What's up with Hiccups?

            When you have hiccups, you get many different suggestions from people on how to get rid of it.  “Hold your breath!”.  “Try swallowing rice/bread without drinking water!”.  “Drink water!”. “Drink water while you are upside down!”.  “Breath normally!”. “Try not to breath normally!”.  And of course, there is trying to scare the shit out of you (or make you laugh really hard) which seems to work too. There simply are so many techniques. And only some will work for you, while some might work for others.  See, that’s what puzzles me about hiccups.  I didn’t really know what causes hiccups but I thought that there must only be one single cause of hiccups, and if that is so, there should only be one way to get rid of it. It turns out, I was wrong.

            In my philosophy class with Professor Steve Gimbel (he writes the philosophersplayground.blogspot.com), we always start with asking questions to him. “Any questions? Any questions at all?” he would ask. And he would spend 15-20 minutes of the class answering those questions. Here are a few questions that I remember to give you a sense of our Q&A section: “To what extent are dreams symbolic?”, “What is reason?”, “Does peanut butter need to be refrigerated?”, “What is the whole fuss about the economy?”, “Does intention matter?”, and so on. And he will try to give an answer to the best of his knowledge. Anyway, in my last class, I asked – “why do we hiccup and how do we get rid of it?”. His answer is so far the most convincing answer that I’ve heard about the cause and cure of hiccups, and more importantly it explains why so many different techniques work. Here is the gist of his answer:

            We use the muscle in the rib cage called diaphragm when we breathe. Normally, this muscle tightens and relaxes in a rhythm. But as we all know, our muscles twitch sometimes for different reasons (face muscles twitch, and so do arm and leg muscles too). That is the same kind of thing happening with the diaphragm. Only, when the diaphragm gets the twitch, our breathing gets mess up. In most cases, you hiccup because you ate too fast, drink too fast, forgot to breathe for a short while and so on. In order to get rid of hiccups, you have to get the muscle to get back to its rhythmatic movements. To do that you can stop the muscle movement totally, and then get it to start working again. You can do it by holding your breath or drinking/eating (since you can’t breathe when you drink/eat). Or you can show the diaphragm, how to work rhythmatically, by breathing in-n-out in a regular timing (this technique works the best for me). Or you can intentionally try to mess up your breathing rhythm so that the diaphragm gets really confuse and give up its irregular twitch. And you can do that by just breathing in random patterns (if you want to add some flair to this, you can play a harmonica and it will produce the same effect.)

            So I guess it doesn’t matter which road you take as long as you get to the same destination. I have learned not to judge other people who use different technique when it comes to getting rid of hiccups and just celebrate the uniqueness of the individuals.

The Dark Age of America?

Lindsay told me about this little girl that she met yesterday. Her name is Lucy and she is 10 years old. When Lucy saw the Obama sticker on Lindsay's car, she said, "You are voting for Obama?? He is for abortion and I think it's disgusting."

We were both appalled by this comment. Here she is, 10 year old, picking a political view, which I’m sure she has very little knowledge about, on the basis of a subject that she has pretty much no idea about. Of course her parents are republicans and she’s been brain washed by their beliefs and their political opinions. I think this is wrong on the part of the parents to impose that on the child, not so because they are republican beliefs, but because the child should be able to understand the issue and decide what they want to hold as their own beliefs (the same line of thinking will also go for imposing parents religiuos beliefs on the child).

I’m sure this case is new but I’m writing about this because I’m seeing how the definition of democratically picking a leader has changed. Picking a leader is no longer about choosing someone who you have a good reason to belive that s/he will do good things for the country, but it is picking a side that your parents and their parents have picked and sticking with it no matter what. Like Stephen Colbert has pointed out, it has become very similar to choosing to cheer for a sport team. You cheered for the team because your parents and their parents and their parents have always cheered for that team. Everything that the team does is good and everything that the other team does is bad. Love your own team, and hate the other. Your team is always right and the other team is always wrong.

