Joseph Littleshoes wrote:
But hey, not to worry, you all have a nice, charming, quaint, little island, pity about the weather but then you cant have everything:)
Charming? Quaint?
Sure, at least in the early 70's it was. Outside the big cities anyway, lake district, Cornwall, Kent & Sussex were very scenic and i like the cobbled streets and old buildings.
Course i have to agree with Charley Windsor, about the abomination that was put up around St. Paul's in London, i agree with him about 'modern' & especially 'post modern' architecture.
Have you actually ever been to the UK or are you believing everything you see
about the UK on the TV?
Philosophically, i don't 'believe' anything, i either know something for a fact or i doubt it.
In reality, the UK is a stinking dump *full* of crime, drugs and gun & knife
crime! It's also full to the brim with chavs, radical Muslim Pakis and drug
dealing, violent niggers.
Same can be said for most any large metropolitan area. Though your phraseology tends to indict you.
And our supposed "jewel in the crown", London is a hell hole that could only be
improved by the detonation of 10 nuclear weapons above it.
The UK is a dump.
*shrug* one persons opinion does not a reality make.
--
JL
Sunday, January 24, 2010
My future as a writer?
sa wrote:
I do not know if anybody would call it an ambition if I say I want to
become a writer. But certainly it is an ambition in my opinion. But my
aim is not creating great poetry but writing novels. Fact and fiction
combine to create something totally different. What I mean to suggest
is that a writer shold also be a reformer of his society.'
JL replied:
Perhaps only if the writer feels that his art, his writing, needs a bit more macho justification, he is not just an artist he is a "reformer"!
Iirc both Hemmingway and Picasso struggled with this idea of making art socially relevant and the artist something more than a social parasite existing off the sufferance of the ruling class & bourgeoisie mediocrity.
Personally, i have always done the decorative much more easily than the 'relevant' ..... in my case i have neither the stamina nor the enthusiasm to be a 'reformer' preferring instead more the role of the 'decorator'.
"Lets get a little more color in that socialist realism shall we? and could we have the suffering masses move a bit upstage? don't block the handsome young hero's of the revolution...... 'Sondhiem! ...send in the clowns!'"
--
--
Mr. Joseph Littleshoes Esq.
Domine, dirige nos.
Let the games begin!
http://www.dancingmice.net/Karn%20Evil%209.mp3
I do not know if anybody would call it an ambition if I say I want to
become a writer. But certainly it is an ambition in my opinion. But my
aim is not creating great poetry but writing novels. Fact and fiction
combine to create something totally different. What I mean to suggest
is that a writer shold also be a reformer of his society.'
JL replied:
Perhaps only if the writer feels that his art, his writing, needs a bit more macho justification, he is not just an artist he is a "reformer"!
Iirc both Hemmingway and Picasso struggled with this idea of making art socially relevant and the artist something more than a social parasite existing off the sufferance of the ruling class & bourgeoisie mediocrity.
Personally, i have always done the decorative much more easily than the 'relevant' ..... in my case i have neither the stamina nor the enthusiasm to be a 'reformer' preferring instead more the role of the 'decorator'.
"Lets get a little more color in that socialist realism shall we? and could we have the suffering masses move a bit upstage? don't block the handsome young hero's of the revolution...... 'Sondhiem! ...send in the clowns!'"
--
--
Mr. Joseph Littleshoes Esq.
Domine, dirige nos.
Let the games begin!
http://www.dancingmice.net/Karn%20Evil%209.mp3
I just happened across these 2 links.
http://firthessence.net/movies/StrangeFruit.mp3
http://cdn1.libsyn.com/beautifulnoisebroadcast/durasoul2.mp3?nvb=20090506065856&nva=20090507070856&t=06c10d2a1637f8cb507c8
The first is Billie Holliday "Strange Fruit" and the second is a song i cant help but compare to the Strange Fruit. I always bracket with it when i hear either.
Etta James .... "At Last my love has come.... lonely days are over... and life is like a melody...."
The second link goes on and on and on and is an entire program i think but the first song is Etta James singing.
Choose from some menu equivalent of "save target link as" to down load and save to your hard drive.
http://firthessence.net/movies/StrangeFruit.mp3
http://cdn1.libsyn.com/beautifulnoisebroadcast/durasoul2.mp3?nvb=20090506065856&nva=20090507070856&t=06c10d2a1637f8cb507c8
The first is Billie Holliday "Strange Fruit" and the second is a song i cant help but compare to the Strange Fruit. I always bracket with it when i hear either.
