I have learned that since The Astrosite's inception, my friend, "Scientizzle's," blog link was not functioning -- nor was my Mercy Corps. link. Both problems have been fixed. I encourage you visit Mr. "Scientizzle's" site as it is updated frequently and provides a nice contrast to the heavy self-indulgence of my blog.
...And on an unrelated note, congratulations to the Seahawks for finally representing the Pacific Northwest in the Super Bowl! But my sudden interest in football is quite an anomaly, I assure you. My friends have been shocked that I even knew of "The Game" today, let alone that I wanted to watch it. While it wasn't a great game (in the sense of being nail-biter), it is always welcome to see victory anoint a team for the first time. So yes, when "The Game" is on again soon, I'll be watching and rooting for "D," who I've discovered is always the most popular player in sports.
Jan 17, 2006
To Be Or Not To See?
When I was in high school I wrote a short essay on "The Truth". My inchoate, adolescent mind was able to come to two conclusions: it either doesn't exist or we cannot know it. This fleeting entity has humbled human effort for ages. It flunks to no intellect; fractures to no strength; loses to no slight of hand. The Truth is the deceiver of deceivers; it is exclusively the knowledge of God. So why pursue it? Every person I've ever met has surrendered a part of their life to pursuing something unobtainable. What madness! There is no better example of such a person than myself: an aspiring neuroscientist. But maybe it is the pursuit of the truth that gives all fallacy meaning. If, for instance, the absolute nature of an orange was known, then what? It won't matter how the orange tastes, or its color, or its weight, or its origin. All those things will be known to everyone, everywhere, forever. The orange is resolved. And that is boring. I don't want to eat that orange. It is the mystery in an orange's texture and flavor -- the diverse opinions from people that may describe the orange differently -- that allow the orange to be delicious. 
And it is this type of mystery that oils the sprockets of human purpose. We shall never know The Truth unless we are to be purposeless, or for a more savvy muse, unless we are to be God. But it can also be argued that the truth doesn't exist at all; hence, the orange has no true nature, just fleeting existences. Humans, including myself, have problems with this second perspective. Without The Truth, there can be no pursuit of it, and with no pursuit comes no meaning. So then maybe our lives have no meaning. Obviously this won't settle well either. I have plenty of experiences, people, and places that certainly have meaning to me. In homage to Descartes, we do exist because we can ask if we exist. This ability is truly beautiful; it is God's signature. Our brain -- an organized mass of carbon-based molecules -- knows it exists. But do the mouse neurons I'm culturing in the incubator right now know they exist? If they do not, at what point do they gain "awareness"? On the contrary, if they do know they exist, then must my orange also know that it exists? What madness! Perhaps the only truth we will ever know is that we cannot obtain the truth; to do so would be to know the mind of God. And to know the mind of God is to be God, which we're clearly not. And now I'm back to where I started (how humanly typical!): we know nothing.
No matter your perspective on what The Truth is or isn't, it is imperative to respect The Truth (which is precisely what many cultures have been doing for ages through the lore of deities). Unfortunately, abuse of The Truth is rampant. It is as though our brains have gained some serious evolutionary hangtime as a cost for the launch of our consciousness. We have evolved, are aware, and can now "see," but the sheer glare from the intangible Truth can scare us into believing just about anything so long as we don't have to float in a void of blind pursuit. I've been immensely disappointed in people that are supposedly engaged in the pursuit of The Truth for passion's sake (such as a true [pun not intended!] scientist); yet these same people make perfunctory assumptions to which they prescribe as The Truth. We are all guilty of doing this for time to time, but problems arise when pertinacious acknowledgements are made that "The Truth" has been reached. For example, when I would see dark, black clouds while living in South Dakota, I assumed it was going to rain and acted appropriately -- like finishing my beer in the garage. But I didn't cancel the party because maybe it would not rain despite the ominous sky. In this example I acknowledged the truth as a probability, not as The Truth. Likewise, just because two people are dating doesn't mean they are having sex; just because someone is a beer aficionado doesn't mean they drink too much; just because someone deplores George W. Bush doesn't mean that they are a Democrat; Hence, in the search for meaning, we easily lose it. We cannot, nor shouldn't try to dupe The Truth. It will always have the last word. We must respect that. Just as there are, no doubt, 35 black dots in that image above, the glory -- the meaning -- is in the pursuit, not in the nature of The Truth.
