A repost of an article from my other blog.
I would encourage the reader to peruse a book by Chuck Palahniuk called Choke. Mr. Palahniuk also wrote Fight Club, on which the movie by the same name is based. I won't discuss the plot at length. There is a section that describes the protagonist's experience as a boy walking with his mother and looking at the mountains. The protagonist describes his mother's wish to experience the mountains without the filter of perception. Take a moment to think about that. Read my post titled "The world on a diet" before you go any further, if you haven't already.
We take for granted that the world we absorb through our senses is rock-solid and immutable. We have words for everything. If it exists, it is a noun. If it is some sort of process, it is a verb. We have a slew of adjectives and other parts of speech to spice it up some. The world comes in a variety of shapes, sizes and colors. It is the entire basis for existence.
But this world, and the language that sustains it, is simply the world we can all agree upon. (Believe me, I am not talking about the opinions regarding society-- they are as varied as they come.) It is something that looks more or less the same to everyone and fulfills practical purposes.
A fish swims in the water. A fish is comprised mostly of water. It has no idea what water is, because water is everywhere and there is nothing to contrast it with. We look at fish swimming and see an agent moving freely and independently of its environment. We do this because we perceive the fish's shape and color. Without these perceptions, the fish (which is comprised mostly of water) is more or less like a lump in gravy-- a relatively small variation in the aquatic environment. Yes, it moves, but doesn't a lump in gravy move around when you take a spoon to it?
I had a discussion with someone about the expansion of the universe. The question was asked: what is beyond the edge of the universe? We can come up with plenty of guesses. Every one of those guesses will likely be a flight of fancy. It is about as far removed from our world of understanding as one can get. It was at this point that I developed three classifications in the realm of knowledge:
1. Knowledge that we possess. This is the entire body of scholastic work and/or scientific research accumulated throughout history. Ideally, this would be available to everyone, all of the time.
2. Knowledge we do not possess. This is information about the universe that exists but has not yet been discovered.
3. That which is unknowable. Structures and functions in all of reality need not necessarily have some sort of counterpart in the world of information. The unknowable isn't necessarily hidden-- it simply has no analog that relates to perceived classifications and meaningful language. An example of this is the concept of infinity. We can think long and hard about infinity, but we have no means at all of grasping it. We cannot think in dimensions beyond the four that make up the observable universe. And since all of space and time is a part of our ever-expanding universe, we cannot conceive of what might be beyond its edge. Some things are just totally outside the domain of knowledge and understanding altogether.
For most people, none of this is really a big deal, because they give little attention to knowledge, perception and understanding. With an entire cosmos to explore, they are still concerned with bling, sneakers and iPods!
Sunday, November 27, 2011
Friday, November 18, 2011
Repost: The world on a diet
The world is hardly a world without someone to call it such.
I'll totally sidestep the issue of society here-- while society certainly isn't moot, it is not what I wish to address here. We all know that we are connected to the world around us through our senses. So, we have nice little adjectives like round, green, smelly, etc. to describe the world around us. Lo and behold, combine those sensory inputs with higher cognitive functions and we have language. We have history. We have a structured way of looking at the world, identifying each part and taking note of how the parts fit together and how they change over time. We know that the sky is separate from the firmament, and that we are surrounded by air. We have even probed the smallest particles of matter. (Never mind that even with all our advanced technology, we still get hung up on silly things like race, gender and creed). We know the difference between two people.
Try to imagine not having any senses-- somehow or another, you can detect motion around you, the direction of your own locomotion, changes in energy in the environment, etc, without your five senses. How do all the parts appear to you now? You would have to do without the superficial identifying qualities like blue, soft, or hot. Limited to environmental properties such as location, energy levels (heat), velocity... you know, the properties identified in physics, you would not only lose the relative value system that your mind assesses your immediate environment with, you would also lose the notions of separateness and distinctiveness.
Go to the beach on a calm summer morning. Breath in the warm salty air. Watch the seagulls frolic about in the sun soaked blue sky. Hear the waves cresting and crashing on the shore. Then close your eyes and remove all the color from the scene in your mind's eye. See only shapes, and then erase the lines from the shapes. Turn the sounds into simple vibrations in the air around you, then remove the air and replace it with billions of complex particles that respond to the sound vibrations. Rid yourself of the smells and detect only the gaseous molecules carried to your nose from various sources.
Last but certainly not least, rid yourself of blue, sun, ocean, etc... words have no place here.
