Brekkies: A Comparative Analysis

Theodor Kaluza, Patricia Utsler, Austin Corts, Oskar Klein, Alfred Nobel, Charles Darwin; the astute observer may perceive that these names are similar in multiple aspects, in that each name is associated with the quality of appreciation for science, knowledge, and more, but something may also escape the eye: two of the names above cannot be traced back to any significant scientific contribution, those names being Austin Corts and Patricia Utsler. However, they can be traced back to me, myself, and I, and his parent, or rather my parent. Furthermore, just as their names bear similarities and differences with respect to other names mentioned and each other, the people that they belong to harbor even more. Both my parent and I share an appreciation

Throughout the original series of Star Trek, Spock, considered the most popular Vulcan from the series, never fails to maintain a logical outlook on things, even when everything is blaring a red din. Translated to the case of my parent and myself, we also never fail to maintain a logical outlook on things when a red din is emanating from our exact opposite, my sister, the side of my family that I don’t consider part of my roots. Furthermore, Vulcans are oftentimes considered scientific geniuses in the Star Trek universe. While my parent and I cannot at all be considered scientific geniuses, we oftentimes enjoy reading about quantum physics together; one of our running gags is, “I’m laughing so very hard at your joke, and I’m also laughing so very little at your joke,” a nod at quantum superposition. In addition to these qualities, we simply share an overall appreciation of Star Trek. Both of us even possess a duplicate picture of Spock near our alarm clocks; our similar interests suggest that we both love Star Trek, the scientific and logical, and this binds us in a

Materialism, according to Webster's dictionary, is "a tendency to consider material possessions and physical comfort as more important than spiritual values," and I intensely disagree with that tendency; what do materials give that spiritual connections cannot give? On the other side of the spectrum, Patricia says, "materialism is inescapable, especially in the U.S.; just embrace it." Why do I have to embrace it, if I can escape it? Moreover, Webster defines individualism as, "a social theory favoring freedom of action for individuals, and stressing the importance of being unique." I've always favored this philosophy, but, I realize in calling myself an individualist, I'm also a complete hypocrite, as it’s just another label, lacking in uniqueness. Asymmetrically, my parent says, "one is an individual no matter what; no one falls into complete cliches." Nobody falls into complete cliches, but what about those that created the cliches in the first place? Aside from our views on certain concepts, we are also both different when it comes to social qualities. I have been told that it seems to be incredibly hard for me to engage on the social level, and, in general, I’m only socially accepted because of what I spout on a whim that miraculously seems to