I don’t believe or disbelieve these things. Those kinds of stances towards such lofty happenings seem demeaning and facile and dismissive to me. Rather, I sense that there is truth in them. And accept the burden of working upon ‘self’ to evolve matters such that more is gradually illuminated. This feels like a personal responsibility to me. I wouldn’t call it religion; that obscures the reality.
“…for I have overcome the World.” — John 16:33
A recurring idea from Jaron Lanier (“You Are Not A Gadget” – 2010) goes like this: “It isn’t really a question of whether AI can get smarter than humans. It is more whether humans will collectively (unconsciously) agree to make themselves stupid enough to descend to the same level as artificial intelligence”. I’ve paraphrased but you get the idea. What does this have to do with the social debate over transgender athletes?
(This is a slight re-edit of one of the very first WP posts ever made on this blog about ten years ago, when I was transitioning from software-oriented technical writing to more creative things. The exercise exemplified is still of value, it seems to me)… There is a subtle distancing effect which our numerous online devices and other technologies foist upon our minds regarding the world of everyday objects. Left unchecked, we develop a disregard and disinterest in things and their nature, reflected in the disposable stance many ‘movers and shakers’ adopt towards articles of utility. But imagine if the surrounding world of objects could be reunited with their rightful depths of significance, qualities, and history! Suppose you had to think ONLY about a piece of chalk, to take a mundane example, for ten full minutes. How difficult would it be, and what could be recovered?
Some little boys grew up idolizing Capt. Kirk and Spock. All well and good. But some of them have since aged into their 50s and love science and technology and hold positions of serious influence and have retained about the same degree of social sophistication, compassion and insight as they had in 6th grade. That’s a problem.
Apologies in advance, but against my better judgement sometimes, I feel impelled to indicate how repulsive certain holier-than-thou religious blog posts make me feel. How many blows on their noggins does it require to wake up to the message that we should be, above all, entered into an era of social and spiritual tolerance by now? Above all we should be respectful of individualized spiritual pathways…
University life, in America, actually used to be about rampant curiosity once. And the opposite sex. Not too much at all really, about jobs or money. Parents didn’t know this. Bless their forever selfless hearts…
Close your eyes, figuratively. If I ask you to picture the word green, do you imagine this or perhaps this, or something closer to this? How does your typical green image differ from mine or that of your daughter or a business colleague who lives in Costa Rica? Assuming we could develop a statistical norm for what speakers of American English generally mean by the word (and some studies have tackled this question), it only opens the door to further more interesting psycholinguistic puzzles. For example: has the concept ‘green’ changed subtly since the days of Thomas Jefferson, Shakespeare, or William the Conqueror? Do children conceive ‘green’ differently than senior citizens (perhaps even the same individual at different ages)? How does this compare with a Brazilian person who is thinking of verde? Or a Mongolian pondering ногоон?
||skirmishes|| ||with|| ||reality|| 