Who am I looking at?

Sometimes, when I've been drinking, I'll go to the bathroom and do my business but on the way out, when I glance in the mirror... I get a feeling like someone's watching me. It seems the more I drink, the more I sneer at the mirror on my way out. Who am I sneering at--me or someone greater than me? Am I looking at what I think I should be, or at what others think I should be? Do I sneer out of resentment, rebellion, shame, or something altogether different? I do not know.

An online copy of my spontaneous-thoughts-folder

I have a file at work where I type thoughts that come to me throughout the day. This file contains my meandering pondrances and will never be complete. My spontaneous thoughts:

How do you decide when to go with your gut and when to think about it?

For my part, my indecisive nature can be attributed to my irrational fear of making mistakes. I think the cure should be an effort to make more mistakes—not intentionally, but by assuming more risk. Is it ever okay to be willfully ignorant?

Could there be a form of government designed to reward honesty and integrity, rather than self-interest and greed?

Research the etymology of the “goddamn”. To me, when one says “goddammit!” it’s an appeal to their creator to damn something… as if to say “God, damn this thing!”

Is entropy taking us toward what could be considered the natural state of things, or is it undoing what could be considered natural?

Revisit the digital photograph argument next time you consider the controversy about digital piracy… that must have had a mortal impact on the film (for photography) industry, yet it wasn’t prohibited—people can take as many digital photos as they want to. It seems that regular copyright rules should change when applied to something that can be reproduced ad infinitum with negligible cost.

To say “as far as The East if from The West” seems to mean an infinite distance. However, if I were to draw a line on a sheet of paper, one could say that East is on one side and that West is just on the other side making them practically neighbors. But since they can never occupy the same space, they are still infinitely far from one another as they never do quite touch.

You cannot manipulate space without also manipulating time; and vice versa. If it were possible to influence one without changing the other, how could it be done?

Expound upon the relationship or disconnect between the physical world and the mental/spiritual world.

Expound upon the golden rule and how it might be used to detrimental effect. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. So if you hold someone to this rule and they do something that causes you harm in some way, is it permissible then, to treat them in a like manner? Is that spiteful or possibly enlightening for the offending party? Or is it a way to rationalize revenge?

If you have ever imagined that your mind could occupy a certain amount of physical space, how large would it be?

How much is a philosophy of conduct affected by conforming to observed behaviors and how much by rebelling to them?

Why have I been advised so many times to apologize to my wife even when I perceive that I am not at fault? Why am I so opposed to the practice? It seems that it would effectively be a lie. The end result of this lie should, in most cases, result in temporary happiness. It’s like a band-aid on a gangrenous wound.

Write a story about the futility of reason when pitted against emotion (i.e. an angry person complains about another’s habits and the other refutes the complaint, proving the hate comes from within…then nothing happens because hate sees no reason—It doesn’t matter what he says because the issue at hand is not the real issue).

Expound upon infrastructure fragility (water, electricity, roads, etc). We have come to rely so heavily on infrastructure that its loss would be devastating.

It may be important to remember that when a person expresses hate, it is an extension of what exists in his heart, and not a reflection on me. Take time to evaluate hateful remarks or actions in this light before responding.

Yes, religion has been the platform for many atrocities in history, but the perpetrator of each and every one is man.

Take care to note the difference between doing a thing because it’s justified and justifying a thing because it’s been done. The difference is in the impetus. In the former, the justification is known and a course of action is determined as a result. In the latter, an action is performed and its justification is created as a result (forethought vs. afterthought, ready/fire/aim, etc).

In relationships, criticism is important and necessary at times, but it is more important to value praise and recognition.

To expound upon: how to perpetuate motivation.

I recently read some writing I had done several years ago and realized that I’ve been trying to piece this puzzle together since I was a very young man. It’s ironic, and truly telling, that my motivation for finding a way to perpetuate motivation had waned, and for so many years. Now it has resurfaced and I can already sense it dissipating like a drop of color into a cup of water—so poignant and striking at the first instant then, almost imperceptibly, it steadily becomes more dilute until the significant impression of the first moment is replaced by the image of the tinged mass as a whole. How can you maintain it? You have to put a new drop in; and when the water is all brown and mucky, pour it out and start over. It seems to always come back to “stirring the pot” as it were.

