Blog number 340 **** 16 November 2009
I'm reading this book, see. Stories about weird happenings. I was going to write some excerpts from it, but upon reflection, what good are oddities that can't be explained, except to realize that Existence is a really, really odd experience? And one can realize that, just by pondering on how a group of cells can let another group of cells see hear and feel, for instance. One doesn't need stories about oddities. One can use ordinary happenings, because if we look deep enough into anything, we will always find that "THAT CAN'T BE!"
I loved the stories about people, ships, airplanes, armies and whole villages disappearing.
Never to be seen again.
The first story was about a man on a farm in Tennessee in 1880 disappearing in front of his two children, his wife, and two men who happened to be passing by in a buggy. But what good is it to know about that incident? Pleasure from reading about it is all one gets from it, I guess. I like to share pleasures I receive, in the expectation that I can also share the pleasure another gets from experiencing what I experience. I get pleasure doubled, tripled, quadrupled, in that way - depending upon how many get pleasure from reading what gave me pleasure reading. Like telling a joke I enjoyed so that others can get the same enjoyment, which gives me a further enjoyment.
Too much explanation?
Too bad.
Monday, November 16, 2009
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
AND WE KNOW THAT HOW?
Blog number 339 **** 10 November 2009
"Conditioning" is a term coined to denote cultural myths disguised as truths. "Dogs, cats and horses are pets, never food," is one of the common myths in our culture. We have been conditioned by our culture to see these animals in this way. It is not logical that these animals not be food while cows, for instance, are. It makes no logical sense. It is an emotional sense. A conditioned sense. It is not a fact that horses are not food.
Another myth disguised as truth in our culture is the "fact" that everyone by law is innocent until found guilty. I am not a lawyer, so I don't know if this is a law or not, but if it is, I have heard Judge Judy - a lawyer, say to defendants and plaintiffs, "being found not guilty does not mean that you are innocent or have been found innocent." So how does this jibe with innocent until found guilty? Is a person not found guilty, innocent or not? Let's be consistent.
And are not tens of thousands of "innocent" people in the United States jailed every day even thought they have not yet been found "guilty" of anything? Do we jail the innocent? Of course not. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.
The means of this conditioning is very subtly done. Someone tells us something, or we read it, or it is insinuated, or we interpret something to mean something, and it goes into our "belief basket." We never think to check the "fact" out. We simply accept it. And it has to be that way, for if we checked everything that came to us as fact, we would never get anything else done.
Buddhists say that life is suffering.
A recent song lyric says, "I am pain. You belong to me. You'll be with me for a hundred and ninety four years. I am pain. You are all I want."
That last about the number of years might not be exactly correct.
So sue me.
No, please don't.
I don't want to go much further with this, but it is my personal opinion that people take way too much umbrage at death, and those whom I feel take that umbrage is to whom this Blog entry is pointed. I don't think it is too far from the truth to state that the afore-mentioned umbrage comes from cultural conditioning and not from looking at facts. Facts such as the ones insinuated in the five and six lines above this one.
And of course, I am right.
"Conditioning" is a term coined to denote cultural myths disguised as truths. "Dogs, cats and horses are pets, never food," is one of the common myths in our culture. We have been conditioned by our culture to see these animals in this way. It is not logical that these animals not be food while cows, for instance, are. It makes no logical sense. It is an emotional sense. A conditioned sense. It is not a fact that horses are not food.
Another myth disguised as truth in our culture is the "fact" that everyone by law is innocent until found guilty. I am not a lawyer, so I don't know if this is a law or not, but if it is, I have heard Judge Judy - a lawyer, say to defendants and plaintiffs, "being found not guilty does not mean that you are innocent or have been found innocent." So how does this jibe with innocent until found guilty? Is a person not found guilty, innocent or not? Let's be consistent.
And are not tens of thousands of "innocent" people in the United States jailed every day even thought they have not yet been found "guilty" of anything? Do we jail the innocent? Of course not. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.
