I often posit that people don't just live their lives in a void, just following some internal guide, but that we live our lives as a story, and implicitly or even explicitly modeled on an external story that we have, over time, internalized.
This is why some stories are so powerful, and why we tell stories and fairy tales and myths to ourselves and to our children -- these stories are lives encapsulated and give us guidelines and themes, some of which we will identify with and begin to live ourselves.
I don't expect anybody here is going to run off into the woods trailing bread crumbs, to ultimately fend off an evil witch to avoid being cooked alive. A lot of the stories we tell are not literal at all, but metaphorical; not true in a facts sense, but true in a heart sense.
And, like the air to the bird and the water to the fish, we may be intimately familiar with our lives, and with stories in general, but we may not connect that our lives are in fact echoes of these stories, and who we are in our life is also our role in that story.
People just are who they are... or that's how it sometimes seems. But some people also notice that they have choices in how they live, and can step outside of their skin and storyline from time to time, to observe and guide themselves into perhaps a better storyline. Maybe in this storyline they don't have to get eaten by the wolf, maybe they can jump over and hang with the lady in her shoe instead.
Or something. It's late. You'll get over the pain of my examples soon enough.
Another interesting point is that everyone is the hero in their story. Darth Maul? Al Capone? Prince Humperdink? Yeah, in his mind, he is doing what needs to be done, and he's the hero of his particular story. Think about it...if you could do better with your life, you would! But forces, internal and external, shape you and guide you, and at each step you make the best decisions you can, heroically or otherwise, even if the outcomes don't always match your desires. If you could have done better, you WOULD have; and maybe next time you will, with the wisdom of experience and the example of hindsight. And, sometimes, with a little help from your friends.
I know I personally wonder about some people who seem to go out of their way to be conscious and unrepentant dicks... but who knows what is really going on in their heads? In some way, it makes sense to them.
Now, what about a person who loses the sense of their character; maybe the writer was too ambitious with them and just lost control over the plotline; or things just up and exploded and all of a sudden, poof! They don't know their role in the plot anymore.
What a terribly disconcerting place that would be... with no internal sense of what decisions to make, what directions to go, what value they add and what complications they might contribute to the plot. It would become quite the imperative for them to find a comfortable role again, to fit themselves in to the big picture somehow. But what if all the good roles are taken? Or if stress is making it difficult to play anything but a bit part, a character actor at best, or "man in black shirt, mob scene 3"? What an ignominious thing....
Anyway, I sure as hell hope my author gets his act together soon. Or, um, for that anonymous hypothetical person. Yeah.
Ahh Stress -- we all know it, none of us probably love it, and yet it won't ever entirely go away. Of course, there isn't just the bad stress that we associate with the word such as having your truck die or running into some other unfortunate or expensive challenge, there is also "good" stress like marriage or buying a new car -- any huge change, in fact, can create stress.
Now, there is stress and there is STRESS. A little squeeze is good, like noticing that a deadline is fast approaching; it can get the creative juices flowing, brush away minor distractions, and help one focus on the important task at hand.
A big squeeze on the ole' brain is not so good. I make a living by my mind (yes, scary thought, isn't it?) and while some of my tasks can be done by rote and without much thought, most of them require a certain mental capacity. And it's because of this that I notice when my brain is working, or not working, and in what way.
Now, as a flashback, I note my childhood was full of all kinds of stress, and as a child I had certain parts of my memory that just didn't work, I assume not from an inherent dysfunction, but via the pressures applied by stress. Mapping, for example, and tracking silly things like people's names. Gone!
When I'm relaxed and refreshed, these parts of my mind work -- but they are still the first to vanish when I'm tired, hungry, or stressed.
As the pressure builds I notice my focus going from an expansive grasp of a wide range of ideas, plans, and tasks, down and down into a narrow little pinch on maybe one task right in front of me, if even that, as long as I don't have to think about it too much.
Every time it happens, I remember the story Flowers for Algernon, and worry that maybe this time it's Alzheimer's or Old Age or a Brain Tumor, but no, it's probably just stress.
I like being able to track several projects at once, to have enthusiasm for my hobbies which makes my job all that more manageable as well, to be able to organize and write and plan and execute. When these skills begin to vanish under a cloud of anxiety and overload, I miss them, and wonder what I'd be like as a potato on the couch and if I could live with myself that way. I also have dreams of escape, of vanishing and finding a miraculous world where this stress doesn't exist anymore... knowing full well that the stress would not only follow me but would be compounded by any such drastic change.
But still, there are times when I sure can't see my way to the light at the end of the coal pit.
I like being able to organize complex systems in my head and then create them, to find a path (even if it's not the best or cleanest path) through the bramble of a complex problem, and it worries me greatly when I can't. Someday maybe it will be Alzheimer's or Old Age or a Brain Tumor, but not yet, okay? I have things to do still, and people to teach.
Fortunately, stress doesn't last forever... maybe the glands get worn out, or maybe I actually make progress through the stressors and work things out... and I start to get my brain and motivation back. In fits and starts, perhaps, and then in larger chunks, but I see it. Maybe this isn't a coal pit after all, but maybe a copper mine... or with luck, gold.
We'll see.
Of course, this fresh baby brain of mine, newly dipped in the acid bath of a an infinitely long stressful period (so it seems), has to be handled with care. Not too many projects, not too many demands. Like that smurf I need to melt... he can wait. But some things, okay? Some things need doing.
So I poke at them and watch my mind for more signs of life.
Of course, I'm not done with stress yet... but with any luck, it will get better. Until then, maybe someone will get me a GPS mapping unit for my birthday.
I didn't used to see myself as a patient person, but something I was told the other month made me re-evaluate that... they said that (in the context of teaching) I was the most patient person they knew. Blew my mind... me? Patient? Hah!
But then I thought about it and yes, I was patient, amazingly so, when it came to people. In other contexts not so much -- my phone died on me yesterday and my first instinct was to dash it against the ground until all the pieces flew out.
And also, with machines, I can be patient too - fixing wifi, debugging code, a huge number of my vocational (and sometimes avocational) tasks require, absolutely DEMAND, that I slow down and work carefully through the problem.
Maybe I've simply learned how to take things slowly, to work on each detail as it comes up and not try to rush through it, simply because I have to, to be a computer programmer.
I feel that part of my success is because I keep my eye on the ultimate goal at all times -- what is it I want to achieve from this interaction? And then I can evaluate my instincts and responses against that goal.
When I am working with people, I think of it like this -- would I rather be RIGHT, or would I rather be FRIENDS? If I feel someone needs correcting, or informing, or adjusting -- do I want to go about this task with the goal of being right and feeling justified, or do I want to approach it in a way that keeps that person a friend, that doesn't do damage to them?
Likewise, if someone is getting all up in my nose about something (justified or not), do I want to put up my armour and assume a fighting stance, smack 'em around a bit to show 'em who they are messing with? Or will my long-term goal for the relationship be better served by slowing down, rolling with the punches, and then taking the time to work out a more measured response?
Yeah, sometimes it means being humble when I'd much rather be aggressive; I'm good at aggressive, and I have a vicious repartee when I choose to use it; and I've used it in the past... and usually regretted it. I LIKE to fight, I enjoy a tussle, but I try to keep my battles to the death in the realm of projects and inanimate objects, and not with my friends and associates.
Because I really like my friends and, while we have difference of approach or opinion from time to time, I'd rather keep them as friends rather than be "right" a lot and then have to find new ones.
"It's not my fault, I didn't mean to!"
Need I say more?
Probably. Okay, think about it; these two statements DO NOT GO TOGETHER.
"I didn't mean to!" is a statement of intent, of will. But whether you MEANT to or NOT, if your dog bites the man, your camp fire or flicked cigarette butt burns down the forest, or you drunkenly run into a school bus full of children...
... it may still be YOUR FAULT. Own up to it, learn from it, and move on.
In fact, if you never own up to fault, you won't learn or grow, you'll be stuck as an irresponsible, useless person; a child in adult skin. That does nobody any favors.
