January 18, 2011 - January 11, 2011
Nothing new underneath the sun. Indeed.
| pete 2011-01-13
It is a fight to the death. While I tend to criticize Republicans mostly (because how statist they tend to be), Democrats can legitimately be described as psychopathic. They want the total state. State control of any and everything, no matter the evidence against their view.
The consequences? If you run afoul of government edicts, no matter how trivial, you could wind up dead. Sufficiently resist a mere traffic ticket, and the cop will execute you. You can apply the same scenario to countless other ways government interferes in our lives.
Democrats want the government interfering or controlling every aspect of my life. Therefore, and maybe without even realizing it, Democrats want to kill me. (Republicans just want to kill... ok, not now...)
This is even more true if we're talking about society as a whole, because Democrats are openly hostile to the only thing that is really keeping literally billions of people from dying: the market.
| J. W. Helkenberg 2011-01-13
I find it rather uproarious you have decided to argue that psychopathic behaviour is limited to one side of the isle, or to one side of the political dialogue. I think what you might mean to say is, perhaps, that one side launched a psychopathic propaganda machine and that the other side has been playing catch up ever since (King George would agree with me here, but for different reasons). I would think that you were a better student of history - everybody knows the wheels fell off with McKinley and his mailers (the first time in our long and storied history that political clubs were disbanded in favor of the now prevalent mailer and attack ad approach, thank you Mark Hanna).
Anyway, what you are railing against is a symptom, not the actual ailment itself. Fact is, hardcore animosity and violent rhetoric sells. If you want to change the tone, eliminate Neilson ratings for newscasts. Oh, no way! Can't do that! How would we know if the advertising dollars are being well spent?
Let's be real here, we are living under a media system that is 100% focused on sustaining its own interests, and when the chum is in the water the sharks even attack each other, for the smell of blood is the smell of money, and the producers are already licking thier chops (or rotating in new teeth, in the shark analogy) and there is nothing either 'side' can do with regard to *that*.
It is not the political process that is decaying, nor the people (so much), it is the fact that the Fourth Estate is now run by greedy self-serving anti-politico's whose only interest is profit and whose integrity is defined by thier bank account statement. Period. Nothing changes that. Or, maybe a bunch of bloggers can stem the tide, but if they can't sell Tide I seriously doubt they are going to get any play.
This message brought to you by Apple's new iPod. Remember: "Psycopaths may spend most of thier time listening to an iPod, but that does not mean the iPod is to blame for psychotic acts of violence."
Whew. That makes me feel A LOT better.
| Pete 2011-01-13
It occurred to me:
Advocating socialism is at once a death threat and a suicide note.
| J. W. Helkenberg 2011-01-13
Bad, bad rhetoric. I mean, is it any wonder our society is disintegrating into violence and chaos with videos like this to feed hate filled hearts? This was produced by High School Students for god's sake! Stop the madness already!
| IP 2011-01-13
"I find it rather uproarious you have decided to argue that psychopathic behaviour is limited to one side of the isle [sic], or to one side of the political dialogue. I think what you might mean to say is, perhaps, that one side launched a psychopathic propaganda machine and that the other side has been playing catch up ever since (King George would agree with me here, but for different reasons)."
Ah. Canadian or Brit. I don't care which one. Neither of you know how to write anymore. "I think what you might mean to say is, perhaps..." uh uh. What I mean to say I say. If you didn't see it in what I said, I didn't mean to say it.
You're an ass, and I think maybe it's about time you got off my site. You use up an awful lot of bandwidth saying absolutely nothing of value. Please go away.
That's being polite. If you prefer, I can take you apart one molecule at a time. That would be boring to my regulars, though, so I'm, well, being polite.
Or should I find some four syllable word that says "go away" in terms you can understand?
| superobserver 2011-01-13
IP: That is the spirit. Neither side, from underneath a rock.
Words, well, yes. I see that bells can still be made to ring, even when they are cracked. Fewer words better than many, the tremendous volumes of bandwidth I overtake speak volumes to your knowledge of bandwidth.
I am old, so old that it hurts to remember I never learned to read right, and that words swim around like fish out of school. Maybe every other post I could insert some puffery, like, "Your words are a clarion bell bemoaning the filth of inaccuracy and the righteousness of certitude." I could do worse than to say it would not be puffery, "my mentor"; it is sagacity that is evidenced in my effrontery. I do not sling cunning salvos? Perhaps you have been wounded by your own victory?
But aren't you the god of this domain? Particles are your specialty - remind me why poetry was banned from the Academy. Or don't. I am using this thread as more evidence of my existence. In that, I aim to make punks famous. It will be an incidental type of fame but one could do worse.
Also, won't you admit the first 27 seconds of this video bear a hyperbolic resemblance to the current difficulty the right faces in picking a viable Republican candidate (presumably to oppose Obama) in 2012? I write more clearly in Mandarin, btw. Such a lucid language. RISC versus CISC, that is.
[The rest of the video weakly resonates with the predicament, and helps understand the 'kids take' a little more well.] haha
| Gnardo Polo 2011-01-13
The psychopathy does seem related to education, doesn't it? The more educated you are (or think you are) seems to be proportional to the amount of utter bull you are willing to accept. By education, I mean degrees and schooling, not knowledge or thinking.
So it comes out in different ways. The left seems more inclined to violence, but then again, the philosophies of the left practically demand it. At the same time, the right seems unable to confront anyone forcefully, and for a similar reason: their worldview demands true tolerance.
It's why we keep wondering when the right will truly defend themselves.
Good news: the less schooled masses, with the availability of more information, are becoming more truly educated, and are showing signs of thinking for themselves.
