May 13, 2020
REST
On Day 53
I rested.
END
Thursday, May 28, 2020
Daily Ramble 52 - A SUGGESTIVE JOKE
May 12, 2020
A SUGGESTIVE JOKE
I was too busy today to take a long ramble. First we had to drive to New York City to get some Japanese cocktail crackers (and a few score other needed supplies.) Then, I visited a storage facility where I will move the contents of my studio at the end of June. (Milton Glaser has sold the building where I have played for the last 30 years.) Plus a visit to the post office. About four miles on foot in the city, properly masked and gloved. Anyway, I do have a joke, possibly relevant - at least I see some potentially larger meaning in it. It's a classic from Ausbel's Treasury of Jewish Folklore.
In the days when matchmakers arranged things, an inexperienced man was being given instructions about his first meeting with a woman, - how to conduct himself after they met in her home and were left alone on the couch in the parlor. "Start by talking about food," suggested the matchmaker, "that's an easy subject with which to open a conversation. Then you can move on to the subject of family as a way to become more serious. Finally, to show her you have real depth, you can talk about philosophy."
The man repeated, "food, family and philosophy."
Seated on the couch with the woman, after introductions, a heavy silence settled on the room.
"Do you have a brother?" asked the man.
"No," said the woman.
Silence...
Do you like noodles?" asked the man.
"No," said the woman.
Longer silence.....
Finally, the man asks, "If you had a brother, do you think he would like noodles?
It occurred to me that this joke might give some insight into how I should proceed in introducing LUCKISM® to the public. There might be a clue in the sequence of food, family and philosophy. In fact, I have somewhat started with food in my discussion of potatoes and water vs. soda. Perhaps I should work on some family applications of LUCKISM® before getting into the heavy-duty philosophy of applying it to the military-industrial complex et al.That's all folks! Good night and good luck.
END
A SUGGESTIVE JOKE
I was too busy today to take a long ramble. First we had to drive to New York City to get some Japanese cocktail crackers (and a few score other needed supplies.) Then, I visited a storage facility where I will move the contents of my studio at the end of June. (Milton Glaser has sold the building where I have played for the last 30 years.) Plus a visit to the post office. About four miles on foot in the city, properly masked and gloved. Anyway, I do have a joke, possibly relevant - at least I see some potentially larger meaning in it. It's a classic from Ausbel's Treasury of Jewish Folklore.
In the days when matchmakers arranged things, an inexperienced man was being given instructions about his first meeting with a woman, - how to conduct himself after they met in her home and were left alone on the couch in the parlor. "Start by talking about food," suggested the matchmaker, "that's an easy subject with which to open a conversation. Then you can move on to the subject of family as a way to become more serious. Finally, to show her you have real depth, you can talk about philosophy."
The man repeated, "food, family and philosophy."
Seated on the couch with the woman, after introductions, a heavy silence settled on the room.
"Do you have a brother?" asked the man.
"No," said the woman.
Silence...
Do you like noodles?" asked the man.
"No," said the woman.
Longer silence.....
Finally, the man asks, "If you had a brother, do you think he would like noodles?
It occurred to me that this joke might give some insight into how I should proceed in introducing LUCKISM® to the public. There might be a clue in the sequence of food, family and philosophy. In fact, I have somewhat started with food in my discussion of potatoes and water vs. soda. Perhaps I should work on some family applications of LUCKISM® before getting into the heavy-duty philosophy of applying it to the military-industrial complex et al.That's all folks! Good night and good luck.
END
Daily Ramble 51 - EXPLORATION vs. EXPLOITATION
May 10, 2020
EXPLORATION vs. EXPLOITATION
I started my walk thinking I would take a relaxing ramble through some of my favorite aphorisms on the subject of luck or chance. However, up popped what seemed like a ripe thought about the difference between proper human exploration and something insidious which is disguised as exploration but is really something harmful, i.e., space "exploration." One could call it the cosmic pyramid scheme of the military-industrial complex, basically a scam which keeps going by sucking in more and more chumps.
The business of space exploration is based on exploiting the false premise that it is an extension of a natural and inevitable human desire to explore the unknown. Let us pass over the question of whether this is indeed a basic human urge, impulse or need. I would dispute that, or, at least, argue about how far that urge extends. I would deny that it extends beyond the planet, other than as a manifestation of the sense of wonder. I also deny that there is any need for it or any real good coming from it. That addresses the concocted benefits that will allegedly accrue to the human race. (As if there was not enough to provide for humanity on a planet which has sustained life for millions of years.) But I leave that to the good sense of the world population as the difficulties and costs of the space fiasco make themselves known. My objection is "religious" in the sense that it goes to the basic morality of the enterprise.
I claim that exploration of space is entirely outside the proper area of activity of Homo sapiens because it severs all direct connections with nature. It is therefore in conflict with a basic tenet of LUCKISM®, i.e., that a direct relationship to natural chance and unpredictability is an essential and sacred component of life. Stated differently, the totally artificial support required by space explorations proves that it is completely distinguishable from previous natural forms of human exploration.
The distinctions are so obvious that their importance may be overlooked. When early explorers ventured on the land or seas beyond known horizons and beyond communication with their starting point, they were still connected to land and sea and air, subject to tides, weather and, of course, gravity. Although they had only a vague idea of their desired destination, there was a reasonable expectation it would have the familiar conditions needed to support life.
Space exploration is full of contrasts to healthy exploration. First and foremost, it requires that humans detach themselves from all natural connections, including, of course, overcoming the fundamental force of gravity. They must be placed in a state of life support, barely distinguishable from those who are in intensive care as a result of life-threatening disease or trauma. But it has some technical aspects which conceal its horrible artificiality. Unlike most earthly explorers, the astronauts know exactly where they are going and have good communication links with their home base. In short, we have tremendous technology covering up the basic condition of a living death and giving the illusion of connection.
This isn't the only factor contributing to the unnatural goal of space exploration.
Analyze how it is that a four-year-old child in pre-kindergarden, when asked what he or she wants to be, says, without hesitation,"An astronaut." That comes about from a saturation of the learning environment with educational material, entertainment content, toys and other material. It flows from an enormous propaganda effort, fostered by the governmental, industrial and academic entities which have a financial interest in profiting militarily and monetarily from space exploration. The entertainment industry has a parasitical participation when it produces an endless stream of products glorifying heroes and heroines in space.
I have not dealt with the unsuitability of the human body to the demands that will be placed on it in space exploration. In all probability the human body will require modifications and transformations which will lead to "explorers" eventually becoming unrecognizable as human to Homo sapiens.
That's all for now. This only begins my examination of what's wrong with space exploration. For now, I can state that, just as my belief in LUCKISM® keeps me from eating synthetic potato chips or drinking water which has been perverted by the addition of carbonation and flavorings, and further degraded by being packaged in plastic containers, I will not support space exploration or anything which promotes it. Bit by bit, we must begin to address the other nine thousand, nine hundred and ninety-seven things that may need limitation, modification or elimination.
END
EXPLORATION vs. EXPLOITATION
I started my walk thinking I would take a relaxing ramble through some of my favorite aphorisms on the subject of luck or chance. However, up popped what seemed like a ripe thought about the difference between proper human exploration and something insidious which is disguised as exploration but is really something harmful, i.e., space "exploration." One could call it the cosmic pyramid scheme of the military-industrial complex, basically a scam which keeps going by sucking in more and more chumps.
The business of space exploration is based on exploiting the false premise that it is an extension of a natural and inevitable human desire to explore the unknown. Let us pass over the question of whether this is indeed a basic human urge, impulse or need. I would dispute that, or, at least, argue about how far that urge extends. I would deny that it extends beyond the planet, other than as a manifestation of the sense of wonder. I also deny that there is any need for it or any real good coming from it. That addresses the concocted benefits that will allegedly accrue to the human race. (As if there was not enough to provide for humanity on a planet which has sustained life for millions of years.) But I leave that to the good sense of the world population as the difficulties and costs of the space fiasco make themselves known. My objection is "religious" in the sense that it goes to the basic morality of the enterprise.
I claim that exploration of space is entirely outside the proper area of activity of Homo sapiens because it severs all direct connections with nature. It is therefore in conflict with a basic tenet of LUCKISM®, i.e., that a direct relationship to natural chance and unpredictability is an essential and sacred component of life. Stated differently, the totally artificial support required by space explorations proves that it is completely distinguishable from previous natural forms of human exploration.
The distinctions are so obvious that their importance may be overlooked. When early explorers ventured on the land or seas beyond known horizons and beyond communication with their starting point, they were still connected to land and sea and air, subject to tides, weather and, of course, gravity. Although they had only a vague idea of their desired destination, there was a reasonable expectation it would have the familiar conditions needed to support life.
