One of the things that I find hardest to do is to turn off my brain when I get home. I keep on thinking about the problems that I have been dealing with at work. I do research at home. As I am trying to fall asleep, I keep on thinking on how I can change the code to fix open bugs, how to track bugs better, how to improve the build process, what ways our users could break the app by weird work flows and guard for that...
Ahhhggghh!
Maybe if I had a boring job I would be able to leave work at work, but I like what I am doing. *sigh* Ah well. I'm going to go back to bed and see if I can fall asleep this time. :-|
You need to get a Nintendo. Doing something that makes your brain think without it being related to work can help you to draw your brain away from work. Watching tv doesn't take much brain power, so that won't work. Programming your own projects at home doesn't work, because it's too much like what you do at work. You need to find something that makes your mind actually do something else. Physical stuff may not work as well, because your mind isn't active. Do something with your brain that is totally unrelated to work.
ReplyDelete"Maybe if I had a *boring job* I would be able to leave work at work"?
ReplyDeleteI would have gone with the converse:
"Maybe if I had an *exciting home-life* I would be able to leave work at work".
Haha, sucka!
What's the problem? Obviously you like your job if you're thinking about it in your spare time ... you're lucky, most people hate their jobs!
ReplyDeleteHow much you like your job has nothing to do with the fact that you are thinking about your job when your not at work. It all depends on how you feel about thinking about your job. If you feel that thinking about work while not being at work stresses you out, because you hate your job, then you need to stop thinking about work for that reason. If on the other hand you enjoy your job, and don't really feel that thinking about work while not at work is affecting you badly, then there isn't so much of a problem. Maybe you want to stop thinking about work just for the sake of not thinking about it, because there are better things you could be thinking about.
ReplyDeleteMaybe we have a different definition of "like". If I like my job, I won't mind thinking about it.
ReplyDeleteThere's a lot of things I like, but that I don't want to be thinking about all the time. I like playing Zelda, but that doesn't mean that I want to be thinking about it all the time. Sometimes it gets in the way of what I really should be thinking about. You can still like work and not want to think about it all the time. Thinking about something when you are trying not to think about it is not good because it distracts you from what you should be thinking about.
ReplyDeleteLOL, did everyone get that?
ReplyDeleteI'm a little less restrictive about my brain I guess. If I find I'm thinking about something a lot I think it out and finish it. If something keeps popping into my head I'm probably trying to tell myself I'm not done yet.
Anyways, to each his own. I used to have problems sleeping because I'd leave unresolved issues racing in my head. When I deal with things instead of putting them off I sleep better because there's nothing to race around. That works for me, and it has since first year university. Now I stay up late at night because I want to, not because I can't sleep. ;)
I don't see thinking about technology or your job all of the time as a bad thing. I'd say that's just being passionate. People spend their whole lives searching for something to be passionate about. If it's something you do for a living you're one lucky bastard!
Free Speech is at stake!
ReplyDeletehttp://www.globetechnology.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050309.gtmedia09/BNStory/Technology/
The word "passionate" comes from the word "passive" (the opposite of "active"), i think you mean "actionate". Although, maybe people are stressed and they are actively searching for something that they can be passive (passionate) about, because they need to relax. Or does high mental action cause physical passion (low physical action), because you are spending all your time thinking and not physically acting? Hmmmm.
ReplyDeleteThere's something that you can stay up all nite thinking about.
Actually the root of passionate is passion. Which oddly enough, all the roots I could find point somewhat to suffering, as in the passion of Jesus. I think this word's meaning got confused somewhere along way, much like the word terrific.
ReplyDeleteSo we agree.
ReplyDeleteI like how the word got misused for so long that after a while they just got rid of the definition, instead of fixing the word usage. Now the word means nothing. Good work, Dumb-asses. They (the dictionary folk) should be beaten.
Here is the actually reason for the word "passion" meaning the same as the word "action", though. When someone says "i am passionate about tennis", he is saying that he is, essentially, possessed. He is a passive zombie that doesn't think, but is drawn to tennis. So, he is passive, and yet still active in tennis. Its self contradiction is terrific, and people don't seem to notice its terror when they use it, so its nice to be reminded of what you are saying here and there.
Before you beat up the dictionary people, think for a minute that maybe the word wasn't as misused as it appears. You are referring to passion as something active. It can also mean something that you are drawn to, that you love. With me so far?
ReplyDeleteWhat was the pupose of the sufferings of Jesus? They showed Jesus' love, his active desire to sacrifice himself for those He loved. (But God proves his love for us in that while we were still sinners Christ died for us. Rom 5:8) Perhaps this was the link between suffering and love, which is what we commonly associate with passion.
Though the meaning of passion has become less and less related to the original 'suffering', I don't think that beating on the poor dictionary people is warranted.
Nicely put, Karen.
ReplyDeleteUmm, no. This does not contradict any part of my justification. Your version of the word "passion" is the exact same as the one i've already explained as a zombie-like state.
ReplyDeleteAnd, whoever said that love wasn't an action? If you agree that it is, then you have a clear problem. Passion = love = action = Not(passion).... who sees a logic problem????? Does Jesus need to be beaten, too? Oh, wait...
Haha, oh man, i love how when you throw novel, Biblical allusions in, people just blindly jump on board with you. I guess it has worked for the last 2005 years, why not now.
First of all, just because someone sees meaning in something that is different from how you perceive it does NOT mean they "have a clear problem." It simply means they have a different perspective. When it comes to issues that border on the philosphical, there will be many different opinions, none of which are either right or wrong.
