Bwahahahah I must be a bloody genius then!
On 24 Sep, 16:04, [email protected] wrote:
> Raw thought like all ideas are best received when the writing is clear and
> distinct rather than the tendency among some writers
>
> to believe that sounding obscure is equated with brilliance.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Slip Disc <[email protected]>
> To: "Minds Eye" <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thu, Sep 24, 2009 10:32 am
> Subject: [Mind's Eye] Re: thinking of free philosophy
>
> Seems clear to me, the swaying of writing content for fiscal
> advantage. How much of the need to generate funds influences the way
> we write. Discard the functionary, the need, the peer appeasement and
> what is left is the freedom to wholly express raw thought, thought
> without the sieve of processing and without having a reason. That is
> the plight, the eddy of constants in academia elevation, achievements
> even by way of public recognition. Perhaps the earliest of writers
> experienced what it is you are presenting, pure thought without a
> designed end. Still there does seem to be a necessity beyond the
> singular, the other ears to hear, to understand. What is a great
> oration in solitude but the expansion of self to self. There must be
> others to receive, lest the end of the universe be an openness for
> simple primal screaming.
>
> On Sep 24, 4:23?am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Two colleagues once wondered what it might be like to write other than
> > as a functionary. ?The problem is related to Lee's pondering on music
> > rights and illegal downloading. ?The problem of not being a
> > functionary is that there is no 'money' in it. ?Even writing something
> > for Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy online (free to users) could
> > be regarded as 'money connected' - there would be certain 'credits'
> > for an academic career.
>
> > I find myself wondering how we might establish something free of our
> > early twenty-first century plight. ?I see some answers in future
> > memories, perhaps ones in which we write from the perspective of the
> > current plight having destroyed itself. ?I catch glimpses of a world
> > where much we now take seriously is so old hat it could only be part
> > of a ridiculous history (like Blackadder). ?One of these worlds has us
> > genuinely trying to leave Earth with the technology to do so. ?I
> > posted recently on what I believe the case for space-time travel is.
> > Essentially, the equations (sadly based on currently inadequate data
> > on exotic substances like 'dark energy') tell us that travell
> ing at
> > acceleration acceptable to our bodies, we could reach the 'expansion
> > horizon' (edge of the universe) in what we would experience as 30
> > years in 'planet of the apes time'. ?We could not come back, in the
> > sense that all we left behind would be gone, except a bleak, dark
> > place - as 'here' would have experienced eons of 'time'.
>
> > In some sense, my questions are about the 'freedom' such a trip
> > involves. ?We get the freedom to roam space-time vastness, but
> > presumably need to arrive somewhere in which we can enjoy something
> > similar to Earth that has not undergone 'eon decay'. ?If possible,
> > great questions about what we are leaving behind arise, as well as
> > what we would be seeking to do. ?A myriad of 'Mayflowers' becomes a
> > possibility. ?No doubt some sect of 'believers' might well stay behind
> > for the 'second coming' at the time of the heat death of the sun.
>
> > Much that we value, like family, friendship, neighbourliness and so is
> > challenged in this experiment, as well as much of the moral circling
> > we do. ?In my science fiction, I'm concerned with what such a future
> > does to philosophy (I take this from Popper). ?What would a woman in
> > such times regard childbirth as? ?What would we consider 'natural'.
> > In another post, Chris and I are wandering back from Europa, already
> > substantially changed by genetic splicing (he, in fact, is a 'built
> > man' not born of woman - so no change there mate as I plagiarise
> > MacBeth!), unaware in early chapters a new lifeform has entered
> > symbiosis with us from Europa's underground ocean). ?We made the
> > mistake of running out of whiskey and cactus juice and drank the
> > water. ?Earth is recovering from war and asteroid catastrophe and
> > survivors are focusing on relativity travel (there are new worlds out
> > there to royally screw-up!). Would 'morality' at such a time be to
> > sabotage the space-time travel to save the universe from humanity?
>
> > I've been on the fringes of a few physics symposia ('pose' being the
> > key term) at which such stuff is
> trolled out over too much beer and
> > too little female company (sort of Mind's Eye plus beer?). ?My own
> > science isn't good enough to know who is talking rot or not really.
> > What I'm on about, should anyone have survived this far, is changing
> > the 'black boxes' of philosophy to see if we can open up free space.
> > One could imagine in the novel, that when Chris attacks me with a
> > knife, he understands I had always really accepted his view of gun-
> > control as he looks down the barrel of the cocked .38 Magnum I've just
> > raised from under the table. ?Or one could wonder, accepting that the
> > science works, just how daft our current values are, being little more
> > than the good intentions that lined the path to Hell (two more world
> > wars precede the time of the novel). ?My plan is a genre of
> > deconstruction-reconstruction (of mice and men). ?Those in the know
> > may suspect I am somewhat shackled by 'strategic scenario building'
> > here, but I hope there is no return of managerial desire and I'm more
> > concerned with the impact on knowledge of where is knows it 'has' to
> > go, and that we can cut through that straitjacket. ?Relativity travel
> > can remain a fantasy and still provide some direction on how we might
> > better await future generations pass into entropy. ?Those who think
> > religion has no part to play might reflect that such a future moment
> > might well be the triumph of the Cathars (the return to nothingness
> > and final defeat of the material devil).- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
