Atychiphobia or Not

"Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. We ask ourselves, Who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous, talented, fabulous? Actually, who are you not to be? We were born to make manifest the glory of God that is within us. And as we let our own light shine, we unconsciously give other people permission to do the same." Marianne Williamson


I think this quote sums me up rather well.  Atychiphobia is the fear of failure, except I am not sure that I am really afraid of failure, I am actually more afraid of success.  Only there isn't an name for that particular phobia or fear.


I have all these aspirations, goals, and things I want to accomplish, but there is always some reason that I cannot do these things. I think this is part of my procrastination problem.  It took me forever to write 2 little pages to say why I want to study theology at UND, and now I am mostly done with it.  Going to look at it tomorrow and fix it, then hopefully a former professor I am planning to meet with can help me with it some.  


I am not sure though which outcome is really scaring me the most.  Am I more worried about getting in and actually moving far away and not knowing anyone, or am I afraid I won't get in and I'll have to figure out some other path for my life.  


Either way, I am determined to try.  I really want to do this, but you know, there is only so much school I can go do, eventually I will have to get a real job.  I think it's just easier to be a slacker, then no one expects anything from you, and you don't have to expect much from yourself.  Whereas if you actually do stuff, people will expect you to do more stuff.  I am just hoping that Homer Simpson was wrong when he said, "Trying is the first step to failure," and fairly more accurate when he said, "Stupid risks make life worth living."


All in all, I am very hopeful that the need for a real winter wardrobe is in my not so distant future. 

Hitler and Humanity

OK, So I wrote this way back in 2002, but I just came across it (looking for a writing sample for grad. school, and I think it is interesting.)

After reading Hawking’s article, “A Brief History of Relativity” it is not surprising that in a society like ours, Time Magazine would choose Einstien as “Person of the Century.”  The choice of a scientist as person of the century is logical, especially for Americans.  The American society is so heavily dependent on technology and technological advances that the choice of a man who revolutionized the science world with his theory of relativity was chosen as the person of the century, as science is the background of all technology.  But I think the “person of the century” should have been someone that had an effect on our perception of humanity.  Someone who taught us the infinite worth and value of the human person, which at first glance would point to Pope John Paul II, but that is not exactly what I had in mind, although he too would make a wonderful choice, but I believe the one man who truly showed the world the value of humanity would be Hitler.  I recall when they were choosing the person of the century, Hitler was highly considered, not because what he did was good, but its effect taught the world a valuable lesson about humanity.  The holocaust was an awful thing, but the genocide made many people realize that there is value in life, all human life.  I think that the choice of the person of the century should have had more of a focus on the uplifting of humanity.  Science is fine, but it does very little to establish worth and value in humanity, if anything science suppresses humanity.  Hawking tells us, that with his new theory, “Einstein had overthrown two of the Absolutes . . . Did this imply, people asked, that there were no absolute moral standards, that everything was relative?”  This is a huge detriment to an already fragile humanity, to put doubt in the minds of people living in a morally corrupt society that there is an absolute morality, only leads to the down fall of man.  It is precisely this quote, which makes me doubt the choice of Einstein as person of the century.  I am not denying that he was a brilliant man, and he is deserving of much praise, but to be chosen as person of the century I am not to sure about.  I was surprised to learn that is was not Einstein who built the Atomic bomb; I had always been taught it he had designed the atomic bomb.  I admire that “He urged the Allies to set up a world government to control the atom bomb,” this does show concern for humanity I do not deny that, but the majority of Einstein’s work did not have anything to do with the improvement of humanity.  I agree with Hawking “The world has changed far more in the past 100 years than in any other century in history.  The reason is not political or economic, but technological—technologies that flowed directly from advances in basic science.  .  .  .  No scientist better represents those advances than Albert Einstein.”  While I think Einstein was a nice choice for person of the century, and I can see why he was chosen.  I feel that the person of the century should have been someone who taught us something about humanity.  Because it is not just the world that has changed in the past hundred years, but man has changed in the past hundred years, and technology and science effect man and humanity, and I believe that humanity is far more important than any scientific or technological advance.

ETA: I did have a link to the Hawking article in my paper, but of course it is no longer active.

I am such a fanatic . . .

That being said, 15 days!

So last night, I was at the mall (gross) looking for sparkly, dressy Christmas clothes (worse).  As I was going through the mall, finding nothing, and dying a little because it smelled like chocolate chip cookies and I was hungry, I passed Hot Topic, and on the window was a HUGE ad for Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part I, and I stopped walking, and stopped breathing at the sight of it, for a moment, then I was like "Hey Susan, Breathe." Not to mention, the theme started playing in my head.

I came late to the Harry Potter Party, but I jumped in head first with both feet.  I only watched the movies at first, through the Goblet of Fire.  But when I was teaching summer school one summer, I picked up Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, and my love affair with the books began.  I've read them all multiple times and while I love the movies, and own them all, they hardly compare to the books.  I am currently re-reading them, hoping to finish before the movie comes out.  I am in the middle of Order of the Phoenix, not sure I am going to make it. Anyway, I like the books better because they flow better than the movies, and make more sense.  The movies leave too much out and do stuff out of order. It makes me sad, plus the original Dumbledore in the movies was the shit, I know he died, but the current Dumbledore is not the spitting image of what pops into my head when reading the books, it's the first one.  Alan Rickman as Snape, is right on the money though.

I am so ready for November 19th, I have a date with 7 Potters!