A basketball kaki is a friend whom you can expect to play with. It may not be a frequent thing, but they are the first people on ur mind when u just feel like shooting some hoops with someone. You might know him well, or you might not, it doesnt matter. With basketball as the common language, you are friends anyway.

Some historical background about the clique that i currently play with. In JC1 there was an inter-faculty basketball competition. Made out of players who are not familiar with each other, let alone play with each other, my team, called Tian Zui, lost in the first round and got kicked out(I was depressed for days). But there was unexpected side effect, it brought serveral players together as kakis.

Marcus and Teng Soong were in that team and we played with each other frequently after the competition ended. By pure fate, we ended up playing together with my primary school friend, and my shi fu in bball basics, Zhi Feng.

The 4 of us den started inviting more and more kakis, as our small basketball troupe started to grow. I'm going to do something fun for once in this blog. Im taking each of my basketball kakis and link them to an NBA player. Those who do not know the NBA, or just plain uninterested in basketball, is best to ignore this post.

So... Roll call!!

Name:Teng Soong
Nickname: Larry Birdman
Position: Small FOrward
NBA Player:



The best offensive player on our team, sans passing, the best i could come up with for him is Dirk Nowitzki.

Lethal from distance, with a nice soft touch. Avoids contact, uses finesse, have pathetic defense, poor rebounding for their height, and have a mean mid-range jumper. Difference in shooting range though(Teng is more mid-range while Dirk is a former 3 point champion).



Name: Marcus
Nickname: I have no idea. Someone please give him one. How about the 'Paddle':P?
Position: Center
NBA Player:



Tallest player on the team and part of the founding 4.

Strong rebounder with inconsistent offense. Brilliant one moment, cold the next. Both also enjoy the occasional mid-range jumper. Difference in height(Randolph is onli 6-9, below average for his position).



Name: Zhi Feng
Nickname: the Clerk
Position: Point Guard, Shooting Guard, Small Forward
NBA Player:



Hard to choose, but Jose Calderon is the best I can come up with.

Highly efficient with very few turnovers. Both have a devastating change-of-pace move and high on-court IQ.



Name: Wenhui
Nickname: Sleepy
Position: Point Guard, Shooting Guard
NBA Player:



Almost perfect fit with Monta Ellis.

A very stylish player, coming up with sometimes-impossible shots out of nowhere. Flashy passer with high turnover rate. Less-than-average 3 point shooter. Difference lie in mid-range shooting(Monta is usually lights out).



Name: Kai Jun
Nickname: Monkey, Froggy
Position:Point Guard
NBA Player:



A difficult choice. Was either Devin Harris or Jordan Farmar.

Quick point guard. Scores in a hurry and an above-average defender. Both have fantastic ball control. Biggest difference is that Kai Jun is left handed while Ellis is right handed.



Name: Benjamin
Nickname: Rubber-band Ben
Position: Center, Power Forward
NBA Player:



Our best rebounder by far.

Powerful rebounder despite small stature for their position. Consistent outside shot. Ben, however, doesn't block shots that often.



Name: David
Nickname: Medic
Position: Point Guard, Shooting Guard
NBA Player:



Best player on the team. Period. He might disagree with the selection though.

Game changer. Can switch on or off offensively whenever he wants to. Lockdown perimeter defenders. Emotional leaders on the court. Main difference lie probably in jump height.



Name: Jin Hui
Nickname: 3 step man
Position: Center
NBA Player:



Hardest for me to choose. Once compared to the great Charles Barkley. Can't really disagree with that. However, I'm using current NBA players.

Step 1: Pass the ball to him in the inside. Step 2: He pivots. Step 3: He shoots and scores. Elton Brand is almost automatic on the key, with a variety of skills and a dominant rebounder and interior defender. Difference lie in body type.



Name: Wee Cheng
Nickname: Backstabber
Position: Shooting Guard, Small forward
NBA Player:



Quickest hands in the team. He probably already stole your ball before you even realised.

Super fast hands. Great passer with a reliable jumpshot. Difference is greatest probably in the speed.



Name: Xinhe
Nickname: Starhub
Position: Point Guard
NBA Player:



Wish he was around to play more often.

Skilled at directing the offense. Quite slow for their position. Usually available for the outside jumper.



Name: Jia Hao
Nickname: Energizer Battery
Position: Shooting Guard, Small Forward
NBA Player:



Soft spoken but high energy.

