A fleeting moment,
which repeats herself
de ja vu?
yet with each iteration
different from the last
Ending similarly
with the gut-wrenching
guilt and loneliness
ripped apart by
indecision,
circumstance
and by distance
Parallel lines
aren't supposed to meet?
If so then what are we?
What am I talking about?
There is no we;
She's the emphatic and
giving spiral
that tangents
and propels my lifeline;
For each time our paths cross,
I am propelled to new heights...
1. I think that a lot of the new projects in the Makati CBD are starting to all look the same... all of them have Mohawk tops... go figure... check out Oakwood... then Residences at Greenbelt, then The Columns Legazpi/The Columns Buendia... hello?! have we run out of bright ideas on how to treat the crowns of our buildings?
2. Visit Glorietta... then take the MRT and get off at Cubao... drag your ass to Gateway Mall... see anything similar? Right! Its the lasercut motifs... again... chances are... the guys from RTKL came over, stayed in Makati, moved around Glorietta and then subconsciously picked up those motifs and slapped them onto Gateway.
3. When a 23-year-old designer suggests an idea but gets shot down because of biases/taste, but then in comes a design consultant... with a foreign education and a hell of a reputation... suggesting exactly the same idea... and gets away with it... what do you call that?!
4. You don't run things around here kid... yeah... I know... thats exactly why its easier for me to lay my ass on the line and make these suggestions...
5. Foresight pare... foresight... kaya wala tayong nararating... kasi we don't know how to look and plan ahead.
6. Read this somewhere... its true: "Life is a tragedy to those who feel, and a comedy/farce to those who think."
7. Lastly... I might not, but I will, and when I do, you'll see.
Profile: INTJ
Revision: 3.0
Date of Revision: 27 Feb 2005
To outsiders, INTJs may appear to project an aura of "definiteness", of self-confidence. This self-confidence, sometimes mistaken for simple arrogance by the less decisive, is actually of a very specific rather than a general nature; its source lies in the specialized knowledge systems that most INTJs start building at an early age. When it comes to their own areas of expertise -- and INTJs can have several -- they will be able to tell you almost immediately whether or not they can help you, and if so, how. INTJs know what they know, and perhaps still more importantly, they know what they don't know.
INTJs are perfectionists, with a seemingly endless capacity for improving upon anything that takes their interest. What prevents them from becoming chronically bogged down in this pursuit of perfection is the pragmatism so characteristic of the type: INTJs apply (often ruthlessly) the criterion "Does it work?" to everything from their own research efforts to the prevailing social norms. This in turn produces an unusual independence of mind, freeing the INTJ from the constraints of authority, convention, or sentiment for its own sake.
INTJs are known as the "Systems Builders" of the types, perhaps in part because they possess the unusual trait combination of imagination and reliability. Whatever system an INTJ happens to be working on is for them the equivalent of a moral cause to an INFJ; both perfectionism and disregard for authority may come into play, as INTJs can be unsparing of both themselves and the others on the project. Anyone considered to be "slacking," including superiors, will lose their respect -- and will generally be made aware of this; INTJs have also been known to take it upon themselves to implement critical decisions without consulting their supervisors or co-workers. On the other hand, they do tend to be scrupulous and even-handed about recognizing the individual contributions that have gone into a project, and have a gift for seizing opportunities which others might not even notice.
In the broadest terms, what INTJs "do" tends to be what they "know". Typical INTJ career choices are in the sciences and engineering, but they can be found wherever a combination of intellect and incisiveness are required (e.g., law, some areas of academia). INTJs can rise to management positions when they are willing to invest time in marketing their abilities as well as enhancing them, and (whether for the sake of ambition or the desire for privacy) many also find it useful to learn to simulate some degree of surface conformism in order to mask their inherent unconventionality.
Personal relationships, particularly romantic ones, can be the INTJ's Achilles heel. (Gee... I couldn't agree more pare!) While they are capable of caring deeply for others (usually a select few), and are willing to spend a great deal of time and effort on a relationship, This happens in part because many INTJs do not readily grasp the social rituals; for instance, they tend to have little patience and less understanding of such things as small talk and flirtation (which most types consider half the fun of a relationship). To complicate matters, INTJs are usually extremely private people, and can often be naturally impassive as well, which makes them easy to misread and misunderstand. Perhaps the most fundamental problem, however, is that INTJs really want people to make sense. :-) This sometimes results in a peculiar naivete', paralleling that of many Feelers -- only instead of expecting inexhaustible affection and empathy from a romantic relationship, the INTJ will expect inexhaustible reasonability and directness.