Just what is it you perceive after all this? The honest answer: nothing. But after training yourself for a while, you may just begin to come up with an approximate image. Mine is a near-blackness everywhere, with subtle and blurred shapes moving about. This world, without the filter of perception, has no distinct parts. The area to my left looks slightly different than the area to my right, but everything is all one large system, and nothing is separate. The seagull is not differentiated from the air; Mr. Bird is but a center of activity in the beach-air-sky system. The air and the seagull are not separate, just elements of a greater whole.
In short, the human tendency to name and categorize everything in the universe is an evolved quality. To really understand the real world, you have to strip away the colors and the smells and the words we have all grown accustomed to and take for granted.
I'll totally sidestep the issue of society here-- while society certainly isn't moot, it is not what I wish to address here. We all know that we are connected to the world around us through our senses. So, we have nice little adjectives like round, green, smelly, etc. to describe the world around us. Lo and behold, combine those sensory inputs with higher cognitive functions and we have language. We have history. We have a structured way of looking at the world, identifying each part and taking note of how the parts fit together and how they change over time. We know that the sky is separate from the firmament, and that we are surrounded by air. We have even probed the smallest particles of matter. (Never mind that even with all our advanced technology, we still get hung up on silly things like race, gender and creed). We know the difference between two people.
Try to imagine not having any senses-- somehow or another, you can detect motion around you, the direction of your own locomotion, changes in energy in the environment, etc, without your five senses. How do all the parts appear to you now? You would have to do without the superficial identifying qualities like blue, soft, or hot. Limited to environmental properties such as location, energy levels (heat), velocity... you know, the properties identified in physics, you would not only lose the relative value system that your mind assesses your immediate environment with, you would also lose the notions of separateness and distinctiveness.
Go to the beach on a calm summer morning. Breath in the warm salty air. Watch the seagulls frolic about in the sun soaked blue sky. Hear the waves cresting and crashing on the shore. Then close your eyes and remove all the color from the scene in your mind's eye. See only shapes, and then erase the lines from the shapes. Turn the sounds into simple vibrations in the air around you, then remove the air and replace it with billions of complex particles that respond to the sound vibrations. Rid yourself of the smells and detect only the gaseous molecules carried to your nose from various sources.
Last but certainly not least, rid yourself of blue, sun, ocean, etc... words have no place here.
Just what is it you perceive after all this? The honest answer: nothing. But after training yourself for a while, you may just begin to come up with an approximate image. Mine is a near-blackness everywhere, with subtle and blurred shapes moving about. This world, without the filter of perception, has no distinct parts. The area to my left looks slightly different than the area to my right, but everything is all one large system, and nothing is separate. The seagull is not differentiated from the air; Mr. Bird is but a center of activity in the beach-air-sky system. The air and the seagull are not separate, just elements of a greater whole.
In short, the human tendency to name and categorize everything in the universe is an evolved quality. To really understand the real world, you have to strip away the colors and the smells and the words we have all grown accustomed to and take for granted.
Thursday, November 17, 2011
4.5head
The term “forehead” refers to the area of the human face that lies between the eyebrows and the forward area of the scalp. Since the term sounds exactly like “four-head,” people have coined the term “fivehead” to describe a higher-than-average forehead, since five is bigger than four. Numerous celebrities have fiveheads, including Jennifer Garner, Mena Suvari and Christian Slater. Now, one must not call bald people like Patrick Stewart or Ben Kingsley fiveheads, because it is the shape of the face and the head that cause fiveheadedness, not one's hairline natural hairline. I believe that if Patrick Stewart hadn’t lost his hair, he would have only an average forehead. Sorry, but in my book, a receding hairline is not reasonable enough grounds for classification as a fivehead.
It has been said that a normal forehead is one in which you can fit four fingers in between your eyebrows and your hairline. This isn’t a rational standard, though, because of the varying thicknesses of human fingers. I don’t want to measure the height of my forehead with the fingers of an anorexic person, as I might wind up having a six- or a sevenhead. Then again, if George Foreman did the measurement, I might just be a two- or a threehead.
I do have a high forehead, but I don’t consider it to be huge. From my own measurements, I’ve determined that I’m a 4.5 head. Or should I call it fourpointfivehead? That is, 4.5 fingers fit between my eyebrows and my hairline. I do have to point out that my fingers are not all of uniform size. I have unusually fat thumbs and unusually thin pinkies.
When someone comes up with a universal standard, let me know.
Saturday, November 12, 2011
Repost: Time Wave Zero and the Love of Ideas
This is something I posted three years ago in my other blog, Concepts and Possibilities. I just feel like it is relevant right now. I'm going to post it again on or around December 21, 2012.