Fault and Intent are not dependent conditions.
You wish your horrible gym teacher were dead and... he gets run over by a school bus full of drunken football players. Was it your fault? You meant for it to happen! But if you didn't drive the bus, or push the teacher, then no... the causality between wishing and events is a form of magical thinking that, sadly or fortunately, is not true.
Likewise, the disavowal of fault because of intent is the reverse form. Your intent may be as pure as the driven snow, but still, when your game of William Tell puts an arrow through your little brother's eye... it's your fault. Sucks, doesn't it?
And, of course, sometimes it is nobody's fault, but that is a different discussion about our crazy, litigation-happy society, where people think it has to be someone's, anyone's, fault... but their own.
Because, after all, they didn't "mean to".
"It's not my fault, I didn't mean to!"
Need I say more?
Probably. Okay, think about it; these two statements DO NOT GO TOGETHER.
"I didn't mean to!" is a statement of intent, of will. But whether you MEANT to or NOT, if your dog bites the man, your camp fire or flicked cigarette butt burns down the forest, or you drunkenly run into a school bus full of children...
... it may still be YOUR FAULT. Own up to it, learn from it, and move on.
In fact, if you never own up to fault, you won't learn or grow, you'll be stuck as an irresponsible, useless person; a child in adult skin. That does nobody any favors.
Fault and Intent are not dependent conditions.
You wish your horrible gym teacher were dead and... he gets run over by a school bus full of drunken football players. Was it your fault? You meant for it to happen! But if you didn't drive the bus, or push the teacher, then no... the causality between wishing and events is a form of magical thinking that, sadly or fortunately, is not true.
Likewise, the disavowal of fault because of intent is the reverse form. Your intent may be as pure as the driven snow, but still, when your game of William Tell puts an arrow through your little brother's eye... it's your fault. Sucks, doesn't it?
And, of course, sometimes it is nobody's fault, but that is a different discussion about our crazy, litigation-happy society, where people think it has to be someone's, anyone's, fault... but their own.
Because, after all, they didn't "mean to".
I haven’t posted in a long time! Been busy, been relieving some of the pressure on Twitter, been tired...
Before the meat, some garnishes:
Twitter: EdwinWiseOne, that’s me.
Projects: This and that:
* Cypress CY8C21343: MCU for a smart LED/timer/controller base for the haunt.
* New Wiki: being written from scratch (DotWiki, to be at ctdwiki.com, plus tags&links database to refactor the internet. Right now the placeholder version is slow, incomplete, and slow)
* New Website: to be put at makerbrain.com (placeholder for now), to be an outlet for my creativity. And I may even monetize it.
* New articles: in Make Magazine -- issue 18 should be, and I’ve got a bunch over the last year or so as well.
* Day job: boring, may get better, but employment is never as fun as projects. How to make projects pay?
* Haunted House: work in progress
So now on with the pedantry... Mental Models!
The old saying “seeing is believing” is wrong; it would be more accurate to say “believing is seeing”. Input from your senses passes through various circuits and scratchpads and goodness knows what in your brain, where it is collected, analyzed, abstracted, associated, and turned into symbol representations of the raw data -- which in turn are stored, manipulated, combined, forgotten, ignored, reprocessed, interpreted, and then sent back out into the world as decisions and actions.
Input -> processing -> action. It’s the old robotics control loop! Ahh, good times.
What is interesting is that our imagination, our visualization and memory retrieval processes, use many of these same circuits, but in the other direction. We hallucinate our expectations into the circuitry and these hallucinations (er, expectations) facilitate our data acquisition.
Think coke, drink milk. Look for an object but “see” it the wrong size, shape, or color (which I do all the freakin’ time by accident). Listen to yourself on a recording (where the expectation of what you sound like comes from hearing yourself inside your head, which is entirely different than what you really sound like).
In a very real sense, we invent our own reality, and what we expect to experience colors what we actually experience. It’s like a filter on a lens -- the filter does not create a new image, but it changes how we see what is there. My own model of it is as a grid that is in place, a mental grid, and all incoming information tries to snap to the corners of that grid. Things that just don’t fit ... fall through. They don’t seem to make sense, and like other noise and distractions, they are discarded.
This grid-model is also reflected in a number of computing models of intelligence, such as the old-school Hebbian learning model, where input is (essentially) clustered by statistical association and then acts as a template to classify new input. See also the more recent, though different, support vector machines (which I haven’t worked with).
I have to interject here and say that this “mental grid” is not a “real” thing but it is an abstraction, a map, a tool that I am using to make a point. It is also a model, in that it can be applied to make predictions, it can be tested to see how well it works against experience, and so forth. If I wanted to prove or disprove it, I would have to restate it as a theory and devise ways to show how accurate its predictions are... that’s science! If I do a really detailed job of it, it’s not only science but a graduate degree, but I digress. I’m not doing science here, and even though this “mental grid” model makes no claims at representing anything real, I still find it to be useful in thinking about thought.
You, with your rectilinear mental grid (for example) come across a person whose mental grid is based on a hexagonal tiling... both of you see the same world, but the pieces that survive your interpretation will in some cases be entirely different than the pieces that survive their interpretation. You have constructed different realities to match your disparate experiences, training, expectations, random chance, and biological variation.
The person who believes in ghosts lives in a different reality than the hard-boiled sceptic. Someone who really, honestly lives in a world of cause and effect with no supernatural infrastructure will interpret and decide differently than a truly religious believer.
Any form of mental grid loses information, but there is TOO MUCH information to be able to cope with without the grid. You have to filter it and assign abstract meaning in ways that make sense... and, in the long run, you have to interpret and filter in ways that allow you to make more children who will then (due to being raised in your context, trained by you both explicitly and implicitly) carry forward your way of thinking. Or, in my case, write books or stories or blog entries that try to do the same.
Yes, children rebel and explore and break away from their parent’s mold... but completely? Every time? If you were born and raised Christian, it is going to be very difficult to switch over to Islam, or Satanism. There will be concepts that you were exposed to at a very fundamental level that will sit uncomfortably in your mind, regardless of what you intellectually think is true or untrue.
Of course we change, we adapt, we re-train ourselves. But think statistically again. Ways of viewing the world and methods of organizing and filtering our sensory and experiential inputs are spread in the same way as our genes are, down from the parents and through the generations. The ideas that have the most utility at PRESERVING THEMSELVES will carry farther and longer. These are not necessarily the ideas that have the most confluence with physical reality, or even sensible expectations of how things work or how people “should” behave.
Unlike our genetics, however, our minds and our ideas can (not “do” but “can”) change with time, and better ideas can propagate out and infect the people around you. A really good idea can change the world, and this has happened again and again. A really good idea can come from anyone, though exposure to the idea is necessary for it to travel very far beyond your own skull.
Take, for example, the Cherry Poppin’ Daddies. An excellent band from my adopted home town of Eugene, but no matter how great they were, it took ten years to go from being a local band to having any impact on the national scene. Growth tends to start slow and then get exponential... but growth is also done against many other bands (ideas) that are competing for the same limited resources.
My writing this journal entry is exposing this idea of the Mental Grid that I got from my father to a larger audience. If it affects the way you consider the world or your own mental landscape, then this idea will have spread a little bit more (in pure form, or mutated based on your own interpretation, it doesn’t matter) and will have a little more life in it.
This mental grid is, if you squint just right, like a street map, a high-level view of your set of mental models (which, in this cartographical analogy, could be houses. Or roads. Or something).
You have mental models of everything in your experience. You have to! That’s what we do. We see something, we categorize it, and from that category we have an instant set of expectations. See that thing over there (that brick, that house, that puddle, that stinky hippy, that uppity yuppie, that soccer mom)? What will happen if you shoot a bullet at it? Apply electricity? Kick it? Light a fire under it? Tell it you are a democrat? Tax it? Feed it hummus? Cover it in patchouli?