Probably the strongest INTJ assets in the interpersonal area are their intuitive abilities and their willingness to "work at" a relationship. Although as Thinkers, they do not always have the kind of natural empathy that many Feelers do, the Intuitive function can often act as a good substitute by synthesizing the probable meanings behind such things as tone of voice, turn of phrase, and facial expression. This ability can then be honed and directed by consistent, repeated efforts to understand and support those they care about, and those relationships which ultimately do become established with an INTJ tend to be characterized by their robustness, stability, and good direct communications. (Sinabi mo pa! Ayoko manghula!)
Functional Analysis
by Joe Butt
INTJs are idea people. Anything is possible; everything is negotiable. Whatever the outer circumstances, INTJs are ever perceiving inner pattern-forms and using real-world materials to operationalize them. Others may see what is and wonder why; INTJs see what might be and say "Why not?!" Paradoxes, antinomies, and other contradictory phenomena aptly express these intuitors' amusement at those whom they feel may be taking a particular view of reality too seriously. INTJs enjoy developing unique solutions to complex problems.
Thinking in this auxiliary role is a workhorse. Closure is the payoff for efforts expended. Evaluation begs diagnosis; product drives process. As they come to light, Thinking tends, protects, affirms and directs iNtuition's offspring, fully equipping them for fulfilling and useful lives. A faithful pedagogue, Thinking argues not so much on its own behalf, but in defense of its charges. And through this process these impressionable ideas take on the likeness of their master.
Feeling has a modest inner room, two doors down from the Most Imminent iNtuition. It doesn't get out much, but lends its influence on behalf of causes which are Good and Worthy and Humane. We may catch a glimpse of it in the unspoken attitude of good will, or the gracious smile or nod. Some question the existence of Feeling in this type (ano ako bato?), yet its unseen balance to Thinking is a cardinal dimension in the full measure of the INTJ's soul.
Sensing serves with a good will, or not at all. As other inferior functions, it has only a rudimentary awareness of context, amount or degree. Thus INTJs sweat the details or, at times, omit them. "I've made up my mind, don't confuse me with the facts" could well have been said by an INTJ on a mission. Sensing's extraverted attitude is evident in this type's bent to savor sensations rather than to merely categorize them. Indiscretions of indulgence are likely an expression of the unconscious vengeance of the inferior emotional/sensual aspects of the person.
Dan Aykroyd (The Blues Brothers)
Susan B. Anthony
Arthur Ashe, tennis champion
Augustus Caesar (Gaius Julius Caesar Octavianus) - haha no wonder I have an imperious personality!
Jane Austen (Pride and Prejudice)
William J. Bennett, "drug czar"
William F. Buckley, Jr.
Raymond Burr (Perry Mason, Ironsides)
Chevy Chase (Cornelius Crane) (Fletch)
Phil Donahue
Michael Dukakis, governor of Mass., 1988 U.S. Dem. pres. candidate
Greg Gumbel, television sportscaster
Hannibal, Carthaginian military leader
Veronica Hamel (Hill Street Blues)
Angela Lansbury (Murder, She Wrote)
Orel Leonard Hershiser, IV
Peter Jennings
Charles Everett Koop
Ivan Lendl
C. S. Lewis (The Chronicles of Narnia)
Joan Lunden
Edwin Moses, U.S. olympian (hurdles)
Martina Navratilova
Charles Rangel, U. S. Representative, D-N.Y.
Pernell Roberts (Bonanza)
Arnold Schwarzenegger, Governor of California
Josephine Tey (Elizabeth Mackintosh), mystery writer (Brat Farrar)
Rudy Giuliani, former New York City mayor
Donald Rumsfeld, US Secretary of Defense
General Colin Powell, US Secretary of State
Lance Armstrong
Richard Gere (Pretty Woman)
Katie Couric
Cassius (Julius Caesar)
Mr. Darcy (Pride and Prejudice)
Gandalf the Grey (J. R. R. Tolkein's Middle Earth books)
Hannibal Lecter (Silence of the Lambs) - naku... tendencies ah
Professor Moriarty, Sherlock Holmes' nemesis
Ensign Ro (Star Trek--the Next Generation)
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern (Hamlet)
George Smiley, John le Carre's master spy
Clarice Starling (Silence of the Lambs)
I'm no economist, but being someone who tries to keep abreast with things, I read up a lot, with economics, business and capitalism being some of them.
One of my favorite topics under those 3 main subjects is the idea of zero-sum games, wherein there can only be one winner in a situational "game" among 2 or more participants. Because these situations put human behavior in a purely "selfish" and capitalist setting, its interesting how people behave under these static conditions.
