Do You Feel Lucky?

(and feel free to comment! My older posts are certainly no less relevant to the burning concerns of the day.)

Monday, September 29, 2014

Thought of the day: CREATIVE

Destruction is a creative act, and I love to create - so stay the hell back.

Humanity Is Not Your Tribe.

"Us Versus Them."

Group-based bias.

Identifying in groups, thinking one's group good, regarding others suspiciously, prepared for hostility. A problem in this day and age? Simplistic thinking? More like natural. More like tribal, like a blood deep animal instinct. The territorial/extended familial instinct. The instinct of loyalty for and protectiveness of one's tribe. It's actually not even a problem!

The problem is when it's misapplied. The problem is when you do not know your tribe. Racism. Nationalism. These are expressions of a false tribal loyalty.

Nationalism teaches us to grossly distend and misapply the strongly felt loyalties that homo sapiens felt for tribe, extended families, for people one knew and with whom we worked in intimate cooperation: to carve out a niche for survival, to live and thrive within the bounds of our known world.

The known world was a small place, then - a garden. Hundreds of thousands of years of this living bred into us the value of such strongly-felt loyalties. Bonds of automatic trust for the members of one's positive bias group. It bred into us a concomitant wariness of, often hostility towards any out-groups one came in contact with. Naturally. Contact then often meant conflict, but usually at least competition. Us versus them was not only perfectly natural, it made good sense.

Still is. Still does. The problem is you, if you think your tribe encompasses millions of strangers. The problem is you do not know your tribe.

When writing began to make words that could stay, words that could fly, bridge long distances, bring news and values, it acquired power to unite vast stretches of land in culture, in civilization. Shared language accompanied conquest. Shared language was itself conquest. Soon, members of wide territories were exhorting each other to stretch and extend natural feelings of tribal loyalty to one's "countrymen." Bonds that had grown from shared experience in shared land, that were felt towards the families and people one actually knew, were now being stretched and distended beyond all sense. Likewise the out-group bias, the sensible wariness and preparedness for hostility towards any outsiders who actually showed up in our land - this too was perverted and misapplied.

Hordes of people we didn't know and had never met were to be treated as if they were our tribe. Hordes of other people we didn't know and had never met were to be marked out for hatred sight-unseen. We were to be prepared to war upon them.

This false tribal bias is powerful indeed. War used to be a fairly local phenomenon, but as media united wider and wider areas under culture it couldn't stay such. Once local tribes, clans and families began to ally themselves into nations, there proved to be no stopping them. Any territories occupied by tribes that had not so united their strength would be conquered by the nations that had. Disunited tribes would be swept aside, their territory divvied up and annexed. The tribes themselves could flee to further territories - a temporary solution at best, as war and conquest would not stop. Tribes that refused to flee would fare no better: conquered, subjugated, enslaved or assimilated - solutions considerably more final.

Racism is very like nationalism. Please note by "racism" I mean here race-based bigotry, such that anyone might feel. Any one of any race can have a race-based bias. Even though there are other far more complex definitions, additional senses invented to convey other ideas, the irreducible core of racism is race-based bigotry. As with nationalism, the positive group bias - the part where we are to treat millions of strangers as if we love them - is perhaps not so bad! We wouldn't call it racism if positive bias towards the in-group were the extent of it, we'd call it racial pride. For nationalism, if positive bias towards the in-group were its extent, we'd call it patriotism. Our high regard for a stranger based on some grouping we share with them may prove misguided, but as long as we are giving them the benefit of our ignorance and not the detriment of it, we don't call it bigotry even though it is bias. Positive bias, we don't call bad.

It is when we teach ourselves to regard millions of strangers we don't know as if their group makes them bad that we call bias bad. We call it prejudice, to treat or regard people as bad when we don't know who they are. When we know only one limited aspect of what they are, when we judge the person bad because of how we view their group - we call that bigotry.

