Something to think about...

You know the time when nothing makes sense... Not the one after 5 Johnnie Walker Black doubles, neither the one after getting dumped....Its gonna be a serious philosophical musing, specially addressed to "Forever Alone"...  What I am talking about is more like an instantaneous gust of objectivity, when everything turns into a socratic dialogue, as if world turns into a chick flick - people do and say shit that is unbearably annoying and repeats over and over again.. It is unlike omniscience, rather opposite i'd say, where smallest syntax can be interpreted infinitely, making this fractally blur in my mind.... you're never really asleep, and you're never really awake... On reminiscing, every single decision fails test for rationality.... Axioms of life, the very foundation of our value system reduces to a poor fiction, more useless than Windows service to check connection problems online, ie not only that it does not make sense, but you know that you know it is nonsense...

Let us begin with age old question - "Is it right to cheat on a test?" Ethically speaking 'no'... so if you cheat, you are immoral... what if it was an ethical test? You cheat, you are immoral, but you get good marks.... But doesn't good marks mean you are more moral then most mortals.... you see, there is an inherent fault... taking it a step further, what about an interview... every interview has a purpose and a vision for the applicants... now, is the purpose the stated one or is it to make the interviewer believe that it is the stated one? I somehow believe that the person who actually satisfies the stated criteria should get it... but, is the guy who'll invent fake stories and is glib enough to pull it off unworthy? Well, he didn't actually have the intended qualities... on the other hand, he had more drive, be it greed, need, determination or desperation... or may be his values rate this behavior correct... if we do not accept this guy, then interview was a failure... if we do, then the purpose was not correctly stated, but then there will appear this guy who invents fake stories and pretends about inventing fake stories and pretending about satisfying original purpose....

 First of all, how did it come to be like this? Technically, this is a classic example of game theory and psychology, where interviewer moves first and tells you his purpose... then you decide whether or not do you satisfy the purpose as per your value system and then  interviewer decided whether your expectation from the interviewer were correct or not... On thinking about it logically considering future implications, if interviewer has no way of finding out that you bluffed or he has no effect on you future, then you must fake satisfying the purpose even if you do not satisfy it literally - all scholarships and awards, and many job interviews come under this category.... but there are other like placement interviews where one should present what he truly is.... Then again, there is implicit assumption of perfect judgement.... Interviewer can have his personal biases, worst case when he himself is a bluffer... you'll say, ok I can handle that... but few iterations and the statement of purpose loses its purpose... then there is problem of finite time - to keep it simple, you can either practice cheating or excel in the purpose... moreover, more you cheat, the tougher it is to cheat next time... same is the problem with excelling... but for cheating, you need to improve to fool the interviewer even after the exam.... this will involve some sort of dexterity in the purpose itself... so the cheating system actually forces you to learn, so now overall you are better then you bizarro-self.... it is subclass of one of the best methods for self - "do or die"... How did we end up on a very respected and highly selective development methods by starting with a lie??

Now, discussing the above para itself... does the use of words like "bluff" represent my own beliefs or a Platonic "bluffness" or it is all between you and me.... Now discussing the last line, is there a Platonic "bluffnessness" corresponding to my/your "bluffness"? You see, its feels like living in Xeno's paradox...

And when I stop chasing the tortoise, I am immediately caught into wondering about the life.... like what is life? what is the purpose of life? is the purpose of life, life? is the purpose of life, finding the purpose of life??
Say I have a muffin in my hand.... do I eat it just cuz it tastes good? or do I keep it for later? or should I give it to hungry??? Now, let the muffin be enjoyment/happiness and hunger be a measure of effort/pain.... so it boils down to a showdown between hedonistic contentment and altruistic narcissism.... I want to make it clear that high and mighty deeds like cutting off my leg to feed the hungry do not even count as options for me... the only reason to give away a muffin is because giving it satisfies my ego more then it hurts my id. Is there an optimal solution?

Whatever it be, evolution is such a slow and inefficient process that useful traits for neanderthals still manifest thoroughly in our psyche... I believe we developed into a more probable setting then a more efficient setting for our development... moreover, our languages themselves seem to restrict domain of thought... But, will it be worthwhile to try to recreate the world from first abstract concept.... and who will do it?? I wont, because hedonism isn't against my belief, I can very well enjoy physical pleasures... you see, there is always this instinct to get the larger piece of the pie.... Just some food for thought... I really want your opinion on this one...