I don't believe that language or lack of language limits thought. (Of course, Sapir-Whorf is more complex than that.)
Caution: This post is not revised. I got tired.
Perhaps this is because I solve problems intuitively. There might be a few steps of logic I can explain, but there is usually also a leap of intuition that cannot be explained except with "and then a miracle occurs." I know intuition involves the mind's background processes; I read that several (like 13) seconds prior to an insight, certain brain waves change, indicating processes we are not aware of.
I have a tendency to zone out. But I'd like to think that my mind isn't vacant, simply elsewhere. However, often times if someone asks me what I'm thinking, I honestly have no idea. I have even said to a friend, "if I'm staring off into space, I'm really not thinking of anything." Ideas and thoughts are sometimes words, sometimes images, and sometimes neither words nor images, but feelings. Are these "thoughts [that] can't be thought"? I'd like to think that even if I'm not "thinking senses" (like sound of words or image), there are processes going on I'm unaware of. Often times thoughts are feelings of a certain kind of connection (or analogy) between abstract concepts. I know ADDers tend to see connections other people don't see. Of course our culture considers seeing connections other people don't see to be insanity.
These feelings are not vague, they are very specific. They only become vague and iffy if I try to translate them into words. "Feelings" have a negative connotation in English, a connotation of iffiness and pseudo-science. "Intuition" is (only) slightly better, though has a connotation of femininity, weakness, irrationality, and hysterical fantasy ("figment of one's imagination"). I won't say whether feelings are real or illusion because the question itself is an illusion (definitely insane).
I will say that some feelings can be correct or incorrect, like sense of direction--when I find out my internal north was wrong, it feeling like the entire world just spun and I'm now in a different place, even though I know the lay of it.
The feeling I'm referring to is either:
-the inexplicable feeling you suddenly get which leads to the correct answer of a problem, the "and then a miracle occurs" step in a problem, which you must cross to get to the answer and you cannot explain without giving away the answer
-the perception of analogy between abstract concepts, which can be put into (inferior) words and understood by a handful of friends (usually ADDers or really bright friends). When I get ideas, they are often a complex feeling (not an emotion), which I will often then spend an hour or two translating into language and writing down, usually losing quite a bit in the process.
-the perception of relation and flavor of relation between words in language. perhaps because i'm not confined to thinking in words, i can think *about* words.
-an _uncommon_ immediate identification. it's a feeling because it's trivial or obvious (or perhaps arbitrary?). unless i'm lost, i can tell you where north is. i feel like i know "how," but i've rarely succeed in explaining the logic. most people know this immediate feeling, where someone asks you a question, and you inexplicably know the answer, my immediate, inexplicable answers are only considered strange because they're occur in different places. for example, if i ask you which of your hands is your left hand, most people would probably immediately know. if you ask "how do you know," the person would not know how to reply. i however don't have the intuitive knowledge of my right and left hand, instead i have to logically reason (i write with my right hand, etc), therefore i could answer "how do you know."
This could just be because of my ADA-recognized "disability." The process of the large jumps my mind makes ("distractions") are similar to that of the jumps of insight--inexplicable and intuitive, probably involving a lot of thinking underneath consciousness. Unlike the norm for ADD, I have pretty good spacial reasoning and sense of direction. Both are probably a step below intuition, because they involve images and not pure, abstract thought.
I apparently can also count without using numbers heard or numbers seen--often times when I'm counting out something, I'll get distracted and lose count, but then will still accurately count out 10, or 16 or whatever. I don't think this is in any way exceptional. Similar feelings about numbers themselves, if one's IQ is an additional 3 standard deviations above the norm, would be like Daniel Tammet's sense. I won't flatter myself to say that if I don't have the capacity for such feelings they surely are made up.
I also do not have Synesthesia. Instead, an occupational therapist might say I have some Sensory Integration problems.
Maybe Daoism isn't for everyone after all. It might make mind blowing sense to me, but it won't make sense to a person whose "great thought" actually *can* "be thought."
Maybe transcending the illusion is an impossible and worthless concept for people whose sensory illusion is actually flawless (though my 5-senses indeed raise a flawless illusion, dreams are always forgotten, hallucinations never happen except wavy grass/walls when sleep deprived). Maybe this fact is why every culture turns twists the prophet's words into stifling religion--the only words that normal, functioning people can understand.
I feel like I can see into things--see the way things are, or see the way all things seem to be part of a [something; not quite "movement," not quite "whole"]. How to prevent yourself from becoming a crank? Unfortunately, I can't seem to see the things that I'm supposed to see, such as the main point of an essay or reading. This could be a totally mundane learning retardation, just like the math concepts that math tutees can't understand because the concepts are too trivial to yield a pattern in the tutees' mind.
20090923
20090913
finding
You gotta have faith that you'll figure things out. Not the meaning of anything, but something that works for you. Know you're gonna find it and hold on to it with your soul, Buddha be damned. There's a way.
Labels:
life
20090906
Democracy and Progress
Is democracy progressive or conservative? I posit that, for better or for worse, democratic systems have more inertia than other systems. I opine that democracy is still the best way to go at present. Maybe in the future consensus anarchy will be viable.
1) Democratic America lagged behind the enlightened monarchies in abolishing slavery.
2) Decentralized Islam, where any crank can issue fatwas (whether or not other Muslims believe them), is unimaginably more conservative than structured religions (Catholicism, Protestantism). Even the decentralized Buddhism and Hinduism are more conservative than people in the West are led to believe--popular East Asian religion is only progressive in the West. You might say Protestantism is more progressive and more decentralized than Catholicism. I say Protestantism necessitated a centralized Catholicism to define itself. The very word "Protestantism" betrays this fact.
