application of amateur philosophy

when i lay my thoughts in front of me like a spread arc of playing cards, i shake my head at the contemptible thought of arranging them for this blog, instead of letting the ideas dictate the direction of the blog.

but it does beg the question: what do i really want to say? I am keeping a positive attitude that i will survive this latest ripple in my battle, however I would be naive if i didn't think about what I may want to concentrate on if this is indeed my last year.

I am reading some philosophy... most of which makes me roll my eyes only because the observations were with me already, but i am reading them simply to proof that they are with me, because if I demand accountability in others, I must proof some sort of connection to the running leaders of the topics that interest me.

i think the best place to start is in discussing my last post. it has occurred to me that some may view it as dark and depressing. the rantings of someone who is trying to come to grips with the possibility of death.

do i do that? absolutely. was that my intention in the last post. nope.

what i am trying to do is form some sort of construct in which i can think about particular topics from a very realistic point of view while at the same time analyzing the holistic point of view.

a common message from me is the fact that we as individuals need to become more accountable for the thoughts and ideas we express. the wisdom that an individual is reasonable but a group of people are irrationally insane is quite right. and why? because up to this point we have omitted from our many ideas on ethics and mores accountability in the majority of information that is being transferred.

it is time that more than a small intelligentsia contemplate the universe. It is time that there is expectation for someone to critically apply tests to their own ideas for both the reality on the individual tree and the forest in which that tree resides.

Too often we let abstract ideas that embody possible truths of our existence be ridiculed in lieu of being taken seriously when weighing actual questions of policy. just because our feet have to hit the ground eventually, and we have to make a decision that will no doubt be imperfect, does not mean that we push away the sky from which we came from.

it shouldn't be me going back and reading different viewpoints of the respected philosophers of our past. it should be those that rather give me a funny face and tell me how strange and crazy i am simply because they can't walk with me in a discussion that goes beyond real estate taxes.

to be fair, it should be both of us.

i get it. i understand that while i am no great mind or expert, i have had the fortunate of being able to ponder these ideas for years in an environment that challenged but did not disrupt. this gives me the advantage of grasping abstract ideas and their connections to the real world faster. but that is all it is...is faster.

and the true intelligentsia of this world... those who probably read this and grin, like they would at a freshman in a class they are teaching, are much much faster than me. while the expansion of that class of thinker is important, what is vital is the increase of that type of thinking altogether. everyone is capable, they are just unwilling or too restricted to try.

so perhaps thats where i'm going. I don't know yet. but it seems reasonable to look at current events and analyze them through that lens. more importantly breaking down issues to social progress versus individual rights. or maybe not, i refuse to nail it down in my head, even though i am tempted from time to time, because if i was provocative and placate a particular social group, i could gain readership.

i must remind myself that the end never justifies the means. that this is for me. i would love to have people read, discuss, and perhaps expand their perspectives as they expand mine. if i said i didn't, i would be lying. but ultimately, if i believe in this process of laying out my ideas, then to do anything beyond that purpose would be to compromise intent and, honestly, content. and if i had the good fortune of gaining readers, it will be with genuine intent, and honest content. and if not, then hopefully there exists now or in the future, someone else who accomplishes it.

you know how they say a politician slowly becomes corrupt by making little compromises along the way, and that is how politics seems to be automatically linked to the game of disingenuous dealings to gain power with which you can do good things with.

it is because the politician, no matter how genuine and pure he is, will ultimately come to a point where he has to decide whether to proceed with a compromise of purity rather than a compromise in transparent, public discussion so that he can continue with what he thinks is needed: his election. for the good of the people.

the latter is a good thing. no politician running should have anything short of that amount of confidence. however, that doesn't justify compromising the integrity of the system. the arrogance that you are absolutely right, and there is no possibility that you are not good for the country, is irrational and idiotic. yet it is the driving force behind most marketable things from candidates to fruit juice.

instead, one must look at the whole of time. as i had said yesterday, paraphrasing fighting club, sooner or later everyone's survival rate goes to zero.