This is the case for both republicans and democrats. When you think about this, it is no wonder that the candidates are not giving any real answers to the difficult questions like the bail out. They don’t have to answer these questions. Each of them says, “I belong to this party and these are my beliefs which coincide with the party’s agenda.”, and they will get the support of their people at the end of the day.

The problem is that people are not thinking anymore, at least not critically. They are not thinking about what the history has shown them. They are not thinking about the consequences of their actions. There are some experts who have suggested that this very state in which people lack critical thinking, is the very essense of a “dark age”. So, is America going through a dark age? Or am I just being too pessimistic?? It is very discouraging for a third world kid like me who had a great deal of respect for America and her democracy, and hoped a change for a democratic government in my country.    

Currently Reading I Think, Therefore I Laugh By John Allen Paulos see related

Notes from "I think, therefore I laugh"

The Universalilty of Games

Anyone who has read my entry on the capital letters of English language would know that I've mentioned my friend Brian Wilson. We've been good friends since my first year. He's a fellow philosophy major too. Of many of his good qualities as a person, the most interesting would be his curiosity. He always seems to ask interesting questions that I never really think about. From that many interesting discussions have started over the years. Here is one of them.

            We were hanging out at the “benches” (the benches near the school’s library, our favorite place to hang out), when Wilson asked “what kind of games do you guys play when you were young? (“you guys” – addressing to a friend from Nepal and myself). And we started talking….. As it turns out, games like tag, freeze tag, hide-n-seek and red-light-green-light are all played in Burma, US and Nepal. Later, we found out from our Nigerian friend that Nigerian kids play tag, freeze tag and hide-n-seek too!!! (Red-light-Green-light: I don’t know how this game is called in Burmese but it is the one where the antagonist counts from one to ten while looking away from the rest of the players try to creep up to the antagonist. Once the antagonist turns around, the rest of the players have to freeze in whatever position they are in. As the antagonist examine the frozen players, whoever moves first is out)  

            We could think of two reasons why this can happen. One, it is a product of European colonialization. Second, the rules of the games are very simple, so they might be developed simultaneously all over the world. I personally believe that games like tag and hide-n-seek are developed simultaneously. Even cats and dogs play some sort of tag. And hide-n-seek is just a different version of tag (tag uses touch as the confirmation of perception while hide-n-seek uses vision as the confirmation). However, freeze tag (in Burmese Kyout yote Kyout Phyatt) and red-light-green-light have rules that seem too complicated to be developed independently and simultaneously.

            Anyway, I’m curious what you guys might think.

PS: I have talked about this to my logic professor who got so interested in the subject that he wrote about it on his blog. http://philosophersplayground.blogspot.com/2008/09/universality-of-games.html 

On Blogging (cont....)

I have given some serious thoughts as to why I'm writing blogs again. And as Lin has pointed out in his comment, I'm writing again because I want to keep in touch with all of you my friends. Another reason (and this is a habit I have totally picked up from Lindsay) is that I want keep the quotes and passages that I like recorded and what better place in the world is better than on the blog. Also, I'm writing again to get your opinions on topics that confuse/interest/frustrate/enlighten me (also some that make me laugh my ass off).

I know I'm making a big deal about writing a blog but I do this because I want to be honest with myself and with you all too. I have realized that in the past, I have said/written things that make me sound smart or funny or pity worthy etc.. And I want to be careful that I'm not blogging for that reason. Honestly, I'm fed up with the side of me that thinks I'm so smart and that I've things to say that people should listen to because they will learn a valuable lesson. I'm done with that. 

Anyway, this is going to be the last blog on blogging. I have come to terms with my intention of blogging again. I will leave you with a nice verse (on problem of evil) by Boehius from "The Consolation of Philosophy", and see you next time.

'Creator of the starry heavens,/ Lord on thy everlasting throne,/.......... All things thou holdest in strict bounds,/ To human acts alone denied/ Thy fit control as Lord of all./ Why else does slippery Fortune change/ So much, and punishment more fit/ For crime oppress the innocent?/ ............Of this great work is man so mean/ A part, by Fortune to be tossed?