Spark plug off the bench. Strong rebounder for his position. Very quick. Reliable jumper and aggressive defender. Differ most in aggressiveness.



Name: Wenjie
Nickname: Twister, Left-hand Hooker(what a horrible nickname)
Position: Point Guard, Small forward, Power forward, Center
NBA Player:



haha... my opinion of myself. Therefore, not accurate.

Versatile but weak-minded. Tend to enjoy being in the background, content with passing, playing defence or rebounding. Both left handed. Inconsistent Shooting. Difference lie most in height. (Lamar Odom is 6-11, above average for small forwards/power forwards).





So what do you think of my selections? Disagree? Lemme know. All comparisons are done in relative to the neighbourhood court. Like the NBA scaled downwards.

What is the first thing that comes to mind when the word 'philosophy' comes up? Most of us would probably think of old men with weird names, like Plato or Socrates, sitting together and coming up with troublesome questions such as 'what is the meaning in life?' or 'why does the universe exist?'

It is because of this reason which why majority of people tend to shun philosophy. It is viewed as a subject without any quantitative findings, which makes most students even more uncomfortable. To make matters worse, majority of the questions asked within the realm of philosophy seems to be without any answers, unlike, say, science.

That is where the concept of philosophy is wrong. Philosophy is not a subject, it is a way of life. The answers are simply not important, it is the questions that matter, and the pursuit of these answers. Or rather the emphasis on the journey, than the destination. You do not need to know who Democritus is to be a philosopher. If you are studying about Plato, you are studying history more than philosophy.

Science is also not different from philosophy; it is the result of it. Early scientist in ancient Greece, cradle of western civilization at that time, were mainly philosophers in pursuit for the answer. Rather than trust in mythology that was persistent at that point in time as the 'true' answer of existence, they investigated nature, and science was born. The word 'philosophy' itself means 'love for wisdom' in Greek.

Philosophy does not refer to set rules. The sentence that starts with 'My philosophy is...." in itself does not make any sense. Philosophy, in fact, ignores rules. It ignores general perception, it ignores other's opinions, it ignores lifestyles and upbringing. It teaches us to break these rules in order to find that 'true' answer, impossible to find as it may be, and be better for it.

So what do I mean by philosophy is a way of life? As I have said before, the essence of philosophy is to question. Question what? To question everything. From your existence to the universe, from why your younger brother is so irritating to Death. Everything. And in doing so, you will find more meaning in the actions you perform. Brushing your teeth every morning will no longer be a routine, it would become a quest. Studying for a test wont be just another necessary thing to go through, but a chance to gain knowledge. When each action has meaning to it, you will find that your life itself will have a purpose.

I'll bet many of you would half expect me to type 'Carpe Diem!', another famous philosophy, but what i have said is true. It is ironic that while searching for answers to those important questions, as silly as each question may seem, the answers probably lie in the search itself.

Furthermore, one would also enjoy a greater sense of calm. Minor troubles do not seem to hurt as much, in fact they seem rather petty, while the joys in life are enhanced. As your life is enriched, you will view the lives of others in a different light. If only we would simply question.

My love affair with strange sport of tossing an orange ball into a tall hoop started when I was 8 yrs old. My mom had bought a ball, knowing that she has to expose me to different sports to find my niche. It was a cheap, rubber ones, painted in red, white and blue. When I touched the ball, at that age, I felt like it was a part of me, instantly merging, integrating into my very being. I couldn't wait to test out the new toy.

My mom drove me down to a neighbourhood court, and watched quietly as i attempted to throw the ball in. The hoops seemed so tall, an unattainable goal. But it only made me more determined. Again and again, the ball went up. Some missed the rim totally, and some clanged hard off. And there were those oh-so-close shots that just wont go in.

I've seen people hit shots like it was nothing and I knew I was weaker in skill and strength. But hey, the ball nearly went in didn't it? That means I was nearly as good as them, doesn't it? That was how i thought of my skills when I reflected on the small shoot around. I had only needed to practise a bit more, before I will enter the league of the pros such as those in secondary school.

However, that, of course, was not going to the the case. I played ball constantly by myself after the first encounter, but never really found myself a good basketball kaki until I was Primary 5 when I met up with Zhi Feng. He taught me the basics, and we played together with Li wei, another classmate of ours. We progressed steadily; Zhi Feng went to the basketball team at the Chinese High, now called Hwa Chong Institution; I practiced on my own, since my own basketball school team's training clashed with my swimming training.

