Skip to content
Archive of posts tagged definition

this is love…

one could arguably define it as the most complex and important emotion that humans hold…it comes in various shapes and sizes, and for the most part there’s as many definitions of love as there are people. instinctively each person at some point or another will say they felt as if they did ‘love’, however agreeing on how it feels and what it is…that’s another story. quotes and various ideas about love have been spread around through civilizations. it has been used as a reason to smile and to hurt, a reason to cherish someone and to fight with or against someone…it’s been written about and it’s been sang about…everywhere you go there’s some sort of reference about love…yet for the most part it remains an emotion…an emotion that is so vivid to those who believe they feel it…yet illusive…

on the other side, science seems as if it has no boundaries…as long as there are unknowns there is someone that will be willing to study it…as it turns out there is someone studying love, helen fisher, and she’s been studying for around 30 years so far. without entering the discussion of when do we draw boundaries about what we study or how far we study…her research is bringing about evidence of how one starts to love, how it expresses itself in the body and it is starting to hint at us being able to determine why sometimes we just can’t help it but feel the way we do about a particular person…so love might be blind…but as it turns out it’s only blind to the human eye…

here’s a video (it’s about 20+ minutes long…but i can assure it’s worth it), enjoy…

at some point…i’ll have a bit more time to fully state my thoughts on her research and what this means to me in particular…but also to what this can mean to society as a whole…

define ‘employee’

according to an instructor i heard today

“if you are getting paid, you are an employee”

writing out loud here though:

a. so anyone that is getting paid is an employee of someone (…duh?)

b. theoretically then a ‘working-girl’ is an employee, thus:

  • a ‘working-girl’ must have a lot of employers (i truly do wonder which one of them pays coverage to worksafeBC)
  • i wonder if the compensation level from worksafeBC depends on the cocktail composition of std’s such an employee has
  • i wonder if they think of themselves as employees?

c. theoretically, accepting a bribe makes one an employee…sort of opens up quite a few new opportunities

d. theoretically, giving change to beggars makes them your employee

e. brings a whole new light of putting those $20 bills in a stripper’s panties

f. chinese new years comes to mind…after all the number one gift is a red bag with money

g. does that mean that a volunteer is not an employee (…i guess we should not be responsible for their well-being at work?)

democracy, right?

the last i recall democracy meant the majority of the voters chose who the leader is. well, it seems that perhaps this may not be the case. i have not followed the canadian political turmoil for the last few days to closely. however, i’ve spent some time today reading about and trying to understand the reasons behind this attempt at over-turning the voted government. two months ago that is, yes on oct 14th, canada went to the polls. why? simply…had nothing better to do…

however, a choice was made and a minority government was chosen, yet again. this may or may not be the best thing, but it’s certainly not the worst. hint…remember the changes when the bc provincial liberals took over with a majority government.

the opposition parties threat to form a coalition and overturn the government. hmm, what happened to the choice of the majority? i guess democracy means you’re told you have the right to vote only for the politicians to make the same decision they were always gonna make. on one side, the update the conservatives offered last week was quite weakly prepared; however, they were chosen to lead this country for the next period…yet i guess going to the polls for a second time in two months is just peachy. regardless how much the liberal ‘leader’ wishes to become the 23rd prime minster of canada (i guess that magical jordan number is quite desired). we’re apparently dealing with a financial crisis…yet the best plan the liberals came up with is to force themselves into power by creating a coalition with the ndp and bloc quebecois. well…if that does not go so well…i guess wasting money on another election is just what the doctor ordered for a canada faced with this ‘financial crisis’.

regardless of their reasons, this is just ill-adviced and…but then again who really believed their vote matters…just ask the americans …

also, i guess making a coalition between two parties that have publicly stated their dislike prior to the elections is the most appropriate way to govern a country…but let’s also not forget the third supporting party is the one that wants to break up the country…i have a bit of a hard time following the stated reasons for this coalition – that they care about canada?