On language

We should not forget that it can behave like a virus. Some may go as far to say that it is one.

Supposedly it is used to encode and decode information by using arbitrary symbols and sounds.

The development and usage of language is a credit to the human (and inhuman.. un-human) creativity.

We’re taught rules of our native tongue when young so we can effectively communicate to others of similar descent or culture. Learned so young, language becomes innate, often inseparable from what we term our thoughts. Words, concepts and ideas have become interchangeable. The structure of language steers our perceptions.

Mediums are used to convey expression primarily. While some may attest that language was developed to facilitate reason, the expression inherently imbued in the use of language creates a much denser medium.

Much of language, as it presents itself, is not transparent. Even “honesty,” which strives for transparency, manifests as translucent at best.

It is naive to limit one’s view of language to merely words. Words can act as cloaks, masks, decoys. There are so many more communicative tools beyond the written or spoken words. Yes, I am talking of nonverbal communication such as body language, but also beyond that as well. Nuances, aires, scents… are all languages, illustrating similar properties when behaving as a vein of the Language entity.

As an egregore, composed of the whole of the human race (not to mention every life form on the planet… and potentially every astronomical and astral body), it is rapidly evolving, acutely aware, constantly shifting and highly adaptable and evasive.

It’s really not about what you say, or how you say it. It’s not even about if you “mean” it (or if you think you do, or if you don’t but you want to, etc). It’s about something completely different from all that… something that by virtue of its nature, I cannot put into words or ever convey to another.

iou some Adaptation

I glanced at your blog and saw:

oui oui oui oui oui oui … over and over again, taking up pages…

until the word and the form broke down as the spacing became different and the letters ran together.

ouio uiou ioui oui ouiouiouio uioui ouio uiou iou iou iou iou … the transformation to iou over and over again.

Instead a string of oui’s without any other content, the message became extremely different: iou. This begged the question of what, what does the I owe you?

It read somewhere down the page of nonsensicle things to owe another: iou sky, iou soft, iou heart… iou love. That was the one that struck me: iou love. I wanted to reach out to hold you and tell you no, love is not something you owe another. I knew I was not the you being spoken of or to in the spiraling message. But I have been in that I before and in that you. It was so diificult to see a loved one be the I in the owing. You don’t owe him anything; you do not carry the responsibility of making him realize beauty and life. You have showed him all you can by action and example, with your affection and words, in all times and spaces that togetherness was possible.

In Adaptation there are four central characters: Charlie, Donald, Susan and Laroche. If you haven’t seen the movie, the associations break down like this: Charlie and Donald are identical twin brothers both screen play writers but with very non-identical personalities. Susan and Laroche become romantically involved despite the fact that Susan is married and that she originally thought Laroche was a madman. In these couples, it becomes apparent that one of the 2 “know how to live,” in a sense. They exude passion and exuberance in the face of life. They take chances and opportunities for experience even if it may cost them time and pain. These characters are Donald and Laroche. Susan and Chralie tend to be more isolated, at least personally, emotionally. The way they live their lives is more governed by sadness, anxiety or fear. They don’t put all their chips on the table, rather they don’t even sit down at it most times. Susan hides her truths from people, even herself. Charlie believes that his truths are ugly and so hides himself from people. What’s the point in all this? Donald and Laroche have elements in them that are so bright, they ignite others around them. If the Charlies and Susans of the world want to really live, they should learn from the Donalds and Laroches. It is not an easy process and certainly not a quick one. Sometimes, as unfortunate as it sounds, for Charlie or Susan to start living, they must burn on their own, learning to create their own light in the abscence of Donald and Laroche.

“Charlie Kaufman: There was this time in high school. I was watching you out the library window. You were talking to Sarah Marsh.
Donald Kaufman: Oh, God. I was so in love with her.
Charlie Kaufman: I know. And you were flirting with her. And she was being really sweet to you.
Donald Kaufman: I remember that.
Charlie Kaufman: Then, when you walked away, she started making fun of you with Kim Canetti. And it was like they were laughing at *me*. You didn’t know at all. You seemed so happy.
Donald Kaufman: I knew. I heard them.
Charlie Kaufman: How come you looked so happy?
Donald Kaufman: I loved Sarah, Charles. It was mine, that love. I owned it. Even Sarah didn’t have the right to take it away. I can love whoever I want.
Charlie Kaufman: But she thought you were pathetic.
Donald Kaufman: That was her business, not mine. You are what you love, not what loves you. That’s what I decided a long time ago.
Donald Kaufman: Whats up?
Charlie Kaufman: Thank you.
Donald Kaufman: For what?”