We became competent in the game. I rose to the top of the hierarchy in the neighbourhood court, using superior speed and height to beat most people. I then travelled around with a ball, looking for more and more people to play with or against. My dismal defence start to pick up as I went to courts in Hougang, Buona Vista, Ulu Pandan, Marine Parade, Bedok, Tampines, Jurong, Clemnti and countless other courts I cant remember where.

The people I played with were the best part. I saw gangsters that play with each other. I saw that they can be honest and caring, yet malicious and brutal. I met noobs and taught them what I knew. I was awestruck by girls with skills a thousand times higher than mine. I was stunned guys towering 2 meters above me. I met up with foreigners that have no language platform similar to mine except for basketball. I played one-on-one with blacks from the US and got elbowed, kneed left, right and center for it.

My brother, influenced by me and the stylish aspect of the game, joined in the fun. We had characterized 'hood players into different categories: Noobs, godbies, peers, god-pros and pros.

Noobs would be those with limited or no experience in the game. The causual players that are just in it for fun. Win or lose, it doesn't matter.

Godbies have limited-to-average experience on the court, and think they can beat anyone. They clothes are always stylish, and they always try to be the leader on the court, either by barking instructions or by trying to score the most points, usually trying to score against multiple opponents. Then enjoy bullying noobs on the court, for it makes them feel good about themselves. They wont take a loss for an answer, and would almost surely will blame someone else for it. As you can see, I hate this group the most, and they are, unfortunately, the predominant group in most courts.

Peers are people with decent standard, and choose not to brag about it. My favourite group to play with by far as the games are usually competitive and fun. They are usually willing to share the basketball and are not above taking any advice.

God-pros are the same as godbies, except that they are much better in terms of skill. they are the people who layup, shoot or dunk over your head, and would make sure you remember it. And you cant do anything about it cos they are usually just that good. The worst kind in all the groups, and thankfully not many.

Pros same as peers, except they are much more skilled. If a god-pro rubs his skill in your face, call a pro friend to help you trash the guy's ass, so you can see the look on his face.

Looking back now, it seems laughable that a small rubber ball was able to propel me into the world of 'hood bball. It is quite remarkable actually.

If you go to a bookshelf on relationships, you will notice there are lots of books on how to start a relationship and how to maintain a marriage, both of which I have zero experience. Yet, in 5 yrs of beautiful(and not-so-beautiful) togetherness with my girlfriend has taught me a trick or ten on how to keep the engine running. But i must stress that the relationships im talking about are the serious kind, not the type where you get tog to see what it is lik or just plain infatuation.

In romance, after u get the girl or guy, there are 3 phases. There may be more, but i probably have not reached that stage yet.

First is the Quarreling Stage. This is the roller coaster ride where couples come into terms with having a girlfriend/boyfriend. It is when couples straighten out issues among themselves. The issues will vary, from the important ones such as physical relationship(sex), money(who pays for the meal?), communication (why you never call me last night?), religion(Church? what is that?) to the petty issues (Why did you step on my toe?... You have bad breath...Can you stop tapping you foot...etc)

Many couples do not last past the first stage, which may take up to a month or more depending on how long the quarrels can be. The best advice to most couples is to ride it out, and settle them as quick as possible.

When you can get past that portion, you will reach the blissful Honeymoon stage. This is the best time in a relationship, where quarrels are few and the benefits of going through hell start to come. That is not to say no major quarrels will turn up. This of course depends if u exited the roller coaster feeling sick or thrilled.

This however brings up the long-run issues, where couples start to ponder about the future with their partners. Issues, such as attitude, education or occupation, previous accomplishments, third parties(or ex-es), marriagability and of course parents, start to arise. But since these issues take time to solve, it is not as much a rollercoaster ride as the previous stage. However, the issues are serious nonetheless, and couples must take proactive action in solving them.

The 3rd stage is what i like to call the Plateau stage, where the relationship start to slow to a standstill. Because of the slow pace of the previous stage, and when one gets used to the presence of the other, people tend to take the other for granted. In this stage, the problems and negative traits within the relationship seem all the more glaring and the grass rapidly seems greener in the outside.

Many have fallen prey. Call it the 7-year itch, as the saying goes. A party has to start being imaginative with the relationship and his/her partners. This is the time when couples should try going to places that are new for dates, or anything outside the norm of repetition and routine.


