Throughout much of the past few weeks, I have been quite upset at my inability to write a half decent paper. As some of you may have noticed, I have not posted anything on this blog in months. At first, I was just too busy to write. Now, though, I just can’t seem to write. My next paper, which has the working title, “The Allure of Absurdity,” is still just a short unpolished draft, unfinished and seemingly immune to any form of progression.

I have no intention to stop posting on this blog, but for whatever reason I am just unable to make a half decent article. I have decided, as a result, that I will begin a “Daily Ramblings” page on this site for anyone who wishes to see the various mostly random things I think of throughout the week. Thanks for reading!

Is anybody truly “useless?” This question popped into my mind earlier, and it’s a question that I’m sure many people have posed whilst considering their own contributions to the world. I, for one, do not believe that any one could be truly “useless,” as no matter how useless someone might seem, they always have at least some level of impact on the people around them, as well as the environment.

But what about from a more human standpoint? Well, now the answer might be different. Say there’s a 30 year old man, we’ll call him Fred. Fred has never had a job, he has very little education, and lives in his mother’s basement. Each day, Fred wakes up, eats food that his mother paid for, and scurries off right back to bed. Is Fred useless? Some people might say yes, he benefits nobody, after all. But must someone have a positive impact to be useful? That is not a question that I can answer, but my opinion on the matter is that so long as a person does anything they are not useless.

Even though someone might seem as though nothing much would change without them, there is always some level of reflection they cause on their environment. As I wrote that previous sentence, I pondered about the implications of simply… exterminating those people who have no positive impact on their environment. At first glance, it might seem blatantly immoral, but would not improving the lives of those people who do positively affect their environments so that they might better be able to their work be a net positive? This assertion is, obviously, insane. Although I am out of time for today, I might cover this topic at some point later.