You’re a Fucking Dumbass!!!

There comes a point in your life when you find yourself laying on the glass, staring at the clear night sky, your mind fixated on the twinkling stars. A peculiar blend of serenity and mystery overshadows you and you come to a profound realization, akin to Siddhartha Gautama’s enlightenment.  You’re forced to acknowledge that the only thing you know is you know nothing.

Acknowledging your ignorance is both frightening and thrilling.  Not knowing is scary, leaving your vulnerable and insecure.  We value security and certainity.  We want to ensure our safety and well-being. We want to accurately forecast the days ahead so we can make preperations today.  We want to survive and prosper.  But unfortunately, there are no guarantees in life.

Yet one can’t be help but be fascinated by mystery.  It’s alluring and captivating.  Seductive and sensual, like having your body tingle by the mere touch of a gorgeous girl.  We have a addiction to seek and discover.  Yet ironically, as we obtain information, our ignorance becomes more apparent than ever.  The smarter we become, the dumber we feel.

Why is that?  What is behind this paradoxical truth?  Perhaps, we, as a species, have been in over our heads since the Ancient Babylonian priests initiated their scientific inquiry into the nature of the Cosmos.  After all, for nine-tenths of human history, our ancestors were nomadic hunter-gatherer, wandering in the wilderness searching for game.  They weren’t concerned with proving P=NP, discovering the Higgs Boson or uncovering parallel universes.  Their ambitions were merely capturing wild animals were meat and building shelter for themselves.  Their goal was survival.

Being homo sapiens, our ancestors had exceptional brains, which they used to devise strategies.  They planned out tactics to capture the buffalo. They planned ways to build a temporary dwelling and ensure the safety of their loved ones, particularly children.  They secured stocks of foods and other means that enable strength and vitality.  These skills translate into what we now call “common sense”

Common Sense is a amalgamation of basic skills and tactics one is required to have in order to ensure his/her well-being and future.  Unfortunately, common sense isn’t so common.  Why is that?  Perhaps its because we live in a world that’s extremely different from our ancestors.  Our global markets and institutions are constantly evolving at unpredictable rates, making it extremely difficult for mere mortals to adapt.  Technology has advanced to the point where you call your friends, access your favorite TV program, lookup sources for research paper and play your favorite song all on one device–something most people couldn’t do ten years ago.  As a result, we’re constantly distracted, thus diminishing our self-awareness.

If we have enough trouble grasping common sense, what chance do we have at unlocking the mysteries of the universe?  Sure, our reputable research scientists have made tremendous progress over the past couple of millennia.  Yet there are too many questions left unsolved and too many questions arising from our newly-found sets of information.

We used to think species were fixed.  It turns out all species, including humans, were a result of millions of years of natural selection and genetic mutation.  A hundred years ago, it was impossible to even imagine sub-atomic particles spontenously emerging, yet advances in quantum mechanics proves that truth is stranger than fiction.  Constantly, our worldviews are forced be reevaluated, making us wonder is there is such as thing as truth and reality.

Look, we don’t even know who was Jack the Ripper!  We don’t know who really killed JFK and planned the 9/11 attacks!  We don’t know why the Kardashians are so fucking popular! We don’t know what’s going on in Kanye’s mind….or what the Donald is smoking!

The world is one gigantic enigma too complicated for us to fathom.  And forget the Riemann Hypothesis, life is one of the most crucial unsolved problems! At the end of the day, it doesn’t matter if you’re a CERN research scientist or a shit-kicking, trailer park-dwelling redneck from Alabama, we’re all fucking dumbasses


Top Ten: Most Overrated Movies

 I could say I’ve seen a few movies in my lifetime. I’ve seen the good, the bad and the fucking horrendous! I’ve also viewed my share of atrocious films which were, nevertheless, heralded by film critics and the public. Here are a list off ten movies which received more than their fair share of praise!