Tribal bias was perfectly good, healthy and natural. Working on the scale of the local, of those one knows, tribal bias was kept in check by human encounter and real experience. As neighboring tribes came into contact, initial distrust would lead to clashes. But assuming neither tribe was strong enough to drive the other out, continued sharing of the same territory would breed a distaste for misery - ours and theirs. As we each evolved little accommodations to reduce conflict, our efforts would erode the initial cautious (and mostly beneficial) distrust. Otherness would be supplanted by acquaintance. True cooperation would spring from mutual benefit to be gained in trade, in exchange of knowledge, and soon enough, exchange of mates. Over hundreds of years of such contact and exchange, tribes become tribe - enriched and strengthened.

Nationalism and racism are based on false tribe, but the feelings they give rise to are powerful and real. When huge group divisions encompassing millions of strangers are used to bring down one's hate and contempt upon the other side - also comprised of millions of strangers - the check of personal encounter and cooperation is nowhere to be found. Distance breeds demons. Worse, the demon bred at a distance will be treated as one, once you meet it in person. False tribal loyalty is real enough to take lives, to make wars, and to set in place blood debts of hatred that - without the check of intimate cooperation and encounter to temper it and teach each group that the other is as human as we are - will endure down the centuries: an inheritance of hate.

Us vs. Them. It's natural. A survival mechanism. It's never going to go away. Grouping together and aligning in solidarity is too powerful, is too beneficial. We will not do away with it, and nor should we. Tribal loyalty remains a good and useful thing, limited to what tribe always was: those who we actually live among, encounter and experience. Then as now, it's sensible to be cautious of those whose ways we don't know. Then as now, it's sensible, understandable and human to affiliate strongly with those whose ways we do. All of this is nothing to fight.

What we must be on guard against is not bias, and not even negative bias, but ignorant bias. In a global age, people group along increasingly vast lines, and we're not going to stop this powerful alignment from happening. But we can prevent our own thinking to be contaminated with irrational distortions and false loyalties. We can keep our loyalties based in life experience, at our own human scale. It's insane, inhuman, to consider our tribe to be a group that includes millions of strangers. It's ignorant and diabolical to decide there are millions of other strangers we're not prepared to regard, encounter, or experience as equal in human dignity to ourselves. It is when we let our loyalties be ruled by abstractions that we allow strangers to be branded enemies, all based on the dictates of a false tribe. We make demons of others in our own minds, and we stand ready to do worse: to be demons ourselves. To treat the other inhumanly, if ever we should meet. All because you we do not know our tribe.

Know your tribe. If you don't know your tribe, you don't have a tribe. If your tribe includes millions of strangers - you don't have a tribe.

Humanity is not your tribe. You do not know them. Media has made it possible for you to know, and live, and love, and be in communion with - so many humans, a great deal farther-flung from you than was ever possible in past times! But possibility is not life. Life is human-scale. Life is not made of abstract people.

If you do not know the person, if you do not live in their life and they in yours, if you do not love them and share their love, whatever some media connection could somehow possibly let you be to each other gives no power, makes no connection, makes no difference. You don't know them.

Who do you know? Work with? Live with? Love? Who are you in communion with? Who is your community?

These are the people you know. These are the people it is natural for you to be biased towards. It is even good! You know them, and they know you. You love what is good in them - and love always makes bias. These people are your in-group. They are your tribe. It is as good to be cautious towards outsiders. You don't know them. You don't know them, yet. And as you chance to encounter them, you will have a chance to come to know them, person by person. You will have this chance for every person you may ever meet.

You will only have it so long as you haven't poisoned yourself against them, by placing yourself in one false tribe - and them in another.

Monday, September 22, 2014

Hope for the future #1: Racism.

Racists are cowards, and can only survive cowering under cover huddling and whispering with people they already know share their bullshit views. They gain very few converts there.

Every generation racists raise more children embarrassed of their parents. And then they die. The battle for hearts and minds is not won in the invisible dark. It is won in the light, incrementally, over lifetimes, over centuries.

It needs patience, but ultimately this: only truth can withstand the light of human reason.

