YuHeng's blog

Got another knife. Two knives. Am I content? Yes. I am content. Do I have what I want? Yes. Do I have what I need? I’ve had it with my first knife. Do I need another one? Yes. Can I do without it? Yes. Do I still need the second one? Yes, if only based on my need of having two knives. Do I need this need? No. So, is the second knife still necessary? No. It is not necessary after considering the idea of neglecting the second one, meaning my desire has changed based on contemplation, by simply thinking… My need changed based on the need from which I started–the source and way of thinking that I set my ideas on. This comes as common sense, but if I shift my notion of common sense upon the idea of the second knife… then it is no longer common, for it is not in the sense of the common that it is such–common. It is upon the idea of the second knife that it is common, or at least a sense–that is, a sense of the knife. So far, it is not a sense, insofar as it is not a sense of the knife. It is merely a sense of whatever it is a sense of. The question of commonality does not even come into play. I do not know whether this is a sense of commonality or not, or if this sense is common at all; I simply do not yet have this sense yet. Only is it in the sense of the second knife that I have come to grasp that it is indeed, a sense and it is common. And the cause and effect of this does not transcend beyond its own boundaries–that is, of being common sense within the general dialectic. It must be in the context of a second knife that it is common sense. So, what is it a common sense of? People ask isn’t this common sense, and I do not know if this is the common sense of which we both speak. I do not know of your common sense, and there is no general consensus for a sense that everybody knows; there is no agreed upon sense. My sense is different from yours, and despite how similar it may be, they cannot be the same. The notion of being identical isn’t viable. I just can’t have the same sense that you have when it comes to a certain issue. Maybe on one issue yes, but not on all, and that alone justifies the inconsistency of a common sense that applies to all the senses that one should be familiar about; the common sense does not generate a sufficient amount of consensus. I simply do not understand common sense, or the roots of it–people’s content with a laid-back notion of what they think is difficult and intolerable to discover themselves. Why? Because one could look at happiness this way, that it is only a level of tolerable despair that they can handle; they simply call it happiness. I don’t understand a lot of the things that people say, and that is why I’m saying it. I must say it myself before anyone else does, for no one else can speak for me. So, yes, only I can speak it, and that is why I’m speaking for myself. I must do everything myself if I want to get to the bottom of it all. I must do this if I want to realize the value in the act of doing this. Someone can do it for me, but I will never be able to discover the value of doing it, but only of having it done. That is the difference. I can have inheritance, connections, for example, and its great if one is privileged to have those things, but if I want an identity for myself, of myself, then I must do something, whether related or not to, say, the connections, something that I can call “myself,” something that I can identify with based on the dissolution, transcendence, and unification of my selves. That’s what I believe in, and I don’t know if it’s true, but truth and beliefs are problematic. I can have a true, justified belief and a true, unjustified belief etc. But in the real world, beliefs are hard to stand by, and true or not, I don’t care, because at that point, it doesn’t even matter. It doesn’t matter what your beliefs are, but only that they are in fact, your beliefs and not the accumulation of others. Or at least make it yours… You know? I’m very self-oriented. I think I need to read The Glass Bead Game. Oh Herman… someone like that would understand perhaps.