In many cases our mental model returns a nil result to a query... it doesn’t cover that case so you get a mental shrug of the shoulders. But if pressed hard enough, you would come up with an answer. Because that’s what we do. NOT KNOWING doesn’t mean we don’t still have a model for the context, it’s just incomplete. Or, in some cases, the question is just irrelevant to the object in question: what happens when you kick air? (okay, I have enough of a mental model of both feet and air that I have a decent answer to this... but I hope that my suck-ass example doesn’t detract from the point).
Our mental models both liberate us (I can get behind the wheel of any ordinary motorized vehicle and make it go) and shackle us (if you believe you can’t do something, you might not even try).
How can our models shackle us? Take, for example, Technology. Computers. Maybe your fancy new laptop with all the bells and whistles that you researched and purchased, and filled with exciting new games and software.
Plop it down in front of Grandma, open up Telnet, or Eagle Schematic Layout, or World of Warcraft or whatever complex aspect of your machine you are familiar with. Many Grandmas will see it and drop the whole thing, laptop and all, into their model of “fancy technology stuff that I don’t understand and am no good at.” End of story.
I don’t want to pick on Grandma, specifically, and the poor dear is an overused model anyway. Drop me in front of an engine , give me a set of wrenches, and tell me to advance the timing on the valves (or perhaps refill the blinker fluid). I’ll give you a blank stare and reach for Google, to look up a mechanic.
When your mental model for something is just a black box (see also this black box) then you tend to mash the subject of the model a few times with your fists, shake this fist at the heavens in frustration, and then throw your hands up in despair... it’s beyond you, you don’t understand it, and doesn’t work, it’s stupid, and why the hell would I care anyway?
Anger, frustration, dismissal. We all have a self image at being competent. In something, somewhere, somehow, we have a shiny nugget of self worth and value. And when we fail at something, our nugget tarnishes, and we work out strategies (right or wrong, sensible or not) to put the shine back on. Those strategies often involve devaluing the thing that caused the tarnish (see also, for example, this excellent book on cognitive dissonance).
This is part of a trend I see in the US (I would say “current trend” but it was there when I was young) to demonize the smart and the capable, the makers and thinkers, the philosopher and the mechanic (not to imply that mechanics are not philosophers or that makers are not also thinkers). The nail that sticks up gets pounded down. Heck, look to China’s not-so-distant “cultural revolution” and wonder what they were thinking. It’s not just us, it’s everyone; people don’t like to be made to feel small, stupid, or incapable.
What does this have to do with mental models, anyway?
Going back to the engine and the blank stare, for example. I have a basic model of what an engine does, and I know pretty much all of the major components (I think), but I lack any functional knowledge of how to fix, adjust, build from scratch, or even take apart such a thing. Hence, the blank stare when given the task.
What I _do_ have is a model of how to learn, of how to discover things that are unknown (debugging, the scientific method, curiosity, and obstinence are all strategies that can aid discovery), and I have a general idea of “how things work.”
That means that, given a strong enough need (strong enough to overcome my other immediate needs, like the need to sit on my ass and drink a beer, my need to exercise, or to do any of my other hundred projects) I would be able to make progress on the engine problem. I know how to break the task down, how to work through careful steps, the mental attitude required to do intricate work (e.g. slow, careful, and patient). I know how to curb my usual frustration when things go wrong or slowly, and so on and on. Not all of these pieces are the same kind of skill: some of them are emotional skills, some are intellectual; some are muscle skills; some are just from experience.
But what about your crazy girlfriend (or boyfriend) from when you were seventeen? What would they do? Could they break the problem down and make it work? How about your mom? Sibling? That one boss or co-worker who can’t seem to even figure out how the coffee machine works? How would they approach fixing an engine, or debugging a piece of code, or analyzing the timing on a new piece of hardware?
And, more important, what is your reaction when faced with the unknown, with the difficult, with the task that is beyond your reach?
The ability to approach difficult and unknown tasks is an important skill, and it is grounded in your mental models; your model of HOW to do things, and your model of WHO YOU ARE; your skills, your abilities, your emotional reactions (which I think are as much trained as they are innate), and so on. Just because your mental model says you suck at (for example) Math or Electronics or Engine Repair does not mean that it is a true model (because all models have faults), or that it can’t be changed (because nothing is truly unchangeable).
It’s easy to take our own expectations and beliefs at face value, and to limit ourselves to what we think is possible (or easy, if you are lazy). Part of our limiting mental models are grounded how we were rewarded as children, and how these rewards (and expectations) are stated -- are you rewarded for being smart or good at something, or at the work it took to attain it? Did you ever find reward intrinsic in a task, or was it all external? Were you ever challenged to do hard things, or was “lack of talent” an easy fallback? It is easy to fall back on the crutch of “oh, I can’t do that, I have no talent for it.”
Talent is, in no small part, a lie. Sure, some people are GREAT at something, and apparently with no effort. Scratch the surface, though, and in many (most?) cases you’ll find someone who sucked at the task at first but then got better through hard work and diligence.
On a related note, making things (and especially completing things) is hard, surprisingly so in light of the actual work involved in them (see, for example, The Courage to Create)
This brings me, the long (long!) way ‘round to the subject of the Maker community, and the spirit of Making. I think that being immersed in a world where people actually DO stuff and MAKE things, no matter what these things are, from crafts to complex machinery, helps you think of yourself as a capable human, able to do more than consume like good little citizens.
Making is Revolution, and changing the way you look at the world, from passive to active, is the first step.
Oh, and exercise more. Your body is your friend; if nothing else, it carries your mind around for you.
Oh yeah, those atheists, violating all of God's laws, of course our country and much of this world is collapsing around us.
I mean, how can the natural order operate with such Godless behavior everywhere; not to mention, it's just undignified. I feel sick when I even think about the Babylonian excesses these people get up to. I fear for the punishment that will be handed down to us... soon, I fear. Soon.
For example, gravity. Gravity is a law I can get behind, and it just makes sense; but here we have people, sometimes even deemed to be heros, "astronauts", recklessly floating above the land in frank denial of one of the fundamental laws handed down to us from on high.
And let's not even talk about airplanes; those infernal devices may pretend to follow the laws, but really, they are just flaunting our secular ingenuity, a sure rise of hubris just as surely to be followed by a fall.
Then there is the speed of light. But modern "scientists", who choose to ignore the limits and regulations that govern all of life, try to flaunt even this vital cornerstone of our universe -- just recently, in fact, they used "entangled" photons (a perversion of the light if I ever heard of one) to "see" an object without even seeing it properly, as God intended. One of the photons was sent out to a mask of a toy figure, and the other one, immorally entwined with the first, was detected and used to fill in details at a distant site. A thousand such pairs were used, building an image of the mask using poor innocent photons who had never even touched the source image.
Indeed, things are in dire straits.
Atheists, of course, are at the heart of it all -- without the constant threat of divine wrath and eternal suffering, they run rampant, causing horrible immoral acts that are bent on destroying the very fabric of our nation.
Bob, for example, to pick one prominent atheist. Fearing no eternal damnation, no divine paranoia or forced external conformance to arbitrary laws via the interpretation of those who decide they are his betters, well, I'm sure he is out there eating babies and fornicating with unclean creatures (and I don't mean Mo; Mo bathes regularly, I hear).
Doubtless. For how could any person be a good person, or find their way to feel sympathy for and cooperate with their fellow man, if they didn't feel coerced to do so by some overwhelming, over-arching father figure, poised to mete out harsh punishments at any arbitrary transgression?
As a people, as a nation, there is no need for us to grow up and take responsibility for our lives, like aduls; such a suggestion is laughable, and even perverse! We, in a fine tradition, need, deserve even, a Father figure to guide us, to think for us, to tell us how to feel and how to live. I mean, to move beyond the level of a four year old, to think for ourselves, and to make decisions based on empathy and a desire for a greater good? That is crazy talk! People won't ever do that! Better for them to be treated as children, or sheep, and to herd them and guide them with threats of torment and promises of some future reward. After all, it's for their own good.
It's worked so well so far. The Catholic Church, to take one example, has shown themselves to reflect the perfection of God that they claim, all through their history; Galileo, the inquisition, the crusades, the stance of "breed as much as you can and don't worry about the consequences"; all of these were part of a divine, and unimpeachable plan.
And our current government leadership, all very devout Christians, religious to a fault, and ardent proclaimers of their belief in all things heavenly and divine; they have surely proven themselves to be capable and compassionate stewards of God's gardens, our environment; the air and water and land which nurtures and supports us all. And they have shown compassion and sympathy to those less fortunate, of course, as Jesus has done, offering a helping hand to those in need; and chastising those who would make obscene profit at the expense of others.
Indeed. Or, perhaps, instead; the dominant religious paradigm is completely broken, our religious and political leaders are for the most part full of shit, and our people need to grow the fuck up and learn to live their own lives by their own decisions, and tell these jackasses to go fuck themselves.
You decide. After all, it's your life, and you only get one chance at it. Make it worth something.
Also, read my "God's Laws" column and think "irony". It should read better then.
There is No Law but God’s Law.
All of our man-made laws are just a construct of our human pride and ignorance; and those laws that actually work are those laws that were written in conformance with God’s will. To follow the laws of man above the laws of God is a sin (“sin” meaning “to miss the mark”, e.g. "oops, you can do better there sunshine"). The hell you are cast into for missing that mark is a hell of your own creation... and believe me, I've seen that hell and it's no place for the timid.
But what are God’s laws? I know that there are a bunch of holy books out there that are reputed to have been written under the direct and irrefutable influence of God’s hand -- and they include such oddities as serious (on-pain-of-death) rules such as to not trim the corners of your beard, or to not wear fabrics of mixed fibers, along with some very sensible ones about not killing your neighbor or stealing their stuff (or wives, though wives are often lumped in with “stuff” in many cultures).
Given that God permeates _everything_, is in fact the source and origin, the motivating force and reason for existence of this entire universe of ours (pretty much by definition; anything less would be an insult), you would think that it would be pretty darned easy to discern what God’s wishes were, to know what was one of God’s laws versus just random thoughts in our own heads.
Of course, it’s not that easy; and some of the more introspective religions note that our perceptions of the world around us are akin to seeing the world through a warped, dirty, and cracked window. We see it, but we don’t see it _correctly_. So the prophets are those among us who have a cleaner window, and can report back that yes, trees do in fact have individual leaves (or the spiritual equivalent). Of course, it can be tricky to tell the difference between a true prophet and the schizophrenic fellow ranting on the street corner -- a problem that I have to assume existed back in the good old days as well, if not more so.
There is always, of course, the issue of miracles -- but all the popular religions had miracles, hardly a discerning factor. Also I myself have personally performed miracles, at least that is what I heard after the fact when I had done some magic tricks for a relative I later learned was not entirely stable. Miracles are easy; ask me, I'll do one for you. And second-hand reports of miracles? These are garbage! Worse than useless! I've heard reports from intelligent and reliable people of miracles (er, magic tricks) that they had seen... that had almost nothing to do with the actual trick that was performed. And yes, I have an extensive collection of magic references, and have engineered magic tricks that were used in television specials, so I know wherefore I speak.
So we can't rely on heresay. It is a good thing that God’s laws are there inside your heart for you to discover. It could, in fact, be no other way! You are a part of God, God permeates you, and a true listening of God’s voice speaking to you from your heart has got to be a good place to look for truth.
Mormon’s use this test -- to have you look deep inside your heart, from a quiet and respectful state of mind, to listen to that quiet voice deep inside you, and see if it tells you that your chosen faith, your spiritual path, is the correct and true one, in Jesus’ name, Amen. (As a side note, you know it's prayer and not ritual magic if you invoke the correct demon's, er, spirit's, er, God's or Jesus' name when you do it; otherwise, prayer and ritual magic are almost entirely indistinguishable; bet you didn't know that!)
You know what? That quiet voice says yes! I bet it says yes to... damn near everyone, regardless of their religion.
Maybe they are _all_ correct? Or _all_ wrong but instead fulfilling some deep-seated psychological need of humanity, something that made sense as we developed but may have been hijacked in modern society?
God’s laws are the laws that _work_; that are in harmony with society and with human nature; they serve to keep the social structure working and reduce conflict. God’s laws will promote both the individual spirit (and our need to be unique) and the needs of the whole (and our need to be part of something bigger than ourselves). God’s laws will see the big picture. God's laws should be irrefutable, otherwise, what's the point?
Sticking your fingers in your ears and going "nah nah nah I can't hear you" while burying yourself in random scriptures in your particular holy book does NOT count as a valid refutation. Just so you know. 'cause I have MY holy book, and it contradicts yours; my prophet can kick your prophet's ass! As you can see, appeal to authority gets us... nowhere.
There are some of God’s laws that are very nearly universal, and pretty darned hard to argue against: Don’t kill people, for example. The trouble comes in with the details -- how about when you are attacked? What serves as a “person”? What about yourself? How about for legal punishment for murder? Baby raping? Writing bad checks? Voting for Ralph Nader? It goes on and on, but still, the basic principle is sound.
Light travels at 186,000 miles per second. That is absolutely one of God’s laws, and it is in fact so serious a Law that it can not be broken, whether you want to or not. The really fun laws are not these immutable truths, though, but those trick questions that God lays into your path, to try to trip you up and test your soul. The American Indians may have had it right with their Coyote trickster! Not to mention Loki, et. al.
For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Interestingly enough, this works as a social law as well -- when my HOA sends me a rude or impersonal letter, I automatically set myself into the stance of the disobedient rebel, whether I want to take that role or not. More discussion on this rule can be found in “The Lucifer Effect” by Philip Zimbardo (though I am seriously mischaracterizing his research, I think it fits).
Animals will reproduce until they exceed the ability of their environment to support them, and as a result not all of them will survive to reproduce further. Those animals that are better suited to their environment are more likely to reproduce and hence send their descendants into the future. Reproduction, moreover, is an imperfect transaction, causing changes, both good, bad, and neutral, to the organism through time.
Simple stuff. Hard to refute. But with incredible repercussions, especially when considered in a geological timeframe (which humans are, by nature, nearly incapable of doing; how long _is_ 50,000 or 100,000 generations, anyway? What does that _mean_?)
The Earth, from direct observation and some clever thinking, can be seen to revolve around the Sun. When the Church refuted this, fearing it would be too scary for their congregations, they were in fact violating God’s law and were in sin.
They got better. Some.
Not all of God’s laws are so clear, and our record of what we THINK are God’s laws is equally impure -- these holy books (yes, your holy book too, Mr. My Holy Book Is Perfect) have been written, edited, carefully and selectively amassed from scores of conflicting manuscripts, and even blatantly forged, by both madmen and by cynical bastards with a cause to support. Lying, in fact, was considered to be a noble act if it “brought people to God”. But which God?
I like my God to be a God of Truth.
Some people like to decry science as being anti-religion, of being atheistic at its core (or, even more laughable, as being a religion in itself; these folks have no idea what they are talking about, so it’s hard to hold a discussion with them). Science, however, is nothing more than the act of asking the right question, and keeping track of the answers.
That’s it. Pretty radical, huh?
Finding the right question is an art, and reflects both the interests and the biases of the question-asker, but if the right question is found, and the scientist has both the skill and capacity to hear the answer, the answer is part of science.
The body of science is composed of thousands, millions!, of questions and their answers; and, when we get better at listening to God (typically through better eye and ear surrogates) we get better answers.
It is our logical mind, that part of our mental anatomy that gets so little use amongst the greater public (when AI researchers model intelligence based on logical expressions, I both cringe and laugh at them), that helps us discern what is a true answer and what is noise or internal bias swamping God’s voice.
