It happened again...

It happened again today.

"What?" You may ask.

Well, you, someone asked me what I plan to to with my major. I suppose it is a legitimate question. Every other major seems to have some "do" involved. And even philsophy, as a major, is used as a springboard to seminary, law school, and the like. Everytime i try to be realistic, every time it try to tell myself that i should perhaps get a more applicable, useful, tangible field of study, something in me will not allow it. Over the last 2 weeks i've begun to realize a bit more about just why that might be.

National Student Leadership Conference was an incredible weekend full of thoughts that needed to be manifested into word form. But, the thoughts and words i would most like to recall for you are the ones spoken by a Dr. Paul Spears, protege of the ever-loved J.P. Moreland. I sat in Dr. Spears workshop "The Curse of Cursive Writing, and other Myths that Shaped our Education," and drank in every word. He relayed the common idea of education today, and it went somthing like this:

-Edcation is about job-getting, not about flourishing.
-Students need to start thinking of themselves as what they can produce, not in terms of what they can know and understand.
-Education is a monetary end, not an interaction with the world around us.

We are keenly cautious and aware of the fact that there are standards (A's & B's) that must be met and that are, for all intensive purposes, our primary goal. If we are, in some way, unable to meet these standards, we are deemed unfit for the intellectual realm and pitied for what we can never become. (For afterall, we have learned that our ability to do intellectual work directly relates to capitol). We have been so brainwashed into thinking that meeting these standards is the goal, that we have forgotten to pursue education that we may become "better men." The sad thing is how entrenched we are, and how unaware.

Not only in at National Student Leadership Conference, but also in my studies for class, i have read things that shed further light on the point of education.

In Technopoly, Neil Postman points out an important shift in the way we see achievment in the realm of education: "I refer to the seemingly harmless practice of assigning marks or grades to the answers studnets give on examinations. This procedure seem so natural to most of us that we are hardly aware of its significance. We may even find it difficult to imagine that the number or letter is a tool or ,if you will, a technology...I shall not argue her that this is a stupid or dangerous idea, only that it is peculiar. What is even more peculiar is that man of us do notfind the idea peculiar. To say that someone should be doing better work because he has an IQ of 134...or that this man's essay on the rise of capitalism is an A- and that man's is a C+ would have sounded like gibberish to Galileo or Shakespeare or Thomas Jefferson. If it makes sense to us, that is because or minds have been conditioned by the technology of numbers so that we see the world differently than they did. Our understanding of what is real is different."

The idea of quantifying intelligence is just an example of how education is now viewed. Studies are a means to something else, be it a grade, law school, or the perfect job (perhaps all three). And thats fine, its just not really going to be satisfactory in the end. Many of you have heard me talk of the cyclical nature of this view of education, but here it is again: Why do we work hard in high school? To get into college, of course. Why do we work hard in college? To get into Grad school, of course. Why do we work hard in Grad School? To get a good job, of course. Why do we need a good job? To make money, of course. Why do we need to make money? To put food on the table, and to put our kids into good schools, of course. Why do we make our kids work hard in school? So they can get into college, of course. Why do they need to do well in college? To get a good job, OF COURSE.

Of course, I realize this isn't the stated motive of most, but I would be willing to guess, judging by the questions i recieve so often concerning what i will "do" with my major, that a majority of people see education in this way--as a means to an end.

Well, I think its an end in itself. So here I am, a philosohy major, quite unsure of what i want to do with my life, and thoroughly at peace about it.

And here is a little something from tonights Heidegger reading: "It is absolutely correct and proper to say that 'you can't do anything with philosophy.' It is only wrong to suppose that this is the last word on philosophy. For the rejoinder imposes itself: granted that we cannot do anything with philosophy, might not philosophy, if we concern ourselves with it, do something with us? So much for what philosophy is not."

And here i am, back up on my soapbox, begging for a reorientation in education. Its not about what we do with education, its about what it does to us. (This does not mean that there is no need for doing, just that education is not something that ends when a job is ascertained, nor is it job-training. It is, itself, an end.)

And this too, is an end. (of a long post)

Car Alarms

I just heard one, and I know i'm not alone in my reaction to the incessant beeping--"stupid person hit the panic button on their keychain, again"

Does this defeat the purpose of car alarms if this is our immediate reaction? I think so.


On another note, we had our National Student Leadership Conference this weekend and it was incredible. I don't give out compliments like that to conferences very frequently, in fact this may be the first conference-like thing i've ever attended AND enjoyed. The speakers didn't seem as "conferency" as usual. More on this later when i'm not catching up on all the work i haven't been doing all week.

Things change.

