Wednesday, December 19, 2007

k o k o l o g y

kokology. quite a funny-sounding word, no?

i don't know where this word originated, but it is the title of a series of books which delves into the psych/e(?) of an individual by providing the basis for or an insight into the answers given to questions based on a specific situation.

ate macel just bougt one of the books. in the aftermath of eating, and talking in groups, and basically having nothing else to do as a collective (the Sonic collective, if i may say so) supposedly enjoying a Christmas party, some of us held class and answered questions, sharing a bit of our answers, and agreeing and vehemently denying the interpretation of some of our answers.

in the trash can-related question, the loose pieces of trash spilling from the can signify the image people have of me - something about me being straightforward and/or being righteous - but that it's only superficial. for deep inside, i'm actually keeping a lot of feelings bottled up, not providing for an opportunity to let them free.

in the cinderella story, the thing that stood out for me most of all is the image of Cinderella being transformed into the beautiful lady complete with paraphernalia and servants by the fairy godmother. yes, it's got something to do with me being optimistic in life, my expectations all high above, neglecting the fact that oftentimes, reality is many times less wonderful than our dreams. in the real world, practical approaches are needed, but due to this overly optimistic nature of mine, i tend to think of things in a grander way, which do not really help me. there's something else related to my ambitiousness but i couldn't find that train of thought.

both hit right on target. the first one is a matter of nature. i guess the second one also is, me being a dreamer and all. however, i think some aspects of it could be remedied, like me staying grounded in reality. for the questions regarding relationships, i must say i can't fully relate as yet, especially when the discussion turns to the type that requires, well, basically, romance.

note: seems like wasn't able to provide a sort of conclusion for the thoughts enumerated aboe. but i'll post them anyway. hehe.

No comments: