Twitter is externalized ADHD.
It is in the fast-paced MTV style of editing,
valuing recognition over symbolism.
On the Twitter level it is understanding over comprehension.


The real work of philosophy is to downplay these activities of understanding,
to see them not as a gateway to a,
for the lack of a better word,
"correct" understanding of the universe.


If only
we had endless lands,
but the Earth,
was round,
and finite.


Another theory:
the world has always been,
and will continue to be,
mostly out of control.

The coherence vs. the correspondence theory of truth is not an either or competition.
Some statements rely more on coherence, others rely more on correspondence,
but "truth" itself is a fuzzy notion.
To reduce language to truth even of statements that seem to report things around the world is massive oversimplification,
and therefore also a massive misunderstanding.
However a genuine understanding of the so-called "truths" of propositions may prove impossible.

It's as though our tech-conglomerates are in a race to harvest as much personal data as possible from us.
But can they ever really know us?
And our boredom and vague dissatisfaction we blame on the present.
What is better than finding a new interest?
Can they satisfy my needs?
Well how much of my need is for things I can buy?
(And once you have a hot water heater you are not going to need another one for many years.)

American ideals, like Christian ideals, may sound very good
but when they are ignored in American, or Christian, practices
they become less idealistic
more like hypocrisy,
and consequently are not to be treated as truth.

The final tome may be impossible,
all we have a promising starts.
which can be recognized as such.
Like promising starts om a journey, they lead in very different directions.
This is argument by metaphor: we look for similarity in the thing you don't know|understand for the metaphorical thing you do know|understand.
How can this be done? What are the touchstones of understanding?
The important thing is they argue with a sense of their personal metaphysics, their individual thoughtful amalgam of brain and their world.
We can handle an actual landscape like that, so can we also handle a virtual landscape. It might have places and contextual behavior, dangers, possibilities of fun, places of work, and a place that is mine, among others.

As a society
we have failed to come up with a necessarily nuanced
but equally necessarily,
a somewhat simple theory of "knowledge":
truths in their wider multi-contextual uses.
In spite of Kuhn, Imre Lakatos and Wittgenstein (On Certainty), we hold on to the idea that a statement is either true or false.

And if a statement is not factually true,
we either claim, in a post-modern way,
that everything is true or false,
and cling to opinions that I may hold onto my own personal truth.
This is far too binary.

We need to redefine a new notion of truthiness, or contextual truths,
and recognize a large number of knowledge structures,

We also need to recognize that by using abstract words,
slippery shape-shifting (i.e. meaning-shifting) words,
a shifting caused by active family resemblance,
due to our human understanding,
that in many contexts, a sentence is not simply A or not-A,
but A and not-A,
albeit in sightly differing contextulizations.

The complete truth cannot be thought or spoken
because anything spoken uses words.
(General words are an open ended reality, much like, and indeed a part of, nature.)

You don't know a lot by just looking.
You can look at many things in many ways,
but in those cases that would be what looking is.

ITW [in todays's world] you can tune out voices you don't want to hear.
And ITW there are many more voices BG [by golly].

In a multiprocessing environment
like the human mind,
"because" or "it is caused by"
may no longer have a place.

Listening to a Brian Ferry CD, I wondered what is Brian Ferry doing right now? I bet he could be having an interesting night.
Idea: You can pay to be camera in Brian Ferry's button-hole during the day
and be with him as he lives his life,
and listen to the people he is talking with.

Even more interesting mught be if we track another person's eyes,
so you can see what someone else looks at in the course of his or her walkabout life.

Let us presume there are multiple metaphysics.
This may tempt you to think that anything works, and that the world can be anything.
But it can't.
Think of it as a flower you can see from countless perspectives, yet it is impossible to see a flower in ALL its perspectives, and not only at once.
Which in some sense would be not seeing it at all.

If most people were to write down stuff that was most important in their life,
they would not write down insights.
(If nothing else they would not remember them.)

If you are composed of many processes, then there are many ways of being you, since all aspects cannot come into play in any one context.
This means that you do not have an essences.

You can drive a car almost unconsciously,
though must keep your eyes open.
Think about that, and that we often do it better unconsciously than we do with conscious attention.

There could be a study of gif memes.
Why certain ones?
How do they work? Or do they?

One minimum standards for what a human can do is to pay for a bill successfully in a store in a minimum amount of time, although there is some flexibility in how this is accomplished.
This is just one of many many things humans can do.
There is no defining set of skills for being a human.
A lot of skills are necessary, such as being kind, and showing many expected behaviors.