well if you go along long enough, the probability will rise to 100 that someone who does not give into corruption in the slightest will come along with all the other variables being in the right place that they will proceed to do right by the people without having to compromise integrity or owe. everytime, that doesn't happen, we put further distance between us and that event.

today it is not possible, or rather it would be one in a trillion. mostly because of the presumption of corruption being necessary in politics. of course right now, everyone is playing the game so as not to lose any political footing. i get that.

but what of the individual? the MOMENT a person starts to contemplate corruption or corruption of ideals to gain power, is the moment that that person proves unworthy.  but sometimes there is an anomaly... and the first isn't remembered,the second is barely recognized.... and a thousand years later the game withered.

for one must ask, why am i running? is it to protect the freedoms of americans, is it to better america society as a whole, or is it a calling to push a specific agenda? why am i so important? is every one of my actions linked to a general belief that i am playing a long term role, and all i can do is show myself for what i think and it may be my turn? or am i going to hide myself, because i believe it is more important to win so i can share my greatness?

i haven't read one historic story that didn't have good things come out of bad, and bad things come out of good. and most compromises have future consequences. so does it not stand to reason, that even if you did do your "good" could it not still lead to bad? and if that is the case, would it not make better sense to attempt to achieve that good through a genuine plea to the people so you have no shackles of compromise?

the best we can ever hope for is to hope we are right. "knowing" is for posters, but is an ideal that will never be attained. and you may know better, but if you truly believed in progress of society or progress of the individual, you must allow the opposition a fair shake, for when pride is placed underfoot and dignity is held strong in our hearts, both incorrect and correct ideas will benefit in time.

you wait around long enough, the probability of a bad event turning into something good goes to one hundred. the only thing we have is the way we conducted ourselves, how much we respected those who follow us, and the line items of compromise which are either corrupt power plays, or true discussions of genuine ideas.

its the moral of "fool" tales, where the hero is a fool who doesn't know better and their honesty and good will gets taken advantage of, but in the end it is to the detriment of those who tried to take advantage. in real life, not every fool wins out, in fact the majority do not, but those who do win have a more powerful victory, and over time the sums of those losses and victories make for the better portion of our society.

my ever changing cloud

people.

everywhere i go now i watch people with such a different eye.  particularly in NYC, where there are just so many.  they move about going to one endeavor or another, all carrying with them the same general makeup, the same parts, the same ticking gears. 

and yet they are all so very different.  each one has a cloud over there head.  a cloud of issues, emotions, opinions, missions, perspectives, and agendas.  so many people walk around with a mixed bag of emotion and agenda, that they do not even notice that perhaps they cater towards a perspective that perpetuates their cause.

how else can someone get as angry as most people on this sphere do?

I often think about terror.  much of terror spawns from the fear of death.  horror often has the characters of doom being those who will bring about your end.  and that is terrifying.

but how does that translate when you consider the chances of living over the larger span of time?
wasn't it Fight Club that had the quotation along the lines of "in time, everyone's survival rate eventual reaches 0" or something to that effect.  indeed, while people lined up at the movie theater and were engrossed in movie selection and popcorn ordering, i was struck by a thought... most of the people I see will be very lucky if they reach their 80s.

Sure there are average lifespans and ever increasing cures, but the fact remains that  people die everyday.  we focus so much on the process of dying and the mourners afterwards, but there is little concentration on the entity post-humorously.  not memory, mind you, but the actual non-existence.  probably because it is impossible to discuss a lack of something so absolute.

so we continue on.  some hold on to the idea of afterlife, while others embrace a colder reality of nothingness.  the fact is the person will not see the rest of their life or anyone else's.  and the rest of us try to picture ourselves hitting 90.  and still there is a tinge of terror, but that death is distant, so it can be pushed back, shoved aside, tucked beneath.

I don't know the statistics, but i can say confidently that reaching past 60 is a feat.  probably more than 50%....  probably much more.  however, when you speak of such absolute consequences, anything greater than 1% is a lot.  to have survived the chances, is to have accomplished something.