What I’m doing right here—writing things down—seems to do much for keeping fires lit. If I can store even a small piece of the original thought and feeling, rereading it later seems to bring it back to life.

When my sweet tooth is aching and I am looking for sweets at the store, little contemplation is given to the task. I might typically scan the shelves for 15-20 seconds before making a decision and then grab what seems best at the time. After all, it’s a decision that doesn’t have a very big impact on my life—a low-risk decision. When inspecting the relationship between decisiveness/indecisiveness and consideration/non-consideration, I think it’s important to consider the perceived risk involved. Very few people would take much longer than I when choosing candies. However, as the importance of the decision increases, the general tendency is that decisiveness slackens and indecisiveness grows. It might be more accurate to say that as perceived risk increases, boldness decreases. Take extra time to make sure your risk is accurately measured.

To expound upon: How familiarity breeds contempt… we analyze relationships that are more important to us

We excel in areas where we have had to overcome adversity. Would it be advisable to create adversity in order to gain valuable skills in overcoming it? By taking risks, you have potentially created adversity (see below about teaching children life-lessons).

I believe parents strive to provide for their children things which the parents themselves lacked when they were young. Yet, each generation seems to demonstrate this behavior with regard to widely varying issues. So a parent rectifies a perceived injustice or unmet desire from his own childhood by ensuring his child does not experience it. But the child, not having shared his parent’s experience, takes it for granted yet will face a different injustice or unmet desire that he swears his children will not have to endure, and so on.

To expound upon: how the vanity of trying to maintain appearances for the sake of others is equal whether you’re trying to conform or deviate. Consciousness of appearance is the source of the vanity—not the appearance itself.

When you only listen hard enough to pick attackable points from my statements, you’re not really listening. Take an extra moment to digest it.

Is there a physical dollar for every one that exists digitally?

Why would I hold someone in a favorable light who has been instrumental in providing a beneficial service when he is just doing his job? When someone has done me a disservice but it was only his job, it would be unfair to hold it against him—his character presumably exists outside his occupation. For me, it is ok to bestow unwarranted kindness, but not ok to bestow unwarranted unkindness.

It seems to me that good and bad are not equal and opposite. Perhaps good simply is and bad exists where good does not.

What should make one automatically suspicious of the theory of evolution is that there is a stigma for those who choose not to believe in it. It’s as if, once the evidence proves insufficient to convince a person, that fear of ridicule might work in its place. This seems to indicate that the goal of the believer is not in finding truth, but in sharing what he has already taken for granted as truth.

On a different note, but concerning the same method: When Shannon and I have a disagreement and she perceives that I have not been swayed, she usually resorts to anger. Does she truly believe that, after hearing unconvincing evidence, that I might be persuaded to her side by submission?

Let love and faithfulness never leave you. Bind them around your neck. Write them on the tablet of your heart. Do this and you will find favor in the sight of God and men (check for accuracy. Also, look up multiple definitions of faithfulness. And… research why one would want to seek favor in the eyes of men… what in this world is worth doing?).

Is it advisable to treat every person with love and compassion in every situation?

While it is important to maintain order and good discipline for my children, I must remember not to stifle the act of trying a new thing. Violet has lately adopted some disrespectful habits after having spent much time playing with a neighbor of about the same age as she. She has soaked up many of this girl’s behaviors like a sponge. I find myself disliking many of them, but I must be very careful when determining which ones to stamp out. The disrespectful ones must go. But the ones that simply annoy without consequence should be preserved for her scrutiny alone.

If A = B and B = C, does A = C? In math, yes. In logic, not necessarily. Consider this: Socrates is a man. Man is a species. Socrates is not a species. This was brought to my attention by “History of Western Philosophy” by Bertrand Russel. I had never before considered this outside of the field of mathematics.

