Skip to main content

Viva el baño



For one side or two of politics these days, it seems that what you do matters far less than what you say. Moreover, it is just as important what you (say you) believe. But who knows what any of them believe nowadays?  Who can you trust when you trust no one?

One simple fact about the terrorist Ahmad Khan Rahmani is that ISIS will never claim his acts are on their recognizance.  Why?  Because his actions were beyond stupid. He was captured almost immediately; one of his big bombs and others did not detonate.    He is alone with no support. This is his ultimate punishment. He will spend twenty years or more in prison - completely alone. If ISIS would claim him as theirs, his life would be complete.  Not to happen. 

Question.  What do Secretary of State John Kerry and New Jersey bomber Ahmad Khan Rahmani have in common?  Answer.  Same IQ.

Truth is greatest ally of power.  It matters little if the "truth" is actually true.  It is the pronouncement.    And the pronouncement implies justification.  And with the justification in hand, power can exact any remedies it deems correct or just.

We cannot be too harsh on Mitt Romney and Jeb Bush for rejecting Trump.  Trump is changing the Reps, taking them more moderate and more responsive to extant conditions. A similar phenomenon would be true if the Dems had a candidate making them more moderate, though with a slightly different definition of moderate. What is curious that moderation has become an outlier among party establishmentarians on both sides. Moderation seems regarded as defective, less pure, and tainted.  

The perennial battle to make a better country has dissembled into a war between ideologies.  By analogy, the difference between the extreme Reps and extreme Dems: the one group will allow the public to decide how much toilet paper is allowed in the restroom, the other allows the public to choose only the color.  Viva el baño!

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Accepting Fake Information

Every day, we are all bombarded with information, especially on news channels.  One group claims it's false; another calls it the truth. How can we know when to accept it or alternatively how can we know it's false? There are several factors which influence acceptance of fake or false information. Here are the big four.  Some just don’t have the knowledge to discern fact/truth from fiction/fact/false*. Some fake information is cleverly disguised and simply appears to be correct. Some fake information is accepted because the person wants to believe it. Some fake information is accepted because there is no other information to the contrary. However, the acceptance of  information  of any kind become a kind of  truth , and this is a well studied topic. In the link below is an essay on “The Truth About Truth.” This shows simply that what is your point of view, different types of information are generally accepted, fake or not.   https://www.linkedin.com/posts/g-donald-allen-420b03

Your Brain Within Your Brain

  Your Bicameral Brain by Don Allen Have you ever gone to another room to get something, but when you got there you forgot what you were after? Have you ever experienced a flash of insight, but when you went to look it up online, you couldn’t even remember the keyword? You think you forgot it completely. How can it happen so fast? You worry your memory is failing. Are you merely absent-minded? You try to be amused. But maybe you didn’t forget.   Just maybe that flash of insight, clear and present for an instant, was never given in the verbal form, but another type of intelligence you possess, that you use, and that communicates only to you. We are trained to live in a verbal world, where words matter most. Aside from emotions, we are unable to conjure up other, nonverbal, forms of intelligence we primitively, pre-verbally, possess but don’t know how to use. Alas, we live in a world of words, stewing in the alphabet, sleeping under pages of paragraphs, almost ignoring one of

Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious?

  Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious? I truly like the study of consciousness, though it is safe to say no one really knows what it is. Some philosophers has avoided the problem by claiming consciousness simply doesn’t exist. It's the ultimate escape clause. However, the "therefore, it does not exist" argument also applies to "truth", "God", and even "reality" all quite beyond a consensus description for at least three millennia. For each issue or problem defying description or understanding, simply escape the problem by claiming it doesn’t exist. Problem solved or problem avoided? Alternately, as Daniel Dennett explains consciousness as an account of the various calculations occurring in the brain at close to the same time. However, he goes on to say that consciousness is so insignificant, especially compared to our exalted notions of it, that it might as well not exist [1] . Oh, well. Getting back to consciousness, most of us have view