Ronin of the Spirit

Because reality is beautiful.

News from the weird

You know what’s odd?  That if a scientist can describe something in words that have Greek and Latin roots that somehow that makes it now scientific instead of paranormal.  For instance, the phenomena of having a nightmare and waking up with a specter of the nightmare over the bed then it slowly dissolves.  Well, psychologists have a special name for that (Which, pathetically, I can‘t remember even though I read it 2 days ago.  Its about 17 letters long).  They say it is a unique hallucination brought on by the mental change over from sleep to wake.  Oh, and it only happens to people under stress.  And only waking up from nightmares.  And it is one of the oldest recorded such phenomena, having a history as long as human story.  It doesn’t fit the normal profile for hallucination of any type, including Deliriums Tremens which has some unique attributes.  It is both unique (in its pathology) and universal crossing all racial, cultural, and historical backgrounds.  I’m intrigued by that.  See, hallucination, by definition an mystic experience.  A mystic experience is personal and subjective.  That doesn’t mean that it isn’t real.  If you see something, your seeing of it is fires real neurons, and creates real biochems.  Its just not verifiable because its subjective.  It occurs only between your ears.
    But the deal is, if every one is having the same hallucination under the same conditions, you really can’t call that a hallucination, or you have to so extend the meaning of hallucination as to be useless.  Under a definition broad enough to include this phenomena, you would have to include feelings as a hallucination.  Interesting no?
    Further weirdness comes from the field of aural photography.  If you take pictures through a special process people have halos around them.  “Well,” the scientist answers smugly “that’s simply the effect of high frequency light on the water vapor and heat the regularly escapes the body.  That is why the head has the brightest ‘aura’.” But then why do people who are wearing thick clothes have the same aura as ones in porous knits?
Why don’t people in a strong breeze have their aura bent by the wind.   Why don’t people touching electrostatic sources have more energetic auras?  Why do people with recent injuries have weaker auras over the injury?  
    I suppose with both of these things its important not to get drawn into “either or” arguments.  Either or arguments say that if you can’t believe one thing than you must believe another.  It’s a fallacy of argument.  The fact that I was not delivered to my parents by a stork does not prove that I was found under a cabbage leaf.   So the fact that specters of evil and aura are not yet fully understood doesn’t mean you should wrap your head in aluminum foil quite yet, but to me it says this
    The fact that something cannot be quantified does not necessarily mean that it doesn’t exist (Example: desire.)  Nor does the qualification of something prove that it does exist (Example: time.)  Reality is a rich and complicated experience.  Science a worldview which can help us quantify reality, but the ability to quantify is not interchangable with understanding.  Science is a profound tool to help us understand reality, but its just a tool, and not the only one.

December 13, 2006 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Holy Lust?

You know its easy to forget that my friends and family read these blogs and it is not just me practicing my typing.  That is, until I write an article about sin/porn/identity/reality.   That  really seems to have thrown the proverbial rock into the proverbial hornets nest.   I appreciate the feed back!  And I want to clearify what I think the Bible says about lust. 
    The Bible does NOT forbid lust.  The word translated as lust in the context of illicit sex  is translated as fervent desire in more positive contexts.  Several of the commands to “desire earnestly” the things of the Lord use an identical word as is translated “lust” in other contexts.  Its been a very long time since I did that word study, but I am relatively sure that’s true in both Greek and Hebrew.
    It is the rare act that God finds so intrinsically evil that it is sin regardless of the object of the act.  Homicide and  incest  all spring to mind.  Homicide is commanded when the object is just revenge  and incest was the method by which the all the earliest generations got here.   The point is God looks at the object/motivation/purpose  of an act and judges each act individually. 
    Lust, even in the context of sex is clearly NOT forbidden.  The Song of Songs makes that very clear.  Even the most euphemistic translations are going to reveal a pretty randy narrative.  A randy narrative about 2 people who desperately love each other with a holy and God-given love, but a randy narrative never the less.  They want each other RIGHT now, they are filled with desire for each other, and to be satiated with each other.  That’s lust.  And clearly, here, holy lust.
    The issue is not lust.  It is what/who you are lusting after and WHY.   If a man buys a Playboy magazine to look at the pictures as an aid to masturbation and sexual fantasy, the Bible makes it about as clear as day: that’s sin.  If a man looks at his lawful wife and wants her right now on the kitchen table: Praise God!  But both are lust.   I stand by my statement that the mechanism by which porn rots a person is the LIE, and if that lie isn’t addressed then it will fester somewhere else.    Address the lie.  Shine the light and the darkness flees, curse the darkness and you soon find yourself trying a new darkness.  It is the non-reality that kills, and commitment to a greater communication with reality (God being both the author of reality and being real Himself) which ultimately brings life. 
    Ultimately my point with the previous post was to say that while the porn is an sin (and make no mistake, it is indeed a sin) my POINT is that I am learning not to let the yuck factor of porn distract from the fact that other sins  which operate by  similar means are just as funky.

