Knowledge is (allpowerful) progress is (omnipotent) purpose is (all-live-you) people catalyzing cataclysmic catharsis, persistently potentiating the synthesiterative flow of the universe.
On The Meaningiddy of Unity:
What Do(es) You(nity) Mean(ity)?…
Fanger than Striction
I am the one creating this: my life is not a novel nor is it, yet, quite, novel (or else we can say every life is a novel novel but that’s another essay maybe)…a work in progress: life continuously correcting causeffecting concatennecting comparing collaborating to corroborate the conclusion: Chaos! Now, you there, construct! This is nature’s order, from the higher-ups (unity): Dis order we have now is boring, depressing, look around you. There is no choice at first you are here that is given then from this moment forward (abstractly) in Spacetime, your worldline describes a curve over a complex surface pro(poppop)pagatin’ along and if that doesn’t make any sense to you then where?doinOK high-five down-low-too-slow because the future has no definite structure you cannot though you will try so hard to represent this future in your head you might even correctly concoct the concurring correlating convolutions congratulations conquering clocks but even clocks will no longer be clocks at some vanishing point and what then when faced with real Time…
(I got that can’t stop, won’t stop, in my veins)
and Connectedness and Divisibility
Here’s a lesson in arbitrariness and possibly survivorship bias: America, and therefore the world essentially even if not explicitly, still follows, religiously (re: submissively) an antiquated, anachronistic, archaic et al, division of this (misconceived) linear, causal, continuous(ly-forward-moving) model of the True God, Time, that our brain uses to process relationships (here used in the most general, abstract sense) between matter and energy (or things and other things, things including anything and everything) into discrete pieces and then those pieces into pieces into pieces and so on years months weeks days hours minutes seconds into pieces and all the pieces matter maybe or not or then we take the (many) pieces once we have experienced them (one-by-one, alllll the liiiiittle pieces, where dooo they all come from? All the little pieces, where do they all belong?) and we associate those pieces with the (emotional) context in which they come to pass: memory. We can control the representational structure/form of our long-term memory, but in our contempormodernity, we assume the structure that our history has used is the proper structure. Take a look at History and tell me with a straight face that we know what we are doing…Nature and evolution and the universe provide the answers to our questions on systems, structures, symbiotic behavior, so we either listen or lose everything.
Disclaimer: I’m not against weddings…(disclaimer 2Bcont’d)
(Irish Seinfeld): Wha’tis the deal with weddings these daze? It’s like, let’s officially begin our lives t’gether b(u)y spendin’ a year(‘s salary) plannin’ a family reunity twoice ohver (as if gatherin’ one family’s baggage into a single room izzint e-nuff ‘ta gift, plus if we’re talkin’ about travelin’ then we have baggage on baggage on baggage) Continue reading
On the Algebra of Words
Life often feels like:
A series of disappointments,
And unmet expectations.
But don’t lose Hope! Continue reading
Kingspiercing and Snowmen
“The not-art of criticism needs to change. Everything has to change, or everything should be dynamic like the universe: time is motion in one sense or dynamism these are ideas not merely words tiswhatis important here: if you can tell your brain to treat things it reads or learns as ideas and concepts outside of language, then you can explore and create new knowledge on your own with language as a tool to guide you. Continue reading
Effect (cause) to You,
Ancient Human Thought
The profound sense of self-significance leading to the formulation of the universe as some abstract not-earth, but certainly something because in this space of habitually-blue-but-not-water-blue somethingness exist the two great balls, the one of fire who must be best friends with eyeballs, raised to an exalted position because despite eyeballs’s inability to provide reciprocate offerings (staring at the fireball all day is harmful (while inducing any major-general assumptions about something based solely on sensory perception generoftenally (moreoftenthannotuhlee) makes an ass out of umptions or sumpthins, enough anecdotal evidence exists to support the following conclusion: staring at the Great Ball of Fire assiduously ironally makes an ass out of one’s eye duo thusly we derive the proverbial epithet ‘butthead’ to those blindly worshipping that which cannot be known) the great fireball still shows up and gives to eyeballs everything it can. And even though it must abdicate for that introverted, oft-veiled (finger nailed?) ball of shadows, the two balls having some sort of agreement or compromise on the great question asking is one ball better than the other (I’m playing around here wondering what representations consciousness and memory could have possibly formed in early homo sapiens, but humanity’s common perception of our ‘outer space’ remained fairly static until relatively recently on our timeline); or, perhaps, equivaliantly to these icons of egotism, is one ball more deserving of attention than its dual.
This is probably how early human minds thought about these things right? No? We tend to imagine transitions like the one to full conscious thought and fuller sense of time and self and environment and others etc. as very sudden, or we don’t think about it at all. Biologically, we share certain invariants with all life, but consciousness split human evolution because a brain with some self-awareness, self-reflection, being-in-worldness with other beings and objects, and access to long-term memory representations and associated functions to compare and synthesize (thus self-generating new constructive representations leading to creativity and imagination and multi-tasking) and retain for most of a lifetime has profound implications for human life, for all life, and even for the universe. Instead of relying on successive generations for evolution to perform its future-blind, random ‘learning’ by natural selection on entire populations using DNA as the memory record-keeper (but one the individual member of the species cannot access for learning it’s merely to pass on to offspring), the human brain can create limitless closed representations to both map in reduced form onto DNA for later generations but, locally, to store in the infinitely complex (built on unity) fine structure underlying our hyperfunctioning deep memory. Over an entire (very short relative to biological evolutionary timescales even though we live long) lifetime, each individual human being experiences, learns, and synthesizes more knowledge than natural selection can do on its own over epochs.
The BIG QUESTION OF QUESTIONS at the beginning of the evolution of human beings is then, informally, the following: Why consciousness evolved at all? We shall see…though to answer this I will first write about evolution from a general, theoretical perspective (I know I’MSOEXCITED URGONNALUVIT!).