Today I just realized that I have an easily displaceable self. It is based on a weak sense of self, which is a good kernel, spiritually. But it also includes a kind of “not self”; a kind of anxiety that denies myself in two ways: there is always a higher priority and a place for someone else’s presence, just like a car always has a driver seat, no matter how able it might be to run its own self. And the second piece, which is most important, there is a built-in “alarm” of sorts whenever I am left alone “to run myself” or when I have no “driver” whether it is someone else or a portion of myself that is “driving” me with control in mind. The “alarm” serves to discontinue what I’m doing and to check once more for a possible controlling factor, thereby interrupting and discouraging any blissful action. That piece explains a lot. All of these components are one.
I think they all came from a child’s coping with “being run” or controlled by his parents… so much so that that is all he knows and that it became a part of him to include that control even when he is not controlled externally. When my inexperienced coworker asks for my help, he has a style that is commanding, which at once displaces my sense of self. I, of course, have a streak of defiance towards that but sadly it is from a complete belief that he controls me. So, I immediately believe that he controls me when he speaks, which it seems is the only way he knows how to ask for help. Even when he tries to be better, I still see the control and I make it true even it was not really there. I also do that to myself when I want to do something. It always has to come from control, although I’m better at coming from freedom more and more.
But the piece I got is that, even when there is no one around, and I’m in bliss, say watching a show, reading a book, programming, or doing something very immersing, I seem to try to break from that simply and solely because I’m having too much fun, and because whatever I’m doing without being directed “is not right” somehow. I gotta pay attention to something else, not this, not me, not self... especially when I'm fully myself.
Another Mind-Tar-Pit
Well, first my mind was occupied with a kind of law streamlining system. Then I discovered that’s my way of being interested in things. Then I expressed interest in the same way with many other little things, like a speed dating service. Thankfully I was able to give that up and learned how to calm my mind in general. But boy; was it hard with this one: LET Systems or Local Trade Exchange Systems or LETS.
I just finish reading Rushkoff’s Program or Be Programmed. I also read his Life inc., the ideas of which he re-iterated here, here and here. I also looked at these two, and this, this and this. Also this. All that made my mind go crazy. My brain really likes to think about and build systems like that.
I think I’m free now from that obsession. I think the conditions included documentation so that it can go back to it if it wants. But for now, this realization will take its place in terms of energy: the anxiety the book created about relevance, legitimacy, “making it” or success, and the ultimate meaninglessness and change of all things… somehow got redirected into a solution that was already proposed in the previous book. Come to think of it, it is a common practice: create anxiety (or excess energy) then redirect it into a thought (or solution). We do it to ourselves and others do it to us, as well.
Thankfully, I now realize that I am alive and living as long as I am however I am. I feel what I feel however that feels and it is fine. If I want to act I can, freely. And if I want to leverage, which I do, then I'd like to continue my venture into programming, from scripting. And enjoy the spirituality it brought me, the philosophical foundation it helped me build, and the various affordances it gave me like a traditional job, exercising and just general peace.
I just finish reading Rushkoff’s Program or Be Programmed. I also read his Life inc., the ideas of which he re-iterated here, here and here. I also looked at these two, and this, this and this. Also this. All that made my mind go crazy. My brain really likes to think about and build systems like that.
I think I’m free now from that obsession. I think the conditions included documentation so that it can go back to it if it wants. But for now, this realization will take its place in terms of energy: the anxiety the book created about relevance, legitimacy, “making it” or success, and the ultimate meaninglessness and change of all things… somehow got redirected into a solution that was already proposed in the previous book. Come to think of it, it is a common practice: create anxiety (or excess energy) then redirect it into a thought (or solution). We do it to ourselves and others do it to us, as well.
Thankfully, I now realize that I am alive and living as long as I am however I am. I feel what I feel however that feels and it is fine. If I want to act I can, freely. And if I want to leverage, which I do, then I'd like to continue my venture into programming, from scripting. And enjoy the spirituality it brought me, the philosophical foundation it helped me build, and the various affordances it gave me like a traditional job, exercising and just general peace.
Content to Life
Life cannot be about nothing. It can be against nothing but it has to have something. It must. In learning to live from nothing, I keep finding myself in nothing and I keep thinking that I need to think nothing, feel nothing, plan and be nothing... which cannot be.
I think it is OK to have something. Everything seems pointless for me to have. Except for the richness of the depth of everything, there is only one thing that I feel very comfortable being the content of my life. And that's my time in Eclipse.
I'm saying this as an affirmation and a reminder that it is OK. Whatever I'm afraid of, that's just content. I can live past that into this realization.
I think it is OK to have something. Everything seems pointless for me to have. Except for the richness of the depth of everything, there is only one thing that I feel very comfortable being the content of my life. And that's my time in Eclipse.
I'm saying this as an affirmation and a reminder that it is OK. Whatever I'm afraid of, that's just content. I can live past that into this realization.
Old Oppressions Die Hard
This company seems to be doing a version of something I was thinking about for a while. It is nice to see my thoughts being shared and thought by others.
As I was cutting fruit, I was thinking, wouldn’t it be nice to see if I can work for these people. Then I thought about already working for them and how that would be like. I imagined being entrenched and consumed by furthering their work and making it my life’s work… and that’s when it hit me. Why am I making the victimization I feel into further reality, by seeking out venues to affirm it?
I realized this before, when I asked myself, why am I so sensitive to commands and unfriendly requests from unseasoned managers? Even though I know this manager has no malice and does not really care about the job? The answer was, I still internally believe I’m subjugated or subjugation material and seek out others or re-create them in an image that affirms that… simply because I’m used to it, still, from my old days and don’t know how else to be.
Now I’m realizing that I’ve been doing that with the entirety of my law interest! All these intricate plans, connected systems, distribution channels, and clever schemes… were just me practicing converting my emotions into thoughts in another area of my life for the same aspect.
It was wonderful realizing this. I should could fruit more often, in the same clarity and calmness. In fact, I’d like to do that with every event and non-event in my days.
As I was cutting fruit, I was thinking, wouldn’t it be nice to see if I can work for these people. Then I thought about already working for them and how that would be like. I imagined being entrenched and consumed by furthering their work and making it my life’s work… and that’s when it hit me. Why am I making the victimization I feel into further reality, by seeking out venues to affirm it?
I realized this before, when I asked myself, why am I so sensitive to commands and unfriendly requests from unseasoned managers? Even though I know this manager has no malice and does not really care about the job? The answer was, I still internally believe I’m subjugated or subjugation material and seek out others or re-create them in an image that affirms that… simply because I’m used to it, still, from my old days and don’t know how else to be.
Now I’m realizing that I’ve been doing that with the entirety of my law interest! All these intricate plans, connected systems, distribution channels, and clever schemes… were just me practicing converting my emotions into thoughts in another area of my life for the same aspect.
It was wonderful realizing this. I should could fruit more often, in the same clarity and calmness. In fact, I’d like to do that with every event and non-event in my days.
Archiving "About Me"
I'm interested in phenomenology and existential philosophy narrowly as it pertains to being in general and to machines in particular. This coincides with my secular spiritual practice in a form palatable to a non-cultural but still western orientation. This allows for my cultural migration to a society that allows for gay sexuality and the possibility of not being defined by it, where I’m taking root. The very act of which was possible due to my unique upbringing, the psychology of which also interests me.
This and other things here and there you might find on this blog, the name of which speaks to how I think computers should or can be, philosophically speaking; plus it has my name in it. This is concretized in my work, on and off, developing an experimental programing environment. The integrated development environment (IDE) I’m using is Eclipse. I’m writing a plug-in for it that would eventually allow me to write in a Java virtual machine (JVM) language called Clojure, a type of Lisp or functional language that emphasizes immutability and a view on identity that hands-over control of concurrency to the machine and frees the programmer to write more enlightened code. The project is hosted here.
At work, I use my unique understanding to integrate human systems with computer systems using very simple “disposable” systems which might include clever but small software systems to automate processes, increase efficiency, and introduce transparency to ultimately magnify the great skills my consulting team has to offer in the area of project management in specific, and construction consulting in general.
But that’s only one faithful rendering of my manifested being in time. I am ultimately unrenderable as I’m ultimately an expression of the unmanifested.
