By Angus Needle
Saturday, May 5, 2007
A brief thought on Wittgenstein
Stupid feedblitz subscription thing. I'm not sure if it's working yet so if you want to subscribe and you get a message that says you're subscribing to "unified health" please let me know. Also if you aren't getting the updates.
What should I talk about now? I'd like to talk about logic, how the unit of measure of the mind can't be considered as a unit but only as a process. I'd like to talk about the fact that all we see is a reflection of our thoughts, and those thoughts are entirely governed by this relational structure that keeps us from seeing beyond the possible preconceptions of our own minds and into the realm of Truth. That would be nice. To be able to speak about speech itself and map out it's limits, from the inside, Like Ludwig. I'd appreciate that if I could, or if I really wanted to. But how do I come to do that? How can we really speak about the laws that govern speech? These laws (or rather consistent structures) totally pervade every aspect of ever word we utter. We cannot utter a word or phrase or any sort of intelligible or unintelligible sign without it being controlled by the logical form that our minds have imposed on us. I say imposed because I have an inkling (like old Witty) that, even though we are entirely subject to it, we can actually use logic to arrive at a place that will enable us to be free of it's confines. Logic cannot take us the whole way, I think only concentration can, but it can draw an out line of what lies beyond itself (from within itself). So what could this mean? That, first of all, we are limited to the possibilities of combinations of thoughts, that those combinations are limited by logical form (at least our interpretation of them is limited), and that logical form is destroyed by...
Morning gibberish. Just straightening out a couple things I learned this week about the great and powerful Wittgenstein. I think everyone should study at least some logic. At the very least every person should be taught (preferably in high school or junior high) the basics of informal logic and the basics of propositional logic. At the very least a person should know the most common fallacies and be aware of why they are fallacies. This would clear things up a bit.
What should I talk about now? I'd like to talk about logic, how the unit of measure of the mind can't be considered as a unit but only as a process. I'd like to talk about the fact that all we see is a reflection of our thoughts, and those thoughts are entirely governed by this relational structure that keeps us from seeing beyond the possible preconceptions of our own minds and into the realm of Truth. That would be nice. To be able to speak about speech itself and map out it's limits, from the inside, Like Ludwig. I'd appreciate that if I could, or if I really wanted to. But how do I come to do that? How can we really speak about the laws that govern speech? These laws (or rather consistent structures) totally pervade every aspect of ever word we utter. We cannot utter a word or phrase or any sort of intelligible or unintelligible sign without it being controlled by the logical form that our minds have imposed on us. I say imposed because I have an inkling (like old Witty) that, even though we are entirely subject to it, we can actually use logic to arrive at a place that will enable us to be free of it's confines. Logic cannot take us the whole way, I think only concentration can, but it can draw an out line of what lies beyond itself (from within itself). So what could this mean? That, first of all, we are limited to the possibilities of combinations of thoughts, that those combinations are limited by logical form (at least our interpretation of them is limited), and that logical form is destroyed by...
Morning gibberish. Just straightening out a couple things I learned this week about the great and powerful Wittgenstein. I think everyone should study at least some logic. At the very least every person should be taught (preferably in high school or junior high) the basics of informal logic and the basics of propositional logic. At the very least a person should know the most common fallacies and be aware of why they are fallacies. This would clear things up a bit.
Friday, May 4, 2007
From Angus to Poetry
There's a nice classy comic from Angus. I feel so proud. I had to fix the formatting and crap for him this morning so that's why there's only the one for now. He did say that he's going to put up some new ones later today and that there might be a surprise or something for all of us sometime over the weekend. Yay!
I think Angus has one of the most startling and thought provoking styles I've ever come across. He's actually quite an accomplished artist so to see such crappy drawings in his comics leads me to believe that he intended that to mean something. Any ideas as to what that might be?
Also, he said he might want to start saying some things every once in a while so be prepared.
Where does the shadow of life
dance with the love of the body?
