Another contradiction...

So I spent a whole post trying to make the reader envision a four dimensional model of... (of what?)... possibilities.  I started with the bell curve, proceeded to a three dimensional nipple, converted it into a three dimensional sphere, and then caused it to move in time and space.  But this, in and of itself, is nothing new.  It is complex, but not entirely outside of experience. We are familiar with something similar.  

But let's take a point on that ball. Every point on that ball is just another ball.  And every ball is just another point on a bigger ball.  This is also complex, but not outside of our experience.  It is the theory of each of our solar system being just an atom in the larger solar system.  I don't really want the reader to think about it that way, but I am trying to make it seem more concrete by using familiar examples.

So now take the balls within balls, points flowing in and out between balls and the balls all moving...

And realize these are only the construct and possibilities in YOUR imagination.  Each person, every animal, every blade of grass, every living thing (we can debate the guardrail theory of the living universe later)  has a set of possibilities.  They float around and bump into everyone else's possibilities.  In fact, they are not balls at all, but the balls stretch, elongate, flatten and fatten as they move.  As your range of possibilities are limited for whatever reason, or expanded for whatever reason, the shape of the constructs making up your world changes into unrecognizable shapes.  You could say they were no longer shapes at all....and you would be right.

In the smaller person, this means that decisions, actions and possibilities are not this or that, or even one side of a three dimensional continuum or not.  Rather possibilities are limited by what you can imagine as a possibility.

Of course, now you tell me, "But I cannot fly!"  True enough.  because in a more complex system possibilities are also limited by what OTHERS imagine as a possibility.  In its most elemental form this can take a physical shape, as when people are violent and limit the freedom, actions and possibilities of others.  In a more intellectual sphere it can include manipulation and coercion.  It could be unfeeling and unthinking.  The universe itself might just not have thought about us flying yet.  It doesn't really matter to some extent.  Some possibilities are foreclosed at some times.  The point also is some are opened at some times.

So back to the visuals. We now have possibilities that are floating around seemingly at random being pushed and pulled, and decisions and issues that no longer resemble in any way what we can imagine based on our understanding.  Think about it.  Who knows what the biggest problems were to the dinosaurs?  Their issues have been lost in the mists of time.  For years, people have worked on freeing their mind and imagining better futures.  Even working along those small cross sections of temporal issues that will disappear.  This is a good thing.  We all want to make our part of the universe as we perceive better and there is no higher purpose.

Or is there?  Based on this ebb and flow model, working within the confines of the cross sections of temporal issues does NOT anticipate the movement of the world.  It does NOT plan for anything "better", but only something marginally not worse than stagnation.  This is where it gets tricky.  We must identify and share possibilities.  We cannot simply theorize in our ivory castle.  We need to bump our thoughts into others and force our collective spheres of possibilities into an egg, a pancake, a decision tree with nodes and spikes and, ultimately, press it into the next collection of possibilities that it will inevitably become.

Part of that process is simply seeing the possibility.

Oh, and by the way, the trick is on you.  By the time you have read this....my world of possibilities has already forgotten it and moved somewhere else.  Thanks for listening.

Contradictions....

 My world is full of contradictions.  Or seeming contradictions.  Consider that the typical view of ideas, concepts, political positions, intelligence or pretty much anything is the “Bell Curve”.  A bell curve is defined as

a symmetrical bell-shaped curve that represents the distribution of values, frequencies or probabilities of a set of data.  It slopes downward from a point in the middle corresponding to the mean value, or the maximum probability.  Data that reflect the aggregate outcome of large numbers of unrelated events tend to result in bell curve distributions.  The Gaussian or normal distribution is a mathematically well-defined bell curve used in statistics and science generally. 

The American Heritage® Science Dictionary Copyright © 2005 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company.  This is a useful concept to define what is “mean”, “typical” or “(more value –laden) “normal”.

The interesting thing is that this bell curve also reflects our society.  The Yin and Yan, the right and left, and the polarization of issues.  It leads to the proposition that the middle can be defined only by and with reference to, the extremes.  The result of such a proposition is tension, struggle, and (in the best of circumstances) compromise.  This is a social practice of the philosophical thesis, antithesis and synthesis that most people can superficially relate to. 

I would like to challenge the reader with some thoughts.  Not yet fully formed, but half baking through my foggy brain.  Close your eyes and imagine no longer a bell curve, but a baby bottle nipple.  The very tip of the nipple is the “mean”.  The edges of the nipple represent the outlying “extremes”.  There are no longer two solutions, but are an infinite variation of solutions.  In fact, there are many more solutions in the three dimensional model than in the two dimensional.  The outlying solutions even have a greater relative number to the typical than found in the bell curve.  The relationship between extreme and typical is altered, although only slightly.  Of course, two solutions near each other on the edge are similar and “lumpers” will tend to argue they should be put together, but such is irrelevant for my purposes. 

Given this type reflection, we do violence to ourselves by foreclosing our options in a two viewpoint world.  It is not a question of right or wrong, but of where on a continuum do we want our actions to be?  Applying this to driving a car, it is not whether we drive a car or not and where on the bell curve do we fall with the amount of car use we are willing to accept.  Rather, there are legs, bicycles, motorcycles, busses, trains, planes and automobiles and the individual mix of use may depend not only on the curve of what you are willing or able to use, but on the circumstances surrounding the situation (one wants to get to a hospital FAST, as opposed to simply enjoying some scenery around the yard or neighborhood). 