The same happens with spiritual questions and their answers. That inner voice may be telling you that Mr. Evil Politician is a Bastard, and that killing him will both (a) serve the greater public and (b) get you the attention of Natalie Portman (hubba hubba!)... you need to engage some of that rational thought to recognize that your inner voice perhaps needs to see someone and maybe take a nice pill, put the gun down quietly please and we'll get past this nice and easy.
When the preacher tells you that you must vote for So and So or THE COUNTRY WILL GO TO HELL in a blaze of EVIL, well, maybe they are full of shit and maybe you need to analyze their motives and intents rather than drink that particular coolaid. Which is tough, because it's a BLAST to be part of a dynamic, relevant, and angry movement that is out to change the world... ask any teenager, ex-teenager, or especially any person who grew up in the sixties.
In fact, here is one of God’s Laws, that I’m sure is true: When someone is absolutely positively sure of their position on a spiritual point, then they are absolutely and with the same magnitude as their belief... wrong. "For every spiritual belief, there is an equal and opposite..." well, maybe not quite so formulaic, but still; I think a thoughtful person has more true perspective than the demagogue.
It’s like that restaurant on the highway called “Joe’s Good Eats”. It might have belonged to Joe once, there’s an off chance that they do indeed sell “eats”, but will it be good? No. The more the sign proclaims their excellence, the worse it will be. The _truly_ good restaurants rely on more subtle cues... such as actually serving good food and not beating you about the head and shoulders with proclamations of its goodness.
Unfortunately, we as a species love to follow leaders who are sure of themselves, who are confident of their direction and who exude belief like a sweaty athlete oozes saltwater (or Gatorade, depending on their sponsors). Such leaders can also be dead wrong (and often are; note current politics in the US), even though they themselves know deep in their hearts that they are right.
So be careful out there, and use both your heart and your mind. These are the tools that God gave us, and you wouldn’t want either of them to get rusty from disuse; otherwise there will be Hell to pay later.
Here are some more laws that I’ve found:
I must not fear.
Fear is the mind-killer.
Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
I will face my fear.
I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path.
Where the fear has gone there will be nothing.
Only I will remain.
An it harm none, do what ye will.
If anyone harms (others), God will harm him, and if anyone shows hostility to others, God will show hostility to him.
Those actions that you perform, those thoughts that you think, your memories and your intents, are reflected in your spirit (and face, and mind, and even posture); such that others will see you and react to you in ways that depend on your past actions, your thoughts, and your memories. That which you cast out onto the waters (good and bad), will return to you many-fold.
The most excellent Jihad (struggle) is that for the conquest of self.
Do with these laws what you will.
Namaste.
Mythos and Logos. AND. Not "OR". Important distinction, that.
In the not so distant past, and in the very real present for perhaps most people, folks guided and ruled their lives according to mythical explanations of the world. The sky gods, eventually logrolled up into a single all-powerful and jealous deity for most existing religions, were/are a real and powerful force in people's lives.
In the 18th and 19th centuries the power of logos, of rationality, started gaining momentum -- not just in the Christian world, but the Muslims had some activity here too (though European meddling in their culture and government seems to have put a bit of a pox on their explorations, so now they are very much in reaction to us, rather than exploring their own territory; but hey, Arabs and Persians are mostly still a mystery to me so I don't know).
In the 19th century, in fact, some philosophers were decrying the death of God entirely, and predicting that humanity will be ruled solely along rational lines in the near future.
Hah! See how well THAT worked out!
Well, World War I happened, and the joys of science turned out to have a very ugly side as well (not even going to MENTION WWII, it only got worse), plus there were a huge array of people not so enthralled by having their entire life map declared null and void.
That brought us, apparently, the current sets of conservative religious movements -- ugly ugly things that they are.
What we see today is a reaction by the bearers of the old mythos against the encroachments of logos -- if the world sees logic and reason as primary, and those immersed in mythos KNOW in their HEARTS that their religion is true and valuable, then therefore their myth must also be valid when viewed under logic and reason. Truth is truth, right?
This leads directly to literal readings of the bible, the creationists, and so forth. For those of us heavily steeped in logos, we see these attempts as ludicrous -- so bad as to not even be wrong. What can they be thinking? But for the people endorsing their mythos as a true answer to how the world works, misapplying science to it, they are fighting for their very existence, to preserve the meaning behind their life.
There's a key problem here: mythos and logos do not address the same aspects of our world, and applying the rules of one to the context of the other is a recipe for embarrassment at least, and social and political disaster at worst.
You just CAN NOT read mythical works, that are written to address the heart and soul, as logical treatises. And you CAN NOT expect the world of science and reason to be able to address matters of the spirit. When you try, you are missing the point quite badly.
Your baby dies and science tells you exactly WHY. Does this help your grieving? No.
Your spiritual text talks about floods and mankind being reborn. Does this make your study of geology or meteorology better? No.
Humans are amazing in our ability to rationalize (in fact, another treatise is about how we only act on reflex and rationalize every action after the fact, truth!); this is probably the thing that really does set us apart from the other animals. Our ability to predict the future, to explain our actions in terms of the past, to apply abstract systems of thought onto the world and to invent symbols to represent things that don't actually exist, to communicate ALL of this across both space and time... OH. MY. GOD. It's a huge thing. Our rational abilities, our power of logos, are unbelievable when compared to ... everything else.
But that's just part of who we are as humans.
We have a very real need for myth as well; how many of the enduring stories in the world are simple explanations? None? A few? Think about perhaps the oldest stories you know... I bet they have roots in the Grimm Fairy tales! Myths.
Neal Gaimen's stories? That guy does good mythos.
The stories that really resonate (no, not those pink romance novels, "tingle" is different than "resonate") with us, I would be willing to guess, are all mythically endowed; they reflect an unspoken, unspeakable aspect of our human nature, our condition, our place in the world.
With a good mythos, we can really feel in our heart how we fit into the world, how our life and actions can mesh with the lives of others around us, how we work as part of an overarching _story_ to achieve a greater goal.
Mythos gives us purpose; it helps us identify ourselves, to know who we are and how we fit in.
The hat-wearing shit-kicking cowboy went from reality to myth; how many cowboys do you see on 6th street in Austin? How many of them actually walk through cowshit during the day? They are identifying themselves with the cowboy storyline; the attitude; the myth.
The Goth. The Punk. The Geek. The Jock. These are each a reality and they are also each a mythical archetype, a template that can be held up to a life and used as a measure of it.
How well am I doing in life? Well, me, personally -- it depends on which archetype you compare it to!
I don't have a big savings account. I don't wield an political power. I have a million tools. I have a million skills. I work well with people, for the most part. I like to read. I like to WRITE.
So, for the template of BUSINESSMAN or POLITICIAN or even SPORTSMAN, I suck, my life is a failure, and I should just go kill myself. But for the role that I've selected for myself, the ROGUE_TECHNOLOGIST (which is a variation on the MAD_SCIENTIST), with a touch of ARTIST and INTELLECTUAL, but with a dash of MYSTIC as well -- well, my problem is that I don't have a good archetype. I had to mostly invent myself. And my my measure, I'm doing damned well, thank you.
I need to write the story that tells my myth.
EVERY SINGLE ONE OF YOU is living a story, and in that story you are the hero. Absolutely. Even if you are a villain, and you know that you are abusing those around you and that you cheat the medical system and fuck over your friends... you are still doing the best you can, and you are still the hero of your story. There is no other way to justify a life otherwise; the mental contortions to GET there may make a Chinese acrobat cringe in pain, but it's there.
The problem, the BIG PROBLEM at the CORE of so many problems both in our personal lives and in the world at large, is one of balance.
We try to live as all Mythos, denying our rational side, denying our need to invent and reinvent the world around us. We try to live as all Logos, denying the fact that our lives are stories and not equations, denying our spiritual need and our need to incorporate myth into our lives.
We need both. To be able to think and be logical, as well as to be able to have ritual and myth.
People like to be true, to be ABSOLUTELY TRUE; which feels like it should mean that MY TRUTH should be the same as YOUR TRUTH. Truth is truth, right?