This and other things here and there you might find on this blog, the name of which speaks to how I think computers should or can be, philosophically speaking; plus it has my name in it. This is concretized in my work, on and off, developing an experimental programing environment. The integrated development environment (IDE) I’m using is Eclipse. I’m writing a plug-in for it that would eventually allow me to write in a Java virtual machine (JVM) language called Clojure, a type of Lisp or functional language that emphasizes immutability and a view on identity that hands-over control of concurrency to the machine and frees the programmer to write more enlightened code. The project is hosted here.
At work, I use my unique understanding to integrate human systems with computer systems using very simple “disposable” systems which might include clever but small software systems to automate processes, increase efficiency, and introduce transparency to ultimately magnify the great skills my consulting team has to offer in the area of project management in specific, and construction consulting in general.
But that’s only one faithful rendering of my manifested being in time. I am ultimately unrenderable as I’m ultimately an expression of the unmanifested.
Computer - Car Analogy
I got this from a friend.
For all of us who feel only the deepest love and affection for the way computers have enhanced our lives, this is for you.
At a recent computer expo (COMDEX), Bill Gates reportedly compared the computer industry with the auto industry and stated, 'If Ford had kept up with technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving $25 cars that got 1,000 miles to the gallon.'
In response to Bill's comments, Ford issued a press release stating: If Ford had developed technology like Microsoft, we would all be driving cars with the following characteristics:
1. For no reason whatsoever, your car would crash... ... ... twice a day.
2. Every time they repainted the lines in the road, you would have to buy a new car.
3. Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason. You would have to pull to the side of the road, close all of the windows, shut off the car, restart it, and reopen the windows before you could continue. For some reason you would simply accept this.
4. Occasionally, executing a maneuver such as a left turn would cause your car to shut down and refuse to restart, in which case you would have to reinstall the engine.
5. Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, was reliable, five times as fast and twice as easy to drive - but would run on only five percent of the roads.
6. The oil, water temperature, and alternator warning lights would all be replaced by a single 'This Car Has Performed An Illegal Operation' warning light.
7. The airbag system would ask 'Are you sure?' before deploying.
8. Occasionally, for no reason whatsoever, your car would lock you out and refuse to let you in until you simultaneously lifted the door handle, turned the key and grabbed hold of the radio antenna.
9. Every time a new car was introduced car buyers would have to learn how to drive all over again because none of the controls would operate in the same manner as the old car.
10. You'd have to press the 'Start' button to turn the engine off.
P.S. - I 'd like to add that when all else fails, you could call 'customer service' in some foreign country and be instructed in some foreign language how to fix your car yourself!
For all of us who feel only the deepest love and affection for the way computers have enhanced our lives, this is for you.
At a recent computer expo (COMDEX), Bill Gates reportedly compared the computer industry with the auto industry and stated, 'If Ford had kept up with technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving $25 cars that got 1,000 miles to the gallon.'
In response to Bill's comments, Ford issued a press release stating: If Ford had developed technology like Microsoft, we would all be driving cars with the following characteristics:
1. For no reason whatsoever, your car would crash... ... ... twice a day.
2. Every time they repainted the lines in the road, you would have to buy a new car.
3. Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason. You would have to pull to the side of the road, close all of the windows, shut off the car, restart it, and reopen the windows before you could continue. For some reason you would simply accept this.
4. Occasionally, executing a maneuver such as a left turn would cause your car to shut down and refuse to restart, in which case you would have to reinstall the engine.
5. Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, was reliable, five times as fast and twice as easy to drive - but would run on only five percent of the roads.
6. The oil, water temperature, and alternator warning lights would all be replaced by a single 'This Car Has Performed An Illegal Operation' warning light.
7. The airbag system would ask 'Are you sure?' before deploying.
8. Occasionally, for no reason whatsoever, your car would lock you out and refuse to let you in until you simultaneously lifted the door handle, turned the key and grabbed hold of the radio antenna.
9. Every time a new car was introduced car buyers would have to learn how to drive all over again because none of the controls would operate in the same manner as the old car.
10. You'd have to press the 'Start' button to turn the engine off.
P.S. - I 'd like to add that when all else fails, you could call 'customer service' in some foreign country and be instructed in some foreign language how to fix your car yourself!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)