A simple concept, but hard to grasp in practice as it can always be lumped or reduced to two choices.  Not a subject here, but I would suggest that is short sighted.  A military survival manual once instructed me that when faced with a problem, you should come up with three solutions.  Less, and you ignore facts.  More and there is too much to make a decision.  While I may not agree totally, this illustrates the fact that too much lumping simply does not meet the needs of society. 

Now, I would like to challenge the reader further.  Close your eyes again.  The nipple now closes upon itself and becomes a ball.  The edges are the outer surface, and the “mean” is the middle.  Denser and heavier in the middle, more spread out and loosely connected on the outer edge.  The range of options has now expanded dramatically.  We have put decision making in three dimensions.  Right and left have become irrelevant.  One still defines the normal by reference to the outside in the sense that you cannot find the middle without the extremes.  This is really just an extension of the nipple, but one I think about for a reason.  It has three dimensions.  It is not yet too far outside our realm of thinking. 

Finally, take the last leap.  Put the ball in the fourth dimension of space time.  THE BALL MOVES!  The middle and the edges flow inward and outward.  They are not static.  The yin and the yan are inextricably the same.  As the ball moves whole new ideas which were not within the original ball are covered, and whole modes of thinking are no longer part of the ball.  Ideas grow which were never thought of before and old ideas disappear from reality.  The “norm” is not static in any way. 

Critics may say my thoughts reduce things to relativism.  I tend to think not.  There is, after all, still a ball in space.  But is it not much more difficult to argue, or even hate, an idea or person when you realize that the idea or person is temporal?  Is it not easier to accept other people, other ideas, and discard things that are no longer useful when you see that it is a normal part of the universe?  And in so doing any negative feelings that normally accompany such things also are temporal and can be put in perspective. 

Think of any problem you need to deal with, get away from yes or no, in or out, on or off.  Open yourself to the world of possibilities and see if there is something different that works for you and know that if it works for you, it is not wrong. 

Peace, and unrest.

Who is an anarchist to tell you what to do?

I am sitting here on my front porch at 8:39 on the evening of June 1, 2013.  It is only now truly bearable to be outside, as it was a very hot day.  The third of three hot days.  It was probably only 92 or 93 today e in Harrisburg, PA.  But to me, at 50 years old, that is some of the hottest weather I remember this early in the year.  Especially three days in a row.  It is still getting cold at night, so I have little room to complain, but I do make the observation.

I would like to start out by saying I have a gas mower, I am strongly considering an electric mower.  I am driving to Philadelphia tomorrow.  Our home has two LP gas fireplaces and a heat pump.  We do have a solar hot water heater, we also have an electric back up.  Of course, since we use well water, we need a well pump.  All of that is by way of telling the reader, that my family and I are by no means divorced from society.  We are not "off the grid".  We do not live a no-impact lifestyle.  In fact, my electric bill comes every month telling me I use more energy than 60 or 60 percent of my neighbors (never mind most of them are two person empty nester households and we have a teenage daughter and 9 year old son).

But I am also in the midst of a long term experiment with reel mowers.  First, of all, reel mowers are NOT for everyone.  It is not that they are that difficult to use, per se.  In fact, the 16 pound reel mower is probably easier to push around the hill that is our yard than the self-propelled gas mower.  But it does require a fair amount of raw muscle power in muscles I do not normally use (the shoulders and lower back in particular).  In addition, it requires a fair amount of maintenance to keep it sharp.  Finally, a reel mower requires an investment in time.  It simply takes longer to mow the grass.  Almost directly this is a product of the fact a muscle powered mower is smaller than a gas powered one.  The cutting deck is 16 inches as opposed to 22 inches.  It takes a little over 2 hours instead of a little over one hour to mow the yard.  For those who do not have the time, this investment is not acceptable.  FOR ME, when I do not have the time, this will not be acceptable.  As it gets dark earlier, mowing will become increasingly difficult.

On the up side, it is the best workout I ever got without working out.  I do not go to the gym on the days I mow.  Or the day after.  In addition, it is so quiet, I can actually carry on a conversation or listen to a podcast while I am mowing.  This also means that if I chose to mow in the early morning (when it is not so hot) or at night, I would not annoy the neighbors.  Finally, using a reel mower gives me a chance to think.  Yes, for two hours while mowing, but also NOW.  Right here.  I am still reaping the benefits by recognizing I am not tied to fossil fuels.  I do not HAVE to sit in the air conditioning all the time.  I do not HAVE to drive a car everywhere.

Oh!  I have written before about my days not driving.  Well, today was another.  Not only did I not drive, but I also did not even get IN a car.  I did not sit at home being a hermit and Luddite.  I went and filled a prescription, rode to my office, went to Fort Hunter Park and played with my son and came home.  Nineteen miles in all.  Could have gone more, but I had nowhere to go.

So.....I come to the title of this blog.  I am anarchist in theory.  I like to believe people will take care of people and will do the right things without a government telling them what to do.  Someone recently told me that coercion never makes lasting change, only understanding.  Since governments are inherently coercive, I have little use for them.  I am not AGAINST them, necessarily, just don't really see much point.  Thomas Jefferson is credited with saying "The Revolution was won, before the war began."  Truth is all around us if we know where to look.

So do not listen to me tell you what to do.  I cannot.  Change, if there is to be change, has to come from within.  There have to be more of us sitting at night thinking how it is hotter than it used to be and how good it is to feel a relationship with work, and to feel the happiness of slowing down on a bike or walking.  No there is nothing an anarchist can tell you........

.......but maybe, if you are willing to slow down and look around, I can show you.