Without further ado, I will give 10 quick tips to all those with a Loved One out there:

1. Set down rules

At the start of the relationship, settle down a few rules that both parties can agree upon and keep at it. If you break a rule, face the music. Rules can be things like no sex till marriage, settling of quarrels before we go to bed, never mention breakup until all solutions have been exhausted, etc (btw, these are some of the rules in my own relationship)

2. Compromise.

This is a hard thing for many, as it is hard to draw a line on what is fair and what is not. But trust me, if the issue does not go to either one's way after an extended period of time, a compromise is for the best.

3. Change yourself, but not too much.

Similar to the previous one, but applied for the longer-run. To change yourself shows a dedication to the relationship, and adding oil into the engine. However, we must always maintain a certain amount of self. Learn where to put the foot down as to when changes should go. If the changes are good for you, go for it, if not discuss with your partner on why you should change. (i.e. If your partner is telling you to stop smoking, just stop. If the partner is asking you to change your fashion sense, you can choose to put your foot down here.)

4. Settle arguments as quickly as possible.

Quarreling is essential for the relationship. If you do not quarrel with your partner, you are NOT in a relationship. However, extended quarrels are detrimental to a relationship's well-being. It wears down emotionally on all parties involved and generally not healthy. Settle it fast, either by giving in, compromise or hard sell, whichever is the best option to maintain the relationship. Extended arguments generally lead to breakups.

5. Respect your partner for their decisions

There will be decision where you just cannot agree with her. It may not be anything to do with you, but you feel like he/she is heading down the wrong road i.e her job. Trust your partner to do the right thing and suck it up, esp if he/she is being stubborn about it.

6. Communicate honestly

I know some out there may think that there must be some secrets among couples and I say it depends, on your partner. On things where your partner is being obviously unreasonable, perhaps it is best to keep it from him/her. However, if the partner can take it, tell it upfront, with the details included. Leave out sarcasms, raised voices when communicating about serious topics.

7.Know the differences in male and female

Men and women think and feel differently. and this would affect the relationship. Women are generally more vocal about their feelings (men just shut up and listen) and men usually do not voice out their displeasure or discomfort(women just shut up and show your support quietly). Other differences include solving of problems, ego in a different fields, handling of parents, sex, etc. Find out more about your partner before you judge him/her as he/she may not have the same way of doing things as you.

8. Skinship

I'm not talking about sex specifically. But it is shown that a couple with greater physical intimacy usually last longer. 'Skinship' is another way of communicating love, perhaps the strongest way. This may range from the hugs and kisses to actual sex. However, it is vital not to treat skinship as entertainment but as communication, and both parties must realise that. Progress slowly; if you are serious about having a sustained relationship, there is no hurry. But progress nonetheless.

9. "Break up" is a phrase only used as a last resort

And by last resort, I do really mean last resort. Normally that is not the case, as couples end the relationship too early, and realise it only after the deed has been done. So when should a couple break up? Only when one party does not love, or respect, the other anymore.

10. Coming to a decision, it is equal parts Heart and Head.

It is good to be passionate in a relationship. However, if the it is a serious issue, to think using your heart, ie to be overly emotional, is bound to lead to serious consequences. Use you Head when thinking through problems, rationally discuss with your partner. On the other hand, do not be cold to him/her and show that you do care. Equal parts Heart and Head.Those who are overly emotional, usually girls, try to curb it and think rationally, and those who are too calculative, usually guys, open your Heart more than your partner.

I do hope these 10 tips has helped you in your respective romance. Good luck!

Those who have read my previous post may have noticed that I left out the elaboration on the 'god' part. Reason why is because that part resides a little closer to my heart. To elaborate on it would reveal my view on the divine, which would be egoistical in a supposed unbiased piece.

I do not belong to any religion. Which is no way means that I am not a religious person. Does that confuse you? Let me explain.

While I did explain that the 'man' part and the 'god' part are equally important pieces in any structured religion, it my view that the 'man' part can be ignored. Not because I do not like traditions, regulations(ok, mayb not this) or places of worship, but because of the fact this stuff often gets in the way of objectivity when concerning religion. But in the end, I firmly believe that the belief on the 'man' portion is left up to the individual, as long as the two parts do not mix.