All of a sudden i have a heightened awareness that each year, month, day, hour, minute is something that i will probably not experience again.

Reflecting on this year, and looking forward to next year, i have realized what a drastically different year it will be. Moving to a different wing, PAship, class presidency, 2 good friends gone in Lithuainia first semester, different roommate (whom i have not yet found), a few good friends graduating and leaving me. My days will look entirely different. My responsibilities will change radically. Its just not going to be the same, at all. Its not necessarily a negative thing, I'm excited for a new start, but i suppose its natural to not want to let go of the things that made this year grand. Its not that one year will, neccessarily, be better than another, just different. A difference that i am rather aware of.

On a more philosophical note, today, in History of Philosophy, we talked about how the shift in language and art around the time of Hegel radically changed the way we saw reality. Whereas art used to be judged by its ability to accurately represent and pictify (through paint, notes, or words) an object, the shift was made to valuing those things that brought experience and personal reflection and into exsistence. The art, the words, were no longer about accuracy concerning the subject, but about experience of the subject. And since then, it has remained. Things will never be the same. Its not that one way of seeing thing is better, or worse, just different. A difference that we need to be aware of.

Similarly, in COS104, two days ago, we talked about technology (go figure). We've been reading 'Technopoly', a book by Neil Postman, whose main goal is to draw awareness to the fact that technology is not neutral, it changes thing, for better and for worse, planned or unplanned, noticed or unnoticed. He uses the example: "If you put television into America in 1946, by 1960 you don't have America just "plus television", but a new kind of America, so that our social relations are altered and our attitudes toward childhood are altered and our political system is altered and we get new meanings of old words and so on. That's not something that's new in culture." Technology changes things. Some things will never be the same. Its not neccesarily better, or worse, just different. A difference that we need to be aware of.

Somehow, change seems to be a trend here. And this is probably why i have this heightened awareness of experiences, thoughts, people, never being the same. I don't think that any of this kind of change is better or worse, some lends itself to either side, but at its core, change is just something we need to be aware of, not wary of, not overly excited about, just aware, cognizant, contemplative, i suppose.

SB08

finally.

FINALLY.
I've been waiting for the day that I could honestly say, regarding my studies, "I'm done" (for now). Well, that day has arrived.

It is a magnificent day here in Upland, Indiana. I had zero classes . I found out that I got a 94% on a test I thought I failed. I looked (H)/(G)OOD for "be a baller" night (our sb08 team's kickoff event). I went for a walk with my dear friend Kristin. The weather is prime.

Altogether, a splediferous day.

In other news, we leave tomorrow morning for miami.


(i apologize, but this is exactly what comes to mind whenever i tell people where I'm going)
thanks, will.

Also, its midnightish, and i have't started to pack. If there is one thing in life that I would wish away, (after many a social injustice), it would be packing. I abhor it.

But, I will. And I will start now.
Check out what my team is up to via the blog that we have set up for our team (i'll be blogging for us, go figure, my obsession continues).

[SBO8 MIAMI BLOG]

i like to think AND i'm a girl.

Sometimes, i wish i had magic powers. I want to be able to get into peoples' (especially girls') heads to understand what exactly they are thinking. I happen to be a girl who doesn't emote frequently, and if i do it is about some idea i am passionate about. This cuts me off from the 95%of girls who gush, sob, giggle, and freak out about things that i may or may not think are silly. Here is my theory: girls give to social pressure to be that way. I will not deny the fact that girls are more emotional and what not, but I don't think that I can be the only one who just does not really care about how every situations makes me "feel." Yes, I have emotions. No, i don't portray them at the drop of a hat, let them get the best of me, or wear them on my sleeve. Perhaps I'm a bit stoic. But here is the thing, I've been told by numerous sources lately that i "act," "think," and "just are" different that most girls. Now, I understand that, and partially, i suppose, i have pursued that. However, one person told me that I think logically, and thus, am set apart from other women.

HOW SAD IS THAT, WOMEN?

I know that i may just be soapboxing it here, but come on. Analytic minds are not reserved for men. Why must emotions always win out over logical conclusions? Shouldn't emotions be the result of our logical conclusions(that way we know that they are properly placed)?

Now, understand, i get that i have a bias. I am a philosophy major, thinking is my great love. Maybe that is why i am writing this. I want to share something that i love with women that i love. I love taking myself out of situations, forgetting how they affect me, and concluding things based on an analytic study of the situation. Nerdy? perhaps...But, its ok because i hang out with kids who do rubix cubes all day long :P

All I'm saying is, try it. I know that girls like to be "girly" and whatever, but i also know that there are a lot more women out there who really don't have strong emotions about things but are compelled to have them and let everyone know, just because its the "girlish" thing to do. JUST STOP. Someone once told me that there are not that many things in this world that require very strong emotions. And i agree. You may have heard of the "proper ordering of loves", well I'm advocating the "proper expression of emotion". Emotion means something, we shouldn't dilute it by infusing every moment, decision, and conversation with some emotion that we feel should necessarily be there.