Etta James .... "At Last my love has come.... lonely days are over... and life is like a melody...."
The second link goes on and on and on and is an entire program i think but the first song is Etta James singing.
Choose from some menu equivalent of "save target link as" to down load and save to your hard drive.
alan wrote:
Tartare sauce, anyone got a recipe for it?
Alan
There are a number of variations you might want to try.
Sauce Tartare
4 -5 hard boiled egg yolks
salt
freshly ground black pepper
1/2 pint (1 & 1/4 cups) oil
1 tsp. vinegar
2 tbs. mayonnaise
1 tbs. chopped chives.
Mash the egg yolks to a paste with the salt and pepper, gradually work in the oil, add vinegar, and lastly the mayonnaise and chives.
Sauce ravigote ou vinaigrette
1/2 pint (1 & 1/4 cups) oil
3 tbs. vinegar
1 tbs. capers
pinch of parsley, tarragon, chervil, chopped chives
pepper
salt.
Mix all well together. If desired, one ma add to this sauce 1 tbs. worcestershire sauce and 1 chopped hard boiled egg.
Sauce remoulade
1/2 pint mayonnaise,
2 tbs. Dijon mustard
1 tbs. chopped gherkins
1/2 tbs. chopped capers/
pinch of chopped parsley, chervil, tarragon,
1/2 tsp. anchovy paste.
Mix all the ingredients together.
Sauce Gribiche
--------------
Place the yolks of 6 freshly cooked hard boiled eggs in a basin, crush
them and work to a smooth paste adding 1 tsp. mustard and a pinch of
salt and pepper, then proceed in the same way as for Mayonnaise by
adding 2 & 1/4 cups oil and 1 & 1/2 tbs. vinegar.
Finish the sauce with 3 & 1.2 ounces mixed chopped capers and gherkins;
1 tbs. mixed chopped parsley, tarragona and chervil; and the whites of 3
hard boiled eggs cut into short Julienne.
Cambridge Sauce
---------------
Finely pound 6 yolks of hard boiled eggs together with 4 well washed
fillets of anchovy, 1 tbs. of capers and 1 tbs. of chopped tarragon,
chervil and chives in equal proportions. Add 1 tsp. mustard and proceed
as for mayonnaise by adding 5 fluid ounces of oil and 1 tbs. vinegar,
season with a little cayenne and pass through a fine sieve.
Place in a basin and whisk until smooth then finish with 1 tsp. chopped
parsley.
--
JL
Tartare sauce, anyone got a recipe for it?
Alan
There are a number of variations you might want to try.
Sauce Tartare
4 -5 hard boiled egg yolks
salt
freshly ground black pepper
1/2 pint (1 & 1/4 cups) oil
1 tsp. vinegar
2 tbs. mayonnaise
1 tbs. chopped chives.
Mash the egg yolks to a paste with the salt and pepper, gradually work in the oil, add vinegar, and lastly the mayonnaise and chives.
Sauce ravigote ou vinaigrette
1/2 pint (1 & 1/4 cups) oil
3 tbs. vinegar
1 tbs. capers
pinch of parsley, tarragon, chervil, chopped chives
pepper
salt.
Mix all well together. If desired, one ma add to this sauce 1 tbs. worcestershire sauce and 1 chopped hard boiled egg.
Sauce remoulade
1/2 pint mayonnaise,
2 tbs. Dijon mustard
1 tbs. chopped gherkins
1/2 tbs. chopped capers/
pinch of chopped parsley, chervil, tarragon,
1/2 tsp. anchovy paste.
Mix all the ingredients together.
Sauce Gribiche
--------------
Place the yolks of 6 freshly cooked hard boiled eggs in a basin, crush
them and work to a smooth paste adding 1 tsp. mustard and a pinch of
salt and pepper, then proceed in the same way as for Mayonnaise by
adding 2 & 1/4 cups oil and 1 & 1/2 tbs. vinegar.
Finish the sauce with 3 & 1.2 ounces mixed chopped capers and gherkins;
1 tbs. mixed chopped parsley, tarragona and chervil; and the whites of 3
hard boiled eggs cut into short Julienne.
Cambridge Sauce
---------------
Finely pound 6 yolks of hard boiled eggs together with 4 well washed
fillets of anchovy, 1 tbs. of capers and 1 tbs. of chopped tarragon,
chervil and chives in equal proportions. Add 1 tsp. mustard and proceed
as for mayonnaise by adding 5 fluid ounces of oil and 1 tbs. vinegar,
season with a little cayenne and pass through a fine sieve.
