Skip navigation

Tag Archives: reality

Our affections are built from how our loved ones react to our actions, and although every person has her unique way, you can say the aggregate reactions have a certain shape. Like even though talking about genitalia does not gross everyone, it is more likely to receive censorship than praise.

Amongst every action thus produced, there are the ones forming the «thinker» archetype, but this is a dodgy mask, for it tends to hide that thinking is an action. The very «hiding» of embodiment is an action.

To hide is a trick. Interacting with people, it gives you the upper hand if they can’t read you. It’s like throwing sand into a boxer’s eyes. But this one trick can poison other actions, like the insecure cool guy who dislikes everything just to show that he already had everything that is awesome inside.

To think, it is not demanded to lay a wall between «inside me» | «outside me». To think it is indeed demanded that you conjure the sensations your feet and hands feel. It is demanded that you hunger for understanding together with hungering for eating. It is demanded to have rhythm and reach which are deep bodily powers.

The trick of denying embodiment was folded and refolded for centuries, again and again. Its powers are distilled, but so are its risks. So have i been cut by this isolation of certain behaviours and denial of certain needs. An it is not something i can unlearn. Then i need an anti-trick, which is also an action, that reconnects this body without losing the power of this hiding.

It is certainly harder to say this than to do. And there is a part of it we can’t describe. But it begins with a listening: Besides this little voice in my head, «thinker» also has a backbone hurting a little because the chair is too darn soft, also has a certain curiosity for a certain girl would like to know more about, also has hunger and a distinct lack of disposition to go after food. My bedroom’s mess is part of my thinking, and so is the sky which has just show a hint of blue after 5 grey days. To listen to those other elements is our first little step to this trick.

Another one: Not silencing thinking. Avoid trying to control it. Don’t shut the little voice out. Let it say, and then also invite it to say about this backbone, about this bed, about this music, about this sun. Call it very close to your body, call it inside.

And then you can exercise this. A good one is the improvisation, in many forms, because when you are in that moment you feel the urgency which helps you focus. You can bungee-jump. You can talk to a girl in the street. And then think about this exercise. And then think where your thinking was at that moment, which place it was occupying. Try to feel it. Meditation (in all its flavours) are good shortcuts to it, and you can meditate about the exercises later if you feel comfortable with it.

In the end, of course, you’ll understand your thinking was already a part of you. But to see it is more important than to know it. And then again maybe this is even another way to hide my own being. Because hiding is an action. It is a trick. And thinking is an action. Repeat.

The basic methods of Quantum Physics being primarily mathematical, after this particular field of science gained steam there ensued a tide of discussion (or maybe let’s say enraged argument) over which exactly should the maths mean in terms of reality — what exactly Quantum Physics implies that sub-atomics are. My meagre knowledge of the whole issue seems to indicate that the most established idea of the problem is the so-called Copenhagen interpretation, which in the worst translation possible is this thing that says that a given particle is at the same time there and not there, that the cat is at the same time 37.0945% dead and 62.9055% not dead. So that you can stop reading now: What follows is a take on the issue by someone who does not understand Quantum Physics, nor the mathematics that underlie it and furthermore is a collection of ideas that arose while reading Terrence McKenna’s book that besides Quantum Physics also deals with psychedelic drugs, aliens and the I-Ching. So. Read More »

§ Epistemology is a subtopic of language theory.

§ Methodological consideration: do not assert something if you’ll need 15 minutes to qualify what you meant.

§ There is no antonymy in the world.

§ All certainties are negative — just bits of invariation we extract from the world. They are never central to existence. They are the exception, not the rule.

§ The current idea of an alien — big head, big black eyes, skinny elongated features — all could be explained by a too literal reading of a drawing of a person.

The (misguided) comparisons between brain and computer usually begin by stating that the brain is massively parallel, working into multiple threads of thought at the same time.

But it just isn’t.

The brain is not a massively parallel processor. It does not process more than one symbol-chain at the same time. The brain deals with only one thing at a time, and it can’t even vary this one thing: the brain is always dealing with the person’s immediate circumstance. Read More »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 107 other followers