Tuesday, September 16, 2014

Arguments between the Id and other abstractions #1: the Conscience?

I finally figured out the difference between us, sir. You are Haughty in Righteous Cause. Sometimes even with righteous cause! Not I.

I, I, I am arrogant in all matters of inconsequence. So long as they call to me, I thrill to rush in, conscious in my exaggerated sense of self and worth! This is arrogance: to hold an exaggerated or falsely high estimation of self or self worth. I know I am arrogant. I glory in it, I glory in what calls me, I rush in to it - dauntless more than brave, heedless more than courageous - but those as well, surely. In valor, we may say, so long as we leave the better part. I find I have rushed in before conscious of the call, and as I fly through and out of the frame gang-tackling it, I feel at the very least equal to it.

Superior, maybe. But that isn't a bad thing! If it can be managed, one should find ways to be superior to all one's calls.

Thursday, September 11, 2014

I don't feel the need to picket the Catholic church over pedophile priests. I denounce the crime itself, I'll note the criminals are in fact not the church, but enemy agents sheltering within it to leverage whatever trust, power and respectability it has left while violating both the oaths they took and those who it was their sworn duty to guide and protect! I'll note Rome's shocking failure to condemn the problem, and I'll sound a call for the truly penitent to take up a stricter penance, in gratitude for Christ's forgiveness: confess to Caesar. Turn yourselves in. Even blameless Christ submitted himself to human judgment,  and paid for doing so. Submit yourselves to human justice. Christ forgives sin, but you are criminal. 

So too it saddens me that Islam as a whole does not rise up to condemn the acts of these blasphemous heretics whose gospel is God Says Kill. But if a Muslim fears these beasts, fears for life, limb and loved ones, they are fucking a right to do so. Only thing an extremist hates more than an infidel is an outspoken moderate.

I am Christian and I ask: what has betrayal of vows, abuse of trust and the penile penetration of juvenile orifices to do with the church of acceptance of God's judgment? God's judgment upon us, which is Christ, halleloo y'all!? NAUGHT. There is no excuse to be found there.

So too Islam. What does the murder of strangers, civilians, in order to drum up publicity for a political grievance - what does this have to do with the religion of submission to God's will?

Naught.

Oh, I jihad. I jihad all the time. See me war.

Monday, September 08, 2014

Quote of the day: Responsible

"I am responsible for all I say or do, for when questioned I am the one who must have response.

I am responsible for all any do to me. For no one but me will respond for me.

It is right and fair for every single one, and people are hell, and life is cold and this world is death. And some have advantages I don't have, and still we must make response for ourselves, or suffer and die. Good fortune of others does not make my lot unfair, and we will die.

Until then only you must make response for only you. Suffer no liars to deceive you on this point, to your sorrow."

- Sir Fauntleroy Gilchester Fakereference

Saturday, September 06, 2014

Strong Assertion

I don't know about psychic media.

I keep an open mind, but I don't believe in anything paranormal or anything supernatural. If it exists, hey, it may be abnormal! But if it exists it's natural and if it exists, we - homo sapiens sapiens, I mean - is going to get it. As in, "get" it. Grasp hold, drag it kicking and if need be screaming into the light of our comprehension. Probably take a pass or two to fine tune the description slash theory on some of the most abnormal shit there is, but we'll do it. We'll get it, or die trying. We'll grasp it or - as they used to threaten in the old books, "...or I'll know the reason why."

You'll say I have too much faith in humanity, too much faith in the method. You would be wrong. I assure you I'm the strongest skeptic yet met. I suspect I am a stronger skeptic than any of you.

We haven't really talked philosophy, though. It's possible my strong suspicion here will prove unfounded! In any case, skepticism is no contest. It's a moral position, one whose survival value and adaptive benefit has been tested and proved again and again and again.

My faith in humanity is not faith at all, really - faith is a pure figure of speech, here. Same with my faith in the scientific method. Such "faith" is no more than justified confidence based on track record. Again and again and without exception yet, the method is proved sound. It is made to run on human error, and to advance by falsification. Again and again we have proved equal to its good use. Confidence justified - compellingly so, as I hope anyone with a decent brain and half a mind to use it would agree.