ReplyDeleteSecond, I would be careful about assuming that posting you referred to is representative of someone "blindly jumping on board." It could be that she literlly thought Karen's comments were "nicely put"... ie. expressed eloquently. Or perhaps she has put a tremendous amount of thought, effort and LOVE into her faith and truly believes, with a self-educated heart, in what Karen has said.
If seeing and experiencing love as a "zombie-like state" helps you live a happier and more fulfilled life, then more power to you. Others may choose to perceive love differently, according to their own personal values and beliefs.
What? I think you need to read my comments again. First of all, i said "IF"! That's an implication, not a necessity. And, IF the condition if true, THEN she has a "clear problem", because as i reinterpreted her argument, she is saying A = Not(A), and A = Not(A) is a contradiction. It's impossible to have more than one perspective on that, and i "perceive" it the one and only way; as a contradiction. I wasn't attacking her, only her argument. Maybe i should have said that her argument has a clear problem, my fault, then.
ReplyDeleteIt's one thing when someone writes something that just doesn't work, but when others encourage and second that which doesn't work, then there is a more serious problem. It was quite obvious to me that Karen had brought up issues that i had already explained, because i had both my previous argument and hers right in front of me. Karen didn't, so that's excusable. But when you have the two articles in front of you and still back the problem, then that's messed.
"If seeing and experiencing love as a "zombie-like state" helps you live a happier and more fulfilled life, then more power to you. Others may choose to perceive love differently, according to their own personal values and beliefs." What? Is that an insult? What does that even mean? I was explaining that IF people consider love to be a passion, then it is explained by the zombie-like state. When did i ever say that experiencing love is like being in a zombie-like state? I said that the transition of the meaning of "passion" can be explained using the zombie metaphore. So i equated "passion" to the "zombie-like state". Karen is the one who equated "love" to "passion", not me. In fact, i argued that love is an action, which would be the opposite of a passion, and, therefore, the opposite of a zombie-like state. But, i can see both sides of it, since the word "passion" is self-contradicting in its current usage.
Are we reading the same material here???? I'm so confused.
Since this thread got way off topic, and started talking about Jesus, and the word passion, here is my view. The reason (IMO) that the passion of Jesus is called the Passion, is because of how Jesus was passive in his actions in the events of the passion. He took no action against those who were persecuting him. When the Jews chose Barabus over him to be set free, his only response was to forgive the people. Most people would retaliate in some way when being treated the way Jesus was during the events leading up to the crucifixion. But, instead, Jesus, "took it like a man", and was passive in his actions towards those who were persecuting him.
ReplyDeleteCooter, I was not responding to your description of passion as a zombie-like state. I was responding to your assertion that "They (the dictionary folk) should be beaten." I was simply offering another explanation of the etymology of the word 'passionate', which as Eric pointed out, "... the root of passionate is passion. Which oddly enough, all the roots I could find point somewhat to suffering, as in the passion of Jesus."
ReplyDeleteTo be honest, I would be curious to find out where you learned that the root of passionate is, in fact, passive. Where did you learn/read that? I don't seem to be able to find it, but then again, English was never my strong point.
Until you can show me otherwise, I don't see the root of passionate as passive. I certainly do not see love as passive. I have written before (on my blog) about my view of love as active. So I do not see a logical contradiction.
If, however, you can show me that the root of passionate is, in fact, passive, then I will conclude that I really shouldn't ever teach English :)
Heather, thank you for affirming my earlier post.
If you want to see the definition of passion, look to dictionary.com.
ReplyDeletehttp://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=passion
There, you'll see the 7th definition, Passivity. Which it lists as "Archaic". Apparently nobody uses this meaning anymore, but it was one of the original meanings. Does anybody have a copy of teh OED?
Thanks Eric, I appreciate that. Hope I never teach English :)
ReplyDeleteWell, let's just hope you never get stuck teaching english to someone like Scott, who should really learn the meaning of the work "deprecated". I'm sure he'll make up some weird meaning for that word too.
ReplyDeleteWhew...!
ReplyDeleteWell I hope that (at the very least) you're sleeping better Jim. Hee hee!
Karen, and i was just saying that the definition that you brought up is already encompassed in the zombie-like state with the passion of tennis that i brought up, so your point was nullified (mute?). Whatever.
ReplyDeleteA few hours ago my brain turned on and it became quite apparent to me that the actual root of passionate, passion, and passive is "pass", as in to do nothing and let something pass, as opposed to act. I think that it should be clear to most people that the word "passion" comes from the word "pass", because extensions such as "ly", "ate", "ive", "ion", "s", etc. are just there for context, and can be removed to find the root of the word. I'm sure that "passion" is one of these words with one of these extensions ("ion"). It means "to pass" or "to allow to pass and not to act".
I think that the miss on the root of a word has very little to do with your capability as an English teacher. Your reasonability and desire to learn speaks volumes about your potential, though, i think. This is all just fun and shouldn't reflect on anyone's personalities or qualiifications, including mine, i pray. It's just that the opposite/contradictory use of words such as "passion" and "terrific" get on my nerves sometimes. OK, let's end this.
Okay, I think that I'll finally comment on this.
ReplyDeleteYes Kibbee, I *do* play NES, but then I stay up at night playing Dr. Mario in my head. Same problem, different thoughts running through my head.
Ryan: Yes, I do really enjoy my job and if work is running through my head, it's what I wasn't able to finish before I came home or something new I want to try out the next day.
As for all the word play, that's beyond me as much as Scrabble is.