Who's the one that keeps the faith
in the face of the immanent fall?
Where in life does light seep through
from the rays of the radiant sun?
Another has been to the palace of two
and come back through the palace of one.
Just sort of burst out of me that time. Seems to be a good one, don't judge it till I've had a chance to incubate it though. Incubation is very important to all sorts of artistic and intellectual endeavors. It broadens perspective, gives a certain clarity to the work, allows the artist to see the work through different eyes and reconsider what ought to be reconsidered. Don't neglect incubation. Take breaks, have fun, but always with the calm assurance that this fun is also part of the creative process.
I think Angus has one of the most startling and thought provoking styles I've ever come across. He's actually quite an accomplished artist so to see such crappy drawings in his comics leads me to believe that he intended that to mean something. Any ideas as to what that might be?
Also, he said he might want to start saying some things every once in a while so be prepared.
Where does the shadow of life
dance with the love of the body?
Who's the one that keeps the faith
in the face of the immanent fall?
Where in life does light seep through
from the rays of the radiant sun?
Another has been to the palace of two
and come back through the palace of one.
Just sort of burst out of me that time. Seems to be a good one, don't judge it till I've had a chance to incubate it though. Incubation is very important to all sorts of artistic and intellectual endeavors. It broadens perspective, gives a certain clarity to the work, allows the artist to see the work through different eyes and reconsider what ought to be reconsidered. Don't neglect incubation. Take breaks, have fun, but always with the calm assurance that this fun is also part of the creative process.
Thursday, May 3, 2007
Sentimentalism on a stick.
I'd rather be the futile mess of Wittgenstein than Russell's prize apostle.
Yesterday a friend of mine asked me if I'd be willing to let him put some of his comics on this site. I said "sure why not?" then he said "thanks I will." So today at some point he's going to put up a comic or two. They will more than likely be offensive but that's ok. I don't mind. I would definitely like to hear from you if you find it offensive, not because I'll take it down but I always like to discuss such limited views with people.
Speaking of which I'd just like to mention something that I've been working on for the last few months. I was introduced to something called "the inquiry process" through Paul Scheele's Abundance for Life course. It originally came from a woman by the name of Byron Katie.
Essentially the work is just a few questions that are supposed to lead you to uncover the truth behind limiting beliefs and false perceptions of reality. So far I've had a whole bunch of great successes. Like yesterday I finally realized that I struggle to keep my apartment and stress over money for absolutely no reason. The money I need, whether I have it or not, does not control me. I am in control of where my attention, energy and emotions go, and it has nothing whatsoever to do with the money. I also realized that living on the street wouldn't be so bad. Like the last time I lived on the street I got used to it. It's only bad or uncomfortable when we attach our sense of self to these external circumstances. If we can realize that our state is only dependent on our thoughts then the external reality matters much less than our internal reality. Though we might be in a "bad situation" we can still be perfectly happy and fulfilled.
I really want to give you the questions because I think they really could benefit anyone who uses them but I'm sure they're copy written. Whatever, if they want to try to sue me for a few books and some kettlebells they can go right ahead.
The inquiry process is as follows.
First make a statement about whatever it is thats been bothering you. This works really well for dealing with petty interpersonal problems, jealousy, "shoulds" and "shouldn'ts" and just about anything else. It might look something like "I'm angry at Sylvia because she treats me badly."
Now ask yourself the first question "is that true?" Usually you'll get something like "yeah it's true I feel terrible every time she treats me bad."
Now ask yourself "do I know absolutely that it's true?" and you might get something like "well no I'm not feeling it right now and I'm not sure I'll react that way in the future, but in the past it has been true."
Then you ask "how do I react when I believe that it's true?" and you'll get all sorts of reasons like "angry" "I feel useless" "I hate her" etc.
Now ask "who would I be without that thought?" and you'll find your answers.