Space exploration is full of contrasts to healthy exploration. First and foremost, it requires that humans detach themselves from all natural connections, including, of course, overcoming the fundamental force of gravity. They must be placed in a state of life support, barely distinguishable from those who are in intensive care as a result of life-threatening disease or trauma. But it has some technical aspects which conceal its horrible artificiality. Unlike most earthly explorers, the astronauts know exactly where they are going and have good communication links with their home base. In short, we have tremendous technology covering up the basic condition of a living death and giving the illusion of connection.
This isn't the only factor contributing to the unnatural goal of space exploration.
Analyze how it is that a four-year-old child in pre-kindergarden, when asked what he or she wants to be, says, without hesitation,"An astronaut." That comes about from a saturation of the learning environment with educational material, entertainment content, toys and other material. It flows from an enormous propaganda effort, fostered by the governmental, industrial and academic entities which have a financial interest in profiting militarily and monetarily from space exploration. The entertainment industry has a parasitical participation when it produces an endless stream of products glorifying heroes and heroines in space.
I have not dealt with the unsuitability of the human body to the demands that will be placed on it in space exploration. In all probability the human body will require modifications and transformations which will lead to "explorers" eventually becoming unrecognizable as human to Homo sapiens.
That's all for now. This only begins my examination of what's wrong with space exploration. For now, I can state that, just as my belief in LUCKISM® keeps me from eating synthetic potato chips or drinking water which has been perverted by the addition of carbonation and flavorings, and further degraded by being packaged in plastic containers, I will not support space exploration or anything which promotes it. Bit by bit, we must begin to address the other nine thousand, nine hundred and ninety-seven things that may need limitation, modification or elimination.
END
Sunday, May 10, 2020
Daily Ramble 50 - LUCKISM® AND THE PLAGUE (2)
May 9, 2020
LUCKISM® AND THE PLAGUE (2)
What better than a worldwide plague to encourage us to think about a better future; even better than the immediate past for which we now long?
In particular, I'm thinking how a new "religion," namely, LUCKISM® would place us in a better position than the one in which we find ourselves and the one in which we were before the latest plague. Why? At bottom, because it provides something which has been glaringly absent from the prevailing conduct of world civilization, namely, reverence for the chance activity of life and nature. A civilization which gives the resulting modesty a central place in its zeitgeist would have long ago achieved the proper perspective from which to deal with a plague and would be in the best position to handle future plagues.
Picture this; an intelligent animal comes to believe it has the ability to eventually know everything worth knowing and to control everything worth controlling on earth. Even though its sciences begin to reveal a vast zone of "unknowability," and "unpredictability" this creature continues to live as if it was destined to rule the universe. Its favorite poem is "Invictus" (which means "Undefeated") by William Ernest Henley. That insane hymn to human determination ends with
I am the master of my fate,
I am the captain of my soul.
Along the way, the poet boasts,
Under the bludgeonings of chance
My head is bloody, but unbowed.
Then, along come submicroscopic nothings called "viruses," with barely enough complexity to be called living things, and they bludgeon the entire human race, from head to toe. And they do so repeatedly, with a frequency which ought to get the rapt attention of an intelligent creature.
One thing the poet got right. It was chance that hit him and us. Not because it was evil, but because it was omnipresent, because it was built into reality and we were stupidly not ready to encounter it.
Can you imagine a creature so deluded it cannot comprehend or respect something that is everywhere all the time? On top of which, the creature concocts fictional deities to explain the activity of that omnipresent and eternal force. And, as the final absurdity, it fantasizes that these deities have granted special rights and privileges to Homo sapiens! Dominion, conquest, numerosity, life after death or maybe even life without death.
From a narrow point of view of current plague events, it began with the unpredictable mutation of a particular virus into one capable of infecting the human animal. Chance was involved in the first infection, whether it was transmitted in a so-called "wet market" where wild animals are sold to be eaten or whether it leaked from a laboratory or whether it just blew in on the wind. Chance then operated in innumerable, unpredictable ways to spread the infection in the world population and to kill those who are most susceptible to its activity. Chance also affected the type and degree of care received by those who were infected and it is affecting the development of cures or protective vaccines.
From the wider point of view, the major choices made in the pursuit of progress by modern civilizations, under the illusion of control of nature and "progress" were made without giving proper respect to the operation of chance in nature. For at least 700 years we have been aware of plagues. More recently we have become familiar with the microscopic and submicroscopic world. But only a tiny fraction of the resources of the world have been allocated to that area; a pittance compared to what has been dedicated to weaponry, electronic communication devices, entertainment devices, transportation equipment etc.
If LUCKISM® was a guiding force in the world, the concept of progress, at least since since the so-called scientific revolution, would be much more focused on the natural world, both as a source of sustenance and of potential danger. People would know more about the contents of the natural world, including viruses and microorganisms, than they know about pop singers and movie actors. More financial and human resources would go into study of nature than into matters of importance to industry or the military. School curricula at all levels would give priority to subjects with direct impact on the natural world and relations between living things. There would be less banging of atomic particles and blasting-off of space rockets.
The work that remains is enormous. We have the insight. We know the truth of the fundamental facts. Now, how do we apply this to the ten thousand things in the world? I use "ten thousand things" as a shorthand term in the Daoist sense of "everything that can be named in the world." What has to be limited? What has to be changed? It will all flow from learning how to bring ourselves into harmony with the dance of order and chance.
The material in this ramble may be somewhat disorganized and sketchy. I will continue working on it.
END
LUCKISM® AND THE PLAGUE (2)
What better than a worldwide plague to encourage us to think about a better future; even better than the immediate past for which we now long?
In particular, I'm thinking how a new "religion," namely, LUCKISM® would place us in a better position than the one in which we find ourselves and the one in which we were before the latest plague. Why? At bottom, because it provides something which has been glaringly absent from the prevailing conduct of world civilization, namely, reverence for the chance activity of life and nature. A civilization which gives the resulting modesty a central place in its zeitgeist would have long ago achieved the proper perspective from which to deal with a plague and would be in the best position to handle future plagues.
Picture this; an intelligent animal comes to believe it has the ability to eventually know everything worth knowing and to control everything worth controlling on earth. Even though its sciences begin to reveal a vast zone of "unknowability," and "unpredictability" this creature continues to live as if it was destined to rule the universe. Its favorite poem is "Invictus" (which means "Undefeated") by William Ernest Henley. That insane hymn to human determination ends with
I am the master of my fate,
I am the captain of my soul.
Along the way, the poet boasts,
Under the bludgeonings of chance
My head is bloody, but unbowed.
Then, along come submicroscopic nothings called "viruses," with barely enough complexity to be called living things, and they bludgeon the entire human race, from head to toe. And they do so repeatedly, with a frequency which ought to get the rapt attention of an intelligent creature.
One thing the poet got right. It was chance that hit him and us. Not because it was evil, but because it was omnipresent, because it was built into reality and we were stupidly not ready to encounter it.
Can you imagine a creature so deluded it cannot comprehend or respect something that is everywhere all the time? On top of which, the creature concocts fictional deities to explain the activity of that omnipresent and eternal force. And, as the final absurdity, it fantasizes that these deities have granted special rights and privileges to Homo sapiens! Dominion, conquest, numerosity, life after death or maybe even life without death.
From a narrow point of view of current plague events, it began with the unpredictable mutation of a particular virus into one capable of infecting the human animal. Chance was involved in the first infection, whether it was transmitted in a so-called "wet market" where wild animals are sold to be eaten or whether it leaked from a laboratory or whether it just blew in on the wind. Chance then operated in innumerable, unpredictable ways to spread the infection in the world population and to kill those who are most susceptible to its activity. Chance also affected the type and degree of care received by those who were infected and it is affecting the development of cures or protective vaccines.
From the wider point of view, the major choices made in the pursuit of progress by modern civilizations, under the illusion of control of nature and "progress" were made without giving proper respect to the operation of chance in nature. For at least 700 years we have been aware of plagues. More recently we have become familiar with the microscopic and submicroscopic world. But only a tiny fraction of the resources of the world have been allocated to that area; a pittance compared to what has been dedicated to weaponry, electronic communication devices, entertainment devices, transportation equipment etc.
If LUCKISM® was a guiding force in the world, the concept of progress, at least since since the so-called scientific revolution, would be much more focused on the natural world, both as a source of sustenance and of potential danger. People would know more about the contents of the natural world, including viruses and microorganisms, than they know about pop singers and movie actors. More financial and human resources would go into study of nature than into matters of importance to industry or the military. School curricula at all levels would give priority to subjects with direct impact on the natural world and relations between living things. There would be less banging of atomic particles and blasting-off of space rockets.
The work that remains is enormous. We have the insight. We know the truth of the fundamental facts. Now, how do we apply this to the ten thousand things in the world? I use "ten thousand things" as a shorthand term in the Daoist sense of "everything that can be named in the world." What has to be limited? What has to be changed? It will all flow from learning how to bring ourselves into harmony with the dance of order and chance.