( looked it up, sweden is 8%, the US is a bit higher: probability of not reaching 60)

but we do not think about that.  we walk, and talk, and drive with a cloud over our head.  we get enraged by an idea given to us from an outside source, and act on those conceptions and thoughts.  rarely do we emphasize the philosophy that we are running on, the questions of sentient existence, or the futility of an individual life.

i was spouting out my own ideas about liberals and conservatives.  how most arguments can and should be broken down into a rights of the individual versus the betterment of society.  that balance is really what an organism made up of many sentient parts truly struggles with at its very most basic state.

but while making this argument, i suggested that liberals had the society point of view and conservatives were for individual freedoms.  this was contradicted.  i was out read and outclassed.  the very word "liberty" suggests the opposite, does it not?  so what am i missing, or have i taken an old point of view and tweaked it just enough to not fit in the round hole it came from?

I am going to get to the bottom of it.  i am going to trudge through the old philosophies, some of which i have read and many others i have not.  i need to discover the origins of the ideas... and more importantly, the origins of the language used for these ideas. 

because, i do not know where i'll be or if i'll be in one years time, but i do know that when I thought the cancer was cured, my cloud returned.  it had been there before when I did not worry too much about the outcome, and dissipated when it became obvious that the outcome wasn't obvious.  but there it was, hanging there with doubled power when i got the impression of victory.

wasn't i suppose to change?  I am sure I have, but not in any way i thought or took for granted.  not in anyway obvious way.  and now as my cloud dissipates again, i realize again that while the issues are still there, my hunger for them runs at a much different level then before. 

blessings and curses all - sometimes at the same time.

what i would like to see in Obama's campaign

1. marketing plans for various government services such as mymoney.gov.  not as a direct campaign commercial but to get people aware of what is available to them.

2. a virtual tour of the administration - each department, their mission statement, and goals and achievements.  people need to see what a well put together executive branch looks like.  you have it, but joe independent isn't going to go to whitehouse.gov and start reading.  an interactive tool that is marketed to high school and college kids would be a great start.

3. an "ask what you can do for your country" sentiment that expresses to the people the importance of the three branches of the government, and how you will do your job, but they need to start taking more responsibility for the legislative branch.  They are voted in by the people.  discussions need to be more assertive in this country and less emotionally polar.  when i ask folks in the silent middle majority to back up what they know about a particular issue with facts, it becomes obvious that they are only repeating hearsay, and doing so without apology.  its time that we as a country move past that and take responsibility for what we say and have accountability for the environment we set up in washington.

4. a shift, even more, towards small business talking points.  its time to be blunt and show these rural red cities that they have been in a 20 year recession because of the draining of manufacturing sure, but also the killing of small business.  do we want 1 million jobs over 10 companies, or 100,000 companies hiring 10 people a pop?  in this day and age of technology and efficiency, we need to focus on more ideas, diverse innovation, and bring back the visionary. the number one country in the world should be a breeding ground for leaders and inventors, not managers and investors.

sure, jobs jobs jobs... but ask anyone who has worked for a small company. it is a more rewarding experience and the actions performed by the small company are typically more noble and direct.   Many fail, but with each failure, another may take its place, and there won't be any 20,000 layoffs.  We are a country full of in the closet entrepreneurs with great ideas, we need to maximize that and start a new movement where the obsession with consumption and making things is in direct competition with the yearning to "go for it" and pursue your ideas and dreams.

5. foreign policy. the world is changing! it is important not only for the US but for the human race. We are witnessing revolutions and cultural evolutions.  Nature cycles of human systems that the west continues to pursue and the rest of the world is following.  the anthropological lens should be applied more often by this country rather than the overbearing parent, or worse, school yard bully.  who among the GOP actually understands those concepts?  Are they still trying to "win"?  What does that mean?  Its time we better define our global goals so we can help nurture rather than retard the growth of other countries.