IFLS is an intended result of Science

LAX: What is that supposed to mean
REZ: whats what supposed to mean
LAX: “objectivity is a big fucking meme, just like science”
REZ: it’s the same group of people and same mentality
REZ: IFLS is effectively a religion
REZ: or if you’re a bit more highbrow, the Rationality Community e.g. Less Wrong, Slate Star Codex et. all
LAX: Are you saying you’re opposed to science?
LAX: Science and being objective are appropriate in certain situations
REZ: I am opposed to both science and IFLSers, though they’re two slightly different topics
REZ: well, i suppose it could be seen as two slightly different ways of being the same thing
LAX: How can you be opposed to science yet use a computer?
REZ: my using a computer has nothing to do with science
LAX: It’s a byproduct of science
REZ: i will give you 5 more arguments until i stop this line because it’s base as fuck and wastes my time
LAX: I get being opposed to the IFLS shitlords
REZ: it’s a byproduct of a bunch of things which aren’t science too; doesn’t mean anything
REZ: it’s like saying haha aren’t communists funny they complain about capitalism but they still buy things
REZ: communists are idiots but that’s not a legitimate argument to level against them
REZ: they have about as much choice to not buy things as they do to evade taxes or not drive cars or not speak english
REZ: there’s one great thing that everyone touts about science and it’s that it’s self correcting
REZ: which is completely nonunique since every way of thinking has methods of self correcting
REZ: religions have priests who interpret their holy books, science has scientists who interpret their experimental results
REZ: i forget the number but something came out recently showing that something like 1/2 or 2/3 of scientific papers in recent years have experiments which aren’t reproducible
REZ: in english that means “most of recent science is effectively made up shit and not science”
LAX: I know of this
REZ: science isn’t so great that i have to acknowledge tribute to it by using something i have to use in order to live
REZ: science sticks its name in a bunch of things just because it’s only ever so marginally related
REZ: like a college claiming “oh yeah that famous guy? he went here.”
REZ: whereas the vast majority of people who’ve actually been to college can tell you, it really isn’t that special.
REZ: except for the partying.
REZ: when colleges start saying “oh yeah that famous guy? he partied here. and that’s why he’s famous” instead of pretending it’s some great knowledge or insight he gained through hard work and education, i’ll take another look.
REZ: same with science.
REZ: but if they do that, then their credibility goes out the window, so i won’t have to.
LAX: So you’re not actually opposed to the scientific method, just the way people use science to “seem smart”?
LAX: like people using science to publish a paper that’s just total bullshit?
REZ: why would the difference between what something is and how it manifests matter to me?
REZ: we had this conversation like yesterday
REZ: my brother COULD be something that ISNT a complete literal retard
REZ: but unless it’s demonstrated who cares?
REZ: science COULD be the greatest thing ever but if the big people who are so much smarter and so much more productive than me are 1/2~2/3 LYING about their SHIT then why do i care?
REZ: i don’t have any personal investment in the word or ideology of “science”
REZ: i see its leaders being shit, as far as i’m concerned, it’s shit
REZ: if i remember high school science and youtube atheism from pre-2010 correctly this is the scientific response too
REZ: god COULD exist
REZ: but if we can’t detect him then he’s not in this universe, i.e. he doesn’t exist
REZ: that’s the big problem
REZ: the other problem which is somewhat related is science is one of the mainstream religions
REZ: anything which is NOT “proven by science” is “pseudoscience”
REZ: things which have long existed before science are deemed “immoral” or “wrong”, even if they are accurate predictions and have demonstrable effects, up until the moment some “scientist” records it in an experiment and presents his conclusions to a “scientific community”
REZ: at which point it becomes truth, oh look we were wrong this whole time, isn’t it great we have science to correct our ways?
REZ: like literally go fuck yourself
REZ: the point, anywhere in any field of human activity, is to be “correct” or to get a job “done”
REZ: whether it’s “scientific” or not is secondary
REZ: and the more i see and hear about science it’s the modern day equivalent of religion in the sense that they’re the gatekeepers of knowledge
REZ: just like media
REZ: “if we say its true its true, if we say its false its false”
REZ: media has eroded a bit thanks to internet and smartphone video but people just keep lapping up whatever they hear when they also hear the word “science” or whatever
REZ: it’s all related
REZ: IFLS is not a mistake, it’s an intended consequence of how science is portrayed and how their people work in our system
LAX: Okay I’m with you now
REZ: good
REZ: laxeris was not an idiot today
LAX: I don’t know about not an idiot.
LAX: But I wasn’t totally retarded
LAX: :3
REZ: yes, which is why i said “today”.
LAX: Sometimes I forget the way you view things and it makes it really hard to comprehend how you come to conclusions
LAX: Like how you put science and science people in the same category. Which makes sense, but not the way I do it.
REZ: people like to recite that one line from v for vendetta, ‘you can’t kill an idea’
REZ: but you can kill people, and you can censor books, and if there are no people to espouse an idea and no one to hear the tree fall in the forest, it doesn’t make a sound
LAX: I dislike that line, it’s pretty stupid
REZ: in obverse: an idea is only as much as its people
REZ: i could take the conventional stance, “those guys weren’t real scientists, how horrible they abused our system!”
REZ: but why would i do that?
REZ: people generally don’t reach that question because they just accept that science is correct
REZ: which it might or might not be
REZ: if we’re to believe the great message of science, that we’re always learning and 90% of what we knew 100 years is wrong today and 90% of what we know today will be wrong 100 years from now
REZ: it’s pretty plausible what we think of as “the scientific method” today will look fucking stupid in 100 years
REZ: in which case the only thing retained is the name
REZ: the brand
REZ: the marketing.
REZ: the religion.
REZ: and i don’t care about marketing that brand for free.
REZ: i’m gonna need to get paid.
LAX: I think it’s fair to assume that science is correct a decent amount of the time. But to place one’s entire faith into the results of science and accept it as fact, I completely disagree with too
REZ: i’m not going to assume science is correct even a decent amount of the time
LAX: I think the baseline of what science would change into (should) still remain the same
LAX: To compare them to computers, in 100 years our computers will be slow and basically useless
REZ: first of all stuff we actually operate on day to day doesnt rely on science
REZ: science today is string theory or other nonsense
LAX: But at their cores they’d still be the same fundamental idea
REZ: yes… a same fundamental brand.
REZ: an idea in your head and not related to anything that’s actually done.
LAX: The methods used to “extract data” would still remain fairly the same
REZ: you say this without any knowledge of how university researchers do things today or how university researchers did thing in the enlightenment.
LAX: I don’t need to know the tiny details of how they find things, like what equation they use, or what material etc
LAX: Those things will obviously change
LAX: The core of having an idea, then testing the idea, then retesting the idea should remain the same
LAX: Which is the core of what science is built on
LAX: If that were to change, and it still remained “science” that would be a problem
LAX: But if the catalyst in which science is preformed is changed that doesn’t really affect anything.
REZ: clearly it doesn’t exist anymore then, because 300 years ago a majority of experiments were actually done to retest other people’s ideas, these days everyone’s trying to do their own because that’s what gets published
REZ: which is why you hear about all these studies being done on some really specific super obscure shit that doesn’t matter
REZ: it’s “still science”
REZ: just like how people living in california can “still own a gun”
REZ: have fun marketing pointless research no one’s interested in for grant money and not being able to buy a rifle with a detachable magazine in the current year
LAX: Plenty of people still test old ideas with new variables to see if it still holds ups
LAX: Obiviously not a lot of people though
REZ: undergrads in chem 02a and that’s it.
REZ: you’re right though
REZ: chem 02a is mandatory, so “plenty of people” is an accurate statement.
LAX: Until someone finds a new variable to test the old things with, what would be the point of testing them with the same variables?
LAX: Thus people look for new variables and have to go through the bullshit procedure of getting funding
REZ: “what would be the point of testing them with the same variables”
REZ: well lets see
REZ: lets see if i cant find some textbook-like description of the pillars of science
REZ: actually i dont have to
REZ: you already conceded that the 1/2~2/3 story was true
LAX: Mhm
REZ: the only reason why that story matters is because reproducibility matters
REZ: if i do an experiment and you can’t reproduce it, that means, in science world, that something is wrong
REZ: whether you can’t won’t or don’t is irrelevant
REZ: that it isn’t means science either is dying or isn’t happening

The Education Mythos

Today I learned that guns today don’t actually use “gunpowder”, and that modern “smokeless powder” is required for automatic weapons.

This is almost as big a revelation as the fact that cars can’t actually theoretically run forever on the smallest bit of fuel.

I hate education.

>scienceforums.net
>reading up on how smokeless powder is made because it’s clearly significantly different than gunpowder, which formerly explained one of the most important power shifts in history
>thread gets locked early in discussion by mods
>”3b. Descriptions of the construction or synthesis of illegal or hazardous devices or chemicals are subject to removal at the discretion of the staff.”

Among the other things education lies to you about is how complete it is while hiding where its holes are and how important those holes may be. There’s so many fucking holes in goddamn everything we actually do live in a magical world; the only differences being the terminology and artistic theme has changed to be dominated by angular metal and glowing glass rectangles rather than by twisted wood and colorful balls of light.

SOLAR ROADWAYS!
MANNED MISSION TO MARS WITHIN FIVE YEARS!
KEYSTONE PIPELINE IS BAD FOR THE ENVIRONMENT!
GLOBAL COOLING NOW GLOBAL WARMING NOW GLOBAL COOLING AGAIN!

People will buy fucking anything if “Scientists Believe” is attached to it. Educated scientific society my fucking ass it is.

I actually wouldn’t have too much of a problem with it either, if they would actually just come out and say what knowledge was forbidden. But no, they have to talk about how it’s about obtaining truth and knowledge and truth will set you free and some other bullshit, doing it themselves while stopping you from finding out how.

But I guess it’s consistent enough with the general mythos of the West. “YOU can do it, YOU are in charge”.

It’s what they said about democracy, and who’s in charge of the government?
It’s what they said about free markets, and who’s in charge of the economy?

Why wouldn’t they preach the same for knowledge of the physical world?

This also reveals another huge fucking hole in another narrative, namely that higher education is nothing but Middle School Pt. 3 and fails to prepares you for any real jack squat work in the real world whatsoever. I thought it was odd when looking for jobs that there were so many seemingly super-niche fields requiring odd expertise, that it might’ve just been my lack of specialization or choosing interesting classes, but stuff like manufacture of smokeless powder is is literally hidden information.

You can’t fucking learn it in books or in classes or online or from undergrad research, because they’ll get the patent police on you. There is literally no way you can learn it without spending several lifetimes with the blessings of fortune and hidden unless they tell you how to do it. To put it another way, you don’t get qualified to receive that knowledge by knowing other knowledge, by having some “expert understanding”, you get it by fucking direct transfer. It is literally a secret.

Who knows how many other things out there are designated secrets, either by religion or the government or patents or any number of other powerful “old men” interests? The full extent is unclear, but the principle is well-demonstrated just by the huge divide between what’s listed on the curriculum and what’s listed on the job posting.

And this principle explains fucking everything. All the range of super-niche engineers, all the range of super-niche game developers, all the range of super-niche visual effects, they didn’t get there by knowing how to do any fucking bit of it straight out of “higher education”, they got it by either cozying up or being given a chance or something – anything – other than the “certifications” or “skills” it’s claimed to be.