So the important question: Do i believe in God? The answer is yes. Which god, however, I can and cannot say. I would say all the Gods and none of them. I just believe in a higher power.

Why? No, not because of faith, as you know by now im not a believer of blind faith. No, not because of upbringing. I come from a family composed of free-thinkers, even though I did go to a christian kindergarden and secondary school. Nope, none of those. The answer is logic.

Logic? How did I come to the conclusion that God exist through logic?

Well, the answer had to be derived on unbiased grounds, without assumption. So i cannot go and assume god exists because i fear death and require the comfort that he does exist. Even though i admittedly was spurred to find an ans by precisely that reason. So, after searching Men for years, i found the answer in nature and science.

It is strange that im eloping seemingly 2 extreme faculties together. I believe that science exists because of god. The existence of God is generally residing in miracles, something which the scientific faculty scoffs at. But the result of science is, to me, a miracle in itself.

How does millions of cells, fuse into tissue and systems work cohesively to form a complex lifeform? And from that lifeform, develops intelligence to study, analyse and form conclusions?How on earth did the Hydrogen cycle just fall into place? Together with the nitrogen cycle? By coincidence? Impossible, the odds are way too great to comprehend. How does the elements of nature fit so perfectly into a nicely formed jigsaw puzzle in this place called earth, while physics run chaotic in the chaotic universe around it?

Logically, it cannot be done. Yet, it is there, miracles before our very own eyes while we search for men who walk on water. My conclusion therefore lies in an external power, changing the odds, making these miracles possible, allowing life to exist.

Furthermore, I also believe that life has to have a higher existence then contribution as fertilizer to the ground. We live years of intelligent life, of struggling, of joy, of pain. There has to be a higher purpose, otherwise, there is no point in living in general. Earth my and as well be Mars.

To finish off, I would like to quote from one of my favourite visual novels in Watchmen by Alan Moore.


Dr Manhatten, a near-godlike being, is being persuaded by his ex-girlfriend, who is crying, to come back from Mars to save Earth. He is convinced. When asked why, he replied,

"Thermo-Dynamic miracles... Events with odds against so astronomical they're effectively impossible, like oxygen spontaneously becoming gold. I long to observe such a thing. And yet, in each human coupling, a thousand million sperm vie for a single egg. Multiply those odds by countless generations, against the odds of your ancestors being alive; meeting; siring this precise son; that exact daughter...

until your mother loves a man she has every reason to hate, and of that union, of the thousand million children competing for fertilization, it was you, only you, that emerged.

To distill so specific a form from that chaos of improbability, like turning air to gold...

that is the crowning unlikelihood.

The thermo-dynamic miracle.

But if me, my birth, if that's a thermo-dynamic miracle... I mean, you could say that about anybody in the world!

Yes

Anybody in the world.

But the world is so full of people, so crowded with these miracles that they become commonplace and we forget...

I forget.

We gaze continually at the world and it grows dull in our perceptions. Yet seen from another's vantage point, as if new, it may still take the breath away.

Come... Dry your eyes, for you are life, rarer than a quark and unpredictable beyond the dreams of Heisenberg; the clay in which the forces that shape all things leave their fingerprints clearly.

Dry your eyes...

and let's go home."

Many of you have heard this story. I think it is worth repeating.

Religion is a strange subject. Rarely does even mentioning the subject evoke such an emotional response. What more a careless statement? This post could very well land me in jail should even 1 phrase, no 1 word, be misinterpreted. Misinterpreted u ask? Yes, because while I do not belong to any religion, I carry no specific discrimination to any specific religion. So any perception that I am so is misinterpretation.

I'll let you in onto my very first argument with my girlfriend. I had this theory which i told her, and started to regret doing so almost immediately. I said that I believe that free-thinkers, people without a religion, have a more objective view on religion, as opposed to people within the religion. My thinking was that people within the religion will be, in small part or large, will be affected by bias when it comes to viewing other people's religion, let alone their own religion. Boy did she fly off the handle. Let me inform you, my girlfriend is not a very staunch catholic, and is rather tolerant of criticism, yet we had a very quiet evening tt day.

Did what i say make any sense? I think it did. The reason why religions clash with each other so often, is partially because of this 'rose-tainted glasses' perspective. Each religion tends to view that their religion is the 'best'. Yes, that is generalising. I agree that there are members within the religion that do not have such a perception, but such people are rare. Most have the feeling that his/her religion is the 'right' one, the 'true' one. Which is why the radical view of other religion's members to be infidels are actually present in the moderates. Maybe not to such an extent where you will be bombing buildings, but more like soft whisperings at the back of the head.