Which means that this is about to become even less civil than it is now.
| Diogenes 2011-01-13
IP: two compliments in one day! I hardly know what to think! Made my week, at least. [although I am at that other place with the same initials, whose saying rhymes with "Go Ducks"]. Thanks.
Helkenberg: [You are about to see the difference between a Hadrosaur's and an Allosaur's repsonses] Pete got it directly, but you have missed the point. He sums it up in one sentence. Hostility and rhetoric are of no consequence in this battle. That "issue" is a distraction, and it is intended to be a distraction; and that's part of what's so dismal about this whole week's business.
A renaissance lit scholar named Stephen Greenblatt referred to the Elizabethan culture [wrongly, i think, but that's way off the track] as "totalizing and totalitarian." The left's project is totalizing, totalitarian, and millennialist: when they have complete control over us all, and we are entirely obedient to their ideas, then perfection will reign on earth. This is why they are aligned with the Islamists: both are identical in these characteristics. And all means are justified in bring the new man into being, including killing me or forcing me to behave their way.
I am not a number, I am a free man!
republicans? If they arent' statists, fine. Otherwise, out with them.
But the strategy, tactics, and ends of the left are inhumane, anti-human, psychopathological.
C.S. Lewis's greatest work was "That Hideous Strength" -- too bad he, like so many, relied on magic to defeat the antagonists. There is no magic; there is only us.
What is astounding is that our society is NOT disintegrating, as you claim. It is in precarious straights, but it holds yet. I worry that it might disintegrate, but it is not doing so now. In fact, the fact that we are fighting back is highly encouraging.
Think for a moment what an accusation of racism is. It is intended to destroy the other person and his ability to respond, while at the same time forcing him to defend himself on fraudulent terms selected by the person who plans to destroy him. Psychopathy. Pure and clear.
| IP 2011-01-13
"But aren't you the god of this domain? Particles are your specialty - remind me why poetry was banned from the Academy."
Yes, I'm the god of this domain. And particles ARE my specialty, which is why the Academy ain't so fond of the poetry of particles anymore. Particles choose. Which means the universe isn't an abacus. It means that being the god of this domain is equivalent to being the god of every other domain. And because I'm a poet above all else, I am a particle who not only chooses but chooses beautifully.
Why the whole world quakes when InstaPunk roars.
| IP 2011-01-13
I'm not going to expose your secret. But let me tell you a family story. My mother went to Hio State. Her parents went to Ohio State. One of my best friends, a Marine, lives in Columbus and sometimes closes his emails with the phrase "Go Bucks."
I can't tell you how long and cruelly I have suffered with Ohio State's battle against the Pac 10 and other awfulnesses. I just have. Like all Buckeye fans.
This probably means nothing to you, unless it does.
Sorry. Didn't mean to interrupt your day. Or anything like that. But who's that fat coach they just hired for the Wolverines? Sorry. Forget I said anything. My brother-in-law is a Wolverine. The way he talks about Buckeyes, I'm thinking he must be a psychopath.
But you know how that goes. Unless you don't.
| superobserver 2011-01-13
Diogenese, the antagonism I 'evidence' as I lash out against "the intolerable certainty of an incontrovertible future" is triggered by one of your statements:
"In fact, the fact that we are fighting back is highly encouraging."
This statement, after you deny the disintegration. The enemy of people is no 'thing' it is a 'state of mind' really, that is my hypothesis. But a state of mind is a 'near thing': like hunger and the drive to reproduce are states of mind (over which we exercise little or no personal control), can we honestly say that we understand the stability of the human state of mind, outside the narrow and restrictive context of our currently stable cultural norms? There is no fight to be had, there is no victory to be achieved, because what is impending is not a political crisis, it is an existential one.
Particles are restricted to only one law (really), and to this one law all Man-made, Natural and Emergent phenomena are bound: Entropy is never decreasing.
Now, human society has a well-ordered formulation: based on predictions regarding modes of conduct, we think that aside from a few maniacs, anarchistic chaos is a far removed 'mental mode of conduct'. Well, buddy, I am here to be the bearer of some bad news: It is *patently not the case* that the inheritors of this great nation are (at all) well equipped in the formulation of complex instruction sets. Rather, they instantiate reduced (specialized) instruction sets - as a result of this, the granularity of our ever-improving technologies (+blogs, +videos). And by granularity I mean simply that the family doctor used to show up on your doorstep, because he had no 4-ton superconducting magnet (MRI) in tow. Where did the MRI come from? Man increasing the entropy of the universe (or, at least, not decreasing it).
John Adams brother wrote a little book about how all political societies seem to achieve a point of maximal political stability, and then proceed to evolve rapidly into totally anarchistic out of control fallen empires (no matter how big or small, the natural tendency of political economy is akin to performing a highdive into an empty swimming pool). wish I could recall the title.... he remarks how he was afraid to publish it, for fear of it being embarrassing to him and his brother. I mean, who could buy such an idea, that the more effective you are the closer to anarchy you become? -->then I read "The Goal" by Goldratt and knew immediately how our cultural 'fate drama' was going to play out.
Ants are in the sugar.
Anyway, what matters is: My (personal) measurement of this thread indicates that your reaction to it is a 'fait accompli' at best, and a symptom of the above mentioned irreversibility at worst. To avoid at least tinkering with this construct (spontaneous cultural decoupling) is an indication to me that people will not treat the possibility that the US government is on the verge of a fractionalization that (must/might) result with large numbers of people decoupling from societal norms and, as predicted elsewhere, behaving in ways no deterministic model can predict.
Fine, it would take more than a conspiracy of dunces at this point in time to destabilize the aggregate demand placed upon a hyper-industrialized and global commodities infrastructure, even in the midst of catastrophic natural disasters Rio Tinto can make an adjustment. I know they can; also, didn't that Obama chap just give us the best estate tax rate since the 1930's - I mean, as a pragmatist it is a victory, right?