The means of this conditioning is very subtly done. Someone tells us something, or we read it, or it is insinuated, or we interpret something to mean something, and it goes into our "belief basket." We never think to check the "fact" out. We simply accept it. And it has to be that way, for if we checked everything that came to us as fact, we would never get anything else done.
Buddhists say that life is suffering.
A recent song lyric says, "I am pain. You belong to me. You'll be with me for a hundred and ninety four years. I am pain. You are all I want."
That last about the number of years might not be exactly correct.
So sue me.
No, please don't.
I don't want to go much further with this, but it is my personal opinion that people take way too much umbrage at death, and those whom I feel take that umbrage is to whom this Blog entry is pointed. I don't think it is too far from the truth to state that the afore-mentioned umbrage comes from cultural conditioning and not from looking at facts. Facts such as the ones insinuated in the five and six lines above this one.
And of course, I am right.
SILLY QUESTIONS NUMBER ONE
Blog number 337 **** 10 November 2009
We (Teresa and I) went to Mimi's this morn. Teresa ordered a cup of coffee and it was sitting there when a server came over with something - I don't know what - I was reading, when I heard the waitress say, "Do you want me to bring a napkin for that?"
I looked and Teresa's coffee had been spilled - Teresa says by the waitress. It ran under the plastic covering the table cloth, on to Teresa's book, and on the newspaper we had brought with us. Looked like almost a quarter cup or so of coffee.
"Maybe a mop," I said.
No I didn't.
We (Teresa and I) went to Mimi's this morn. Teresa ordered a cup of coffee and it was sitting there when a server came over with something - I don't know what - I was reading, when I heard the waitress say, "Do you want me to bring a napkin for that?"
I looked and Teresa's coffee had been spilled - Teresa says by the waitress. It ran under the plastic covering the table cloth, on to Teresa's book, and on the newspaper we had brought with us. Looked like almost a quarter cup or so of coffee.
"Maybe a mop," I said.
No I didn't.
Sunday, November 8, 2009
PEOPLE CAN CHANGE. CAN TOO!
Blog number 336 **** 08 November 2009
The author of the book I'm reading (see Blog number 335 below) seems to me to suffer from a bit of naivety. He seems like such an intelligent and thoughtful scientist that it surprised me no end to find that out. I can't get over it. What's the matter with that man?
Let me explain.
After WW II, and after the Germans had invaded the peaceful kingdom of The Netherlands and killed many innocent civilians and destroyed much of their property - all without provocation, much as has been done by another country to another country in our present time, the author states that since that time the Dutch have been less than enamored of their neighbors to the east (the Germans).
As an undergraduate of at the University of Nijmegen, he was taught by several German professors who spoke Dutch with a heavy German accent. One of these professors was a grumpy old man who was rumored to have been a concentration camp guard. Then the author goes on to say, "Obviously this couldn't be true, since he would now have been in jail or worse."
Well, that's good enough proof for me. How about you? O. J. didn't go to jail when he killed his ex, so he must have been innocent too. Right?
But wait. Besides being old and grumpy, was there anything else about that man that might make one suspicious of the truth of that rumor? Well, let's see.
"To make matters worse, this professor manually killed the mice needed for our anatomy practicum. He didn't believe in death by ether, and would simply take a box with live mice and stand with his back turned to us. A few minutes later, a pile of dead mice with cracked necks lay on the counter... you can imagine we found this professor a bit scary."
The author of the book I'm reading (see Blog number 335 below) seems to me to suffer from a bit of naivety. He seems like such an intelligent and thoughtful scientist that it surprised me no end to find that out. I can't get over it. What's the matter with that man?
Let me explain.
After WW II, and after the Germans had invaded the peaceful kingdom of The Netherlands and killed many innocent civilians and destroyed much of their property - all without provocation, much as has been done by another country to another country in our present time, the author states that since that time the Dutch have been less than enamored of their neighbors to the east (the Germans).