The material in this ramble may be somewhat disorganized and sketchy. I will continue working on it.
END
Daily Ramble 49 - HOW TO AVOID DESIGN SNOBJECTS
May 8, 2020
HOW TO AVOID DESIGN SNOBJECTS
A "snobject" is a deceptive product of a special type. It pretends to be a highly desirable design object. It is produced and marketed in a manner intended to get people to pay the highest possible price for it. In reality, it is inferior in all respects to easily available and far less expensive alternatives. In today's sermon I will tell you how to spot these abominations, based on the fundamental differences between them and the "real thing." Buying, possessing or displaying a "snobject" is a sin against everything that's holy in art and design (aside from being a foolish waste of money.)
The presence of one or more of the following factors may indicate that something is a snobject:
1. It does not give priority to function.
2. It fixates on appearance, novelty or celebrity connection.
3. It costs more than it should.
4. It glorifies the designer.
The Philippe Starck juicer is a "snobject" par excellence. Functionally defective, it boasts of its "legginess," sells for more than $100 and is even offered as a non-functional, collectible miniature (4.5 inches high) for $49.
The field of watches is full of "snobjects." The so-called "Museum Watch" sold by Movado is a good example and rewards analysis. It was originally designed by Nathan George Horwitt (1898-1990) in 1947. It was a wristwatch with a plain black face without numerals and with a white disk marking the 12 o-clock position.
It was pirated by Movado in 1948. Horwitt sued. Twenty-seven years later, in 1975, Movado settled with him for $29,000. Movado now touts Nathan George Horwitt as "the first artist to explore the concept of time as design." Nowadays Movado offers eleven "Museum" watches for sale. In a very funny development, three of those watches supplement the original disk at 12-o-clock with a face full of hourly markings, thus completely contradicting the intention of the original design. Incidentally, the prices range from $495 to $1,495.
Movado's Museum Watch satisfies all four of the "snobject" criteria. It diminishes the functionality of the watch. It fixates on appearance. It costs too much. Finally, it glorifies the designer (after first ripping him off.)
The sordid commercial history of this design is not our focus. What is most interesting is that this watch is exalted as a "museum" piece despite undermining the main functional purpose of a watch. The sequence of events appears to be that it was accepted in the Design Collection of New York's Museum of Modern Art, Movado later began calling it the "Museum" watch and later registered a trademark for that name.
The reputation of this design owes more to the gullibility and lack of design standards of our time than to any true design merit. It would be a fitting watch to be worn by the Emperor in Hans Christian Anderson's wonderful tale "The Emperor's Clothes." A watch without clear indications of the hours is a proper accessory for a person who wears non-existent clothing. It also fits perfectly into a decadent society which turns timepieces into frivolous jewelry. No one who actually needs to tell time quickly and accurately would dream of relying on this design. It takes a person who has lost touch with reality and is living in a world of arty-farty abstractions to exalt the removal of time indicia from a timekeeping mechanism. Where would we find such a person? Heading the design department of a museum, perhaps.
It would be a noble gesture if, to make amends for accepting this watch as a gift from the designer in 1960 and as a penance for enabling this sterile and functionally impaired object to become a "snobject", the Museum of Modern Art would expel it from the collection for failure to meet the standards of good design. Of course, that would be a dangerous precedent and might require the expulsion of countless other objects.
ADDENDUM:
I neglected to contrast the vastly overrated Movado Museum watch with a truly good design, functional (with a superb additional feature), inexpensive and modestly presented. I refer to the Timex Easy Reader watches, available in various styles from $29 to $65. Some of them have a feature which allows them to be read in the dark with the push of a button. These are watches which a true design connoisseur will be proud to wear.
END
HOW TO AVOID DESIGN SNOBJECTS
A "snobject" is a deceptive product of a special type. It pretends to be a highly desirable design object. It is produced and marketed in a manner intended to get people to pay the highest possible price for it. In reality, it is inferior in all respects to easily available and far less expensive alternatives. In today's sermon I will tell you how to spot these abominations, based on the fundamental differences between them and the "real thing." Buying, possessing or displaying a "snobject" is a sin against everything that's holy in art and design (aside from being a foolish waste of money.)
The presence of one or more of the following factors may indicate that something is a snobject:
1. It does not give priority to function.
2. It fixates on appearance, novelty or celebrity connection.
3. It costs more than it should.
4. It glorifies the designer.
The Philippe Starck juicer is a "snobject" par excellence. Functionally defective, it boasts of its "legginess," sells for more than $100 and is even offered as a non-functional, collectible miniature (4.5 inches high) for $49.
The field of watches is full of "snobjects." The so-called "Museum Watch" sold by Movado is a good example and rewards analysis. It was originally designed by Nathan George Horwitt (1898-1990) in 1947. It was a wristwatch with a plain black face without numerals and with a white disk marking the 12 o-clock position.
It was pirated by Movado in 1948. Horwitt sued. Twenty-seven years later, in 1975, Movado settled with him for $29,000. Movado now touts Nathan George Horwitt as "the first artist to explore the concept of time as design." Nowadays Movado offers eleven "Museum" watches for sale. In a very funny development, three of those watches supplement the original disk at 12-o-clock with a face full of hourly markings, thus completely contradicting the intention of the original design. Incidentally, the prices range from $495 to $1,495.
Movado's Museum Watch satisfies all four of the "snobject" criteria. It diminishes the functionality of the watch. It fixates on appearance. It costs too much. Finally, it glorifies the designer (after first ripping him off.)
The sordid commercial history of this design is not our focus. What is most interesting is that this watch is exalted as a "museum" piece despite undermining the main functional purpose of a watch. The sequence of events appears to be that it was accepted in the Design Collection of New York's Museum of Modern Art, Movado later began calling it the "Museum" watch and later registered a trademark for that name.
The reputation of this design owes more to the gullibility and lack of design standards of our time than to any true design merit. It would be a fitting watch to be worn by the Emperor in Hans Christian Anderson's wonderful tale "The Emperor's Clothes." A watch without clear indications of the hours is a proper accessory for a person who wears non-existent clothing. It also fits perfectly into a decadent society which turns timepieces into frivolous jewelry. No one who actually needs to tell time quickly and accurately would dream of relying on this design. It takes a person who has lost touch with reality and is living in a world of arty-farty abstractions to exalt the removal of time indicia from a timekeeping mechanism. Where would we find such a person? Heading the design department of a museum, perhaps.
It would be a noble gesture if, to make amends for accepting this watch as a gift from the designer in 1960 and as a penance for enabling this sterile and functionally impaired object to become a "snobject", the Museum of Modern Art would expel it from the collection for failure to meet the standards of good design. Of course, that would be a dangerous precedent and might require the expulsion of countless other objects.
ADDENDUM:
I neglected to contrast the vastly overrated Movado Museum watch with a truly good design, functional (with a superb additional feature), inexpensive and modestly presented. I refer to the Timex Easy Reader watches, available in various styles from $29 to $65. Some of them have a feature which allows them to be read in the dark with the push of a button. These are watches which a true design connoisseur will be proud to wear.
END
Daily Ramble 48 - DESIGN MADE IMPOSSIBLE
May 7, 2020
DESIGN MADE IMPOSSIBLE
In the overflowing shelves of books about designing and the endless bytes of how-to on the internet there is one aspect of the subject which is overlooked - how to make design impossible, or at least, more scarce. In this short rant I will try to fill that gap.
The first step in preventing a design from being created is to pose the question "Is it really needed?" I don't mean "needed" in the sense of a company needing to fill its lineup of seasonal offerings. I mean needed by people in the way they need an essential of life. That will eliminate 99% of all design ab initio.
If the proposed design passes the first hurdle the next question is "Will the benefits of its production outweigh the harm?" This probes the environmental effect of introducing it into the world, or perhaps we should say, into the garbage dumps of the world. ("Environmental" includes both physical and psychological impact.) This will eliminate 99% of the 1% which survived the first question.
In a world operating under these standards, a person's design objects will be treasured, repaired and passed on with reverence - all five or six of them.
END
DESIGN MADE IMPOSSIBLE
In the overflowing shelves of books about designing and the endless bytes of how-to on the internet there is one aspect of the subject which is overlooked - how to make design impossible, or at least, more scarce. In this short rant I will try to fill that gap.
The first step in preventing a design from being created is to pose the question "Is it really needed?" I don't mean "needed" in the sense of a company needing to fill its lineup of seasonal offerings. I mean needed by people in the way they need an essential of life. That will eliminate 99% of all design ab initio.
If the proposed design passes the first hurdle the next question is "Will the benefits of its production outweigh the harm?" This probes the environmental effect of introducing it into the world, or perhaps we should say, into the garbage dumps of the world. ("Environmental" includes both physical and psychological impact.) This will eliminate 99% of the 1% which survived the first question.
In a world operating under these standards, a person's design objects will be treasured, repaired and passed on with reverence - all five or six of them.