Every jot and tittle counts for something.
The only way you can stop the liberal machine now is to pray that the sun has a coronal mass ejection strong enough to fry electrical devices but not so intense that it kills more than a few billion people
[Note: The liberal dream is realized in the machinery itself, is in fact a dormant aspect of the technologies we are adopting in the private sector. How can we stem the demand for the liberal dream/nightmare when it is coupled to the information technologies we depend upon to deliver us our 'facts' and our 'facebooks'?] ----> We cannot. Rather must brace for it and make a plan to outlive it.
Obviously fiction! Just a poet-deviants ramblings. Nothing to be troubled with, doesn't even reference the current 'players' and VIP's who really matter. Like the 2012 republican Presidential Candidate.............still waiting.....
| Diogenes 2011-01-13
IP: I've been here since 1978 and met Woody! One time you wrote about the locution "THE Ohio State University" and I was going to explain it, but thought better than to waste everybody's time. Hah! Yeah, you got me. But it isn't a secret [and I'm not as clever as your hadrosaurus joke, either].
Oh, the fat Wol... uh, coach at least knows not to mention us out loud. Maybe next year will be fun. And the SEC curse is now over, at least, sorta.
Superobserver: I remember Chris McCandless and his self-chosen nick name. And Tim Treadwell. Talk about disintegration. Why have you changed your name, but not your assumptions?
| superobserver 2011-01-14
I changed my name because, well, doesn't that make me an anonymous poster? Hilarious that anyone thinks anything is anonymous in the pipeline. I mean, I can set up a proxy and I can turn other peoples computers into slaves and I might possibly be able to produce a polymorphic virus that implants during the handshake protocol and hides itself in bad sectors on your hard drive, resulting ultimately with a complete information meltdown worldwide. But nothing, I repeat *nothing* is anonymous.
Also, I am wondering if the irony is lost on me: the image of the two people, one stabbing the other in the back, on "The New Civility" post. Do any of you know the website that image came from? Anybody?
Well, I think that is enough serendipity for one morning.
| Eduardo 2011-01-14
You are a lugubrious bore. I hope your entropic, existential particles figure that out. Soon.
| superdisturber 2011-01-14
Let a painter stand in for me on this one. That is all I will ask of you right this second.
Or reference your previous collateral experience regarding the series of paintings by Thomas Cole, "The Course of Empire".
Srsly, what phase are we in?
I have my own fame to worry about (congrats on being you, whoever you necessarily are). The internet is free, though locally everywhere fascist in the most personal sense. Sadly, Zarathustra has something meaningful to say about this.
If only I could remember it.
| Zarathustra 2011-01-14
"I teach you the overman. Man is something that shall be overcome. What have you done to overcome him?
"All beings so far have created something beyond themselves; and do you want to be the ebb of this great flood and even go back to the beasts rather than overcome man? What is the ape to man? A laughingstock or a painful embarrassment. And man shall be just that for the overman: a laughingstock or a painful embarrassment. You have made your way from worm to man, and much in you is still worm. Once you were apes, and even now, too, man is more ape than any ape.
"Whoever is the wisest among you is also a mere conflict and cross between plant and ghost. But do I bid you become ghosts or plants?
"Behold, I teach you the overman! The overman is the meaning of the earth. Let your will say: the overman shall be the meaning of the earth! I beseech you, my brothers, remain faithful to the earth, and do not believe those who speak to you of otherworldly hopes! Poison-mixers are they, whether they know it or not. Despisers of life are they, decaying and poisoned themselves, of whom the earth is weary: so let them go!"
| apotheosis 2011-01-14
It's as though Penny ate an entire thesaurus.
| Eduardo 2011-01-14
"It's as though Penny ate an entire thesaurus."
HAHAHAHAHA! That was awesome.
| IP 2011-01-14
Cute. So you're the new determinism. The Joker standing above the inevitable model of entropy as the slayer of nations. That's your kick. Being superior to it all.
I don't doubt your capacity to be a vandal because it's deep in your philosophical nature. Just like your profound misreading of Nietszche, who was more outraged satirist than philosopher. His uniqueness was that he was a German with a sense of humor. Something you don't have, to your fatal detriment. You have wit and think it a synonym. It isn't.
But not every human being is a vandal, and not all developments in physics and society are accounted for by entropy. There is also a force which puts things together and makes them resilient against destruction.
Only a fool would claim at this moment in time to understand what is inevitable in the dynamic brew technology has created in our world. It MAY spiral into decline, but it may also rejuvenate, empower, and liberate the ordinary people who have historically been victims of increasingly centralized and psychotic power structures.
This isn't wishful thinking. It's a function of an exponentially increasing set of societal variables whose interactions no one can confidently predict, unless they're egomaniacal delusionaries surfing on a wave of academic language.
Your assumption is that when the variables escalate into the realm of chaos, i.e., unpredictability, the unavoidable result is accelerating entropy and therefore total breakdown.
But the history of Human culture is actually the generation of successively better metaphors for the way everything in the universe works. Your arrogance aside, we could be on the brink of metaphor breakthrough, one that offers promise rather than pain as the inevitable result of human effort.
One thing the entropy champions find hard to explain: all those doomed and dying empires, forever falling apart in the past, somehow keep advancing -- not linearly but on the whole -- oddly nondestructive effects like increasing lifespans, the comfort that makes possible art and contemplation, and the freedom to live lives less as slaves of the power lords and more as individuals who can aspire to meaning and even a sense of the divine.
I know you think you're intimidating. But you aren't. If I'm reading our commenters right, and I think I am, you're coming across as kind of sad. I don't doubt you're smart, in your way, but that's a key point. Smart is part of the equation but it's not the whole equation.