10) Slumdog Millionaire

This movie was a portrayal of the poverty-stricken, strenuous life endured in the slums of Bombay. The story follows a 18 year old chaiwalla from those very slums who competes in Kaun Banega Crorepati and was miraculously able to answer every question because each question had some relation to his past.
I don’t have a problem with this far-fetched, unrealistic story. I don’t even have a problem with the fact that this uneducated shantytown dweller speaks chaste English with an impeccable Oxford accent.
However, the acclaim this film received is undeserving. There have been more noteworthy films created by Indian filmmakers (not some British bloke) which accurately portrays slum life in an authentic and more engaging way. Movies including Salaam Bombay, Deewar and Nayagan have never received their fair due on the international platform. I suggest you check them out

9) Life of Pi

I read the novel and watched the movie. I am sorry to report that I was impressed with neither. As enthralled as I was with the cinematography, the plot was disappointing. The protagonist, Pi, has a severely superficial understanding of religion. I mean, dude, you can’t follow three religions which are inherently contradictory to each other! I don’t care how accommodating and cosmopolitan you want to be!

The end was completely preposterous. After he revealed the second story involving humans instead of animals, I was so angry Pi wasted almost two hours recalling a tale which was obviously false.  At that point, I felt I wasted my two hours (despite having previous knowledge of the plot). I only went for the cinematography. That’s the only thing I got from this movie.

8) Forrest Gump

The fact that Forrest Gump received more acclaim than Shawshank Redemption or Pulp Fiction at the Oscars is a testimony of how irrelevant the Academy Awards really are!

This movie was nothing more than a story about some mentally-retarded Southerner who aimlessly wanders through thirty years of American history yet unknowingly acquires luck wherever he wanders. Tom Hanks received a lot of praise for his portrayal of Forrest Gump but I found his acting to be soulless and monotone, with that constant stone look on his face. None of the characters are remotely likable and the story is completely flat. In fact, there is barely a story!  It comes across as patronizing to the mentally-ill. Somehow, if you blindly follow orders and swift through life like a leaf riding on the flow of a river, you’ll be prosperous in any manner!

The so-called inspirational quotes were utterly meaningless. “Life is like a box of chocolates, you never know what you’re going to get”…..ummm, unless if you look at the fucking box!!! And that’s my problem with his movie. People view Forrest Gump as a deep, profound cinematic work. It’s nothing more than two hours of drivel!

7) Ferris Bueller’s Day Off

This classic 1986 film marks the introduction of Ben Stein into the spotlight, where he would proceed to do a myriad clear eye commercials and direct a propagandist documentary promoting creationism.

But this movie is not about Ben Stein, who played a humble economics teacher taking attendance. The story circles around Ferris Bueller, a good-looking, charismatic all American boy loved by all despite being a sociopathic, manipulative douche! His scheme of faking an illness and cutting school is threatened by the evil Edward Rooney! Yes, the Edward Rooney! Whose determined goal is to catch Ferris and get him back to school because…well he’s the Dean of Students and that’s sort of his job. Hmm….I’m sorry who was the bad guy again?

This is an example of why I hate teen movies. Ferris gets away with every lie and act of destruction and the adults are too stupid to catch him in the act. It paints an unrealistic picture of life and sends a misleading message to the viewers.

6) The Breakfast Club

Ugh! Another high school movie! And this film also embodies many of the qualities I hate in teen movies. This story is about five high school students embodying five different stereotypes (because who has the time to write a three-dimensional character?!) who all receive detention. So, they all are forced to meet at the school library on Saturday where they are to be sitted for the entire day. And for some reason, they’re unsupervised for the majority of the movie.

So, you have the rebel, the jock, the nerd, the weird girl with a plethora of psychological idiosyncrasies, and the rich princess. At the end of the movie, the weird girl gets a makeover and…surprise surprise!…the jock falls for her (not to sound superficial at all!). The rich princess falls in love with the rebel. Sure we can discard the scene where he performed non-consensual cunnilingus on her. I mean, why should we get all up at arms over sexual assault?!

No surprise this is a John Hughes movie. He’s the guy who also directed Ferris Bueller’s Day Off. I mean, was he high in the 80’s or something?

5) The Blind Side

This movie depicts two of America’s greatest pastimes: Football and Exploiting White Guilt!  This screenplay concentrated more on the latter.  The protagonist is Micheal Oher,a heavily built black teenager from a broken family and impoverished background.  Now, one would think the film will dive deeply into Micheal’s childhood, the relationship with his (drug-addicted) mother and (half) siblings, the traumatic events he might have endured, along with his experiences with foster homes.

Instead, the writers decided to focus on Leigh Ann, a White, Southern, Republican affiliated Christian woman who, out of the goodness of her heart, took in this poor, helpless negro who only speaks in monosyllables.

Seriously, what is with Micheal’s one-word responses? Even real-life Micheal Oher, currently an offensive tackle-man for the Carolina Panthers, criticizedhis character  portrayal for “being stupid”, contrary to his actual aptitude.