END
Daily Ramble 47 - SHAGGY WISDOM
May 6, 2020
SHAGGY WISDOM
I recall a story about a university professor of philosophy who became obsessed with finding the meaning of life.
Prof. L___ abandons his family, cashes in all his assets and sets out on a search for the wise person who can answer his question of "What is the meaning of life?". His journey takes him to his philosophy professor at Harvard and thence to his professor at Oxford and on to the latter's teacher at the Sorbonne. At each encounter the professor is told that his interlocutor's teacher may have the answer. It turns into a journey of years, full of hardships, which eventually leads him to the "ultimate" guru in a cave on a mountaintop. The professor is physically and mentally at the end of his rope.
He staggers forward and says, "O holy guru, I have sacrificed everything, my family, my fortune and my academic career to find the answer to this question: What is the meaning of life?
The guru smiles and says, "Here is the answer: Life is a fountain."
The professor is stunned. "That's all you have to say?" "I have traveled for years, suffered countless miseries and the best you can offer me is the platitudinous "Life is a fountain?"
The guru is taken aback. With wide eyes he asks the professor, "You mean... life isn't a fountain?"
This story is usually considered to be an example of a "shaggy dog" story, a form of perverse humor in which the listener's expectations are built up through a long series of details, only to end with an ordinary finish. [The genre may have derived its name from the story of a person who enters his shaggy dog in contests for the shaggiest dog. He wins them all from the local contest up. They are all described in excruciating detail. Finally, at the world championships the judges look at his dog and say "That dog is not so shaggy." See, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaggy_dog_story/]
Although the guru story has the form of a shaggy dog story, I see deeper meaning in it. To me it shows that, even at the highest levels of wisdom, there must always be doubt. I say, "Beware of absolute certainty!" It contradicts the fundamental law of life and all existence. That is one of the reasons I feel comfortable designing the religion named LUCKISM®, which, like the sciences, has chance at its core and can never have absolute certainty about its fundamental premises. It's beauty is that, while its sacred essence is verifiable in many ways, that very fact also requires acceptance and respect for uncertainty. If I was to find myself sitting in a mountain cave and someone like myself comes with a question about the meaning of life I would say, "Life is interacting with the universe, subject to the dance of order and chance." That's better than a fountain - and filled with enough uncertainty and paradox to be true.
END
SHAGGY WISDOM
I recall a story about a university professor of philosophy who became obsessed with finding the meaning of life.
Prof. L___ abandons his family, cashes in all his assets and sets out on a search for the wise person who can answer his question of "What is the meaning of life?". His journey takes him to his philosophy professor at Harvard and thence to his professor at Oxford and on to the latter's teacher at the Sorbonne. At each encounter the professor is told that his interlocutor's teacher may have the answer. It turns into a journey of years, full of hardships, which eventually leads him to the "ultimate" guru in a cave on a mountaintop. The professor is physically and mentally at the end of his rope.
He staggers forward and says, "O holy guru, I have sacrificed everything, my family, my fortune and my academic career to find the answer to this question: What is the meaning of life?
The guru smiles and says, "Here is the answer: Life is a fountain."
The professor is stunned. "That's all you have to say?" "I have traveled for years, suffered countless miseries and the best you can offer me is the platitudinous "Life is a fountain?"
The guru is taken aback. With wide eyes he asks the professor, "You mean... life isn't a fountain?"
This story is usually considered to be an example of a "shaggy dog" story, a form of perverse humor in which the listener's expectations are built up through a long series of details, only to end with an ordinary finish. [The genre may have derived its name from the story of a person who enters his shaggy dog in contests for the shaggiest dog. He wins them all from the local contest up. They are all described in excruciating detail. Finally, at the world championships the judges look at his dog and say "That dog is not so shaggy." See, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaggy_dog_story/]
Although the guru story has the form of a shaggy dog story, I see deeper meaning in it. To me it shows that, even at the highest levels of wisdom, there must always be doubt. I say, "Beware of absolute certainty!" It contradicts the fundamental law of life and all existence. That is one of the reasons I feel comfortable designing the religion named LUCKISM®, which, like the sciences, has chance at its core and can never have absolute certainty about its fundamental premises. It's beauty is that, while its sacred essence is verifiable in many ways, that very fact also requires acceptance and respect for uncertainty. If I was to find myself sitting in a mountain cave and someone like myself comes with a question about the meaning of life I would say, "Life is interacting with the universe, subject to the dance of order and chance." That's better than a fountain - and filled with enough uncertainty and paradox to be true.
END
Daily Ramble 46 - TRADEMARK
May 5, 2020
TRADEMARK
You can look at religions, political institutions and all "isms" as gigantic games of "Telephone" or "Chinese Whispers," [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_whispers].
That's the party amusement in which an original statement is whispered by a first person to the next person in a long line of people. Each person passes the statement along by whispering it in the ear of the next person. In the end, the last person announces the statement to everyone. The original statement usually has undergone amazing transformations in its wording and meaning. [A story from WWI has it that the important message "Send reinforcements, we're going to advance" was passed along by a series of radio operators from the front until it was finally received at headquarters as, "Send three and fourpence we're going to a dance".]
Over time, just as mutations arise in biological evolution, variations, schisms, heresies etc. pop up in the transmission of ideas or doctrines. After all, change is another fact of life, connected to the operation of chance.
With respect to religions, the whispered transformations of the original material over millennia often makes the original insights unrecognizable. Just look at the "founders" of some major religions and compare their words and behavior to what is practiced today in their names. Case closed.
When I contemplated designing a new religion one of the questions I faced was whether my design could maintain its original principles over time. The precedents in religious, philosophical and political isms were all discouraging. My tentative answer came from beer. That's where you find true adherence to original principles/ingredients, certified by what is known as a trademark.
Lowenbrau claims to have to have been using its trademark since 1383. Stella Artois claims continuous use of its mark since 1366. Those were before governments started official registrations. The first officially registered trademark was the Czech beer, PILSNER, registered in 1859. It seems to me that maintaining a registered trademark is about the only way someone can guarantee that what is presented to the public is their authentic product.
So I have registered a trademark for LUCKISM®. That brings to mind a possible slogan: "Try LUCKISM® - the religion with the integrity of a great beer!
I would have written more but my day was filled with chores such as wood-cutting and weeding and de-stoning the moss.
END
TRADEMARK
You can look at religions, political institutions and all "isms" as gigantic games of "Telephone" or "Chinese Whispers," [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_whispers].
That's the party amusement in which an original statement is whispered by a first person to the next person in a long line of people. Each person passes the statement along by whispering it in the ear of the next person. In the end, the last person announces the statement to everyone. The original statement usually has undergone amazing transformations in its wording and meaning. [A story from WWI has it that the important message "Send reinforcements, we're going to advance" was passed along by a series of radio operators from the front until it was finally received at headquarters as, "Send three and fourpence we're going to a dance".]
Over time, just as mutations arise in biological evolution, variations, schisms, heresies etc. pop up in the transmission of ideas or doctrines. After all, change is another fact of life, connected to the operation of chance.
With respect to religions, the whispered transformations of the original material over millennia often makes the original insights unrecognizable. Just look at the "founders" of some major religions and compare their words and behavior to what is practiced today in their names. Case closed.
When I contemplated designing a new religion one of the questions I faced was whether my design could maintain its original principles over time. The precedents in religious, philosophical and political isms were all discouraging. My tentative answer came from beer. That's where you find true adherence to original principles/ingredients, certified by what is known as a trademark.
Lowenbrau claims to have to have been using its trademark since 1383. Stella Artois claims continuous use of its mark since 1366. Those were before governments started official registrations. The first officially registered trademark was the Czech beer, PILSNER, registered in 1859. It seems to me that maintaining a registered trademark is about the only way someone can guarantee that what is presented to the public is their authentic product.
So I have registered a trademark for LUCKISM®. That brings to mind a possible slogan: "Try LUCKISM® - the religion with the integrity of a great beer!
I would have written more but my day was filled with chores such as wood-cutting and weeding and de-stoning the moss.
END
Daily Ramble 45 - LUCKISM® AND THE PLAGUE
May 4, 2020
LUCKISM® AND THE PLAGUE
Presently, in a time of plague, we are experiencing, personally and directly, the effect on our lives when an essential element of life is almost completely reduced to nothing. What is that element in its irreducible essence? It is the chance, the uncertainty, the unpredictability that comes from proximity to, and real interaction with, other living things and with active forces of nature. On the surface we can say, "We miss the hug, the pat on the back, the handshake, et al." However, if you drill down to the core of what all these things have in common, it is the natural, energetic unpredictability they contain, along the whole spectrum of reality from the macro/physical to the sub-atomic (in actions and material.)