Anyway, I do enjoy the topic of psychic media, things of that nature. I don't believe in that stuff based on current studies and facts in evidence, but that doesn't mean I'm not curious about what others believe! Damn curious, what others believe.

But then what do you want, belief is not suspicion, belief is not conjecture. It's a feeling, and sometimes, an irrational one. Maybe sometimes justified, too! But a lot of the time you don't know. You know what I believe?

I believe skepticism is the strongest moral position you can stake out.

One should not believe in the truth value of any proposition whose validity is not compellingly established. For me, for phenomena, that pretty much means the method. Reality - if you please, reality ought to be demonstrable and repeatable, or else we ought to suspend judgment.

Huh. Bit of a tangent there, but very clear I believe. I don't imagine any of you will find any claim in it you'd care to contest. There never was a claim I made I couldn't back up - except the one that I will take back down. I love the test best when I'm proven wrong. I don't understand why anyone would not crave disproof, thrive upon being proven wrong. I love human error, and especially my own!

It's how we advance.

Friday, September 05, 2014

"The Trick": One Weird-ass Peculiar Unbeatable Sweet Trick to Change the World, Pt.2

~ This Post is a Part 2. There was also a Part 1. ~

Ok, I just had a guy pay me $5 for "The Trick" crash course life improvement program. Accordingly this notice herby notifies all and sundry that I have begun employing this mark for this service as a "mark in trade," and that if my mark can be demonstrated to infringe on a similar mark for the same class of product or service, I thereby owe that rights-owner five bucks then, don't I? Fuck your legal fees pal! Let's see your C & D demonstrate infringement first, because as I've always and already informed you - once it's demonstrated, I immediately comply.

You'll never have to file suit on me. File suit without C & D'ing me and you'll be paying my legal fees, pal. I get that legal letter with infringement clearly demonstrated, I won't waste one minute or a single dime! I'll take it to my fucking attorney and see what she has to say. She has no fool for a client. If she agrees you've got the mark, or even feels it's arguable enough to go to court - I'll just call it something else! Easy. Especially for me, I come up with better business ideas than that during sex. But to be honest, here, I'd caution you. I'm of the opinion that you don't have an enforceable mark. To be honest. I bet upon examination, my service and product is going to be so different from yours as to be a completely different type of product or service, and wholly unconfusable with yours. Whatever the hell yours is. And even assuming it exists! Screw your legal fees. At best you'll be paying MINE, pal. Watch it.

Hell technically, I don't even have to give you the five dollars. I'd only be doing that because to me, that's all part of my sweet trick.

Also part of The Trick, you can see above displayed the decency and dignity we were talking about earlier. That's where the "one encounter at a time" case-by-case aspect comes in so crucial! None of your absolutism here, none of your idiotic inapplicable universal principles. Those don't work case-by-case, because there you have to proceed on merit. Your Ideals, your Virtues, will never ever work on merit. Except maybe in the freak case where one happens to pertain, but you could live and die waiting for that to happen.

On merit, case-by-case, you'll see the above example pertains to "dude got his lawyer involved." Due consideration for etiquette is advised in such a case! And let me tell you, your lawyer's not going to feel belittled by a little straight talk. It will refresh them. And then they will assure you how decent I've been, to caution your ass. Which will reassure you! You'll be like - "that Sweet-Trick bastard! He had my dignity in mind the whole time!" I sure did. And then they'll invoice you.

THE TRICK. It works. Even there, you can see how well it works!

I used to call it Invincible Professionalism, but then I saw that #1 I'd been acting the same way off work for years. Long before I came up with the brilliant idea to act that same way on the job. And who the hell knew it would work? Nobody acts that way on the job! I thought I was a genius when it worked even better. But also, #2, I kind of had to stop calling it Invincible Professionalism because...well, to be honest, in practice, in conjunction with my specific personality, there's nothing particularly professional about it. Nothing all that professional my sweet THE TRICK. Tee-Em.