60s aficionados may know the name Terence McKenna. I won't go into a biography here as I don't want to get lost in the details of this fascinating man. Mr. McKenna once devised an idea that the passage of time and events in history are inextricably linked. He used symbols from the Mayan calendar to build a fractal pattern that coincides with periods of disaster throughout Earth's history. He referred to these periods of coincidence as singularities, and these singularities would give way to a phenomenon he called novelty (in which the world basically rebuilds itself until the next singularity). It is a very interesting idea with some scientific merit. I recommend you read up on it when you have some time.
I do not embrace this idea as fact in any way. Whether or not the space-time continuum is actually affected by events in history is a question that leads to much speculation, and I don't have any answers here. But it is an idea with its own merits, its own beauty, one to be savored and kept in the mind until it can mingle with other interesting thoughts to possibly give birth to another beautiful idea.
We live in a polarized society that demands immediate results (that we usually won't fight for ourselves) and has become complacent in its thinking. Say you are a pro-choice individual and a pro-lifer speaks up on his beliefs on the matter. Do you automatically blow those beliefs out of the sky, deeming them completely wrong and without weight because they conflict with your own? If you are a creationist, do you shake your fists at the cosmologists who have developed the Big Bang theory, regarding them as stinking blasphemers?
One of the big hurdles we as a race must overcome is the desire to cast as wrong any idea that comes into conflict with our own. Don't get me wrong... we must take a stand against a great number of things like pedophilia, rampant crime and rising oil prices. But outside of the things that directly harm people, there is a great deal of room for movement. Let our arguments be friendly and our words well-considered. An idea should be enjoyed like a fine wine is, whether you embrace it or not.
60s aficionados may know the name Terence McKenna. I won't go into a biography here as I don't want to get lost in the details of this fascinating man. Mr. McKenna once devised an idea that the passage of time and events in history are inextricably linked. He used symbols from the Mayan calendar to build a fractal pattern that coincides with periods of disaster throughout Earth's history. He referred to these periods of coincidence as singularities, and these singularities would give way to a phenomenon he called novelty (in which the world basically rebuilds itself until the next singularity). It is a very interesting idea with some scientific merit. I recommend you read up on it when you have some time.
I do not embrace this idea as fact in any way. Whether or not the space-time continuum is actually affected by events in history is a question that leads to much speculation, and I don't have any answers here. But it is an idea with its own merits, its own beauty, one to be savored and kept in the mind until it can mingle with other interesting thoughts to possibly give birth to another beautiful idea.
We live in a polarized society that demands immediate results (that we usually won't fight for ourselves) and has become complacent in its thinking. Say you are a pro-choice individual and a pro-lifer speaks up on his beliefs on the matter. Do you automatically blow those beliefs out of the sky, deeming them completely wrong and without weight because they conflict with your own? If you are a creationist, do you shake your fists at the cosmologists who have developed the Big Bang theory, regarding them as stinking blasphemers?
One of the big hurdles we as a race must overcome is the desire to cast as wrong any idea that comes into conflict with our own. Don't get me wrong... we must take a stand against a great number of things like pedophilia, rampant crime and rising oil prices. But outside of the things that directly harm people, there is a great deal of room for movement. Let our arguments be friendly and our words well-considered. An idea should be enjoyed like a fine wine is, whether you embrace it or not.
Thursday, November 10, 2011
From Cynthia, with love (on Facebook)
Another message of "love," this time on Facebook. Minimal editing.
Cynthia M****
Hi
My name is Cynthia,how are you doing? How long have you been on the Site?How has the site treated You?Howmany luck have you gotten so Far?I am New to this...I was on the site as am New to check out the members in it and suddenly before getting far i saw your very attracting look and i was impressed to write you this lines so i can also know you better.If you are also new and Looking for a Serious and a Long term relationship ,Kindly get back to me to see if you are the Right man have been waiting For, I would love to know you better i, think we could & would have lots of fun with each other we could hang out spending time with good stimulating conversation doing all kinds of fun & exciting things as sharing our fantasies together getting to know each other being friends having a real relationship with you, you'll find Im also very flexible as well so lets talk getting our fun with each other started. I hope to hear from u soon via email so we can get to learn more about each other from there,take good care of yourself .
Cynthia
Me
Hi!
Good to meet you. I'm glad you wrote me. The thing is, one of my 5 wives is soon to die of cancer and I need to replace her. I think you would look great wearing her pearl necklace! It's ok, I was getting tired of her anyway. I have been telling her for a long time that I wanted to trade her in for a newer model.