It seems to me that most, if not all the philosophers made confident declarations concerning things, about which they had incomplete evidence. (this thought is unfinished)

Is the fourth dimension time, or could it be an extra spatial aspect, such as how the third dimension is an addition to the second? This relies on the idea that there are first and second dimensions—which is theoretical. Thus, could there be another explanation for what we call the third dimension that relies not upon extrapolation from the first and second dimensions, but upon something entirely different?

Side note: I’ve heard much about the three popular dimensions: the first for length, the second for width and the third for depth. It seems to me that there should also be a zeroeth dimension—a finite point in space with neither length nor width.

Life is a game whose contestants are to play with no foreknowledge of its rules, an overwhelming wealth of information from which its goal is to be determined, and indeterminate certainty as to the veracity of any discoveries.

Some might say I lack resolve. I’m not so sure.

To expound upon: What makes a thing funny?

To expound upon: The burden of conscience. Why do some seek it and others avoid it?

Revisit “History of Western Philosophy” The Rise of Greek… @ ~ 28mins (audiobook)

I think there are two schools of thought concerning achievement. One could embrace a goal and vehemently strive toward it until it is reached. One could also “let it go” as it were and eventually happen upon it. This thought came to me as I was pondering initiative. I’m still trying to answer the question: Does initiative blossom after much consideration or after little; or could it be equally effective either way?

The eyes of the thousand yard stare are inwardly focused, yet appear to the outward observer to have no focus at all.

What do I want my life’s accomplishment to be? Not necessarily what do I want to do with myself, but how do I want to be remembered by my children? How do I want to influence the world? How can I influence the world? Need I influence the world?

The thing about the rolling eyes issue is that it’s symptomatic. It is simply a subconscious expression of genuine emotion. Avoiding the action of rolling one’s eyes does not vanquish the feelings within.

Learn more about initiative. You know it is an important aspect of wrestling and chess. Find out how you can find it and keep it in other areas of life. This thought came to me when I was pondering finances. We seem to always be reactionary with money. I want to initiate action and have the advantage. I think greater knowledge will yield greater confidence and thus encourage wise initiative.

i think that from time to time, i instinctively try to mimic things other people do. There often ensues a quarrel between my rational aspect and my instinctive aspect. this sounds more like a symptom and not a root cause. think deeper.

Perhaps ridiculous, perhaps genius: today we take for granted things which people hadn’t dreamed of a century ago. Perhaps we can skip a century’s worth of research by simply contriving a new concept or idea and taking it for granted. I’ll have to go with ridiculous here. Taking a thing for granted is not how progress is made, it’s a byproduct of progress itself.

After further consideration, I believe this method may have a causal effect in social arenas. In politics, for instance, leaders sometimes talk about something as if it were already history while it has yet to take place. As another example, many people today are quick to assume that racial tension is the source of a conflict where a black man and a white man are on opposite sides. Whereas the conflict may not have considered race at all, interest groups might “steal” the argument and use it as an example for agendized—rather than legitimate—lobbying for legislation. Assumptions, when they take place between people, can have a very real effect on opinions and ensuing decisions.

Another thought: This could be considered a crude description of how theories and hypotheses are brought about. Perhaps this or a similar sort of forward thinking is essential to progress. After all, philosophy is closely tied to the most recent scientific developments. As we learn more about the world, we develop philosophies to suit our new “understanding”. For some reason, philosophers seem to rarely, if ever, look beyond the current scientific situation. If philosophy were to jump ahead, perhaps science could follow.

We are, as a species, the smartest and dumbest of all creatures.

Why was it difficult for Robert Pirsig to define quality? Off the top of my head, quality is a measurement of utility for any thing. The trouble seems to arise when we try to create a standard definition that can apply to anyone. When we say one man’s trash is another man’s treasure, we say that one believes an object has quality and that another does not. Thus, quality is a subjective attribute. Was he hung-up because he sought an objective definition?

The idea that the journey is preferable to the destination rings especially true when the destination is not a desirable place.

Why do people approach science with a profound emphasis on objectivity, yet believe in their findings with equally great conviction?

If the Newton’s laws fail at the micro level, might they not also fail at the macro level? And can that be applied to relativity as well? If photons had mass, then they couldn’t travel at the speed of light, but how can they exist without mass? Perhaps a different approach is required at this extreme. Is that what the Unified Theory tries to explain?

            Sci-fi application: A relativity bomb: a small amount of matter is accelerated to near-light speed so its mass becomes very large resulting in a devastating impact.

We tend to shy away from things that we do not understand. If we would but take the time to learn about these things, the diversity and quantity of life’s meaningful experiences would multiply with each study.

Eradicate self-deception.

Is it good to have such confidence in yourself that, believing success to be inevitable if an act is to be attempted, that no attempt is ever made? In my assessment, no.

Confidence is like a valuable tool in a chest. It has inestimable value when put to use, but is completely worthless if left alone.

Is it possible to learn a valuable life-lesson without having to learn it the hard way (many lessons my parents tried to teach me were not heeded, but eventually learned anyway—and years later—after making mistakes myself)? If so, can a method be devised which could be applied to many such lessons so as to give a child a world-wise attitude and therefore an enormous head start on the study of wisdom? The value of foresight comes to mind. Perhaps that is the key.

Simulation or role-playing might achieve this goal. My most important role is to impart to the child why the lesson is important. If he understands the lesson’s gravity, he will want to learn it. That is really the root of why I failed to learn lessons my parents tried to teach—I believed the advice to be sound, but it wasn’t personal and carried no special meaning for me because I didn’t truly understand why the lessons were important.

Could a lesson be created as a sort-of one-sided performance where I am playing a part while the child is oblivious to the fact that an artificial situation is being played out? Could a lesson be rigged to happen where events are arranged so as to precipitate an event, yet save me from thespian duties?

Do instinct and reason exist independent of one another? It is possible that a high stock in reason has deprived me of much practice in decisiveness. Or has my decisiveness been dulled by an abundance of reasonable choices, brought only to my attention through reason?

To expound upon: the connection between fear and decisiveness and between fear and closed-mindedness. Also… I believe decisiveness and close-mindedness are close kin.

Nearly every day in a metal and glass cage I am propelled at high speeds to various destinations by thousands of small explosions, while sitting atop a large gasoline bomb and in the company of other speeding gasoline bombs—some very small and some of monstrous size.

From death is life nourished. No thing can glean energy from another without reducing it to its constituent particles, thereby reaping the bounty of death. Each living thing feeds upon dead things until eventually, it is itself consumed. Is that the process by which our natural existence is governed; that in the polar realms of heaven and hell there is only life in one, death in the other, and each self-perpetuates; but that in the world of men, the terms of our existence are bound by the inevitable contest between them?

            Continue thinking about the life and death cycle

            “Strife is justice” (Heraclitus)

How do you suppose an adult peer would react if you were to approach him and at once ask if he’d like to be friends?

You can dream big and be practical at the same time.

The good ol’ days are here and now. After several years, look back and you’ll see.

To expound upon: the incongruity of religious faith and civil law

Yesterday, I was stressing to Violet the importance of safety around cars. She was chasing a ball behind a car that was getting ready to back out. When I asked her why she did it, she said she knew the car was there but that she thought she could get to the ball first. When I said that a ball could be replaced while she could not, she pondered for a moment and said “well, you could always have another daughter.”

I am not the sum of my experiences. I am the sum of my interpretations of them.

Work is indeed only time exchanged for money, but the amount of effort you put into that time can translate into better compensation.

When you work for an employer, you receive compensation and complete another man’s task. When you work for yourself, you receive compensation and complete your own task.

Our very nature causes us to desire order yet our environment is endlessly chaotic. Should we assume that these surroundings are maligned against this bent, or that they complement it, as fuel to a fire?

If you fail to try, you are only trying to fail.

She is more than my matrimonial equal…