What higher education prepares you for is to be a replaceable grunt of a marginally different kind. To be a replacement part for the gods of money. Maybe -maybe- if you’re lucky, not only will you not have to move to the third world to use your knowledge, you may even be arbitrarily endowed with a berry of knowledge. A shredded page which for once doesn’t describe the world as it worked two hundred years ago. And of course, it’ll be attributed back to the greatness of the alma mater and, when the time is right, to the Advancement of Knowledge for Humankind.

What a disgusting fraud, the “education” mythos is.

(originally posted to personal facebook in three pieces over the span of an hour; combined here with original pictures and slight edits)

Frame Control

I like to make predictions.

I like to make them quickly, with scarce evidence, with accuracy, and with confidence.

As far as I’m concerned, this is the end goal of all knowledge. Knowledge is a conceptualization of habit, but whereas habits are formed only if they bring you repeated success over the same situations, knowledge ideally brings you success without having to practice the same situation ten thousand times. The stronger the knowledge, the more you can extrapolate what you have learned in the past to new situations in different fields in the future. Perhaps this is not “knowledge”, but “wisdom” or “learning” or whatever; the particular word doesn’t matter to me. The goal is perfect foresight: seeing the future. With it you have much more time to respond and elaborate on what you might do once the situation arises, or alternatively, avoid the situation entirely. Prevention is better than cure.

Most people’s idea of “evidence” does not enter the equation. I know people’s pet favorite Scientific Method says you need it and all, and the facetious rebuttal that if there’s no evidence then it’s the same as a fantasy in your head. It’s not like I’ve been living in a cave; we all went through approximately the same K-12 thanks to modern society. The difference is not that I “don’t know” what the scientific method is, it’s that I’ve decided to use something else. I don’t claim to red pill or tell people to wake up, I realize this is a strong marketing strat but I find it distasteful. I’m not in the business of satisfying the peanut gallery of Peer Reviews. I’m in the business of being correct. Actually, I’ll probably have to deal with it eventually; everything needs PR (the other PR) and marketing. But you can’t market a game without programmers. So I’ll focus on my department first.

If I am accurate in my predictions, have been, and continue to be, what does it matter what my methods are?

You knowing what my methods are is completely irrelevant to whether or not I’m correct. There are plenty of things in your life which you have no clue of the methods to (meat section of the supermarket, engine in your car, where your boss gets the money from, what your wife does when you’re not around), but work just fine anyways. You also trust them, based off of track record or some other criteria, so it’s not relevant to trust either. Fermat was shown correct in his last theorem, but he certainly didn’t use all the complicated math that Andrew Wiles used from more modern times to get to it. He never wrote the proof. But he was correct. This works the other way as well; just because you have an explanation doesn’t guarantee that it’ll be correct either. Financial/economic theory and PR moves are all calculated based on supposedly very intellectual and You Wouldn’t Be Able To Understand Unless You Paid A Million Dollars To A Certified Institution theory, but here we are in a depression anyways and no amount of “restoring confidence” these past five years has done jack squat.

It doesn’t matter why the prediction works, only that it does work.

I’ve found recently I’ve been extremely accurate at one kind of prediction:

If I damn someone twice, it is inevitable that they will be damned by the public.

In other words, a negative character judgement. I have generalized it to fit all the kinds of people I condemn; I usually have predictions about how they will screw shit up, but those differ from type to type. I have no prediction on the timeframe; I don’t believe this is necessary because I presume that most people never fundamentally change. “Twice” also has no timeframe; sometimes it takes two months, sometimes it takes two minutes. It is the fundamentals that I am reading, and it is the fundamentals that are the first order and thus most influential limiter on the set of possible actions they can take. I completely reject the notion of “Well, You Never Know”. I don’t think very highly of friends who ask me if I did something stupid, I respond with “Why would I do that”, and then they respond with that. We are friends; you should know “who I am”, alternatively, “what my character is”. I am very good at seeing negative characteristics, and by extension, negative characters.

In the past two years, every single one of my condemnations has been shown to be correct.

By “shown to be correct”, I mean either the person meets a bad situation of the same type one would stereotypically expect of a certain trait (i.e.: theft:police::cheating:reveal), or everyone comes to agree with me that the person is not worthy of respect. I agree with everyone, just the everyone-tomorrow and not the everyone-today – which has significant differences of course. But the fact that I got there earlier, and often significantly earlier, than everyone else gives me (and everyone who believes me) its own benefits as well. Namely, less drama and destruction. I can’t explain exactly how I got to the conclusion. They either disgusted me in a certain way or reminded me of someone else I had condemned in the past, so I condemned them too. And then I “happen” to be right again. Just like how ancient architects and engineers just kept “happening” to build structures that last longer than modern ones. With the help of books, the fact that they’re alive, and other things which help their relevance, architects and engineers today can make plenty of excuses about how their buildings today are made of shit, look like shit, and feel like shit. But if you’re looking for something sturdy, you don’t take their “advice”. For those who know just a little bit, it’s clear the new things from cars to houses to microwaves are only better in the sense that there are easier to find replacement parts.

Arguments, reason, the spoken and written word: people have forgotten these are only aids in making decisions. These are all things created by other people. There is also the evidence which “speaks for itself”, i.e., your own interpretation from your own experience. In terms of just your own opinion, you don’t have to fight back at all. As my dad likes to say, “Don’t need to waste saliva”. Or as everyone remembers from Reading Rainbow, “You don’t have to take my word for it”.

There were occasions where I gave people a second chance because people in the group wanted them there. Every time, I was asked to present reasons for eliminating them. Some of those occasions I had presented complete arguments detailing and linking to evidence; other times I had none at all. None of those second chances ended up showing that I was wrong; they were all condemned again in the end. Does this make me a bad debater? Absolutely.

Does this make my readings and judgement of people false?

When I was a kid, I told my mom I’d write a book on all the things that people don’t talk about. I’m not sure if I’m going to do that, but now I at least understand why something like this hasn’t been written: People don’t have any particular need to explain themselves. I’ve been right every single time, and I have confidence the next time I think badly of someone. Everyone knows the minigames that pure presenters play, from politicians to journalists to professors; this is the kind of stuff (and all the financial minigames) you have to deal with when you write for the public. In smaller groups like family friends or apprentices and master, the lead can simply say what he wants and leave it open and the idea will hold for itself due to common understanding or experience. Presenting to the public is different. More complex, probably, but it’s also probably a different skillset.

This is not to say that presenting is not an irrelevant skillset. It’s irrelevant if your aim is only to be correct. If your aim is only to present or persuade, then correctness doesn’t matter. What is relevant depends on what your goal is.

Keyword is not “goal”.

Keyword is “your”.

Last night, Travis was on /vg/ and there was a question to him about his opinion on TotalBiscuit. Both are in the realm of esports, Travis being a journalist and mostly in the region of LoL, while TotalBiscuit is a variety commentator and owner of a pro team in SC2. Recently TotalBiscuit has been looking into possibly commentating for DOTA2, as the SC2 scene looks fairly grim. He looked into LoL once, got a bunch of referrals and on LoL’s system was supposed to be able to design a champion for the game. He didn’t get to and got only a consumable named after him. General consensus is that this is why he doesn’t have very high opinions of LoL. TotalBiscuit has said that by this time next year, DOTA2 will surpass LoL in viewership count, among other praisings. At this time, 35,917 follow Travis and 208,535 follow TotalBiscuit on Twitter.

If something is not relevant, it doesn’t matter if it’s correct or not. Debaters love to point at their list of logical fallacies on wikipedia or whatever and cite “ad hominem” or whatever from it; “just because a thief said it doesn’t mean it’s wrong”. Well no one’s arguing that right? What’s being implicitly said is that it doesn’t matter what the thief says. If a tree falls in a forest and no one is there to hear it, it does not make a sound. I remember asking a judge when I was in high school debate, and I will remember this forever, what the point of a “Respect Kritik” was. I asked him, why does it matter whether or not someone’s case (their collection of arguments) is disrespectful to their opponent, if the argument he presents shows the resolution (the thing being debated) is true, then he should win. He said it matters because if he disrespects his opponent then there is no debate to begin with. While in the context of just being correct about a point this is stupid, in the context of being in the National Forensics League and going to tournaments and rounds to be judged to win over opponents, he is correct. You can be correct all you want about the point, but that’s not what debate is. Debate is about winning a certain thing, and that certain thing has its own smaller environment. Its own little minigame. TotalBiscuit’s minigame is completely different and separate from Travis’s minigame. I can agree with both Travis and TotalBiscuit because there is no conflict, and because my minigame is also different.

The PUA/Manosphere calls this “frame control”. They use it in the context of picking up girls, talking about how girls like a man who isn’t moved by their bullshit and knows how to make her want to do things for him. I think the phrase and concept are very useful, when given a greater background and support glossary outside of just talking to and fucking random strangers. It is the distilled version of the common wisdom “be yourself”, “don’t try to be someone else”; people just don’t know what it means or when it holds. There’s also common wisdom which says you are the average of the people you spend time with, and being nice and polite; these things can’t possibly all happen at the same time all the time.

They don’t.

I didn’t read the long one that he posted, because I knew it wasn’t going to be relevant. The timing of a long response of that order at that time given what had occurred both in the conflict sense and the attitude he had shown already could only have a certain kind of content, a kind which I would not be able to respond to if I had accepted the premises in any way. In my dad’s words: “You have already damned me in your heart; there is nothing to talk about.”. I wrote my response already and posted it the instant I saw he responded. Could I have been wrong about my prediction? Yes. Was I? I’m fairly certain I wasn’t. I have shown it in its entirety here, because this is a presentation context. I haven’t read it, and I never plan on reading it, because you are what you read and I’m not reading something I know is shit. I can smell it without seeing it. If all I see is smoke, can I scream “fire”?

Up until recently, I would’ve just ran with the premises given to me until I found an inconsistency. It was my strategy for the longest time, and I’d often be able to find them, whether or not they were there. My parents wouldn’t be able to answer why contradictory things happened, the religious would not be able to explain why their god worked “in mysterious ways”. This didn’t work so well for me once I got into high school, joined debate, and talked with people who were more into ideologies or politics than I was. I’d delve into their world, and then find that everything was internally consistent: at the very least, they had an explanation for everything. And yet, many other people of other beliefs would also be internally consistent, and many of them would disagree with one another. I never had a good run in debating; I’d always ask questions in cross-examination, they’d respond to it, and then occasionally I’d think “That actually makes sense, I like that a lot”… then I’d be forced to disagree with myself.

While I’ve not gotten any better at disagreeing with myself, I have gotten better at not being open to new and different things all the time. Shahbaz Shit certainly would’ve convinced me if I had an “open mind” and was “amenable to reason”. But just as I close my doors to strangers and open them to friends, I have nothing to say to those who want to hear nothing from me.

“If you’re so confident in your methods, it shouldn’t bother you to explain them.”

Trade secrets which make millions of dollars aren’t given to the masses just because they’re clearly profitable. I don’t treat my methodology on judging people as something which belongs in the public domain – at the very least, not in an unencoded form. We’ve already discussed how something working has no correlation to how thoroughly it can be explained. And of course, the existence of enemies. A general can be entirely sure that his strategy will work for the upcoming battle. Does that mean he explains each and every part to each and every soldier, much less show all of it to those he plans to eliminate? Perhaps his strategy is only effective on the premise that only certain people know about it. Sometimes it requires feeding the enemy certain false information, sometimes true information and then bait them in because they only know part of it, and fails completely if the bait isn’t taken. Truth has its own mechanics.