For some truths, the logos truths, yes; Gravity will probably turn out to have some absolute mechanism and structure that is universally true. For now, we know down to a very fine measure, exactly how physical and energetic objects react with regards to gravity, and this is the same _everywhere_. Truth is truth.
For other truths, though, this is not even a little bit true. Your personal truth as a human being living on this vast and complex planet, interacting with your local and even global societies... our personal truth is just that. Yours. Personal. You may share it with your community, your church, your city even; sometimes even to some extent with your country. But that does not mean this is a universal truth! A billion Christians can be wrong, just as two billion Buddhists can be wrong. And at the same time, they can be right, in a local sense.
Spiritual truth is tied to the land, to the society, to the individual temperament.
For me, mythos is best represented in ritual (in action), but also in art and literature; it provides a coloring and resonance (that word again) to an otherwise black-and-white scientific world.
For some, the study and exploration of science IS their mythos; they find their spiritual fulfillment by living their life down to their very core as a scientist, teasing apart the mysteries of the universe. This is no weirder than those who find their spirit in the arcane disassembly of their sacred text, until there is no hiccup or flyspeck left unanalyzed.
God does not need to enter into the mythos as all; there are plenty of excellent myths that don't need a prime deity, or even a pantheon.
Fighting and killing because other people don't believe in your precise flavor of mythos is the stupidest, most damaging, RIDICULOUS things humanity has EVER come up with. Catholics and Protestants? Come on people, you are killing each other over... what? Yeah, for a long time the Protestant US felt the Catholics were the anti-Christ, and for all I know some still do. But that's applying your mythos inappropriately.
We need, as a race, as a SPECIES, to learn to live our lives according to myth, while at the same time exercising rational control over ourselves and our environment; and even more importantly, we need to stop acting like babies, expecting our religion or government to take care of our every need, and to GROW UP and TAKE RESPONSIBILITY for our lives. Dammit.
Yes. Bad things happen. Random death and destruction occurs. But we still have choices, as long as you breath and can move and think, you have choices. Make them wisely.
The first choice, taken carefully and with much thought, should be -- what mythos makes sense for my life and my future? Once you find that, things should become easier.
But remember, just because your mythos is the perfect thing for you, your neighbor may dance to a completely different drummer. Don't fuck up his music, okay?
Try not to confuse mythos and logos. Bad things happen when that happens; really tragically and epically bad things happen. History can be our guide on that front.
Try to pick a mythos that doesn't include too much ancillary damage; we still do need to live together as a species. Somehow.
Remember, my mythical avatar may just have a big damned hammer to smite yours with. But he won't because, frankly, that would be antisocial.
Yeah, you, I'm talking to you buddy. What good are you? What GOOD are you? How do you justify your water and carbon footprint on this planet?
Is the work you do of any value, or are you just a parasite sucking all the goodness and strength out of others? Yeah Mr. Lawyer, Mr. Politician, Mr. CEO, I'm looking at you, and you over there in the corner, you too. Yes, these jobs are all necessary and valuable when done right, and for the right reasons; but these and others are also drains on humanity when pursued for selfish reasons. You are dragging the rest of us down!
Humans are wickedly competitive, like rats on a sinking ship, and there is a horrible sense sometimes that most people would sell their grandmother into prostitution if it would help them accumulate more wealth or power.
Wealth! Now there is a stupid thing to live for. Money, and money analogs for those of you still trading in seashells or whatever, has a purpose; it stands in for the work and value we have created during our time on this planet, and we can use these markers in the various ways we have learned to love and/or hate.
But to live just to make money? What stupidity is that? You are going to spend your days doing random annoying bullshit just to collect these markers? Is what you are doing fulfilling in any way, are you creating anything, or taking entropy out of the system to make it work smoother and better? Or are you just out there... shuffling markers, trying to get the biggest pile before you die?
You are born naked and penniless, you will die the same. Your ancestors? Fuck 'em. They need to be able to be useful to society on their own merits, unless you really want to found a dynasty that will be reviled and hated for generations to come -- what is it about third or fourth generation wealth that just oozes uselessness?
Power? Sure, it's a trip to be able to control the fates of thousands, if not millions, but to what end? WHY do you want this power, WHAT do you plan to do with it?
Do you have to lie to people to achieve your goals? Distort the truth, bend reality to some alien shape and shove it screaming and writhing up the ass of your adoring public (or employees), to be able push your agenda? If so, you are doing it wrong: there is just one true evil, one unforgivable sin, and that is hypocrisy.
We, each of us, make decisions on the information we have; when that information is a lie, a distortion, then the system begins to collapse. When a company, a politician, a lawyer, an individual is living a hypocrisy, pushing bad data, it hurts all of society. I'm looking at you Mr Lawyer, Mr Politician, Mr Mega Corporate Leader, and even you Mr Player in the clubs, oozing up to the honeys and denying the damage and bitterness and alienation you leave in your wake.
There is one concept of God and Judgment that appeals to me (and just this one, I'm pretty picky): when you die, your entire life lays exposed to universal inspection (to God, to your wife, your children, your mother and father, your priest, everyone), every action, every thought, every lie and deception, every good deed done for true purposes or for false; all of it. Is this life something you would be proud of? Or will you be cast into hell, which really, is just the horror you will feel at this level of exposure.
Or maybe you won't, maybe you are a psychopath or see yourself as a predator and that it's up to everyone else to get the hell out of your way or become just another source of food (or money). There's a sucker born every minute, after all! Make good use of them!
But does that strategy scale very well? Not really; we as a society and as a culture get a LOT more done when we work pulling together, than when we are predating on each other. Most religions make note of this, the whole love your brother, forgiveness, thing.
I bet most people will cast themselves as a good Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, or whatever; hell, I've got friends who see themselves as very fine and upstanding Wiccans, Atheists, Agnostics. The entire spectrum. Good! Good for you, good for me. But, really, who the hell cares?
I see you over there, the person preaching and railing on this religious topic or other, going to church every week, saying the right things, wearing the right clothes, laughing at the right jokes, showing indignation at the right topics. So what? So you spend a few hours a week dancing a dance.
Is this really _you_? If you are casting yourself as a member of this religion, do you really LIVE that life, or are you just pretending when it is convenient? Is every moment of your day, every plan you make, every aspect of your future and every interaction with your fellow man informed by this religion, guided by it? Is your every act an act of worship, a reflection of the premise and promise given to you by your deity? For some Muslims, for some Jews, yes, I believe it is... for most of you? Hell no. You talk the talk, but I'll be damned if you walk the walk.
Oh, you wail, you hold me to too high a standard! Jesus (or Mohammad, or Buddha, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster) was so damned special, so close to the One True God, that no mere mortal can hope to compare! So you just give up? Hypocrite. If you don't make the effort, then you have no place taking the label. Call yourself atheist or agnostic instead, but do not take on the mantel of that which is holy, for you merely defile it with your carelessness.
Sure you can have doubts, and conflict, and struggles. Perfection is not for us, neither is rationality, nor full compassion, or any of those ideals. But unless you carry that vision with you, and live your life at a mirror for that which you call holy, you fail at religion. Sorry. Try something else.
This applies to more things than religion, too. I take Tai Chi and Ballroom dancing, and I move my body, in everything I do, with an awareness of the lessons I have learned in these disciplines. These skills become part of who I am, and not just things I do.
There are precious few things in life that are actually important, that are worthy of getting worked up about.
We all need shelter and clothes; humans are feeble and weak creatures, and comfort is nothing to be disdained. But does your house need to be huge, your clothes always the latest fashion? I don't think so. Sure, you can want the fine things (I know that I do) but is it important? Not really. It's NICE. It's PLEASANT. But to throw a fit because your shoes aren't the latest rip-off fad? Please! And I'm looking at you Mr. Fashionable Teen.
We all need sustenance, food, drink. And variety in that. But come on people, don't be pigs! And don't think that the crap they shovel out the windows at most fast food restaurants is good food, no matter how many times they put the Lite and Healthy and Low Fat (compared to pure lard) label on it. Remember, those companies are most likely being run by hypocrites whose only real goal is to fulfill the next quarterly corporate goal for the shareholders.
We all need society and friends and love. Really. Look to the studies with monkeys who don't get these things, it's not pretty.
Tools. I believe in tools, because I spend my life developing skills and making things. Tools are what make this possible for me.
Books.
These things give us power. Tools give us the power to create and repair. Books give us the power of society, of civilization, of education. You don't read books you say? Shame on you! I see you there, Mrs. Half of America, hiding behind that romance novel. That's not a book, that's porn. Pick up something that's not pink, mmm'kay?
Can't wield a tool? Nonsense. Knitting needles are tools, as are crochet hooks, as are your hands. Paintbrushes. Pens. Typewriters and computers. Learn to create something, whether a craft, a science, anything... for in creating we can find true satisfaction, the pleasure of seeing a real object and saying, "I made that".
Do you know what is not important? Most everything else.
A nice car or truck -- shiny, polished, lovingly cleaned every weekend . What a waste of life! Don't talk to me about resale value, you could probably repaint it before selling it with the value of the labor you put into it keeping it pretty. Sure, it can be a hobby, but important? Don't be stupid. Okay, some of you folks in the East and other places do have a valid anti-corrosion argument, I'll give you that.
Likewise, that SUV you use, that giant Pickem-up truck, has it ever seen a dirt road? Or carried a load of lumber or steel or manure? Will it? If not, then you, in your greed and childish desire for a nifty toy, are spending your life and resources unnecessarily depleting our world.
Yes, it's your right. Of course it is. If you want to be a selfish asshole, go for it, crowd the parking spaces, be a hazard on the road, suck down the gas, and waste your own resources filling it with gas. Knock yourself out. But remember that discussion above on religion, hypocrisy, and so forth? Yeah, I'm looking at you, dude.
That clean house of yours. Does it really matter? For some people, housecleaning is a pleasant activity and a clean house a joy and pleasure. For others it is a neurotic requirement, a necessity imposed on them by neurotic parents.
I grew up in clutter and, yes, filth (if you count my great-grandparents, especially), but I had in those cluttered, chaotic, dirty spaces love, attention, and support.
Which is more important? Getting the clothes off the floor, or paying attention to your children or partner?
Of course, I'm not one to harp on paying attention to family; I suck at it, and I of course point my fingers back up the chain of neglect passing through my father, his father, and on deeper into history. But still, think about it for a minute, and at least find an honest truth about why you do what you do in life. Is it really important? Does it really matter? When you have died (and yes, you will be dead soon, before you even realize it), will anyone have cared? What will the mourners at your wake remember you for? Will you even HAVE mourners?
So I don't much care for housework and the like. It doesn't matter, except when the clutter interferes with what I'm actually trying to do -- and then I clean for pragmatic reasons, to keep the bugs down, to make it easier to find stuff, to make my other more interesting tasks easier.
Every second, minute, hour, day, week, month, and year of your life, from the first moment you take a self-direction action until the very last moment before you lose conscious volition, you are spending your life.
Money is a token of work, of effort, or in some cases, of dishonesty and of theft. But still, it represents physical value.
Time is the token of life; attention and time spent are the currency of your life. Right now, you are spending some of your life reading these words, and I hope that I'm not wasting this precious resource.
You have a limited amount of time, and you don't even know HOW MUCH YOU HAVE. It's like a bank account; you can withdraw from it, but can never see the balance.
What do you spend your life on? Is it worth it, not only to you, but to everyone you come into contact with?
There are so many ways to put value on a life. What good are you with respect to your family?
Family. Breeders are everywhere, people with five and more children, spawning like the earth was still empty and in need of filling up. Dear god people, show some restraint!
Family is important, and through our children we create and re-create the world around us. It's not just the biology of procreation that is important, but the lessons, explicit and implicit, that you teach your spawn. Go for quality, not quantity. Growing without restraint, growth without boundaries? What other organism does that? Cancer. Let's not be a cancer, people.
What good are you to your community? Whether your community is your neighbors, your workmates, your friends; a physically bounded community or one tied together through common interest, how do you fit in?
I know that I feel very vividly the approbation and applause of my various communities, and that I feel so much better when I am filling an identifiable niche in the order of things.
We all have a need to be individuals, to have uniqueness and importance, but there is no way that each and every one of us can be a great shining star in the firmament. It's just not going to happen. But each of us can play a role, and play it well, in the structure of our family and a community of our choice (or not of our choice, it doesn't matter; what you do _counts_ and if affects those around you).
How do you play your roles? Do you bring joy, or improvement, or insight, or some kind of value as you fulfill your role in life?
You see, we also all have a strong need to belong, to be a part of something bigger than ourselves, to struggle with a common cause or against a common enemy. That's why when teenagers rebel, they rebel by _joining a group_ that stands at odds to the thing they are rebelling against. Why most religions set themselves up in opposition to something, in an eternal struggle. Almost nobody goes off to be a hermit, to found a new movement, to define themselves in isolation. People go off to define themselves as part of something, a something of their own choosing, but still, a group or community, with goals and standards and struggles.
Even I do that, and I grew up the consummate outsider, part of no group, bending to damn few pressures from my peers. But I chose to belong to certain groups, and to fulfill specific roles therein, because I feel better about myself when I do.
THINK about your life. Realize that the minutes you spend, you are irrevocably spending; there are no refunds. When you run out of minutes, you are DONE. You don't get a do-over.
So man up, harden the fuck up, and take responsibility for those minutes. Use them in a way that makes your world a better place, even if it's just putting a smile on a friend's face, or providing a surreal moment for a stranger to make them think about something differently. If things don't go right, don't piss and moan and sue people and whine about how the negroes or jews or Bulgarians or whomever are destroying the country; those are stupid excuses. You and only you have control over your life, so face up to it and buckle down to the work.
And who the hell cares what the neighbors think?
Heinlein. Not Herbert.
Clearly, I need a vacation.
We Humans love to think we are different from the "lesser" animals. Yup, we go on and on about "soul" and "symbolic manipulation" and "tools" and "language".
What is interesting, however, is that I have yet to see any study that shows any real difference between us and the other species.
There are gradations, of course. We use tools WAY better than any other animal. We use a more complex language (but other animals _do_ communicate, and even lie). Hard to say if animals use symbols in any way like we do, but bees perform interesting abstract dances to represent flight paths (so I hear). As for soul? Well, as soon as someone devises a test for this, let me know.
Animals have feelings, both emotional and physical (of course). They remember (and in the case of Parrots, they can keep a grudge for _ages_). The look forward to the future.
Heck, some animals both communicate better and have a richer mental and emotional life than do tiny humans!
So really, what does it mean to be human?
And then, take your garden variety human and... take away part of their mind. Put a railroad spike through their brain. Or give them a stroke. Take away a part of their body... remove their hands in a war, lop off their legs. Still human?
In some ways, who we are is an accumulation of our memories and experiences; our identity based on a continuous chain of existence, recorded in our minds. Damage a piece of your brain and this chain is snapped; nothing new gets added. What are you then?
Take a child who is just four cells big. What is this? It is a small speck of potential! But what if it grows into a baby with no brain? Or a person who is genetically scrambled, making them behave or function far below the mean?
Human?
Or, the person who is brilliant, who soars above the rest of the madding crowd to achievements that most of us can only imagine? Still human? Are all of these "humans" the "same"?
We are very attached to our humanity, and defend it vigorously. But to what end? Does it serve us well to set ourselves high on this pedestal and to look down all all other creatures as inferior? Then, we can enslave them, breed them, torture them in animal fights or for "sport", eat them, do whatever we like to them without it impinging on our conscience.
In fact, history has shown us repeatedly that groups of people can easily consider other groups of people to be inferior, to be "just animals" or "the enemy", based on any slight trick of the moment; their color, their tribe, their religion, anything. And from this trick of the mind, they can justify any type of abuse.
