He hadn't written anything in nearly a year. No. That wasn't entirely true. He had written something. Many somethings. Many somethings tantamount to nothing. They were no more than writing exercises. He would start with an idea, a wonderful idea, a brilliant beginning and it would go nowhere after a day. His flirtatious romance with inspiration was just that. His obsession with her kept him in withdrawal when she left and his sense of direction deteriorated. In his languor, he wondered why he kept to such deleterious circumstances. And then, she returned.
Will read your latest entry later (rant on MWT thread will explain why I'm skipping bits).
I suppose I'm the only one who reads a movie's script instead of watching the movie
Not quite, I read scripts in order to fill plot holes, find quotes and sometimes when I'm not quite motivated enough to see the movie but want to give the idea a burl. But this does not happen often.
The colorless thingy is supposed to make no sense- Chomsky's point when he wrote the phrase was to demonstrate that a grammatically correct (according to English) sentence can be parsed but nothing meaningful need be conveyed.
As for Finnegan's Wake...let me recover from uncovering the Pandora's box that was the schema for Ulysses before I come back to Joyce!
Can't complain about the hours though. It comes with having a career.
Catman, Chocolate, and the Ginger Bun
Once upon a time Catman and Chocolate were sent on a magical quest to search for the powerful, magical Ginger Bun to help save their plagued town. Catman had a magical cloak woven by his half-feline birth mother that made him invisible. Chocolate had magical armor forged by his half-confectionery father that protected him from all harm. "We shall not fail in our quest, Chocolate," Catman proclaimed so that all could overhear. "Indeed, Catman, Son of my Mother," Chocolate replied in agreement, "for we are strong and unbeatable and handsome." "Indeed, Chocolate, Son of my Father," Catman echoed in agreement. "We are strong are strong and unbeatable and handsome for we raised ourselves as orphans in spite of our evil stepparents for our parents were unjustly murdered." "Indeed, Brother of Mine," Chocolate added in agreement. "For we lived a hard life, we shall triumph over all." "Indeed indeed, Brother of Mine." "Indeed." "Indubitably." "Indeedily-doodily." They went on their quest, seeing through all illusions without reason and triumphing over all hardships without defeat and stealing the hearts of all maidens across all the lands without vener--... They finally came upon the hallowed grounds of the Ginger Bun. "Perhaps we should rest now, Brother," Chocolate suggested, "for we are near the Ginger Bun and we shall need our strength should enemies wish to do us harm." "Indeed, Brother," Catman agreed in agreement. They snared a light brown rabbit for dinner and roasted it, not knowing that they were about to eat the Ginger Bun.
I dislike "suburban" (or contemporary) minimalism, convoluted inflation and pure abstraction, which is probably why I like Calvin and Hobbes, which is undeniably one of the best comics ever. And thus, a display of pedantry with a hint of moronism.
An overview of phrenological convolution cartography from an ontological perspective
Shape of skull = shape of brain
An overview of quotidian Sinological nutritional regimens from a geo-agricultural perspective
Rice in the south. Noodles in the north.
A fiscal approach to the prognostication of unpremeditated outcomes of dual hexahedral incertitude
There's a reason it's called craps. (I'm not sure if that word is censored or not, but it's not hard to guess what it is.)
Optimistic prospects exclusively contingent on profundity within the global information infrastructure
Congratulations, you must be the only person ever to submit 4 grad-level theses in the space of a single document :P
Questions though:
1) Why ontological as opposed to anatomical? 2) I've never played craps so I didn't quite understand. Should stochastic be in there somewhere? 3) I'm a big Calvin and Hobbes fan myself. 4) No we're not: forty-two!
I'm still wondering what I'm going to do for my senior project when it comes, let alone what I'm going to do as a grad student.
1) I might have been thinking physiognomy (Shape of face = shape of character) when I put ontological, as both (phrenology and physiognomy) are interesting forms of "scientifically" justified discrimination.
2) I always though that stochastic implies that there is an entropic system which has unpredictable results, which is true to this case, so hmm... That's why these things are peer reviewed! In craps one bets on the numeric outcome of the dice with different styles of betting. If you win big, you win big (up to 30:1 payout), but you're more likely to lose money even on the safest bets. And there are a load of fallacious "theories" on probabilistic outcomes. That is, the house always wins.
4) lol. That is exactly the thing I am talking about. The Earth was destroyed in all possible universes.
1) Hm, I get where you're coming from. That's not how I understood ontology was all, but then again I haven't studied this formally so it's highly likely that I've misunderstood.
2) I'm not a betting horse (har har), so I had to go over the "craps" description again. Now I get it!
1) I might be misunderstanding ontology if I'm getting it wrong. Isn't materialism or physicalism a facet of ontology? That's what I'm really getting at.
I have a(n obvious) scienctific bias/starting point when it comes to philosophy to have a better grip over certain aspects. (Such as emergence or emergent properties to understand metaphysics.) Otherwise it goes over my head (like morality).
2) I just find craps interesting.
4) Haven't a clue what modal philosophy is.
I should finish my comment on Star Shine 2, but I don't feel like picking up on it now.
