haitus

I'm unlikely to be posting anything here soon. I'm so incredibly desperately missing her and wishing it could be different but it can't.

Classical v Romantic knowledge

I'm trying to break the habit of searching for information that proves what I believe, and instead change my beliefs to fit the known facts. Where the facts are not known, I wish to learn to keep an open mind. I witness regularly people presenting only what supports their belief, even when it's not true; they ignore any assertion that runs counter to their preformed belief. I'm not sure if it's a fallacy, or poor critical thinking skills, or what, but it is sadly pervasive.

But I know that intuition is also powerful, and that 'facts' can be misleading. In his book Blink, the power of thinking without thinking, Malcom Gladwell describes how decisions reached with 2 seconds of thinking can be more accurate than researched decisions. Gladwell states that he dislikes the term intuition because it is associated with emotion, and he wants to emphasize that 'rapid cognition' is intellectually based. I still prefer the term intuition because I believe that it is the balanced intertwining of intellect and emotion that allows for accurate rapid choice.

So I'm seeking to develop both research based belief and rapid cognition based belief. The former is what school can teach. The latter comes from experience, and I certainly don't know how to teach it. It's basically the same ideas that Pirsig puts forth in Zen and the Art of Motorcyle Maintenance with classical and romantic knowledge.

Follow Bush's lead on this

"'People should feel comfortable about expressing their opinions about Iraq,' he [President Bush] said. 'I heard somebody say, well, maybe so-and-so is not patriotic because they disagree with my position. I totally reject that thought.'" Los Angeles Times

If Bush ever said that before, I missed it. I sure heard enough bloggers and commenters make the outrageous claim that dissent was unpatriotic. I hope they can take President Bush's comment to heart. As much as I disagree with this administration's vision and direction, I believe they are sincere in doing what they think is right for America.

And from the same article: "'An immediate withdrawal of our troops from Iraq will only strengthen the terrorists' hand in Iraq and in the broader war on terror,' Bush told reporters in Beijing."

And continued war continues to provide training ground for terrorists, and live targets for murder. Lady McBush walked us into a river of blood, and there is more blood everywhere we turn. We need new leadership, a new direction, and international support.

this is me on sleep

Yesterday, as I was cleaning up the yard in preparation for Thanksgiving, I saw two crows attacking another large bird, possibly a hawk. I assume it was a territorial thing. And I remembered again what I keep forgetting. People are still animals, with animal instincts and behaviors. I was discouraged by the lack of logic and civility, and it was ridiculous on my part. To lament the way things are and will likely always be is a waste of time and energy. One (that oned being me) should work towards the world one wants, but focus on navigating the world as it is. It’d be great if people were honest and door locks weren’t needed, but that’s not the way it is. So now I must try to remember, and to learn how to respond in my own style to the absurdities of others. How can I express my disagreement and disapproval with respect? When should respect end?

Sleep is a wonderful thing. I need to try it more often.

Unsubstantiated claims

Carl Sagan said, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." Perhaps that's why Kathleen Harris ordered a ordered a study that water blessed by a Rabbi would cure citrus blight. Wonder why this study got government funding? Could it be as the article claims?

Florida's citrus crop contributes billions of dollars to the state's
economy, so when that industry is threatened, anything that might help is considered.

I was curious, so I did a little more digging (if you can call putting some key words in google and then reading through results digging) and found this site with these claims:

Harris had a keen interest in the project. She was repeatedly sent copies of the letters and memos bouncing between Florida canker officials and Hardoon

Why would she take such a keen interest? Could it be because "Harris [is] the granddaughter of legendary citrus baron Ben Hill Griffin Jr."? Something she loved, the citrus industry, was threatened, and her judgement was clouded, making her vunerable to the con of charlatans?

This is the very thing I'm trying to avoid in myself. I never want to be one of those old people who are conned, so I'm working to keep my mind logical and sharp. It's already too late to use my former plan of dying young (effective but draconian).

Ok, that's all more sillyness than actual belief. I love logic, and deplore superstition, and any belief based not based in factual evidence.

still manic

I'm still unable to sleep, but now I'm beginning to have flashes of grandoise creativity (as opposed to paranoid delusions). I hope I can take advantage of this state and get some creative work done, but the exhaustion is exhausting. I ain't young anymore screams every cell below my neck. I can fly scream all the ones above it.

recovering

Between 9 am Sunday and 6 am Monday, I got 16+ hours of sleep. I seem to be coming down from my latest manic/paranoid episode. Something Bill G pointed out helped me come to terms with the comments to my blog. It is titled rant and rave, and yet I'm seeking rational, logical, discussion with supported assertions. I'll have to rethink that and decide if I'm ok with ranting and raving, or perhaps I should change my name and blurb. Now I'm going to try and pick up the pieces that I've broken and scattered around in my disassociated sleepless rampage.