As an undergraduate of at the University of Nijmegen, he was taught by several German professors who spoke Dutch with a heavy German accent. One of these professors was a grumpy old man who was rumored to have been a concentration camp guard. Then the author goes on to say, "Obviously this couldn't be true, since he would now have been in jail or worse."
Well, that's good enough proof for me. How about you? O. J. didn't go to jail when he killed his ex, so he must have been innocent too. Right?
But wait. Besides being old and grumpy, was there anything else about that man that might make one suspicious of the truth of that rumor? Well, let's see.
"To make matters worse, this professor manually killed the mice needed for our anatomy practicum. He didn't believe in death by ether, and would simply take a box with live mice and stand with his back turned to us. A few minutes later, a pile of dead mice with cracked necks lay on the counter... you can imagine we found this professor a bit scary."
YEAH! WHAT'S THE MATTER WITH YOU?
Blog number 335 **** 08 November 2009
I'm reading, "The Age of Empathy" by Frans De Waal.
Talking about the difference of opinion about social bonding amongst social biologists "recalls that famous dinner conversation between a Russian literary critic and the writer Ivan Turgenev: ' We haven't yet solved the problem of God,' the critic yelled, 'and you want to eat!' "
I'm reading, "The Age of Empathy" by Frans De Waal.
Talking about the difference of opinion about social bonding amongst social biologists "recalls that famous dinner conversation between a Russian literary critic and the writer Ivan Turgenev: ' We haven't yet solved the problem of God,' the critic yelled, 'and you want to eat!' "
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
CAN WE GET AN AMEN FOR REASONABLE LEADERS?
Blog number 334 **** 03 November 2009
I'm reading a history of The Simpsons. One story contains a remark by the first President Bush's Drug Czar, William Bennett.
Willie admitted that he had never seen [an episode of The Simpsons] adding, "I'll sit down with the little spike head [Bart Simpson], we'll straighten this out ...there's nothing that a Catholic school, a paper route and a couple soap sandwiches wouldn't straighten out."
The Simpson writers responded, "If our Drug Czar thinks he can sit down and talk this over with a cartoon character, he must be on something."
I'm reading a history of The Simpsons. One story contains a remark by the first President Bush's Drug Czar, William Bennett.
Willie admitted that he had never seen [an episode of The Simpsons] adding, "I'll sit down with the little spike head [Bart Simpson], we'll straighten this out ...there's nothing that a Catholic school, a paper route and a couple soap sandwiches wouldn't straighten out."
The Simpson writers responded, "If our Drug Czar thinks he can sit down and talk this over with a cartoon character, he must be on something."
Sunday, November 1, 2009
WISH I COULD WRITE LIKE THAT
Blog number 333 **** 01 November 2009
I'm reading a kind of a biography by James Lipton - the "Inside the Actor's Studio" guy?
James was an actor when he met Harold Curman - the name's not important. Harold was a greatly respected acting teacher. Harold would talk with the students after classes, telling stories, One night James asked him, "Weren't you a play reader for the Theatre Guild in the Twenties?"
When he said that he was, one of the other students asked him what were the greatest plays he ever read.
He said the best was one that he never went beyond the title page because nothing could equal it.
"It said, Act one, Scene one; Ten million years before the first living creature crept out of the primordial ooze.
Act one Scene two; Two weeks later. "
Hah! Delicious!
I'm reading a kind of a biography by James Lipton - the "Inside the Actor's Studio" guy?
James was an actor when he met Harold Curman - the name's not important. Harold was a greatly respected acting teacher. Harold would talk with the students after classes, telling stories, One night James asked him, "Weren't you a play reader for the Theatre Guild in the Twenties?"
When he said that he was, one of the other students asked him what were the greatest plays he ever read.
He said the best was one that he never went beyond the title page because nothing could equal it.
"It said, Act one, Scene one; Ten million years before the first living creature crept out of the primordial ooze.
Act one Scene two; Two weeks later. "
Hah! Delicious!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
