To begin, I felt that it was necessary to refer to the subject as the "concept of risk" because those who know me are aware of the fact that the board game is one of my favorites: it's not a very large stretch of imagination to believe that I would consider writing an entire blog post dedicated to the strategy and the metagame. No, no, in this particular post I will discuss the all-pervasive possibility of failure or unintended consequences, and how its existence affects our actions and thus our lives. The good, the bad, I'll try to cover it all and evaluate risk in a fair manner, for it would be sacrilege to my logical nature to do anything else. I arbitrarily choose to start with the bad, in order to appeal to the frightened child in us all.
Risk is inherently dangerous. Risk ruins lives and relationships. Risk is the reason why so much potential in this world is not realized, perhaps why we haven't yet colonized the moon or cured cancer. Risk accompanies any path of action, and some people dedicate their lives and careers to minimizing it, usually in a financial or political scene. Alas, I find it hard to continue writing this; I'm sure you all are intelligent people and don't need me to tell you what risk is. The question, for me, then becomes "how can I contribute a unique viewpoint or fact about the concept to keep my readers' interests?"
I argue that risk is philosophically tied to happiness. There can be no reward if there is no risk; after all, what value would a trophy have if you hadn't faced hardship to earn it? Without a negative result to feel good about avoiding, happy endings are meaningless. Moreover, life without risk is too deterministic and dependent on circumstances for my tastes. One of my greatest quirks is that I simultaneously believe that we can change fate, despite the fact that it's immutable. (I could go over the logical basis for my belief, though that's a blog post for another day.) I guess the larger point that I want to bring up is that happiness can't exist without despair.
Avert your eyes if you don't wish to see me beating a dead horse. Without X to contrast with Y, we can't appreciate either. One who has grown up knowing only Y can't appreciate it. Statement of personal belief, followed by a small opinionated sentence fragment. Statement of larger aim.
You're still reading? Impressive. I can't even stand to read my own writing sometimes.
Back to the haphazard discussion: one of the most unique concepts that I pondered when I was younger was the idea that, without exception, anything and everything had an opposite. You may say "but people are unique and don't have opposites," but you'd be looking at the matter from an emotional viewpoint. In my mind, people are collections of attributes and experiences. Most attribute have opposites (mean and nice), and every characteristic or experience that doesn't can be broken down into parts that do. Tripping and scraping your knee on the driveway is a combination of: losing balance as opposed to keeping balance, the death of knee tissue as opposed to generation, an attractive force (gravity) as opposed to a repulsive force (think magnetism), and sadness as opposed to happiness.
I believe that humans cannot comprehend anything that doesn't have an opposite. I suppose it is up to you, the reader, to challenge me if this belief seems absurd; just know that I've probably already contemplated the first criticism that pops into your head. Perhaps a spirited debate would ensue, who knows. I'd appreciate any well-intentioned comment. At any rate, you're getting tired of reading my loose arrangement of opinionated statements. Maybe you can even look to this post as sort of a how-to guide on making stylish logical fallacies, then it might serve some purpose. As a final note, I apologize for going off in such a tangent, because I was "supposed" to be discussing risk. I figured that I would rather annoy you, the reader, by keeping the title. I will relish your frustration. </sadism>
No comments:
Post a Comment