Normally, in a healthy world and society, the fundamental energy that underlies existence is absorbed and exchanged by creatures in direct interaction with natural resources and other living things. Even the smallest interactions, such as handing money to a cashier or standing with others at a bus stop, or leaning on a tree, provides this important component of life. A fortiori, full-blown interactions of a social or physical nature are the most beneficial. When those interactions are stopped we are close to a living death. Half alive and half dead. How far away are we then from being bodies maintained by mechanical life support systems, wired to receive communication and entertainment? We are closer to being inanimate (or shall we say spiritless?), not just because our organisms may succumb to a virus, but because the avoidance of the virus is preventing us from living life as it must be lived in order for it to be called "life."
LUCKISM®, whether you call it a religion, a philosophy or a way of life, gives reverence to the element of chance and unpredictability which attaches to all matter and all action. This is the deficiency being felt by Homo sapiens in the time of plague. This is why, no matter how many virtual, electronic methods are found to supply our needs, we sense an enormous vacancy in our lives. Before the plague, this vacancy was only partial, the sense of unhealthiness was masked by feelings of novelty and diversions of entertainment. But now, we feel how thin the veneer of indirect experience is.
In the short term, those who agree with this analysis of the core problem may benefit from playing games which involve chance by themselves or with others with whom they are safely confined. This can range from coin-tossing, to cards, craps and roulette, if you have the equipment. Also Scrabble-like word games. But not games in which skill and experience are paramount. Games with a generous component of "luck" will provide some of the chancy energy which is missing.
Any contact with nature, no matter how small, is beneficial, even pouring water back and forth between two glasses. Let the scoffers laugh. Water is the chanciest substance, even in a glass. Standing by an open window and feeling the wind is good. The chance, my friend, is blowin' in the wind. Of course, houseplants and pets are desirable, including fish and turtles.
Needless to say, open-ended conversations and interactions with other people should be sought out, within the prescribed limits of safety.
The plague arose by chance and matters will proceed in accordance with chance and the efforts made by Homo sapiens. Social distancing seems to be in the cards, in some form or other, for the foreseeable future. This makes sacralizing what is left of natural chance in our lives more important than ever.
Luck you!
END
LUCKISM® AND THE PLAGUE
Presently, in a time of plague, we are experiencing, personally and directly, the effect on our lives when an essential element of life is almost completely reduced to nothing. What is that element in its irreducible essence? It is the chance, the uncertainty, the unpredictability that comes from proximity to, and real interaction with, other living things and with active forces of nature. On the surface we can say, "We miss the hug, the pat on the back, the handshake, et al." However, if you drill down to the core of what all these things have in common, it is the natural, energetic unpredictability they contain, along the whole spectrum of reality from the macro/physical to the sub-atomic (in actions and material.)
Normally, in a healthy world and society, the fundamental energy that underlies existence is absorbed and exchanged by creatures in direct interaction with natural resources and other living things. Even the smallest interactions, such as handing money to a cashier or standing with others at a bus stop, or leaning on a tree, provides this important component of life. A fortiori, full-blown interactions of a social or physical nature are the most beneficial. When those interactions are stopped we are close to a living death. Half alive and half dead. How far away are we then from being bodies maintained by mechanical life support systems, wired to receive communication and entertainment? We are closer to being inanimate (or shall we say spiritless?), not just because our organisms may succumb to a virus, but because the avoidance of the virus is preventing us from living life as it must be lived in order for it to be called "life."
LUCKISM®, whether you call it a religion, a philosophy or a way of life, gives reverence to the element of chance and unpredictability which attaches to all matter and all action. This is the deficiency being felt by Homo sapiens in the time of plague. This is why, no matter how many virtual, electronic methods are found to supply our needs, we sense an enormous vacancy in our lives. Before the plague, this vacancy was only partial, the sense of unhealthiness was masked by feelings of novelty and diversions of entertainment. But now, we feel how thin the veneer of indirect experience is.
In the short term, those who agree with this analysis of the core problem may benefit from playing games which involve chance by themselves or with others with whom they are safely confined. This can range from coin-tossing, to cards, craps and roulette, if you have the equipment. Also Scrabble-like word games. But not games in which skill and experience are paramount. Games with a generous component of "luck" will provide some of the chancy energy which is missing.
Any contact with nature, no matter how small, is beneficial, even pouring water back and forth between two glasses. Let the scoffers laugh. Water is the chanciest substance, even in a glass. Standing by an open window and feeling the wind is good. The chance, my friend, is blowin' in the wind. Of course, houseplants and pets are desirable, including fish and turtles.
Needless to say, open-ended conversations and interactions with other people should be sought out, within the prescribed limits of safety.
The plague arose by chance and matters will proceed in accordance with chance and the efforts made by Homo sapiens. Social distancing seems to be in the cards, in some form or other, for the foreseeable future. This makes sacralizing what is left of natural chance in our lives more important than ever.
Luck you!
END
Daily Ramble 44 - MOSS
May 3, 2020
MOSS
Our plague hideout is on a half-acre on Long Island, about 110 miles from New York City. We've had it for forty years. As a result of Emma's hard labor over that time, we have no grass. First, she removed the low brush and then the grass. Everything which would be covered by grass in a typical such property is covered here with moss.
The property consists of a house, trees, a pebbly stone driveway (in front and on one side, interspersed with moss), an accumulation of old leaves in the far back and all the rest is moss. If we consider 44,000 square feet as a half-acre, then I estimate that the moss is at least half of that.
The original moss has been encouraged by ruthless removal of invasive grass, transplanting surplus moss to needy areas and the occasional addition of new moss from gifts (the outstanding birthday gift of a moss-a-month for a year from our 3 sons comes to mind.)
What's the point? Well, grass is a typical example of a stupid fashion. In the form of lawn grass it is not an indigenous growth. It requires excessive watering, fertilizing and insect protection. See, for example, https://www.loveyourlandscape.org/expert-advice/lawn-care/insect-and-pest-control/5-common-pests-that-like-to-call-your-lawn-home/ Grass also has to be maintained by periodic cutting, a nasty labor with much accompanying noise. It is not comfortable to walk on barefoot. In short, it is an insane additional burden on the environment and the property owner.
Moss, on the other hand, is completely natural, requires only 1% of the water needed by a grass lawn (and, if it dries out, revives quickly when rainwater returns) doesn't need fertilizer, or insect protection, does not need cutting and is a pleasure to walk on barefoot. A news article from 2008 shows that we are not alone and may indicate that there is hope for the future of humanity - at least with respect to the ground cover they choose for their hideouts. https://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/01/garden/01moss.html
The "grass-moss analysis" can be done with many other things in society to which people are foolishly addicted. But that is not where I am rambling today.
Instead, the moss brings to mind my best friend in law school and for a few years afterwards - because his name was Moss. He was a handsome fellow in a generally Mediterranean way. Quite close to the actor Tom Cruise in appearance. The highlight of my first term in law school was a competition with him to see who could see more movies. No shortage of women in his life - or marijuana. He drove a super-powerful Pontiac GTO and I remember him beating out an aggressive taxi driver in an inches-apart race through the curved section of Park Avenue that runs under the Met Life building (at that time, the PanAm building.) One could say he had everything. Alas, he killed himself at age 28 - I know not why. There was a period of mental problems before that, which he attributed to adulterated grass.
Here endeth a genuine ramble into the past.
END
MOSS
Our plague hideout is on a half-acre on Long Island, about 110 miles from New York City. We've had it for forty years. As a result of Emma's hard labor over that time, we have no grass. First, she removed the low brush and then the grass. Everything which would be covered by grass in a typical such property is covered here with moss.
The property consists of a house, trees, a pebbly stone driveway (in front and on one side, interspersed with moss), an accumulation of old leaves in the far back and all the rest is moss. If we consider 44,000 square feet as a half-acre, then I estimate that the moss is at least half of that.
The original moss has been encouraged by ruthless removal of invasive grass, transplanting surplus moss to needy areas and the occasional addition of new moss from gifts (the outstanding birthday gift of a moss-a-month for a year from our 3 sons comes to mind.)
What's the point? Well, grass is a typical example of a stupid fashion. In the form of lawn grass it is not an indigenous growth. It requires excessive watering, fertilizing and insect protection. See, for example, https://www.loveyourlandscape.org/expert-advice/lawn-care/insect-and-pest-control/5-common-pests-that-like-to-call-your-lawn-home/ Grass also has to be maintained by periodic cutting, a nasty labor with much accompanying noise. It is not comfortable to walk on barefoot. In short, it is an insane additional burden on the environment and the property owner.
Moss, on the other hand, is completely natural, requires only 1% of the water needed by a grass lawn (and, if it dries out, revives quickly when rainwater returns) doesn't need fertilizer, or insect protection, does not need cutting and is a pleasure to walk on barefoot. A news article from 2008 shows that we are not alone and may indicate that there is hope for the future of humanity - at least with respect to the ground cover they choose for their hideouts. https://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/01/garden/01moss.html
The "grass-moss analysis" can be done with many other things in society to which people are foolishly addicted. But that is not where I am rambling today.