The people you're trying to dominate here aren't victims of anything. They're parents and citizens who have a very good sense of what their lives mean, whether you think they mean anything or not. And that's a much more powerful force than your patronizing scientism can ever comprehend.
One final point that may be lost on your nationality, whatever it is. American exceptionalism. There has never been a nation like this one, whose citizens made a distinct positive choice to come here and compete for what they most value. Which is to say that we might just escape all the unbreakable rules of history and survive for yet another lustrous day.
Besides, your scientific postulations are bankrupt. There is the physics of particles, to be sure, known as quantum mechanics, but a hundred years in there is still no quantum theory that explains the precise behavior of particles. It still looks very much as if individual human consciousness has a role to play in the deepest behaviors of the universe.
In other words, you are "super" only in your mind. Not here. And not in the physics that anyone can irrefutably confirm.
Note that I haven't even attempted to ban you. I just suggested you should go away. Because when all is said and done, you're just not very interesting.
| Alfa 2011-01-14
"It's as though Penny ate an entire thesaurus."
Lol. Bang on.
| J. W. Helkenberg 2011-01-14
Brilliant, I haven't even listened to that Obama litany and I know already that what you just elicited in me cannot be superseded by the words of any supercilious pompous ass. No way.
Just a few points:
"...like your profound misreading of Nietszche..." They are just words, and Kauffman's words at that. I cannot misread them, though I can misjudge them. But then we arrive back at that problem of determining whether or not humans in this age are adept at comprehending (recognizing) complex instruction sets; both our minds apprehend with perfect clarity what is changeless (in a book, for instance) while we may trade (unfriendly) blows over what is irreducible in our personal prejudices. Our "meaning" is personally derived from what is changeless.
Entropy puts things together, not as an aphorism but as an irreducible constraint over which nobody exercises any authority. Complexity is a measure of entropy, and while you see the 'progress' as representing an additive, positive, anti-entropic series of contributions (to wit, the library of human awareness grows larger all the time, chock full of fact and wisdom and (negation of falsehood)), I see this process of 'improvement' as arising from a diagrammatic necessity tied to the operation of a cosmic law, again one over which no person exercises any authority.
You stated: "But the history of Human culture is actually the generation of successively better metaphors for the way everything in the universe works." It is also, maddeningly, the discovery of processes that are not explained by the 'metaphor of the moment'. Your 'better' arises from a quest to describe what cannot be predicted by the current model, springing from a black hole (literally and metaphorically) the arrival of a new interpretation comes at the tit of the current inadequacy. To be the 'discoverer' of any advance is also the greatest arrogance anyone could ever hope to promote ----> laws are inherent in the data, and the verbal description of the data table is always restricted to being a verbal description of the elements---> the system that constrains our awareness is the same one that enable us to transcribe our personal metaphor into a string of symbols; enabling a meme (or just a string of words) to be stored and transmitted necessarily constrains 'understanding' to the mental declaration of a word (or string of words).
To quote you: "Only a fool would claim at this moment in time to understand what is inevitable in the dynamic brew technology has created in our world." What is inevitable is complexity, what is relative about complexity is that it is a personal judgment as to what 'complexity' is a measure of. Necessarily, emergent phenomena either are or are not predictable (based on possessing a sufficiently general description you ought to be able to determine the probable outcomes for a system comprised of finitely many units, said units possessing many individual degrees of freedom, but whose total energy (as a global system) is tied to some overarching constraint. Specifically, Moore's Law is a general schematic operator that tells us what the processor speeds must (likely) look like over time, and it is pretty damn accurate). Is it safe to generalize when we have enough empirical data to confirm the trend? Not when we are describing dynamical systems of humans, apparently.
You said: "The people you're trying to dominate here aren't victims of anything."
Now you have really got me laughing. Of course *they* are not victims, they have had everything they ever wanted. It is their grandchildren that are doomed ----> but what culture, decoupled from morality and common sense, isn't doomed? Maybe an eternally more complex culture can avoid entropic forces?----> I guess grandpa will never fully understand why porn is so addictive, being how he turns his head and would rather die than watch any of that torrid stuff. Kids, however, love it (make it!). In fact, for many it helps offset the cost of a higher education. It is comforting to know there are alternative earnings strategies for so many of the kids today. *Hot*.
Also by you:
"It still looks very much as if individual human consciousness has a role to play in the deepest behaviors of the universe."
That does not sound very conservative to me. Are you suggesting that the human mind may possess faculties that enable it to engage in activities that could (for lack of better terms) only be described as "6th sense-ational". If I am reading *you* correct, I think I can confidently state, to God and Country, that some poster (whose identity I cannot confirm) just awakened to the dawn of a new synthesis. But, my good anonymous friend, if you go there, to the world of dreams, don't forget to take a thread with you. You'll need something to pull you back down from the Atman.
Your words: "I know you think you're intimidating. But you aren't. If I'm reading our commenters right, and I think I am, you're coming across as kind of sad." I *am sad* you fucking deuce, my culture (apart from some pricier gated places and such) resembles Somalia more than it resembles Academy! $14,000,000,000,000.00 is enough to scare a *reformed* Monetarist, let alone a pragmatist!
You all misread me; my sadness prevails. it is not as an enemy of conservatism that I encroach on your reliquary.
| 2011-01-14 04:26:00
it is not as an enemy of conservatism that I encroach on your reliquary.
...you're really kidding now, right?
| IP 2011-01-14
Actually, I'd love to debate you. But I'm faced with one of two cases: 1) you can't write; or 2) you can't think.
The fault is not mine. I defy you to find anyone who can make sense of your comments.
I write understandably. You don't. That makes you the fool, not me.