There are universal truths, yes. But to think truth only exists in the form of universals is naive.

To accept someone else telling you that your truth is fake because it’s not universal is more naive.

Link shared above is here. Story from the man himself is below.

“Respect” is a magical word, like “love” or “morality” or “justice”, but is slightly more grounded. There are two uses for respect: either as recognition to the fact that someone is in a more powerful position in the social hierarchy, or to lubricate interactions with strangers. Kelly Shitties is neither someone I want lubricated interactions with, nor someone who I recognize as more powerful than me. “But Alliance has won TI3 and she’s more rich than you” And? I read up on her and found that she’s a disgusting waste of carbon atoms, so I tweeted about it. How better to “make my voice heard” than by directly tagging the person in question? Am I relevant? No. Not by any measure, not to anyone except close friends that read this blog. By all means she should not have responded and I did not expect a response. But clearly the topic at hand was relevant enough.

She first told me off that I’m irrelevant, which in and of itself doesn’t work because I’m being responded to. I copied her tone, suggesting that her actions and the person she did it were also irrelevant to the point of nonexistence. She then recognizes their existence, claiming irrelevance for a different reason: that it was a “mistake”. It’s bad enough to give a reason for something being irrelevant; having one shot down and then replacing that reason with a completely different one is hilariously bad. I didn’t respond to the other random person because I found them irrelevant. Do I hate women? I don’t think I do.

What I hate are bitches. Whether or not you think of yourself as a bitch is not my concern. And then her boyfriend the big Alliance carry player tells me off,

I didn’t expect this. I also didn’t respond to it. He and what he had to say was irrelevant in terms of the conversation, and that he responded to me has tarnished his image even more than it already was.

The fact that they responded at all and in such a way indicates a certain expectation they have of people, and one I think is fairly accurate. Let us suppose that someone had the same reaction I did, but for them it was just an outburst and they forgot to rescind/delete their opinion before it stirred up a shitstorm. The average response to such, I imagine, would be at least guilt. The big PR systems work to please the masses when they go into damage control mode, meaning the more successful the PR department is, the more it imitates exactly what average person would do: apologize profusely. These are big people and big players in a bigger world than yours; who are you to judge them? Maybe kellymilkies sleeping around while having a couple of children she doesn’t see, walking offstage from a live commentating position is perfectly okay. Perhaps it actually is moral to dump someone on their first day of a big tournament and then hug another guy in front of them. Maybe it’s okay up there.

YOU DON’T KNOW.

I’ll make it simple so this is easy to understand; the linked post is the long version. The counter to the accusation of uncertain knowledge is:

“That’s just your opinion.”

Kellymilkies I predicted with loads of evidence and people who share the same opinion. But to me, it’s just the same as any other prediction. I didn’t focus on the evidence, I focused on the character, and I was able to read it just as clearly as any other person I have judged. “Kudos to him for being clueless” Yes, thank you. No, I don’t care that I don’t know how many times she blows you a day. I like being good at my job: I’ll be correct regardless.

[1:37:01 PM] ML: I TOLD THEM ALL SHE WAS CRAZY
[1:37:04 PM] ML: I TOLD THEM FOR YEARS
[1:37:07 PM] ML: FINALLY THEY BELIEVE ME
[1:37:09 PM] KS: we are similar
[1:37:14 PM] KS: we predict early and accurately.
[1:37:24 PM] ML: yes
[1:37:27 PM] ML: then everyone thinks I am judgmental
[1:37:29 PM] ML: and I’m like
[1:37:29 PM] ML: okay
[1:37:31 PM] ML: call me when I’m wrong
[1:37:33 PM] ML: never happens
[1:37:34 PM] KS: LOL
[1:37:35 PM] ML: it’s very sad
[1:37:37 PM] KS: too good
[1:37:38 PM] ML: I wish people would just believe me at this point
[1:37:40 PM] ML: ._.
[1:37:42 PM] KS: im more like
[1:37:47 PM] ML: and if they don’t believe me at least trust that I have my reasons
[1:37:59 PM] KS: “I’m never wrong. you trust me or you don’t. you don’t, you will get fucked”
[1:38:13 PM] KS: not nearly as snarky
[1:38:16 PM] ML: if you want to wait for shit to visibly hit the fan you can do that
[1:38:21 PM] ML: but I see early signs so I’m
[1:38:21 PM] ML: gonna
[1:38:23 PM] ML: get out
[1:38:24 PM] ML: ._.
[1:38:38 PM] KS: i hate people who predict late, vaguely, with evidence, and without confidence
[1:38:38 PM] ML: and if that makes you feel like a better person then more power to you
[1:38:42 PM] KS: but those people are the ones who get paid
[1:38:43 PM] ML: I’m gonna be happy with my drama free life
[1:38:49 PM] KS: so maybe im doing it wrong by being the exact opposite of them.
[1:39:09 PM] KS: i also just hate this general jackoff to evidence
[1:39:14 PM] KS: SHOW ME THE EVIDENCE
[1:39:25 PM] KS: well sure i understand why evidence is important
[1:39:28 PM] KS: but we’re trying to read the future here
[1:39:31 PM] ML: funny
[1:39:37 PM] KS: I CANT SHOW YOU EVIDENCE OF SHIT THAT HASNT HAPPENED YET
[1:39:39 PM] ML: people who hire me say they like how cautious and drama-avoidant I am
[1:40:01 PM] ML: ikr I can show you small signs of things that make someone prone to shit
[1:40:03 PM] ML: butI am not
[1:40:05 PM] ML: about to WAIT for shit to happen
[1:40:17 PM] ML: I used to do that
[1:40:22 PM] ML: it never ended well because SHIT WOULD HAPPEN
[1:40:24 PM] ML: AND THATS
[1:40:25 PM] ML: NOT GOOD
[1:40:25 PM] ML: SO
[1:40:27 PM] ML: NO MORE WAITING

Of course, presenting it is important too. I don’t entirely enjoy being a son of Cassandra. But it is important that as a son of Cassandra I don’t distrust my foresight. It is one of the few things I have.

Do not throw away your gifts, and do not let people trick you into doing it.

Home

Points in Space
Cathedral of Light
Mass Production
There Is Only One Game
Remember Me

__________________

In the three preceding chapters we have shown that the world is divided between two philosophies. The one the philosophy of free trade and universal liberty – the philosophy adapted to promote the interests of the strong, the wealthy and the wise. The other, that of socialism, intended to protect the weak, the poor and the ignorant. The latter is almost universal in free society; the former prevails in the slaveholding States of the South. Thus we see each section cherishing theories at war with existing institutions. The people of the North and of Europe are pro-slavery men in the abstract; those of the South are theoretical abolitionists. This state of opinions is readily accounted for. The people in free society feel the evils of universal liberty and free competition, and desire to get rid of those evils. They propose a remedy, which is in fact slavery; but they are wholly unconscious of what they are doing, because never having lived in the midst of slavery, they know not what slavery is. The citizens of the South, who have seen none of the evils of liberty and competition, but just enough of those agencies to operate as healthful stimulants to energy, enterprise and industry, believe free competition to be an unmixed good.

The South, quiet, contented, satisfied, looks upon all socialists and radical reformers as madmen or knaves. It is as ignorant of free society as that society is of slavery. Each section sees one side of the subject alone; each, therefore, takes partial and erroneous views of it. Social science will never take a step in advance till some Southern slave-holder, competent for the task, devotes a life-time to its study and elucidation; for slavery can only be understood by living in its midst, whilst thousands of books daily exhibit the minutest workings of free society. The knowledge of the numerous theories of radical reform proposed in Europe, and the causes that have led to their promulgation, is of vital importance to us. Yet we turn away from them with disgust, as from something unclean and vicious. We occupy high vantage ground for observing, studying and classifying the various phenomena of society; yet we do not profit by the advantages of our position. We should do so, and indignantly hurl back upon our assailants the charge, that there is something wrong and rotten in our system. From their own mouths we can show free society to be a monstrous abortion, and slavery to be the healthy, beautiful and natural being which they are trying, unconsciously, to adopt.

– George Fitzhugh

There is no psychology; there is only biography and autobiography.

– Thomas Szasz

It is not ‘I think, therefore I am’… yes, it is ‘I think, therefore you are’.

– Ergo Proxy

Every belief is a perspective: a vantage point, from which we take in our ‘worldview’. In the modern scientific era we have emphasized highly what the field of vision covers, which direction it’s pointing in, and how clear that vision is. This is where all our energy goes. Outside of the “groundbreaking discovery” which causes a “paradigm shift”, every action we take stays inside the structure, filling it in, like a technician making ever more minor decisions but still following the blueprint working inside the major design constraints overall. The standard Question Everything base of Western philosophy, Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, gives us a semi-occasional reminder (depending on how many times we’ve heard it before) that not everything we believe is true, that something may be wrong with the fundamentals. But we never seem to know what our fundamentals are, nor do we believe what they are when we’re told. When we encounter someone who seems to have different fundamentals than us, we don’t really know what to do.

The phrase “See where they’re coming from” is used, but no one knows what it means.

It’s easy to know that you’re not supposed to talk poorly about women as a category because everyone knows whether they’re for or against that worldwide and historically women have been oppressed, they’re a minority, you know as well as them that each individual women is always going to stand up for women as a whole. It’s easy to know that that’s what they think (or are told they should think, which amounts to the same thing). Same with blacks, muslims, gays, etc. But all these things are what they believe; these are not “where they’re coming from”. That is where they want to go, where they think they are going. It doesn’t matter if you declare that you share your destination; girls don’t care if you sing them all the feminist fantasies and gays don’t care if you start standing on a sidewalk with a banner. Ideology does not make friends, only political points. There’s a reason why all/even the most powerful and well-known feminists want patriarchs, and will continue lusting for them long after they’ve ditched their BFF feminist friends for lifelong grudges. It is something more personal and also more broad than “we agree” or ‘we are similar”. In other words more fundamental, more true.

The “view” in “point of view” is what we are familiar with: what is close, what is far, what can be seen and what cannot be seen. The “point” however is not a concept fathomable in conventional terms, thanks to “We are all One” and equality and other entropic ideas. Even uniqueness does not help, for still it makes us a conglomerate of vague ideas and feelings isolated in space. In this each of us would exist, but not in relation to anything else – atomic, individual, isolated. What you can see is strictly a function of field of vision, like a kid in a planetarium. But there is no function of position: no matter where you stand in a planetarium, whether you bring in a chair to stand on or are laying on the floor, you’re going to be able to see everything available with the turn of a head. It is not so simple if you are in a city with skyscrapers – where you are, your position in space, your point – for no one can ever see everything at once. Get in a helicopter, control a satellite, or gain access to the NSA’s surveillance systems: you will always see something different, and it is always impossible to see everything. Perhaps this is why equality and individuality fit together so well: both ignore ordinates.

What are the ordinates of people? What in the world informs you of your cultural and philosophical position, your point in social space? In math, additional points are required to define additional dimensions. In society:

Additional people.

We understand others through understanding ourselves. Sympathy is not possible without or before empathy, and don’t start saying it’s possible because you can see how other people can feel in situations from books or movies, you still have to feel it yourself first. Being able to read off a list that so and so person has been through A B C experiences in their lives and therefore statistically thinks X Y Z things so you should probably react in α β γ manners is great and all, but a computer can do that, and so far see how well people are responding to automatic systems. Does being able to read and follow instructions off a sheet make a good doctor, customer servicer, or policeman? These are not what cause us to like, follow, and be candid with others.