Place in a basin and whisk until smooth then finish with 1 tsp. chopped
parsley.
--
JL
On Mon, 06 Apr 2009 10:27:25 -0700, Joseph Littleshoes wrote:
+ B o r i s + wrote:
You don't like me because I have a massive penis.
*Chuckle* its almost reassuring to know that there are bigger idiots than myself out there:)
Just because I have a huge penis, it doesn't make me stupid!
True, but making a usenet post about it does.
--
JL
+ B o r i s + wrote:
You don't like me because I have a massive penis.
*Chuckle* its almost reassuring to know that there are bigger idiots than myself out there:)
Just because I have a huge penis, it doesn't make me stupid!
True, but making a usenet post about it does.
--
JL
You can pickle sausages?
Me mum did, there's lots of info on the net about such recipes.
Cooked assuages, a good kilbasa, is a commercial type often recommended for 'pickled Polish sausage' soak in a vinegar, sugar and spice marinade.
Iirc me mum added mustard powder and peeled garlic cloves to the vinegar as she heated it up, poured it, boiling hot, over the sausages and then let sit for days, weeks or months.
Im pretty sure me mum used plain old white vinegar. I think she may have used "pickling spices" also as i recall there being a kind of herbal sediment in a jar of them. Course she also made her own sausages so not having that skill i have never tried to duplicate her recipe.
--
Mr. Joseph Littleshoes Esq.
Me mum did, there's lots of info on the net about such recipes.
Cooked assuages, a good kilbasa, is a commercial type often recommended for 'pickled Polish sausage' soak in a vinegar, sugar and spice marinade.
Iirc me mum added mustard powder and peeled garlic cloves to the vinegar as she heated it up, poured it, boiling hot, over the sausages and then let sit for days, weeks or months.
Im pretty sure me mum used plain old white vinegar. I think she may have used "pickling spices" also as i recall there being a kind of herbal sediment in a jar of them. Course she also made her own sausages so not having that skill i have never tried to duplicate her recipe.
--
Mr. Joseph Littleshoes Esq.
Cabbage
>
>>Cabbage is what our poor immigrant great-grandparents ate in the old country
>>because it was cheap and plentiful, what our grandparents overcooked and
>>forced our parents to eat because it was cheap and plentiful, and what our
>>parents swore they would never eat again if they didn't have to and never
>>cooked for us.
>>Cabbage is seen as a poor-persons vegetable, and people shunned it in the
>>post-WWII time of prosperity, and no one ever learned to cook it properly.
>>Cabbage is a labor-intensive plant, both to grow and to prepare for eating.
>>Young people don't care to do all that.
>
>
> Mom cooked cabbage until it was so soft, it activated my gag reflex. A
> lot of her vegetables did that. I remember when she discovered
> tender-crisp carrots. Suddenly, they became edible! Most other
> things continued to be three minutes of cooking short of becoming
> cream of whatever soup.
>
> I love cabbage sauteed briefly in olive oil and butter, then salted,
> peppered, and devoured.
>
> Carol
>
I have several non - standard ingredients for my stock pot and cabbage
is at the
top of the list.
I do tend to keep the all the windows in the house open when boiling
cabbage though:)
I also like to make a chiffonade of cabbage and sauté it with some rice
noodles in sesame oil add a bit of shrimp and/or chicken & mushrooms,
season with a bit of chili sauce and serve with a bit of soy sauce &
dark sesame oil.
Of course people usually gag on hearing about my boiled meat loaf which
is wrapped up in cabbage leaves, as well as having chopped cabbage as an
ingredient in the meat mix, but once they taste it they change their
mind about it. Once i discovered Escoffier i stopped calling it boiled
meat loaf and now call it "Sou Fassum Provencale" :)
Stuffed cabbage is very good though tedious to make.
Chou rouge a la flamande is a favorite of the elderly relative.
Cut the cabbage into quarters, discard the outside leaves and stumps and
slice the rest into a fine julienne. Season with salt and grated
nutmeg, sprinkle with vinegar and place in a well buttered earthenware
cocotte.
Cover with the lid and cook gently in a moderate oven. When three
quarters cooked, add 4 peeled and sliced pippin apples and 1 tbs. of
brown or caster sugar. Take care that the cooking is gentle from start
to finish and that no other liquid except the vinegar is used.
Im actually very fond of Brussels sprouts also.