I do have a theory: you're just one more obnoxious Brit. But I'm prepared to be wrong if you can find some way to write a single goddam comprehensible sentence.
| Lake 2011-01-14
IP, this site seems to be a Strange Attractor. Penny has not been gone long, and this bizarre distraction crops up. My instincts always suspect a conspiracy... or an inside job.
But we can tell that you're genuinely distraught and have been making deep points about the current travesty, so I don't think it's you, spinning another fascinating (if long-winded) character. Not anymore.
Hard to know what to make of it, though. I, too, am waiting to hear a basic, simple, and honest point from it.
| Pete 2011-01-14
(back to,the actual conversation, if that's ok...)
"Bad, bad rhetoric"? Hardly! Provoke the opposition to go as far as they're willing to take things. We need them to show themselves. Better that people understand the true nature of their surroundings and the players. (Referring, of course, to the electeds. Last weekend's tragedy had nothing to do with politics.)
I think Rendell is 2 for 2 lately ("wussified Americans" and telling the press to grow a few more layers of skin.) Again - and I'm someone with little confidence in elected Republicans - the problem starts with the left. If our most intimate acts must be politicized, how can you not expect violent backlash. While there is such a thing as a "Christo-fascist", most - by far - "right-wingers" just don't want to be legislated and regulated into sin and blasphemy.
That, and deep down they know all tax is theft, even though they'd never go quite so far.
| Reagan's Rotting Corpse 2011-01-15
"They are assassins targeting our lives and liberties. They hate us. They intend to kill us."
"I do have a theory: you're just one more obnoxious Brit."
"I'm from the country. We have a greater critical distance than most of you. That is, you get too close and we back away or make YOU back away. What we country folk have noticed about middle easterners (sic). They stand too close to you in the subway, in line, and in every other situation too. You city people may be inured to it. You're so close to everyone every day you create the necessary distance by living your lives looking at the sidewalk or sucking on your cellphones. We aren't inured to it. There isn't anyone in any tavern or pool hall in south Jersey who doesn't know that the guy who stands too close to you is preying on you or seeking to dominate you. That's when we push back. Sometimes very damn hard."
| Reagan's Rotting Corpse 2011-01-15
Oh, and who can forget this classic?
| Diogenes 2011-01-15
All y'all chummin' the water, hoo boy.
"Ich liebe Den, der freien Geistes und freien Herzes ist: so ist sein Kopf nur das Eingeweide seines Herzens, sein Herz aber treibt ihn zum untergang." F.N. Also Sprach Zarathustra
Those are not Kaufmann's words.
Pete, in one way you're right: we ought to get back to the discussion. On another hand, maybe the dispute with [S]He-of Many-Annonymities [M. Helkenberg] is very precisely to the subject. If not, please think of me as a beagle getting distracted by a scent... and mixing my prior metaphor, I'm afraid.
Helkenberg: Your actual expression of fear about our $14T debt and its consequences for our descendants makes me think that the rest of your outpouring is a defense mechanism you've developed to protect your mind from a world beyond your ability to understand and a life beyond your ability to control. Get over it, dude; your answers don't answer and your obfuscatory logorrhea cannot protect. Face that abyss and be free.
You make a lot of assumptions. You say, "They [commenters on this blog] have had everything they ever wanted..." You have no idea of the depth of your ignorance; I'll leave it at that lest I become impolite. You attempt to demean IP's oblique introduction of Heisenberg into your plaster of popular physics. These abstractions regress forever: all answers, even contemporary physics, are products of human consciousness. Godel answered this-- what? -- 100 years ago. Jeez, don't waste your time trying to cope with this reality by grasping onto yet some other product. It is identical with somebody thinking that their deep empty anxiety will be cured, this time for sure, by buying a new car or having a bigger home, or getting drunk one more time. Just face that abyss buckaroo, and when it looks back at you, that'll be you in the mirror.
As Joe Bob Briggs says, I'm surprised I have to explain this to you.
Anyway, Helkenberg, I have this hunch that you're a bright young guy at a decent school trying things out. Keep trying. You'll grow up. If you are indeed young, well sorry about what my parents' generation did to you, money wise; but life has always been nothing but work and suffering. The Protestants figured the work part out, to our benefit; everybody Christian or Jewish already knew the suffering part.
Read Milton and Samuel Johnson [Rasselas is a good place to start with ol' Sam; figure out how it relates to Bob Marley...]. Paradise Lost, really. Try it. Milt knows things you don't.
On the anonymity of IP: hah! Most commenters here know who he is better than I, and I think with about ten minutes work, I could have a map to his house. It takes time to understand the blog's actual project.
Oh, and Aristotle's culture resembled Somalia a lot more than it resembled your idea of Academy... and neither resembled anything today, anywhere.
The other side of the sociopath [a slight difference form the psychopath, in my private usage] is the entirely unexamined sociogene. That creature whose superiority is energetic enough to create immense value [I'm not talking about perfection, though]. On May 1, the Church of Rome will beatify John Paul II.
It is American exceptionalism that I refuse to give up. I would rather be poor and attempting to work through the world under my own responsibility, with little government and lots of freedom; than to "have everything I ever wanted."
Lake: Strange attractor indeed. I guess I'm contributing to the strangeness.
Pete: sorry for my part in the distractions. Tax is theft, yes; no regulation into blasphemy and sin, yes and yes again.
IP: I don't think he's sad, unless he's our age [in which case... Holy Mackerel]. I just think he's young and has read a couple of books. I think I've read them too, but I didn't memorize them... the "Atman" b-s gave it all finally away.
But you know, each and all, "encroach on your reliquary" will be exactly right if we lose the battles we are in and are facing. Everything even the best of us has thought or done will be replaced by the darkness claiming to be light; and this little bit will appear exactly as a reliquary appears to a Sotheby's appraiser. So once again, face that abyss! Work through those ineffective defense mechanisms!
| J. W. Helkenberg 2011-01-15
Those are not Kaufmann's words.
