Motoring Modification

For some time I have been entertaining the hypothesis that the motorcar drivers who do not use their blinker lamps to indicate turns or lane changes are incapable of operating such due to mental deficiency. Now a second such state has been offered to me: that motorcar drivers who are unaware that they don’t know where they are going also do not use their blinker lamps.

Degeneracy. a source of bemused satisfaction.

Which Reality?

One day, and back to gym. Rather dragging podcast, an episode of the CBC’s “Best of Ideas” interviewing some muslim journalist who alternated between being boring and strident but did trigger some association with something my colleague Magnetic Inductance Force said

“people who believe that society is reality”

and prompted some cognition.

Following on the heels of yesterday’s blot on thinking, I take as a given that different people tend to think in different ways. In effect, that they have different realities. For physicists, reality is physical; for mathematicians, math is reality; for biologists, biology is reality. And for justicers, law is reality and for physicians, medicine is reality.

But for most people, the ones who are not educated (but likely, if young, have a college diploma,) and EXTRO bogs, reality is society. Only occasionally does something other than friends, family, neighbors, and community intrude and briefly, usually denied, have an aspect of reality. It has been offered that this is why people told they are going to die turn to superstition.

The sad thing is that while none of these things is right (accurate?) none is wrong either. All are different pieces of reality. But for some reason, most of us seem unable to consider meaningfully any totality of reality. Part of that inability is ignorance; we are long past the time when any person can learn and know everything. So some of it is just plain not knowing.

The social reality people are the saddest. They have the shortest, thinnest view of reality, the part that is purely “made up” by humans, having almost nothing to do with Nature at all. In fact, usually in staunch denial of Nature. A reality of emotion and superstition and hormones.

Equally sad is that it is almost impossible to alleviate this sadness. Most of these people are incapable of dealing with any other reality, and the ones who are capable are almost all uninterested. One has to wonder just how inaccurate the “Sapiens” naming is?

Under many circumstances this can be abided. These people can be avoided and ignored. But when they decide to try to eliminate the other realities, which they deem trivial or heretical because they cannot understand them, they move the species closer to extinction.

Which may not be all that bad.

In Search of Thought

Seven Day. Moderate. Actually emerged from Castellum SCP to perambulate in a light jacket. If this be winter, summer will be death. 

I have been thinking lately about thinking. And yes, that does seem somewhat recursive. This emerged (?) from thinking about outreach and why some people (LOTS of people) refuse to learn. (And no, I will not go down the trail of mumbling about how universal college makes the entire population stupid and vapid and boggish. Even if it does.)

Anyway, the question arose from my personal distaste for most outreach efforts. I deplore the need to dilute and wrangle science to present it to disinterested, unlearning bogs. But I had to confront that perhaps the obstruction is that different people think different ways?

So I did a bit of a literature search – as much as I can do absent any library but my own – RSIC is too far away and slowly discorporation and the Greater Metropolitan Arab library is largely inferior to my own. (Actually, I suspect it is entirely inferior except for its rather quaint War of Southron Independence collection.)

I started with the dictionary – the on-line one built into Linux, of course – and borrowed a couple of (fairly) contemporary definitions:

profession n 2: an occupation requiring special education (especially in the liberal arts or sciences)

discipline n 1: a branch of knowledge; “in what discipline is his doctorate?”; “teachers should be well trained in their subject”; “anthropology is the study of human beings

Both of these are taken from something named “WordNet” and dated 2006.

Profession is rather a misused word these days. It seems to have been appropriated by everyone who has a job and wishes to establish that they have some merit thereby or therein. Any argument or discussion of this outlook is clearly on a kneeless slope. What constitutes special education and how much. Is on-the-job training adequate? (In past days of this so-called republic, physicians and justicers obtained that education on-the-job.)

Similarly for discipline. Is what a bog has learned just by existing (I hesitate to evoke the “living” discussion.) a “branch of knowledge”? And does someone who obtains a degree in some academic discipline but never uses that knowledge have a discipline?

Are craftspeople and manual laborers professionals? Clearly plumbers and carpenters are paid for their specialized knowledge. But is knowledge education?

None of this maundering gets at our basic question. I know from experience that I think differently than the majority of humanity. But do I have a discipline; am I a professional? 

Since I do think differently from almost everyone else there seems little chance that I can persuade them to my point of view. So I must be satisfied with whatever I think and try to avoid their wrath for my being different. In that context, I can associate profession with education in one or more disciplines. And having obtained that education it seems congruent that the difference in thinking is implicit. 

That rather sounds like “Bippity Boppity Boo”, doesn’t it? Perhaps it is. Or perhaps it is actuality. Perhaps the actual test of education is whether one thinks differently from the mode? If one thinks thusly then one is educated; otherwise one is not educated.

This still does not quite address what is a professional. This seems equally subjective. Perhaps it is a matter of education? If one has an education, is one paid for using that education? And if so, is one then a professional. And what of those who have a diploma but neither special education not apply it to their work? 

 

Inherent Evil

Lovely haze this morning. Which the weather beavers are proclaiming as fog but so far as I can tell from the visibility numbers only one spot in the Volunteer state actually has fog.

So in that vein I can report that the Super Bowl continued this morning with a right lusty defecation on my return from gym. The joys of Oatmeal! Which is perhaps the solitary (or at least nearly so,) joy of winter. Not that this has been much winter except in my straining to avoid shivering. Not easy on blood thinners and a thin diet of low impulse foodstuffs.

The podcast this morning was an episode of the CBC’s “Best of Ideas” entitled “The Myth of the Secular.” From my point of view the whole thing was rather a collection of stercus. The argument was muddled but mostly consisted of deposing the idea that secular is public and religion is private.

Evidently this rather farcical idea is appealing to sociologists (and probably a lot of bogs who pretend to be rational?) Strikes me as the same sort of pseudo-science practiced (?) by economists. Maybe worse?

Anyway the antithesis was offered by an Indian (as in subcontinent) sociologist. Somehow these episodes come across as horribly unbelievable and ambiguous. 

I tend to approach the matter largely from an organizational standpoint. Large scale evil is perpetrated by organizations; small scale evil is perpetrated by individuals. Religion is more often evil than not, excusing its evil as good in the typical prevarications and circumlocutions typical of developed religions. The secular, on the other hand, is also particularly evil but in a different guise. It just ignores the evil it does.

Otherwise hopeful of a passable one day without the benefits of either religion or the secular.

Excluded Pornography

I normally do not recommend software for social media, often because I don;t do much social media activity. I get on FaceScroll once a day to sample what’s what with people I haven’t seen in a while and often, don’t want to see. Mostly people I went to high schule or college with or worked with. 

But I installed a browser client “Social Fixer” and have been pleasantly surprised with how much it has improved the experience.

The client has numerous capabilities but the one I am waxing poetical about here is its capability to filter certain FaceScroll postings. In this case Sports and Politics Pornography (and yes, I realize that’s almost redundant. Politics and Sports that I can involve myself in and do are not pornographic because I participate and don’t observe. But those are scarce and this client strains out about 0.9+ of all that porn.) 

I recognize that there are people who enjoy this type of pornography. I do not but I have no substantive desire to be prudish about it so long as I am not exposed to it incessantly. 

Like fall American football and partisan politics.

So jolly good job on that client.