Some cultures or subgroups have moved in a direction to treating animals as equals. Others still consume the tasty critters but do so in ways that honor them and minimize their suffering.
I eat animals, and I love to do so. I have killed chickens with my own hands, and have contracted to have a cow slaughtered in our driveway (in a trailer, it turns out, and not in the open), so that my step-kids at the time would realize that meat comes from life. We should be aware of this. I also did these things so that I would know, deep down, that yes, I am a predator and that these foods I buy and eat so lightly from the store carry a heavy price to the creatures providing them.
In spite of my predatory nature I would not slaughter and eat another person. Nor a monkey. Nor a dolphin. Perhaps it is hypocritical, but I prefer not to consume anything that is "close to me" in terms of its internal life.
Pigs are known as vicious, filthy animals. And yet, I've had pot-belly pigs and they are amazing creatures with fascinating personalities. Big pigs, the kind we eat? I have no idea, but I do know someone who won't eat them because she feels they are too smart to be treated as food.
Maybe it is this ability to reflect on things, to consider things in the abstract, to _identify_ with all manner of entities, that makes us human. I doubt a cat feels badly when it is torturing a mouse to death; but I know that I would feel very badly if I were to hunt and wound some creature so that it suffered badly before it could be killed. But how do _I_ feel when my cat is torturing am mouse? I try not to think about it.
I used a glue trap once, and caught a mouse. I will never do so again.
Some say that our ability to look into the future, and to reconstruct the past in symbols, is a gift from our background as hunters. We must be able to look at marks in the environment and deduce what has already happened, so that we can predict the future so we can kill and then eat. To hunt, we must predict; to predict, we must identify with our prey, and we must invent "time" so as to simulate this prey's actions into the future.
We use our minds to build up these pictures, these stories and progressions, so that we can hunt. We _have_ to use our minds, because our other senses are so poor; our smell, our vision, our hearing, even our limbs are slow and weak compared to many animals.
What came first, the ability to use our minds to make our lives easier hence providing a gateway for our other aspects to fade, or the loss of our skills necessitating the growth of our minds to compensate?
Take a human as they are now and go back in time 2,000 years. Yup, still human. We haven't changed much, really, in that span. 10,000, to the dawn of agriculture? Probably not a huge difference there either. Heck, Chinese written history covers a significant chunk of that. How far back do you go before we think "monkey" rather than "person"?
My favorite definition of humanity comes from Frank Herbert's book, "Dune", and the test of Gom Jabber. There are different interpretations out there but mine is that a Human has Choice and can choose to suffer in order to achieve a greater goal. An Animal is ruled by the moment, by reflex, and will respond in kind.
By this rule, how many of us are Human, and how many are just animals wearing a human shape? Just because we are born with potential and powerful tools of thought, doesn't mean we use them. In the neglect of these tools, do we also forfeit our humanity?
How do you fill _your_ life? How do you make your decisions? To what extent do the emotions of the present drive your actions?
Are you human? Or just wearing a human shape?
I don't think that most of us are really human. But then again, I'm not entirely convinced that "human" is such a great special club to be in, given our track record. I think we can do better.
To the religiously fundamental, all of this introspection is set aside with a simple "to be human is to have a soul," and much of their thinking can be replaced by rules handed down through history. When pondering the great patterns of nature and life, the miracles and the horrors, it all comes down to "such is the mysterious way of God".
This is passing the buck and answers nothing; it simply pushes the problem back one step (who made God? Why does God behave in these specific ways? Was God drunk when many of these creatures were made, or does God just have a creepy sense of humor?) to a point beyond which we are not allowed to ask questions. Because to question God is a sin. Because, umm, some guy said so. Right. So move along, son, nothing to see here, don't mind that man behind the curtain.
Further reading:
http://www.sheldoncomics.com/archive/030429.html
"The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil " by Philip Zombardo
"Phantoms in the Brain: Probing the Mysteries of the Human Mind" by V.S. Ramachandran
"I Am a Strange Loop" by Douglas R. Hofstadter
"Ishmael" by Daniel Quinn
"Dune" by Frank Herbert
"Family Evaluation: An Approach Based on Bowen Theory" by Michael E. Kerr and Murray Bowen
"Stranger in a Strange Land" by Frank Herbert
What does it mean to be a computer programmer? What are we doing when we program that computer?
I've been programming computers of one stripe or another since I was about 13 (giving me 30 years of experience, more now actually, ouch). In some ways, I am a very good programmer. In other ways, I still suck horribly. Daren, a co-worker of mine, put it the most eloquently: "All software sucks. Even the stuff I write." Daren, by the way, is a very smart, very capable programmer who simply recognizes the inherent limits of this field.
At the most basic level, "computer programming" is the process of breaking down some task into the steps (codes, literally, "a system of symbols used to represent assigned and often secret meanings") that a computing machine must take to perform that task.
Easy, right?
No. We've been programming computers, as a species, for what SEEMS like forever, but in actually is just a short blip of time. Frankly, in spite of all the techniques and methodologies and religions (yes, religions) of computer software development, there is still a large component of random luck and guesswork involved. We don't know what the heck we are doing.
I'm sure some folks are sputtering now, ready to defend their own fabulous skills and methodologies, demanding that I provide specific examples of our ignorance. How can I let such a sweeping statement stand?
Well, if we knew what we were doing, software development would be a more deterministic process. It's a rare (and usually boring) project that hits its time estimates the first time.
I _do_ know a few things that programming is _not_. For example, knowing the syntax and semantics of one or more computer codes (languages) does not make you a programmer (though you SHOULD know what I mean when I say "syntax and semantics").
Writing code that "works" is not programming. Sure, it looks like programming from the outside, but "works" is a fragile metric. I know one programmer who writes code that works, for certain liberal definitions of "work", but it is fragile and prone to stop "working" with the least provocation.
Writing clever, complicated code is very definitely not programming. Cleverness is a curse, and code that makes you go "wtf?" when you look at it is _not_ good code [1]. You should look at a piece of computer code and exclaim "well, duh!", as if someone just told you, in all seriousness, that water has zero calories, or the sky is blue.
Maybe good programming is just as Albert Einstein said: "Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler."
Another source of ugly incomprehensible code is the programmer's own ignorance (as opposed to cleverness). It's not necessarily the programmer's fault, it's just that some problems (e.g. most of the interesting ones, and often ones where you are working within or next to a poorly-documented system [2]) are not very well defined and the code and the understanding of the problem inch forward, hand in hand. This syndrome is the cause of some truly, amazingly bad code that I have written.
A good programmer, however, knows when his code has turned into garbage and will re-write it as soon as possible, redesigning the solution so that it is clear and comprehensible.
I spent most of my career in small teams where I got to live with the code through the entire life cycle. One thing I noticed, coming in to my current job at Big Technical Company, is that "clear and comprehensible" is in the eye of the beholder. Everyone's brain works differently, and the code you put into the computer matches the thought process between your ears. Sometimes it is painful to wedge someone else's code into your own brain.
So what is good programming? Writing good programs. And a good program? Is one that works, that is easily understood, that is robust against changes, that is a pleasure to use, and that is economically rewarding. Do we, as a species, as a profession, know how to make good programs reliably and predictably? In the immortal words of Robin Williams, "Fuck No!"
But all is not lost. There are some good tools out there, the crescent wrenches and screwdrivers of the profession. Object-oriented thinking. Patterns. This and that.
But programming is still more craft than engineering. And now I have to go to a meeting, so more random pedantry will have to wait for later.
Meetings, by the way, do not improve one's programming.
[1] There are exceptions, and times when you must be clever. Some 3D texture-mapping code I wrote once _had_ to be clever, to be able to run fast enough. Very small or very efficient code most sometimes be clever.
[2] Most engineers SUCK at documentation, and poorly-defined systems are the bane of my existence. Come on guys, if you can't communicate it, you don't understand it. Try again.