“John Laroche: You know why I like plants?
Susan Orlean: Nuh uh.
John Laroche: Because they’re so mutable. Adaptation is a profound process. Means you figure out how to thrive in the world.
Susan Orlean: [pause] Yeah but it’s easier for plants. I mean they have no memory. They just move on to whatever’s next. With a person though, adapting almost shameful. It’s like running away.”

And the one we must never forget:

John Laroche: Point is, what’s so wonderful is that every one of these flowers has a specific relationship with the insect that pollinates it. There’s a certain orchid look exactly like a certain insect so the insect is drawn to this flower, its double, its soul mate, and wants nothing more than to make love to it. And after the insect flies off, spots another soul-mate flower and makes love to it, thus pollinating it. And neither the flower nor the insect will ever understand the significance of their lovemaking. I mean, how could they know that because of their little dance the world lives? But it does. By simply doing what they’re designed to do, something large and magnificent happens. In this sense they show us how to live – how the only barometer you have is your heart. How, when you spot your flower, you can’t let anything get in your way.

---

A work of Fiction

A story using the Devil’s Dictionary:

It started like this:

ACQUAINTANCE, n.

A person whom we know well enough to borrow from, but not well enough to lend to. A degree of friendship called slight when its object is poor or obscure, and intimate when he is rich or famous.

CONVERSATION, n.

A fair to the display of the minor mental commodities, each exhibitor being too intent upon the arrangement of his own wares to observe those of his neighbor.

Simple as that. Then we set to do something, to make something… it was to be

GREAT, adj.

    "I'm great," the Lion said -- "I reign
    The monarch of the wood and plain!"

    The Elephant replied:  "I'm great --
    No quadruped can match my weight!"

    "I'm great -- no animal has half
    So long a neck!" said the Giraffe.

    "I'm great," the Kangaroo said -- "see
    My femoral muscularity!"

    The 'Possum said:  "I'm great -- behold,
    My tail is lithe and bald and cold!"

    An Oyster fried was understood
    To say:  "I'm great because I'm good!"

    Each reckons greatness to consist
    In that in which he heads the list,

    And Vierick thinks he tops his class
    Because he is the greatest ass.
                                    -Arion Spurl Doke

We would be discussing and exploring such things together:

PHILOSOPHY, n.

A route of many roads leading from nowhere to nothing.

TRUTH, n.

An ingenious compound of desirability and appearance. Discovery of truth is the sole purpose of philosophy, which is the most ancient occupation of the human mind and has a fair prospect of existing with increasing activity to the end of time.

REALITY, n.

The dream of a mad philosopher. That which would remain in the cupel if one should assay a phantom. The nucleus of a vacuum.

And what was in store in the

FUTURE, n.

That period of time in which our affairs prosper, our friends are true and our happiness is assured.

Especially regarding our work together and

FRIENDSHIP, n.

A ship big enough to carry two in fair weather, but only one in foul.

    The sea was calm and the sky was blue;
    Merrily, merrily sailed we two.
        (High barometer maketh glad.)
    On the tipsy ship, with a dreadful shout,
    The tempest descended and we fell out.

(O the walking is nasty bad!)

We built a place to foster

UNDERSTANDING, n.

A cerebral secretion that enables one having it to know a house from a horse by the roof on the house. Its nature and laws have been exhaustively expounded by Locke, who rode a house, and Kant, who lived in a horse.

    His understanding was so keen
    That all things which he'd felt, heard, seen,
    He could interpret without fail
    If he was in or out of jail.
    He wrote at Inspiration's call
    Deep disquisitions on them all,
    Then, pent at last in an asylum,
    Performed the service to compile 'em.
    So great a writer, all men swore,
    They never had not read before.
                                      -Jorrock Wormley

INTIMACY, n.

A relation into which fools are providentially drawn for their mutual destruction.