But the truth is, the real world is not a zero-sum game, our everyday lives encapsulate so many trade situations wherein people, all take part in varying degrees of trade and exchange. Its interesting to note that despite a lot of altruism and group-think that litters our consciousness, we still act and behave in our self-interest. At the end of the day, self preservation and genetic continuation are still the rules in the game of life.
But the beauty of this is that self-interests can also work for the benefit of the group, and that oftentimes, in life and in trade/business, its not this-or-that, but this-and-that, meaning, we all win or we all lose. This has been proven by John Nash (yes, the role played by Russel Crowe in A Beautiful Mind, and yes, the Nobel Prize winning mathematician, and yes... the schizo) that the point wherein a competitive system achieves balance and a win-win situation for all its participants can be determined through quantitative means and is called the Nash Equilibrium.
So anyway, where does this take me? Game theorists and economists have a favorite situation called the Prisoner's Dilemma, wherein 2 cellmates are given the opportunity to decrease their sentences by squealing on his cellmate's other crimes. Now, if both stay silent, they maintain the status quo. But since people act in their self-interest, both will try to squeal on the other, and try to do it earlier than the other cellmate.
Mathematically, the Nash Equilibrium for this situation is achieved when both squeal on each other at the same time. Where does this lead to then? Well the defined variables are limited, but chances are it will lead to both of them getting their sentences extended, or both of them maintaining the status quo. But at the end of the day, it just shows that given they both have other crimes unconfessed, all is fair in love and in war, and yes, in prison.
From a purely worldly standpoint... Quits lang... walang santo/altruist at lahat tayo nandito sa mundo at ang laro nating lahat ay para sa sarili natin. Iba-iba lang ang standard natin ng victory and definitions of preservation/genetic continuation. Some see money and material wealth as their currency for preservation, while others see favors and kind acts as their instruments to salvation.
The irony of it is that kind acts and altruism cannot be quantified and put in an equation. If you try to establish an equilibrium by repaying these acts, or for exacting a repayment for your kind acts, society and our morality labels you as garapal.
Which is why (pardon the subtle racism and ethnic bias) I see Chinamen, or better yet, Businessmen/Capitalists (who operate in the freemarket) as the most moral and just people in the world. At least they give you the chance to get to a win-win settlement by providing room for payment for goods and services. They do not act as altruists and plant seeds of utang-na-loob with which you as the beneficiary cannot repay them for. There is no such thing as a human altruist, because everyone acts in his own self-interest
And which is why Jesus Christ could be classified as the only and ultimate altruist. He repaid our debts without asking for repayment, in fact he repaid our debts in order to save us. The summation of all our offerings, faith and good works wouldn't even amount to His ultimate act, that of self-sacrifice. That is why I know he is God, because a man or a woman cannot fathom/think of self-sacrifice unless it is in his or her own interest!
| One day I decided to quit...I quit my job, my relationship, my Spirituality... I wanted to quit my life. I went to the woods to have one last talk with God. "God", I said. "Can you give me one good reason not to quit?" His answer surprised me... "Look around", He said. "Do you see the fern and the bamboo?" "Yes", I replied. "When I planted the fern and the bamboo seeds, I took very good care of them. I gave them light. I g! ave them water. The fern quickly grew from the earth. Its brilliant green covered the floor. Yet nothing came from the bamboo seed. But I did not quit on the bamboo. In the second year the Fern grew more vibrant and plentiful. And again, nothing came from the bamboo seed. But I did not quit on the bamboo." He said. "In year three there was still nothing from the bamboo seed. But I would not quit. In year four, again, there was nothing from the bamboo seed. I would not quit." He said. "Then in the fifth year a tiny sprout emerged from the earth. Compared to the fern it was seemingly small and insignificant...But just 6 months later the bamboo rose to over 100 feet tall. It had spent the five years growing roots. Those roots made it strong and gave it what it needed to survive. I would not give any of my creations a challenge it could not handle." He said to me. "Did you know, my child, that all this time you have been struggling, you have actually been growing roots?" "I would not quit on the bamboo. I will never quit on you." "Don't compare yourself to others." He said. "The bamb! oo had a different purpose than the fern. Yet they both make the forest beautiful." "Your time will come", God said to me. "You will rise high" "How high should I rise?" I asked. "How high will the bamboo rise?" He asked in return. "As high as it can?" I questioned "Yes." He said, "Give me glory by rising as high as you can." I left the forest and bring back this story. I hope these words can help you see that God will never give up on you.! |
