I gained this insight from game theory lecture. Let's take chess for example. How do we think systematically in order to cover the many arrays of possibilities? It's true that there are nearly infinite, and mind that i'm not talking about strategies, but rather, the viewpoint that we can take in order to develop a strategy. In other words, we assess how we usually think in a game such as chess. Basically, we can categorize it as follows :

1st order of thinking : "I know"

Meaning, we must 'know', we must be rationale! The application of adopting this 1st order of thinking is, if i do this, then that would follow. We assess each and every moves in this way.

2nd order of thinking : "I know what he knows"

To be a more competent chess player, not only do we assess things on our side, we should assess things in our opponent's point of view. We must also assess every of his moves and what might follow as a consequence.

3rd order of thinking : "I know what he (thinks) he knows about what I know"

This is often used to set a trap. It's logical to move a certain piece, because it would lead to A, which would be an advantage to us. Our opponent foresees this, he thinks he knows everything, and we should have guessed that he would block it. However, we're not going for A. Indeed when we move to A, we could gain B, which is more advantageous.

Another case is making he think that we're making a foolish move, he think he knows everything and there it is! He's going into a trap!

...

I dunno if we can extend this further to many more levels of thinking. Perhaps we could then devise a more advanced strategies by developing on these approaches  =p

Seperti yang Kau ingini

Bukan dengan barang fana

Kau membayar dosaku

Dengan darah yang mahal

Tiada noda dan cela

Bukan dengan emas perak

Kau menebus diriku

Oleh segenap kasih

Dan pengorbananMu

Ku telah mati dan tinggalkan cara hidupku yang lama

Semuanya sia-sia dan tak berarti lagi

Hidup ini kuletakkan pada mezbahMu ya Tuhan

Jadilah padaku seperti yang Kau ingini

Kinda late, but it's better than never.. I made a commitment, and broke it at the very beginning, and now i'm gonna start over..

So here it is :

1) Wont go online unless it's vr important

2) Study hard

3) Be a more obedient n faithful servant to the Lord

Well.. just 3 resolutions, but i think it's enough for the time being.. =)

I don't understand why people would persecute missionaries of other religions. Don't they ever think of what drive those missionaries to go to such 'dangerous places'? To spread what they believe? Because they care that they want people to be saved? Certainly, their motivations are not for selfish ambitions! Why would a mentally healthy, rich people, used to staying in some safe place wanted to risk their lives? Any educated person would know that they're not selfish! They go for noble motivation.

Now comes the question to any educated people, why would you persecute those missionaries? What's wrong in someone wanting to do good things? Even if the outcome is bad, we still know that their motivations are noble, and we should just kindly tell them that we don't agree, what's so difficult with that? Why are we educated people behave ourselves as if we're immoral? Do we persecute just for the sake of 'social stability'? So that there's no social conflicts in the area by introducing a 'new' religion? Then we're no different from a person who kills just for the sake of small, 'material' benefits! I personally don't understand why we still persecute. Shouldn't we, educated society, behave according to our conscience, or at least act rationally instead of just using our sentiments? I think missionaries of any religions should never be persecuted! Nor by civilians or by governments.

Why would we want to start a relationship? Most often, the case was 'because i love her!' And what is love? A painful feeling in the chest, a readiness to sacrifice, a 'spark', a gloomy day if we don't meet that person? So then, we want to have a relationship because we want to satisfy our uneasy feelings! We want to be happy! Well, these perhaps are our conceptions, my conception in the past, which is actually wrong! These are incorrect motivations for us to start a relationship with someone!

Well, basically we can break up any relationships into 3 categories, according to their motivations.

1) 'Take and take' -> A and B are 'unhappy' persons, they see each other as someone that can make them 'happy', so they decided to engage in a relationship. This is dangerous! Engaging in a relationship by expecting something, 'happiness', in return, would lead to frustation if we no longer obtained that happiness from the other party! Even if it was maintained by commitment, it's still the wrong motivation! It would be plain duty to love each other in the next stage, which is so mechanical, not genuine, but bounded by commitment.

2) 'Take and give' -> Parasitism ; A derives happiness from B, and B loves A without expecting any happiness from A. (Almost unconditional) This would drain B's energy and B will live a miserable live to satisfy A's unending desire.

3) 'Give and give' -> A and B are happy persons, they can live without each other happily. Indeed, they can be singles happily. But they wanted to share their joy to each other. Their happiness isn't derived from the other party, but from God Himself, that flows to each of them, and channeled between them. Because their happiness is not derived from the other party, they are not easily disappointed. They will see their spouse as someone that God had appointed, and no matter how much have the other party failed to satisfy the other's emotional needs, the other party would never be disappointed.

Certainly, the 3rd category is the correct choice! Humans are limited beings. To force them to give happiness, in which case they couldn't, is abusive! Only God can assure happiness, and no human being can guarantee. 

(The 1st category is definitely wrong! What are we? We're just human beings incapable of loving! Human love is a conditional love. It is a deceit to say that we love someone unconditionally if we tend to set standards on the qualities that we want our partners to have,eg. if looks are the first thing that we assess. Therefore, human love is cursed! Human love is object-centered, and not subject-centered! If we are loved, it's so much dependent upon whether we can maintain our 'lovability'. So then, do you still think that we can be happy just by 'to love and be loved' by another human being? Of course we can't since there's no guarantee that we will be loved unless that other person sees us as God's appointed person! But that would mean we would be someone willing to 'give/share' our love, and not 'take/derive' love from the other person... in which this will fall into the 3rd case.)

(Adapted from Yohan Candawasa's sermon)