    Two Seidlitz powders, one in blue
    And one in white, together drew
    And having each a pleasant sense
    Of t'other powder's excellence,
    Forsook their jackets for the snug
    Enjoyment of a common mug.
    So close their intimacy grew
    One paper would have held the two.
    To confidences straight they fell,
    Less anxious each to hear than tell;
    Then each remorsefully confessed
    To all the virtues he possessed,
    Acknowledging he had them in
    So high degree it was a sin.
    The more they said, the more they felt
    Their spirits with emotion melt,
    Till tears of sentiment expressed
    Their feelings.  Then they effervesced!
    So Nature executes her feats
    Of wrath on friends and sympathetes
    The good old rule who don't apply,
    That you are you and I am I.

But alas, after some time, we found certain attitudes and phenomena surfacing:

RANK, n.

Relative elevation in the scale of human worth.

    He held at court a rank so high
    That other noblemen asked why.
    "Because," 'twas answered, "others lack
    His skill to scratch the royal back."
                                           -Aramis Jukes

This naturally led to 

DISOBEDIENCE, n.

The silver lining to the cloud of servitude.

REFUSAL, n.

Denial of something desired; as an elderly maiden’s hand in marriage, to a rich and handsome suitor; a valuable franchise to a rich corporation, by an alderman; absolution to an impenitent king, by a priest, and so forth. Refusals are graded in a descending scale of finality thus: the refusal absolute, the refusal condition, the refusal tentative and the refusal feminine. The last is called by some casuists the refusal assentive.

 
It became apparent that there was a lack of balance and that 
certain things were happening:

BAIT, n.

A preparation that renders the hook more palatable. The best kind is beauty.

EAVESDROP, v.i.

Secretly to overhear a catalogue of the crimes and vices of another or yourself.

    A lady with one of her ears applied
    To an open keyhole heard, inside,
    Two female gossips in converse free --
    The subject engaging them was she.
    "I think," said one, "and my husband thinks
    That she's a prying, inquisitive minx!"
    As soon as no more of it she could hear
    The lady, indignant, removed her ear.
    "I will not stay," she said, with a pout,
    "To hear my character lied about!"
                                         - Gopete Sherany

INJUSTICE, n.

A burden which of all those that we load upon others and carry ourselves is lightest in the hands and heaviest upon the back.

 
So the arguments continued internally, mostly regarding concepts 
that were symptoms rather than the disease itself:

SYMBOL, n.

Something that is supposed to typify or stand for something else. Many symbols are mere “survivals” — things which having no longer any utility continue to exist because we have inherited the tendency to make them; as funereal urns carved on memorial monuments. They were once real urns holding the ashes of the dead. We cannot stop making them, but we can give them a name that conceals our helplessness.

CONTROVERSY, n.

A battle in which spittle or ink replaces the injurious cannon-ball and the inconsiderate bayonet.

    In controversy with the facile tongue --
    That bloodless warfare of the old and young --
    So seek your adversary to engage
    That on himself he shall exhaust his rage,
    And, like a snake that's fastened to the ground,
    With his own fangs inflict the fatal wound.
    You ask me how this miracle is done?
    Adopt his own opinions, one by one,
    And taunt him to refute them; in his wrath
    He'll sweep them pitilessly from his path.
    Advance then gently all you wish to prove,
    Each proposition prefaced with, "As you've
    So well remarked," or, "As you wisely say,
    And I cannot dispute," or, "By the way,
    This view of it which, better far expressed,
    Runs through your argument."  Then leave the rest
    To him, secure that he'll perform his trust
    And prove your views intelligent and just.
                                             -Conmore Apel Brune

GRAMMAR, n.

A system of pitfalls thoughtfully prepared for the feet for the self-made man, along the path by which he advances to distinction.

LEXICOGRAPHER, n.

A pestilent fellow who, under the pretense of recording some particular stage in the development of a language, does what he can to arrest its growth, stiffen its flexibility and mechanize its methods. For your lexicographer, having written his dictionary, comes to be considered “as one having authority,” whereas his function is only to make a record, not to give a law. The natural servility of the human understanding having invested him with judicial power, surrenders its right of reason and submits itself to a chronicle as if it were a statue. Let the dictionary (for example) mark a good word as “obsolete” or “obsolescent” and few men thereafter venture to use it, whatever their need of it and however desirable its restoration to favor — whereby the process of improverishment is accelerated and speech decays. On the contrary, recognizing the truth that language must grow by innovation if it grow at all, makes new words and uses the old in an unfamiliar sense, has no following and is tartly reminded that “it isn’t in the dictionary” — although down to the time of the first lexicographer (Heaven forgive him!) no author ever had used a word that was in the dictionary. In the golden prime and high noon of English speech; when from the lips of the great Elizabethans fell words that made their own meaning and carried it in their very sound; when a Shakespeare and a Bacon were possible, and the language now rapidly perishing at one end and slowly renewed at the other was in vigorous growth and hardy preservation — sweeter than honey and stronger than a lion — the lexicographer was a person unknown, the dictionary a creation which his Creator had not created him to create.