But hey, Hollywood audiences love indulging in White Saviors!  Speaking of which…

4) Avatar

download.jpgA lot of critics chastise Avatar for utilizing the ‘White Savior’ trope.  While it is a valid point, the film’s lack of originality is far more problematic.

Ever seen ‘Dances with Wolves’? ‘Pocahontas’?  You might notice some similarities between those films and ‘Avatar’.  Your typical South Indian film buff might even recall ‘Vietnam Colony'(both the 1992 Malayalam version and its 1994 Tamil remake)!

Just because you throw in a bunch of blue people, the story is still about a privileged protagonist who fights with indigenous people against corporate exploitation.

On the plus side, the cinematography and CGI was mesmerizing!  The innovative motion capture techniques is a tremendous breakthrough cinematic technology. The direction was splendid.  I wish I could say the same about the plot

3) Passion of the Christ

Ooh boy! What can I say about Passion of the Christ.  Well, obviously Mel Gibson has some orgasmic fantasy with torture.  I wouldn’t exactly call myself devout. However, I love religious-themed movies.  They have a certain timeless element.  Ben-Hur is among my favorites.  Nevertheless, Passion of the Christ negates the purpose of religious films.

download (1).jpg

Faith-themed productions are supposed to be inspirational.  They should convey a message of hope, encouraging the viewer to be a charitable, virtuous person.  On the contrary, Mel Gibson decides to guilt-trip the viewer in a lengthy, agonizing story of Jesus being cruelly whipped and beaten until his battered body hangs from the cross, blood and water pouring from his wounds.  Now Jesus could have saved himself from such a bloody death, yet he chose not to do, because he loves humankind…and he chose to die for our sins

WTF!? What am I, the viewer, supposed to take from this?   Since when does a snub film convey any positive message? And where’s the screenplay?  Is there even a screenplay?  There’s no character development!  None of the characters even have any basic traits!  The movie is literally just one guy getting the shit kicked out of him!  I mean, what the fuck!!!

On a positive note, the film was directed in Aramaic and Latin, accurately depicting   1st century Palestine.  Usually biblical stories, even well-produced ones like the Ten Commandments, the dialogues are recited by the actors in an awkward, Transatlantic English accent. So this aspect of the film is refreshing.


2) Gone with the Wind

By 1939 standards, Gone with the Wind would have been more remarkable. After all, color pictures were extremely rare in that era. Perhaps I’m viewing this film through 21st century lens but I found it completely horrendous. Vivian Leigh’s acting as Scarlet O’Hara was laughable. The portrayal of the Black characters such as Mammy and Prissy was akin to a blackface minstrel show.

Scarlet O’Hara is supposedly this icon of feminine strength and will power. Honestly, she seems to be nothing more than a selfish, conniving shrewd who marries men who truly loved her, only to get some material gain. All the while, she yearns to be with Ashley who has no feelings for her whatsoever. Then, predictably, her third husband, the supposedly dashing, yet creepy looking Rhett Butler, gets so fed up, he ends up leaving her. And frankly, I don’t give damn about either character!

This film, along with the novel written by Margaret Mitchell, would have appealed to disgruntled Confederate soldiers and aristocratic Southerners who nostalgically reminisced the bygone days of slavery and white supremacy. I mean who wouldn’t miss those golden days when nappy-headed, uppity niggers knew their place!

In addition, I’m sure your typical impenitent bitch would have identified with Scarlett O’Hara.  But I can’t imagine any decent person being dazzled by this heralded, yet contemptible story.

1) Titanic

I saw this film when I was a child. I couldn’t explain why but somehow, I hated it! After fifteen years, I think I can articulate my thoughts on Titanic

The sinking of the Titanic was one of the most significant events in the twentieth century. You could imagine the 1500 people riding on that ship and the myriad of stories each of them had.

However, the plot decided to focus on a tale between a good-for-nothing, penniless artist and a first-class aristocratic lady. Gees, you’ve never seen that story! It didn’t help that the two protagonists only knew each other for a couple of days yet somehow were in love.  Think what you want about me but I don’t usually subscribe to this notion of “love at first sight”

I honestly don’t know what my problem is. I never liked romantic movies. In fact, I nearly throw up at the sight of two people kissing or cuddling. Maybe, I’m just a cynical asshole! So sue me!