Once Around a Starry Night
The harmonica is blown. The guitar is strummed. Bob Dylan can't sing, but what does it matter? Outside the window the stars shine bright, twinkling clearly on this starry night. Down below and on the road the fireflies race, glowing white and flashing red as they dance and weave in the fading light. In the distance the torches are lit as a bass riff swells. Accompanied by a tenor sax, you get the feeling all is well. Outside the air is chill, but it will be warm tomorrow. At the darkest of the night with the rush of wind, the clock ticks down to the last minutes of the last hour, though you wish it would rescind the ending of the day. You wish you could play the piano as well as she can play it. Or just hear her fingers on the keys one more time, before you have to say, "Good day."
1) Oh yeah, I get it now. I've only read anything much about "social" ontology (realism, empiricism, idealism, transcendental idealism etc.) and so had not considered that discussions on the nature of physical being were part of ontology too (duh). It should have occured to me as I constantly have to juggle Platonic-dualist rhetoric and its incompatibility with my own perspective which lies somewhat closer to neutral monism.
As I further embrace the scientific bias in seeking more rigorous moral 'neutrality', given my belief that the proper practice of medicine is the practice of compassionate mediation, I also find most layman moral arguments increasingly difficult to relate to. Colleagues who burst out with "You can't do that!" and "That is wrong!" irritate me but at the same time I have to acknowledge that they are part of the tides that we swim with or thrash against. I mean...if everybody in medicine sought neutrality we wouldn't ever know what we were doing!
4) Apparently, modal philosophy is the philosophy of discussion of possible worlds and hypotheticals. It concerns itself with the proper manners of arguing and interpreting arguments that involve hypothetical worlds i.e. the validity of statements such as: "if she hadn't stopped suddenly I wouldn't have had that accident" or even "if only I had answered that one question correctly, I would have passed my exam!" I made the joke because "in all possible worlds" is a bit of a catchphrase in modal phil.
This, along with speculative cosmology, goes right over my head because I'm the kind of person who says que se-, actually no, more like quis est, est*.
It's hard to enjoy (hard) science fiction without speculative cosmology. But I don't ascribe to speculative cosmology as much as I apply it to "Man is a microcosm."
Not exactly sure what you said (____ is, is), but I know what you're trying to say.
Forgot to post this in preface to my last entry right after the Star Shine remark: Bonus points if you can guess the band and song playing with the bass and sax. (There is an acoustic version and the album version is over 8 minutes long.)
A Preface
He didn't touch the hard stuff, not the quintessential ephemeral nature of life. No pain. No suffering. Why would he? He never experienced any of it. He never died. He never knew anyone who died. He never dealt with death and wasn't afraid of death. He had never been poor or mistreated. He never had a crisis. And these writers who write of death? What do they know? Death of innocence? His lady wouldn't hear of it. Nothing was ever like it was in the books. No character was real enough to be real. Not to him. Life was good. So why try so hard? He once heard that to be great, one must write the gritty stuff. He never experienced any of it. But when she left, the angst he felt was overwhelming. No. He wouldn't touch it.
Very fun to read, your writings are, Gantic. Every time I try to visualize what you look like in real life, it ends up being a bizarre mix of T.S. Eliot, Søren Kierkegaard, F. Scott Fitzgerald, James Joyce, Kurt Vonnegut, and Juan Jose Arreola. :P
It's hard to enjoy (hard) science fiction without speculative cosmology.
Yeah, I think I'm too hardcore now :P
I should probably revise and acknowledge rightful limitations and allow appropriate license before I wake up one day and find I've led myself into a reductive snare from which I cannot escape.
That's a good list, Parsat! And I don't dare hazard a guess.
I don't know who Juan Jose Arreola is, but I suppose that's not surprising. I doubt I look even slightly as distinguished as those authors. I like to think that I look more like this.
Mind on Autopilot
I once attended a Greatest Minds of the Universe conference in orbit around Alpha Centauri A, as a reporter. It was supposed around Antares but the humans were being whiny about how a binary star system was more interesting. The first speaker posed, "A D'deridex-class warbird fires upon three Negh'var and five Vor'cha and destroys a Negh'var and a Vor'cha. How many Negh'var and Vor'cha are remaining?" Someone, a human, no less, shouts out "Zero!" confidently and a wave of groans washes over the audience. I didn't get it.
I'm guessing I'm partially responsible for the revival of "When I see your face..." amusing as that thread is...
Princes of Another Time
Who's to say where the wind will take you? "Why are you listening to U2?" I asked. He looked morose albeit relaxed in his recliner. "I don't know, which way the wind will blow," he sung out in unison with the chorus. "When's their new album come out?" "Next Friday."
Understandably, this one might be hard to understand... It's really lame though since I've been reading too much questionable content. (Was that pun even lamer?)
Corazon del Local
Unsense the barristar that divaided your hartria. Thouw it haurt snow, cauld sholt huurt shoult hingiang on. Time pastis will heal thu wund twofuld. Or juke mulp. Willcome yoursoul to cofe Corazon del Local.