    God said:  "Let Spirit perish into Form,"
    And lexicographers arose, a swarm!
    Thought fled and left her clothing, which they took,
    And catalogued each garment in a book.
    Now, from her leafy covert when she cries:
    "Give me my clothes and I'll return," they rise
    And scan the list, and say without compassion:
    "Excuse us -- they are mostly out of fashion."
                                                -Sigismund Smith

There was a self-fulfilling prophecy made:

OMEN, n.

A sign that something will happen if nothing happens.

It became obvious that there was a severance and this was getting 
us nowhere. 

DEGRADATION, n.

One of the stages of moral and social progress from private station to political preferment.

Someone had to be named, a title that passed through hands until 
it stuck to one or a couple:

ACCUSE, v.t.

To affirm another’s guilt or unworth; most commonly as a justification of ourselves for having wronged him.

REBEL, n.

A proponent of a new misrule who has failed to establish it.

 
What was once pushed:

DECIDE, v.i.

To succumb to the preponderance of one set of influences over another set.

    A leaf was riven from a tree,
    "I mean to fall to earth," said he.

    The west wind, rising, made him veer.
    "Eastward," said he, "I now shall steer."

    The east wind rose with greater force.
    Said he:  "'Twere wise to change my course."

    With equal power they contend.
    He said:  "My judgment I suspend."

    Down died the winds; the leaf, elate,
    Cried:  "I've decided to fall straight."

    "First thoughts are best?"  That's not the moral;
    Just choose your own and we'll not quarrel.

    Howe'er your choice may chance to fall,
    You'll have no hand in it at all.
-G.J.

ALLEGIANCE, n.

    This thing Allegiance, as I suppose,
    Is a ring fitted in the subject's nose,
    Whereby that organ is kept rightly pointed
    To smell the sweetness of the Lord's anointed.

…was settled in some ways, although undesirably to some. Certain 
things were lost:

TRUST, n.

In American politics, a large corporation composed in greater part of thrifty working men, widows of small means, orphans in the care of guardians and the courts, with many similar malefactors and public enemies.

 
As some things became clearer:

HYPOCRITE, n.

One who, professing virtues that he does not respect, secures the advantage of seeming to be what he depises.

 
And so things followed:

EXCOMMUNICATION, n.

    This "excommunication" is a word
    In speech ecclesiastical oft heard,
    And means the damning, with bell, book and candle,
    Some sinner whose opinions are a scandal --
    A rite permitting Satan to enslave him
    Forever, and forbidding Christ to save him.
                                                            Gat Huckle

DISSEMBLE, v.i.

To put a clean shirt upon the character.

    Let us dissemble.

Certain attempts were either not made or not made “well enough” 
in the eyes of those involved.

APOLOGIZE, v.i.

To lay the foundation for a future offence.

COMPROMISE, n.

Such an adjustment of conflicting interests as gives each adversary the satisfaction of thinking he has got what he ought not to have, and is deprived of nothing except what was justly his due.

 
However, there is something bigger involved that has a presence 
and consciousness all its own:

ACCOUNTABILITY, n.

The mother of caution.

    "My accountability, bear in mind,"
        Said the Grand Vizier:  "Yes, yes,"
    Said the Shah:  "I do -- 'tis the only kind
        Of ability you possess."
                                            -Joram Tate

Maya and the null hypothesis

Note before reading: I am not a statistician nor very talented in statistics. Please indicate if my thought experiment with comparing Maya and the null hypothesis appears faulty.

