I devoted most of my Sunday to finding travel gifts for my friends and family. I bought my sisters some woven pencilcases, some friends some prayer flags, my dad a Yak-wool blanket, and my best mate a traditional Nepalese board game. ('Bagh Chal')
I didn't do much us else during the day but that was fine with me. I lounged around in the hotel, read more rousseau and finished reading "eating animals". (I'd recommend it - I might write a review of it sometime)
Guy went paragliding and described it as 'sheer terror' for the first 5 minutes followed by 30 minutes of 'beautiful, amazing adrenaline'.
(^An amusing nepali attempt at english)
In the evening we went back to the busy bee cafe (although really it's a bar) and I managed to engage Guy in a philosophical discussion. Although I'm really just passionate about philosophy and enjoy discussing it with people my intense questioning (some would say 'interrogation' - I disagree) is often interpreted as me trying to change the persons beliefs. This is so incorrect. Sometimes I wish people would change their beliefs of their own free choice - if I'm the person that triggers them to re-think their beliefs then 'so be it'. But I would hate to think that somebody would change their beliefs because I told them to.
Guy was quick to realize this, which made our discussions much easier.
I get a perverse satisfaction by putting forth the most controversial thought experiment I can plausibly accept and watching my companion squirm as I seem to defy all common sense. ('The philosophy of one generation is the common-sense of the next') My particular brand of hedonistic act utilitarianism (or 'extereme utilitarianism' to use J.J.C. Smart's term) is rarely accepted with ease.