Tags: camus - albert

crazy /eek - screaming ashtray

Any minute now I'm expecting all hell to break loose

cf /duh - lost brain

Different Thinkly?

Albert Camus

Posted in rwemmersonquote on 2017.11.06 at 06:09

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/brainyquote/QUOTEBR/~3/cq4xZaQGMIs/albert_camus

"Freedom is nothing but a chance to be better."


I almost bought a book by Camus while I was at the bookstore, but as usual, I did my culling, and it went into non-existence, therefore it wasn't. It was a collection of his earlier journals, and I thought, "I already do this." Another book I didn't buy was Victor Frankel's, "Man's Search for Meaning." Another rejected book also had, "meaning," in the title but I forgot what it was.

Last night, I watched, "Steve Jobs: The Man in the Machine," (my second Steve Jobs movie). (2015; 2 hours+). It was a somewhat loving portrait, starting off, littered with Bob Dylan music. But it eventually switched into some strong, Michael-Moore-type criticisms of Apple, and all its many controversial, or illegal, "incidents." One of these incidents concerned the Chinese corporation, "FoxConn," (i.e., the wily con of a fox). Production of its touch screens and circuit boards for apple caused massive pollution, worker health problems, and suicides. (This year, Wisconsin fought hard to bring a giant FoxConn plant into the state, with numerous unfair enticements, and numerous ignorances over the problems of the past - which shall also soon be visitted on Wisconsin). FoxConn, like Apple, like Jobs, is considered TOO BIG TOO FAIL, and therefore we kiss ass and sanctify kings. When Jobs died, multitudes grieved him, like drunken North Koreans over a Kim, not so much because they loved him, but because they loved his things. (And, yes, I deliberately rhymed right there).

No news to me, Steve Jobs was shown to be the lying controllaholic megalomaniacal boy-next-door that he was. (Not entirely unlike our great and powerful president). I watched every clip of him closely, and I could identify it. I could see him lying through his teeth - "distorting reality" - and simultaneously putting on a boyish front, to manipulate. People just ate it up.

I have wondered why Steve Jobs seemed so much like a psychopath, and yet someohow escaped that moniker. It was because he acted like he cared about people, his Apple family, his customers, usability. He started off giving the finger to the cold, megalythic IBM, yet ended up being a ruthless gigantico-capitalist himself. He claimed to be maintaining Apple's, "core values," as Apple got bigger - but what he was really referring to were the core values of control and subterfuge.

Today, I decided that Steve Jobs could be called a, "Romantic psychopath," (something of a contradiction). He had hankerings for love and family which kept going back into monkish spiritualism. He built a new structure for family and connection through his work, in the Family of Apple. But, like many rude, grandly naive and selfish Baby Boomers, he went too far with his romantic ideals and plans, and turned them into their very opposites. Long ago underwritten by his need to care, his methods became diabolical and self-rationalizing. He became the violent, overbearing father, who just really, "cared so much."

We don't always look at psychopaths as being people who care or have sentiments. But they all seem to get stuck in some emotional tragedy in their childhoods, like Citizen Kane. Ever after that, they become determined machines concerned mainly with figuring out the details, the means towards their wrongful ends. Ends that first emerged in broken adolescent hearts; and means that are constructed by perpetually adolescent minds, cold and deceptive to the enemy outside world.

In that he pretended to care, I think Steve Jobs was a consummate fake. I also think that he believed himself to care deeply, but elevated this onto a lofty pedestal of narcissism. Of being special, chosen, too big to fail - permitting any sort of lie or abuse. If you consider what might be the symptoms of being a, "Romantic psychopath," you might see that they could be indistinguishable from being an alcoholic. And so, maybe he was. I see him pictured with beers - and his workers celebrated victories by sucking on hard liquor. So, who knows.

Needless to say, he "invented" some good stuff, which is turning us into zombies addicted to a false, "techno," family. We are getting less sleep and turning into monsters. We tap into only what people who agree with us say, think and feel. We stumble over ourselves to suckle on our smart phones. Meanwhile, Apple, and corporations, and hackers, and the Government, track our every move.

If this is the freedom he brang, I'm not having it. When everyone is logged on in lockstep, then where is the chance to be better anymore? When everyone is on twitter, bitching and stabbing, including a farce of a president, then what does any of this really amount to?

"An extension of the self..."

Watch movie via the site.
crazy - i have issues don't be mean

Bat Shit Crazy

Bats are confusing. Scientist continue to have a hard time, putting them in their place, phylogenically. They are not flying mice. They are more closely related to camels. Camels. Maybe that is why they, along with camels, have been spreading MERS, (the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus infection). And, the Megabats are very different from the Microbats, even though there are small Megabats and large Microbats). And, no, Microbats have nothing to do with T-ball. I don't really have a scientific bat article for ya, but here is Wikipedia.

Many animals are very unrelated, and yet end up looking and acting the same because of living in similar environments. One good example is: dolphins, compared to fish. Bats, compared to birds - or maybe even to each other. Tasmanian Devils, compared to wolves. There are many, many examples of similar morphology in unrelated species. It is something extremely important to remember when studying biology and evolution. (It also helps to keep this rule in mind when studying sociology or politics). Here's an interesting site to explore...

