanity among religious and political groups, moral righteousness.

The attempt to be good reveals that they aren't good. You may ask, "should we not even make an attempt?" Yes, you shouldn't even make an attempt. If you are nice, you don't have to attempt nicety unless you are insecure, impure, or both. It's like a guy attempting nicety to get a girl. His attempt implies that he isn't genuine. The only way you can actually be good is by stop trying to be good. That's why I am suspicious when people act nice and carefree when they don't. Moral righteousness is an extremely powerful motivator, these "nice people" capable of the evilest.

"The highest virtue is not virtuous. Therefore, it has virtue. The lowest virtue holds on to virtue. Therefore it has no virtue," Lao Tsu.

Nov 29, 2018

Adherents of all religions claim that God's love is unconditional. The same people exhaust every bit of their energy trying to please God and upholding some sort of moral code. They sacrifice animals like savages, hoping God will reward their savagery. They harshly monitor their actions, whom they talk to, whom they work with, whom they hang out with, whom they marry, what music they listen to, what kind of words they use, etc. They self-regulate so much that they become slaves to their own regulations.

They erect monuments and temples to please God, as if God was insecure and miserable, or as if God holds a grudge against them. They go to great lengths to establish troops, schools, colleges, and a variety of other institutions to serve God as if God was pitiful and helpless. They go even further to convert and wage wars against adherents of other religions. Some spend their entire lives worrying about pleasing God.

To be an object of unconditional love means you do not have to do or be anything at all to receive it. To have any worries or any insecurities is contradictory to the first principle as stated above. Such love is supposed to liberate you, not bind you or constrain you in any way.

PS. Now, whether the first principle is true or not, that I don't know.

Nov 27, 2018

People who say the sweetest stuff may be the most hypocritical. If you actually cared about someone, you don't need to say it. You care not because you want him to think you do, but because you think it is the right thing to do or because you are naturally inclined to do so or because of some other reason that isn't rooted in greed and selfishness.

Those who say that they care all the time probably don't care about you. If they did, they wouldn't have to care about you. They may be insecure about whether they care or not, which is why they are hoping to choose to care, which again means that they don't care. They may also just be playing with your mind, or following a moral code that obligates them to care, none of which is care.

And I won't even start on "the more they fake, the more they deplete their ego, the more frustrated and stressed out they get, leading them to become cruel". I am not suggesting pessimism, rather a more laid back attitude to people who admittedly care too much. Of course, there might be a kind that cares and says that they do, though I am yet to meet one.

Nov 22, 2018

It occurred to me what eternal laws if they are real, may potentially mean. The Hindus call it Sanatan Dharm. The Taoist description of the Dao sounds similar. If they are laws, they can neither be instructions nor hypotheses, because laws are absolute truths by definition. They hold across space and time, like conservation of mass and energy. They can withstand the most rigorous logical assault. There can be no counterexample to them. They have to be totally apart from individual and social ego. It follows that they have to be founded on hardcore rationality, so much so that these laws may be the essence of logic/rationality or rationality itself.

The Greek idealists thought something similar, that this rationality fills up the universe, separate from our ego. Both the Greeks and the Romans called it the λόγος, too. Marcus Aurelius writes in The Meditations (audiobook's on YouTube) that everything emerged from the λόγος, is it, and will dive back into it.

Nov 9, 2018

It occurs to me, as an intuition, that man's quest for wisdom might just be the same as his quest for God. Look at physicists and mathematicians. They want to know everything about the universe. They revel in the process, pondering of the mystical workings of the universe, to find out where it all came from and what it is all about as if they were devoutly worshipping as if they wanted to know God. But some of them call themselves atheists.

Look at philosophers. How are their broodings on politics, life, human behavior, etc not similar to a wonder for knowledge, the knowledge of the open and the infinite, what some call God. Would all devotes not give up their quests if they found God unless God is that process.

In the beginning was the Logos (wisdom, knowledge, reason). The logos was with God. The Logos was God (look it up).

Oct 8, 2018

The compensational theory of social justice didn't quite click. Are we really gonna make women pay for housing, dates, household items, and whatever else? Are we really gonna send them to unnecessary wars to get killed? Are we really gonna reshoot Titanic and ensure women died and men were saved?

Oct 1, 2018

It occurs to me as if your real friends may not be those who offer help, but those who ask for it. As David Metzer once said that people have to suck up their egos to ask for help (rephrased) but to offer it may just swell up your ego.

Christians say they are called to give freely. WRONG. You can't give freely without asking for freely. It's like running forever without eating. At some point, you'll be just $3 away or just 30 minutes away from helping the next individual. Suck up your ego. Learn to ask freely if you want to give freely.

There is a reason why I tell people "you may regret this" when they invite me to dinner because I don't hold back, and most people severely underestimate my appetite.


Last Friday, in middle school, a girl walked into my class looking for good students who were supposed to get cupcakes.

Me- what do you mean, good kids?

She- those who were good this week

Me - how do we measure who is good?

She - I mean, those who were behaviorally good

Me- so, where do we find them?

She - oh, I have a list.

She showed me a list of "good kids" that other teachers had come up with. Whether you like it or not, teachers keep their preferences and quietly ignore other kids. This game of not hurting anyone's feelings only handicaps those whose feelings you are trying to protect. The kids who need no help have resources allocated to them, while those who need help get quietly ignored. To say anything means to hurt their feelings and be unkind. How else can they possibly do better?

You can probably guess I am talking about black kids primarily. Someone has to hurt their feelings, if they ever are to learn to annunciate their words properly, present themselves properly, keep their academic promises, and act in ways that uphold prosocial values and individual dignity.

You can probably guess black kids are much less likely to end up on "the good kids" list, whatever that means. The teachers have quietly, in isolation, altogether made their decision, and you know what it is. They just wouldn't say it.

In fact, people being polite (in a sociopolitical sense) only makes you impervious to help and learning. There have to be people whom you crossed paths with, who knew how to stay healthy, how to become wealthy, how to be productive and not lazy, how to speak and dress better, how to live stress-free, etc. If you are fat, broke, lazy, or stressed, you probably played the politeness game with them. They protected your feelings, leaving you, unprotected.

Sept 28, 2018

Who taught you not to assume and feel? Those may be the two most aspects of communication. You assume that the baby needs water, or your pet needs something. Since my senior year, I have noticed that people rely on words too much (Low Context culture of the west). It's impractical. Not everything can be said. Not everyone is capable of articulating himself well, except poets. Words are discrete units of communication, but the human experience seems rather continuous, like music, dance, paintings, etc. We are progeny of folks who made assumptions because the nonassuming lineage probably died off, as the mothers waited for their babies to demand food and water in explicit words. The expectations were too high. The babies couldn't keep up. Imagine how hard it must have been on Future's mom. His being alive is a testament to her mother's ability to assume, feel, and provide for his needs.

Sep 6, 2018

What if I tell you that some of my middle school kids are more academically developed than MSU athletes? I am afraid MSU is exploiting athletes by giving them leeway on academics, when the majority won't make it big, and will simply be abandoned by the education system. Well, the athletic department can pat their backs because they already made money off them.

May 14, 2015

In the world of the polite, truth doesn't exist

Recent Posts

See All

As long as a society needs laws to be civilized, it is not intrinsically civilized. Why didn't Socrates, Ram and Buddha ever write a book?

When you can't offend someone, you have become. When everyone says thank you, you suddenly are out of words when you want to thank someone