Posts filed under ‘writing and thought’

The “countdown” begins

The first meaning would be what “Type 7 or VII” is.  The countdown mentioned is to the usual timeframe; over 64 hrs old, that type of Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome, very close to 0% chance that I’ll live longer, especially due to the combination of weakness and being unable to even partially ‘defend’ myself because ‘it’s not a very serious disease (especially since it’s from so long ago).  The ‘defense’ failed utterly. And it actually is a better idea to take care of someone younger first.

 

I’m also taking ‘antidepressants’.  For bipolar, right?  No.

For epilepsy (also often also used for the treatment of depression).

April 17, 2018 at 5:33 pm Leave a comment

Humans and Protocols

This study has, to me, entirely different meanings than those assigned to it.  One of the unstated assumptions, for instance, is that “good” scientists can be defined by some criteria or criterium (it almost seemed like the latter was indicated).  The main one is once again that proximity at the least implies a causational relationship.  It doesn’t, and the directionality of causation isn’t a given.  At times studies have been done that were like saying a stream being polluted caused mining.

“We are extremely susceptible to how questions are posed.”  That would be the likely result of the phrasing indicating the kind of framework of judgment that’s expected.

For right now, I basically wanted to earmark the article and say this; language is the DNA of society, just as necessarily humans are the cells.  There is practically infinite evidence that mammals default to using language, and a fair amount of evidence that life forms that aren’t warm-blooded don’t.  (This also depends on your definition of language.  Technically, the usage of pollen can be counted as language, although it’s not “realtime” compared to ordinary human usage.)  Cold-blooded actually do use genetic transmission of knowledge, warm-blooded don’t do as much (there is some real evidence that we have a genetic predisposition to find the nearest thing we can and act like it, “we” being warm-blooded; humans, of course, tend to be a tad helpless at birth).

The kinds of protocols, then, that humans use as components of a group are fairly limited.  First of all, there are task-oriented and generalized protocols; those two broad trees.  A task-oriented protocol is short-term by nature.  We’re perhaps most familiar with such protocols in situations involving money, modernly.  Spend or save?  Does saving make sense in sense of such-and-such a percentage of profit in terms of such-and-such a percentage of inflation?  Generalized protocols involve “bonding”, basically.  They do something to establish identity.  Remember the roots of the word “identity” here.  Identical means the same.  Identity in social terms means relative position in an effectively infinite sequence of ordered sets.  However, being analog the way we sloppy humans are we tend to summarize things like this with “He’s rich and an a**hole,” and so forth.  (He’s actually a very nice guy.)  Identity in term allows some automatic decisions.  This makes things easier.

And an actually final note.  One passing comment was that humans will consider the negative before the positive.  In a situation involving survival, you’ll always try to make the right choice.  We model on things.  That means we get taught.  Like, by adults, or what passes for them.  Rewards, that is, are handled by the same person as the one who gives the punishments.  And for the first few years, this doesn’t tend to be terribly consistent.  Well, I’ll back up.  It’s no problem at all getting punished.  Getting the reward is a great idea and may never happen.  I’ll say it again.  Humans learn. More than that, language/society evolved to its present condition because (at least in a specific environment) it was the best way to survive, for one and all.  A multicellular organism was best for a lot of situations once again.

–Glenn

April 19, 2009 at 7:55 pm Leave a comment

Huh

My apologies for the title; I couldn’t resist*.  This is a rehash, because Mil Millington’s Things My Girlfriend and I Have Argued About actually started the whole deal, and was hysterically funny.  Yes, in fact, if nothing else I do expect you to follow the second link, or at least do the search on Google or whatever.  It is also a book.  The book is fictional.  The website is not, or not entirely.  I can assure you that both characters are well, characteristic of the breed.  I used to have an e-mail subscription to the site, so I assume Mil quit updating it.  I did communicate with him.  I think he might have been taken slightly aback by my bizarre sense of humor (nah, don’t ask).