Thanks all for reading, and I welcome any thoughts on this, Peace out.

December 11, 2006 Posted by | Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Men, women, porn, and reality

I wrote this really complicated and not particualary clear article on this, which when I explained it to my wife.  When I said it outloud  I realized that there was an far easier way to look at it.
1. Entertainment is fantasy
2. There are only 2 worldviews about fantasy
    A. Fantasy exists to add color and depth to reality.
    B. Fantasy exists to replace reality.
       Now, a lot of people get hung up on objectification.  Objectification in this case meas looking at people only as objects to satisify an emotional/physical need.  Women in particular complain that porn objectifies women.  And there right it does.  But thats not the problem.  Reality is complicated and time is not unlimited.  We, as a species objectify those around us to classify them and help us understand things.  My sister is my sister.  I also have a close female friend who I objectify as my sister.  If everytime I related to her at all I had to again go through every possible relationship that she and I could possibly have and what needs that each of us could meet for the other in each of those particular relationships,  I would go bonkers.  Far easier, AND healthier, to simply make her a sister object and work from there. 
    In the different relationships I have there are people I objectify as siblings, parents, etc.  The  problem is not objectification.  The problem isn’t fantasy either.  Humans are not alone in fantasizing.  All higher mammals dream.  Most practice funerary rights.  Funerals are filled with fantasy.  We objectfy the dead to ease the process of morning.  We fantasize what they would have done differntly, or how they would feel if they were alive today.  Al of it is fantasy, and its all a healthy normal part of life
    The problem is when we start fantasizing for purpose B.  to escape reality.  You fantasize not to facilitate reality, but IGNORE it.  Pornagraphy is the furthest logical conclusion to a world view that is based on ignoring realiy.  The images, bodies, dialogs, reactions, all of it is completely fake.  So spending a lot of time looking at it will gradually remove you from reality.  Your comments to others are based not in how they are, but how you wish them to be.
That being said, the problem with porn isn’t porn.  Its the worldview that creates it and consumes it.  People can (and do) reach the same level of nonreality from obessing about ANY media source.  And the answer to NOT being a porn addict isn’t the porn or lack thereoff.  Its a world view that is based on using fantasy for its design purpose of adding color and depth to reality, rather than self destructively using fantasy to escape reality. 
   And a note: don’t let the “yuck factor” of porn make you blind to Type B living anywhere.  Romance novels, movies, books, videogames.  Any genre can do to the hungry for X mind what porn can do the hungry for sex part. 
 

December 10, 2006 Posted by | Uncategorized | 4 Comments

Design for Mass Production

Thanks to everyone who commented so far, as always your imput is apprieciated (I really mean that.  Its not as much fun to write this if I don’t think anyone is listening.  Well today I am going to again talk about Design.    James, you are absolutely right that my Design 101 page could be used as a proof of a Designer if you apply it to the human body.  I wish I had thought of it.  But I didn’t
Ok anyway…
    For those of you who don’t know I decided when I was about 12 that I was going to be the next Henry Ford.  I’m still working on that, but as I said earlier, design begins first in the mind.
For a long time I have been trying to desing a subcompact car (For you non-auto nuts out there a car that has less than 99 inches between the center of the front wheel and the center of the rear wheel is a sub-compact.)  Sub-compacts are the hardest cars to design in the world.  A mininimist design is not particualry fault tolerant.  In case you have ever wondered why your laptop regularly poops out and your desktop PC keeps chugging, thats why.
  So I have been looking at the different subsystems tring to design a car that can sell for what the last model T did.  The last model T’s sold for about $3000 in 2006 dollars.  I think that no matter how different a car is from others people will buy it if they could get a warrenty and a new car for 3000 bones.
 I’ve got the drivetrain slimmed down about as low as I can see it getting (12 moving parts) Thats engine and transmission together.  I’ve got the body reduced to the cheapest lightest design possible (that could pass a collision test)  ect, ect.  Should get around 60 MPG and have a top speed around 80MPH.   But if I’m right, and if I can prove it by producing it, thats only one car.  How I do I design the rest?
  A concept that changed by life is something called an Index Mutual Fund.  An IMF is a company that exists only on paper.  All it does is buy stocks.  So if I own one share of IMF A, than that one share can be some Google, some GE, some GM, some United Airlines, etc.   Its a great way to share ownership (and wealth).  Well there are lots of mutaul funds.  IMFs are special because of  how they decide what stocks are kept and what stocks get sold.  They just have a rule book.  When a company’s stock meets condition XYZ it the IMF buys it.  If it goes to ABC they sell it.  IMF’s basically give you a place to put money that does whatever the market is doing on average.  (Usually 8% growth yearly.)  Thats a pretty low growth, but it actaully makes you more money that a lot of funds which pay 20% growth.  How is that possible???
    Its something called operational expense.  The operational expense ina Vanguard brand S&P 500 IMF is around 1/10 of 1%.  The operational expense of a some (actively managaged rather rule managed) is over 12% because an “expert” has to be paid to “manage” the stocks.   So I think it might be possible to run a car company (or a government, for that matter) with an absolute minimum of intervation if a clever enough rule structure is imposed.  So heres my ideas for a car company rule structure.
So here it is in its unrefined and naive glory.  The view points of the following people must be considered to make a world class product.
1.  The stock holders profit:
    A. Monthly
    B. Quarterly
    C. Yearly
    D. Five year
    E. 25 year
2. The producers
    A. High level statistics
    B. Production staff product ideas
    C. Production staff production process ideas
    D. Management compensation ideas
3. The Sellers
    A. Increasing volume
    B. Increasing margin
4. The Owner
    A.  All ideas
5. The Maintainers
    A. All ideas