--
JL
>>Cabbage is what our poor immigrant great-grandparents ate in the old country
>>because it was cheap and plentiful, what our grandparents overcooked and
>>forced our parents to eat because it was cheap and plentiful, and what our
>>parents swore they would never eat again if they didn't have to and never
>>cooked for us.
>>Cabbage is seen as a poor-persons vegetable, and people shunned it in the
>>post-WWII time of prosperity, and no one ever learned to cook it properly.
>>Cabbage is a labor-intensive plant, both to grow and to prepare for eating.
>>Young people don't care to do all that.
>
>
> Mom cooked cabbage until it was so soft, it activated my gag reflex. A
> lot of her vegetables did that. I remember when she discovered
> tender-crisp carrots. Suddenly, they became edible! Most other
> things continued to be three minutes of cooking short of becoming
> cream of whatever soup.
>
> I love cabbage sauteed briefly in olive oil and butter, then salted,
> peppered, and devoured.
>
> Carol
>
I have several non - standard ingredients for my stock pot and cabbage
is at the
top of the list.
I do tend to keep the all the windows in the house open when boiling
cabbage though:)
I also like to make a chiffonade of cabbage and sauté it with some rice
noodles in sesame oil add a bit of shrimp and/or chicken & mushrooms,
season with a bit of chili sauce and serve with a bit of soy sauce &
dark sesame oil.
Of course people usually gag on hearing about my boiled meat loaf which
is wrapped up in cabbage leaves, as well as having chopped cabbage as an
ingredient in the meat mix, but once they taste it they change their
mind about it. Once i discovered Escoffier i stopped calling it boiled
meat loaf and now call it "Sou Fassum Provencale" :)
Stuffed cabbage is very good though tedious to make.
Chou rouge a la flamande is a favorite of the elderly relative.
Cut the cabbage into quarters, discard the outside leaves and stumps and
slice the rest into a fine julienne. Season with salt and grated
nutmeg, sprinkle with vinegar and place in a well buttered earthenware
cocotte.
Cover with the lid and cook gently in a moderate oven. When three
quarters cooked, add 4 peeled and sliced pippin apples and 1 tbs. of
brown or caster sugar. Take care that the cooking is gentle from start
to finish and that no other liquid except the vinegar is used.
Im actually very fond of Brussels sprouts also.
--
JL
Science and Magick
The Philosopher wrote:
Mr. Joseph Littleshoes Esq. wrote:
>
>
> The Philosopher wrote:
> >
> >
> > I would say, that the core of my thesis is the proposition that in
> > fact, all observable phenomena are the result of metaphysical
> > assumptions.
>
>
> Hmmmmm ...wouldn't any "proposition" be merely a thought? even if of
> matters "metaphysical" a speculation about first principles is just a
> speculation with no demonstrable proof of a first principle or cause.
> Apparently, something was going on before the big bang
really?
News to me. Time starts at the big bang. No 'before' existed. Least
that's the way I understand it.
Yes i have tried to address that idea that time in any conventional sence began with the big bang, that there was no before. However that strikes me as a bit like the rejection of the copernican idea of the sun revolving around the earth. It seems inescapably obvious to me that if a beggining is postulated there must have been something before the postulated beggining. No matter how much one defines this previous state as a lack of anything it is still that.
> (how long before may be irrelevant if 'Time' began with the "big bang')
>
> Hunger, the experience of hunger, fear or other such stimuli are then
> "metaphysical assumptions?" Of course your argument works better with
> stones and planets and nebulae and such and while applicable to the
> human condition i think, is, rather more hubristic, species
> chauvinism, than it is representative of some fundamental perceptual
> bias, if i understand your use of the term "metaphysical."
>
I doubt you do.
If you like, the sensation of hunger, rather than a slippery slide down
a multicolored slope of bramble thorns, is the expression of a
metaphsyical choice you don't know you are making ;-)
Pleasant vs. unpleasant seems to be one of the easiest concious choice to make, what are more difficult choices are when one knows the proper choice will result in pain or somekind of suffering. As it so often does.
>
> > But I suspect that's way over your head.
> >
> >
> > Ergo, there in no science
> >
> >> to metaphysics.
>
> As i understand it we can not directly observe the "big bang". I
> understand that some "Scientists" reject the idea of a big bang and/or
> postulate an infinite series of 'big bangs.' We can conceptualize
> "eternal" which would seem to me to have no beginning as well as no end.
>
yeah. Its all in yer mind boyo. Its just a questiuon of drawing usable
maps and telling helpful stories.