So, is there a way to change this perspective? Yes, there is. But it involves in a change of perception of the individual's own religion, in order to be more tolerant of others. This is no easy task, since religion is bonded with one's core, lik a central pillar. To see religion in a different way is to demolish that pillar, and rebuild it in a different way. Difficult for some, near impossible for others, depending on how staunch they are.

This allows little room for error, in a world with religious diversity. This is especially so when countries rule from a religious standpoint. This allows lesser chance of cooperation from the get-go, the rose-tinted glasses preventing any objective decision to be made. Countries such as Israel, Palestine and even the United States have had confrontations with countries, because they feel that it is their divine right to do so, though they may claim otherwise. For example, the war on Terrorism by the U.S. may not be motivated by purely benign reasons.

This, ironically, supports the realist paradigm in international relations, which has been the predominant paradigm for thousands of years. Religion, of course, provides many positives aspects on the individual level, such as motivation to live, faith, hope, kindness. HOwever, collectively in a larger scale, such as communities and countries, religion simply cannot co-exist together. Why? Because of people's perception of their own religion. Is it flawed? To me, yes, and I will discuss this further next time.

Just had a very entertaining conversation with Claire, an old colleague from my CPF days(before army). Here is how I knew her. When i saw her, i was intrigued by her overall looks, complete with funky red-rimmed specs. Nope, not love at first sight tt kind of thing, just intrigued. Bt we talked very little at our time in CPF, although apparently I left a good impression on her(i suspect flattery). But we did exchange emails and it was through msn that we started to talk, as if we are old frens. In fact, she was the one who convinced me to enter Banking and Finance.

Mayb we already were already good friends. Which is why i felt it strange. On how the impact of the internet can actually strengthen relationships between people who hav hardly met, or even met at all. What constitutes a friendship,or rather what creates friendship, if it is not face-to-face interaction? After pondering on this question for a while, I did not, could not, come to a satisfactory answer. Which is why this is a TwIsTeR Ramblings and not TwIsTeR Insights- Im just rambling out my thinking.


First of i must set the context straight here. Im not toking about casual 'friends' or acquaintances. Im not toking about the people you just say 'Hi' and 'Bye' to (which is what Claire and I were when we were colleagues). Im toking abt the special bond that exists between you and that other person. No, not love, at least not that type of love, or lust, jus pure plain platonic friendship. That friend is one who you can tell ur true feelings to, one that you can feel comfortable with, spoken or even with just the mere presence.

So what constitutes that friendship? Must there be interaction involved, internet or otherwise? I think not. Lemme explain. Imagine this: 2 students studying together for an examination together. They dont know each other. One forgets to bring the oh-so-important calculator. The other lends the forgetful one an extra calculator, without a word. They enter the examination hall, and leave as friends. Has it occured to you? It has for me, so i know it is true. The bond was already been built, through a small token of kindness, and should the 2 meet n speak to each other again, they will realise that they have become frens.

The mistake is thinking that it is the speaking that triggered that friendship, and not the action of lending the calculator. True, the 2 may not meet again, or speak again after the event and the bond will fizzle out. But that does not mean the bond was not there in the first place.

So, back to the question: What constitutes a friendship? It is sad that sum people freely, carelessly call ppl their friends. And yet, these friends take advantage of them, talk behind their back, etc. in a purposeful, spiteful manner. With friends like this, who needs enemies? So the title of friendship cannot be freely given, even if one wants to.
Because, if the bond is absent, you can call the relationship what you want, but it is not friendship.

So the answer is not either the 2. You cant call a relationship a friendship if it is one-sided; interactions, while it may help the friendship) it doesnt cause it. Could it be shared interest, and therefore creation of a bond? I highyly doubt it, as friends who are totally different from each other does exist.

My theory, while far from a conclusive argument, is that friendship is a subset of love, or vice versa. It is strange putting intangible values such as love and friendship into a mathematical type of scenario such as subsets, but one cannot argue the 2 are closely related. So to answer what causes friendship, or what constitues friendship is probably the same as what causes love?

If that is the theory, then that is where the questioning stops, since is a mystery for even the best psychologists. If we could find out what causes love, we can manufacture love, something which is impossible to do. Perhaps the best answer is that it just happens, and just enjoy it, appreciate it.