It's not as bad as I make it sound, but it does suck.

uninformed opinion

I found this article: http://www.yaledailynews.com/article.asp?AID=21864 using the search criteria, "uniformed opinion". I was feeling great discouragement at the flip comments and insults in the comments to my blog entries. With this discouragement, I searched for some inspiration, and found the above referenced article. This quote particularly struck a chord with me:

Consider also that our opinions, more often than not, are shaped by the opinions of the people around us and the force with which those opinions are expressed. The more you speak in ignorance, the more likely you are to inspire similar opinionated ignorance in others. Intellectually indefensible enthusiasm is contagious in a way that apathy is not.

I'm a high school dropout with an AA degree. I have limited training, but I greatly value logic, the scientific method, and civil discourse and debate. I was hoping through blogging to improve myself, to learn to develop and express informed opinion. I now believe I was (once again) incredibly naive to think that I could have meaningful interaction through blogging. Instead I seem to have inspired "...opinionated ignorance in others" and myself.

I believe I need to do as the author of the above article suggested and "...read up or shut up." I don't know whether I will make another blog entry again, because as someone once said, "never argue with a fool, someone watching may not be able to tell the difference."

I do wish to express my respect for Fred for always interacting with civility, and for not presenting uninformed opinion as fact. But then, he didn't really take much of a stance on any issue.

Perhaps farewell, I'm off to eat my sour grapes.

Once again I’m inspired by Fred to create a post. Darn libertarians are constantly driving the discussion. I’m inclined to accept:

Newman's corollary as restated by Gordon
Libertarianism (pro, con, and internal faction fights) is the primordial net.news discussion topic. Any time the debate shifts somewhere else, it must eventually return to this fuel source. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin)

"I became convinced that noncooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good. No other person has been more eloquent and passionate in getting this idea across than Henry David Thoreau. As a result of his writings and personal witness, we are the heirs of a legacy of creative protest." - Martin Luther King, Jr, Autobiography, Chapter 2 (http://eserver.org/thoreau/civil.html)

So, are the critical mass participants engaging in noncooperation with evil? If one believes that oil is the cause of the Iraq invasion, that car exhaust is a major green house gas contributor, and that global warming is occurring and human activity is contributing, then one would could easily conclude that cars are evil. And from that vantage point, participating in critical mass and blocking traffic would be justified. I think the point is to increase awareness of the consequences of our car habits.

Certainly our love of the automobile has serious negative social, political, and ecological consequences (as well as positive ones). We’ve structured our cities and towns around cars. Bicyclists are put at risk, or extreme inconvenience on many routes due to lack of consideration of biking needs. The 101 Mad River bridge is a prime example. I’ve crossed that bridge in both directions on bike, and on foot, and it’s risky trip. The alternate route is several miles longer. If our goal is to increase bike use, then it is an issue that needs addressing.

If more of us rode a bike, instead of drove a car, we would reap numerous benefits as a society. If 5% of car trips were replaced with bike trips, that would be a 5% reduction in gas consumption. This would reduce the amount of air pollution, and it would extend the world’s oil supply. The individuals riding bikes would reap personal health benefits from the exercise.

Since (and no pun is intended) the squeaky wheel gets the grease, I think that the cyclists are justified in continuing the critical mass protests. In our two party, democratic system, tyranny of the majority is one of the faults. Sometimes a minority must create a fuss to get their legitimate concerns heard, to have any chance of remedy. The police must do their job, and enforce the law; if the cyclists are breaking the law, then the police can and should cite them. These civil disobedience confrontations are a clash of cultures: protestors who want change, citizens who want the status quo, and officers charged with enforcing the laws and keeping the peace. It’s an unfortunate feature of human nature that these clashes will sometimes turn violent. The police are armed and trained for violence, and sometimes legitimately and other times illegitimately, they act violently towards protestors. If protestors are acting belligerent, throwing things, and defying orders, then they should darn well be expecting to be tear gassed, beaten, etc.; right or wrong, that's the way it goes. But sometimes it’s the officers who show up with ill will towards the protestors, and are looking for an excuse to lash out at them. Prejudice is the likely culprit.

Wow, I'm honored

My song, (The Reluctant) Marty McJack will be featured on Power 96.3 on the local music spotlight sometime during the 8am hour. Thanks so much to Eldin and Mike for selecting me. If you miss it on the radio, you can download it or stream it from my humboldtmusic.com webpage.

I really should get my album done.