Instead, the moss brings to mind my best friend in law school and for a few years afterwards - because his name was Moss. He was a handsome fellow in a generally Mediterranean way. Quite close to the actor Tom Cruise in appearance. The highlight of my first term in law school was a competition with him to see who could see more movies. No shortage of women in his life - or marijuana. He drove a super-powerful Pontiac GTO and I remember him beating out an aggressive taxi driver in an inches-apart race through the curved section of Park Avenue that runs under the Met Life building (at that time, the PanAm building.) One could say he had everything. Alas, he killed himself at age 28 - I know not why. There was a period of mental problems before that, which he attributed to adulterated grass.
Here endeth a genuine ramble into the past.
END
Daily Ramble 43 - ALEATORY GUIDANCE
May 2, 2020
ALEATORY GUIDANCE
a·le·a·to·ry
adjective: aleatory; adjective: aleatoric
depending on the throw of a dice or on chance; random.
How is it possible that we can get knowledge and guidance from something that is random and chancy? That is the common sense question one asks when told that the I-Ching is a valuable system and will be used in LUCKISM®.
We must get rid of our automatic reactions and preconceptions about chance and randomness.
In Daily Ramble 31 - "LET THERE BE DICE!," I have touched on the recognition of chance in our daily lives and at the bottom of fundamental sciences such as Physics.
In the background, it is helpful but not decisive to know that the I-Ching has been in use for thousands of years. It has gained the respect of people such as Confucius, Carl Jung and Daniel Young.
It is also helpful, but not conclusive, to know that chance is useful in other areas without being specifically recognized as such. See generally, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Applications_of_randomness
For example, chance is involved in inferential statistics, the science of using random sampling of a small part of a population to reach conclusions about the entire population. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_inference/ Making decisions on the basis of statistical analysis is nothing less than looking at an accumulation of a mass of individually chancy events and combining them to get a definite conclusion.
Polling applies statistical methods to arrive at a prediction from an accumulation or sampling of individual facts, each of which, by itself, has no overall predictive power. Statistical chance is also at the foundation of the gambling industry, guaranteeing a profit from individual gambling events which are, by themselves, unpredictable.
The conclusions or "profit" reached in the business of particle physics, also known as high energy physics, are of the same type. The final particle "observations" are not fruitful or meaningful until they are extracted from indirect detection of billions of individual, unpredictable events. So, in my view, they are nothing more than condensations or digests of chance, viewed in accordance with a notion that certain probabilities indicate the existence and movement of particles.
Let's move one step further along the line of research in particle physics. According to Nima Arkani-Hamed of the Institute For Advanced Study (a leading light in these matters) the research at high energy, (banging particles together to see what comes out), is reaching its limits. To continue going further in that direction will require so much energy concentrated on so small an area that it will create a black hole, "swallowing" the very things we want to observe. I understand him to suggest a new way to go further by looking for mathematical/geometrical explanations of what we have already observed. (Keep in mind that those underlying observations already have chance as an ingredient.)
Arkani-Hamed proposes a description of the entire cosmological history and contents of the universe as a mathematical object. His approach, called a "bootstrap" method, infers the laws of nature by considering only the mathematical logic and self-consistency of the laws themselves, instead of building on empirical evidence. Whew! That's a mind blower. Or is it a simplification? Or a unification? Is it real? Godel's work suggests that, whatever mathematical system is used to accomplish the purpose of explaining the universe as a mathematical object, it will have incompleteness at it base. So, I ask, "What is existing and operating in the area of incompleteness beyond Arkani-Hamed's future explanation?" I say,"chance, uncertainty and unpredictability." "ALL THE WAY DOWN," as the lady said.
In sum, chance may be an ineluctable aspect of the existence of matter/energy and the universe, however you derive or describe them with the prevailing tools of physics and mathematics. Stated differently, you cannot have a continuation of reality, let alone life, without chance, whether it is in a Ptolemaic geocentric system, a Newtonian cosmos, an Einsteinian/ Bohrian spacetime/quantum universe or some mathematical/geometric construct slouching towards Princeton to be born.
Now let's move from "science" to ordinary decisions and conclusions in life. Consider how you make a decision in a state of uncertainty, after you have the best input from all the experts you think are needed, scientists, economists, psychologists, ethicists, politicians, family, friends, Google, etc. (I mention without stressing it, that there will already be an abundance of chance elements entering into those opinions.) What do you do with the many varying facts and opinions? You "make up your mind." So let's look into the making up of the mind. Is it weighing pros and cons? If so how do you assign weights? Is it the "preponderance of evidence" use in jury decisions (whatever that means)? Don't forget that there is a lot of chancy stuff also going on in the thinking organ you call a "brain.'
I could go on with this line of questioning and reasoning but I don't think it's needed. It leads to the conclusion that, when there are imponderables, or a multiplicity of contradictory factors or opinions, chance will enter into the decision, all along the way, in dealing with the spectrum of facts and expert opinions.
Bottom line: Using chance explicitly, in a system designed to have it create patterns, and interpreting those patterns (the most difficult part) in accordance with an underlying philosophy is not in conflict with common sense. Moreover, placing chance or unknowability at the center of a religion is more grounded in reality than relying on the provisional certainties of Science delivered by the current stars of the subject or on the instructions of a god, delivered by way of representatives known as prophets or priests or mullahs or rabbis or popes.
I have much more to say about the I-Ching and its use in the gatherings of LUCKISM® to decide questions of importance to the congregation. But this is enough for one ramble.
END
ALEATORY GUIDANCE
a·le·a·to·ry
adjective: aleatory; adjective: aleatoric
depending on the throw of a dice or on chance; random.
How is it possible that we can get knowledge and guidance from something that is random and chancy? That is the common sense question one asks when told that the I-Ching is a valuable system and will be used in LUCKISM®.
We must get rid of our automatic reactions and preconceptions about chance and randomness.
In Daily Ramble 31 - "LET THERE BE DICE!," I have touched on the recognition of chance in our daily lives and at the bottom of fundamental sciences such as Physics.
In the background, it is helpful but not decisive to know that the I-Ching has been in use for thousands of years. It has gained the respect of people such as Confucius, Carl Jung and Daniel Young.
It is also helpful, but not conclusive, to know that chance is useful in other areas without being specifically recognized as such. See generally, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Applications_of_randomness
For example, chance is involved in inferential statistics, the science of using random sampling of a small part of a population to reach conclusions about the entire population. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_inference/ Making decisions on the basis of statistical analysis is nothing less than looking at an accumulation of a mass of individually chancy events and combining them to get a definite conclusion.
Polling applies statistical methods to arrive at a prediction from an accumulation or sampling of individual facts, each of which, by itself, has no overall predictive power. Statistical chance is also at the foundation of the gambling industry, guaranteeing a profit from individual gambling events which are, by themselves, unpredictable.
The conclusions or "profit" reached in the business of particle physics, also known as high energy physics, are of the same type. The final particle "observations" are not fruitful or meaningful until they are extracted from indirect detection of billions of individual, unpredictable events. So, in my view, they are nothing more than condensations or digests of chance, viewed in accordance with a notion that certain probabilities indicate the existence and movement of particles.
Let's move one step further along the line of research in particle physics. According to Nima Arkani-Hamed of the Institute For Advanced Study (a leading light in these matters) the research at high energy, (banging particles together to see what comes out), is reaching its limits. To continue going further in that direction will require so much energy concentrated on so small an area that it will create a black hole, "swallowing" the very things we want to observe. I understand him to suggest a new way to go further by looking for mathematical/geometrical explanations of what we have already observed. (Keep in mind that those underlying observations already have chance as an ingredient.)
Arkani-Hamed proposes a description of the entire cosmological history and contents of the universe as a mathematical object. His approach, called a "bootstrap" method, infers the laws of nature by considering only the mathematical logic and self-consistency of the laws themselves, instead of building on empirical evidence. Whew! That's a mind blower. Or is it a simplification? Or a unification? Is it real? Godel's work suggests that, whatever mathematical system is used to accomplish the purpose of explaining the universe as a mathematical object, it will have incompleteness at it base. So, I ask, "What is existing and operating in the area of incompleteness beyond Arkani-Hamed's future explanation?" I say,"chance, uncertainty and unpredictability." "ALL THE WAY DOWN," as the lady said.
In sum, chance may be an ineluctable aspect of the existence of matter/energy and the universe, however you derive or describe them with the prevailing tools of physics and mathematics. Stated differently, you cannot have a continuation of reality, let alone life, without chance, whether it is in a Ptolemaic geocentric system, a Newtonian cosmos, an Einsteinian/ Bohrian spacetime/quantum universe or some mathematical/geometric construct slouching towards Princeton to be born.