Exactly, but they are words none-the-less.
$14T debt, obfuscatory logorrhea cannot protect; faced that abyss and I *am free*.
You make a lot of assumptions
--->forecasting by its very nature consists of imprecise statements regarding some (authored) evolutionary operator as it transforms a field of real entities. The scope of our generalization is determined by our choice of words (elements).
[I do] demean IP's oblique introduction of Heisenberg---> I make it exact.
Goedel answered this-- what?
I will destroy you and your obnoxious ignorance! Speak not of things you conceptualize only through the action of a WORD. I *become incompleteness* when I manufacture a finite string. Summate that abyss, or don't.
Re: All finite systems (of logic) close around their own (self-evident) solutions (via the limit imposed by *scope*). Incompleteness (in your sense) is not a product of a physical reality, any more than Zeno's Paradox is a serious hindrance to accuracy of my arrow, rather it is a byproduct of continuous (classical) reasoning, and while this makes for fun mental acrobatics, it creates less than zero value for those whose business it is to find closed solutions for real world problems.
Read Milton and Samuel Johnson-----> BE THEM (oh, I am sorry, this reduced instruction produces a null pointer in your mind. Well.)
The global mind is simultaneously real.
Have you ever killed a bear, up close, with a spear? I know someone who has - are his thoughts available to me? Him, under the squelching fire of an August sun, at Paradise, me near a tree, him hanging from the tree, rope tied to two wooden spikes in his back, dangling, in the sun, with no water nor food of any kind, on a "vision quest". I refused taking a sip of the hanged mans tea....his cactus tea.
What, exactly, am I doing there, with my brain mere feet from the brain of this laughing man, this superficially pained man?
The classical mind says that I am just sitting there, drunk or not drunk on the spirit of my molecules, my context constrained to a word-view; by possessing a vocabulary I reconcile my state to the expression of a particular admixture of tokens. But what is thought, and vision, and what is the biosemiotic transaction(s) involved with processing empathy, and rage, and intuition?
Das Ich ist unrettbar. Die Vernunft hat die alten
Götter umgestürzt und unsere Erde entthront. Nun
droht sie auch uns zu vernichten. Da werden wir
erkennen, daß das Element unseres Lebens nicht
die Wahrheit ist, sondern die Illusion.“
On that note: We have a finite number of participants in our closed Earth game. I got a friend right now in NYC that wants to turn (this) you guys into a 'big deal', to be heard not just by those present in this cave, but by millions, and potentially billions, of ardent suporters. We create the supporters in advance, and then we tell the supporters what to do and what to think, in exactly that order. And they do it, you included, and so this *is* the Age of Reason, and if you don't want to be spit out as lukewarm (at best) and fetid (at worst), prepare to become one local mind. Say it: "I am all minds everywhere." Say it again: "I am all minds everywhere."
Of course, you can prove my (hook shot) assertion incorrect, because my ability to see all minds is not extensional, and so therefore you readily awaken to a personal fact, that I am inane and just pulling your chain. BTW, it is hard not to at least try to free those who are chained; at the core, Death lashes all beings to Her House.
*****Your assumption is that when the variables escalate into the realm of chaos, i.e., unpredictability, the unavoidable result is accelerating entropy and therefore total breakdown.*****
I used to think this was the rule, but no longer. There is no escalation, save from the perspective of those whose local judgment alone determines the relative pace of advance and decline. What there is, however, is a steady progress from indeterminacy to superselection (einselection specifically but suffer for me). The words used to assign meaning to our investigations are themselves the critical constraints. A far greater complexity and far greater chaos is introduced by a semantic system that conveys thought as thought, via the 'over-word'. How? Across a network of minds whose [O2] nuclear spin states are (to varying degrees of susceptibility) simultaneously coupled (entangled). Instantaneous communication ---> locally, barely better than cell phone speeds, but across cosmic distances the advantage of instantaneous networks become obvious. It (as I.T.) is manifest in the local creation of the 'missing exotic state of matter' ---> our node (on the cosmic-scale network of Real 'exotic matter machines') becomes extant as soon as we know how to address the other non-local but simultaneously real machines that maintain this special state of matter ----> they (the machines), do not communicate at the speed of light, at all, because light communication is Grandpa shit and sooo yesterday that I literally cannot comprehend it.
Such a machine is possible due to the fact the human mind operates on exactly the same paradigm; our physical brains exploit this exact property of quantum scale interactions. We are entangled with everything that has existed previously, and all that will exist, as a function of the fact the total energy of the cosmos is a conserved quantity.
The future self is inevitable, whatever form it takes.---> No Joker here, a man in a hole perhaps but no Joker.
*But you know, each and all, "encroach on your reliquary" will be exactly right if we lose the battles we are in and are facing.*
You are soooooooooo goddamn right, but based on your current perception of what constitutes 'thought' and 'transmission of thought' I don't think you are at all equipped to win the War, even if you win every single battle.
By the way, I have made Steers of Bulls, and I have smelled the cauterizing flesh, and kicked the balls from the dirt into the awaiting jaws of my hounds. I am Country in the oldest sense.
| slasha 2011-01-16
What could be more sociopathic than people who mass consume mass produced mass information...and mistake it for reality?
| superobserver 2011-01-16
Why beat a dead horse? Practice makes perfect.
I was relating my recent series of outbursts to a friend of mine, a professor of physics, as I helped him set up an experiment. What he is looking for is a quantitative approach for modeling voltage discharges measured for supercooled fluids undergoing a rapid phase transition from liquid to solid.
