Tag Archives: individuality

Apple-pie order

dictionary with letter A

Ap·ple-pie or·der (n): perfect order or neatness.

When I read today’s definition, I realized I had no recollection or information on this terminology, and since I am a writer on the Internet, I am fully qualified to expound on it in great detail.

For I will tell you–I like the phrase “apple-pie order,” and I realize that it is never used in our generation simply because we find that a certain amount of disarray is necessary to convey our individuality.

If you want to lose friends and not influence people, just suggest they initiate organization. It is the classic definition of “buzz kill.”

Because even though people cannot argue with your assertion that a certain amount of prioritizing is essential, they feel very American and freedom-minded by continuing their chaos in bliss.

What is the apple-pie order of life? Does it vary from one situation to another? Or has the evolution of the human experience shown us exactly how we work best?

I think that we, as human beings, are heart, soul, mind and body creatures.

When we make our decisions based on our bodies, we normally end up in some derivation of excess or hedonism.

If we decide our life goal based on what we think, we borrow too much from our training and parents’ philosophy and never gain our own sense of purpose.

Even those who feel they’re very spiritual by promoting prayer and God-seeking in the forefront tend to sprout too much piety and not enough practicality.

So we must begin with the heart. If we don’t deal with our feelings and rectify them with reality, they will hang around and kick us in the butt if we turn our backs.

So I think the apple-pie order when attempting to place things in a realistic framework is to start out with:

  1. What do I feel about this?
  2. Is there abiding knowledge or wisdom on the issue?
  3. Can I think of a way to take what I’ve just discovered about my feelings and universal truth and come up with a great idea?
  4. Can I motivate this old bod that I’ve carried around and encourage it to perform the functions that make me appear adept instead of inept?

So it turns out that the apple-pie order is so much like the dessert itself: it works better if you take some time to seek out an a la mode.

 Donate Button

Thank you for enjoying Words from Dic(tionary) —  J.R. Practix

Anthropology

dictionary with letter A

Anthropology: (n) the comparative study of human societies and cultures

There is an abiding, if not persistent, inclination to believe that intelligence invokes individuality.

In other words, because the human race possesses greater brain power than, let’s say, the duck, we are segregated into a multitude of clumps that not only differentiate us from one another, creating chasms of separation, sprouting suspicion.

Anthropology would do a great service to humankind if it pursued the premise that we are much more like the duck. No one sits around and discusses how ducks from the south are different from ducks from the north. (Maybe it’s because they fly south for the winter and north for the summer. Of course, most of our aging human population has similar travel plans.)

It is ironic to me that a scientific community which fastidiously places us within the animal kingdom as brother and sister to our jungle family suddenly decides to separate us from that kingdom when it comes to matters of race and culture.

Is it possible that we would be better off if we punctuated our similarities instead of showcasing our differences?

  • For instance, does someone born in Siberia who is transplanted right after birth to Southern California still prefer to wear parkas?
  • Would a native of Africa, born in the Serengeti, if translated to London-town, constantly find him or herself pining to hunt with a spear?

Can we really continue to take the attributes that are engrained and nearly beaten into us by our families and pretend that they’re a part of our natural desire?

Very few people ever consider the personality profile of an individual chimpanzee. Yet in some sort of “Homo sapien silliness,” we think that each and every one of us is a snowflake falling from the heavens, with our own particular jagged edges.

Yes, I believe anthropology would provide a salvation to humans if the science explained how much we share in common.

We would certainly be more like the duck, and realize that our particular quack … is not that special. 

Donate Button

Thank you for enjoying Words from Dic(tionary) —  J.R. Practix

Ambush

dictionary with letter A

Ambush: 1. (n) a surprise attack by people lying in wait in a concealed position 2. (v) to make a surprise attack on someone from a concealed position

It all depends from what perspective you view this experience.

If you are the ambusher, you find your tactics to be clever, inventive, cost-saving and ingenious.

If you are the ambushee, you will contend that the same actions are conniving, vicious, unfair and animalistic.

We think that certain behavior is acceptable as long as we come up with it and implement it to our common good. It is what makes us both human and obnoxious.

Candidly, a world without a Golden Rule, which insists that we try on an experience to see how it feels if done unto ourselves before we target it toward another person–well, a world without that kind of consideration is vile, unpredictable and destructive.

How can we ambush other people while thinking that all we’re trying to do is communicate our feelings?

1. If another human being doesn’t have the right to disagree without looking ridiculous, then we’ve robbed them of their God-given blessing of purpose and individuality.

2. If our sharing with another person is done in front of other folks for convenience or back-up, we have removed the generosity that allows our friends to repent if they’ve erred and to learn if they lack information.

3. The instinct to capture folks in their moment of weakness and attack them is never noble, even if we think it’s producing spiritual conclusions.

Here’s the truth: human beings don’t have to be right.

God, Himself, does not go around plotting trials and tribulations for those who are in rebellion to reason. That’s why the Good Book says “it rains on the just and the unjust” and “the sun shines on the good and the bad.”

So if God doesn’t ambush jerks, get your helmet off. There’s no war.

And “ambush” is a term we normally relegate to warfare–when being devious and even ruthless, unfortunately, may be necessary to win the battle and save lives.

But to introduce this concept into everyday interactions with humankind is not only cruel, but in this humble writer’s opinion … damnable.