ongoing, Diary of sorts

October 22, 2008 at 8:46 pm Leave a comment

1021 2008
Up again and still pondering.  I was pretty irritable earlier.  Interesting to realize that John was actually trying to test me for something.  He failed his.  No wonder he reacted so poorly to me telling him that he “wouldn’t get it”, the thing I’ve spent forty years on.  Of course he wouldn’t; he can’t even imagine spending forty years thinking about something, much less being or having been capable of doing it.  I wish I could actually witness his reactions to it, at least to some extent.  I don’t actually much care.  What hippy was missing was the feeling of absolute control, and what he was getting was the feeling of complete irrelevance.  No one cared much about his opinion, really; his favorite trick with the stove didn’t work, because I just went outside and left not much later, and he was left with his little pile of pot to gloat over and the breakfast he’d intended to eat in front of me.  That became a good way to escape for me, and there was no way he could completely miss that.  He afforded me a perspective.  Part of the perspective was that trusting him at all would be at best questionable.  Really the oddest thing about it then in retrospect is that there seems to have been something he needed from me, and I can’t imagine what it was.

But then think about this in the perspective of position (within an effectively infinite series of, actually) in an ordered set.  That’s what value is, with society being the ordered set–that’s why “communism” has no difference from “capitalism” or any other means of denotation.  An identity based on a foundation of royalty and obligation is the same whether or not religion is directly involved in matters of state.  In point of fact it’s a bearable argument that if a given religious argument is tenable under a given form of state then it’s supported by it, although the argument is quite weak.   The capitalist/”scientific” based set of values actually doesn’t have any moral basis.  The very idea of morality–of a workable set of protocols which will work for any set of circumstances–is at least debatable.
So essentially what we’re in the process of doing (from another perspective, no less) is forming classes.  For data processing, that is.  Essentially, anyway.  What we’re saying is that a protocol–a consistent way of reacting to ranked classes of stimuli (which are ranked according to their position in an ordered set)–can also be called a method of data processing.  Philosophy by the gun instead of by the book, so to speak.  That’s really crude but perhaps appropriate.  What we are definitely saying is that in order to perceive something by means of a lingually-derived consciousness data processing occurs.  It’s not something that’s implicit in the experience per se.

A lingually-derived experience involves a set of beliefs.

I need to try to be more faithful about taking notes.  That one paragraph cum sentence is centrally important.


Interesting how some “new”  skills become refined overnight and per se, without experience’s mitigating effect.  Most of that was the result of tablet and pen.  However, I’m still a lot better with the keyboard than anything else.

Society’s method of defining nodes.

So society could be regarded as a node from the viewpoint of a species.

So node as a specific example of a kind of logic; a chain of statements and inferences about reality.  Mode is the abstraction.  Philosophia, love of knowledge…whosit and his bloody island.


The primary problem with the establishment of logic (the preservation of stability; the usage of precedent as justification) is the assumption that consistent action and reaction to the environment is sensible, that it will produce consistent results.  Unfortunately, this brings in with it another whole batch of assumptions that may be progressively less comfortable, like confining undergarments for women with age or something.  (I was thinking specifically of a line from one of the Pirates of the Caribbean flicks.)  Baby with bathwater works in reverse, remember.  The quest for truth says there is such a thing (so you nurse the dragon).  The pursuit of stability seems to pretty much be a vote for intelligence.

At this point intelligence seems to be questionable as a survival factor without some other things.  The major one is a method of representation that actually works.  So the logic is part of the representative system.  We’ve thrown out the Lawn of Identity and replaced it with the Weed of the Unique.  Every time something is identical to something else we’ve missed something.I’m pretty sure he found my variation to be cheating, but I guess that’s the way it goes

Better than that the unique is probably in terms of error.

Again, the primary characteristic of language is that (other than merely being able to represent) it can be used to communicate.  It either represents things which are so nearly identical variation is insignificant or the hardware and intrinsic software are so nearly identical variations in stimuli are insignificant.

So what this means in terms of humans is that they’re not intrinsically terribly intelligent in terms of their environment.  Your “city guy” can’t go out into the country and start splitting wood without instruction.  As far as doing the chainsaw bit, only if he has a serious suicide yearning.
I finally managed to make myself call the Veteran’s Administration, and waiting was a good thing.  What an odd deal.

Extremely complicated micro-circuitry is tested.  It would be fascinating to know the failure rate.  Explanation of the above, the only thing I need to do is get in touch with RVMC and pay them some money if necessary to send information to the VA.  End of story.  About all the VA can do is demand another examination.  Oddly enough I think it’s unlikely they will.

Knowledge and deflorescence; in some senses John is quite utterly a virgin.  For one thing he can’t imagine that he’s not the leader, the center of the group.  One of the things he did the other day was one of his ritual games; he had me sit by the stove, which was too hot.  So I went outside.  It was odd to (having gathered quintessential data over years) just look at him and the way he assures himself of his identity.  The little pile of pot, that someone else would have to ask for a pinch of (and he’d probably deny them).  He used to like to show off bits of his money or brag about it.  I didn’t see that in evidence.  A somewhat childish selfishness.

That was interesting; I used the pen/tablet seemingly successfully and then the entry just disappeared, reminiscent of Windows 3.11.  My target right now–utter than getting a lot of money from the VA (I sat staring into space there for about a minute)–is tying all the knots.  Unified Field Theorem indeed.  One of the offspins of it is this ability to more-or-less read people’s minds.  That’s a really bad phrase for it, of course.  I avoid showing it.  There’s something fairly obvious that I find myself increasingly contemplating.  Not that I express it much; hell, I avoid expressing half the things I think, simply because I have to assume that I have an audience.

Entry filed under: philosophy, writing and thought. Tags: , .

New gaming site up: from today’s mutterings and notes

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed

%d bloggers like this: