It's a windy Monday, a good day to be outside, unless it starts raining again. The month draws to a close, and July is on its way. Already nearby in the vacant lot a tent is set up- this is a yearly tradition since Connecticut state laws changed to allow the sale of some fireworks- not knowing much about them except don't light them in your hand, I think the laws mean those that would generally not be called dangerous. I don't think rockets can be sold, as the fireworks sold are mostly stationary, Roman-candle type affairs. But the smell of burnt gunpowder always brings back memories. Max, my oldest, is just finishing up kindergarten, then will have a long, rocking summer before becoming a first-grader! In two weeks, as well, will be his 6th birthday. I could say, he's growing up so fast, and that would be right, but also a terrible cliche. I'm proud of him, though. I think his life will be an exceptional one.
I also stumbled across a website (mentioned in Field and Stream magazine, ironically) about PETA killing animals. PETA, of course, has nothing to do with flat bread, and stands for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. At first glance, this makes sense- after all, animals are alive, so we should be nice to them. Does that include not eating them? Well, that's a matter of choice. If you do eat them, (and I do) encourage developments that allow the animals a peaceful life and a humane end. In other words, kill them quickly and painlessly. If you don't eat them, that's OK, too. There are just about as many reasons for not eating them as there are vegetarians in the world. But back to the topic at hand. PETA is accused of euthanizing the vast majority of the animals that they take in, despite the front page of their website stating specifically, "Animals are not ours to abuse in any way". The website petakillsanimals.com does seem to back this up fairly well, although we can only assume the records they post are accurate. The numbers do show that for every year information is available over 90% of the animals are euthanized that come through the doors of PETA animal shelters. Yet, this is seemingly anathema to PETA philosophy, as they object to hunting and fishing, trapping and generally anything where animals are captured and used for food or by-products. Assigning animals equal status with people seems odd. Animals do, in varying degrees, posess intelligence. However, why then, if they are not to be used as food, are humans capable of eating and digesting them? Also, why are plants considered a source of food? They are undeniably alive, as well. Yet to pull parts off of them to eat, by the same PETA logic, seems also cruel. Why animals are not ours to 'abuse', and plants are, is a mystery. It would seem humanity has cultivated animals, much as they have cultivated plants, to serve their needs. This is a mark of intelligence- man has ceased to be subject to the environment, and now actively shapes his environment to his own needs. Some anthropologists put this turning point all the way back to homo habilis, the first pre-human to implement tools. The use of tools did and does set humans apart from other animals, although in some instances higher primates have adopted tools to a limited extent. So, out of all of this, I draw the conclusions that we are pretty much running the show as far as evolution is concerned. That means that we should do so carefully and responsibly- screw up the planet at our own peril. In the meanwhile, domesticated animals have been kept for millions of years- prior to that, they were hunted for food. It could be a mark of evolution that we no longer strictly need to hunt them, but then again, old instincts apparently die hard. My experience has also been that people who hunt also support conservation and sustainable use of the world- after all, if you wipe out all the animals, what's left to hunt? To say animals are our equals seems kind of silly. I'm fairly confident that your average human would not lose to an average chicken in a fair fight, or a battle of wits. (Of course, there are exceptions...) We have a responsibility to treat animals humanely, and not be cruel to them, especially seeing as it's in our power to harvest animals with very little suffering to them. But to say that we should treat them as equals seems to remind me of the Roman emperor Caligula, who, amongst other less mentionable practices, put a horse in the Senate. Seek a happy medium, it seems.
Monday, June 22, 2009
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Demotivation
I stumbled across this random piece of film, thought I would share it with the world. I don't get all the Nazi imagery (bunch of douchebags), but the music is kind of cool, and it does have a weird sense of continuity.
Speaking of weird continuity, I almost finished an interesting book- The Alchemist, by one Paulo Coehlo, late of Brazil. It deals with a young man from Spain who wishes to travel to Egypt, where he will seek out a treasure revealed to him in dreams. A strange start, true. However, the young man is a shepherd by trade, and so, to get to Africa he needs to sell his sheep. This is a pretty drastic step, until an old man pops up and tells him, go for it! So he does. Slowly but surely, he makes his way across the desert, along the way ruminating on something the old man told him, about a Personal Legend. (It's capitalized like that in the book). This Personal Legend is kind of the story of your life, what you're meant to do in the world. (If I'm to actually accomplish something before death, it looks like your humble narrator is pushing the bounds of immortality at this point...) At any rate, the young man looks for and usually finds omens, things pointing him in the right direction. Although a little heavy-handed on the pop psychology, the story is a good one, and the idea of Personal Legends is an interesting one. It also raises the question- do we determine our own destiny, or is it, like a legend, already written? If so, are we the star of this legend, the hero that we know ultimately will succeed, even when he seems in deepest peril, or are we just some extra in someone else's Greatest Story Ever Told, to die along the wayside, perhaps in service to someone else, who will never let our memory die? But then again, perhaps the legend is still being written. From the context of the book, it would seem that our legends are part pre-ordained, part improvised on the spot. Where we go is a product of our own past actions and decisions. However, at every step of the way, we find a decision to be made, another choice, and these can affect what happens next. And on it goes. Perhaps there is a path laid out ahead of us, although that makes life seem pretty overly simplified. All you do is move from one clue to the next. Perhaps it's more organic than that, always shifting based on the decisions we make.
Although on the other hand, having a plan and a destination in mind will help tremendously. Without this, you tend to wander. I spent more than a few years doing just that- instead of making things happen, I waited for them to happen to me. (I don't recommend this as a course of action for your life, by the way). Without a clear purpose, you tend to grasp whatever comes floating down the river. This will usually get you nowhere. Rather, (again, going heavy on the pop psychology), pick a goal and figure out how to get to that goal. Good luck, failing all else!
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
The Crawling Chaos
It may be just me, or it may be just coincidence, (either explanation is probable), but I can recall dreams of places and things I never have seen before. Of course, nothing is really that strange about that. However, when these things crop up in the real world, it's occasionally unnerving. Take, for example, a recurring nightmare. It centers around a place called Lemuria, which is a legendary continent, country or island, not unlike Atlantis in this way. At any rate, the Lemurian society in my nightmare is an advanced one, but jaded and decadent. Having grown weary of the world, they become evil and corrupt in a search for new experiences. As a result, medical and genetic experimentation is common among Lemurian scientists, although they too have been touched by the corruption in their society. Their experiments go beyond the realm of pure science and even the basic pursuit of knowledge into the realm of the monstrous. What they produced doesn't bear telling here, luckily they tend to have short life spans. Just an overly active imagination on my part? Probably. The strange thing is, this dream occurred, name and all, before I had ever heard of Lemuria in waking life. The strange thing is, there really is a legend of Lemuria- the name prompted some perverse whim to go look it up, and I found that the legends told that Lemuria was indeed an ancient and advanced society- destroyed in part because of their rampant genetic experimentation.
There were also instances of dreaming of Cthulhu, the giant monster/god from space. The story, written by H. P. Lovecraft, says that this entity long ago came to Earth, and inhabited a city called R'Lyeh, constructed according to Cthulhu's ideas, which are not like ours- geometry and structure were completely alien to a human mind. However, the stars in the sky proved to be his downfall, as when their positions change, they rendered the Earth completely unlivable for Cthulhu, subject as he was to their influence. However, his body was not composed of normal flesh- rather, it was a substance that regenerates itself. (this is also alluded to in the story). The result is that Cthulhu cannot die- he was, however, forced to retreat into the city and remain locked away in a tomb or chamber inside. While there, his body is preserved by its regeneration- whatever decays or eats at him has no effect, as the substance of his body simply regenerates again and again. And so there he sat, unable to leave, but able to project his thoughts outward across the world. The result was that men heard these things, and formed a religion around him- Cthulhu promising them that they would inherit the earth if they remain faithful to him and rouse him when the stars are once again right to let him walk on the Earth. Then, however, the city sank into the ocean. This proved to be a problem- Cthulhu's mental projections can't penetrate water. However, the cult was established, and was said to continue on always. The dreams I had were of his return- a huge thing, as Lovecraft put it, 'miles high', that looked down from the sky and sought out people, despite our comparative small size.
The reason this all seems interesting is that Lovecraft himself, author of all these stories and creator of what's now known as the Cthulhu Mythos, first had the inspiration for these things in dreams. They seemed rather detailed, and some people point to this as indicating that what Lovecraft did was tap unconsciously into something that had long been known to the human race, although kept concealed deep in our subconscious. The surprising consistency of these dreams, and their organization does lend some credit to this, although I tend to think there are more broad archetypes of gods and monsters than the specific entities Lovecraft saw. An example is the story Nyarlathotep, which was based on a dream- the author claims to have dreamed of recieving a letter from a friend, informing him that Nyarlathotep would be in Providence (Rhode Island, Lovecraft's home town), and not to miss the performance. In the story, Nyarlathotep appears as a performer or lecturer, drawing people into his control.
All Lovecraft's stories point to a common theme of beings beyond anything known to mankind- most are completely inhuman, by our own standards monstrous and cruel, but not actually evil. We would feel no more remorse about calling an exterminator than they would about wiping out an entire continent. Although these beings pretty much ignore people, they sometimes may make use of them as slaves or a source of food or entertainment. It's an interesting perspective, and makes the place of man seem small and insignificant. Exactly what role humanity does play in the universe, who really can say? Perhaps only the role we ourselves choose, consciously or unconsciously.
There is a good collection of Lovecraft's stories available on-line. While not complete, (I don't think a complete collection exists, although multiple books are out there) this is one of the better ones I've found. The language is somewhat dated, and perhaps a little hard to understand, but the stories are genuinely engaging and more than a little creepy.
http://www.dagonbytes.com/thelibrary/lovecraft/index.html
Kudos to Dagon for putting together a great collection~
Check out also the Dark Art gallery- if you're into that kind of art. Actually, I think it's pretty good on its own artistic merits.
There were also instances of dreaming of Cthulhu, the giant monster/god from space. The story, written by H. P. Lovecraft, says that this entity long ago came to Earth, and inhabited a city called R'Lyeh, constructed according to Cthulhu's ideas, which are not like ours- geometry and structure were completely alien to a human mind. However, the stars in the sky proved to be his downfall, as when their positions change, they rendered the Earth completely unlivable for Cthulhu, subject as he was to their influence. However, his body was not composed of normal flesh- rather, it was a substance that regenerates itself. (this is also alluded to in the story). The result is that Cthulhu cannot die- he was, however, forced to retreat into the city and remain locked away in a tomb or chamber inside. While there, his body is preserved by its regeneration- whatever decays or eats at him has no effect, as the substance of his body simply regenerates again and again. And so there he sat, unable to leave, but able to project his thoughts outward across the world. The result was that men heard these things, and formed a religion around him- Cthulhu promising them that they would inherit the earth if they remain faithful to him and rouse him when the stars are once again right to let him walk on the Earth. Then, however, the city sank into the ocean. This proved to be a problem- Cthulhu's mental projections can't penetrate water. However, the cult was established, and was said to continue on always. The dreams I had were of his return- a huge thing, as Lovecraft put it, 'miles high', that looked down from the sky and sought out people, despite our comparative small size.
The reason this all seems interesting is that Lovecraft himself, author of all these stories and creator of what's now known as the Cthulhu Mythos, first had the inspiration for these things in dreams. They seemed rather detailed, and some people point to this as indicating that what Lovecraft did was tap unconsciously into something that had long been known to the human race, although kept concealed deep in our subconscious. The surprising consistency of these dreams, and their organization does lend some credit to this, although I tend to think there are more broad archetypes of gods and monsters than the specific entities Lovecraft saw. An example is the story Nyarlathotep, which was based on a dream- the author claims to have dreamed of recieving a letter from a friend, informing him that Nyarlathotep would be in Providence (Rhode Island, Lovecraft's home town), and not to miss the performance. In the story, Nyarlathotep appears as a performer or lecturer, drawing people into his control.
All Lovecraft's stories point to a common theme of beings beyond anything known to mankind- most are completely inhuman, by our own standards monstrous and cruel, but not actually evil. We would feel no more remorse about calling an exterminator than they would about wiping out an entire continent. Although these beings pretty much ignore people, they sometimes may make use of them as slaves or a source of food or entertainment. It's an interesting perspective, and makes the place of man seem small and insignificant. Exactly what role humanity does play in the universe, who really can say? Perhaps only the role we ourselves choose, consciously or unconsciously.
There is a good collection of Lovecraft's stories available on-line. While not complete, (I don't think a complete collection exists, although multiple books are out there) this is one of the better ones I've found. The language is somewhat dated, and perhaps a little hard to understand, but the stories are genuinely engaging and more than a little creepy.
http://www.dagonbytes.com/thelibrary/lovecraft/index.html
Kudos to Dagon for putting together a great collection~
Check out also the Dark Art gallery- if you're into that kind of art. Actually, I think it's pretty good on its own artistic merits.
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Fluffy Bunnies
That term still cracks me up! I don't know when it first came into common usage, but it has come to refer to a practicioner of Wicca who is, well, kind of light and fluffy, without recognizing it as a serious religion. Why fluffy bunnies are limited to Wicca is, likewise, a mystery to me. But fluffiness refers to flaky, New-Agey-let-me-cleanse-my-aura-from-the-negativity-of-male-oppression type people we all sometimes encounter. Again, not to be disrespectful- a sincerely held religious belief can be a very wonderful thing. But there are people who are, well, posers. They seem to think that because they are religious, they have all the answers, or their lives are perfect, or any other person who doesn't think like them is completely clueless. Another pitfall associated with this point of view is that, since they have all the answers, anyone and everyone is simply floundering in the world, and is waiting in earnest for them to come and make everything perfectly clear. Actually, there's a difference between religion and spirituality, although the two may not necessarily be different. Religion is a commonly held set of assumptions or beliefs about the world around you. These beliefs are generally of a speculative nature- that is, things that can't be proven or disproven, although people tend to point to events as proof or evidence.
It's my experience that some of these things can't be readily dismissed. Others can. The principle of Occam's Razor (the best a skeptic can get, tee hee) states that the explanation that requires the fewest number of assumptions is almost always the correct one, when that explanation can incorporate all known facts. However, there are events that do incorporate all known or available facts and still come up short. However, it's an error to go jumping to conclusions- we can say with certainty only. "I don't know".
But back to the fluffiness. These are the "feel-good" people, who are in it for self-gratification or ego stoking. The truth is, what we don't know outweighs what we do know on the order of several billion to one. For every one thing we know, there's several billion we don't. I find it's best not to dwell on this too much, or you'll find yourself wondering why you don't just fall off the face of the earth. The point is, stuff works. Beyond that lies speculation and uncertainty, although that's certainly no reason not to go check it out, to formulate new and more in-depth ideas. And this is a problem with fluffy bunnies- they tend not to question. I've encountered several places where Wiccan authors say that outside philosophies, religions or whatever we're dealing with "brainwash" people. Enter the heroic Wiccans, who will free their minds from shackles! (Again, not many Wiccans actually think like this) And also in actuality, I'm pretty sure Wicca does not and did not exist in a vacuum. Where would any system of understanding the world be if it didn't incorporate outside ideas? It would seem that Wicca has suffered the same pains as many other religions- we're right, you're wrong, end of story. At best, this results in close-mindedness, at worst, people get really hurt. Wicca is a religion, this much is true. But like all religions, it's not an excuse to be a jerk. The interesting thing is, most religions have as their basis compassion and respect for living things.
I've noticed that as a Buddhist- I've been a Buddhist for over 10 years, although all that means is I can sit in the lotus position longer than most people. I don't claim to be an authority- I can tell you about Buddhism, but refuse to present it as (bad pun... wait for it...) gospel truth. It's a system of philosophy that makes sense of the world, and seems to be generally supported by scientific understanding, to the limited extent that science has been able to come to conclusions. The same is true, I think, of most other religions, or spiritual paths. If they allow you to make sense out of the world, love and respect your fellow man, then good. If it rings true with you, it seems to me that there must be at least a spark of truth in it. Truth is truth- would a rose by any other name be less a rose? As we move forwards into the 21st century and beyond, watch out for fluffy bunnies in authoritarian clothing. Let your mind be open, and never assume you have all the answers.
It's my experience that some of these things can't be readily dismissed. Others can. The principle of Occam's Razor (the best a skeptic can get, tee hee) states that the explanation that requires the fewest number of assumptions is almost always the correct one, when that explanation can incorporate all known facts. However, there are events that do incorporate all known or available facts and still come up short. However, it's an error to go jumping to conclusions- we can say with certainty only. "I don't know".
But back to the fluffiness. These are the "feel-good" people, who are in it for self-gratification or ego stoking. The truth is, what we don't know outweighs what we do know on the order of several billion to one. For every one thing we know, there's several billion we don't. I find it's best not to dwell on this too much, or you'll find yourself wondering why you don't just fall off the face of the earth. The point is, stuff works. Beyond that lies speculation and uncertainty, although that's certainly no reason not to go check it out, to formulate new and more in-depth ideas. And this is a problem with fluffy bunnies- they tend not to question. I've encountered several places where Wiccan authors say that outside philosophies, religions or whatever we're dealing with "brainwash" people. Enter the heroic Wiccans, who will free their minds from shackles! (Again, not many Wiccans actually think like this) And also in actuality, I'm pretty sure Wicca does not and did not exist in a vacuum. Where would any system of understanding the world be if it didn't incorporate outside ideas? It would seem that Wicca has suffered the same pains as many other religions- we're right, you're wrong, end of story. At best, this results in close-mindedness, at worst, people get really hurt. Wicca is a religion, this much is true. But like all religions, it's not an excuse to be a jerk. The interesting thing is, most religions have as their basis compassion and respect for living things.
I've noticed that as a Buddhist- I've been a Buddhist for over 10 years, although all that means is I can sit in the lotus position longer than most people. I don't claim to be an authority- I can tell you about Buddhism, but refuse to present it as (bad pun... wait for it...) gospel truth. It's a system of philosophy that makes sense of the world, and seems to be generally supported by scientific understanding, to the limited extent that science has been able to come to conclusions. The same is true, I think, of most other religions, or spiritual paths. If they allow you to make sense out of the world, love and respect your fellow man, then good. If it rings true with you, it seems to me that there must be at least a spark of truth in it. Truth is truth- would a rose by any other name be less a rose? As we move forwards into the 21st century and beyond, watch out for fluffy bunnies in authoritarian clothing. Let your mind be open, and never assume you have all the answers.
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Throwing Stones
I recently started a pretty interesting book- A Brief History of Everything, by Ken Wilber. More like Eastern metaphysics than anything else, it presents one really curious one, that the world is composed of holons- the word was invented by Arthur Koestler, and means something that is both composed of parts and is itself part of a greater whole. Take as a for example a rock- the rock is composed of molecules, which are composed of atoms, which are composed of subatomic particles, and so on down the line. The rock itself is part of a greater system- let's just say arbitrarily it broke off of a larger rock- the larger rock is part of the regional soil and geologic strata- this in term is part of a larger system contained in the earth, the earth is a part of a larger system of planets, and so on- both directions show both a whole and the component parts. This being the case, it's pretty reasonable to assume that the universe is organized, to some extent. However, to go beyond this enters the realm of speculation.
Consider the old problem of the monkeys- the story goes, if a hundred monkeys sit at a hundred typewriters typing away constantly, sooner or later one of the monkeys will type the complete works of Shakespeare. That's true- there is no such thing as a zero probability. However, the problem with this is time- we do not have an infinite amount of time to do this in. The universe has about 12 billion years from beginning to end, at least that's a reasonable estimation. It would take about 10 times that long for anything really significant to happen once- and under this explanation, we need a whole truckload of really significant things to happen. So out the window goes that argument! Chance alone cannot account for the patterns we see in the universe.
Now comes the fun part- people of a religious bent point to this as proof of God- well, yes and no. It proves that something exists- a pattern underlies everything in the universe, and things happen at a rate that cannot be explained by chance. Does that indicate, for example, that a Hindu god runs the universe? No- merely that a pattern is present. Beyond this, we move into speculation and faith. Faith, of course, being belief in the absence of evidence. (that may sound a little harsher than it's intended) By this, though, we can impose whatever characteristics we may want on this force, and call it God. The problem comes in when we start saying, "I'm right, everyone else is wrong". Apart from being pretty egotistical, it's not really anything that can be proven or disproven, as all we can see is the pattern. The pattern itself is really neither good nor bad, but simply is. What we choose to do with it determines whether it's good or bad.
Consider the old problem of the monkeys- the story goes, if a hundred monkeys sit at a hundred typewriters typing away constantly, sooner or later one of the monkeys will type the complete works of Shakespeare. That's true- there is no such thing as a zero probability. However, the problem with this is time- we do not have an infinite amount of time to do this in. The universe has about 12 billion years from beginning to end, at least that's a reasonable estimation. It would take about 10 times that long for anything really significant to happen once- and under this explanation, we need a whole truckload of really significant things to happen. So out the window goes that argument! Chance alone cannot account for the patterns we see in the universe.
Now comes the fun part- people of a religious bent point to this as proof of God- well, yes and no. It proves that something exists- a pattern underlies everything in the universe, and things happen at a rate that cannot be explained by chance. Does that indicate, for example, that a Hindu god runs the universe? No- merely that a pattern is present. Beyond this, we move into speculation and faith. Faith, of course, being belief in the absence of evidence. (that may sound a little harsher than it's intended) By this, though, we can impose whatever characteristics we may want on this force, and call it God. The problem comes in when we start saying, "I'm right, everyone else is wrong". Apart from being pretty egotistical, it's not really anything that can be proven or disproven, as all we can see is the pattern. The pattern itself is really neither good nor bad, but simply is. What we choose to do with it determines whether it's good or bad.
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
The Code of Chivalry
. I noticed a lot of interesting parallels between knighthood and modern military service. A complex code of chivalry (that is, honor and conduct) governed the life of a knight. This should not be confused with the code of shivering ,which many New Englanders have come to know in the winter months. At any rate, a knight would pledge allegiance to a king in exchange for lands within the kingdom, or, in later years, for cash. The knight would be expected to be ready at all times to defend the king and/or the kingdom, or to go to war at the king's orders. A lot like modern military service- the Oath is a little different (we vowed to defend the Constitution and follow the orders of the President), but the principle is largely the same. I wonder if this is why we call officers "sir"? Perhaps another holdover from those times, like the salute. (The right hand that you salute with would also be the hand that would hold a sword- the gesture is both one of respect and of trust- if your hand is visible, it's not on the hilt of your sword or concealing a weapon).
However, a knight could also court a lady- these would generally be women of the court. The knight would champion them in battle or jousting, as well. Beyond that, a knight could also offer his sword in service to another, as long as that did not conflict with his first duty to the king. Remember, a knight giving his word was considered a binding contract, and to break such a contract meant dishonor for the knight. So a knight would make a symbolic gesture to the person he pledged his help to- this would be not out of a practical sense, as could be said of service to the king, but rather out of love and honor. If the knight had a lady, the service he would render would be either stated or implied. There are about a million and a half rules in the codes of chivalry, and even more in the codes of courtly love. (Do not confuse this with the code of Courtney Love- to attempt to understand that is to invite madness). What this all comes down to for me is- act with honor, and do not give your word lightly. True, there are formal knightships (Elton John and Paul McCartney are both knighted), although I would warrant that the code of honor among men and women ideally would apply to us all. People talk a lot about honor, and it's an easy concept to use- but the real challenge comes when we try to live with honor.
However, a knight could also court a lady- these would generally be women of the court. The knight would champion them in battle or jousting, as well. Beyond that, a knight could also offer his sword in service to another, as long as that did not conflict with his first duty to the king. Remember, a knight giving his word was considered a binding contract, and to break such a contract meant dishonor for the knight. So a knight would make a symbolic gesture to the person he pledged his help to- this would be not out of a practical sense, as could be said of service to the king, but rather out of love and honor. If the knight had a lady, the service he would render would be either stated or implied. There are about a million and a half rules in the codes of chivalry, and even more in the codes of courtly love. (Do not confuse this with the code of Courtney Love- to attempt to understand that is to invite madness). What this all comes down to for me is- act with honor, and do not give your word lightly. True, there are formal knightships (Elton John and Paul McCartney are both knighted), although I would warrant that the code of honor among men and women ideally would apply to us all. People talk a lot about honor, and it's an easy concept to use- but the real challenge comes when we try to live with honor.
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
Big Guns, Little Guns
This is an odd one- there are gun-owning gay rights advocates who are rather vocal and militant. One such is Pink Pistols- (you can't make this stuff up...). The link to the article is here- http://washingtonindependent.com/46097/pro-gun-gay-groups-take-aim-at-hate-crimes-bill Their motto- "Armed Gays Don't Get Bashed". That may be true- however, they may well wind up going to jail for manslaughter- the law is notoriously vague on the concept of self-defense and justifiable homicide. It is true, people have a right to own firearms, with the appropriate permits, training, and lack of a criminal background.
But then again, it speaks volumes about the state of the nation when people feel that they need to be armed against hate crimes. Why just gay people, as well? What about women, or for that matter white guys like me? What if some nameless black/hispanic assassin jumps out of the bushes? Come on, don't you guys watch TV news? According to them, they're freakin' everywhere! No one is safe, anarchy in the streets! Women should also be armed- presumably against men like me- I fit the profile, except for being a minority. Mid-20's to late 30's, single, suburban, described by peers as "eccentric"... wow, I better go get a gun to defend myself against myself, just in case I try something! Oh yeah, and to keep the terrorists at bay. Can't forget that- like the army of minorities, they too are lurking everywhere, to blow up our tract houses or something like that.
This may sound strange coming from a member of the Army- actually, I volunteered, and believe in what it is the US does- ideally. I can't say I unconditionally support US military action, but I do believe in the ideals this country was founded on. The ones spelled out in the Constitution, not those of a "Christian nation" (this is actually a common misconception, the state is technically agnostic for all intents and purposes). But telling people to be afraid means ratings. And ratings are the name of the game- unfortunately, the press, at least in this case, is not entirely concerned with "fair and unbiased" news. (Why does that sound so familiar...) But on a positive note, I think people are fundamentally good, or at least from the point of reference of not evil. Wherever you go in the world, we all laugh, we all eat, we all breathe the same air and really just want the same things. And there's enough to go around, although the systems we have in place may not always work to the best interest of everyone concerned. I think Man is unique in that we are the only creatures who still exist despite managing to work against our own best interests on such a wide scale.
But then again, it speaks volumes about the state of the nation when people feel that they need to be armed against hate crimes. Why just gay people, as well? What about women, or for that matter white guys like me? What if some nameless black/hispanic assassin jumps out of the bushes? Come on, don't you guys watch TV news? According to them, they're freakin' everywhere! No one is safe, anarchy in the streets! Women should also be armed- presumably against men like me- I fit the profile, except for being a minority. Mid-20's to late 30's, single, suburban, described by peers as "eccentric"... wow, I better go get a gun to defend myself against myself, just in case I try something! Oh yeah, and to keep the terrorists at bay. Can't forget that- like the army of minorities, they too are lurking everywhere, to blow up our tract houses or something like that.
This may sound strange coming from a member of the Army- actually, I volunteered, and believe in what it is the US does- ideally. I can't say I unconditionally support US military action, but I do believe in the ideals this country was founded on. The ones spelled out in the Constitution, not those of a "Christian nation" (this is actually a common misconception, the state is technically agnostic for all intents and purposes). But telling people to be afraid means ratings. And ratings are the name of the game- unfortunately, the press, at least in this case, is not entirely concerned with "fair and unbiased" news. (Why does that sound so familiar...) But on a positive note, I think people are fundamentally good, or at least from the point of reference of not evil. Wherever you go in the world, we all laugh, we all eat, we all breathe the same air and really just want the same things. And there's enough to go around, although the systems we have in place may not always work to the best interest of everyone concerned. I think Man is unique in that we are the only creatures who still exist despite managing to work against our own best interests on such a wide scale.
Monday, June 8, 2009
Good News- Cigarette Juice
Mainly because my dear friend is a fan of Spagett- yes, this is what I do when you mortals are sleeping. If memory serves, I watched this commercial, such as it is, at the home of my lady friend, who was snoozing at the time. I can recall a habit of hers that warms my heart no end, reaching out and finding her man still there, then, quite secure in this knowledge, goes back to sleep, content that all is right with the world. I only hope I can live up to such a noble standard as this! At any rate, this features the legendary Spagett- insane insomniacs, you know full well who I'm talking about- touting the latest Cincorp invention, Cigarette Juice. I have seen the effects of water on cigarette butts, though admittedly not on what appears to be tea brewed from cigarettes. The Cinco Phone is also worth a look- I'll post a link when I don't have to wage war with dial-up. At any rate, this is repulsive in every way, much like the bulk of this show-and yet, oddly funny. Perhaps that's why they show it on late-night Cartoon Network- speculation abounds. At any rate, you know the so-called Big Tobacco would be doing this- having seen "Russian Flavored" energy drinks (my guess is vodka, which will serve you well when you're low on cash, and maybe have something to mix it with), very little is capable of surprising me any more. This particular (nameless- what's another word for The Metamorphosis?) energy drink I did not try, mainly out of fear for what the results would be. Nonetheless, life goes on, as does late-night cartoons. I remain a big Fullmetal Alchemist fan- were the secrets of alchemy (...) so easy, wouldn't more people have grasped them? Enough randomness- in the hopes, dear readers, that all is well among you.
More Waffles Than A House of Pancakes
It began with John Kerry, and seems to be an epidemic- Democrats not doing anything! Should inertia on such a wide scale spread, it could very well throw the Earth off course! It was a bit of a disappointment, and a little confusing. Obama got some flack from one Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, who was pissed at Obama for saying that it's "time to deliver" on healthcare reform. This is confusing because Obama largely left the details of working out a bipartisan compromise to the Senate. This prompts the question for me- did the President act rightly, and did he need to be involved every step of the way? The one answer is, if this is his kind of pet project, yes. On the other hand, if the Senate can't come to any conclusions on this without constant guidance and hand-holding, what is it exactly that they do on Capitol Hill other than argue and waste billions of taxpayer dollars? I'm not sure Obama acted incorrectly in allowing the Senate to hash something out, as this sounds a bit to me like asking them to do their jobs for a change.
The Prez also was called on being in France while all this was going on. Accused of "sightseeing" by Sen. Grassley, the statement portrayed the Senate as working hard while Obama goofed off. What was Obama doing in France? Actually, commemorating the anniversary of D-Day. Again, this seems to be kind of a gray area for me- this is a pretty noble thing to be doing, and the fact that the Senate seems unable to get it together when the President is there tells me it may not actually matter where he is. I'm reminded also of Bush the Second, who spent more than a little time home on the range down in Texas trimming brush while the Senate presumably argued about the ramifications of the Twin Tower attacks. Was Bush also guilty of "sightseeing?" I would say he was, and remains, guilty of far worse than that.
In a best-case scenario, I would say Obama remains the idealist we voted for, but got bogged down in the quicksand that is American politics. Remember the old joke- if pro is the opposite of con, what is the opposite of progress? Congress. In a worst-case scenario, it would seem Obama promised voters the moon, and once the office was secured, things just went back to politics as usual. Personally, I'd like to give him the benefit of the doubt- we can't expect sweeping changes to start in an old political system-but with time, all things change. Hopefully for the better.
The Prez also was called on being in France while all this was going on. Accused of "sightseeing" by Sen. Grassley, the statement portrayed the Senate as working hard while Obama goofed off. What was Obama doing in France? Actually, commemorating the anniversary of D-Day. Again, this seems to be kind of a gray area for me- this is a pretty noble thing to be doing, and the fact that the Senate seems unable to get it together when the President is there tells me it may not actually matter where he is. I'm reminded also of Bush the Second, who spent more than a little time home on the range down in Texas trimming brush while the Senate presumably argued about the ramifications of the Twin Tower attacks. Was Bush also guilty of "sightseeing?" I would say he was, and remains, guilty of far worse than that.
In a best-case scenario, I would say Obama remains the idealist we voted for, but got bogged down in the quicksand that is American politics. Remember the old joke- if pro is the opposite of con, what is the opposite of progress? Congress. In a worst-case scenario, it would seem Obama promised voters the moon, and once the office was secured, things just went back to politics as usual. Personally, I'd like to give him the benefit of the doubt- we can't expect sweeping changes to start in an old political system-but with time, all things change. Hopefully for the better.
Waiting for July
June is moving along- the weekend was great, and now it's Monday, which really is like the weekend except it's more towards the beginning of the week. I'm wondering what the next step is- not that things are overly uncertain, but rather that I wonder what the next hurdle will be. In the midst of the fray is fine for me- sitting around polishing the guns (so to speak- I don't actually own a gun) is much harder. But in the meanwhile, I guess the principle of doing things the way I think they should be done seems to be working pretty well. It's been a job getting everything straightened out, but I think we're finally ready to go. Unless something else pops up, and then it's back to square one.
Everyone tells me-don't worry about the future, and they're right. It's probably just good old-fashioned paranoia. I've got a lot riding on this, so I guess it's human nature to be concerned. And the fact that I don't move out until the end of next month means plenty of time to ruminate on it. But in the meanwhile, things are really not that bad. Everyone I've talked to seems more concerned about me coming back in one piece. Being deployed seems pretty much a given, and this looks fairly likely, as there is a regular rotation of troops in and out of the fields of combat, although it's nothing like what we've seen under the Bush administration. But that's a whole other post. At any rate, if so, I'll be a likely target, assuming I'll be doing my MOS. But a likely target is not necessarily a stupid one, or one that's going to go risk his neck without a good reason. But this is the life I chose, and I went into it with both eyes open. And as far as I can see, the benefits outweigh the risks.
Everyone tells me-don't worry about the future, and they're right. It's probably just good old-fashioned paranoia. I've got a lot riding on this, so I guess it's human nature to be concerned. And the fact that I don't move out until the end of next month means plenty of time to ruminate on it. But in the meanwhile, things are really not that bad. Everyone I've talked to seems more concerned about me coming back in one piece. Being deployed seems pretty much a given, and this looks fairly likely, as there is a regular rotation of troops in and out of the fields of combat, although it's nothing like what we've seen under the Bush administration. But that's a whole other post. At any rate, if so, I'll be a likely target, assuming I'll be doing my MOS. But a likely target is not necessarily a stupid one, or one that's going to go risk his neck without a good reason. But this is the life I chose, and I went into it with both eyes open. And as far as I can see, the benefits outweigh the risks.
Saturday, June 6, 2009
Go-Go Trance
Just because- I like this song. If anything, be true to who you are. That probably sounds like some pop-psychology feel-good quick fix, but it runs a little deeper than that. First, you need to learn who you are, find out what you are in the dark. Is there a way to do this without pain? In my case, guess not. What you are is what is left when everything else is ripped away. But then, when that happens- it hurt, but was it anything you couldn't live without? Would I still be here if it was? This stems from something in the Necronomicon (the modern version by Donald Tyson, in case clarification is needed).
Turn not your mind from night fears, but embrace them as a lover. Let terror possess your body and course through your veins with its heady intoxication to steal your judgement, your very reason. In the madness of the night, all sounds become articulate. A man sure of himself, confident in his strength, aware of his rightful place, remains forever ignorant. ...Abandon hope and you shall become free, and with freedom acquire emptiness.
In other words, what are you really afraid of? It's not so much going insane from fear- rather, it's finding what really matters in life. There are those things worth fighting for.
Friday, June 5, 2009
Death To America!
Actually, I look more Afghanistani than this guy... This is the kind of video from bin Laden we want to see! But seriously, if we can all laugh at stupid shit like this, perhaps peace across the globe is not just a pipe dream. Or, we could all just gang up and wipe Romania off the face of the map. (Just kidding, Slavs- you know we love you!) But to be serious- laugh! The world is a funny place, and laughter is perhaps a good medicine to heal the rifts between us. I was kind of waiting for those headphones to fall off his head... origins unknown.
Guerilla Traffic Lessons
I once heard it said that the heights of human capability know no bounds- nor does the depth of human stupidity. I'm inclined to agree. There's a particular intersection I have to cross pretty much on a daily basis- traveling almost always by bike. This intersection is a four way intersection, with a stop light. Nothing strange about this, it's largely like most other four-way intersections across our fair land. However, there must be some overhead wires or something, as it seems to prompt stupidity en masse. As you no doubt no, bicycles tend to favor the right-hand side of the lane. This is to accomodate passing cars, so that assuming they are moving faster, they can continue to do so without interruption from us, plodding up the hill or whatever it is we're doing. At an intersection and at a red light, when encountering a bike on the side of the road, and the bike is not attempting a right on red, assume the biker is waiting there for the light to change to proceed straight through the intersection, and is on the right side so that you, the person in the car, can likewise proceed straight through the intersection, passing on the left. I make it a point to drift a little rightwards, to allow cars plenty of room both to get around the cars coming towards them, and allow them to get around me. And we all live happily ever after. Women, I know I'm the hunkiest guy you've ever seen- please keep your wolf whistles within the confines of good taste, however. (True story).
Now, if you find yourself behind a bike at a red light, the bike is simply sitting there, and you want to make a right, there are two options. Provided that you can do so safely, you may wish to come around on the left, get ahead of the bike and take your right turn. Failing that, simply wait behind the bike if you are unable to pass, and wait for the biker to get into the intersection and subsequently out of your way. If you wish to go around, do so. However, observe the light. If you pull up so far that you can't see the light, you might as well just stay the hell put and wait for the biker to move.
Here's a situation that happens all the time at this intersection- the biker (me) is waiting for the light to change so he can proceed straight through the intersection. Up comes a car behind him, to the red light. Said car now rushes around the biker, who has noticed that the light has turned green, and assumes (not really such a wild assumption, I think) that the driver of the car has likewise observed the green light- although annoying, the car has plenty of time to proceed right and allow the biker to continue on unimpeded. However, despite being in a tremendous hurry to get around the biker, the driver is clearly not in a hurry to proceed further. The driver cuts diagonally in front of the bike, stops dead halfway out into the intersection... and checks to see if there are oncoming cars. If you are this driver, the loud smack you heard is my hand connecting with my forehead. On more than one occasion, I have had to jam on my brakes to avoid drivers doing this. It's really just a minor annoyance to have cars pass too close on the right, or go flying around you to make a turn less than a yard ahead of you. However, these are minor annoyances because they don't actually require any action on my part- shaking my head at the amount of fuel such a jackrabbit acceleration and subsequent slowing down just wasted is not really an obligation on my part. (In case it wasn't obvious, people who forgo cars for bicycles tend to be on the smug side- we know it's obnoxious, and we're working on it, hopefully with government funding in the future). At any rate, would you not be annoyed if someone driving their car cut your own car off, only to stop in front of you? It's insensitive and rude. According to traffic laws, a bicycle is a vehicle. (Technically, bicycles can get traffic citations, too). However, there is an advantage to bicycles- they do not require insurance, and a rider bent in the head enough can ram them with impunity and very rarely damage to the bike. This has occurred to me recently- if I were simply to "miss" the brakes, a nice little controlled crash would result in me being completely unharmed, the side of the car I just rammed into at about 15 miles per hour not faring as well, and the bike taking the brunt of the impact across the front (rubber, air-filled, highly resilient) tire. Why, whatever would the insurance company say? What would the driver say after the insurance company finds out they are responsible for the damage to the car? Of course, leaving the scene might mean that wouldn't you know it, I just happened to get the plate number, Officer. Of course, I might well have jinxed myself into actually not having room to stop, and winding up taking a dive off the handlebars. This too has happened before, though off-road, never in traffic. I still have a scar from a dislocated shoulder that resulted from some abrupt contact between it and hard-packed dirt.
But then again, we should follow legal channels- part of the reason car insurance is so outrageously expensive is because some people abuse cars. Of course, about all of the rest of the reason is because car insurance companies can get away with one of the greater legal scams in history. But I digress. However, I begin to fear that if people like this continue to drive without paying much attention to what they're doing, someone could get hurt. If I was to pull off this little charade, it would be to teach a lesson I'm not at all sure I should be teaching in the first place. If circumstances are different, it could cost a life.
Now, if you find yourself behind a bike at a red light, the bike is simply sitting there, and you want to make a right, there are two options. Provided that you can do so safely, you may wish to come around on the left, get ahead of the bike and take your right turn. Failing that, simply wait behind the bike if you are unable to pass, and wait for the biker to get into the intersection and subsequently out of your way. If you wish to go around, do so. However, observe the light. If you pull up so far that you can't see the light, you might as well just stay the hell put and wait for the biker to move.
Here's a situation that happens all the time at this intersection- the biker (me) is waiting for the light to change so he can proceed straight through the intersection. Up comes a car behind him, to the red light. Said car now rushes around the biker, who has noticed that the light has turned green, and assumes (not really such a wild assumption, I think) that the driver of the car has likewise observed the green light- although annoying, the car has plenty of time to proceed right and allow the biker to continue on unimpeded. However, despite being in a tremendous hurry to get around the biker, the driver is clearly not in a hurry to proceed further. The driver cuts diagonally in front of the bike, stops dead halfway out into the intersection... and checks to see if there are oncoming cars. If you are this driver, the loud smack you heard is my hand connecting with my forehead. On more than one occasion, I have had to jam on my brakes to avoid drivers doing this. It's really just a minor annoyance to have cars pass too close on the right, or go flying around you to make a turn less than a yard ahead of you. However, these are minor annoyances because they don't actually require any action on my part- shaking my head at the amount of fuel such a jackrabbit acceleration and subsequent slowing down just wasted is not really an obligation on my part. (In case it wasn't obvious, people who forgo cars for bicycles tend to be on the smug side- we know it's obnoxious, and we're working on it, hopefully with government funding in the future). At any rate, would you not be annoyed if someone driving their car cut your own car off, only to stop in front of you? It's insensitive and rude. According to traffic laws, a bicycle is a vehicle. (Technically, bicycles can get traffic citations, too). However, there is an advantage to bicycles- they do not require insurance, and a rider bent in the head enough can ram them with impunity and very rarely damage to the bike. This has occurred to me recently- if I were simply to "miss" the brakes, a nice little controlled crash would result in me being completely unharmed, the side of the car I just rammed into at about 15 miles per hour not faring as well, and the bike taking the brunt of the impact across the front (rubber, air-filled, highly resilient) tire. Why, whatever would the insurance company say? What would the driver say after the insurance company finds out they are responsible for the damage to the car? Of course, leaving the scene might mean that wouldn't you know it, I just happened to get the plate number, Officer. Of course, I might well have jinxed myself into actually not having room to stop, and winding up taking a dive off the handlebars. This too has happened before, though off-road, never in traffic. I still have a scar from a dislocated shoulder that resulted from some abrupt contact between it and hard-packed dirt.
But then again, we should follow legal channels- part of the reason car insurance is so outrageously expensive is because some people abuse cars. Of course, about all of the rest of the reason is because car insurance companies can get away with one of the greater legal scams in history. But I digress. However, I begin to fear that if people like this continue to drive without paying much attention to what they're doing, someone could get hurt. If I was to pull off this little charade, it would be to teach a lesson I'm not at all sure I should be teaching in the first place. If circumstances are different, it could cost a life.
Behind The Veil
Just a random illustration from an old alchemical book- probably the most relevant part is the three triangles- corpus (body), anima (soul) and spiritus (spirit or Divine nature). So why put this up here, apart from the fact that I don't have anything else to do? Alchemy is an old science, and largely a symbolic one. The official purpose is to transmute metals or other substances into gold. About the only way to do this is to go pulling subatomic bonds apart, which is not such a hot idea. However, the real purpose of alchemy is to turn "lesser substances" into "gold". Alchemists developed the idea that we exist on only one of a series of planes- there is the highest plane, which would be God, or the Divine. This is not the bearded dude in a robe God, but rather the highest state of existence- creation realizing its own nature. Below that is the lesser, physical world, where the real nature of what's going on is not realized. Nonetheless, the nature of the Divine kind of imbues all things- everything that is a part of it shares in its nature, and operates according to the principles of it. Like mathematics- everything operates according to mathematical principles, although in many cases the operations of these principles are far too huge for us to fully grasp. The basic principles apply, but to formulate a prediction would involve such a huge number of variables the human race would have come and gone several times over before any of us managed to even get a fraction of it down. In my experience, this is something more to grasp intuitively than logically- oddly enough, the same logical principles as the ones we can readily grasp apply, except on such a huge scale, we simply can't get our brains around it. (No reason not to try, though, says I). There's another illustration around somewhere, where a man is poking his head through a large curtain- the curtain itself is covered with stars, and represents the sky, or the heavens. Behind this, he sees an incredibly complex array of wheels, machines and concentric rings. This stuck with me, as this guy has managed to look beyond the surface and find an underlying pattern, even in the seeming chaos- in other words, he looked past the immediate impressions of the world and saw a greater whole and greater pattern. It's an interesting analogy, and any of us really can see this pattern- reminds me of that old Robert Hunter song- once in a while you get shown the light, in the strangest of places if you look at it right. And really, that's all this is- wherever you look, whatever medium you look through, there is a pattern and order to our existence. Whether or not this is a comforting thought, I think, depends on where you are standing.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
Public Service Announcement
Yes, this is a real church. Yes, this is a real religion, inasmuch as that applies. Yes, I am a member. Rev. Stang is a real(?) person, they are based out of Dallas. This is, sadly, one of the sounder philosophies I've encountered- just thought I'd put this out there for your viewing pleasure. Because if you're reading this, YOU MAY NOT BE ONE OF THEM!! But in all seriousness, guys- a touch of surrealism now and then is cherished by the wisest men. Enjoy, my dear readers!
Yoda Busts A Move
Yes, it's silly. But you watched it! The famous 'numa numa song'. I think the words are in Romanian, as to what they're actually talking about- no idea. But it is one of those bizarrely catchy tunes. In an age of incredible technology, when we can communicate across vast distances at the speed of light, we still have silly stuff like this. Enjoy, everyone!
On the Outside
Life on the outside ain't what it used to be
The world's gone crazy and it ain't safe on the street
It's a drag, and I know
There's only one place to go, I'm comin' home,
I'm comin' home
- "I'm Comin' Home", by Cheeseburger
This actually is the theme for the thoroughly bizarre cartoon Superjail. Yet, for some odd reason that song remains stuck in my head, and sums it up. The world sometimes does indeed appear to have gone crazy- but then again, normal and abnormal depend greatly on perspective- it could well be that we only understand abnormal from a commonly accepted and arbitrary definition of normality. Why, then, do we have imaginations and stories, and movies, all of which can create worlds full of strange things? And sometimes, don't we all like to retreat into daydreams? They're often so much more interesting than reality, which can sometimes be a drag. The definition of insanity is the inability to distinguish one's own thoughts from concrete reality. Here's the funny thing- the brain itself cannot or does not distinguish an internal (i.e. thought or daydream) from an external one (something really happening in the world around you). So how do you know what's real and what's not? The line is somewhat blurred. Say you're walking down the road, and someone runs up, points at your feet and yells "snake!" However, the snake turns out to be a piece of rope or a stick lying on the ground. Eventually, you would figure that out. In the meantime, if you're afraid of snakes, you would probably react to it as if it were a real snake. You reacted the same- the actual reality of the snake is secondary to the fact that if it were a real snake, you would have done the same thing. However, the way to figure this out is to come up with some kind of consensus as to what's going on anyway. You can observe the world, and if your observations jibe with other people, (let's not open the can of worms from the question, how do we know the other people are outside observers and not just figments of our imagination) we can generally accept that as reality. But again, there really isn't any hard and fast way to tell if the world around you is just an elaborate daydream or not. You can imagine yourself flying, but may not be able to do it in real life- perhaps your mind doesn't believe you can fly, so you cannot fly in your daydream. Or perhaps you are just subject to your own mind- generally when we think of dreams, we can control the content. However, there are dreams you cannot control the course of, and these you either wake up from or ride out. Not that all of them are bad, there could be some fun dreams where you don't have control, too. But at any rate, the point being- this could be a dream. I could be a part of your imagination, telling you this, perhaps because your mind wants to wake up from the dream, and so it invented me, or invented these words. Or it could be that I'm dreaming this, and that I just imagined writing this, imagined posting it, and in reality no one will ever see it, as I'm actually dreaming somewhere, perhaps tucked away in a cave and not aware of it. Okay, enough weirdness for one day. Go outside- look at the sun. I'm pretty sure we all live under the same sun, all of us on the same earth. So if that's the case, let's all assume things are hunky-dory, and we're all sane. Because the alternative is just too darn depressing.
The world's gone crazy and it ain't safe on the street
It's a drag, and I know
There's only one place to go, I'm comin' home,
I'm comin' home
- "I'm Comin' Home", by Cheeseburger
This actually is the theme for the thoroughly bizarre cartoon Superjail. Yet, for some odd reason that song remains stuck in my head, and sums it up. The world sometimes does indeed appear to have gone crazy- but then again, normal and abnormal depend greatly on perspective- it could well be that we only understand abnormal from a commonly accepted and arbitrary definition of normality. Why, then, do we have imaginations and stories, and movies, all of which can create worlds full of strange things? And sometimes, don't we all like to retreat into daydreams? They're often so much more interesting than reality, which can sometimes be a drag. The definition of insanity is the inability to distinguish one's own thoughts from concrete reality. Here's the funny thing- the brain itself cannot or does not distinguish an internal (i.e. thought or daydream) from an external one (something really happening in the world around you). So how do you know what's real and what's not? The line is somewhat blurred. Say you're walking down the road, and someone runs up, points at your feet and yells "snake!" However, the snake turns out to be a piece of rope or a stick lying on the ground. Eventually, you would figure that out. In the meantime, if you're afraid of snakes, you would probably react to it as if it were a real snake. You reacted the same- the actual reality of the snake is secondary to the fact that if it were a real snake, you would have done the same thing. However, the way to figure this out is to come up with some kind of consensus as to what's going on anyway. You can observe the world, and if your observations jibe with other people, (let's not open the can of worms from the question, how do we know the other people are outside observers and not just figments of our imagination) we can generally accept that as reality. But again, there really isn't any hard and fast way to tell if the world around you is just an elaborate daydream or not. You can imagine yourself flying, but may not be able to do it in real life- perhaps your mind doesn't believe you can fly, so you cannot fly in your daydream. Or perhaps you are just subject to your own mind- generally when we think of dreams, we can control the content. However, there are dreams you cannot control the course of, and these you either wake up from or ride out. Not that all of them are bad, there could be some fun dreams where you don't have control, too. But at any rate, the point being- this could be a dream. I could be a part of your imagination, telling you this, perhaps because your mind wants to wake up from the dream, and so it invented me, or invented these words. Or it could be that I'm dreaming this, and that I just imagined writing this, imagined posting it, and in reality no one will ever see it, as I'm actually dreaming somewhere, perhaps tucked away in a cave and not aware of it. Okay, enough weirdness for one day. Go outside- look at the sun. I'm pretty sure we all live under the same sun, all of us on the same earth. So if that's the case, let's all assume things are hunky-dory, and we're all sane. Because the alternative is just too darn depressing.
Monday, June 1, 2009
Rules of Engagement-Horror Films
In a new age of great horror, it's a good time to revisit some of the ground rules should you find yourself in a horror film. This can help you avoid becoming one of the pretty/annoying/creatively killed members of whatever party you find yourself in the situation with. While not intended as an all-inclusive guide, these rules can significantly increase your chances of survival.
1. Don't do it. These three words can make all the difference in the world. Whatever it is, if you have any doubts, don't do it. If it seems dangerous, don't do it. If you doubt that it is entirely safe- don't do it. Countless victims have spent their last moments saying, "I shouldn't have done that", be it opening a door, going into a house, looking somewhere they shouldn't have done, or showing up in the first place.
2. Do not abandon weapons. Often, an object suitable for use against whatever horror from beyond the grave is chasing you will be on hand. Know the location of weaponry, keep a clear route open to said weaponry, and don't be afraid to use it. Also, don't drop it and run away- usually a monster will pause and rethink his/her/its options if you are carrying a large and destructive object. Use this to your advantage.
3.Listen to the town drunk/crazy old man/woman/local legend. Often these will contain clues that will indicate a monster's weakness or secret. If any of the above people tells you not to do something, see rule #1. Likewise, if they have a helpful suggestion, follow it, however silly it may sound. These people inexplicably will know more than you, so listen to them and follow their advice.
4. If you observe some strange or unexplained phenomena involving any of the following, leave at once and do not return-
-appliances, especially electrical or electronic ones
-light fixtures or switches
-furniture, especially paintings, mirrors, beds or cabinets
-anything and everything in your kitchen including but not limited to the stove and refrigerator.
-animals, especially domestic animals such as cats or dogs
-bladed, pointed or serrated tools
- fireplaces
-windows
5. Trust no one, especially if they begin acting strangely or speaking in an unusually deep or odd-timbred voice.
6. If no one lives there, there's a reason for that. Do not conduct your own investigation into what may or may not have transpired there. Assuming the worst is almost universally the best assumption.
7. Secure all weapons as early as possible- if you notice any object that could serve as a weapon missing or out of place, leave immediately.
8. Avoid alcohol and/or sex- both tend to distract you when the monster is calmly and unhurriedly strolling up behind you. If you must, establish a designated "safe zone" for drinking, sleeping and fooling around in.
9. Know your history. Family heirlooms, curses, eccentric relatives or persons should be given special attention, as this can provide some insight into what you are dealing with.
10. You will encounter various terrains- some to avoid are-
-enclosed spaces
- narrow passageways
-underground passageways or structures, naturally occurring or constructed
- attics
-basements
-abandoned industrial areas or industrial areas currently under construction, despite the likely availability of weaponry.
- secret or concealed areas, especially if said area has been boarded over, plastered over, does not occur in the original building schematics, or is otherwise sealed off or closed.
- disused bedrooms, especially if the bedroom has been sealed or closed off
-heavily wooded areas, especially in the absence of a trail or map
-disused buildings- the distance this building is from a main road, town or civilization is directly proportional to the likelihood of encountering a monster there.
11. Should you encounter the monster face-to-face, communication is usually ill-advised. Should the monster attempt to communicate with you, use this opportunity to kill or incapacitate the monster, as many monsters employ a tactic of deceptive information or presenting a false front to put a victim off-guard.
12. Assume that the monster is not dead. The only exceptions to this are complete destruction, decapitation or other loss of physical form. If the monster's body is not visible or has not been recovered, leave immediately. It is more than likely that the monster is regrouping for a renewed assault.
13. Avoid saying "we made it", "we won", 'we survived" or any ironic remark directed to the monster. Chances are if the monster is still alive, this will anger him/her/it and will prompt further antagonization.
14. Do not seek out the monster in any way, shape or form. This includes but is not limited to-
- calling out or inviting a monster to attack. Being fairly polite, monsters rarely refuse an invitation.
- calling the name of a missing and unresponsive peer- almost always it is safe to assume this person is deceased. Any reappearance of this person acting strangely or unresponsively is an indication to leave immediately.
- digging up graves or invading a suspected resting place of the monster, despite rumours or knowledge of money or valuable objects concealed therein. If you do manage to obtain these things, you may be prompted to return them as a condition of escape and/or defeating the monster. Removal of these objects may also prompt a monster attack.
-looking in, behind or through doors, cabinets, windows, rooms or anything not in broad daylight. If the monster is concealed, it is because the monster is waiting for you to come find it. Not looking for the monster sows confusion, andcan allow you more time to arm yourself, escape or prepare for close combat.
