rambling on changes

People change when they grow up: that's a pretty obvious (duh) statement.

But in riding these currents of change with time, how are we to assess whether this change is good or bad, desirable or not?

Looking back on my last couple of years, I am very thankful for the intellectual growth and experiences that I have had, but I am still left grappling with the cultural relativism ideology I have been conditioned to embrace, from being an cross-cultural studies student and an anthropologist.

In addressing change (in personal life, ideologies, or habits), perhaps the question we should really ask is (not whether these changes are good or bad) whether or not the changes that we have been through are applicable to the present (the current and surrounding environment or institutions, as defined by Ostrom). I say this because often, those who have lived in many different places, who claim to be victims of dislocation, face the problem of applying the adopted practices and habits to root them down to where they presently are. The conflict arises when the past and present-- two seemingly different worlds, categorzsed separately in the victim's mind-- collide. And how the victim analyzes this collision also depends on his/her frame of mind which is also affected by his/her surroundings or atmosphere.

So really, people change all the time, and to say that someone has changed for the better is an imposition of one's own standards (of goodness) onto another person's. But in making this statement, I am also aware that my thinking has shifted sides to the existentialist, relativist mindset, which some would misinterpret to be 'emo.'

So do I switch back to being 'pragmatic' and stop thinking these immaterial questions and fit right in with my atmosphere? Or is there really a venue for these thoughts to be applied to a more meaningful endeavor? Either way, there is no right or wrong answer but just how the answer is analyzed. It will be a happy ending, with lenses of analysis.