The concept (from Wiki):
“Maya, is the principal concept which manifests, perpetuates and governs the illusion and dream of duality in the phenomenal Universe. For some mystics this manifestation is real, but it is a fleeting reality; it is a mistake, although a natural one, to believe that Maya represents a fundamental reality or Truth. [1] Each person, each physical object, from the perspective of eternity is like a brief, disturbed drop of water from an unbounded ocean. The goal of enlightenment is to understand this — more precisely, to experience this: to see intuitively that the distinction between the self and the Universe is a false dichotomy. The distinction between consciousness and physical matter, between mind and body (refer bodymind), is the result of an unenlightened perspective.

“The word origin of maya is derived from the Sanskrit roots ma (“not”) and ya, generally translated as an indicative article meaning “that.” The mystic teachings in Vedanta are centered on a fundamental truth that cannot be reduced to a concept or word for the ordinary mind to manipulate. Rather, the human experience and mind are themselves a tiny fragment of this truth. In this tradition, no mind-object can be identified as absolute truth, such that one may say “That’s it.” So, to keep the mind from attaching to incomplete fragments of reality, a speaker could use this term to indicate that truth is “Not that.””

In some ways, Maya can function as the null hypothesis. Oddly, as you can see in the description below, one can not really ACCEPT a null hypothesis, however they can NOT REJECT it. Though food for thought… if one REJECTS the null hypothesis (Maya in this case), then it IMPLIES that one has accepted the stated hypothesis, BUT is the stated hypothesis a truth or clarity… or can every hypothesis act as a null hypothesis, thereby playing into Maya. So that we act to REJECT or NOT REJECT within Maya, perhaps thinking we have transcended Maya in that we assume our REJECTION of the null implies ACCEPTING of the stated.

Also from Wiki: “In statistical hypothesis testing, the null hypothesis (H0) formally describes some aspect of the statistical behaviour of a set of data; this description is treated as valid unless the actual behaviour of the data contradicts this assumption. Thus, the null hypothesis is contrasted against another hypothesis. Statistical hypothesis testing is used to make a decision about whether the data contradicts the null hypothesis: this is called significance testing. A null hypothesis is never proven by such methods, as the absence of evidence against the null hypothesis does not establish it. In other words, one may either reject, or not reject the null hypothesis; one cannot accept it. Failing to reject it gives no strong reason to change decisions predicated on its truth, but it also allows for the possibility of obtaining further data and then re-examining the same hypothesis.

For example, imagine flipping a coin three times, for three heads; and then forming the opinion that we have used a two-headed trick coin. Clearly this opinion is based on the premise that such a sequence is unlikely to have arisen using a normal coin. In fact, such sequences (three consecutive heads or three consecutive tails) occur a quarter of the time on average when using normal unbiased coins. Therefore the opinion that coin is two-headed has little support. Formally, the hypothesis to be tested in this example is “this is a two-headed coin”. One tests it by assessing whether the data contradicts the null hypothesis that “this is a normal, unbiased coin”. Since the observed data arises reasonably often by chance under the null hypothesis, we cannot reject the null hypothesis as an explanation for the data, and we conclude that we cannot assert our hypothesis on the basis of the observed sequence.”

If we view these as sets: rejecting set (R), not rejecting set (NR) and accepting set (A). By DEFINITION R and NR are completely separate, never overlapping or touching. However, A in relation to these 2 sets is usually seen as overlaying NR (i.e. binary mind frame defined by the 2 choices of R vs NR). If we are to look closer, A may appear to overlay NR, but there is just as likely an explanation for those 2 sets to never touch but appear to be joined/overlayed. Imagine a 3D view of the sets, with R and NR on the same plane. The way in which A will never touch NR is if A exists on an entirely different plane. By one viewpoint (bird’s eye) A and NR look the same, but by another (closer observation between planes) they are clearly completely different.

wear your favorite molecules

OMFG why didn’t I think of this? Flaunt your science savvy.

…

Best…

…jewelry…

EVER!

Motion Lights

I remember very few details. It was night, and I was staying overnight at a House for reasons unknown to me (perhaps I was too gone to leave). I didn’t even know the owner of The House. My mind fills in the holes…. I am pretty sure I arrived here with my brothers, and I think I was told that The House was one of brother’s friends’ place. For some reason, I found the environment unimportant up until a certain point. But what was that point? And who was  I then? I was surely not the me that had arrived. Half of me was asleep, passed out in a haze of acid-splatter candy-colored-flavored frequencies of Hendrix and Morrison. The other half was me, and the me that filled the sleeper’s void was a new one.