    Any time you make a product you have to BALANCE all these things.  If you don’t you will go broke.  Over focus on 1A will bankrupt you before 1D becomes a problem.  Over focusing on 3A will kill 3B and vice verse.  Over focusing on 4A can kill absolutely everything.  If you don’t have customers you will obviously go broke.  However if you listen to the customer to much you will go broke, as what is in the customers best interest (A car the goes 10,000 MPH, never needs maintainence, gets 1000 MPG and costs a nickle) is NOT in the companies.  All you have to do is figure out a constitutional sort of system to decide who gets gets how much say in each situation and your company will never go wrong.  Its a freemarket of ideas, and by tapping its pulse to make the best product at the best price.

December 9, 2006 Posted by | Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Entry for December 06, 2006

It happened.  I got placed in charge.  And told to whip my team into shape.  So now I am person who can delegate the nothing that we do everynight, but I have to make sure that all the nothing is properly notated.  Sigh.  I passed my evals (as usual) and my arms really hurt now.  I found out when I am supposed to report to my new base, but can’t get my orders yet.  And I got in trouble for not signing something, which I was “punished” for but do to unique circumstances my punishment effects me in no way what so ever.   Weeeeee.
Oh and I saw the Nintendo Wii.  I wanna touch it.  I want to have it in my home.  I want to put it on a little silk pillow.  Its incredible.  Its not even that advanced as a processor, but the human interface with it is the most brilliant I have ever scene.  Its going to be the 64 1/2 Mustange of consels.

December 6, 2006 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Not in jail

I feel as if I should have something brillliant to say. But I don’t. We did a bunch of stuff last night which for privacy’s sake I am probably not supposed to blog about. So I leave it at this. Mom, dad, thanks for teaching me not to be an idiot. Thats why I am here instead of in jail. Thats it.

December 4, 2006 Posted by | Uncategorized | 3 Comments

The PhAAAAAAAAntom of OperAHHHHHHH

Tonight at work I was able to watch most of the Phantom of the Opera between calls.  It just so happens that I also have this P of the O techno remix on my computer (I am listening to it right now.  Now, the first thing I have to say is that I really dislike serious operas.  You’re watching this girl trying to escape from the clutches of this twisted and psychotic (though very talented) man, and she pauses in the middle of escaping for a little solo.  That sort of thing makes me crazy.  Actually I don’t even like the opera style when I understand what people are saying.  In Italian its just beautiful music, but in English is just people singing there lines.  So my mind began to wander, and I wondered if they’re was a interesting new take that could made of it.
    I decided that a really cool (if artistically appalling) action movie could be made.
See the Phantom could be a little boy in theater troop.  The whole troop perishes in an opera house fire, but, able to crawl into the sewers underneath the theater, escapes though horribly scared.  He finds that the fire had been on purpose by an evil land owner who has burnt down tenet houses and any place where the poor congregate in part of a vast conspiracy to control Paris and become obscenely rich.  (Which largely works)
    Gradually he grows older, and very well read by reading the books that people throw away.  He also becomes very well acquainted with the Paris organized crime syndicate. (They dispose of bodies in the sewer.)   The evil landlord builds a lavish and expensive opera house/criminal headquarters over the charred remains of the first theater, and directly over the Phantom.  The phantom is content to remain cloistered in the cities
    He threw some means realizes that the adopted daughter of the crime lord is in fact his sister, who didn‘t die in the fire after all.  When she is killed the Phantom decides to take down the slum lord.  He begins by traveling through the sewers and assassinating business men and government officials connected to the landlord.  Finally the movie ends with a 30 minute orgy of death in which the Phantom kills all of the bad guys in the opera house with various booby traps, dueling pistols,  and sabers.   
    
That’s my plan.  It beats the heck out of the one I watched tonight

December 2, 2006 Posted by | Uncategorized | 2 Comments