To see where others are coming from, we have to see where we are coming from. We have to for ourselves as well be able to understand in a way which is different from the self reflection we do when we think of what to put on a cover letter or resume. Can you see where you’re coming from? Do you know who you are?

Can you know who you are when you are free?

__________________

 “I’ve noticed a fascinating phenomenon in my thirty years of teaching: schools and schooling are increasingly irrelevant to the great enterprises of the planet. No one believes anymore that scientists are trained in science classes or politicians in civics classes or poets in English classes.”

– John Taylor Gatto

If any question why we died, tell them, because our fathers lied.

– Rudyard Kipling

[…] When I came in they presented engineering as, look at all these labs we have, all the things we build, all the machines students can use, other nice facilities and resources. Then when we started engineering classes it was ehhhh heeeeee~mmm walcum du injineeeering wuhn hundurd. Then when we started looking for jobs and internships, the double major is seen as completely irrelevant compared to just the single major, and they expect so many things out of us that we’d never even heard of before. And then every once in a while, we see random students, no particular observable pattern, who speak of college as this great wealth of opportunities that you’re never going to see “in the real world”. They work on projects with 15K grants, build real things, use all the programs, know all the names and all the people. And it’s there, they say; for everyone, they claim. All I needed to do was ask around. Is it my fault? That I didn’t know what to do?

I’ve not thirty years of teaching, but I have had fifteen years of being taught.

And I have concluded that school is garbage.

Or (rather /) more broadly, the narrative is garbage.

In K-5, the adults always seemed to be playing games with us. In the cafeteria the female principal would always go up and tap on the mic repeatedly until the room of two hundred kids all went silent, then said her little thing which we never cared about before we were let out to lunch recess. Being second graders of a fairly decent neighborhood we had no words to express our anger but we started eating outside instead, unrestricted by this little game of hers. We all knew it was possible to quiet us down without such a disgraceful performance – possible to get us to hang on your every word, even. This was not simply theory, for one vice principal one year would get applause every time he showed up instead of the principal, and we’d all stop talking and start paying attention before he ended his second syllable. But the principal never managed. Not even when the whole population had essentially rotated out: no one liked her when we were in kindergarten, no one liked her when we were in fifth grade.

In middle school (6-8), the teachers started playing these games, but it got stricter and we started getting grades so we played the games with them. We didn’t like the games, of course. No one liked the vice principals, their decisions were never consistent. The teachers were more consistent, but their standards were arbitrary and often didn’t help us at all (why do we have to decorate and use colored pencils on an vocab assignment?). Girls started getting obviously favored on many things for reasons completely outside of their supposed better ability to sit well and pay attention and get higher grades, and suddenly we had to haul 25 pounds around every day in textbooks and PE clothes. Parents started talking about college, and talking about how the “bad kids” could bully us around now, but we’ll be their boss and be able to tell them what to do because we’ll go to college.

High school (9-12) the games increased, but got more subtle. Forensics, or Speech and Debate, would have us pay $500 a year (at the time I could only conceive of $150) to hire outside coaches to make us better at public speaking and to pay the teacher who organized it to stay after school. But the school period was always a free period – no one ever took it seriously and always either just played card games or worked on homework due the next period. The teacher never came out or did anything except complain about how he has to work hard. The coaches never helped anyone individually – except those who had already won things at tournaments, and those individuals would be all that they would help. I joined it because my parents had always said I was good at arguing; mostly everyone else joined it because “it’ll look good on your college applications”. But even forensics was a joke. They always told us that it was based on the Roman “forum” and a search for truth. What it was was theater. Every event/competition must be judged, and each judge is a parent – the atmosphere was clear, it was nothing more than an immigration war. The “speech” events were even described as simply performances; the debates always had silly arguments in them and “Kritiks” which at first seemed to be serious business that only the best debaters knew how to use and then were clearly just silly. The Honors/AP teachers didn’t play so many games, we actually learned how to execute things. But when and where do we execute these things?

I thought there were no games in the college of engineering, but I was wrong. I just didn’t see and didn’t want to believe until now. The first two years we had approximately half our classes where we learned things, the same kind of teachers (with less personal time) in high school. The other half was trash. Can’t speak english, can’t teach, tests with things we’ve never seen before, professors so bad they knew they were bad so they’d give out the final exams with the answer key beforehand then give it again during the assigned time. Of course, they were just “practice” exams, it’s not like only a few digits were swapped out and everything else was kept the same. Then professors who’d teach one way and test another, have completely different midterm and exam styles, have homework due during finals and mention new material which would be 100% of the final during the last half hour of class on the last day. That class I would pass. Another class which was easy the whole way through this quarter, I would fail.

But it’s okay, because I have an internship and career lined up and ready to go because I’m above 3.0 in engineering and that’s hard and most people can’t do that. No actually I don’t. And because I don’t have this, hard luck bad economy tough times go back to school and get a doctorates because bachelors is the new high school diploma?

Top Fucking Lel.

The reason why the boy who cried wolf had all his sheep eaten not because he lied, but because the villagers had a better memory than a goldfish. Every time a large event happens there are some ironic comments about how everyone’s going to forget about it within two weeks. Ironic, like it’s not going to happen again and again and again, making them part of the joke as well. Literally dumber than Gooby, who at least can see that Dolan’s still just screwing with him. No, every bad occurrence regardless of frequency, intensity, or trend over time is just a “bad apple“. Everything’s actually just dandy because God’s in His Heaven and All’s Right with the World.

Which would be true, except that God is dead.

If I flunk out of college I’m not going back. I don’t care that there’s “only one year left”.

The other day my mind was made up and Aerospace is garbage. The department agrees, and doesn’t encourage anyone to go into Aero, and rumors are they’re going to close the major because Aero is just Mech with specialization in Aero. No one actually gives a damn about you double majoring, not the professors, not the university, not the companies, the only one who cares is your mom because your dad will realize if not already realized that there actually is no “high demand for STEM majors”. (Go look up “STEM myth” or something along those lines. Or just use your brain: Would detached money-driven business wait for America to raise a generation of STEM majors, who are probably going to demand more pay, or are they just going to import Indians?) So now I’m just doing Mech, because now it’s not some stupid whole-year lineup where failing one class means “You’ll Have To Come Back” next year when tuition is 30% higher. No point in graduating with a double major if it means squatting in a shithole for five more years. And what will happen when I get out of college?

There’s literally nothing out of college that is useful, or maybe it’s just California, but I have no means of transportation so to me this is essentially the world.

Everyone complains that Millenials and Generation X and Generation Y all have a raging sense of entitlement. If that’s true at all, remember that some of those younger people are now in management positions.

I’ve noticed it in the way they write job descriptions on Craigslist. Everything is all about them, and what they think they deserve, and what they need, what they think you should do for them — not what they have to offer. I’ve laughed out loud at a few ads that contained long lists of qualifications, demands, and complaints about former employees…followed by a starting salary offer… just above minimum wage.

– Jack Donovan, Hours are Just Hours

I do have a “raging sense of entitlement”. I think I’m entitled to my parents’ generation telling me the truth to the best of their ability. What they should have told me is that everything is a lie, everything is an advertisement, and the only thing that matters is how much you make others like you, no matter what the cost – this kind of thing is what you see on TV, what Mafia bosses tell their sons, right next to “A man who doesn’t spend time with his family can never be a real man.”. What they did tell me was study hard, focus on school, and you’ll be rewarded with meaningful work, power over those who shat on you before, and raising a family who will take care of you in old age. Studying hard hasn’t gotten me anywhere, because those classes which need studying for are the same ones which have completely inconsistent professors. Focusing on school clearly is full of shit because the only ones who get anything out of universities on average are women, either with international careers lined up or an MRS degree, for the same obvious reasons why they started getting favored in middle schools. Two parts of five have been shown to be complete and total lies. That’s 40% of the game. What reason is there to believe in the other 60%?

Of course, maybe I’m the degenerate. I haven’t done any undergraduate research, haven’t taken any part-time jobs, am not a straight-A student. Not the best athlete, have no particularly amazing skills, and can’t keep my mouth shut when someone’s full of shit. Maybe I just haven’t been trying hard enough, because “the resources are there” – we live in the age of the internet after all, where everything is open to everybody. I should be emailing everybody about their lives, inquiring about openings, making connections. Signing up for extra classes to meet more people and learn more things. I should have initiative. College is what you make of it.

Let us assume this thing is true, because it probably is.

Then why the fuck are they here?

Why the fuck am I paying them for even what they think of as garbage (“they’re here for research”)?  They don’t respond to my emails (“they’re busy people”). Actually, we can extend that quite a bit – why the fuck does school exist to begin with? I would’ve willingly gone to some of my classes because they taught me things which were fun for me and I found useful for my own means, but many of them have never been useful in the slightest and have had teachers who are clearly there just to get paid, and inversely I’m just there to pay them. What? Why would I do that?

Fifteen years of my life and how many hundreds of thousands of dollars for this garbage system? Suppose that the meaning of life is to make things meaningful to someone else. School doesn’t teach you how to court or how to fuck. School doesn’t teach you how to speak or when to keep your mouth shut. School doesn’t teach you how to communicate effectively. School doesn’t even teach you how to use excel, perhaps the greatest program ever devised. Even in the almighty STEM majors, 3.9 students are scratching their heads “So why do we have to learn about this method if we’re never going to use it? Shouldn’t this be a History class and not an Engineering class?”

Do you realize how much time fifteen years is? (I don’t, so I won’t elaborate further. It’s probably significant. Maybe. I’m only twenty. Soon I’ll be Forever 21.)

The titties aren’t here. The fame isn’t here. Family has never been here. And now, even the money isn’t here.

There’s only a hope. Audacity of Hope, indeed.

It’s not that the companies’ decisions are unreasonable. I don’t like them, but it can be understood. If a 20~25 year old kid blasted music all night, disturbing his neighbors whose names s/he doesn’t even know, partying like s/he’s the center of the universe, then when the sun rises in the morning (leaves on the music), puts on a suit and holds a folder stands in a firm fashion and starts bragging to you about how good they are at whatever and how they’ve made whatever impact and learned whatever things, then goes and sleeps in class taught by a teacher who is just there so they can get paid for research they delegate to grad students who have their fun fucking with undegrads’ grades on homework, to get an A+ and be confident that they’ll be set for a full career, would you hire that kid? If you knew this was the standard, or even the aspired standard by the great Fraternities and Sororities as “professional brotherhoods”, irrelevant what department or what kind of degree it was, would you be looking forward to working with any of them at all?

“Dolan are you trying to trick me again?”

Did I say the money isn’t there? I’m sorry. It is; college is a hedge fund. It’s just not your hedge fund.

No one fell for it when they said algebra would be useful in real life to calculate the speed of a freefalling object, or two trains one leaving chicago the other leaving san francisco, or to calculate your compound interest rates. Questions quickly became, are we going to go skydiving soon, but what about drag, I know it gets harder to go faster. Are we going on a field trip to see some trains? Who cares about interest rates, use a computer. But then, somewhere along the way, everything changed. Gotta apply to colleges. What are the top five things that matter to you when choosing a college? You need to structure your personal statement in this that other manner. Follow these ten weird steps to make your resume stand above and beyond the crowd! HR/Admissions is always flooded with applications, you want yours to catch their eye. No, no one cares that you are good at what you do. You have to be good at presenting it. You have to get your foot in the door.