15. Perhaps most importantly, don't assume the monster is dead or absent. Monsters are notoriously patient, and will readily wait for decades for the chance to get out into the world again. A previous victory over the monster means it is advisable to steer clear of the last place you saw and/or fought the monster, as they are also notorious grudge-holders, and will remember you in an instant.
As the monsters improve and become more sophisticated, no doubt further rules will come in handy. Remember that the best policy in any situation is common sense, and if you must fight, pull no punches. Happy hunting!
1. Don't do it. These three words can make all the difference in the world. Whatever it is, if you have any doubts, don't do it. If it seems dangerous, don't do it. If you doubt that it is entirely safe- don't do it. Countless victims have spent their last moments saying, "I shouldn't have done that", be it opening a door, going into a house, looking somewhere they shouldn't have done, or showing up in the first place.
2. Do not abandon weapons. Often, an object suitable for use against whatever horror from beyond the grave is chasing you will be on hand. Know the location of weaponry, keep a clear route open to said weaponry, and don't be afraid to use it. Also, don't drop it and run away- usually a monster will pause and rethink his/her/its options if you are carrying a large and destructive object. Use this to your advantage.
3.Listen to the town drunk/crazy old man/woman/local legend. Often these will contain clues that will indicate a monster's weakness or secret. If any of the above people tells you not to do something, see rule #1. Likewise, if they have a helpful suggestion, follow it, however silly it may sound. These people inexplicably will know more than you, so listen to them and follow their advice.
4. If you observe some strange or unexplained phenomena involving any of the following, leave at once and do not return-
-appliances, especially electrical or electronic ones
-light fixtures or switches
-furniture, especially paintings, mirrors, beds or cabinets
-anything and everything in your kitchen including but not limited to the stove and refrigerator.
-animals, especially domestic animals such as cats or dogs
-bladed, pointed or serrated tools
- fireplaces
-windows
5. Trust no one, especially if they begin acting strangely or speaking in an unusually deep or odd-timbred voice.
6. If no one lives there, there's a reason for that. Do not conduct your own investigation into what may or may not have transpired there. Assuming the worst is almost universally the best assumption.
7. Secure all weapons as early as possible- if you notice any object that could serve as a weapon missing or out of place, leave immediately.
8. Avoid alcohol and/or sex- both tend to distract you when the monster is calmly and unhurriedly strolling up behind you. If you must, establish a designated "safe zone" for drinking, sleeping and fooling around in.
9. Know your history. Family heirlooms, curses, eccentric relatives or persons should be given special attention, as this can provide some insight into what you are dealing with.
10. You will encounter various terrains- some to avoid are-
-enclosed spaces
- narrow passageways
-underground passageways or structures, naturally occurring or constructed
- attics
-basements
-abandoned industrial areas or industrial areas currently under construction, despite the likely availability of weaponry.
- secret or concealed areas, especially if said area has been boarded over, plastered over, does not occur in the original building schematics, or is otherwise sealed off or closed.
- disused bedrooms, especially if the bedroom has been sealed or closed off
-heavily wooded areas, especially in the absence of a trail or map
-disused buildings- the distance this building is from a main road, town or civilization is directly proportional to the likelihood of encountering a monster there.
11. Should you encounter the monster face-to-face, communication is usually ill-advised. Should the monster attempt to communicate with you, use this opportunity to kill or incapacitate the monster, as many monsters employ a tactic of deceptive information or presenting a false front to put a victim off-guard.
12. Assume that the monster is not dead. The only exceptions to this are complete destruction, decapitation or other loss of physical form. If the monster's body is not visible or has not been recovered, leave immediately. It is more than likely that the monster is regrouping for a renewed assault.
13. Avoid saying "we made it", "we won", 'we survived" or any ironic remark directed to the monster. Chances are if the monster is still alive, this will anger him/her/it and will prompt further antagonization.
14. Do not seek out the monster in any way, shape or form. This includes but is not limited to-
- calling out or inviting a monster to attack. Being fairly polite, monsters rarely refuse an invitation.
- calling the name of a missing and unresponsive peer- almost always it is safe to assume this person is deceased. Any reappearance of this person acting strangely or unresponsively is an indication to leave immediately.
- digging up graves or invading a suspected resting place of the monster, despite rumours or knowledge of money or valuable objects concealed therein. If you do manage to obtain these things, you may be prompted to return them as a condition of escape and/or defeating the monster. Removal of these objects may also prompt a monster attack.
-looking in, behind or through doors, cabinets, windows, rooms or anything not in broad daylight. If the monster is concealed, it is because the monster is waiting for you to come find it. Not looking for the monster sows confusion, andcan allow you more time to arm yourself, escape or prepare for close combat.
15. Perhaps most importantly, don't assume the monster is dead or absent. Monsters are notoriously patient, and will readily wait for decades for the chance to get out into the world again. A previous victory over the monster means it is advisable to steer clear of the last place you saw and/or fought the monster, as they are also notorious grudge-holders, and will remember you in an instant.
As the monsters improve and become more sophisticated, no doubt further rules will come in handy. Remember that the best policy in any situation is common sense, and if you must fight, pull no punches. Happy hunting!
June
Today is the first of June! This is a good thing, as it means that school will soon be out. I'm not in school, but that's a good thing for people who are and want to get on with the business of summer. Two months and counting until my ship date! It's true, I'm going to be in the South in the sweltering heat, but that's okay. Perhaps more sweltering heat awaits in my future. If I get deployed to combat, I get deployed. Warfare is not glamorous or exciting- rather, these people are just as human as I am- they are fathers, sons, brothers, mothers, sisters and daughters, too. Their lives are worth no more or less than mine, and were circumstances different, our positions could be reversed. But nonetheless, I took an oath to both defend the Constitution and follow orders, with the full knowledge of what that could entail, and will bear the consequences, karmic or otherwise.
On a lighter note, we took Max out fishing yesterday, in pursuit of the elusive bass. The elusive bass evidently had set up a cozy home under an overhanging tree branch in the Windsor Locks canal, and wouldn't budge if it meant a whole plate full of worms with hot sauce. The lack of hits we got was probably due to the mayflies- they were laying eggs on the water, and in so doing became a ready meal for fish. With all the food literally dropping out of the sky, the fish were probably not that interested in pursuing a meal that required a bit more effort to go out and get. However, there were a lot of fish in the canal, mostly small ones, though. But, of course small fish in time develop into bigger fish. There were two carp, who seemed on pretty social terms. These two carp looked for a moment like the ones above- symbolic of the idea of moving freely in the water (symbolic of the world) without drowning or being caught up in it. I'm told they also represent the Yamuna and Ganges rivers in India. The fish are a common symbol in both Buddhism and, earlier, in Hinduism. Not that any of that has any real bearing on carp in the canal, as carp don't eat worms as a general rule, and I've heard they don't taste that good, either. But apart from that, it was nice weather to knock around and do very little productive with. In the hopes that all your Junes are good ones!
On a lighter note, we took Max out fishing yesterday, in pursuit of the elusive bass. The elusive bass evidently had set up a cozy home under an overhanging tree branch in the Windsor Locks canal, and wouldn't budge if it meant a whole plate full of worms with hot sauce. The lack of hits we got was probably due to the mayflies- they were laying eggs on the water, and in so doing became a ready meal for fish. With all the food literally dropping out of the sky, the fish were probably not that interested in pursuing a meal that required a bit more effort to go out and get. However, there were a lot of fish in the canal, mostly small ones, though. But, of course small fish in time develop into bigger fish. There were two carp, who seemed on pretty social terms. These two carp looked for a moment like the ones above- symbolic of the idea of moving freely in the water (symbolic of the world) without drowning or being caught up in it. I'm told they also represent the Yamuna and Ganges rivers in India. The fish are a common symbol in both Buddhism and, earlier, in Hinduism. Not that any of that has any real bearing on carp in the canal, as carp don't eat worms as a general rule, and I've heard they don't taste that good, either. But apart from that, it was nice weather to knock around and do very little productive with. In the hopes that all your Junes are good ones!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)