The experiment consists of taking a u-shaped tube, filling it a little more than halfway with H2O, adding a few grains of ordinary table salt (non-iodized) and then placing the tube in an ethanol cooling bath. We watch as the temerature of the fluid approaches 32f then down, down down to around 0f. It is still a fluid, just sitting there in the tube, stubbornly refusing to acknowledge its own desire to become a solid.
So, the prof suggests I take up a pencil and gently strike any given side of the u shaped tube. I do this, and as if by magic the liquid becomes a solid-slush.
Now, this is boring as shit right? I mean, who the fuck gives a flying rats ass about this?
The pro.f senses my total lack of enthusiasm, as my only reason for being there was to tell him about a bunch of dunces I met online. Well, he then asks me to wait, because he tells me that in this experiment of his, all the answers I seek are to be found. He then hooks up a voltmeter to the water in the u-shaped tube (by placing one bare wire in one side and one bare wire in the other, then plugging these wires into his voltmeter).
"Watch," he says, "and learn." He supercools the liquid and strikes the side of the tube and, voila, he buries the fucking voltmeter. Buries it. Like a veritable lightning strike.
I then *explain to him* that the disorganized molecular lattice of H20 molecules at the superfluid point has a potential organization that is *not realized in the superfluid state*; due to the absence of a nucleation site the crystalline lattice structure of water cannot evidence itself; there must be a precedent, an initiate, for the molecules to instantiate a new (internal) relation. When he taps the glass, the added energy is enough to induce a phase transition on the part of a single (or several) molecules, thereby the state rapidly transmits across all the molecules and the lattice becomes self-evident. I also then designed to explain that, in the classical model, the temperature gradient is relative to gravity (because the ethanol bath is lower than the top of the tube) and that the NA and CL ions (it is a slightly saline solution, remember) have no place where they fit in in this new H2O lattice, and therefore they are expelled at a velocity that is proportional to the rate at which the lattice 'spontaneously forms' - the voltage is registered as the motion of a charge (na or cl) moving in the space near the wire, and that given a few specific quantities being fixed at the outset, it should be easily demonstrable that the voltage induced by motion of charged particles being expelled by a lattice that forms relative to a temperature gradient is given by a first order equation.
Bo-Ring. Fucking lame show already. How the fuck does this help me understand Deutsche-bag lamers who are fundamentally obsessed with bi-polar politics? He then says something very profound, which has moved me to treat you all with (quantifiably) more respect.
"In dem Gitter sie sind, sie wissen es nicht. Sie wählen nicht ihre persönlichen Beziehungen und Experiment nicht. Weep neun Tränen für Na, Cl, oder H2O. Das Experiment erlaubt kein Wandel. Der Versuchsleiter muss sein!
Then I woke up to my Japaense bantam rooster, Phaedrus, cockle-doo-a-dooing. I love that rooster. When it gets really cold at night, I bring him inside and have him sit next to me as I work online. He is utterly humanized, and when I get emotional he crows. Sentience is (also) about registering unspoken sentiments. Also, the prof and the experiment are real - what makes you think the dream is any less real?
| Lake 2011-01-16
Phaedrus? Is that a clue? Steve, is that you?
| 2011-01-16 06:43:00
| J. W. Helkenberg 2011-01-17
Das gericht ist Braucht!
Of course that superobserver idiot meant not to say a superfluid, but a supercooled fluid. Head scratching, indeed.
| Brizoni 2011-01-17
"Of course that superobserver idiot meant not to say a superfluid, but a supercooled fluid. Head scratching, indeed."
What do you call that? Preemptive auto-satire?
| IP 2011-01-18
You still can't write. Which means either that you can't think or that your thinking is opaque to others and of use only to you.
Therefore, you prefer to react to what others write, always from an imaginary position of superior perspective, a perspective which your own elaborations of physics suggest to be impossible.
Simultaneously, you seek to show off superior knowledge and assert that knowledge cannot exist except as egoistic delusion.
All your supposed learning has made you into a mere performer, which is what you seem to decry here.
That's why I say you are sad, regardless of your age. Because you are not a very good performer. You're the magician who is so innovative he makes a great show of putting a rabbit INTO a hat. All the theatrics can't hide the fact that the trick is a bore.
Your only insight is despair. Which is a prize purchased with far less verbiage than you expend. Hopelessness is the easiest possible interpretation of the human condition. It really doesn't matter how many circuits of Robin Hood's barn you navigate to get there. The same destination could be achieved with a simple "Oh shit."
But I do enjoy what I call Cosmic Narcissism, the super-intelligence which describes the entire universe as a chaotic meaningless mess inferior to its own embrace of thanatos, as if some Mount Everest of perception had been skillfully climbed, when the facts (yes, facts) are that a similar decision might have been made quite simply and easily on far less sophisticated evidence by Cro-Magnon man, thus saving us all the delusional achievements of impossibly incompetent human consciousness.
Without which, there would be no Venice:
You want to talk about bears. I want to talk about civilization. Which you equate with chickens, everything always inferior to yourself.
Sad. In your cosmology, the height of universal achievement is YOU. And your penetrating insights about super-cooled fluids.
Wrong. There IS a meaning to the human experience from which you are inevitably and permanently locked out. It is the story of human drama, achievement, courage, and aspiration. A meaning that can't actually be refuted by any of your stunning attempts at rhetoric.
Which will far outlast the peak represented by your derivative, presumptuous, and, yes, inane cosmological theory organized around the godlike brilliance of one J. W. Helkenberg.
One final word of advice. Learn to write, or you will be forever crushed or swept aside by a human capacity for faith that transcends all your loftiest illusions about yourself.
There's no need to rebut you. You rebut yourself in every strained, self-aggrandizing paragraph.
| superobserver 2011-01-18
Ok you stupid fucking whores, listen up. you implied me retarded and naive for 'fearing' $14T. Ha! You must think me from the Ganges - I don't bathe in shit.
