Sigit, temen saya yang satu ini bikin ulah lagi. Kebiasaannya mengirim sms ke teman-teman muncul lagi. Kali ini isi sms anehnya berjudul : What is a thing? Saya sendiri ngga dapat. Reaksi teman-teman bermacam-macam. Ada yang cuma ketawa-ketawa, karena memang bukan sekali ini aja dia kayak gitu. Ada yang serius banget sampai chat di Y!M hanya untuk membahas itu.

Rupanya kali ini gayung bersambut. Dia terlibat diskusi dengan beberapa teman. Inilah isinya:

TeleDiscussion
Good morning Indonesia, Wednesday 16 February 2005
Moderator (host): susanto sigit rahardi
Participants : Khalid Zabidi, Velayati, Hilman ‘Boy’, Pepen

Question:
what is a ‘thing’?

Answers:
vela: thing is think??!
Host: does it make thing become thing? what does it mean ‘to be’? how are thing with you?
vela: to be is everything. things need ‘to be’ to get real and connected with other thing
Host: so those are thing. what is a ‘thing’? what is reality?
vela: i don’t know very much about reality, all i know is pain and rainbow, what do you think?
Host: how about existence? what do you know about existence? what is
its state? how it is connected with system? what is ’system’ then? but wait, what is a ‘thing’?
vela: thing is thinking.stop thinking, there will be nothing. but it’s impossible. exist is when something need/ready to get connected with other things in system
Host: why it should be ready? do you make things by thinking?
vela: i think so. when i go to sleep, everything is gone. dreaming is when the unconcious thinking. stop thinking!
Host: so you are goddeess. can you explain to me about those peculiar things?
vela: i’m not sure i’m that goddess u talk about. sometimes we thought we know something, but truly we don’t.

KhalidZ: thing is not a think but think could be a thing, or both are something.
Host : does it make thing become thing? what does it mean ‘to be’? how are thing with you?

Pepen: Thing? sesuatu lah. tgantung contextnya.
Host : how thing is context dependent? why? who is context?
Pepen: i have no idea. may be thing is a thing because of the context that comes with it.
Host : what is the bloody context? why all thing is always associated with context? does it make you wonder this peculiar thing?
Pepen: Haha. it used to.but i’m simpler thinker nowadays.
Host : explain to me those peculiar things in simple manner. what is a ‘thing’? simple is it?
Pepen: A thing is a thing.try to look it up in a dictionary to be more sure.
Host : How thing become thing? how come? what does it mean ‘to be’ [is]?

Hilman: Yup, i think i’ve falling in love with a ‘thing’.
Host : love? what is it? is it a ‘thing’ too? how come you can ‘love’ a ‘thing’?
Hilman: love… U do know better than i’m, yup cos it’s beautiful.

Proposition:< br />
from instrumentalist stand point, a ‘thing’ is better understood as a bundle of latent, or potential, properties that are only brought into being by the act of measurement.

question: Are you agree with that? (to Hilman, Pepen,Khalid & vela)

Pepen : Couldn’t have said it better git.
vela : not understand yet. why ‘act of measurement’ need here? why thing has to be measure?
Hilman: Absolutely right! can we have a lunch together?
Khalid: im not quite understand this kind of subject but im truly grateful to know. i wonder how could ‘act’ could be a measurement action?

……………..to be continue???????????????????????????? yes ??????????????????????????????

Sigit ingin bermain dan dia tidak menemukan kawan bermain di tempat kerjanya di Bogor. Dengan kesimpulan itu saya merancang tanggapan yang mungkin tidak akan pernah diduganya, saya balas emailnya dengan email berikut:

Hello, Mr. Susanto

I have made a simple program, written in C-like language, so i hope you can find your answer here. Yes, i’m sure you’re already familiar with C language.

// Begin of file (bof)

void main()
{

	// Let us define a global variable named '$everything' as an array of these basic elements

	global $everything = array('something','anything','nothing');

	// Now, check whether $everything is okay, it has to be initiliazed and has valid type
	// We have to ensure that the computer memory resources has been properly allocated
	// Is it okay?

	if(is_it_okay(){
	// then, just do something
  		call do_something();
	}

	// Oww..Nope?, then do nothing
	else{
		call do_nothing();
	}
}

// And these are the functions definitions we used in the above lines

boolean is_it_okay()
{
	if(var_is_array($everything){
		return true;
   }
	else
   {
		return false;
   }
}

void do_something()
{
	foreach($thing in $everything){
		print("$thing must be done, because it means $thing and i can do $thing. \r\n");
	}
}

void do_nothing()
{
	print("I didn't do anything, or should i say, nothing is happenned ! \r\n");
}

// End of file (eof)

Now, when the global variable has been initialized and has valid type, you got:

something must be done, because it means something and i can do something.
anything must be done, because it means anything and i can do anything.
nothing must be done, because it means nothing and i can do nothing.

Or, when the global variable has not been properly initialized nor the type is not valid, you got:

I did'nt do anything, or should i say, nothing is happenned !

Nice code, uh..!
Regards

Pertanyaan filosofis itu, kalau memang ternyata harus mengeluarkan semua jurus-jurus ilmu filsafat untuk membongkar satu-per-satu definisinya, memang sedikit menggelitik. Tapi, saya memilih untuk mengikuti permainan saja.