I had regained a kind of consciousness in the screened-in, renovated patio area. The dark of the night sky told me is was well into the early morning hours but still a while off until dawn. My movements getting to my feet were slow, like fighting weighted balloons on my limbs and peering through petroleum-smeared goggles. I could function, but I was wobbly, breaking into a million pieces and fluttering back together in a fraction of a second. The motion lights in the back yard were on. I don’t remember when or in what succession they turned on. I just knew that something moved close enough to The House to trigger all of them.

As I walked clumsily to the screen door to get a better look outside, I noticed that not many people were on the patio with me, and the few that were had crashed. I was the only awake and the only one to bear witness to whatever it was that was moving outside. Peering out into the yard, I didn’t see anything, not even shadows. I was in full observation mode with no fear in me, just intrigue. While I was searching, I was hit with vague impressions or memories. I had no idea from where or who I was receiving them.

I saw colored paper lanterns, intoxicated Asians, fake gold decorations and numerous incarnations of The Dragon. Was this a Chinese New Year celebration? Music and spoken word mingled so I could not make sense of anything I heard. There was a strange feeling that seemed to loom over the party. The people that seemed not to notice the feeling ended up either leaving the party or falling asleep. Those that were left in the atmosphere showed signs of discomfort or uneasiness. Many did not speak of it at all, but tried to forget or ignore it. During this time, I had become a little more interested in finding out what was going on… was something here, affecting this room? My eyes scanned the yard of The House while my mind scanned the scene in my head. I felt the aire in the yard similar to the one over the room. I saw nothing with my eyes, but images of fire-breathers grew in my head. I took notice of someone toward the edge of the room that I had not seen amongst the louder festivities before the room had cleared a bit. The person sat quietly alone with his/her hair in front of most of its face. Were they rocking slightly? I saw a compilation of people in the person, some particular faces came out more than others. At this time my body had mimicked the scene in my mind; I found myself physically closer to the other corner of the room, diagonal from the screen door. I was looking into an empty corner and a compiled persona simultaneously.

Mentally we had a conversation. I felt my desire to find out “what IT was” (whatever my attention had drawn to.. the feeling, the aire, the creation of tension and unease). This persona likened the IT to a Dragon, but not the Eastern Dragons or Western ones even. IT took the form of a Dragon, but was not a Dragon.

“You’re chasing a dragon that will never help you,” the persona said aloud to me through stringy black hair. I knew they had experience.

I took this comment, knowing that the persona was speaking from experience. I did not respond with a comment, but with action. I dropped my interst in the Dragon immediately, determining that whatever IT was, IT was after whoever allowed it access to themselves. I was not about to end up like this emptiness in the corner. As soon as I had made the decision, the scene in my mind vanished, and I awoke in another part of The House.

I had been slumbering in quilts and sleeping bags on hardwood floors. The TV was on, some Asian action movie was playing in the background. Lights were on all through The House though it was still ~4AM. I heard a lot of noise from upstairs: music, talking, coughing, and walking. I knew the sounds were from my brothers and their friends in one of the bedrooms. Looking around, I saw that some people were still around me asleep or half-asleep on the floor or couches.

I was slightly dazed and disoriented, wondering what had happened in the last couple hours. Looking down, I found a pouch. I instinctively knew it was mine though it resembled nothing I have in waking life. The pouch was solid but was able to change shape, rotating from a tree stump to a small metal box to a card-holder to a glitter snowglobe with a faery statue inside. The items contained within it are still vague to me, but I can remember that they were rare, important and magical.

I heard rapping on the front door so I promptly hid my “pouch” before checking the peephole. Two cops were at the door. I answered, figuring they were called on account of the noise and that I would be able to placate their worries with reasoning with the boys upstairs. When did I become mom or Wendy? Both the cops were friendly enough and seemed to be more annoyed with being called for such a task rather than upset with the party. I was sure there was no problem… but then all 3 of us smelled something… definitely pot, maybe some other smoke as well, coming from upstairs. While they were fine ignoring the possibility of drugs a minute ago, their faces became stony at the smell.

“Ok, ma’am, we have to come inside now.”

In the room I had been sleeping in, there were 2 full glass cases of pipes and bongs next to another glass case of flasks and martini glasses. Strange novelty and antique items were interspersed within the glass cases and posters of old horror flicks, rock bands and Betty Page hung from ceiling to floor. The whole set-up conveyed an aire of seediness that the cops were very perturbed about. They asked whose House it was. When I claimed not to know, they became suspicious. They attempted to hold me responsible for the contents of The House and all the activities within.