I tell you what though, it's weird. It's weird what to call it, and it's weird how to class it, but you better believe whether I come up with a better name or not I am as of now in business with this. This sweet trick of mine is a gold mine on cloud nine, people! Because you know what? "Change the world"? Hell yes! People will eat that up, and I intend to charge by the barge for the pleasure of enriching their fucking lives.

One Weird-ass Peculiar Unbeatable Sweet Trick to Change the World

I always do the random acts of kindness, and Morgan Freeman is damn right - that does change the world, but here's another trick I find also works great. And not a lot of people seem to have picked up on it! Even though, pretty simple right?

One encounter at a time, random or not, speech or action: treating each other we meet with decency and dignity, whether they've done so or not. Whether they hate how we see the world or love it. Whether we love them or not. Whether we in fact hate them. Whether either of us thinks the other has "deserved" it.

The above trick is so fucking nasty, so sneaky and unexpected that it pretty much runs roughshod over people who'll have no reference frame for how they can react! What are they supposed to do, when you come back at them with THAT? It's like a jujitsu move. But warning: anyone who's a total dick will A) first be extremely suspicious of your motives, and then second, B) eventually shift to thinking they can "take advantage of you." Good luck with that.

C) varies, to be honest. You have to play that one by ear. As long as you keep using the sweet trick, they're pretty much fucked don't worry.

I'm serious, people! Dead sincere. The above sneak trick, or "sweet trick," as we seem to have agreed I'll call it, works like riding a bike off a log - you could never learn to forget a thing like that. This one weird-ass peculiar unbeatable sweet trick, if practiced consistently, will change your whole world. I just wish I had a catchier name for it. Maybe just call it, "The Trick"? TM!

Be clear, here: my sweet trick has nothing at all to do with treating the other "as we'd treat the self." No relation at all to any so-called "golden rule" situation. Number one, because that rule doesn't fucking work - not for practically anybody! It only works for people who have self-love. No wonder people scoff.

My sweet trick also has got fuck all to do with kindness. Or love, or anything like that. Unless mercy? But seriously, WHO CARES what it's called. It works! It's my sweet trick.

People have no idea how to stop it, or stop you doing it, or stop you.

My sweet trick. Change your whole experience of the world.

Fiction Friday: Another Going-Away Party.

At the party tonight a dear friend and I were delighted to have a chance to catch up, and did so. As we talked, we realized that despite the loveliness of the occasion - so many people we both knew, loved and missed! - and despite each of us having kicked off with frank, sincere assurances of "never better," by the time we finished catching up, between us she and I had just described a pretty hard year. She summed it all up with "I just pray next year is easier." I immediately nodded my sincere agreement, adding "I just pray next year there is a God."

She started punching my arm, but when she saw the surprise in my face - why am I ever surprised over getting hit? - and she saw the lack of any "me giving her shit over she of all people praying" vibe, she stopped punching and gave me just the best hug ever. I had to to tell her stop I'll cry! Thank god I didn't, but I guess we both had already, a little. Then another new mother walked up to say hi to Suzy, and she smiled so at the both of us, seeing the trace tears but seeing only good tears. I excused myself before concern could creep in.

Before I left, though - these were my two favorite wives, and I told them so. Suzy said she didn't like that. She requested it be changed to "favorite moms." Now of course at that, Julie and I said "SUZY!" And then she stopped a second and then she laughed, seeing the dilemma. Both Julie and Suzy had met Lauren at the engagement party, but Suzy had even babysat Tally one happy night. Clearly they knew, the competition was considerably less stiff in the "wife" category.

"Well okay," she groused, "wives it is." Then after a second she started, adding "Hey! That's not going to last either!" Made a hurt face. We all cried a little laughing at that perfect pout of hers. I actually felt bad for a second, then I felt good thinking of her prediction, then eventually settled on worse.

Suzy's a card!