There is no creative endeavor that is a waste of time.
"Life is like that. If you don't enjoy it, you void the warranty."
I'm waiting for someone to digitally insert Sean Connery into all of Roger Moore's movies.
The more things I try, the more things I find I can do.
I: If you want the discussion
Kermix: I was looking at other discussions as well, briefly
Kermix: And even if it were an "elaborate hoax", the fact that it has a complex appearance, could teach us something just by how we try to decipher it
I: Or why someone would make it
Kermix: Any scientific observation includes the instrument, and tells us as much about the instrument as it does about the observation
Kermix: So maybe that thing tells my nervous system that it's a message from Xtlocthxep, that tells you as much about me as it does about the thing
Kermix: By the same token, if I say it's a hoax, you have a pretty clear idea of my beliefs in that regard
I: Do I?
I: The wired article someone linked to is pretty neat
Kermix: Maybe. At the very least, my belief tends to be reflected by my observation
Kermix: When I'm not paying attention, I will mirror my surroundings, as I did when we had no direct sunlight for weeks, and I allowed myself to remain sick
I: w00t, rejemy commented!
Kermix: The day it stopped, Raul dragged me out of the house, we talked, did stuff, and I felt better
Kermix: And yeah, I saw that :D
I: Alison said she was talking to him last night
I: "This "expertise gap" is rife in academia, but few recognize it, let alone know how to correct for it. It starts with the best of intentions. Institutions want top-notch people, so they offer incentives to attract and groom experts. Young grad students learn early that if they want to carve out a niche, they must confine their interests to a narrow field. It's not enough to work in spinal cord regeneration; it must be stem cell-based solutions to the problem. That's great if a researcher just happens to stumble on a perfect stem cell cure. But as specialists get further from their core expertise, the possible solutions - what's been tried, what hasn't, what was never properly examined, what ought to be tried again - get even more elusive."
I: This is why I left school
I: Pretty much
I: in a nutshell
Kermix: "Specialization is for insects"
Kermix: Hm, this Rugg article is gonna make me think if I sit down and actually read it, but I need to eat first
I: "Psychological studies suggest that experts, defined as someone with 10 years in a discipline, don't have any more reasoning power than the rest of us. What they have is tons of experience. An old doctor, for instance, has seen so many cases of the mumps that he no longer follows methodical reasoning to arrive at a diagnosis. He instead uses a shortcut called pattern-matching: face red and swollen - mumps. Next!"
I: I told you; psychology is in its infancy
I: It has potential
Kermix: I saw this years ago when I used to hang out with CalTech students
Kermix: They got so good at complex things that they would forget the basics and look like big geeks
Kermix: Plenty of experience, plenty of studying power, able to deal with complex ideas, but the same reasoning power they walked in with
I: One of my big things is intelligence
I: I don't believe in it anymore
I: I don't think I ever did; it was just shoved down my throat since I was "smart"
I: But I don't think I've ever been called arrogant
I: I don't talk down to people
Kermix: At least you didn't believe you were stupid
I: But I did
I: You can't have one side of the coin without the other
I: I can't call you smart without you thinking: "How smart?"
I: Then you can make comparisons to Einstein or Hawking or Edison or Corky Burke
Kermix: which requires a definition of smart, I get it
I: You can't be smart without being "smarter than"
I: Which also makes you "stupider than" someone
Kermix: We do have a lot of words whose meanings we've sort of lost or fogged up
Kermix: blurry boundary lines
Kermix: I stopped believing in mental illness for much the same reasons
I: I think intelligence—especially entity models of intelligence, where you are as smart as x number of points for your whole life—is one of the most destructive influences in society
Kermix: They created boundaries and prisons that implied a hierarchy of power
Kermix: Hateatron!Anberu has acknowledged a multiple personality, but she still sees it as she's been taught, as an illness... and it basically houses a lot of her dark side
Kermix: Morrison says, let's embrace our dark sides as part of who we are, and regain our sense of power
Kermix: Learn from these divisions we made in our own heads
Kermix: At the end of The Invisibles, Jack Frost says that we invented gods, police, jailers, and other authorities to keep us safe from each other... and then we forgot that we invented them
Kermix: The last words in the book are, "Our sentence is up"
Drew's entry is protected, but for those who can't see it, a little bit of wisdom came from it:
This all ties into some things I've been thinking about lately in terms of humanity/society acting as a whole. The way that we come upon information is all through the above sort of shared authorship (and not just with kermix). This is all throughout history. I think the lone inventor is a myth, or at most an epiphenomenon of the post-Renaissance world. Newton himself said he stood upon the shoulders of giants. I think he stood on the shoulders of regular guys like himself; like ourselves. Because as it seems, we're moving towards a sort of personal independence. You have more freedom since you don't have to grow, gather and kill all your own food. We're free to do more things, go more places, contemplate more often because we have unyoked ourselves. But simultaneously, we are more interdependent when it comes to science and technology. We know (or think we know) Edison invented the phonograph. Who invented the CD player?
I welcome people to be whoever they are, or think they are. Relish the diversity of inputs. Humanity itself is an information system. But you are more than a bit. You're a self-modifying program in the mainframe, and you have the power to change how other programs modify themselves. Your goal is an answer; we are all philosophers. "All I want is the same as everyone: Why am I here, and for how long?" But even if you find your answer, it will not be the answer for any other program, as they all have different parameters. Perhaps then, the true answer is in the searching. Are we looking for a method by which to live our lives, by which to find the answer(s)? To make the search easier, while no less fun, for the next generation? To what end?
Perhaps we should not be concerned with ends. Perhaps we should be concerned with means, where the means are our present thoughts and actions. If you are no longer focused on the ends, you remove "judgement" from the equation, as it implies a temporal analysis. Without judgement, "good" and "bad", you remove anxiety and equivocation. We know what we each of us want, and we have an idea how to get it. You remove the wall between idea and action. And so doing, you become the fool.
If you never take the leap, you'll never know if you can fly. Live lucid.