I never took an SAT.

I never stepped foot in a highschool class.

I didn’t drop out either.

I just don’t know what the fuck I’m supposed to do. I’m trying to self-teach one of my passions, programming, but jesus man. Guess that makes me too entitled.

Step parents pulling me in and out of home school and public school.

K-2 was public, 3-5 was home, 6-8 was public.

Was very hard adjusting both academically and socially. Imagine taking a child 12 years old or so who really didn’t have friends or understand the world around him or what being social was like and then thrust him into junior high.

Anyway, they wanted me to do homeschool again for high school, but they were out of state a lot. Always busy working. So, it never happened. A kid cannot enroll himself in a home school, which is what I guess they were expecting me to do. So, I spent my whole high school years doing nothing myself at home. My parents would literally be gone for months on end, come home for 2 or 3 days and then leave again.

Then we moved out into rural texas in 2009 and here I am.

I understand the importance of initiative. But what the fuck? What am I supposed to do?

You don’t know how to do that do you?

Then try this.

“It’s called a confidence game. Why, because you give me your confidence? No: because I give you mine.”

__________________

Even in the midst of flowing time,
Look, listlessness dances round and round.
I can’t even see my heart,
As it withdraws from me, and I don’t care.
Even if I don’t make a move,
I keep being swept away through the cracks of time.
I don’t give a damn about anything around me,
I am me, and that’s all there is to it.

Am I dreaming? Am I seeing nothing?
My words are useless, even if I were to speak them.
Sadness only leaves me exhausted,
And I’d rather live my days feeling nothing.
Even if you told me those bewildering words,
My heart would be elsewhere, not even listening.
If I were to make a move on my own, and change everything,
I’d still turn it all black.

Is there a future for someone like this?
Do I belong in this world?
Does my heart ache now? Do I grieve now?
I simply know nothing about myself.
Merely walking leaves me exhausted,
So how could I care about anyone else?
If even someone like me could change,
Were I actually to change, I’d turn white.

If I make a move, if I make a move,
I’ll destroy it all, I’ll destroy it all,
If I grieve, if I grieve,
Would my heart turn white?
I still know nothing about you, nothing about myself,
Nothing about anything at all.
If opening my heavy eyelids means I’ll destroy everything,
Then let it all turn black.

– Translation: whispersiichan, Bad Apple!!


__________________

I am well aware of the possibilities and ideals, and surely I would want nothing more than a loving wife and a bonded family.

But what is so great about the category, “3D women”?

Everyone loves to talk about how women are oppressed by this and that thing, one of newer ones being that 2D women are now making 3D women “replacable” – which is the complete opposite of what is actually happening. 2DW have never been replacable – if they were, Hatsune Miku would’ve quickly been replaced by another illustrated vocalizer, Rei Ayanami by another silent girl who controls great power, Yoko Littner by some other random girl with huge tits. But they’re not, and they remain popular in the art and in the merchandise. 3DW, on the other hand, are readily replacable. New girlfriend every month, pump and dump, these things are the name of the game today, and they aren’t spilling over to 2DW. Oh wait, I was supposed to talk about the other direction.

Women today are absolute garbage except for their looks and perhaps as an oversized Fleshlight (or TENGA, depending on what you prefer). They aren’t willing to have children, they can’t take orders, and they can’t do anything but dress up or preparing to dress up. “But women are going to college, they’re the majority now” Yes I covered that, it’s under “dress up or preparing to dress up”. What is the purpose of life, Reproduction. What produces children, Women (Men are machines of Labor). Go look up the average happiness levels of 40-50 year old women, those who have children and those who don’t; compare also what they want in their lives, and come back and tell me nature is wrong. But hey, Forever 21 right? I can put off having children for another 20 years, just like I can put off paying off my student loans, my car loan, my doing meaningful work, and building my future. My children certainly won’t mind if I have them when I’m 50. They can’t, because they’ll be retarded.

Currently we evaluate everyone based solely on their benefits to our existing life, so what are the benefits of a 3DW over a 2DW? A 3DW complains, takes up space, takes up money, takes up room on the bed. Can’t cook, can’t drive, can’t help you with work. They could help you with little chores here and there to make your life easier, but they don’t. Always entitled because hey there’s plenty of fish in the sea, why stay with you? Constantly demanded to prove your worth in manners completely unrelated to loyalty, because at a moment’s notice any shred of polyester can be conclusive evidence that you’re cheating. A warm body, probably something not nearly as amazing as the blonde “billions (out of 10)” that you find online. That’s about it.

2DW never changes personality, has a better and actually unique personality, can’t leave you, is more beautiful, and is always there for you. Takes up no room (maybe a couple of GB if you’re dedicated), doesn’t necessarily take up money, can be removed off the bed without much hassle at all. Never ages. Never has anything bad to say about you.

No one cares about bloodlines anymore, so 3DW aren’t needed for reproduction. No one cares about children anymore, and are even against them “because they cost too much money” insert XYZ Loans here. Frankly, 3DW are nothing more than “friends with benefits”, and even that doesn’t mean much anymore because of the same degradation to the concept of friend. The only purpose now is to get under favorable tax brackets due to marriage brackets. If you’re both out working all day, then who’s home to take care of anything? What is a home anymore, but a place to shit and sleep?

Why would a man want a 3DW there? Creates no peace of mind via additional safety, nor solace of soul through reassurances and trust.

Having fun and being in love? What is fun, what is love? Even pulling just from their common usages, fun is something completely nonunique to 3DW – it’s more related to alcohol and activities associated with much laughter. Love for the english language is even more broad; “I love pizza”, “I love my dog”, “I love my mom”. “But it’s different” yes I know the borders of language, thank you for acknowledging semantics are significant. If it is simply the feelings you get with being with a 3DW these are easily recreated with a little bit of mental brainpower, as indicated quite clearly by those who marry dolphins and pillows. If it is the intricacies of sex you want, all those executables not found in only two dimensions, then you can hire a prostitute. Put in a little effort into “pick up artistry” or “game” and you won’t even need to pay. You want the two together, easily done: pump and dump, with a passion. But then each 3DW isn’t that special, are they? Even without going through this exercise: they’re just vessels, the means to get to fun and love.

2DW are not making 3DW replacable, they are replacing them because 3DW are replacable. Many things have replaced 3DW in the past for these reasons. 2DW are simply the newest competitor.

They only happen to look more similar than any of its predecessors.

For that matter, why are >99% of men needed? Women only need their Twilight and their KPop stars.

Why is anyone needed?

__________________

Ever on and on I continue circling
With nothing but my hate in a carousel of agony
Till slowly I forget and my heart starts vanishing
And suddenly I see that I can’t break free I’m
Slipping through the cracks of a dark eternity
With nothing but my pain and the paralyzing agony
To tell me who I am, who I was
Uncertainty enveloping my mind till I can’t break free and

Maybe it’s a dream, maybe nothing else is real
But it wouldn’t mean a thing if I told you how I feel
So I’m tired of all the pain, of the misery inside
And I wish that I could live feeling nothing but the night
You can tell me what to say, you can tell me where to go
But I doubt that I would care, and my heart would never know
If I make another move there’ll be no more turning back
Because everything will change and it all will fade to black

Will tomorrow ever come? Will I make it through the night?
Will there ever be a place for the broken in the light?
Am I hurting? Am I sad? Should I stay or should I go?
I’ve forgotten how to tell did I ever even know
Can I take another step? I’ve done everything I can. All the people that I see I will never understand
If I find a way to change if I step into the light, then I’ll never be the same and it all will fade to white

If I make another move, if I take another step
Then it all would fall apart, there’d be nothing of me left
If I’m crying in the wind if I’m crying in the night
Will there ever be a way will my heart return to white?
Can you tell me who you are? Can you tell me where I am?
I’ve forgotten how to see, I’ve forgotten if I can
If I opened up my eyes there’d be no more going back
Cause I’d throw it all away and it all would fade to black

– Translation: Cristina Vee, Bad Apple!!


__________________

There is only one game.

People like to sort everything into neat little categories governed by tidy simple formulas, even separated by language that appears nowhere else. Math is different from English. Politics is different from Economics. Older is different from Younger. As much as people claim to believe in equality, they clearly at least believe in a “Separate But” version, if not a full-on hierarchy. They believe it exists, they just also happen to believe it should not exist. Is/Ought: the clarification that needs to be made thanks to elementary school teachers everywhere setting up the false dichotomy between “Fact and “Opinion”. We will focus on the former because the latter is relatively irrelevant. Probably also absolutely irrelevant, but I can’t care enough to show that.

When the PA system sounds the buzzer, it’s time to “switch gears”; when the robes are donned it’s time to switch cars. Like history textbooks, people readily attribute “phases” to their lives, and like how we’re told there are three distinct branches of government, people will recognize “positions” between themselves and others. And when that clutch grabs onto the next number, you must be ready to take on an entirely new task. Math and English are entirely different you see, because they use different parts of the brain, and really, just look at what you’re writing, the quadratic equation is obviously not even remotely close to the Schaeffer method. You can’t just say the integral of knowledge with respect to time is wisdom, are you dumb? How could you possibly think that acting how you do in a bar can be acceptable in front of the guy at the career fair? No, they’re clearly different, and you need to keep in mind (believe) that they are different. New situations call for new strategies. “I’ve forgotten everything from math just now” Good. “I’ve forgotten everything from math last year” Very good. “I’ve forgotten everything I’ve learned in my life up to this point” Fabulous.

Or wait, that doesn’t sound right now does it. At least, not that last one.

It is easily recognized that just because I play with different units does not mean that I play a different game. If I play with the same units in a different way, It also does not mean I am playing a different game. Even playing a different game could, in a sense, not mean that you are playing a different game: just as stories have archetypes and can be boiled down to “A stranger came to town”, games are all essentially the same and have skills which translate across one another. You’re going to have to be able to hold a pencil regardless if you’re in math or english class; you’re going to have to be able to speak the same language as the other person regardless if it’s your drunk friend or the guy at the career fair. Some things will be more translatable, others may only have a couple of nuances that aren’t well-understood but seem to be similar nonetheless. “But they’re not the same thing” But ‘not the same’ does not mean ‘everything is different’.

Let’s say we call two things different. If you think of it as absolutely new you will build all your understanding from scratch, and if something you built reminds you of something else, then either you question whether it is different at all or you question what you built (because it’s absolutely new). Either one of these things, you are not spending your time actually on making a better understanding. Now let’s say we call them the same thing. More likely than not they differ in several fairly significant ways, but because the goal is to win the game you want to understand how to win as fast as possible. If you think of the current game as similar to previous games, you will attempt to import skills and make adjustments because that is faster than beginning a wandering with nothing.

With videogames, card games, and board games, this is relatively easy. Dicerolling, mouse accuracy, card handling are all motor skills. We accept them as similar because it’s physically there.

With other games, all of this goes out the window.

Like disregarding everything your parents ever told you about strangers because this stranger offered toys rather than candy and it was a coupe rather than a van.

So we become babies again, hanging onto every word because it’s a wide wide world out there, and obviously this person is good because they’re here talking to me and answering my questions. The teachers have to want me to be educated, the administrators have to want to keep me safe, the strangers in the coupe has to actually have toys they want to give me. Clearly. It’s the only thing I know about this situation, it’s new and something I’ve never seen before. The only thing I can do is do what they say. So they have to have my interests in mind.