Cracked: 10 Animals You Won't Believe Are Closely Related

Standford Encyclopedia: The Genotype/Phenotype Distinction

You may see some insect that resembles a dangerous wasp, yet it is only aping a wasp in appearance, so as to keep birds from eating it. Insects, animals, and plants mimic other beings or conditions in their environment, as if they are all part of some infinite roaming eye, by the coincidences of natural selection. (Similarly, animal languages in the jungle are widely understood, if not shared). This establishes the so-called, "balance of nature," when, in fact, dynamic change and punctuated equilibrium occur in the bigger picture, as does climate change and environmental adaptations.

So, differing species may be similarly moulded by their similar environments. Some animals, like cuckoos, mocking birds and parakeets, may ape others, to gain acceptance, despite being genetically different. Mammals are notorious for adopting, or even loving, very genetically different mammals, despite the rule to, "be kind to same-DNA, above all," (as opposed to being indiscriminately helping or altruistic).

We humans are at the pinnacle of the food chain mountain, and we have generally conspired together, helping ourselves. We have generally been kind to our own DNA, while mowing over the rest of creation. Ever following in the wake of this blood-and-chlorophyll-shed, there always emerges a contrary band of humans advocating for the rights of fish, or trees, or aborigines, or cattle, or foxes - because we CARE. Because, are we all so different, after all? What is the difference between a whale and a microbe, when both hold life?

And yet, we also go to war with each other based on how each clan parts its hair. Egads! What a difference! It is like we are each from vastly different corners of the universe, the way we differently butter our bread! A Moslem says, "God," and a Christian says, "God," and somehow this gross disparity eventuates in world war three. In fact, it is this constant slashing at each other, and this slashing at the Earth, combined with our ever endearing love of self and all, which expands our population above all others, in perpetual madness.

One day, you may see, walking down the street, what appears to be your Doppelgänger. Looks just like you. Acts like you. Sits in the same coffee shop. Will you sit down and chat, and love this person, because his or her DNA is virtually yours? Will you shower upon this person all the love and expectations you have for yourself? What about all your self-limitations, doubts and hatreds?

Or will you be suspicious? Will you be angry that this Other is stealing attention - your social identity? If you put them up - would they steal your clothes, your food, your friends?! Would they be so similar, that you would become so bored with their predictable sameness, that you would both just disappear into some foggy blur of depression?

Or, would they be so different, since they are there and you are here, that jealousy will swell up in you all the more violently, that you would want nothing other than to kill this identical clone, because it is so vastly, vastly not you? Would you envy this photocopy so much, apart from you, that you would want nothing more than to become it, replace it, put your body and life exactly in the space which it inhabits? For, do you not have that right? Has not a crime been committed here - a case of identity theft?

This is how we are as human animals. We hate that what is genetically different from us, especially if it might eat us, or interfere with our easy day. But, we love and reward our genetically related kin, and clan, and even our religion - albeit full of unrelated cuckoos and mocking birds - other races and kinds. For those whom our words call, "Same," we will go to war, we will perform heroic acts of altruism, we will grow our children to do the same for them, or even to be sacrificed for them.

So, why not do the same for your identical twin from another land? You would think you would - and you would - but you can't. In human animals, there is always this tension of how to regard another being, whether it is 100% identical, or 100% different, even while the wider rules are being applied. That means that in every human animal, there is a continuing conflict between the conscious and the subconscious/id, with each sometimes being supplanted by the other.

So, you might go through life, following all the golden, wider rules, only to find that all your so-called friends have mainly done nothing for you but dig you an early grave. Unless you understand this natural paradox in human nature, which is related to 'physics', you will innocently and ignorantly become depressed or sick, and indeed die young. Or, if you only believe the opposite, that all are inclined to kill you, (the psychopath), then you will find your own hell awaiting you.

What if I told you that your Doppelgänger, walking down the street - the one you'd be so wont to love, yet so wont to kill - was not a human at all? Not even an animal. What if I told you that that living image of you was a machine - a computerized android?

Is that different enough for you to leave it alone, or love it?

Is that same enough for you to love it, or leave it alone?

How do you, at the same time, KNOW the difference of its mechanical nature, and yet NOT involve yourself in emotional antipathy towards it, an inert object?

How do you, at the same time SEE the exact similarity in its physical form, and behaviours, and yet NOT involve yourself in empathy?

Conflicted feelings are our greatest accomplishment.

Bat shit crazy.
pink floyd - dark side

Albert Camus

An influence of mine -

Albert Camus (1913 - 1960) was a journalist, editor and editorialist, playwright and director, novelist and author of short stories, political essayist and activist - and, although he more than once denied it, a philosopher. He ignored or opposed systematic philosophy, had little faith in rationalism, asserted rather than argued many of his main ideas, presented others in metaphors, was preoccupied with immediate and personal experience, and brooded over...

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/camus/