Pros and Cons:
P: The scores can be compared with every other person who is taking that same test, thus giving you an idea as to how you will do in that subject or field.
C: The test can take nothing into account except your raw score and is in no way subjective to your life or capacities or hardships or even your brilliance and studiousness.
Bottom line: You are going to have to take a standardized test if and when you want to further your education. If you are opposed to the whole idea of the testing but are going to be forced to take a test, just learn how to fool the test and how to do well on the test. That'll show'em!
JPS
15.12.07
14.12.07
Tax "do-over" and Agency
I agree that a person should "react", as doing such-a-thing is not being an agent and definitely not using your agency correctly (Joseph Fielding McConkie would go so far as to say that such an act is NOT even a true act of agency. It would just be a misuse of agency, as agency is choosing to act in accordance with the spirit and the commandments, and I tend to agree with him [though I don't want to offend someone for "being too picky..."]).
So, let me lay out the decision (though it has already been made and this discussion is solely retroactive and for YOUR sake...): I willingly and almost insisted on taking the brunt of the financial load when getting divorced. I just knew that a complete and total separation was needed as soon as possible... In such a decision, I offered to take care of all of the debt in return for keeping all my paycheck. I also allowed her, under-the-table, to take the my disability check (and to tell the truth, it didn't last all that long before they [Hartford Insurance] said I earned too much anyway...) with the understanding that some day I would also get all of that check.
Now, though, I learned that no allowance was made for the paying of taxes with regard to the income and the write-offs.
Come to find out, you can send in a "correction" to your initial tax-return for years and I plan on doing just that.
Hence my question on "revenge"... Is it being vengeful or not? I think not and 2 Nephi 9:17 says "O the greatness and the justice of our God! For he executeth all his words, and they have gone forth out of his mouth, and his law must be fulfilled."
I don't even think of myself as God, but just a god-in-embryo and try to do only those things that God would be pleased with...
JPS
So, let me lay out the decision (though it has already been made and this discussion is solely retroactive and for YOUR sake...): I willingly and almost insisted on taking the brunt of the financial load when getting divorced. I just knew that a complete and total separation was needed as soon as possible... In such a decision, I offered to take care of all of the debt in return for keeping all my paycheck. I also allowed her, under-the-table, to take the my disability check (and to tell the truth, it didn't last all that long before they [Hartford Insurance] said I earned too much anyway...) with the understanding that some day I would also get all of that check.
Now, though, I learned that no allowance was made for the paying of taxes with regard to the income and the write-offs.
Come to find out, you can send in a "correction" to your initial tax-return for years and I plan on doing just that.
Hence my question on "revenge"... Is it being vengeful or not? I think not and 2 Nephi 9:17 says "O the greatness and the justice of our God! For he executeth all his words, and they have gone forth out of his mouth, and his law must be fulfilled."
I don't even think of myself as God, but just a god-in-embryo and try to do only those things that God would be pleased with...
JPS
13.12.07
Year-End Review...
Ok, not really a "review", but that's just a fun way of saying that these thoughts are actually "random" and not following one single thought...
I just got back from Tithing Settlement tonight. You know, it doesn't matter why I get to go and visit with the Bishop, it's always a really nice thing to do and makes you feel good (that includes needing to go to him for "confession" because you always leave feeling 100% better than you did when you first went in...). It just means that you have all sorts of reasons to feel good about yourself when you walk out of a bishop's office...
I still have to take the GRE soon and just saw that I had written it into my phone/planner to start studying again for the test this Saturday (I have myself some "break-time" after the end of the semester). It's time to dive back into studying (I didn't ever really study, now that I think about it, for my latest Psych class...) but this time for something that actually completely interests me--getting into Graduate School.
My little Buddy, Addison, is coming to Utah for his holiday break. He was originally going to be here only for Christmas Eve and Christmas day and the rest of his vacation was going to be in Montana. Luckily Stephanie changed her plans and now my little Squirt is going to be able to spend almost the entire vacation with me. I can't even say how good it'll be to have him "home" with me. I HATE him being in Califor-nIgh-Ay and even talking to him every night isn't good enough for me. I mean, it's better than nothing, BUT... I just miss having him around all of the time!!!