P.S. To my friends, thank you for your guidance and your love. Thank you for listening, for giving, for confessing, for telling the truth.I hope that we may remain as friends, for even if time tears us apart, friendship still binds us indefinitely.

Took a personality test that Janell recommended. Dunno how true it is though.

Main type	Variant

As an INTP, your primary mode of living is focused internally, where you deal with things rationally and logically. Your secondary mode is external, where you take things in primarily via your intuition.

INTPs live in the world of theoretical possibilities. They see everything in terms of how it could be improved, or what it could be turned into. They live primarily inside their own minds, having the ability to analyze difficult problems, identify patterns, and come up with logical explanations. They seek clarity in everything, and are therefore driven to build knowledge. They are the "absent-minded professors", who highly value intelligence and the ability to apply logic to theories to find solutions. They typically are so strongly driven to turn problems into logical explanations, that they live much of their lives within their own heads, and may not place as much importance or value on the external world. Their natural drive to turn theories into concrete understanding may turn into a feeling of personal responsibility to solve theoretical problems, and help society move towards a higher understanding.

INTPs value knowledge above all else. Their minds are constantly working to generate new theories, or to prove or disprove existing theories. They approach problems and theories with enthusiasm and skepticism, ignoring existing rules and opinions and defining their own approach to the resolution. They seek patterns and logical explanations for anything that interests them. They're usually extremely bright, and able to be objectively critical in their analysis. They love new ideas, and become very excited over abstractions and theories. They love to discuss these concepts with others. They may seem "dreamy" and distant to others, because they spend a lot of time inside their minds musing over theories. They hate to work on routine things - they would much prefer to build complex theoretical solutions, and leave the implementation of the system to others. They are intensely interested in theory, and will put forth tremendous amounts of time and energy into finding a solution to a problem with has piqued their interest.

INTPs do not like to lead or control people. They're very tolerant and flexible in most situations, unless one of their firmly held beliefs has been violated or challenged, in which case they may take a very rigid stance. The INTP is likely to be very shy when it comes to meeting new people. On the other hand, the INTP is very self-confident and gregarious around people they know well, or when discussing theories which they fully understand.

The INTP has no understanding or value for decisions made on the basis of personal subjectivity or feelings. They strive constantly to achieve logical conclusions to problems, and don't understand the importance or relevance of applying subjective emotional considerations to decisions. For this reason, INTPs are usually not in-tune with how people are feeling, and are not naturally well-equiped to meet the emotional needs of others.

The INTP may have a problem with self-aggrandizement and social rebellion, which will interfere with their creative potential. Since their Feeling side is their least developed trait, the INTP may have difficulty giving the warmth and support that is sometimes necessary in intimate relationships. If the INTP doesn't realize the value of attending to other people's feelings, he or she may become overly critical and sarcastic with others. If the INTP is not able to find a place for themself which supports the use of their strongest abilities, they may become generally negative and cynical. If the INTP has not developed their Sensing side sufficiently, they may become unaware of their environment, and exhibit weakness in performing maintenance-type tasks, such as bill-paying and dressing appropriately.

For the INTP, it is extremely important that ideas and facts are expressed correctly and succinctly. They are likely to express themselves in what they believe to be absolute truths. Sometimes, their well thought-out understanding of an idea is not easily understandable by others, but the INTP is not naturally likely to tailor the truth so as to explain it in an understandable way to others. The INTP may be prone to abandoning a project once they have figured it out, moving on to the next thing. It's important that the INTP place importance on expressing their developed theories in understandable ways. In the end, an amazing discovery means nothing if you are the only person who understands it.

The INTP is usually very independent, unconventional, and original. They are not likely to place much value on traditional goals such as popularity and security. They usually have complex characters, and may tend to be restless and temperamental. They are strongly ingenious, and have unconventional thought patterns which allows them to analyze ideas in new ways. Consequently, a lot of scientific breakthroughs in the world have been made by the INTP.

The INTP is at his best when he can work on his theories independently. When given an environment which supports his creative genius and possible eccentricity, the INTP can accomplish truly remarkable things. These are the pioneers of new thoughts in our society.

Jungian functional preference ordering:

Dominant: Introverted Thinking
Auxiliary: Extraverted Intuition
Tertiary: Introverted Sensing
Inferior: Extraverted Feeling