I'm so glad you wrote to me! It is hard for me to make time for a pretty young woman such as yourself but I will try. I work a lot and, you know, having 4 other wives takes up a lot of my time too. But sometimes, we can all do things together, right? Like one big happy family. Plus my other wives are too old to have any more children and I made a bet with my brother than I would manage to have a 20th child. Do you think you could give me one? Better hope it's a boy because if not we will have to keep trying! ;)
Do you have a strong back? I have a corn field and the plowing is getting too hard for my legs to handle. Have you ever worked on a farm before?
Well, get back to me soon-- I can't wait to meet you!
Al
Cynthia M****
Thanks albert,I really appreciate your email...I am feeling reluctant to tell you more about me because i don't know how you re going to feel about it...Maybe i will let you know in my next email .....Can you tell me about yourself ?I hope to hear from you and wouldn't mind if you can write me on my private email .. cynthia_m****4dream@*****.com i hope to hear from you soon.
Cynthia
*Sigh* What country was this one from?
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
Penn State and the Pedophile
I really hate to write this article. I hate what has happened here. Yes, this article is about the child sexual assault controversy at Pennsylvania State University. Penn State is one of the most revered schools, well, anywhere. One might consider PSU to be the Ivy League school of the sports colleges. Penn State has a long-living legacy in college football, and Joe Paterno, the long-serving head coach, is the face of that legacy.
What has happened there is a disgrace to mankind. Jerry Sandusky, one time the defensive coordinator of the football team, violently and viciously engaged in sexual assaults on young boys. One of the incidents was witnessed and reported, and the chain of communication failed. Either that, or the moral compass of one or more higher-ups failed.
So what we have is that one of the worst crimes imaginable has occurred in one of the best places on Earth. What has happened now is that we are having separating the heroes from the villains. Those whom we know bear direct responsibility, three people including Sandusky himself, are facing criminal charges. In the wake of this legal action, Joe Paterno has announced his retirement after six decades of service for the Nittany Lions. Did Grandpa Joe fail the PSU community, and the entire world? I don't know. I just know I'm sorry to see him go out this way. And now President Graham Spanier has announced his resignation. Was this the right thing? I don't know. I just know it's a serious shakeup, and I wonder if it really helps anyone. I feel like the one calling the shots right now is the Chairman of the Trustees. I don't know who that is.
A great institution has taken on a serious black eye. Everyone has lost here. While I feel compelled to shed a tear for the fallen legends of PSU, I remember that our greatest responsibility is to the children of the world. When I think of that, it makes me think of a ten-year-old boy, terrified in a shower stall, having a sacred innocence violently torn from him. That's who I should be crying for. That boy should be a symbol for all the horrible child rapes that have occurred in this world. The monsters who have done these things should have a special place in Hell reserved for them. Jerry Sandusky deserves a place among those monsters somewhere near the sewers. If not there, then at least we have some comfort knowing he will spend a great deal of life in similar conditions behind bars. Once there, he can have all the sex he can handle.
What has happened there is a disgrace to mankind. Jerry Sandusky, one time the defensive coordinator of the football team, violently and viciously engaged in sexual assaults on young boys. One of the incidents was witnessed and reported, and the chain of communication failed. Either that, or the moral compass of one or more higher-ups failed.
So what we have is that one of the worst crimes imaginable has occurred in one of the best places on Earth. What has happened now is that we are having separating the heroes from the villains. Those whom we know bear direct responsibility, three people including Sandusky himself, are facing criminal charges. In the wake of this legal action, Joe Paterno has announced his retirement after six decades of service for the Nittany Lions. Did Grandpa Joe fail the PSU community, and the entire world? I don't know. I just know I'm sorry to see him go out this way. And now President Graham Spanier has announced his resignation. Was this the right thing? I don't know. I just know it's a serious shakeup, and I wonder if it really helps anyone. I feel like the one calling the shots right now is the Chairman of the Trustees. I don't know who that is.
A great institution has taken on a serious black eye. Everyone has lost here. While I feel compelled to shed a tear for the fallen legends of PSU, I remember that our greatest responsibility is to the children of the world. When I think of that, it makes me think of a ten-year-old boy, terrified in a shower stall, having a sacred innocence violently torn from him. That's who I should be crying for. That boy should be a symbol for all the horrible child rapes that have occurred in this world. The monsters who have done these things should have a special place in Hell reserved for them. Jerry Sandusky deserves a place among those monsters somewhere near the sewers. If not there, then at least we have some comfort knowing he will spend a great deal of life in similar conditions behind bars. Once there, he can have all the sex he can handle.