P.S. I'm not going to say that I don't think that this is a better way of handling life, because i think it is. I won't apologize for that, however, i will say that i haven't perfected the art (nor will i), and i do think that emotion needs to take a bigger role in my life...I'm just not sure where it fits in right now. I will start with "rejoicing with those who rejoice and mourning with those who mourn"...and I'll go from there.

What's your name?

I'm a name purist. That's right. I just adopted this phrase from a friend, because it quite accurately describes how i view names. At my school, nicknames are a huge deal. There are more nicknames on this campus than there are people (weird right?). I just don't like nicknames. I like referring to people by as full of a name as possible, names are an intimate thing. For example, lets say i have a friend named Johnathan Samuel, and everyone calls him John, or JS, or whatnot. I am going to want to call him Johnathan Samuel, not a syllable more, or less. For some reason i have this idea that by referring to someone by their real name, I am trying to deal with them closely, as a name is an intimate part of a person. The more of the name i say, the more of the person i wish to interact with? This, is entirely unfounded and when other people refer to their friends by nicknames, I'm ok with it, but i often fall into peer pressure (haha peer pressure to use nicknames...that's not something they teach you in D.A.R.E) and use the nickname. Well, I'm going to try to stop. now. I don't like it.

Let's analyze classic nicknames for a moment:
-The Last Name: Any variation. We see the full last name, the shortened last name, the chopped up last name, and the rhyming game with the last name. In any case, its not very personal. A first name is what sets a person apart from the rest of the "smiths" and the "joneses" of this world.

-The Hairstyle Name: Carrot Top. Curly. Pippi Longstocking. Think about it, have you ever known a hairstyle name that didn't end up completely defining a person? Be careful, these people may be proud of their hair, but you can't confine them too it. After all, They are NOT their hair. ("I am not my Hair" by: India.Arie. great song...its my theme song. Don't listen to the remix with Akon..not as good.)

-The "hey it was funny once" Name: You all know this name. The nickname that originated from some event, sometime in history, that some people were witnesses to, and somehow has permeated everyone's addresses towards this person. Fun for some, not for all. Not to mention, who wants to be called back to some embarrassing moment every time they are addressed? No one, that's who.

-The Initial Name: No matter who you are, you've been called by your initials. Unless you have really really sweet and rare initials...like "YZX", you shouldn't feel special. Think of how many other people have that very same set of initials.. a lot. (don't, however, think of how many people your name, because that number is probably pretty large too).

-The Generic Name- Heyyyyy "buckaroo", nice to see ya "partner." Yea. not personal. Kinda lame. Plus, who says buckaroo?

-The Body Part Name- "Big Foot" I mean, who even needs another example? Look how detrimental it was to him. I mean really, maybe if people were nicer when determining what they would call him, then he wouldn't have retreated to the woods to live a solitary existence.

I will, however, allow for names that define people's function, for purposeful use. For example: Mom, friend, lover, boss. These, in most cases, are acceptable.

I suppose it doesn't really matter what you call people because, on a much more serious note, its not their real name anyway. I can't wait to have my real name:

"...and I will give him a white stone and in the stone a new name written, which man may know only if he receives it." Revelation 2:17

Anne Marie isn't my real name, He has a name that is precisely my name, i just can't have it yet, because I'm not really me yet. I love that when someone calls my name, it makes me aware that they are aware of me. To know that God is aware of the me that i have not become is a rather comforting thought. When He calls my real name I'm going to be aware of a me that I had been progressing towards, but hadn't yet reached, until then. I love it.

I wonder what my new name is going to be...I hope it is Sophie.

Manimal Crackers.

The titles says it all, really.

I wish they made them. It would also be a good way to curb/ween someone off of their cannibalistic tendencies. After a while of eating manimal crackers, you could switch to animal crackers..BOOM. you are healed of those tendencies, and animals start to look more appealing.

weird..i know, welcome to my mind.

Beauty Week.