Anyway, you know the end. Leonardo Dicaprio drowns while “My Heart Will Go on” is played as the background score. I never really cared for Celine Dion but whatever.

I’m a history buff and normally I would be fascinated with any film involving a historical event, including the sinking of the Titantic.  But there were 1500 passengers, each with their own unique story.  Why did the writers choose to focus on a cliched love plot?


“C++ is Desperate to be Object-Oriented”

The title is a quote by a friend of mine.  We were having a discussion about different programming languages and their respective advantages.  We got into the topic of object-oriented languages.  She mentioned her fondness for Java and C#.  I mentioned C++, because it was the language emphasized by my CS courses.  It was after all an object-oriented language, or so I thought.  My friend scoffed and bluntly replied “C++ is desperate to be Object-oriented”.

For those of you not familiar with the concept of Object-Oriented Programming(OOP), it is a programming paradigm based on the concept of “objects”, which are structures containing data is the form of attributes and methods(procedures). The methods are able to access and modify the data fields of the objects.  The most popular type of OOP is class-based programming where objected inherit from their respective classes which determine their data type.Object-oriented Programming can be contrasted with Procedural Programming, where procedural calls are carried out through a series of computational steps.  Languages which utilizes this method of programming include C, Fotran, Pascal and BASIC.  Many of these languages are considered by some to be outdated as they have been replaced by Java, C#, Objective C and maybe even Apple’s newest language, Swift!!

My friend made the argument that C++ is not a pure object-oriented language…and she’s right! C++ is actually a multi-paradigm programming language.  This means it has elements of both object-oriented and procedural programming.  Of course, I could list multiple “object-oriented” languages that are actually multi-paradigm.  These include Object Pascal, VB.NET, C# and Java.  Of course, most Java fanatics will retort that C++ cannot be considered “object-oriented” because you can actually define certain functions outside of the class.  However, I would argue that Java allows certain members to be used without objects and it utilizes primitive data types.

It seems like a lot of programming geeks have their own definition of object-oriented which they use to boost the superiority of their preferred programming language.  However, the standard definition of object-oriented programming (as written in CS textbooks include the following): Data Encapsulation, Dynamic Binding, Polymorphism, and Inheritance.  If a programming language includes all of that, it is considered to be object-oriented even if it has other elements.
C++ fits the criteria.

Sex is Overrated

 Some might say I’m too obsessed with sex (which is remarkable considering my lack of a sex life).  Maybe this post is a feeble attempt to comfort myself for never having experienced the joys of  ‘taking the roast out of the oven’. However, here are a few reasons why I think Sex is Overrated

1) Genital Injustice!

To be honest, I find the sight of both form of genetilia to be grosteque. However, it seems the female vagina has been carefully crafted .  It’s as if God took his time in designing the female organ.  Men, unfortunately have been given the short end of the stick!  In the case of the male penis, it seems God’s secretary alerted Him, reminding that the Adam was waiting in the Garden of Eden for something of his own.  The dialogue went something like this:

God’s Secretary: Yo Big Guy, We need something for the guys to poke with!  We’re due for push in one minute too!

God: Oh fuck!!!
*God takes a lump of  clay, rolls it ups and hands it over to the secretary*

God:  Here!  This should do!

God’s Secretary shrugs his shoulders and says: “Eh, better than nothing”

Furthermore, women have the privilege of maintaining state of arousal a secret.  However, if you want to know if a man is arouses, just look at his pants!

Furthermore, a man’s testicles are very sensitive.  Try punching a guy in the gonads and see his reaction.  Yet when it comes to vaginas, those things can take a punch.  People always say “grow a pair” to encourage strength and determination.  However, I think the accurate phrase is “grow a pussy!”

This is injustice!  I call for a strike!  Strike of the gonads!

2) It’s so wet and messy

I have further complaints about sex I wish to submit to God. Maybe this is why I’m borderline anti-religious. The ejaculation of fluids by the male (and sometimes the female…depending..:/) can make things filthy in the bedroom.  Why couldn’t God made sex electronic, which then transmits to the brain to induce pleasure.  It would be more conviniant not to take a shower every time!

3) Orgasm Injustice!

Studies have shown that the average male reaches orgasm within a duration of two minutes.  However, the average females needs around 20 mins in order to reach orgasm!

This is another case of gender inequality!  I call for a mass protest! We shall form a union and call it SFMA (Sexuality Frustrated Males Anonymous) . We shall boycott houses of worship! Submit angry prayers to heaven and demand full sexual justice!

