16th Street

I just had an interesting random thought while reading a philosophical argument concerning religion and wanted to get it down.

I think a new sort of (faux) intelligence is evolving.  It’s a sort of Gestaltian intelligence, a fusion of technology with the human mind.  The human mind will continue evolving as society progresses technologically to the point where mere facts are no longer bothered to be remembered.  Virtual locations are remembered.  Very general concepts are understood to varying degrees, but in all cases of understanding on a topic the bits and pieces and how to piece them together are remembered, and the facts alone are not.  I believe that this allows for a much broader range of understanding over a larger group of topics to occur than is possible with traditional study.  99% of memorization is futile, we just eventually forget.  Computers and the internet do not forget.  It is like a sort of game where you just remember the rules and in what way to apply them, and you win.

The obvious downside to this whole way of thinking and organization of the mind is that without a computer nearby to aid in discussion one can be near useless.  Full of just bits and pieces that come out as a rather fragmentary rambling and rarely convey a single point or clear purpose.  I’m frequently guilty of these ramblings because I will begin a conversation and think I know something when in reality I only have some bits and pieces and cannot complete the whole puzzle without consulting some resource*.  This can be mildly frustrating but we are heading toward an age where computers will be at your “fingertips” (or “voice,” or “thought”) at all times.  Bookmarked sites with highlighted points of interest, wikipedia, google, online dictionaries, etc.; they all currently contribute and more resources will certainly be available in the future.  Before the advent of the broadband digital age this type of thought was not really possible.

I think this is could be a sort of segway between the traditional way of learning and thinking that had dominated for thousands of years before this technological age and the eventual physical culmination of mankind and technology (aka sci-fi stuff like “installing” new skill-sets or “augmenting” forgotten memories, etc.).

*Note: for things which fall under common knowledge this often doesn’t happen and of course I still know how to learn “the old way,” but for advanced concepts the internet is changing my mind…it seems.

For my mother, on mother’s day ; )

That’s how this post began at least, but that was a long time ago and I never could get down on paper how my mother is a Monolith (it’s not that she isn’t a monolith to me, it’s just that I can’t articulate it at this point in my life, I think I’m still too young).  I like the word monolith though and the idea of a monolith creating new boundaries for civilised and uncivilized societies alike was awesome to see in 2001 a Space Odyssey, so I’ll leave it as is.

This post will instead be about pessimism, optimism, realism, and art.  All forms of art.  It’s something that really troubles me sort of deeply.  You see I always have the notion that even with my most creative work it is too much influenced by other artists and is thus not even really original.  If art is unoriginal, then why create it?  If it has been done before there is no point.  I guess what I’m getting around to is this:  Eventually will there come a time when there can really be no further original art created since it has all been done before?

The optimist will say no and embrace the small details that make the artistic work different from it’s influences.  Or will state that this work of art is actually a culmination of many different influences into one new style.  I can agree with that.

The pessimist will say yes but I can’t think of any reasons why he would say that, it is just a gut feeling. I have this gut feeling too.

The realist view is not even worth discussing on a generalized level since it’s so deeply personal, sort of like an artistic spirituality.  Sort of like arguing about politics.  It is of course there though, so it’s worth just a mention.

To me, this writing is new and not a copied work, it came from my mind and not from reading anything else that I can recall.  But my mind is an amalgamation of all previous influences so maybe it’s not so original after all.  It seems science and technology are the easiest routes to follow for creating original artistic work since they are ever shifting, but even those will be overdone eventually.

Now that I’ve written all of this I don’t even really completely believe it anymore and have a hard time framing my original argument.  Same thing happened with my previous post.  I completely thought it was all true when I wrote it while I was stoned, but when I woke up the next morning and looked at some physics it just didn’t seem like very much fun anymore.  That’s a good reason not to smoke, everything seems pale in comparison to the high-state.  Or maybe the high-state colorizes life and real sober life is dull?

To give an example of what I mean with all of this talk of unoriginality:  take a look at the Novel WIP down below,  it is superficially very original (at least I fucking hope so, haha).  The characters are not copied from anything I can recall, very weird things happen in the story, and so on.  However, it is still made up completely of outside influences.  Reading Richard Brautigan’s Trout Fishing in America made me realize it’s okay to have really short paragraphs.  I love fantasy and sci-fi so I created a new world to the weirdest extent imaginable, but my imagination has been influenced by all of the sci-fi I’ve read.  Even though I haven’t directly “copied” anyone, it just isn’t new territory.  Fictional worlds with dreams have been done before, this weirdness has been done before and way better than mine.  Check out Richard Brautigan’s In Watermelon Sugar for instance.  Does anyone else stumble over these issues?

Anyway, in closing, I guess I think my realistic view of art is:  only the best create new genres and they change the world as we know it, reader by reader, listener by listener, observer by observer.  I am not one of the best and so can only try and imagine (however meekly) who or what will be the next major influence in art, and just because I am not creative or insightful enough to make or predict this next genre does not mean it will not exist someday.

I guess this could be looked at as relating to artistic monoliths.  Who would you say some of your favorites are?

It is not that I don’t have passion, or too many passions.  It is that I have but one passion that exceeds all others in the level it invigorates me and I have not realized it until now.  Intoxicating my mind and occupying it for hours that seem like minutes of childlike fascination.  Self improving realizations of the complexities in our beautiful world.  Physics is that one true passion.  I also have passions for writing, and creative activities, and soccer, and biking, and technology, and video games, and music, and reading.  I watch movies on physics lectures FOR FUN.  I try for 2 hours to illegally watch Carl Sagan’s Cosmos series; if I had found it I would not be here right writing this, I would still be watching it, all 1300 minutes.  I also have a passion for helping people and making a positive difference however I can.  I let a homeless 19 year old stay with me for free, and I’m ok with it, who can say that these days?  I have the ability to focus indefinitely and deeply about a topic and the same opposing ability to be carefree and aloof which can allow for recovery and pursuit of other passions.  I am not afraid of change.  Change is the only thing I plan for in life, this is good because I can be spontaneous and comfortable in hectic life to a certain extent.  I only care about people’s opinions of me if I actually have respect for that person, otherwise I don’t give a shit.  I am listening to Pinback’s “Fortress” again right now.  I have a fascination with other accents.  My brain actually created two different distinct personalities just from Jessica Thompson’s accent switch.  She has a beautiful British accent when she wants to.  I like to subtly use other accentual tones in my accent to make it different, for fun.  Especially whilst singing.  I play with my cat to see him flop and jump around, so flexible and exciting and nimble.  I watch his mannerisms also and analyze them.  I analyze a lot, it gives me joy a great deal of the time but there also comes pain in realizing humanity’s weaknesses.

“A human being is part of the whole, called by us “Universe” – a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts, and feelings as something separated from the rest – a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole nature in its beauty. Nobody is able to achieve this completely, but the striving for such achievement is in itself a part of the liberation, and a foundation for inner security.”

-Albert Einstein (1879-1955)