And by that, I mean the original Star Trek--Kirk and Spock roaming the universe, monsters that suck all of the salt out of your body, the Pon-Farr. What lead up to that statement was the following article at American Thinker by Rosslyn Smith: What do women want, a timeless question. She is writing about Liberated and Unhappy, Ross Douthat's review of the study The Paradox of Declining Female Happiness by economists Betsey Stevenson and Justin Wolfers. In her commentary about the review she states: "It is a human paradox that wanting something is often far more satisfying than having it."
Which leads me back to Star Trek. At the end of the episode (Amok Time) where Spock goes back to Vulcan to complete the rite of mating, the Pon-Farr, his betrothed, who has forced him into a situation where he thought he killed Captain Kirk, gives her totally logical thought process (she is Vulcan after all) for bringing things to such a pass. Spock looks at her lover, Ston, and tells him "After a time, you may find that having is not so pleasing a thing after all as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true.."
What do these two things have to do with each other. Really nothing, it's just the way my brain works sometimes and I thought it was interesting. Regardless, both are good commentaries on the nature of wanting.
2 days ago