4) A Marketing Gimmick

Ok, maybe I should leave God alone.  He’s probably busy enough with plagues and punishing homosexuals.  Let’s look at society’s fucked up views on sex.  So many fucking double standards!
Sex has turned into a marketing gimmick.  Every commercial, every form of advertisement has a sexual element.  After all, sex sells!

But in the process, sex has now because a commodity.  A property of corporate American and we, the public, are told what we should be aroused by rather than following our natural instincts.  We are subliminally told only a women who is tall and lean, with C-cup breasts, a small button nose and heart-shaped lips can be considered beautiful.  Similar, only a man who is tall and buff, with a large defined chin, is considered to be desirable.

In reality, the standards of sexual attraction are entirely subjective.  Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder, not a Victoria Secret catalog.

5) Hypocritical Standards

Sex is constantly marketed to the masses.  Yet we are told that sex is dirty and disgusting and should not be discussed in front of children (even if they ask “where do babies come from”)!  If a man is known to be sexually promiscuous, he is a ‘player’. Yet if a woman has many sexual partners, she is a ‘whore’.  And unfortunately, this phenomenon is justified by the absurd analogy that a key that opens many locks is a master key yet a lock that is opened by all keys is considered broken.

No one should be judged by their sexual lifestyle!  It’s nobody’s business!  Men and Women should be able to engage in sex or refrain from it without any negative social consequences

Religion and Programming

A blogger by the name of Aegisub had a post back in 2008 comparing the wide array of programming languages to the various belief systems practiced throughout the world.  Im’ going to mirror his post and add my own commentary.  But again, all credit to him.

1) C Programming Language   

Chances are the first programming language you learned in your CS courses was C programming language.  Its a langauge that’s been around forever and has given rise to numerous other programming languages included but not limited to C#, C++, Java, Objective C, Perl and have considerable influence on Python and PHP.

This is a no-brainer.  The religious equivalent of C is Judaism.  Like C programming language, Judaism is an restrictive yet established as one of the oldest major religions.  In addition, Judaism has given rise to other religions such as Christianity, Islam, and the Ba’hai faith.

2) Python

Honestly, if you have no coding/programming experience, its best to start with Python.  This language is best for acquinting yourself with algorithm concepts and programming language without being discouraged by the complex syntax prevalent in languages such as C++.  The code is basically the equivalent of pseudocode, which is English written in code form.

Python is a easy yet powerful language that anyone can benefit from.  I think it can easily be compared to humanism.  Like Python, humanism is a relative modern way of thinking that discourages rigidness.


Now I know what you’re thinking…..people still use COBAL?????  Well yes they do.  In Industry, programs which have been coded in the 60’s and 70’s, when COBAL was prominent, need people to maintain them.  Thus, the need for COBAL programmers.  But yes, for the most part, COBAL is considered an outdated language, however, it has a special place within the history of Programming

The only religion (or umbrella of religions I should say) that can be compared to COBAL is Ancient European Paganism.  Thousands of years ago, the Titan and Olympian gods reigned within the temples across Europe.  Today, most of these temples have been converted to churches and the old gods have been replaced with the “monotheistic” Trinity.  Nevertheless, Paganism is thoroughly studied by scholars of Ancient  history.

4) Java

Java is perhaps one of the most prominent languages today.  It is based on C programming language yet many of the rigid rules within C are disregarded (ex. explicit handling of pointers)….in favor of its own set of rigid rules (object-oriented techniques.   Nevertheless, Java has more appeal to programmers.  Its portable, supported memory overloading, and avoids crashes with exception handling.

I guess Christianity would be a fair comparison to Java.  Like Java is an offshoot of C, Christianity is an offshoot of Judaism.  Unlike Judaism, Christianity has more of an appeal to the mass (thus explaining its prominence in the world).  In Christian theology, the sacrifice of Christ allows an easier path for sinners to obtain salvation.  Similarly, the various features of Java allows easily programmers to create portable applications.

5) C++

C++ is my dominant language when it comes to programming (although Python is my ‘mother tongue’).  It is the language I learned and have used in all my CS courses.  As you can tell by the name, C++ is derived from C programming language.  It retains all the techniques and rules of C and then adds its own peculiar techniques.  Its object-oriented nature makes it versatile, which explain why it dominates in industry.