Well, maybe one of these days it will be *you* who learn to see like me? Biznatches.
Just a rattle, that is all, and the spike back to 21%. Remember (last time), under Reagan, those interest rates?
I am too stupid to read all that shit one word at a time, so I have to see it all as one word. Get it? You see at least a page at a time, right? Maybe both pages? Well, a book is a fractal and all I have to see is 15 words or less and I have seen the whole book. Any 15 words.
The whole 'future book', that is, which is a fake book by your interpolation.
Words die with the gods, but humans live (on/in) stories.
Hate it; know that my insertion here is a necessary occurrence: My inadequacy is the construct that evidences your superiority. That must be your new speech writing tactic, btw. "The Republican inadequacy evidences the Left's superiority.... not!" Must refocus the message on Eliminating Laws.
Re-form the line!
damn shame about Camden, also. I am sure you will rush down the County Line and park in front of some local taverns and make good with you locally spent dollars, right?
LMFAO at the GTFO treatment of the cops. Not. I am crying over America's apparent loss of appreciation for the old ballads and dance tunes.
I give you the link below because you have never seen it. That is the liars paradox (because you see the letters just now), and mixed with my lie is an investigation of what is inevitable. This *now* exists as a result of your previous existence; your life amounts to little more than the serial addition of discrete events to the Library. The 'dedekind cuts' made by your 'works' (all y'alls works and deeds) now reveal themselves to be serrated, gashed wounds in the near-dead body of our State (*Lady* Liberty is my Goddess). Over-bandaged and under-nourished she is defiled at every penstroke, ignored and now almost completely forgotten. Our worship of her amounts to little more than fucking her in every orifice and cutting her up a little more while we do so.
Sad thing is, only a few people treat her this way, but all America is watching, and everybody wants a piece of the action. Sick, fucking revolting nightmare.
The future is just another inevitable consequence of the past, just as this portal (instapunk), itself one of a finite number of possible worlds (.com, .net, .edu.....), *pulled me into itself*. Not my vision - IT's vision. And we are all ensnared.
BTW, isn't that a new twist on the ol' jester theme. Your twist, my cultural inheritance.
| IP 2011-01-18
"Ok you stupid fucking whores, listen up."
Finally. The real voice behind the hyper-intellectual mask.
Precisely as expected.
. Good God. When
people realize that responding to an argument legitimizes that
argument. I've said I'm in a bad mood. This is why. The righties who
think they are smart are dumb as rocks. Like Hotair
and Ace of Spades.
There's no need to respond. What have lefties done in the last ten years? Wished openly for the assassination of George W. Bush. The rape and murder of Michelle Malkin. The public gynecological examination of Sarah Palin and her daughter to determine who gave birth to Trig Palin. John Kerry made jokes about shooting Bush. So did intimates of Chuck Schumer, insisting he'd put a bullet between Bush's eyes if he had the chance. Alan Grayson insisted that Republicans wanted sick people to die. Good, tolerant liberals hoped Laura Ingraham would die of her cancer, and every time Cheney entered the hospital, the Huffington Post orgasmed with blood lust for his death. I won't go on. And we're seduced into responding to their charges that Tea Party passion is out of bounds? Really? REALLY? HOW FUCKING DUMB CAN YOU BE?
These so-called liberals are fucking sick. There's nothing to answer to here.
Why I'm sick of the new media conservatives. They're exactly like Eric Holder, who can't possibly imagine that Islamists want to kill us because their religion tells them to. The lefties want to kill us for our beliefs. Same thing. Doesn't take hundreds of words of argumentation to suss that out, Ace. All those hundreds of words do is provide new targets for semantic sharpshooting, which semi-literate conservative bloggers are hardly well positioned to refute.
Don't you get it? There's one part of their construct that's correct. They're smarter, better educated, and more rhetorically adept than Ace of Spades and AllahPundit. And Glenn Reynolds, bless his bland, mayonnaisey, oh-so-objective heart. They're waiting for your objections. Because as soon as you lay down your half-assed arguments, they'll eat you for lunch.
Why I'm in a bad mood. Apart from Krauthammer and Jonah Goldberg, there are no first-rate intellects and writers on our side. You're all just meat for their grinder, and I'm in despair.
So shut the fuck up about Tucson. Every time you click a key on your keyboard you do us harm. STOP it.
. I've been blogging
for a long time now, an eternity in Internet terms. Last week I had
reason to cite an early post that dated to pre-Internet times. In the
process I stumbled on a 2003 entry from this blog's precursor site, and
when I finally reread it today I knew I had to post it again here in
2011. I don't know why. I'm counting on you guys to tell me the reason
for my sense of compulsion.
So tell me. Why am I thinking of all this right now?
P.S. My better half reminds me that the archetype of the women I'm remembering was Jackie Kennedy, who wasn't typical by any means, but she was an ultimate lady of the time, and she's as much a part of the Camelot legend as her husband was.
If you can, forget the horrifying image of her climbing across the
trunk of the presidential Lincoln trying to retrieve a piece of her
husband's skull. (What the "weaker" sex can do in crisis is flat-out
astonishing.) Forget the historically iconic instruction she gave
John-John to salute his father's casket. Forget the pain of losing a
baby in the full glare of worldwide publicity. Forget her constant
valor, dignity, and
lifelong grace. Remember instead that she
was a good sport about the
political back-and-forth of the day, which used to be something like,
Back when even liberals had a sense of humor. Instead of veins filled
cobra venom. But women with a sense of humor have become like liberals
with a sense of humor: a vanishing, vanishing breed.
I miss them. The ladies, not the liberals. I have one, but one is a very small number.