Once all these questions are answered (this should be done on paper by the way. The mind is difficult to pin down so writing things helps keep them steady) you can do whats called a turn around. Just play with your original statement to see if you can come up with another statement that is at least as true, if not truer, than the original. You'll get stuff like "I'm not angry at Sylvia because she treats me badly" "I'm angry at myself because I treat me badly" "My thinking is angry at Sylvia because she treats me badly" and tons of others. With each of these new statements just ask yourself if it's true. Often you'll be surprised at which ones really are truer than the original. For instance the first turn around might be truer because you'll realize that you really aren't angry at Sylvia you're angry at yourself, or you're just not actually angry. Lots of new considerations can come of this and rarely will you find that you've not received a whole new perspective on the situation.
Seems too simple to be effective I know but just ask yourself "if there really was such an easy way to permanently improve all my relationships would I take it?" and if the answer is yes then check it out.
Loving What Is
Yesterday a friend of mine asked me if I'd be willing to let him put some of his comics on this site. I said "sure why not?" then he said "thanks I will." So today at some point he's going to put up a comic or two. They will more than likely be offensive but that's ok. I don't mind. I would definitely like to hear from you if you find it offensive, not because I'll take it down but I always like to discuss such limited views with people.
Speaking of which I'd just like to mention something that I've been working on for the last few months. I was introduced to something called "the inquiry process" through Paul Scheele's Abundance for Life course. It originally came from a woman by the name of Byron Katie.
Essentially the work is just a few questions that are supposed to lead you to uncover the truth behind limiting beliefs and false perceptions of reality. So far I've had a whole bunch of great successes. Like yesterday I finally realized that I struggle to keep my apartment and stress over money for absolutely no reason. The money I need, whether I have it or not, does not control me. I am in control of where my attention, energy and emotions go, and it has nothing whatsoever to do with the money. I also realized that living on the street wouldn't be so bad. Like the last time I lived on the street I got used to it. It's only bad or uncomfortable when we attach our sense of self to these external circumstances. If we can realize that our state is only dependent on our thoughts then the external reality matters much less than our internal reality. Though we might be in a "bad situation" we can still be perfectly happy and fulfilled.
I really want to give you the questions because I think they really could benefit anyone who uses them but I'm sure they're copy written. Whatever, if they want to try to sue me for a few books and some kettlebells they can go right ahead.
The inquiry process is as follows.
First make a statement about whatever it is thats been bothering you. This works really well for dealing with petty interpersonal problems, jealousy, "shoulds" and "shouldn'ts" and just about anything else. It might look something like "I'm angry at Sylvia because she treats me badly."
Now ask yourself the first question "is that true?" Usually you'll get something like "yeah it's true I feel terrible every time she treats me bad."
Now ask yourself "do I know absolutely that it's true?" and you might get something like "well no I'm not feeling it right now and I'm not sure I'll react that way in the future, but in the past it has been true."
Then you ask "how do I react when I believe that it's true?" and you'll get all sorts of reasons like "angry" "I feel useless" "I hate her" etc.
Now ask "who would I be without that thought?" and you'll find your answers.
Once all these questions are answered (this should be done on paper by the way. The mind is difficult to pin down so writing things helps keep them steady) you can do whats called a turn around. Just play with your original statement to see if you can come up with another statement that is at least as true, if not truer, than the original. You'll get stuff like "I'm not angry at Sylvia because she treats me badly" "I'm angry at myself because I treat me badly" "My thinking is angry at Sylvia because she treats me badly" and tons of others. With each of these new statements just ask yourself if it's true. Often you'll be surprised at which ones really are truer than the original. For instance the first turn around might be truer because you'll realize that you really aren't angry at Sylvia you're angry at yourself, or you're just not actually angry. Lots of new considerations can come of this and rarely will you find that you've not received a whole new perspective on the situation.
Seems too simple to be effective I know but just ask yourself "if there really was such an easy way to permanently improve all my relationships would I take it?" and if the answer is yes then check it out.
Loving What Is
Wednesday, May 2, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