Islam is a fair comparison to C++. A direct offshoot of Judaism, which its own rigid regulations applied, it is a religion that strives to dominate yet it has provided the foundation for Middle Eastern society since the 7th century.

Theseus’s Identity Crisis

Who are you?  I’m not asking for your name or age or other bits of information you would put on a census form.  Just take a minute and reflect on this question: Who am I?

…….Ok, a minute has elapsed.  Do you have an answer?  Yes? Well, if you already have an answer, you’ve misunderstood the question!

Identity is such a complicated concept.  We go through life studying, working, eating, socializing, stimulating ourselves with entertainment.  Yet how often do we lie under the stars and contemplate our place in the universe.  Where do we fit within the Milky Way Galaxy?  Are we merely specks of dust in space?  Are we the most exalted forms of God’s creation?  Are we characters in a virtual reality stimulation?

How do we define ourselves?  The conventional way is based on four facets: Nationality, Ethnicity, Religion, and Linguistics.  For example, based on the conventional way, I would be a English-speaking South Asian-American Catholic. However, in my view, this method of identification is highly flawed.  First, nationalistic and ethnic labels are pure social constructs devised through political means.  National borders constantly change. Ethnic labels alter.  The region of Alsace (now located in Eastern France) has been tossed between France and Germany for centuries. One minute the Alsatians were French.  The next minute, they were German! Before 1960, there was no such thing as a Palestinian.  Now that’s all you hear about in the news!
Alsace in France.svg

Now applying religious labels to yourself  make sense if you are a sincere believer.  However, let’s be honest.  Most people couldn’t care less if they had a guardian angel.  For most, being a Roman Catholic, a Jew, or a Hindu is a reflection of their ancestors’ belief system, not their own.

As for linguistics, well, thanks to the political climate of certain regions (Quebec, India, Spanish Catalonia), people are forgetting that language is merely a means of communication.  There is no need to have such an emotional attachment to a language, whether it be French, Hindi etc. It is irrational to call yourself a Francophone, an Anglophone, a Gujarati, a Hindi speaker etc.  My ‘mother tongue’ is English yet I would have no problem embracing another language if it is more useful to me.

So if the four facet conventional way is flawed, what is an alternative way of defining our identity?  Is it through our careers?  Maybe.  In a typical social event (i.e. a charity dinner, a party), the first thing people do after meeting someone is ask them “So what do you do?”.   The question doesn’t imply “What are you doing now” but “What do you do for a living”.  In this manner, people are identified by what they contribute to society, whether it be through medicine, technology innovation, law, education etc.

From childhood, our parents have stressed the importance of a formal education.  What’s the point of spending four (maybe more) years to obtain a university degree? To pursue a career.  This is after all the primary objective for people my age.  Perhaps our identity is based on our career and the skills we contribute to society.

But that can’t be right!  In fact, it is ridiculous to base one’s identity on one’s career, although we have a tendency to do so.  It isn’t uncommon for one to switch careers.  At the beginning of my university studies, I was studying health sciences and working part time as a pharmacy assistant.  After a couple of years, I am now pursing computer science.  Did I suddenly alter into a completely different person?  Of course not.  I just happen to choose a different career path.  If one retires from his career, does he lose his identity and ceases to exist?  I hardly think so.  I personally know many retirees who continue to live vibrant and productive lives after 10 years into retirement.  From what I see, they certainly haven’t lost their identity!

Do we base our identities on hobbies and interests?  I doubt it!  Similarly to careers, people definitely change their interests and hobbies over the course of their lives.  Ten years ago, I used to be into anime and Yu-gi-oh cards. Now, I’m still wondering why I was ever fascinated with them in the first place!

Fereidoun M. Esfandiary aka FM-2030 (1930-2000)

The more I think about it, the more it seems that identity is extremely fluid.  The renowned tranhumanism advocate FM-2030 said it best: “I am not who I was ten years ago and certainly not who I will be in twenty years”.  The complexity of personal identity is akin to the Theseus’s paradox.

In the first century, A Greco-Roman historian and philosopher named Plutarch asked whether a ship which was restored by replacing each and every one of its wooden parts remains the same ship.  What do you think?  There isn’t a right or wrong answer.  It’s all dependent on perspective.  Think of the ship as your identity.  Ten years has passed.  You are no longer have the same hobbies.  The way you speak and present yourself is different.  And you even switched career paths.  Can you truly say you are still the same person?