First off, thank you women's ministry. This is a week that NEEDS to happen. For those of you that are unaware, as most who read this probably are, this week is Beauty Week at Taylor University. Most of the girls' wings are covering mirrors in the bathrooms and using these kinds of symbolic actions to start conversations about what real beauty is. Friday night, we had our wing "retreat" (the quotes mean that we didn't really go anywhere, we just stayed in our hallway--which was awesome). To start the evening, we were given a list of questions, there were 7 or 8, but i got stuck, and stayed awhile, on the first one--"What is beauty?" As a philosophy major, my first thought was that of my own opinion concerning Aesthetics. For a while i've spouted off, when asked this question, that beauty is the sum of an objects inherent truth and goodness. I was inclined to leave it at that, until I realiezed that i REALLY had no idea concept of what that meant, especially with regards to people. Here is what i journaled:

If beauty is a combination of one's inherent goodness and truth, then how do we become beautiful?

"I was beautiful, i suppose, originally, but now i'm rendered ugly by the fall. We've been told since we were little "you're special" and "you're beautiful"...but thats just not true. We can't be any of that, not if we believe the words of the Bible.

God is good. God is truth. I am not good. I am not truth.

Perhaps in drawing closer to that truth, found in the person of Jesus Christ, we move towards the good that God created us to be.

Christ in us is beautiful. Without his truth and a return to our lost goodness, we are not beautiful."

When i reflected on this tonight, i realized that we must, as women, as people, have a way to relate to others, knowing that they, themselves, are not beautiful, but instead that the love of Christ has given each person the opportunity to be beautiful. I started in Song of Solomon, and I found a verse that didn't sit right with me at first...

"All beautiful you are my darling, there is no flaw in you.." (S of S 4:7)
[As the lover speaks to the one he loves, he sees no flaw, not an accurate representation of how the woman really is...flawed. We have full knowledge of these flaws in that....

"All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God..." (Romans 3:23)
[This woman, who is seen as perfect, is really not. Perhaps she is seen this way because...

"Above all, love eachother deeply, because love covers over a multitude of sins..."(1 Peter 4:8)
[It is the the love that this man has for this woman that makes him see her as flawless, without sin. Not unlike how...

"God demonstrates His own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us..." (Romans 5:8)
[Ergo, God's love for us, makes us beautiful.]


We are called to be like Jesus, so who are we to exclude people from the title "beautiful"? Our love for people affirms their beauty. Affirming their beauty, however, is not loving them. Affirming the beauty of the one who has, by his love, made them beautiful, and reflecting that love, does, in turn, affirm a person's beauty.

Who are we to emphasize the beauty of creation, and not the creator?

Another thought that i had, rather platonic in nature, i suppose, was that the beauty we cling to is such a shadow. As in Plato's allegory of the cave, we know only the representation of something much more real. Women, and men too, will strive and strive for all that they think is "beautiful," when in actuality, they are grasping at shadows that point to the greater beauty that is to be found in Jesus. Shadows, by nature, only point to something more. If you see a shadow of beauty and work feverishly to attain it, you might. The problem lies in the fact that we don't understand that as much as we try to attain the beauty found in the shadow, its not the real deal. It points to something that we don't have. We will always fall short of what we strive for. It is important to use the shadow to understand the real object of beauty, but contentment will never be found in the shadow. Basically, good luck trying to become beautiful on your own, because if you do "succeed,"you won't be happy. Or, i suppose you may be "happy," but thats just a shadow of joy. :) And on and on it goes, living a shadowy life, never attaining the fullness that life was intended for.

[and again, i've landed on the topic of shadows and copies]


Well, thats it for now. I apologize in advance for the way i will look this week, no mirrors will do things to your appearance. No, actually, i take back that apology, maybe i'm going to, in fact, make it easier to see my beauty this week. :) Maybe, it will be easier to see all of Olson Hall's beauty this week.

My Kantstant companion.

Yes. If you didn't glean from the title all that i wished you would, let me explain: Lots of Kant, all the time. While other philosophers only get one week in my history of philosophy class, Kant gets two, and its in this second week that i have finally found something profound. Ha. Just kidding, but really, though i don't agree with a lot of his philosophy, i do know that all truth is God's and thus when i find morsels and pockets of truth, i get excited... So here is tonight's' truth:

"Imitation has no place in morality. Examples serve us only for encouragement--that is, they set beyond doubt the practicability of what the law commands; they make perceptible what the practical law expresses more generally; but they can never entitle us to set aside their true original, which resides in reason, and to model ourselves upon examples."

Honestly, i don't like it, and probably don't agree with it in the context he used it. He is discussing moral philosophy, and the fact that empiricism will not lead us to the laws of morality, only reason will do that.