Thursday, November 3, 2011
Me, Cherry and her Inheritance
I found this old Yahoo conversation from my archives. I have to admit, my responses to “Cherry” weren’t entirely original, as anyone who has seen Ferris Bueller’s Day Off will attest. This is about the funniest thing that happened to me in 2005. I still don’t know where “Cherry” was really from.
cherry collin: Hi
cherry collin: am cherry
me: hi
me: Al here
cherry collin: am cherry
me: whats up?
me: is that all you are going to say?
cherry collin: no
cherry collin: whats ur name?
me: Al
cherry collin: nice name
cherry collin: where are u from?
me: NJ, USA
me: you?
cherry collin: manchester UK
me: how old are you
cherry collin: 27
cherry collin: u?
me: 32
cherry collin: whats ur email let me send u my pic
me: (censored)
me: did you see mine in my profile?
cherry collin: yes
cherry collin: have u seen my pics
me: i saw one... but if you want to send more, that is cool
cherry collin: k
cherry collin: i still have more
me: i have more too if you want to see
cherry collin: yes
me: hold on
me: email address?
cherry collin: yes
me: what is your email address?
cherry collin: cherry_collin2005@hotmail.com
me: ty
cherry collin: no use this
me: use what?
About 15 minutes later...
me: don’t want to talk anymore?
cherry collin: no
me: okay
cherry collin: am not happy tonight
me: i’m sorry
me: i hope i didn’t cause it
cherry collin: i was just thinking about my dad
me: i see.
me: is he ok?
cherry collin: he is dead
me: i’m sorry
me: i’d like to ask why you started talking to people tonight if you are feeling upset, though
cherry collin: i just thought of him now
me: ok
cherry collin: he died some months ago
me: well...
me: do you want to talk about it?
cherry collin: yes coz i trust u as my friend
me: why do you trust me as a friend? you don’t even know me
cherry collin: yes
cherry collin: but my mind is trusting u
cherry collin: i have not lied ever we started chatting
cherry collin: am an open minded woman
me: ok
cherry collin: its on my profile
me: okay
cherry collin: they are owing dad some amount of money, now they have agreed to pay but they want me to open an account in US where the money can be transferred to
me: ohhhhh ok... i think i get it now
cherry collin: ?
me: you want me to open a bank account for you, so you can put your money in there... and then you pay me a fee for doing that, right?
cherry collin: yes
me: ah.
me: and you are from the UK?
cherry collin: yes
cherry collin: they said it must be an account from Bank of America or Wells Fargo
me: and the British government owes your father money?
cherry collin: not the british govt
cherry collin: a small company in germany
me: why dont they just fork over the cash to your father's estate?
cherry collin: estate?
me: why don’t they give the money to your father's next of kin?
cherry collin: that’s me
cherry collin: and they want to
cherry collin: but they insist i open the account
cherry collin: so there US representative will do the transfer
me: why don’t you just open an account yourself?
me: actually... i do think i will do it for you... i trust you
me: i happen to have an account you can use
cherry collin: so do it
cherry collin: it can be done online
cherry collin: i should be from Wells Fargo
me: ok. but there is a condition on your part that must be fulfilled first
cherry collin: whats thats?
me: for security purposes, i must ask you to produce a corpse
cherry collin: corpse
cherry collin: ?
me: yes
me: i must verify that your father is in fact dead... so i must see the corpse
cherry collin: ok would u come over to UK?
cherry collin: and we will both go to the cemetery
me: well, you are visiting, right? just roll his old bones over here, and we can begin the transaction
cherry collin: see
cherry collin: i can’t come without this money
cherry collin: i depend on it
me: borrow the money from someone, and i will pay it back
me: if you can use a shovel, you can dig up the body and bring it here
cherry collin: but that’s illegal
cherry collin: i can go to jail for that
cherry collin: but if u insist i will try
me: you are his next of kin, the body is your property
me: what you can do is cut the body into sections and put them into a suitcase
cherry collin: but there is no hope to borrow the money except u give it to me
me: ok then... just send me a hand in the mail, along with a strand of your hair... once i verify the DNA match, we can proceed
cherry collin: sorry
cherry collin: i can't do all this
cherry collin: if u are willing to help
me: you can’t just dig up his body and cut off the hand to send to me? it’s not that hard
cherry collin: do so not all this blabbing
cherry collin: moreover am taking the whole risk
cherry collin: am sending money to who i have not seen
cherry collin: am taking the big risk
me: well, i’m taking a risk too, which is why i need verification
me: just taking security precautions
cherry collin: but i can’t meet all that
cherry collin: or would u like to talk to me on phone
me: actually, i think i’m going to step away from this deal... good luck
There were parts that I cut out for the sake of the reader’s boredom. I hope to have more of these to post in the near future. If anyone out there knows Cherry Collins, could you find out how she could misspell her own last name?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)