JPS
I just got back from Tithing Settlement tonight. You know, it doesn't matter why I get to go and visit with the Bishop, it's always a really nice thing to do and makes you feel good (that includes needing to go to him for "confession" because you always leave feeling 100% better than you did when you first went in...). It just means that you have all sorts of reasons to feel good about yourself when you walk out of a bishop's office...
I still have to take the GRE soon and just saw that I had written it into my phone/planner to start studying again for the test this Saturday (I have myself some "break-time" after the end of the semester). It's time to dive back into studying (I didn't ever really study, now that I think about it, for my latest Psych class...) but this time for something that actually completely interests me--getting into Graduate School.
My little Buddy, Addison, is coming to Utah for his holiday break. He was originally going to be here only for Christmas Eve and Christmas day and the rest of his vacation was going to be in Montana. Luckily Stephanie changed her plans and now my little Squirt is going to be able to spend almost the entire vacation with me. I can't even say how good it'll be to have him "home" with me. I HATE him being in Califor-nIgh-Ay and even talking to him every night isn't good enough for me. I mean, it's better than nothing, BUT... I just miss having him around all of the time!!!
JPS
12.12.07
Happy Moments from Following the Spirit!
I don't want to start listing all of the times that my day has turned around and become a great day because I chose to follow a different path and follow the Spirit (nor could I come up with such as list...), but Monday was one of those days!
Monday was the day of my Final at UVSC in Abnormal Psychology (preparing me for a Master’s Degree in Counseling from University of Phoenix—got an ‘A’ at UVSC as well as a 4.0 GPA at UofP!), and so I had most of the morning off and had headed down to school to take the test. I arrived in PLNT of time and went in to take the test with not as much as a worry on my mind. I took the test (and got by with a little help from my friends...) and went up to the main floor.
A girl that I had met at Gold's Gym was there and we talked for a bit. She wanted to tell me something and so we went into an empty room. She confided in me that she was thinking of moving out of her house, because her dad's rules and expectations were "weighing her down". Turns out, as I could tell already from her talking, that she basically had renounced the church, her testimony, and anything that tries to tell her how to act.
I listened to her and then bore my testimony to her and tried to give her a copy of Dr. C. Terry Warner's book ("Bonds that Make Us Free") hoping that maybe that could turn her around...
Finally, I simply gave her a hug, wished her luck, and left.
While walking out of the room and towards the Eating Court", why, who did I "happen to run into" in the hallway? (I'm not saying at all that it was intentional, but just a happy coincidence...) but Teresa's Aunt Lynne (who she has lived with for a year before leaving on her mission...).
We talked for a while and talked about further communications in the future to find out more about Teresa, etc.
When I left I was so excited about the whole encounter and was glad that I had left that room with Bonnie (my foundering Gym-friend) and left the room right then. I had dropped off a XMas present to her the week before, but hadn't seen her as I just left it with her secretary-of-sorts, Kudji. I don't want to bother Teresa's family with my possibly-intrusive wants and desires to be closer to Teresa, and thus, had planned to not try and visit Lynne during the time that I would be at school for finals.
I could cause some serious damage if I let my curiosity/over-aggressive wants to be closer to Teresa, even though she's in need of peace and quiet and the last thing she needs is my ego/almost uncontrolable passion barging into her serene and peaceful spiritual experience. It's hard not to do all I want for her and because of her...
I would say to "Wish me luck" with this too, but I didn't do as well as I would have liked on my final and I don't want your "luck"-wishing to do any actual damage to my life...
JPS
9.12.07
Final Exams
I have a final exam in the morning. Wish me luck (er... that's kind of meaningless, so hope I do well on the test!)...
JPS
JPS
6.12.07
To be a Beauty or not to be a Beauty?
Today I would like to discuss the common phrase:
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Let's talk about that sentence and what it actually means in real life.