Why? to what end? i can accept a totaly random, meaningless, accidental universe, more of an 'Ooops' than a "Fiat Lux." But that just makes me look for loopholes:)
> >>
> >
> > Indeed. That doesn't invalidate the philosophy though.
>
> Which philosophy?
>
metaphysics.
The philosophy of first causes?
> > Science depends
>
> "Science" and the activities the word stands for no more depends on
> metaphysics or what that word might represent than any or everything
> else. The demonstrable influence of "Metaphysics' is largely confined
> to books and obscure letters on the subject.
>
That is a sad fact. Whereas of course, its the adrdessing of the most
fundamental problem humans who like to understand stuff, face.
Yes but which is really fundamental? hunger, fear and pain or abstract speculation on first casuses?
The demonstrable influence of mathematics might be so described as well.
not sure i understand you unless you mean life is quantifiable even if not gualifiable?
> Assuming one agrees with the metaphysics being expressed. Can no -
> thing be a first cause?
>
Why not?
Causality is simply another metaphysical assumption. No way to tell if
its universally valid as a yardstick or not.
> > on metaphysics to exist. Its the metaphysics that says what is real,
>
> Last i checked that was still being debated.
>
So is how many angels fit in the head of a pin.
cant you make up your own mind?
So far it seems to me that all standards of measure be that mathmaticl, euclidian or social are arbitrary, and for convienience only.
> > what is not real, what size is, and quantity. Its the metaphysical
> > assumptions you make that turn incoherent experience into coherent
> > perceptions.
Hmmmmm ...... first causes may have an originating influence on any present percetions i have but it seems to me concsiouness is relatively mundane?
The pixels into the picture. That's long before science
> > starts to analyze the picture...
>
> Pre programed? people learn up, down, right, left which is all you
> seem to be talking about unless your going to include in the pixelation
> of consciousness the deliberate indoctrination of the young into the
> social customs of its environment.
>
All? A baby knows NOTHING.
Your sure of that?
it cant even perceive properly. Its aware,
for sure, but having a fully functional awareness of the elements that
make up the adult world? no. Its *all* learnt.
> As the more draconian and Apollonian social controls have broken down
> in some parts of the world
> so people have the freedom to speculate about previously taboo subjects.
>
I'd say actually, in this country, they have a lot less.
Perhaps the number of people that want to are less, most people find the open ended unresolvable intellectual speculation bores a lot of people.
There is a new
orthodoxy in science, in matters of morality, and the rest. Only
behaviour is liberalised. It seems you can indeed get away with
anything, except expressing ideas freely. That, it seems is almost a
capital crime.
I can read your words but again, i think you tabloidize social taboos.
> It still fascinates some of us, even as we acknowledge its ultimately
> futile nature. Talking or writing about life is not experiencing life.
> It is writing and talking about the experience of life. And
> metaphysical speculation on first causes has occupied both metaphysics
> and science.
>
Who is speculating of first causes? not me, not in the sense you mean..
I merely show a pattern and a hierarchy. I don't admit to causality, or
time, so 'first cause' has no meaning.
Well arent you special:)
> Whether science seems to be approaching some previously stated
> metaphysical platitude remains to be seen.
>
youve lost me there guvnor.
There are metaphysical statements about the fundamental nature of the universe that have been experessed by ancient philosophers that some people believe are expressive of the direction modern science.
> Both are honestly forced to admit their limitations. Though you really
> have to drag the metaphysics out or the room, kicking and screaming,
> when you set down to calculate an orbital decay:)
>
Before you start your calculation, you have already decided the
metaphysics you will use. If it works, use it. The answer is implicit
in the view that results from the metaphysics.
Yes thats the kind of thing i meant above when i suggested that all measurement systems, all mapping systems are arbitrary.
> What will science find, if any thing, an original nothing? some small
> part of the big bang or what ever that may have in any way initiated
> the big bang at the core of every atom?
>
Ultimately if pursued long enough, it will find the metaphysical
assumptions on which it is based, that's all. Big deal.
It will find the 'no - thing' *chuckle*
The answer is the world you always thought it was to be sure. How could
it be anything else?
> The macrocosmic anatomy has a distinctly biological look to it, imo,
> when i see the Hubbell images.
>
*shrug* we are great at pattern recognition. Similar causes we say,
produce similar patterns. We live and die by analogy and metaphor.