Because if they didn’t, I’d lose all the time.

Because if they didn’t, then the world would be a scary place.

Eren… I’d told you to wait for me downstairs!! What have you done… DO YOU EVEN REALIZE WHAT YOU DID?

MERELY PUT DOWN SOME RABID DOGS! SOMETIMES THEY JUST HAPPEN TO LOOK LIKE PEOPLE!

Shingeki no Kyoujin

If you can think, remember. If you can remember, learn.

There is only one game.

__________________

Humanity is a broken series of free men irreparably isolated because of their subjectivity.

– Simone de Beauvoir

What is the meaning of life?

The easy answer is reproduction. You came in by fucking, and most people would like nothing more than to go out by fucking.

But this is not a satisfactory answer: it’s too much physical and not enough spiritual.

This is the common theme throughout all unsatisfactory truths. No one wants to be think that no matter how they eat or what they eat, in the end they’re just the same as pigs and dogs eating slop and shit. They won’t argue that it’s different because it’s cooked and has better nutrition because of some elements or vitamins, because that’s not satisfactory for them either. Paint it up and it’s the same thing; the vision of the future changed quite quickly from a colorful white city to a dirty and dark industry, then back again, but it didn’t matter, no one strictly looks to the future as bright anymore. Everything looks significantly better since ~2010 computer graphics almost universally look better than ~1960 magazine art, and we’ve thought up more things in more ways since then. “We can’t unlearn or unsee” is a copout answer which is also wrong; people don’t learn from history. The difference is that the advertised improvements from the black skyscrapers through the smog are not the same as the advertised improvements from whatever people thought of the future before science fiction.

Apple isn’t selling a piece of glass with electronics attached to it, and that’s not what people are buying. They’re buying an “iPad”. Perhaps it’s stupid, it’s consumerist or whatever. Perhaps some other things like this are stupid too, like truly being attached to the purpose of your job even though you’ve only been there for two hours and your resume shows that you’ve never worked anywhere longer than two years. But they’re there, and people take it as truth, and you can’t force everyone to recognize a slightly larger, bulkier, and more rectangular tablet is the same thing.

Are all things of this category stupid? Nihilists declare this, and like many I Fucking Love Science people of this post-enlightenment era, say they ‘see the world as it truly is’. They describe things purely in terms of the physical, as all spiritual is just “decoration”, “distraction”, and not the true essence of whatever happens to be the subject matter. And yet on average, they all make similar stylistic choices. They’re likely to wear black, and they probably jack off to professional blondes with breast implants rather than to amateurs or fatties. They probably can’t justify color superiority, and they definitely will lose any argument that amateurs are less biologically sound than pros. So why do they do it? Because I want to Well why do you want to? There is no free will. And if there’s a reason, there’s a reason for that reason, and a whole system behind it. ‘See the world as it truly is’?

What separates decorations and distractions from what something truly is? Is a cake without frosting a cake? Is that cake with frosting the same cake if it had no fruit on top? An unspiced slab of meat was certainly seen as different from its spiced counterpart for the past several centuries, and so did nature. Salt was not a “spice of life”, it was worth its weight in gold to sub-saharan africans and was necessary for thousands of seafarers to survive and for long distance trades to occur. Simply because it is not measurable by computers and mechanical instruments, the difference between a cake with and without frosting is simply a distraction? It is again fair to say that one should not rush to satisfy every impulse of a child or woman, but that does not mean that all decorations are irrelevant. The solution to being betrayed and lied to once is not necessarily to treat all statements as false and all people as traitors.

We never truly start out knowing the essence of anything. This is the definition of learning: only in the end do we understand what we did, not beforehand. It therefore follows that whatever we thought we were doing beforehand was not true – not in the fullest sense, even if our guess was somewhat correct. So why did we go into it? The best answer is that we thought that it would be similar to something else that was meaningful in our past: pick up a book because you were told it was similar to something else you found profound. But this is not related to what it actually is – it’s only what you thought it would be. It showed enough properties at the outset to match your imagination.

Is this not what a decoration is?

Does a kid truly know “a priori” what a cake is, how it feels to chew inside, from just looking at the frosting and fruit? He can smell that the outside is sweet, this he has been informed by instinct, the genetic memory. But inside? How does he know that it’s not a steel block past that fluffy white?

If decorations can be meaningful, if we then unrestrict feelings and emotions from the standardized atheist/nihilist/scientific procedure, then maybe there’s more to the meaning of life than just fucking. Maybe there is something more to love. Maybe it isn’t just social conditioning that men who lose custody of their children choose suicide, and women who never have children end up feeling that something is missing from their lives. Maybe we don’t trust lifelong bachelors or self-declared ladies men or the new PUAs and MGTOWs for more than just because our parents and grandparents always simply looked down on them. Maybe there is a reason for these things that happen, even if we don’t know what it is yet and everything we can say about it doesn’t fit any linear correlation with greater than a 90% certainty.

Culturally we are experienced with doubting things. Knowing what/where to doubt – in this it does not have a clue. And so through either concerted or accidental efforts, the power that be and the rest of mankind have destroyed many of its long-standing institutions, all the ones directly tied to the survival and happiness of a people, both “for the forest” and “for the trees”: racial homogeneity, social hierarchy, cultural standards and etiquette, brotherhoods and fraternities… the family unit. The language more and more indicates that men and women are no longer part/property of their family, or “extended family”, or neighborhood, or city, or province, but of the state. Everyone is a ward of the state, only because it can’t be “everyone is a ward of God” because God is dead. Everything must be done legally and through official channels, everything must be measured in money. If it can be shown through articles or papers published in the newspapers or journals, it’s truth – no one cares what you say to your friend at the bar anymore, and it doesn’t spread anywhere. Only the Viral Videos matter now, and they’re even showing it on broadcast TV so no one is left out of “the” loop. Everyone is equally connected to everyone else now.

If everyone is X, no one is X: It doesn’t matter that this is an unintended consequence, it is a consequence. And if it is known now, then it should not happen again the future, to the best of our ability. Yet again and again it’s news “stories” about a “surprising”, “weird”, or “creepy” event where a “man” or a “woman” does an [action] that doesn’t feel quite right. Obviously they have to take classes in the matter. They need to be taught what’s right.

They don’t.

“You are asking me to define what characteristic makes a difference between pious and nonpious. Do I really NEED to be able to tell you what is to be able to conduct a pious action?
How can you use a word like ‘piety’ without knowing what it means, while pretending to know what it means?
“Do I actually have to be able to tell you in plain barbarian non-Greek English, or in pure Greek, what it means to prove that I know and understand what it means? I don’t know it in words but I know what it is.

“Tell me, old man. Does a child need to define mother’s milk to understand the need to drink it?”
“No, he does not need to.”
“And my dear Socrates, does a dog need to define what an owner is to be loyal to him?”
“A dog has… instinct. It does not reflect on its life. He doesn’t examine his life. We are not dogs.”
“I agree, my dear Socrates, that a dog has instinct and that we are not dogs. But are we humans so fundamentally different as to be completely stripped of instinct leading us to do things we have no clue about? Do we have to limit life to what we can answer in proto-Brooklyn English?”

“Then, my good Socrates, why do you think that we need to fix the meaning of things?”
“My dear Mega-Tony, we need to know what we are talking about when we talk about things. The entire idea of philosophy is to be able to reflect and understand what we are doing, examine our lives. An unexamined life is not worth living.
The problem, my poor old Greek, is that you are killing the things we can know but not express. And if I asked someone riding a bicycle just fine to give me the theory behind his bicycle riding, he would fall from it. By bullying and questioning people you confuse them and hurt them.”

“My dear Socrates… you know why they are putting you to death? It is because you make people feel stupid for blindly following habits, instincts, and traditions. You may be occasionally right. But you may confuse them about things they’ve been doing just fine without getting into trouble. You are destroying people’s illusions about themselves. You are taking the joy out of ignorance out of the things we don’t understand. And you have NO answer; you have NO answer to offer them.

– N. N. Taleb, Antifragile

I can only know by my feelings. I cannot logic my way past the arrow of time.

From my experience, the meaning of life has nothing to do with “independence”. There is nothing so liberating about being “able” to deal with applications and forms with words and regulations I have to look up (imagine if I couldn’t look it up), talking to complete strangers who all have infinitely more experience and knowledge of intricacies than I do. There is nothing so compelling about being alone at night, or being with one other person who spends most of their time watching a TV or playing with their smartphone or some other glowing rectangle. These were advertised in a more spiritual manner as well (a “girlfriend” or “significant other”), but they have not withstood any sort of test of time – i.e. different situations and real experiences. Freedom to use money how I please is fine but not inherently fulfilling. Having a bajillion choices everywhere I go is not particularly interesting.

For me, it is something else.

My friends have always found it hard to motivate me to do homework or apply for jobs or even talk with people if it’s for engineering. If I don’t want to do it, it’s basically impossible; if I do, then there’s no explaining it. Do I want to study rockets? Not really. How about planes? Not in particular. Cars? Cars are cool, but whatever. Then why are you in engineering?  That’s another question entirely, but it’s not like I’m totally disinterested. They often joke that I run real life with a fifteen second lag, asking questions long after everything’s already done and everyone else is already satisfied with the explanation – half the time I open with something that sounds super stupid, but all the time it ends up being a real discussion about something they find important as well. No, I’m not passionate about working on fuselages or combustion cylinders. I don’t care about being assigned to work on this part of the student design project of a wooden plane over some other part. I just want to work something meaningful where my friends are. Something useful to us now, something useful for us in the future, and something useful to others the entire way. Am I more interested in engineering than I am in sociology? I expected it to be, and to some extent I’m right, but at least for me, I can never be passionate about these things.

I am only here now because my parents think its a good idea, and all the people I’ve gotten to know these years are here. If it were not for these guys, why would I bother with anything in particular? Because there are more girls in the bio department? Because the mechanical engineering department has a lot of pictures of engines? I can’t even bring myself to play a game just because it’s pretty, how could I spend half the energy in my waking life on reading books and figuratively kowtowing to random professors’ whims just because of advertisements? Maybe I’m a lesser being, not so evolved, but I have no undying interest in anything except the base animal instincts. I wasn’t born to calculate, I wasn’t born to write, I wasn’t born to think. All this conceptualizing I do, fundamentally, is because for whatever reason my brain happens to feel good while doing it, and because I’ve done it for a long time. Perhaps if I had been working in car shops since I was in middle school I’d be more interested in my major. But as it stands, I am simply not as good as their posterboys and postergirls. Even if I was, I wouldn’t care.

Suppose that my blog was huge and popular or otherwise had something important tied to it somehow, and people started talking about it. Supporters would say something along the lines of how I’m so passionate about whatever names my ideas will have, how I’ve spent however much time and how each post takes however much experience or energy and is tied to blah blah blah. He’d have to be passionate right? He’s been writing so much and it’s so intricately constructed. Or something along those lines; everything leads back to passion. How do I know this, because it’s exactly how everyone of every profession is described today when the media catches them. It’s all about “passion”.