Now let's move from "science" to ordinary decisions and conclusions in life. Consider how you make a decision in a state of uncertainty, after you have the best input from all the experts you think are needed, scientists, economists, psychologists, ethicists, politicians, family, friends, Google, etc. (I mention without stressing it, that there will already be an abundance of chance elements entering into those opinions.) What do you do with the many varying facts and opinions? You "make up your mind." So let's look into the making up of the mind. Is it weighing pros and cons? If so how do you assign weights? Is it the "preponderance of evidence" use in jury decisions (whatever that means)? Don't forget that there is a lot of chancy stuff also going on in the thinking organ you call a "brain.'
I could go on with this line of questioning and reasoning but I don't think it's needed. It leads to the conclusion that, when there are imponderables, or a multiplicity of contradictory factors or opinions, chance will enter into the decision, all along the way, in dealing with the spectrum of facts and expert opinions.
Bottom line: Using chance explicitly, in a system designed to have it create patterns, and interpreting those patterns (the most difficult part) in accordance with an underlying philosophy is not in conflict with common sense. Moreover, placing chance or unknowability at the center of a religion is more grounded in reality than relying on the provisional certainties of Science delivered by the current stars of the subject or on the instructions of a god, delivered by way of representatives known as prophets or priests or mullahs or rabbis or popes.
I have much more to say about the I-Ching and its use in the gatherings of LUCKISM® to decide questions of importance to the congregation. But this is enough for one ramble.
END
Daily Ramble 42 - REAL POETRY
May 1, 2020
REAL POETRY
Written more than 400 years ago by John Donne (1572 - 1631) (but not published until after his death) his poem "The Good-Morrow" contains an example of what I consider real poetry in the second stanza.
The Good-Morrow
I Wonder by my troth, what thou, and I
Did, till we lov'd? were we not wean'd till then?
But suck'd on countrey pleasures, childishly?
Or snorted we in the seaven sleepers den?
T'was so; But this, all pleasures fancies bee.
If ever any beauty I did see,
Which I desired, and got, t'was but a dreame of thee.
And now good morrow to our waking soules,
Which watch not one another out of feare;
For love, all love of other sights controules,
And makes one little roome, an every where.
Let sea-discoverers to new worlds have gone,
Let Maps to other, worlds on worlds have showne;
Let us possesse one world, each hath one, and is one.
My face in thine eye, thine in mine appeares,
And true plain hearts do in the faces rest,
Where can we finde two better hemispheares
Without sharpe North, without declining West?
What ever dies, was not mixd equally;
If our two loves be one, or, thou and I
Love so alike, that none doe slacken, none can die.
It makes it clear that the setting is the bed where two lovers are waking up. I put aside the pleasure which comes from the subtle and masterly rhyme scheme, ababccc and the absence of any feeling that the rhymes are forced.
Here's why I prize the second section: It is the audacious alteration of our expectations and the quantum jumps from physicality to psychology to philosophy within a few perfectly expressed lines (namely, the first four) that blows our minds. First, an apparently conventional greeting (good morrow, i.e., good morning) is addressed, not to the body, but to the soul. We are unexpectedly moved from the bed to some other place. Then, we learn that fear (which is presumed to be the norm with which one soul meets another - a deep suggestion, quickly made) has disappeared in this situation. Finally, we are given the reason; the emotion of love has removed it. Why? The final philosophical conclusion tells us that love overcomes and controls all other perceptions. We are finished off with a demonstrative image - the little room in which they/we find them/ourselves is turned into the universe. When something takes us from the local to the universal with concise and beautiful language it may be properly called poetry.
The only thing that could add to this accomplishment is if the poet's thought is expressing an eternal truth on the deepest level. Of this point, I am not certain. Is the poet describing a momentary sensation or an enduring one? It is already a great accomplishment to exquisitely express the power of the emotion called love, and to suggest that it attaches to something called the soul and has a transformative effect.
In the last section Donne tries to take it to the ultimate point, i.e., that this is something that does not die. But the poetic momentum and "reasoning" of the second section does not carry me with him into the final section. I do not find in the last stanza the persuasiveness of the second. But that is not cause for despair. True poetry is a rarity. It may show in a line or two, once in a while. It has to be mined and refined by the reader willing to dig through a lot of ordinary writing.
Randall Jarrell (1914-1965) said, "A good poet is someone who manages, in a lifetime of standing out in thunderstorm, to be struck by lightening five or six times; a dozen or two dozen times and he is great."
END
REAL POETRY
Written more than 400 years ago by John Donne (1572 - 1631) (but not published until after his death) his poem "The Good-Morrow" contains an example of what I consider real poetry in the second stanza.
The Good-Morrow
I Wonder by my troth, what thou, and I
Did, till we lov'd? were we not wean'd till then?
But suck'd on countrey pleasures, childishly?
Or snorted we in the seaven sleepers den?
T'was so; But this, all pleasures fancies bee.
If ever any beauty I did see,
Which I desired, and got, t'was but a dreame of thee.
And now good morrow to our waking soules,
Which watch not one another out of feare;
For love, all love of other sights controules,
And makes one little roome, an every where.
Let sea-discoverers to new worlds have gone,
Let Maps to other, worlds on worlds have showne;
Let us possesse one world, each hath one, and is one.
My face in thine eye, thine in mine appeares,
And true plain hearts do in the faces rest,
Where can we finde two better hemispheares
Without sharpe North, without declining West?
What ever dies, was not mixd equally;
If our two loves be one, or, thou and I
Love so alike, that none doe slacken, none can die.
It makes it clear that the setting is the bed where two lovers are waking up. I put aside the pleasure which comes from the subtle and masterly rhyme scheme, ababccc and the absence of any feeling that the rhymes are forced.
Here's why I prize the second section: It is the audacious alteration of our expectations and the quantum jumps from physicality to psychology to philosophy within a few perfectly expressed lines (namely, the first four) that blows our minds. First, an apparently conventional greeting (good morrow, i.e., good morning) is addressed, not to the body, but to the soul. We are unexpectedly moved from the bed to some other place. Then, we learn that fear (which is presumed to be the norm with which one soul meets another - a deep suggestion, quickly made) has disappeared in this situation. Finally, we are given the reason; the emotion of love has removed it. Why? The final philosophical conclusion tells us that love overcomes and controls all other perceptions. We are finished off with a demonstrative image - the little room in which they/we find them/ourselves is turned into the universe. When something takes us from the local to the universal with concise and beautiful language it may be properly called poetry.
The only thing that could add to this accomplishment is if the poet's thought is expressing an eternal truth on the deepest level. Of this point, I am not certain. Is the poet describing a momentary sensation or an enduring one? It is already a great accomplishment to exquisitely express the power of the emotion called love, and to suggest that it attaches to something called the soul and has a transformative effect.
In the last section Donne tries to take it to the ultimate point, i.e., that this is something that does not die. But the poetic momentum and "reasoning" of the second section does not carry me with him into the final section. I do not find in the last stanza the persuasiveness of the second. But that is not cause for despair. True poetry is a rarity. It may show in a line or two, once in a while. It has to be mined and refined by the reader willing to dig through a lot of ordinary writing.
Randall Jarrell (1914-1965) said, "A good poet is someone who manages, in a lifetime of standing out in thunderstorm, to be struck by lightening five or six times; a dozen or two dozen times and he is great."
END
Daily Ramble 41 - POETIC SINGING
April 30, 2020
POETIC SINGING
This morning my favorite song came to mind, Robert Burns' "Green Grow The Rashes." I thought, "Why not sing it instead of writing a ramble?" That felt like something simple, natural and fully in tune with the most ancient mode of human entertainment - close to the singing of the birds and the howling of the wolves.
Of course, being a human composition, by a great poet, this song is deep and meaningful on many levels. At the conclusion of my rendition I will add some comments. [The original version of this ramble had me singing but getting that audio file into Blogger was too complicated.]
Here is Ewan Maccoll singing Robert Burns' "Green Grow The Rashes." I learned the song from him.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOSgzY5QkyU
[Chorus]
Green grow the rashes, O,
Green grow the rashes, O,
The sweetest hours that e'er I spend,
Are spent amang the lasses, Oh.
There's nought but care on ev'ry han',
In ev'ry hour that passes, O,
What signifies the life o' man,
An' 'twere na for the lasses, O,
Green grow, etc.
The war'ly race may riches chase,
An' riches still may fly them, O,
An' tho' at last they catch them fast,
Their hearts can ne'er enjoy them, O.
Green grow, etc.
But gie me a cannie hour at e'en,
My arms about my dearie, O,
An' war'ly cares, an' war'ly men,
May a' gae tapsalteerie, O!
Green grow, etc.
For you sae douce, ye sneer at this,
Ye're nought but senseless asses, O,
The wisest man the warl' e'er saw,
He dearly lov'd the lasses, O.
Green grow, etc.
Auld Nature swears, the lovely dears
Her noblest work she classes, O,
Her prentice han' she try'd on man,
An' then she made the lasses, O!