> Speculating on the consciousness of matter, even with our self as
> "Exhibit A" in any expansion of the dignity to anything other than
> ourselves is simply not thought about. Especially if extending the
> consciousness of matter to encompass the entire universe as one vast
> living conscious matter. Are we hubristic enough as a species to thing
> that in the entire universe only mankind has risen to the level of self
> aware matter?
Frankly, I couldn't care less. I am only interested in pragmatic applied
science of consciousness.
Then why even use the word "metaphysic."
It is possible to concoct and infinite number
of metaphysics that make the world all matter, all mind, or something in
between, or none of the above. Its an open ended process of increased
sophistication.
It may seem that the choice of metaphysic is arbitrary and meaningless.
Meaningless perhaps..what is meaning? but arbitrary, no. It has to be
functional and effective in the context of its purpose, which is a human
thing.
Yes, well one has to get past the romantcized idealization of the species, it speicies hubris to say nothing of mankinds transcendental spritual pride. Is that the "metaphysics" you are talking about? And God created Man!
vapid speculation is not my intent. I developed what I did for a
specific reason, as the most elegant solution to a problem that
confronted me.
T+A={R}=O+T
Namely how to reconcile classes of experience that did
not fit a rational materialistic worldview. In so doing, it appeared to
me it had far reaching implications that might be of interest to others.
Sadly, it seems it is not of much interest to anybody. The people who
need it can't understand it, and the people who can, don't want to.
Welllll....it does seem to me you are elevating something rather ordinary to a false ideal. Which is not at all unusual given the general tendency of the animale.
You might say that the solution for me was to realise that ordinary
consciousness, is not the general case, it is the exception that proves
the rule.
That there is an exception to every rule? seems a long way to go for very little:)
Ordinary consciousness, (of which science as we know it is the
critical faculty) is a special case of a more generalised spectrum of
experience.
Dont know if i understand you here or if you are expressing yourself well.
I.e. if I have a starting point at all, it is not the
perceived factual reality of rational materialism, it is the experience
of being alive,
Semantic quibble.
in whatever way it is experienced. The baby experiences,
the adult perceives. The development of the entrance fee to the world of
adult perceptions, is long and hard, and only by massive efforts of will
that we don't appreciate till it wears us into old age, can we maintain
the 'normal sane' vision of the world.
Again, if i understand you, i think your putting too much emphasis on what is mostly instinct.
One dont need an intellectual analysis of existance to exist.
Science in a way IS magick,
Nope dont agree. Espicaly etymologicaly.
in the sense that it takes enormous efforts
of will to maintain the necessary worldview in which phsyical reality
CAN be affected by our desires.
No not that either, as i wrote earlier, its almost all instinct.
Namely by building machines, concocting
chemicals, planning solutions and the like.
Specialization.
Now try applying as much effort to maintaining a different view.."Why,
as child I used to believe ten impossible things before breakfast!"
said the White Queen.
One can only assume THAT is the price of admission to Wonderland ;-)
Most magicians know tghe value of and how to play:)
And my apologies for typing this in a machine with no spell checker:(
--
Mr. Joseph Littleshoes Esq.
Mr. Joseph Littleshoes Esq. wrote:
>
>
> The Philosopher wrote:
> >
> >
> > I would say, that the core of my thesis is the proposition that in
> > fact, all observable phenomena are the result of metaphysical
> > assumptions.
>
>
> Hmmmmm ...wouldn't any "proposition" be merely a thought? even if of
> matters "metaphysical" a speculation about first principles is just a
> speculation with no demonstrable proof of a first principle or cause.
> Apparently, something was going on before the big bang
really?
News to me. Time starts at the big bang. No 'before' existed. Least
that's the way I understand it.
Yes i have tried to address that idea that time in any conventional sence began with the big bang, that there was no before. However that strikes me as a bit like the rejection of the copernican idea of the sun revolving around the earth. It seems inescapably obvious to me that if a beggining is postulated there must have been something before the postulated beggining. No matter how much one defines this previous state as a lack of anything it is still that.
> (how long before may be irrelevant if 'Time' began with the "big bang')
>
> Hunger, the experience of hunger, fear or other such stimuli are then
> "metaphysical assumptions?" Of course your argument works better with
> stones and planets and nebulae and such and while applicable to the
> human condition i think, is, rather more hubristic, species
> chauvinism, than it is representative of some fundamental perceptual
> bias, if i understand your use of the term "metaphysical."
>
I doubt you do.
