愛の一粒の真実に対する問うい。 恋愛はどれだけの途轍もない現象であっても、 我らは求め、飛び立つ。 どれだけの小さな細波の欠片になっても、 どれだけ苦痛してても、人は喜ぶ。 人は変化する。 嫌な思いを忘れる。 そしてなにより、身を失う。 どうして？ 寂しいからだ。その寂しさを 忘れる方法はそれしかない…と 自分を胡麻化す。 身を失う範囲に恋愛する価値は 果たして、あるのか？ それとも、貴方の核となる個性は 端から無だったんじゃないかな？

The problems of education. Since the beginning of modern day, people have been in constant rejection of critical thinking due to the hardwiring of the school system. What classes tend to offer, the information at hand, are obligatory formulas where the solution to a problem is, by all means, the only one. By those standards, the student's imagination becomes limited, and with enough exposure, starts to see the world - not as contrastically as he used to - but with only two colours: black and white. A person without education possesses the power to see the world through a meta-perspective; that is to say, no one can classify that whatever is, is right; for it differs from person to person in that mode of discourse. In terms of bringing out the best of oneself, and without any boundaries set up by external sources to limit one's potential with a specific potent answer, so instead of one possibility, there will be instead plenties to choose from. The term "education" in and of itself means to "bring out", but what the teachers do, and the school systems, is "insert information"; needless to say, this is an incredibly stagnative approach. If the student cannot bring out the best of himself, with the help of an enabler, but instead becomes a cheap imitation of a textbook of which already contains the specified questions, and answers - how will the student ever benefit mankind with his limitation of innovative thinking? It's counter-intuitive to its fullest! To identify the problem with specificity: the school board seeks for obedience, rather than critical thinkers - bureaucrats are frightened that more and more people will identify the problems of society, and act upon their discoveries - so they seek to limit the potential, rather than enabling the brilliance of people's souls as much as they can. The utilitarianistic principle that Jeremy Bentham depicted, and of which his successor John Stuart Mill elaborated on died for a reason, this is most probably it.

Thoughts. The honesty of mankind is solely dependant on the dishonest factors, and the relevance of each and every story told behind it; what one is willing to bite into, and whatever one decides to swallow - poison or gratitude - becomes a subject's characterization for rationalization, that of which holds the equipotency of utter ambiguous solidarity with oneself, and society in and of itself.

利他主義の生活をしている人の考え。 もう２年ほどぐらい、 カウンセリングのボランティアをやってた。 この二年間の経験の中で、 人は何回も自らに問う、 「私は今までなぜ、生きてきたんだろう？ 今の私はなぜ不幸せだろう？」 答えは出ない。 己の行動を感情に任せる途端に 余計な事ばかりを優先していく。 それはなぜなら、他者に認識されたいから ではないかな？ 己の自己顕示欲を満たせるために。 孤独を恐れない物はこの世にいない、 自分はなぜ孤独に恐れているかと 疑問する人はいないからです。 最も主観的な僕が最も客観的な結論を下してみせる。 そのための僕の意思は社会の意思となる。 僕の目も社会の目となる。 僕はこの社会、 この世界の不幸せを排除したい。 どんな手を使っても。 自分はこの不幸せな世界で、幸せでいる これはどうしても不公平だと思う。