And then what happens when you actually talk with them? When you talk with those who aren’t just for the show, they actually have things to say that aren’t just listing out their accomplishments, tragedies, and life lessons learned. In fact, they won’t talk about those things at all unless it strictly relates to a point they’re trying to make inside normal interesting conversation. Perhaps I am wrong about this, perhaps I am simply deprived of a gift from God, but passion [looks to be] something which only occurs in instances and specific events. Was Andrew Wiles passionate for the entire duration it took him to solve Fermat’s Last Theorem? Did he sit at his desk 16 hours a day 7 days a week for 7 years, adrenaline pumping, racking through numbers and formulas hitting it every step of the way? Of course not. He took his park walks silently, wandering and thinking, and he did this more than one time. Do the “busy” HR departments do the same thing with applications? Are they truly passionate about interacting with other people and doing what’s best for them? Does anything you know about white collar environments tell you that this is the truth? The passion is part of the advertisement, and the thing itself can’t be the advertisement.

I don’t do things because things are interesting. They can be fun for a short while, anywhere from solo playing a FPS to drawing a picture to writing lines of code. Even when they’re boring you’ll still get moments of excitement every once in a while from a major breakthrough in mechanical skill. But all activities get boring when you don’t talk to anyone about them. If there is no one around and no one with you, everything inevitably gets dreary.

I do things because the people I know are interested in them. I happened to know a lot of people who were interested in “Math and Science”, and my dad happened to be a Mechanical Engineer when he went to college. Clearly the route I have taken with many other people I know is different, because this blog is not about STEM in the least. It so happens that I no longer know people who are both connected and interested in the industry (and willing to connect me to it) while simultaneously getting rectum fucked by the system, so my interest is no longer as strong.

Weak willed? Sure, I don’t particularly mind. What matters is if it’s true. I believe there’s a reason to why so many successful people always thank and are grateful to those closest to them, even when those people did nothing strictly related to the achievement being awarded.

In the 70’s the American Army did a scientific study on soldier psychology. They researched stress levels when fighting aliens and the effectiveness of certain motivations in new recruits by comparing psychological evaluations of soldiers during the two world wars and the early BETA conflicts. They found and interviewed retired veterans from every corner of the globe.

They found some interesting results in the part of the survey asking why front-line soldiers fought.

What were they?

What do you think the most common reason was?

Well, the obvious answer would be… for the sake of humanity or the Earth – And in the older wars, for the sake of their country I guess…

Wrong. That’s the reason given by soldiers who’ve yet to be sent out or are on their way to the battlefield. Some keep thinking that way even on the battlefield. But it seems that the more unfamiliar they were with real warfare, the more likely they were to give idealistic, political answers, or what their education told them. The families of those being sent out probably want to hear reasons like that in order to help them accept the painful truth.

Then… was the correct answer fighting for their relatives or loved ones?

Unfortunately, no, that’s also one most common before reaching the front lines. It also seems to be the real motivation for many of those being sent out.

In the end, the most common reason was… they fought for their comrades. Surprisingly, whether they were fighting humans or BETA didn’t change this result.

For their comrades…?

They didn’t want to let their comrades-in-arms die after living through battles with them. …that’s why they fought so hard. Far below in second place, was the fear of being killed by the enemy. That was why the retreating German Army resisted so fiercely near the end of the German-Soviet war, for instance. The fear of what would happen if the Soviet Army took them prisoner was enough to reinvigorate the German Army, whose equipment and morale were in ruins.

What about you, Captain? What do you fight for?

Me? …good question…

I think… I fight for my comrades too. I want everyone I’ve fought alongside to live at least a little longer. Not that I don’t want Alternative IV to succeed or humanity to win the war. If I’m ordered to infiltrate a hive, I’ll obey, even if I have no chance of survival. But, once I’m inside, it would be difficult to fight to the end for that reason alone.

Maybe because I’d start to want something more concrete to fight for…

Maybe because I’d start wanting a reason to believe my death would not be in vain…

– Capt. Isumi to 2nd Lt. Shirogane, Muv-Luv Alternative

The meaning of life has something to do with friends and family.

Our desire for home cannot truly be satisfied unless we have the people who we choose correctly and the people who are blessed to us by destiny.




Halation Intermissions 3 – A Hand Against The Sun

Deus Ex Machina.

“God From Machine”: the worst possible  literary device a writer can employ. A phrase referring to events which could not possibly be predicted beforehand, viewed as the Author exercising his powers to manipulate the story to his pleasing in an ungraceful manner. In any story, the audience should be able to see events coming: at any crisis or opportunity, the characters and world should only act in a certain probabilistic manner, one which correlates to the audience’s understanding of the trend of the world beforehand. If the Creator writes such that events seem to be predestined, the audience is not likely to be interested. If, instead, the Creator writes such that possibilities have great variation, or such that what he makes reality is not what he appeared to heading towards, then the audience will be outraged. “How were we supposed to see this coming?”, is the sentiment; “This was never mentioned”, it is said. It is true that the nature of Acts of God means that there were no visible signs beforehand.

Is it therefore also true that because it was not predicted, it should not appear?

If it should not appear, does that mean it will not appear?

Isn’t it interesting that for every story, at any given point in time, the characters the audience are familiar with always have enough information or time to respond to the situation? How are they always in these kinds of situations? Those of wealthy and connected backgrounds can explain it away by saying that their organization or group has hands in every pocket and ears in every room, but what of the commoners? How do they always happen to hear, see, or remember a most useful thing at the exact time and place? What sort of rituals do they perform to have Fortuna’s favor in such a consistent manner? We assume, no, demand that this is true for fictional worlds. That every outcome of the important type will, due to perfect information, be a 100% direct result of a character’s morality, intelligence, and action. Any act which breaks this holy promise from audience to character is blasphemy.

But there is no such promise from God to the World. Indeed, there is no difference between them: the characters do not exist independent of “the events” which appear to constitute the story. Their every action, reaction, their tendencies and emotions, history and memory – all of these were dictated to them. They are puppets in a show, pieces on a board. They move and do as the Creator pleases. If the Creator wills them to die, they will die. Perhaps the lack of an intricate method of death removes the possibility of the Creator being a benevolent one. If the Creator desires an event to occur, it will occur. Maybe the character will “respond” in a manner which is “statistically significant”. This may make the Creator appear whimsical, or malevolent. No matter. The character’s and audience’s opinions are not really relevant, not in terms of truth. Their expectations of what should be in a Creator does not mean that it is there. This is true in the worlds we create, and the world we were created in:

We are not guaranteed grounds sufficient for divine judgement.

__________________

“Oh yeah, let’s just introduce another fudge factor.”

In [the college of] engineering, we learned plenty of formulas in lower division. Indeed, calculus and physics seemed to mesh together in the sense that one taught how formulas could interact with each other, and the other taught us what were the actual formulas which described the world. Heading into upper division, however, the balance of information shifted. It was acceptable to most that there were certain universal constants that happened to be there (ex: g, R), and the annoyance of conversions between metric and imperial was probably only something Americans had to deal with, but once the modified formulas and tables were introduced into regular usage, views dimmed. Where once it was expected that all necessary information was given by the problem (save for those constants and annoyances), now it’s a given that you had to look up values yourself. Some have justified this to themselves by saying this is what real engineers do, nobody will so conveniently give the values you happen to need to you, but they’re not too happy about it. The big tests were once always about whether they “understood” the formula and could recognize that the situation called for certain combinations in certain orders; minor errors were “whatever, I’ll get most of the points”. Now, the accident of an incorrect sign here and the wrong value read off of the table of a thousand values there costs the grade.

But the greatest intellectual concern is the modified formulas. In quantum physics, we learned what the “cutting edge” of science really meant – the jamming in of arbitrary combinations of constants and mathematical forms until it fit the data. In thermodynamics the great ideal gas equation was struck down, replaced with modified versions, citing that we need “more accurate” models of how gasses work. At that point, it didn’t really matter that the reasons behind the new models included the attraction of gas molecules and the fact that they take up space. “More accurate”? That’s equivalent to saying that the previous model was at worst a lie and at best a toy, something for us to play with until we grew up and truly were capable of seeing how the world worked. If it’s truth, we should be able to see all the factors beforehand and make the model off of that. And above all, we should be using a model.

Why is it suddenly accepted that solving with a formula and givens is equivalent to just using some table?

__________________

About this “love at first sight” thing… it happened in Aoyama on May 22nd, didn’t it, Misa?
Yes. (was crying)
Why did you go to Aoyama on that day? What did you wear?
I told you, I just happened to go there. How many times have I told you? I don’t really remember how I felt that day or what I wore! Is it so wrong for me to be hanging out in Aoyama without a reason? (defiant)
So when you came back from Aoyama, you were in love with Light and knew his name.
Yes.
You don’t even know how you knew his name.
Yes, that’s right. (increasingly defiant)
Then, how would you feel if Light was Kira?
Huh? If Light was Kira?
That’s right.
That would be wonderful~! I’ve always been grateful to Kira for punishing the man who murdered my parents. If Light were Kira, I’d love him more… though I love him so much already!
We’re talking about Kira here. You’d love him even more? Don’t you feel afraid at all?
That’s supposing if Light is Kira, right? He’s not scary at all. I’m one of those people who accept Kira. I’d think of ways I could help him.
You’d probably get in his way rather than help him… according to this, there’s no mistake that you are the Second Kira, but it’s so clear-cut that I don’t want to believe it.

– L to Amane Misa, Death Note

__________________

I got hit by a car.

That is correct English, I think. The car was in the wrong, therefore “I got hit”.

A car turned right into me. Turned right, into me. I was thinking about how I was about to get run over when I saw a black plane angling into my line of motion, and was facing the sky when my brain returned to my eyes. A couple of bystanders helped me get up and sit to the side, and the driver got out. Five things were deformed: my saddle, my left brake, my rear wheel, my glasses, and her passenger mirror. I had apparently sheared it off. She apologized, and said she’d do what she could for me. I asked for her name and phone number. We parted ways.

After telling a friend about what happened, he recommended that I file a police report. I better do it before she does it and claims I was at fault, and soon so I can get the CCTV footage from the stores nearby. My dad gave a similar recommendation, though he was more focused on how I lacked all the “most basic” information: drivers license, license plate, insurance information. How could I track her if I only had a cell phone number and a first name? Cell phones mean nothing these days, drop one and pick up another like it’s change on the sidewalk. Other friends suggested I start a case on this, pointing that it’s not only negligence but also a hate crime. She also took up my time, didn’t she? Job searching, training, the race I was planning on going to that weekend, study time – this stuff can be valued at least at the minimum unemployed wage. Extort, extort, extort! was the theme. You can’t trust people in this world. You have to take precautions. And at this point, your best option is to screw her for all she’s got. You missed your best chance – “I went from 15mph to 0 in 1 second, do you really expect me to be thinking straight?” – but do everything you can.

But when I called the number, she picked up. Every time I called, she picked up. She gave more information, as I asked for it. The next day, I told her an estimate of the total damages – not taking into account repair costs, since I knew how to fix it and I had free access to the necessary tools. She wanted to keep this off the record, and I said it was fine as long as I get what’s reasonable. Then, the next week, she paid it. When we met, outside of not being able to form a tight fist with my right hand (middle knuckle), all other visible body evidence had healed.

Everyone seemed half-disappointed, but also half-relieved.

__________________

This is called the Baconian linear model, after the philosopher of science Francis Bacon; I am adapting its representation by the scientist Terence Kealey (who, crucially, as a biochemist, is a practicing scientist, not a historian of science) as follows:

Academia -> Applied Science and Technology -> Practice

While this model may be valid in some very narrow (but highly advertised instances), such as building the atomic bomb, the exact reverse seems to be true in most of the domains I’ve examined. Or, at least, this model is not guaranteed to be true, and, what is shocking, we have no rigorous evidence that it is true. It may be that academia helps science and technology, which in turn help practice, but in unintended, non-teleological ways, as we will see later (in other words, it is directed research that may well be an illusion).