If you like, the sensation of hunger, rather than a slippery slide down
a multicolored slope of bramble thorns, is the expression of a
metaphsyical choice you don't know you are making ;-)
Pleasant vs. unpleasant seems to be one of the easiest concious choice to make, what are more difficult choices are when one knows the proper choice will result in pain or somekind of suffering. As it so often does.
>
> > But I suspect that's way over your head.
> >
> >
> > Ergo, there in no science
> >
> >> to metaphysics.
>
> As i understand it we can not directly observe the "big bang". I
> understand that some "Scientists" reject the idea of a big bang and/or
> postulate an infinite series of 'big bangs.' We can conceptualize
> "eternal" which would seem to me to have no beginning as well as no end.
>
yeah. Its all in yer mind boyo. Its just a questiuon of drawing usable
maps and telling helpful stories.
Why? to what end? i can accept a totaly random, meaningless, accidental universe, more of an 'Ooops' than a "Fiat Lux." But that just makes me look for loopholes:)
> >>
> >
> > Indeed. That doesn't invalidate the philosophy though.
>
> Which philosophy?
>
metaphysics.
The philosophy of first causes?
> > Science depends
>
> "Science" and the activities the word stands for no more depends on
> metaphysics or what that word might represent than any or everything
> else. The demonstrable influence of "Metaphysics' is largely confined
> to books and obscure letters on the subject.
>
That is a sad fact. Whereas of course, its the adrdessing of the most
fundamental problem humans who like to understand stuff, face.
Yes but which is really fundamental? hunger, fear and pain or abstract speculation on first casuses?
The demonstrable influence of mathematics might be so described as well.
not sure i understand you unless you mean life is quantifiable even if not gualifiable?
> Assuming one agrees with the metaphysics being expressed. Can no -
> thing be a first cause?
>
Why not?
Causality is simply another metaphysical assumption. No way to tell if
its universally valid as a yardstick or not.
> > on metaphysics to exist. Its the metaphysics that says what is real,
>
> Last i checked that was still being debated.
>
So is how many angels fit in the head of a pin.
cant you make up your own mind?
So far it seems to me that all standards of measure be that mathmaticl, euclidian or social are arbitrary, and for convienience only.
> > what is not real, what size is, and quantity. Its the metaphysical
> > assumptions you make that turn incoherent experience into coherent
> > perceptions.
Hmmmmm ...... first causes may have an originating influence on any present percetions i have but it seems to me concsiouness is relatively mundane?
The pixels into the picture. That's long before science
> > starts to analyze the picture...
>
> Pre programed? people learn up, down, right, left which is all you
> seem to be talking about unless your going to include in the pixelation
> of consciousness the deliberate indoctrination of the young into the
> social customs of its environment.
>
All? A baby knows NOTHING.
Your sure of that?
it cant even perceive properly. Its aware,
for sure, but having a fully functional awareness of the elements that
make up the adult world? no. Its *all* learnt.
> As the more draconian and Apollonian social controls have broken down
> in some parts of the world
> so people have the freedom to speculate about previously taboo subjects.
>
I'd say actually, in this country, they have a lot less.
Perhaps the number of people that want to are less, most people find the open ended unresolvable intellectual speculation bores a lot of people.
There is a new
orthodoxy in science, in matters of morality, and the rest. Only
behaviour is liberalised. It seems you can indeed get away with
anything, except expressing ideas freely. That, it seems is almost a
capital crime.
I can read your words but again, i think you tabloidize social taboos.
> It still fascinates some of us, even as we acknowledge its ultimately
> futile nature. Talking or writing about life is not experiencing life.
> It is writing and talking about the experience of life. And
> metaphysical speculation on first causes has occupied both metaphysics
> and science.
>
Who is speculating of first causes? not me, not in the sense you mean..
I merely show a pattern and a hierarchy. I don't admit to causality, or
time, so 'first cause' has no meaning.
Well arent you special:)
> Whether science seems to be approaching some previously stated
> metaphysical platitude remains to be seen.
>
youve lost me there guvnor.
There are metaphysical statements about the fundamental nature of the universe that have been experessed by ancient philosophers that some people believe are expressive of the direction modern science.
> Both are honestly forced to admit their limitations. Though you really
> have to drag the metaphysics out or the room, kicking and screaming,
> when you set down to calculate an orbital decay:)
>
Before you start your calculation, you have already decided the
metaphysics you will use. If it works, use it. The answer is implicit
in the view that results from the metaphysics.
Yes thats the kind of thing i meant above when i suggested that all measurement systems, all mapping systems are arbitrary.