Shall we start by assuming that 'beauty' is in the eye of the beholder or that there is nothing beautiful in and of itself, but "beauty" only exists in the mind of the person because of a person thinking of or looking at a person or an object. Shouldn't we admit that this is true? All we have to do is admit that two different people will look at the same painting or look at the same face and they will have completely opposite judgments about the beauty...
Then again, now that we've assumed the positive is true we must give the negative to the sentence fair assumptions, don't we? I mean, come on... Let's be fair!
So, 'beauty' is not in the eye of the beholder but simply exists, much like truth exists (whether you might agree that it's true or that it's beautiful, doesn't change the fact that it's true or that it's beautiful...). All we have to do is admit that two different people will look at the same painting or look at the same face and they will have completely opposite judgments about the beauty and one is correct and the other is incorrect...
Then again, now that we've assumed that both the positive and the contradiction are true we must give a synthesis of the two statements it's chance to make sense of his...
Can't we all admit that parts of those two "arguments" have some truth to them? Can we, out of hand, side with one of those statements? I can't, can you?
'Beauty' is in some ways in the eye of the beholder and in some ways not in the eye of the beholder (the truth of whether something is beautiful or not exists independent of the opinion of man). Ah... Now I've brought up a very interesting point that I think will help resolve this whole debate!
Is it the opinion of man that ultimately determines whether or not something is true or should we leave that determination to the Judge of All Things? Everyone must admit that God sometimes declares that things are "beautiful". but simply exists, much like truth exists (whether you might agree that it's true or that it's beautiful, doesn't change the fact that it's true or that it's beautiful...). All we have to do is admit that two different people will look at the same painting or look at the same face and they will have completely opposite judgments about the beauty and one is correct and the other is incorrect...
Think about the scriptures: Mosiah 15:15-18, Isaiah. 52:1&7, Acts 3:2&10, and he even declares that people are beautiful: Genesis 29:17, Deuteronomy 21:11. Ok, don't pretend that you can remember what they say... Either look them up or just trust me that thy are talking about God declaring things and people beautiful. Now though, we reach the crux of what I'm getting at and need to read some more scripture... Read 2 Nephi 14:2 -- In that day shall the branch of the Lord be beautiful and glorious; the fruit of the earth excellent and comely to them that are escaped of Israel. Also read: D&C 82:14 -- For Zion must increase in beauty, and in holiness; her borders must be enlarged; her stakes must be strengthened; yea, verily I say unto you, Zion must arise and put on her beautiful garments.
In order to be truly "beautiful", it seems, it requires both God's judgment AND man's judgment and involvement. What I would like to propose is that something or someone is truly beautiful when man aligns his will and, therefore, his opinion, with God's.
Just think about it again... In order for true beauty to exist it requires two people, namely God and man to be in complete agreement. That is beautiful, in-and-of-itself, but we'll talk about that a different time... So, neither the positive statement nor that contradiction end up being correct, though both of them form a part of the truth: true beauty exists only when man and God are in complete harmony about their judgment of a thing.
JPS
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Let's talk about that sentence and what it actually means in real life.
Shall we start by assuming that 'beauty' is in the eye of the beholder or that there is nothing beautiful in and of itself, but "beauty" only exists in the mind of the person because of a person thinking of or looking at a person or an object. Shouldn't we admit that this is true? All we have to do is admit that two different people will look at the same painting or look at the same face and they will have completely opposite judgments about the beauty...
Then again, now that we've assumed the positive is true we must give the negative to the sentence fair assumptions, don't we? I mean, come on... Let's be fair!
So, 'beauty' is not in the eye of the beholder but simply exists, much like truth exists (whether you might agree that it's true or that it's beautiful, doesn't change the fact that it's true or that it's beautiful...). All we have to do is admit that two different people will look at the same painting or look at the same face and they will have completely opposite judgments about the beauty and one is correct and the other is incorrect...
Then again, now that we've assumed that both the positive and the contradiction are true we must give a synthesis of the two statements it's chance to make sense of his...
Can't we all admit that parts of those two "arguments" have some truth to them? Can we, out of hand, side with one of those statements? I can't, can you?