The point is, too, that as the article actually points out “Tom Sawyer” used “this method” to plan out books.  “Mark Twain” (I’m sorry, I don’t remember his real name right off and I’m too lazy too research it) is more likely to be the subject, since Tom Sawyer was one of his characters, and he did write books based on the audience’s reaction to his travelling road show comedy gig.  We might just finally mention that the method itself wasn’t particularly new; it’s just that the writer was an American, and therefore automatically prejudiced (no matter the color involved–and the green dudes are really weird).

–Glenn

April 19, 2009 at 1:47 pm Leave a comment

Chronic Pain

This is one of those days.  Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome means some nerves pinched in the back, sometimes; sometimes critically.  Orthopaedic physicians, osteopathologists–that sort of people–agree with the lowly (note the absence of quote marks, in criticism of my fellow presumable non-believer of a blogger) chiropractor the Syndrome exists.  And today I can barely walk.  Pity about the compound fracture in ’76 that made things so much worse, too.  O well.  Or something.  I certainly believe in pain.

–Glenn

April 12, 2009 at 2:22 pm 2 comments

On Intelligence

In reply to:
http://nootropics.com/
Is a biological being with all of the physical characteristics distinguishing the human…discernibly human without the effect of society?
A scale representing the relationship between irregular data inputs (reality, if you will) and a regular representational system is interesting because of its implications regarding value.  I doubt value is intrinsic.
This directly implies–pardon me, would seem to–task-oriented valuation.  Relativity, in a word.
Intelligence may be best defined as an ability to form sequences of protocols, then, that best fulfill the task at hand (probably beginning with survival).
Some of these protocols for the human necessarily involve interaction.
The hypotheses involved, then, in the mere discussion of the subject of the enhancement of intelligent, form an effectively infinite field of definitions.  Best of all–what would a “genius” confronted with the “real world” do?  Try to join in, or hide?
–Glenn

April 6, 2009 at 4:10 pm Leave a comment

An Unsurprising Alert: Watch It

There is a rise in spam, fakes, come-ons and general duplicity on the Internet.  It seems to be connected to the latest economic troubles.  Although it is entirely unsurprising, it’s a good time to be especially alert for phishing tactics.  And if it seems to good to be true…

–Glenn

March 2, 2009 at 8:37 am Leave a comment

Cultures and characteristics of communication (especially with respect to the presence or absence of writing)

The mention of orality comes from following a link to one of my posts.  His contention is that basically it’s a lack of the written word (which is a gross over-simplification).  I think that language developed from the need for organization, is quite certainly what distinguishes a society (an organized group, I think) from a chaotic collection, started with the necessity to coordinate for hunts and then was used as a repository for other protocols.  This allowed the construction of formalized definitions which pretty much had to be constructed on the principle of exclusion (definitions depend more on what is regarded as irrelevant than including all available information).  Language also allowed the storage of such prot0cols in steadily more complex fashions, which allowed more and more complex prot0cols.  Religion and its propensity for rhymed and rhythm-modulated lines aren’t accidental; define reality and you may have a better chance to survive.  Without society, humans could hardly fill their current environmental niche.  (You know, wholesale destruction and slaughter and that sort of thing.)  This also allows–with the over-pr0duction that’s allowed by the steadily more efficient protocols, because storage allows evolution–constructing a society with defined niches (like the cell/amoeba bit, where single cells can form a multicellular organism at need).

And as far as the most basic and first reason for the “discovery” and use of writing I suspect it’s simple.  It has to be learned.  If you have a form of communication available only to the few you have several advantages.  From all we know of history, one dividing line for the elect was the ability to read.  Unless you were a noble (or a politician), of course.  Or are.  Then it was and is the ability to peddle influence.  Nor do honesty, tactics and strategy make any sort of stable mix.  Just as without exception all records indicate–as does logic–that the introduction of aggression requires its usage by all parties in inter-societal relationships.

As a final parting or Parthian note…there aren’t two choices.  You don’t just fight or flee.  There are three poles of choices.  You fight.  You flee.  Or you submit.  Submission is called society.  And if you try to fight society you lose, while if you flee eventually it catches up.  The best part, of course, being that it really doesn’t give a damn.  That’s just the way it works.

That’s what I meant, Carlo.  Just couldn’t find a way to comment.  And that will give you a better idea of what I was talking about.

–Glenn

February 13, 2009 at 5:22 pm Leave a comment

Older Posts