> What will science find, if any thing, an original nothing? some small
> part of the big bang or what ever that may have in any way initiated
> the big bang at the core of every atom?
>
Ultimately if pursued long enough, it will find the metaphysical
assumptions on which it is based, that's all. Big deal.
It will find the 'no - thing' *chuckle*
The answer is the world you always thought it was to be sure. How could
it be anything else?
> The macrocosmic anatomy has a distinctly biological look to it, imo,
> when i see the Hubbell images.
>
*shrug* we are great at pattern recognition. Similar causes we say,
produce similar patterns. We live and die by analogy and metaphor.
> Speculating on the consciousness of matter, even with our self as
> "Exhibit A" in any expansion of the dignity to anything other than
> ourselves is simply not thought about. Especially if extending the
> consciousness of matter to encompass the entire universe as one vast
> living conscious matter. Are we hubristic enough as a species to thing
> that in the entire universe only mankind has risen to the level of self
> aware matter?
Frankly, I couldn't care less. I am only interested in pragmatic applied
science of consciousness.
Then why even use the word "metaphysic."
It is possible to concoct and infinite number
of metaphysics that make the world all matter, all mind, or something in
between, or none of the above. Its an open ended process of increased
sophistication.
It may seem that the choice of metaphysic is arbitrary and meaningless.
Meaningless perhaps..what is meaning? but arbitrary, no. It has to be
functional and effective in the context of its purpose, which is a human
thing.
Yes, well one has to get past the romantcized idealization of the species, it speicies hubris to say nothing of mankinds transcendental spritual pride. Is that the "metaphysics" you are talking about? And God created Man!
vapid speculation is not my intent. I developed what I did for a
specific reason, as the most elegant solution to a problem that
confronted me.
T+A={R}=O+T
Namely how to reconcile classes of experience that did
not fit a rational materialistic worldview. In so doing, it appeared to
me it had far reaching implications that might be of interest to others.
Sadly, it seems it is not of much interest to anybody. The people who
need it can't understand it, and the people who can, don't want to.
Welllll....it does seem to me you are elevating something rather ordinary to a false ideal. Which is not at all unusual given the general tendency of the animale.
You might say that the solution for me was to realise that ordinary
consciousness, is not the general case, it is the exception that proves
the rule.
That there is an exception to every rule? seems a long way to go for very little:)
Ordinary consciousness, (of which science as we know it is the
critical faculty) is a special case of a more generalised spectrum of
experience.
Dont know if i understand you here or if you are expressing yourself well.
I.e. if I have a starting point at all, it is not the
perceived factual reality of rational materialism, it is the experience
of being alive,
Semantic quibble.
in whatever way it is experienced. The baby experiences,
the adult perceives. The development of the entrance fee to the world of
adult perceptions, is long and hard, and only by massive efforts of will
that we don't appreciate till it wears us into old age, can we maintain
the 'normal sane' vision of the world.
Again, if i understand you, i think your putting too much emphasis on what is mostly instinct.
One dont need an intellectual analysis of existance to exist.
Science in a way IS magick,
Nope dont agree. Espicaly etymologicaly.
in the sense that it takes enormous efforts
of will to maintain the necessary worldview in which phsyical reality
CAN be affected by our desires.
No not that either, as i wrote earlier, its almost all instinct.
Namely by building machines, concocting
chemicals, planning solutions and the like.
Specialization.
Now try applying as much effort to maintaining a different view.."Why,
as child I used to believe ten impossible things before breakfast!"
said the White Queen.
One can only assume THAT is the price of admission to Wonderland ;-)
Most magicians know tghe value of and how to play:)
And my apologies for typing this in a machine with no spell checker:(
--
Mr. Joseph Littleshoes Esq.
Saturday, January 23, 2010
Introduction
This brief introduction is to explain that the sole purpose of this "Blog" is to warehouse a number of Mr. Littleshoes epistolary comments gleaned form a decade of usentpostings & e mail.
Mr. Littleshoes hopes any readers of this blog will add comments as they see fit, Mr. Littleshoes reserving thee right to edit any such commentary:)
Mr. Littleshoes is not unconscious of the eclecticism of his interests and hopes thier varity will not be too daunting for any reader of them.
Mr. Littleshoes hopes any readers of this blog will add comments as they see fit, Mr. Littleshoes reserving thee right to edit any such commentary:)
Mr. Littleshoes is not unconscious of the eclecticism of his interests and hopes thier varity will not be too daunting for any reader of them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
