Even the most boring of lectures might be inspirational. The key is to be in a certain state of mind.
First of all, I felt as nostalgic as never before, and I mean it. It's been almost three years now, but I miss the high school. I think I wasn't noticing it back then. The memories are nothing but great, though. The sun outside, people chatting, looking for "good seats", while waiting for the lecturer... it all brought back the images of years ago. It felt so cheerful, so peaceful and serene. Surprisingly enough, for once I came up with an inference of sorts, namely it is just as great right now. Even better, maybe! I have every reason to be as happy as I think I should have been back in high school. So let's just be happy.
Another thing, I was wondering why is that some lectures or lessons are, well, boring. Why are the students not interested, distracted, why are they (we) often ignorant of what they are taught or just sleeping on the desks (I would be one of the best examples of such practice, I'm afraid)? The answer I came up with is probably not revolutionary at all, but once again - as with the melancholy thing - never before have it occurred to me as plainly: it's because there is no involvement. Furthermore, I think it should be the lecturer or teacher who gets his students involved, one way or another. To make things a bit more complicated, some people need different stimuli than others. Choosing a course of studies or a faculty should be all motivation one needs to participate and pay attention, you say. I say, if one chose such studies on behalf of her interests, the teacher is all the more responsible for sustaining the flame of interest and should never disappoint the students, but encourage them and suck them into this particular field of knowledge. Never said it is easy to be a real teacher and mentor.
While we're with teachers and mentors: an idea came by as I was trying to focus on the lecture. I see some serious flaws in this little concept of mine, but I think it is a good starting point for something more refined. Ad rem: the science as we know it is described as the sum of all the knowledge (yes, I'm simplifying). It's all good, actually it's nice to see vast tomes of encyclopaedias filled to the brim with so much knowledge. Boosts the self-esteem of our species, doesn't it? What I'd like to see though, is an anti-encyclopaedia of sorts. It would list all the phenomena we have no explanation for; a great book of questions we have, but couldn't answer. Each edition would be thinned as more questions would have been answered, with more and more new questions being added simultaneously as they appeared. I don't know, maybe there is such a book already, I haven't really searched for it. I think it would be an optimistic lecture, after all: sure, it would deal with our lack of knowledge, but then again - it's intelligent people who ask questions. Besides, it would give some alternative measure for estimation of our scientific progress: not with what we know already, but rather with what we're onto. It wouldn't be obviously as useful as a regular encyclopaedia, yet still - I think it would be a valuable compendium.
Oh, and once again I think it would be nice to start actually studying. I just realised (to little amazement) it could be fun. Not to mention all the possibilities it gives... and so on, and so on. But hey, no miracles over here. Maybe I'll start, let's say, tomorrow?
And an important side-note: real or not, karma works. It really somehow does. Along with the fine print, "do not expect anything in return for your good deeds". How come? It ought to be some sociological phenomenon, look it up at the karma entry of the upcoming Anti-encyclopaedia!
Posts