However, i couldn't help but think of it in a different context as i read it, replacing words, to form a different, but similar idea... Here is the Annie version:

"Imitation [of Christians] has no place in Christianity. Examples [of christlikeness] serve us only for encouragement--that is, they set beyond doubt the practicability of what Christ commands; these people make perceptible what it is that Christ expresses; but these people can never entitle us to set aside the original, which resides in Christ, and to model ourselves after them, the examples."


I don't know how many of you read this blog religiously (hopefully not many), but a few weeks ago i mentioned that i don't like cheap copies (2.16.08)...I knew didn't, but now i further understand why. Its easy to fall prey to believing, trusting, and following examples. But why do that? Examples are just that, examples--copies of something more true, copies of something better, copies of something more beautiful. So, when the good, the true, and the beautiful are at our fingertips, why reach for something else that is trying to imitate them. That's just silly. Hopefully I'm getting less and less silly as i get older.

My main concern is found within the Christian community. You all know those people--the ones you, and I, are trying to imitate. I would mention names, but being that all of you are from different circles, they would mean nothing to you. On a larger, and less applicable scale, its the Billy Grahams, the David Crowders, the Mother Thereas. I think that, however, the fact that we've made them celebrities makes a desire to emmulate them less pervasive, however, the people who we admire on a day to day basis in our lives, may it be siblings, friends, aqaintences, it is these people that we often desire to become like. Great examples. Great examples. Why do we, why do i, have such a compelling desire to become like these people. Its funny that in a world in which everyone is trying to "find themselves," we fall prey to copying copies. How unoriginal. I have to constantly remind myself that only in pursuit of Christ will i become who I truly am (a person that i do not yet know). A copy doesn't lead me to me, He leads me to me.



"For we know in part and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect has come, then that which is n ipart will be done away. When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things. For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then we shall see face to face. Now i know in part, but then I shall be fully known." 1 Corinthians 13:9-12

My Life Should be a TV show.

Let me give you a little background on the story I'm about to tell you:

Sometime around September I was playing intramural soccer. My friend was an intramural supervisor. I lost my shoes and so he took me to the Intramural shed to find them. The shoes were not found, however, there was a sweet pair of OSU beaver soccer pants. I mentioned my extreme liking for the pants, and my friend told me to go ahead and take them, as they had been in the shed for a year, at least. I did. I took the pants. They became my favorite pants. I wore them all over campus, all the time. I have worn them to and from soccer, volleyball, dodgeball, and basketball intramurals. I wear them to sleep. I wear them to study. I wear them to dinner.... Which brings me to tonight:

I, being rather dehydrated, walked to go get a cup of water and ran into my friend brad. We talked for a while, standing next to lots of tables full of lots of boys. I got my water and went to sit back down. No sooner had i picked up my water to take a drink, did a boy stride up to our table, stick out his hand and say, "hi, i'm nate, are you annie?". I, of course, answered honestly, "yes, I'm annie, nice to meet you nate." He replied, rather quickly, "well annie, you're wearing my pants." I unabashedly replied, "well, let me tell you how i got them," to which he retorted, "let me tell you how i lost them." He proceeded to tell me a sad tale of how one day, a year an a half ago, he went to work out, took off the pants, and returned to find them missing. I assured him that this theft was not my doing, in that i only arrived at Taylor in the fall. He said he believed me, and i then told him how i really came across the pants (see above). He said, "alright, well, i want them back." I told him that i could arrange it, but that it would have to wait, as i wasn't about to take off my pants in the middle of the Dining Commons--a rather witty remark, i must say. He said he could wait. As soon as he left, i became enraged. I love the pants. I want to keep the pants. The girls at my table made funny "in his pants" jokes and we laughed and decided i should try to make him PROVE that they were his pants. So, i went over and discussed the probability that out of the many pants that were probably manufactured in this exact nature, that these were, in fact, his pants. He told me that they were one of a kind, a gift from his friend who is a Beaver from Oregon State. I offered to buy them, too much sentimental value attached i suppose. All in all, i have to give the pants back. However, on my last night with the pants, the girls from my wing decided to chronicle the life of these pants since the fall. About 40 girls have taken pictures in the pants, doing various daily tasks (i.e. running, showering, baking, cleaning, doing the splits, taking a nap, etc).

I'm glad this happened. Life is so funny, and i love it.

Besides all that, I went snowboarding this weekend and it was ridiculously fun, but as a result i am immensely sore. Its hard to sit. Its hard to walk. Its hard to carry a bag. It's hard to shut car doors. Its hard to get up. Basically, my body aches. But, i would be willing to go through all this pain again, as long as i get to be a good snowboarder. This is a pic of our group and the next picture is one of me and my friend Andrew taking a picture i have always wanted to take--on a ski lift!

Fun weekend, funny night. (pictures of the pants to come later.)