3) Did the common person fare better under the rule of the early Roman senators or under the rule of the early Roman Kings? Any classical scholar can tell you that, except for the tussle over the last king, the common Roman was much better off under the rule of a King. Senators were democratically elected (well, the best democracy the world had to offer at that time), but these rich folk worked hard to further decrease the Roman Gini coefficient.
1) Democratic America lagged behind the enlightened monarchies in abolishing slavery.
2) Decentralized Islam, where any crank can issue fatwas (whether or not other Muslims believe them), is unimaginably more conservative than structured religions (Catholicism, Protestantism). Even the decentralized Buddhism and Hinduism are more conservative than people in the West are led to believe--popular East Asian religion is only progressive in the West. You might say Protestantism is more progressive and more decentralized than Catholicism. I say Protestantism necessitated a centralized Catholicism to define itself. The very word "Protestantism" betrays this fact.
3) Did the common person fare better under the rule of the early Roman senators or under the rule of the early Roman Kings? Any classical scholar can tell you that, except for the tussle over the last king, the common Roman was much better off under the rule of a King. Senators were democratically elected (well, the best democracy the world had to offer at that time), but these rich folk worked hard to further decrease the Roman Gini coefficient.
Labels:
civil rights,
consensus building,
religion
20090905
Psychopathy, Righteousness, and Deserts
Psychopathy rests on righteousness.
That is to say, one cannot be a (primary) psychopath unless one feels supremely righteous. Today I watched The Shawshank Redemption. In the movie, the warden kills the witness that proves Andy's (Tim Robbins) innocence because a single retrial would shake his unwavering righteous belief that every inmate deserves punishment.
"Well?"
"Nothing."
"That's right, because you know deep down you deserved to be punished, don't you, Mr Potter?"
My opinion is psychopaths must be incarcerated (not as punishment but as quarantine of "viruses unrepairable") until spontaneous remission at middle age (if ever) in lieu of therapy, which only gives them better tools to exploit people. Everyone else should be given therapy in lieu of incarceration, is hardly be correctional.
Instead of encouraging psychopathy, the religious figures of history should have used their power to prevent it. God could have said: "none deserve punishment / punishment is a deterrent and not a means of (victim's, perceived victim's) gratification / a deterrent that doesn't deter is unreasonable."
See: "Failsafe" - Religion is humanity's oncogene
That is to say, one cannot be a (primary) psychopath unless one feels supremely righteous. Today I watched The Shawshank Redemption. In the movie, the warden kills the witness that proves Andy's (Tim Robbins) innocence because a single retrial would shake his unwavering righteous belief that every inmate deserves punishment.
"Well?"
"Nothing."
"That's right, because you know deep down you deserved to be punished, don't you, Mr Potter?"
My opinion is psychopaths must be incarcerated (not as punishment but as quarantine of "viruses unrepairable") until spontaneous remission at middle age (if ever) in lieu of therapy, which only gives them better tools to exploit people. Everyone else should be given therapy in lieu of incarceration, is hardly be correctional.
Instead of encouraging psychopathy, the religious figures of history should have used their power to prevent it. God could have said: "none deserve punishment / punishment is a deterrent and not a means of (victim's, perceived victim's) gratification / a deterrent that doesn't deter is unreasonable."
See: "Failsafe" - Religion is humanity's oncogene
Labels:
movies
20090824
How To: Sync iTunes library and folder
This one's really obvious. I have an iTunes folder that's larger than my iTunes library in GB, which means tracks are in the folder but not in my library.
Solution: drag your iTunes folder into iTunes. It will take a few minutes, but in the end only the unadded tracks will be added. You don't need to change any settings beforehand or add a script. To save time, you can disable automatic album artwork lookup.
Note: When comparing your iTunes folder size and iTunes library size, remember to take into consideration your music as well as your audiobooks, TV shows, and movies.
See also: Doug's iTunes scripts for identifying and eliminating (or other action) orphans, or tracks (appears with an "!" in your library) where the actual file was deleted, but not removed from your library.
~~~~
How to make an playlist of "unchecked"songs in iTunes:
Solution: drag your iTunes folder into iTunes. It will take a few minutes, but in the end only the unadded tracks will be added. You don't need to change any settings beforehand or add a script. To save time, you can disable automatic album artwork lookup.
Note: When comparing your iTunes folder size and iTunes library size, remember to take into consideration your music as well as your audiobooks, TV shows, and movies.
See also: Doug's iTunes scripts for identifying and eliminating (or other action) orphans, or tracks (appears with an "!" in your library) where the actual file was deleted, but not removed from your library.
~~~~
How to make an playlist of "unchecked"songs in iTunes:
- Make a 1st smart playlist of all your songs (many ways to do this, ie, "rating between 0 and 5"), check the "only include checked songs" box
- Make a 2nd smart playlist of all the songs not in the first playlist (rule: playlist => not in => 1st smart playlist), DO NOT check the "only include checked songs" box
- If you want to keep a copy, back up songs first (ie, select all in playlist, then drag into a folder in the finder, ie, an external hard drive)
- Select all songs in that playlist (command + a)
- Select info (command + i)
- Change the genre to something no other song in your library is (ie, "delete")
- Press Enter
- Wait until action is completed
- Go to your library
- Select Browse
- Select the above genre (ie, "delete")
- Select all songs (command + a)
- Delete (command + delete)
- Press OK
- Press remove songs from iTunes folder to trash
Labels:
info
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