'Beauty' is in some ways in the eye of the beholder and in some ways not in the eye of the beholder (the truth of whether something is beautiful or not exists independent of the opinion of man). Ah... Now I've brought up a very interesting point that I think will help resolve this whole debate!
Is it the opinion of man that ultimately determines whether or not something is true or should we leave that determination to the Judge of All Things? Everyone must admit that God sometimes declares that things are "beautiful". but simply exists, much like truth exists (whether you might agree that it's true or that it's beautiful, doesn't change the fact that it's true or that it's beautiful...). All we have to do is admit that two different people will look at the same painting or look at the same face and they will have completely opposite judgments about the beauty and one is correct and the other is incorrect...
Think about the scriptures: Mosiah 15:15-18, Isaiah. 52:1&7, Acts 3:2&10, and he even declares that people are beautiful: Genesis 29:17, Deuteronomy 21:11. Ok, don't pretend that you can remember what they say... Either look them up or just trust me that thy are talking about God declaring things and people beautiful. Now though, we reach the crux of what I'm getting at and need to read some more scripture... Read 2 Nephi 14:2 -- In that day shall the branch of the Lord be beautiful and glorious; the fruit of the earth excellent and comely to them that are escaped of Israel. Also read: D&C 82:14 -- For Zion must increase in beauty, and in holiness; her borders must be enlarged; her stakes must be strengthened; yea, verily I say unto you, Zion must arise and put on her beautiful garments.
In order to be truly "beautiful", it seems, it requires both God's judgment AND man's judgment and involvement. What I would like to propose is that something or someone is truly beautiful when man aligns his will and, therefore, his opinion, with God's.
Just think about it again... In order for true beauty to exist it requires two people, namely God and man to be in complete agreement. That is beautiful, in-and-of-itself, but we'll talk about that a different time... So, neither the positive statement nor that contradiction end up being correct, though both of them form a part of the truth: true beauty exists only when man and God are in complete harmony about their judgment of a thing.
JPS
5.12.07
The Temple!
How important do you make the temple in your life? How often do you attend? How are you keeping your covenants?
You can answer by speaking directly to the monitor (I probably won't hear you...) or you can simply use those questions to help spur you on to making sure that you are just better with your temple covenants and duties to do your temple work.
Then, kindly report directly to God, the Father! You know... Kneel in prayer...
JPS
You can answer by speaking directly to the monitor (I probably won't hear you...) or you can simply use those questions to help spur you on to making sure that you are just better with your temple covenants and duties to do your temple work.
Then, kindly report directly to God, the Father! You know... Kneel in prayer...
JPS
3.12.07
The 'Q' back in the hood, or simply put: back in town...
It was the genius of Quinn Woodward Warnick who brought you the hours-of-fun-filled- (and sometimes thought provoking)-excitement was you waited anxiously for the new pieces to appear on "The Whiteshoe Irregular" (some of those original pieces have made their way to this venue...) and although he's not planning on starting it back up, he does plan on something equally witty and bright and needed to brighten your day, but until he does, he will be in here Utah County for Christmas '07...
Let's hear it for the Q'ster!!!! (okay, I got a little carried away there for a minute...)
So, for dead serious, get hold of me or Matt Graham or one of the Donaldson twins or simply reply to this here post and include your email address or messenger name or phone # and I'll bring you right up to speed on the holiday festivities!
So wattaya say? In the words of the old Qster, "Game on!"
JPS
Let's hear it for the Q'ster!!!! (okay, I got a little carried away there for a minute...)
So, for dead serious, get hold of me or Matt Graham or one of the Donaldson twins or simply reply to this here post and include your email address or messenger name or phone # and I'll bring you right up to speed on the holiday festivities!
So wattaya say? In the words of the old Qster, "Game on!"
JPS
1.12.07
Stake Conference...
Although nothing could ever take the place of General Conference, since the council of the Lord given to his disciples is that they should speak only his words (as long as you are meeting with a General Authority, that is...), all meetings can be conducted by any of his disciples and it should be equally uplifting!
JPS
JPS
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