Let us return to the metaphor of the birds. Think of the following event: A collection of hieratic persons (from Harvard or some such place) lecture birds on how to fly. Imagine bald males in their sixties, dressed in black robes, officiating in a form of English that is full of jargon, with equations here and there for good measure. The bird flies. Wonderful confirmation! They rush to the department of ornithology to write books, articles, and reports saying that the bird has obeyed them, an impeccable causal reference. The Harvard Department of Ornithology is now indispensable for bird flying. It will get government research funds for its contribution.

Mathematics -> Ornithological navigation and wing-flapping technologies -> (ungrateful) birds fly

It also happens that birds write no such paper and books, conceivably because they are just birds, so we never get their side of the story. Meanwhile, the priests keep broadcasting theirs to the new generation of humans who are completely unaware of the conditions of the pre-Harvard lecturing days. Nobody discusses the possibility of the birds’ not needing lectures – and nobody has any incentive to look at the number of birds that fly without such help from the great scientific establishment.

The problem is that what I wrote above looks ridiculous, but a change of domain makes it look reasonable. Clearly, we never think that it is thanks to ornithologists that birds learn to fly – and if some people do hold such a belief, it would be hard for them to convince the birds. But why is it that when we anthropomorphize and replace “birds” with “men,” the idea that people learn to do things thanks to lectures becomes plausible? When it comes to human agency, matters suddenly become confusing to us.

Antifragile

__________________

“Yeah, I thought it was simple too. What did you do?”

“Well, it asked for yield stress at that point, which has a formula we all know already. The only thing different from the things we’ve seen before is that this time, he added a weight of the tank or capsule on top. So obviously, yield pressure is just the normal thing from internal pressure plus the pressure created by the weight, which is weight divided by the area.”

“That’s what I did, but he said it was wrong.”

“And how is that?”

“If you draw a force diagram of everything above the point, you’ll note that there are two forces: there’s the internal pressure pushing up, and the weight pushing down. So while there is a second term, it’s not as simple as weight divided by area. It’s integral of internal pressure pushing up on that hemisphere minus that weight.”

“Interesting. I guess that’s reasonable too.

__________________

In the end, it doesn’t matter if you understand. It doesn’t matter if you were there at the right time and the right place, that you chose using dice, that you chose having access to all of the world’s collected information and had no disturbances with all needs provided for and half a decade’s time, that you wanted the other guy to die, that you were going to your wife giving birth, that you were drunk, that you had so many other things planned. It doesn’t, in the strictest sense, and thus the most true sense, matter whether you are able to articulate your ideas to some arbitrary level of clarity or to some arbitrary group of people, or whether you’re able to use language at all.

It only matters whether you win.

__________________

Personally, I believe the most important thing in life is being able to take advantage of an opportunity whenever it may come. If one manages that, one can bring about positive results through later effort. However, effort alone is not guaranteed to bring about such opportunities. Those opportunities will not wait for people to be ready. If you want to accomplish something… there will be times when you must make decisions, whether or not you are prepared for them.

-Tsukuyomi Mana, Muv-Luv

They let me pick, did I ever tell you that? Choose whichever Spartan I wanted. You know me. I did my research. Watched as you became the soldier we needed you to be. Like the others, you were strong and swift and brave. A natural leader. But you had something they didn’t. Something no one saw… but me. Can you guess?

Luck.

-Cortana, Halo 3

The Fatal Conceit (Long Ver.)

I’ve always joked with friends about how I might actually live a happy life if I just moved into some rural town and became a fisherman or a farmer. Though I had not anywhere near clarified the things I see now about families and teams, that was my reasoning: if I went and lived in such sparsely populated areas, surely I would have better friends? There was no understanding. It was simply blind belief. When I learned of the concept of Dunbar’s number, it only reinforced that belief. If you can only recognize 150 people as actors and not environment, then clearly, cities in the hundreds of thousands of people overload your sensibilities.

The argument that cities should therefore be ~150 or fewer people didn’t make sense though. While I hated New York City, it wasn’t because I had read somewhere that it was a city of who knows how many digits. I really didn’t care that I didn’t know any of them either. Being the only person you know out of a crowd does not actually make me feel uncomfortable. Indeed, strictly comparing the best of all worlds, it feels much better around lots of people than it is alone, or only with a group of friends. Certainly there are crowds I do not like in the slightest.

But given the best case scenario, I prefer being amongst more than less.

I’ve spent time in fantasy worlds lately, all of your fairly standard recognizable “feudal” style world. A couple of games, a couple of books, a couple of TV series – all with their differing premises, yet all depicted in worlds before “technology”. Stone walled cities, cobble-stoned streets, narrow curved alleys; barrels of furs, covered wagons of various goods, tavern cellars; young maids flirting with a long table of dock workers after a rainy day, lonely merchants in the land between civilizations, a wide and uncharted world. In this kind of story, the cities are truly the best. There is no better place to be, for here is where all activities of all kinds meet. People came to the city from it to see the sights – the festivals, the amazing crafts and foods of guildsmen, the stories and gossip at tavern, the goods and artifacts from distant lands.

In stories which take place “after” such a medieval setting, people dream about leaving the city. It doesn’t matter if they have a family/team or not, one could be the father or mother of five or a member in a squad of twelve for sports or military, the ideal place to go is in “the wilds”. It could be camping, going to a beach in some foreign country, or to a ski resort. There is no particular desire to actually stay where we go when we vacate our regular position; it’s even thought about as only a “getaway”. Whatever it may be, it is chosen from a sense more familiar to us today: a dislike of the busybodying of a multitude of nobodies. Or, for the more even tempered: a way to relax.

“A way to relax” however is exactly why people of fantasy desire to join the city. Guarded gates, easy access to water, and any good you’d ever potentially want or need basically at your fingertips. It matters not if you are a simple artisan or the head of a rich trading company, whether you have many connections or few, the fact is that with the correct connections or amount of gold, you could get that obscure thing you needed to heal the humor you contracted. In the villages or on the road, whatever financial power or number of influential people you knew mattered not, for there was no way to get you what you needed when you needed it. You cannot call for State Farm roadside help to get a jump or a tire. There are no such things as helicopters which can lift you and your broken leg out of an inaccessible ravine. If a wheel on your wagon broke and you can’t replace it, you better hope you can carry your cargo on your horse and your back; if you’re snowed in a cave in the mountains, pray to God that you stay warm enough to not lose your feet. In the city, people could get you what you need. Where there are people there is material, and where there are materials there are possibilities. Today it is not “people can get me what I need” but rather “people can get me what I need“.

And while there are certainly busybody types in these fantasy worlds, they are simply that – a certain type of person. A curious exception. Only a very few people could afford to be good friends with no one and still survive -(tax collectors and sons of royalty are the obvious examples). The general rule, however, is that everyone has to be a someone to many others. Everyone knows this, and the lack of a universal belief that most people are busybodies allows for many fluid and ultimately living overlays, regardless of if you are a stranger or not. If you can believe that any random person (excluding obvious wanted posters, carrying of a spike with human skulls, and other taboos) has THIS same need that you do, you would be inclined to help them with any need they might have. It would be a given to you that they would repay your debt at least once over and spread tales of your benevolence or hospitality, for you would do the same in their position: the greatest repayment someone can give in a world where people are the most important is putting in a good word for them. This not only turns two strangers into two acquaintances, but raises yourself as well, for those who heard your tale are more likely to believe your words – and thus future requests. It’s a wonderful world.

You are not inclined to begin any step of this process if you believe everyone – regardless if you recognize them or not –  is a busybody, a no one; when you believe the world is not full of wonder, but of guaranteed occurrences.

That’s why I hate cities. It is not because [I see]/[there are] too many people, but because [I see]/[there are] too few.

I think it isn’t a coincidence that all the stories where the urban city is a wonderful place occur in a time where machines are not present.  Or, to put it more precisely, there is no automation. All machines are either in direct control or nearly out of control of humans – the carriage needs to be manned, the windmill depends on the wind; high quality flour and a well-built oven means nothing without the chef, a ship can always be lost at sea. Man always had to be vigilant to hold his ground against the forces of nature and chance, and even then it was up to the Gods whether or not he succeeded.

But with the advent of automated machines came mechanism. Suddenly, the arts of alchemy were no longer mystical – they were givens. It’s a given that the watermill has this amount of power all the time. It’s a given that this engine will produce heat. It’s a given that with the pull of this lever, all these amazing things will happen The posit was that everything can be understood in terms of its components, each relation a process. Is that not how we understand people today? “Incentives” and “Rewards”? It’s not as if humans have never used logic and exploited advantages until the invention of the steam engine, but today we exclusively use “logic” to the point where people pride themselves on being “rational”. We talk about requiring “new evidence” and avoiding “logical fallacies” like everybody was dreamwalking right up until the scientific revolution and the enlightenment.

And yet, that’s exactly what we say about ourselves today. As much as people like to take dumps on the dark ages, they can never bring themselves to complete a depiction of those times as equivalent to apes throwing stones at birds and at each other. It is always shown as great wars with great warriors, fighting for honor, their homeland, and their families – or for the less gore-intensive, the lively and bustling city. What do we write about our own time? Zombie stories. About the future? Smoggy skies, dirty skyscrapers, crowded and lonely streets. “Correlation not causation”?

Science has always been used in one form or another for continual improvement of various activities, but it is only after mechanism where its attitude changed. One can talk about needing more facts and numbers, but it can easily mean something very different from another saying the same thing. What kinds of facts? How many numbers? The fact that these questions seem trivial and irrelevant is what spells out the cause of failure: for all its correction mechanisms, science ultimately requires some one to correct it.  It is a manned action, and the quality of its results are inevitably tied to the wielder’s skill.

But no longer. Once a belief theory is made, we believe it will just correct itself. That’s the point isn’t it? That’s why we believe know this is better than all the other superstitious and voodoo stuff out there. So long as people eat food according to this pyramid, say these things in a politically correct manner and act in such a way according to the television, everything will be perfect and fine. The self-proclaimed enlightened talk about how the religious will always try to fit whatever evidence there is into a prexisting dogma, and talk about how they’re “open minded”. What they actually are is lazy-minded, or rather, non-minded.

That’s funny, loving couples are disappearing “divorce rates” are going up. I wonder what’s causing that. No one understands the joy of having children “Birth rates” are declining and children aren’t respecting their elders. Interesting. I walked miles to school, didn’t graduate high school, worked my whole life, and am fine. But my son hasn’t done any of that. I guess science and statistics will explain that.

Eventually. “They” will probably get around to it sometime before mankind goes extinct. But that’s okay. As long as the truth is found.

Someone thought of some system where the behaviors of people can be explained in XYZ manners, and everyone adopted it because it fulfilled some condition. But it remains in everyone’s way of understanding and operating with the world, because it hasn’t “been shown conclusively to be inaccurate”, and all attacks against it are “not substantiated” or have [insert logical fallacy here]. It doesn’t matter if you and I and whoever’s army feels that something about civilization is declining, that something has been lost, that the numbers are telling us something. It’s just “narrative” and “personal anecdotes”.

Meanwhile, this is why the world ends.