Green grow,etc.
In this poem Burn manages to cover,with wit and profundity, three important topics, loving relationships, human greed and religion. He handles all three with enjoyable poetry and penetration.
He gives human intimate relationships first place in balancing and overcoming the cares of life and bringing about its sweetest moments. He rejects those who focus on accumulating riches (which never satisfy their hearts). He scorns those who sneer at his valuation of relationships, pointing out the Biblical example of wise King Solomon, reputedly the consummate appreciator of women.
Finally, in a magisterial conclusion, he gives the creator god the feminine form of Nature and cleverly changes the creation of man into an early experiment by her "apprentice hand," culminating in the more perfect form of woman.
Odd footnote: The word "gringo," used in Mexico to describe Americans supposedly originates from the Mexican War (1846-1848), when American Soldiers would sing the very popular song, Robert Burns’ Green Grow the Rashes (gringo = green grow)
END
POETIC SINGING
This morning my favorite song came to mind, Robert Burns' "Green Grow The Rashes." I thought, "Why not sing it instead of writing a ramble?" That felt like something simple, natural and fully in tune with the most ancient mode of human entertainment - close to the singing of the birds and the howling of the wolves.
Of course, being a human composition, by a great poet, this song is deep and meaningful on many levels. At the conclusion of my rendition I will add some comments. [The original version of this ramble had me singing but getting that audio file into Blogger was too complicated.]
Here is Ewan Maccoll singing Robert Burns' "Green Grow The Rashes." I learned the song from him.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOSgzY5QkyU
[Chorus]
Green grow the rashes, O,
Green grow the rashes, O,
The sweetest hours that e'er I spend,
Are spent amang the lasses, Oh.
There's nought but care on ev'ry han',
In ev'ry hour that passes, O,
What signifies the life o' man,
An' 'twere na for the lasses, O,
Green grow, etc.
The war'ly race may riches chase,
An' riches still may fly them, O,
An' tho' at last they catch them fast,
Their hearts can ne'er enjoy them, O.
Green grow, etc.
But gie me a cannie hour at e'en,
My arms about my dearie, O,
An' war'ly cares, an' war'ly men,
May a' gae tapsalteerie, O!
Green grow, etc.
For you sae douce, ye sneer at this,
Ye're nought but senseless asses, O,
The wisest man the warl' e'er saw,
He dearly lov'd the lasses, O.
Green grow, etc.
Auld Nature swears, the lovely dears
Her noblest work she classes, O,
Her prentice han' she try'd on man,
An' then she made the lasses, O!
Green grow,etc.
In this poem Burn manages to cover,with wit and profundity, three important topics, loving relationships, human greed and religion. He handles all three with enjoyable poetry and penetration.
He gives human intimate relationships first place in balancing and overcoming the cares of life and bringing about its sweetest moments. He rejects those who focus on accumulating riches (which never satisfy their hearts). He scorns those who sneer at his valuation of relationships, pointing out the Biblical example of wise King Solomon, reputedly the consummate appreciator of women.
Finally, in a magisterial conclusion, he gives the creator god the feminine form of Nature and cleverly changes the creation of man into an early experiment by her "apprentice hand," culminating in the more perfect form of woman.
Odd footnote: The word "gringo," used in Mexico to describe Americans supposedly originates from the Mexican War (1846-1848), when American Soldiers would sing the very popular song, Robert Burns’ Green Grow the Rashes (gringo = green grow)
END
Daily Ramble 40 - DESIGN VERSUS FASHION
April 29, 2020
DESIGN VERSUS FASHION
My thesis: Design can have broad redeeming social purposes. (Witness the noble designer who is trying to develop a new and improved religion.) Fashion has only the narrow purposes of sending signals related to social status and mating potential.
Shoes offer a good subject for examining the difference between design and fashion. On the design side of shoes we have developments such as cushioning material like Dupont's Vibram, structural shock-absorbing heels such as those marketed by Clarks and Nike, traction-increasing soles for slippery conditions and laces versus other closure methods. Plus better production methods which make good shoes available at lower prices. Or even the conversion of rubber tires to flip-flops.
On the fashion side we have developments such as high heels, LEDs and decoration, including coloration of the soles. There is little functional difference between a contemporary shoe design and a Chinese one from the late 1800s. And none of that function is for purposes other than displaying the vulnerability and sexual availability of the wearer.
Since the only real function of fashion is to communicate social signals, the examples shown above indicate, at their core, a willingness to suffer and submit to social pressure, thereby sending a signal to potential mates or employers interested in those characteristics.
Historically, some fashions had a real-world reference. For example, if the sleeves of a Central-Asian man's robes hung down way over his hands, it was a sign he did not have to use his hands, meaning he was an aristocrat.
In contrast, the skimpiness of mens' clothing in current fashion and the exposure of their hands and feet indicates, notwithstanding the princely sums they may have spent on the clothing, they are slaves. Not only is fashion promoting wasteful consumption, it is also helping maintain a society in which slaves are deluded into thinking the uniforms of their slavery are fashionable. (This same delusion operates with respect to electronic communication devices. The slaves take pride in having the latest, thinnest and fastest device for chaining them to the workplace.)
Where to begin the therapy for such widespread pathology? What river can we divert to run through the society to clean out the fashionable muck which has filled the stores and closets of the country (not to mention the minds)? How can we end the infantile obsession with newness? No..., "infantile" is the wrong word. A healthy infant can find endless interest in a simple object and does not need the unnatural stimulation of an endless flow of new things... at least, not until it begins to be corrupted by the adult world. This is an adult pathology, an illness originating in psychological emptiness, unbalanced production and wastefulness in a decadent society.
At the moment I can only generalize. The best thing we can do is make function, simple multi-function, reuse and repair fashionable. The designer who takes a blanket and makes it suit a variety of clothing needs has my vote. We have to design our way out of fashion. If I was teaching in a design school I would begin by studying the design objects used by the aboriginal natives of Africa and Australasia. They would make a healthy contrast to the "design objects" prized by fashionistas in developed countries.
END
DESIGN VERSUS FASHION
My thesis: Design can have broad redeeming social purposes. (Witness the noble designer who is trying to develop a new and improved religion.) Fashion has only the narrow purposes of sending signals related to social status and mating potential.
Shoes offer a good subject for examining the difference between design and fashion. On the design side of shoes we have developments such as cushioning material like Dupont's Vibram, structural shock-absorbing heels such as those marketed by Clarks and Nike, traction-increasing soles for slippery conditions and laces versus other closure methods. Plus better production methods which make good shoes available at lower prices. Or even the conversion of rubber tires to flip-flops.
On the fashion side we have developments such as high heels, LEDs and decoration, including coloration of the soles. There is little functional difference between a contemporary shoe design and a Chinese one from the late 1800s. And none of that function is for purposes other than displaying the vulnerability and sexual availability of the wearer.
Since the only real function of fashion is to communicate social signals, the examples shown above indicate, at their core, a willingness to suffer and submit to social pressure, thereby sending a signal to potential mates or employers interested in those characteristics.
Historically, some fashions had a real-world reference. For example, if the sleeves of a Central-Asian man's robes hung down way over his hands, it was a sign he did not have to use his hands, meaning he was an aristocrat.
In contrast, the skimpiness of mens' clothing in current fashion and the exposure of their hands and feet indicates, notwithstanding the princely sums they may have spent on the clothing, they are slaves. Not only is fashion promoting wasteful consumption, it is also helping maintain a society in which slaves are deluded into thinking the uniforms of their slavery are fashionable. (This same delusion operates with respect to electronic communication devices. The slaves take pride in having the latest, thinnest and fastest device for chaining them to the workplace.)
Where to begin the therapy for such widespread pathology? What river can we divert to run through the society to clean out the fashionable muck which has filled the stores and closets of the country (not to mention the minds)? How can we end the infantile obsession with newness? No..., "infantile" is the wrong word. A healthy infant can find endless interest in a simple object and does not need the unnatural stimulation of an endless flow of new things... at least, not until it begins to be corrupted by the adult world. This is an adult pathology, an illness originating in psychological emptiness, unbalanced production and wastefulness in a decadent society.
At the moment I can only generalize. The best thing we can do is make function, simple multi-function, reuse and repair fashionable. The designer who takes a blanket and makes it suit a variety of clothing needs has my vote. We have to design our way out of fashion. If I was teaching in a design school I would begin by studying the design objects used by the aboriginal natives of Africa and Australasia. They would make a healthy contrast to the "design objects" prized by fashionistas in developed countries.
END
Daily Rable 39 - EGO TRIP
April 28, 2020
EGO TRIP
Once in a while, let's say... once every 40 days or so, a person is allowed to go on an ego trip.
On this trip I will post random photos of myself.
EGO TRIP
Once in a while, let's say... once every 40 days or so, a person is allowed to go on an ego trip.
On this trip I will post random photos of myself.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)