And it is this type of mystery that oils the sprockets of human purpose. We shall never know The Truth unless we are to be purposeless, or for a more savvy muse, unless we are to be God. But it can also be argued that the truth doesn't exist at all; hence, the orange has no true nature, just fleeting existences. Humans, including myself, have problems with this second perspective. Without The Truth, there can be no pursuit of it, and with no pursuit comes no meaning. So then maybe our lives have no meaning. Obviously this won't settle well either. I have plenty of experiences, people, and places that certainly have meaning to me. In homage to Descartes, we do exist because we can ask if we exist. This ability is truly beautiful; it is God's signature. Our brain -- an organized mass of carbon-based molecules -- knows it exists. But do the mouse neurons I'm culturing in the incubator right now know they exist? If they do not, at what point do they gain "awareness"? On the contrary, if they do know they exist, then must my orange also know that it exists? What madness! Perhaps the only truth we will ever know is that we cannot obtain the truth; to do so would be to know the mind of God. And to know the mind of God is to be God, which we're clearly not. And now I'm back to where I started (how humanly typical!): we know nothing.No matter your perspective on what The Truth is or isn't, it is imperative to respect The Truth (which is precisely what many cultures have been doing for ages through the lore of deities). Unfortunately, abuse of The Truth is rampant. It is as though our brains have gained some serious evolutionary hangtime as a cost for the launch of our consciousness. We have evolved, are aware, and can now "see," but the sheer glare from the intangible Truth can scare us into believing just about anything so long as we don't have to float in a void of blind pursuit. I've been immensely disappointed in people that are supposedly engaged in the pursuit of The Truth for passion's sake (such as a true [pun not intended!] scientist); yet these same people make perfunctory assumptions to which they prescribe as The Truth. We are all guilty of doing this for time to time, but problems arise when pertinacious acknowledgements are made that "The Truth" has been reached. For example, when I would see dark, black clouds while living in South Dakota, I assumed it was going to rain and acted appropriately -- like finishing my beer in the garage. But I didn't cancel the party because maybe it would not rain despite the ominous sky. In this example I acknowledged the truth as a probability, not as The Truth. Likewise, just because two people are dating doesn't mean they are having sex; just because someone is a beer aficionado doesn't mean they drink too much; just because someone deplores George W. Bush doesn't mean that they are a Democrat; Hence, in the search for meaning, we easily lose it. We cannot, nor shouldn't try to dupe The Truth. It will always have the last word. We must respect that. Just as there are, no doubt, 35 black dots in that image above, the glory -- the meaning -- is in the pursuit, not in the nature of The Truth.
Jan 4, 2006
Happy Year of the Dog
I'm not sure I know what it means, but my calander told me this morning that 2006 is to be 'Year Of The Dog.' This is somewhat appropriate since the Dog Genome was recently sequenced, but obviously the timing could have been better had that discovery waited a few months. Regardless, it has been way too long since I've updated this, but it's not like anyone has been checking it anyway, so I guess I shouldn't care. But I did have a good friend give me a pumpkin bread recipe (see earlier postings).2005 was an incredibly intense and complex year for me. I'll spare the details, as much of the details are too personal for the public forum. But in sum, it was a transition year. Or better, a reconstruction year. Old foundations were completely demolished and restructured. The glory in this toil is the confidence that my new life structure will be better than the old. Change is hard, but for someone like myself who is constantly searching -- exploring -- for The Human Experience, change is growth. And, unless you're a tumor, growth is good. There is nothing novel or profound about this statement; rather, it's that the weight of the statement is now understood. I have completely reconstructed relationships, beliefs, and perspectives, all of which are very heavy stones in a very human house. I look forward to 2006 as a year of refinement (after, of course, my coming bouts with lots and lots of dogs). I don't think anyone has the capacity to tolerate constant change, nor should they. Refinement is focus -- clarity -- and right now 2005 remains as a tenacious hangover. And so, like everything else, I am at the mercy of time. Patience will be required to allow refinement of the profound changes I experienced in 2005. And in a paradoxical way, NOT working at achieving this coveted focus is likely to yield the clearest picture. Some things are tarnished by effort; they are, in a sense, live entities in themselves that must prosper on their own. 2005 is one of those entities for me and will require time to mature. So I wait in anticipation for 2006. Like the product of a genetic code, a year's product is an amalgam of elements you can and cannot control. And since probability
is required to give you as many deleterious as beneficial uncontrolled elements, utilizing even the smallest amount of controllable elements in your favor is bound to lead to a mostly good year. How's that for an analytical approach!I hope all of you find at least some good reflections in 2005; may 2006 embrace your best ambitions.
Happy New Year!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)