I have seen what was once harmless become anathema,
and morality formerly impermissible become permissible.

Thoughts of a privileged white male:
I prefer slightly hard water.

We cannot possibly understand what is covered by what we call "history."
We can however call our limited understanding "history."
(Over time uur simplistic explanations change.)

The Internet empowers idiots and alternative realities by letting a group of them find each other and converge together.
Normally many ridiculous beliefs are held down by social pressure.

We probe the complex all-at-one-nessly, and ultimately incomprehensible, reality with metaphors.
And why do metaphors work?
In our multitasking minds, many simultaneous processes are making comparisons other knowledges and emotions of our subconscious, using at best semi-conscious multitasking.

The question is not only how an atheist should think about the religious person after they themselves embark on the spiritual path of atheism,
but equally, how should the religious person think of the atheist?

I want quality senior moments.

I am an adynamist: I do not believe in the Force.

"Sure as shootin'"
I had the meaning of that ohrase all wrong for all my seventy-one years.

No news is no bad news.

We are not allowed to disparage people of a certain race, gender, sexual-orientation, religion etc. but we are allowed to disparage liberals and/or conservatives.
How is that possible?

What did people look at before they looked at their phones?
Perhaps "looking" is the wrong metaphor here.

With a few exceptions, the military does not make us more secure. By using up money that could better be spent on health care and useful factories and infrastructure, the military makes us less secure.

If the military was necessary we would need to win wars. For the last seventy years the US has lost nearly every war (Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq) and it has made no difference to our nation(except to our national debt).

I could use a word-processor that saves to several locations at once, say to my hard drive and a cloud drive.

In modern warfare
machines fight machines.
When the best machines win,
then what happens?

Epistemology in a nutshell:
Epistemology cannot be presented in a nutshell.

It's not the tome but the thought.

We speak | think | understand in misleading terms.

Fuck the Zeitgeist
is my new Zeitgeist.

At my age,
in my life,
there is not enough life to go around.

I wanted to have a page of actual monitored news.
What would that be? Without all those things that are not news, the People Magazine of news.
So what is news?
To what extent is it individual, news to you?
What should be news?
Do we need any news?

Should we go away and be on a mountain,
or live in the crowded town for that matter,
and not listen to any news at all?
In theory perhaps,
but it does seem mistaken to condemn all the activities that take place in our equally supsect human social practices.

Nationalism takes competition, and battles, to be the paramount activity of human societies.
We must get beyond this.

Nationalism — out duty is to the state,
and not the other way around.

I am in danger of losing my faith in the stability of the state.

AS we age we must guard against solving the question of our being by adopting a truncated notion of being.

Musicians are the ones that actually do something worthwhile in life —
by creating musical beauty.

The question is: what can we do?
For most of us of course the answer is nothing.
And those who can do things, can have no idea of what they are doing.

What is wrong with nationalism?
If we don't make peace with each other, we will destroy human life on earth.
Nuclear weapons compel us to love, or die.

There is nothing wrong with the world,
the always present world.
This is after all the dance at which we are.

Meme-misunderstanding: Some men have vaginas.
I thought it meant that when we think about men, we must be thinking about women in the same honorific way.
Women can be are founding fathers.

What will make something not be science?

Weinstein Studios needs a good movie to make a comeback.
I recommend the movie Wesinstein!
Now who should we get to play the leading roles?

Government, the control mechanisms of society, which could be the solution to all sorts of problems through enlightened laws, allocation of resources, promoter of harmony, and leading by example.
Instead governments exemplifies gridlock and idiocy, all encased in corruption and easy appeals to tribalisms.
It can be done.
But how do we get rid of the assholes?

A fucked-up people will generate a fucked-up god.

In the world of the future
with the growth of AI,
you will be able interact with the characters in a TV series.
Who will learn from whom?

Do we want a multicultural culture,
or do we want many different cultures,
or both?

The world is not grokkable.

You cannot get your mind around it;
because your mind is also inside it
(not to mention somewhat small).

On our socially networked world,
we are endlessly distracted,
not so much from the world,
(admittedly a little too placidly predictable)
but from our own thoughts.
We are pulled out of ourselves.
It's all very third person.

I click
therefore I am not.

Friends and enemies is a too simplistic way to deal with the world of today.

The allure of the stupid.

The solitude of modernity.

I am always surprised
there are new melodies.