I fought their accusations without pinning others responsible. The last pieces I remember were the cops trying to interrogate me while I kept the pouch hidden.

2 approaches to consensual reality and the potential pathologies

Layers of the Real.

We all control the environment.

“Out of sight, out of mind” and “If you look hard enough…”

Person A takes the approach of “if you ignore it, it will go away eventually” and prioritizes what will be given attention by A’s individual motivation. A will deny things to set up boundaries. A will draw clear boxes and lines in regards to the self and others; A is comfortable within these self-made boxes so long as it is made by the self and no one else. Person A finds control in the reality by denial, by separation and detachment. A does not seek to control others reality but seeks to control only their own personal reality, and A becomes very upset and defiant when A feels that others have imposed their views on A. A will recognize consensual reality and admit to undeniables in the consensus upon manifestation. However, A is, by nature, a skeptic, and can perceive the difference between an object (or event, etc) that 1. is already a part of the consensual reality 2. naturally develops or evolves within the consensual reality 3. is immediately changed or influenced by an external source, “C” or 4. develops in the consensual reality by virtue of a participant already within the reality that exerts influence to modify the consensus.

Person B takes the approach that “if you look hard enough, you’ll see what I mean…” and that everything must be dealt with immediately upon its recognition, prioritizing the perceived “problem.” B will not just accept the existence of a “problem” immediately, but will push for others to see it as well. B will name things, categorize and explain things to give them shape to the self and others. Person B finds control in reality by acceptance, by imposition and attachment. B needs consensus in a reality and thereby seeks to hone any personal realities to one vision. Since B only has intimate access to their personal reality, naturally the consensual reality that they try to foster generally aligns with the reality B perceives with or without input from other sources. B believes that B has perceived and accepted the consensual reality before all others involved, and B feels that it is B’s duty or mission to make others believe/see. B, by nature, is a producer and can perceive the difference in an object (or event etc) that 1. is currently unrecognized by others in the consensual reality 2. needs to be amplified, prioritized, exaggerated or needs to be repressed, de-emphasized 3. is changed or influenced by a source that is not B. Number 4 is that B knows who is disrupting the consensus.

We all act as A and B at different times. These descriptions are not judgment calls on “right” or “wrong;” neither is inherently any better or worse than the other. Pathologies of one or the other are a problem, and those pathologies WILL change the reality of all involved.

Pathology of A: Person A will ignore all that A finds unfit, unsavory or not conducive to their current view, even if it is part of the consensual reality of all others involved and has physical manifestations in A’s life supporting that certain things “exist” and are exerting influence. A will defy solely to defy rather than take disruptive action based on perseving or exercising higher principles.  If defiance is paired with unchecked anger, this can lead to violence (a rabid dog chained). A will isolate the self from others by building a personal reality in A’s own language and constructs such that others cannot reach A on an emotional, intellectual or spiritual level. A’s interpersonal relationships will suffer as others feel they cannot reach A behind The Wall A has built, and so they withdraw to find more fulfilling relationships.

Pathology of B: Person B will push all that B believes onto any B comes in contact with, regardless of what others do or say or the consensual reality shared by many others. B becomes blind to any consensual reality but the one they wish to foster; the push becomes prioritized above all else, including the safety of the self or others, which can amount to violence “for a cause.” If this is paired with ruthless ambition, the scale of violence can increase (fanatic turned tyrant). Person B will seek to midigate or exterminate other “things” (i.e. objects, events, people, ideas) that do not coincide with B’s perception. B becomes isolated as “the purpose” becomes the only thing that matters to B. “The purpose” dictates all B’s actions, causing interpersonal relationships to die and people to withdraw from B for self-preservation.

In conclusion, Person A starts as a strong individual, upholding the virtue of personal realities, encouraging individual thinking and the voice of the individual. Person B starts as a potential community-builder, seeking to merge personal realities to one consensual one, encouraging group thinking and the joining of voices into one. Pathologies can lead Person A down several roads where A may the self as the perceived victim, the violent rebel, the schizophrenic whereas B may find the self as the perceived victim, the violent dictator, the sociopath. They can become some of what they dislike the most by allowing their pathologies to grab hld and form the reality rather than their Higher Selves.

