The Yamazing and Yeggastradinary ZLog of my Self Indulgence!
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Thought du Jour
The length of the "true" longing for a particular thing is directly proportional to the depth of the satisfaction when you get it. If it isnt, then you werent longing for it :)
May be..Not sure..But which comes first? Longing or the fulfillment of it? Its possible that once something is fulfilled you suddenly realise you longed for it (not always conscient of it), so true in that case but in most cases, you wanted it and got it and hence the deeper satisfactin knowing full well that you were after it..
Agree with you on the general principle - because the longer you long for something, the more deeply you want it and therefore the higher the satisfaction.....but there are times when time is of no essence - you see something (need not be a thing) and you instantly have the most deep want for it.....and it might be just 3 seconds before you get what you want (might be anything - including a call from your mom...for eg) but the satisfaction it provides is unbelievable - leading me to believe that it is not the length of time but the depth of desire that is proportional to the satisfaction derived.....
the say looks cool. additionally i feel the post proportional item is enclosed in powered by "n" too. The value of "n" may range from all positive 1,2,3....till infinity. the "n" may not be felt by us but by the person himself who is blasting his brain for him/her/them....
[Anand] True. I stated a neccessary condition, not sufficient one. Lets take your example: in 3 seconds you want something and get it and get deeper satisfaction, great! where's the longing in the picture?
Requiem for longing is that you want something, know it, cant get it, you keep wanting it and presumably keep trying (not neccessary) and one fine day you get it.Thats the scenario I am talking about.
>If it rains, I have an umbrella. I have an umbrella, but doesnt mean it is raining, right?
>depth of desire that is >proportional to the satisfaction >derived.....
Thats also true but I was silent about it and you expressed it as your own lemma to which I subscribe as well :)
5 comments:
the reverse also holds, no?
May be..Not sure..But which comes first? Longing or the fulfillment of it? Its possible that once something is fulfilled you suddenly realise you longed for it (not always conscient of it), so true in that case but in most cases, you wanted it and got it and hence the deeper satisfactin knowing full well that you were after it..
Agree with you on the general principle - because the longer you long for something, the more deeply you want it and therefore the higher the satisfaction.....but there are times when time is of no essence - you see something (need not be a thing) and you instantly have the most deep want for it.....and it might be just 3 seconds before you get what you want (might be anything - including a call from your mom...for eg) but the satisfaction it provides is unbelievable - leading me to believe that it is not the length of time but the depth of desire that is proportional to the satisfaction derived.....
hi Manduoaham-vikasit-prani,
the say looks cool.
additionally i feel the post proportional item is enclosed in powered by "n" too.
The value of "n" may range from all positive 1,2,3....till infinity.
the "n" may not be felt by us but by the person himself who is blasting his brain for him/her/them....
warm regards
- BIGPAL
[Anand] True. I stated a neccessary condition, not sufficient one. Lets take your example: in 3 seconds you want something and get it and get deeper satisfaction, great! where's the longing in the picture?
Requiem for longing is that you want something, know it, cant get it, you keep wanting it and presumably keep trying (not neccessary) and one fine day you get it.Thats the scenario I am talking about.
>If it rains, I have an umbrella.
I have an umbrella, but doesnt mean it is raining, right?
>depth of desire that is >proportional to the satisfaction >derived.....
Thats also true but I was silent about it and you expressed it as your own lemma to which I subscribe as well :)
Calling you now...
Post a Comment