What a clever blog post you wrote

Funny how giving a compliment to someone, can be merely an assertion of one's dominance over the compliment recipient. The giver of praise is assuming their own ability to evaluate the other person and generalize about a particular situation. The compliment giver gets the last word. Those who studied with Jan Cox, the 20th century philosopher, may recall the importance he gave to not being submissive. In one sense, it was the thrust of his writing. 

Reality and Theater

Once you study the question it is apparent that there are no cats in the canon of great plays.  And this leads one to speculate that this situation relates to the fact cats are famously untrainable.  They would therefore merely add a chaotic element to a theatrical situation. How much of a stretch is it to imagine that cats are reality, and the theater stage, human consciousness? If this is a useful metaphor, then one understands why mystics, such as Jan Cox, look elsewhere than man's verbal facility for any so-called secrets. 

The small Print

Management is not responsible for thoughts left in parked skulls

Giant questions

It seems like most mythologies have a story about their origins that involve giants. The Greeks, the Norse, the Irish. That is, there are stories of a conflict between us and  --- people that are much larger than oneself or one's neighbors. Giants who have their own goals which may not be those of our own. The fact the archaeological record does not contain evidence of these giants, emphasizes the puzzling aspect and uniformity of these stories. As Jan Cox, who revolutionized the practice of mysticism in the last century, often said, "what gives?"

Without assuming I have anything like an answer, here are some thoughts that came to mind on this topic. What if, the use of the term 'giants, ' is a way of confronting the fact that we, us ordinary humans, are, ourselves, best described, as 'puny.'  A way, like looking at something in a reflection, of dealing with something that would be too crippling if directly confronted. And if my thoughts have any value, this line of reasoning suggests this use of mirrors to deal with dilemmas, is really basic in the human psyche. 

One result of men thinking their survival depends on outwitting 'giants,' is that men are here grasping fundamentals of reality,  whether their foes are giant, or they themselves, small and ineffective physically. To me it is obvious, men are, looking out at a starry sky, small in terms of what they can survey.  It sometimes seems that this reality emphasizing perspective has been lost by many today, who see MEN as giants, that is people who are "on the verge of figuring out all of nature's secrets." One can wonder, surely, how realistic this shift is.

Approaching the question of the nature of freedom

Even though it is independence day in the USA I am probably the only blogger talking about independence from the mechanical mind. But at least my example is rooted in the fight for freedom among abolitionists and black people in the next to last century, freedom from blatantt external oppression, a fight which generally must succeed prior to an inquiry into the real limiting factors to freedom. 

John Brown, and his raid on Harper's Ferry in 1859  --- demonstrates a peculiar but universal quality of mechanical thought---the sense one has of the clarity of one's verbal conclusions. 

John Brown saw so clearly how much suffering slavery caused, he saw it clearly---so he planned a whole revolt based on the assumption that the downtrodden would rise to his call for revolution. The slaves were miserable and Brown's whole plan was that the slave population of Virginia would rise up once they heard his verbal rallying cry. It was so clear in his mind. You gather your followers so far, you get control of the arms and ammunition in the neighborhood, and then the black people in Virginia will rush to your banner. 

Some people see John Brown today as a martyr, some as insane, but my point here is that he is the exemplar of ordinary thought. His air tight conclusions were so vivid and so irrefutable, that he is remembered even now for a hopeless sally against a bastion of the slave owning south. The point is the faith he placed in his calculations. 

What he is not is a fool. Today the natural scientists display the same reliance on ordinary binary thought when they divide those without science degrees into the "scientifically literate" and the creationists. To most scientists today to speak of varieties of religious experience, is to speak of the subjective and pointless.

They and John Brown are both good examples of that aspect of ordinary thought which can be partially characterized as a clarity of convictions. 

Illusions, Optical lllusions, and Statistics

Lovely bit found at the news aggregater, Newswise, and linked to here--
Neuroscientists Find Famous Optical Illusion Surprisingly Potent
Newswise — Scientists have come up with new insight into the brain processes that cause the following optical illusion...

There follows in the article a link  to a youtube video which clearly demonstrates this effect---after a certain kind of motion your brain continues to see that motion in things which are NOT actually moving. Aristotle noticed this "optical illusion."

Now a scientist at the University of Rochester has pinpointed an area of the brain where this illusion originates. According to the article scientists are carrying on research next to determine if this illusion is beneficial.

What they neglected to look for was an area of the brain where the effect that '"any explanation whatsoever" makes a researcher feel he has found a sufficient explanation', originates. 

An example, of the kind of aspect neuroscientists are mostly oblivious to, would be --  what if -- What if the so-called Motion Aftereffect illusion is so strong because it supports the mechanical illusion that having thoughts is the same thing as thinking. An illusion quite beneficial to the orderly and progressive development of civilization. One thought after another, like a line of elephants in parade, constantly moves through your mind, at least--that is the impression. Closer scrutiny reveals each thought/ I mean elephant, is actually just a statue, a statue on a conveyor belt.  Itself not moving at all. And still everyone on the planet would say, yes my thoughts are alive, they engage. But if they are actually NOT in motion, then some greater Real Motion, might be really moving, beyond the apprehension of man's mechanical intelligence. 

Meeh, why should I give them clues, though. Still some might wonder if, there are not people, who are, as we speak, investigating that conveyor belt. 

Existential Angst and Anomie --- Resolved

At least one case of Existential Angst and Anomie has been resolved. 

My neighbor's new puppy came home from the park carrying a twig in its mouth.

BOIIINNNNGGGGGGGG

The retriever gene kicked in. 

No more -- who am I? No more -- what's it all about? No more -- dark night of the soul.

Just sweet, confident action based on real knowledge.