Notes on pertinent Stars

Notes that some may find interesting:

All from Wiki:

“Since our galaxy is moving with respect to the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMB) in the direction of Hydra with a speed of 550 km/s, the sun’s resultant velocity with respect to the CMB is about 370 km/s in the direction of Crater or Leo

The Sun is currently traveling through the Local Interstellar Cloud in the low-density Local Bubble zone of diffuse high-temperature gas, in the inner rim of the Orion Arm of the Milky Way Galaxy, between the larger Perseus and Sagittarius arms of the galaxy.

The Sun lies close to the inner rim of the Milky Way Galaxy’s Orion Arm, in the Local Fluff or the Gould Belt, at a hypothesized distance of 7.62±0.32 kpc (24,800 lightyears) from the Galactic Center,^{[26][27][28][29]} contained within the Local Bubble, a space of rarefied hot gas, possibly preduced by the supernova remnant, Gaminga. The distance between the local arm and the next arm out, the Perseus Arm, is about 6,500 light-years.^[30]

****

Hydra is the largest of the 88 modern constellations, measuring 1303 square degrees. It has a long history, having been included among the 48 constellations listed by the 1st century astronomer Ptolemy. It is commonly represented as a water snake. In Japanese culture, it is also known as Nuriko, while in Chinese, it is known by the name Willow.

****

The Perseus Arm is a major spiral arm of the Milky Way galaxy.

The Milky Way is a barred spiral galaxy with four major arms and at least two minor arms or spurs. The Perseus Spiral Arm, with a radius of approximately 10,700 parsecs, is located between the Cygnus Arm and the Sagittarius Arm. It is named after its proximity to the constellation Perseus.

There is speculation that the minor Orion Arm, which includes the solar system and Earth, is a branch of the Perseus Arm, but this is unconfirmed.

The Perseus Spiral arm contains a number of Messier objects:

• The Crab Nebula (M1)
• Open Cluster M36
• Open Cluster M37
• Open Cluster M38
• Open Cluster M52
• Open Cluster M103.”

Please note the numerology.

united in one body

A film that you all should watch and one that should be shown in every junior high or high school class room:

The Corporation

corporate

1398, “united in one body,” from L. corporatus, pp. of corporare “form into a body,” from corpus (gen. corporis) “body” (see corporeal). Corporation “incorporated company for doing business” is from 1530; corporatism is from 1890.

incorporate

1398, “to put (something) into the body or substance of (something else),” from L.L. incorporatus, pp. of incorporare “unite into one body,” from L. in- “into” + corpus (gen. corporis) “body” (see corporeal). The legal sense first recorded in Rolls of Parliament, 1461.

etymology

We’ve created giant bodies that propagate themselves with the characteristics of a psychopath or sociopath (as the film illustrates). Times Square is really nothing more than their playground as they conduct pissing contests and attempt to  bully each other around while they feed off of us, the insects that walk the streets, only good enough to feed their hive. They spread like cancer. Did we know what we were creating as we nurtured their development?

Corporation = cancer + psychopath

We fucked up this time.

Morning

I love the sounds of the sleeping world. The darkness before the dawn gives me comfort before the magnificent transition.

Sometimes I am convinced that I’ve had many past lives as a farmer given my internal motivation to start the day while the day has not awoken yet and my taste for buttermilk. Perhaps I romanticize the life, never having experienced it in this life (something I may still want to do some day). The draw is strong.

I imagine eating breakfast in the dark,

starting work before the sun comes up, f

inishing most of the day’s workload by noon,

napping or relaxing mid-day while the sun is beating down on fields,

talking without interruptions from cell phones or televisions,

letting my muscles relax after pushing my body,

having a dinner cultivated by my own hands,

feeding the animals and stroking the horses,

yawning as the sun sets,

returning to my natural rhythm.

For now, I take solace in my mornings alone with the sky and ground. My spirit flutters in the bird songs and fresh breezes. My mind still weaves dreams into the fabric of reality until the sun stains the sky.

The few that cater to the morning wanderers watch the dream dial turn as the masses caffeinate. The clouds fall back with the gossamer images and wish-filled succor of night.

As the buzz begins, I stick addictive electronics in my ears to hide within the music that keeps the dreams revolving.