SHBUI

SHBUI

2jun2001hello by slightly rotating the TV here at the home of my colleague wheresits this elegant device the Apple Computer I can watch TV while talking to yáll. But not to do when watching heavy drama etc. Time is thelimiting factor in the pleasure of being alive; we all will be dead by some centuries later. And listening to Beethoven takes asa long as it takes. But typing this while seeing Animal Planet TV allows me to do both. What happens to memory of these simultaneous experiences? What happens while we do more than one thing at a time? Indeed, are we ever doing only one thing at a time? I have a piece of marble about one centimeter thick and 12 cm wide and 18 cm long, and I use it in more than one way, e g, while reading I lay it over page I do not want to see yet (so there we have the elegance of not yet) ; also it protects nice objects from the wet on table. And it feels goodon my finger-tips. goodon, that´s elegant, sez I. O top of the TV I put these days a book of art : catalog (leave off ue) of major exhibit in Denmark a few years ago of Christen Købke, one of my great favorites since I first saw his work about 30 years ago, in my wandering toward Oslo to see Edvard Munch´s art---and the Danes agree it seems: Købke, it seems is the greatest Danish painter (he died young of TB in 1848, born in1810,so practically identical contemporary of the greatest writer since Homer, ie, Edgar Poe(see my domain dedicated to Poe (Edgar Poe.com)---Poe 1809 -1848, asI recall (centenaries in a few years)(and asI recall Chopin too)(nice to combine celebrations))). So I see Købke incidentally as I look at the TV set. I foolishly at my home put plants on top of TV until one leaked and ruined one(meaning clear). Consciousness of what we are doing is part of SHBUI. We are all each of us entitled to SHBUI (ROYAL ELEGANCE), so I am defining Royal in my own way---nothing to do with the Windsor Family. i am sovereign and my prertogatives include reasonable use of language ways, under the aegis of Royal Tao, as I reasonably perceive it. My entire thinking process devolves from my theory of CosmicRelationship. This includes my own theory of CRKnots, and my corollary to Murphy´s Law--- If it were not that things go wrong (so to speak) we (people) would not be here: evolution derives from deviation. Of course we must consider the prime notioncalled best balance (a greek word I will soon remember), and this bestbalance is necessarily seen in terms of The Reasonable. Clearly we fly by the seat of our pants, and what is in hubris called Science is only tolerable seen as limitted. Basically, my Cosmic Relationship Theory starts with the fundamental capacity to sense the abstract. Reification is the bane of philosophy. When I use the word “thing” I mean it figuratively---but even when (most) philosophers even do not at all use that word, they think in terms of thing: ie,a material object. Another fallacy ubiqitous is that at some point in time LIFE BEGAN---actually and in reality, there is no basis to assume that LIFE did not ALWAYS exist. Of course one thing I am also doing at the same time is typing using my fingers (2 fingers). Also I am talking silently to myself, and as if to you (differentfrom talking to myself only)(but there is a spectrum progressing from isolated(as I may call it) self-conversation, over to proto interpersonal conversation imagined in my solitary silence, even solitary while via TV being now in Africa with Rhino wardens). I love it that even silently talking to myself I use and hear my own voice (of course, but marvellous anyway, as so many “of course”s)---there is much to explore from these minute observations of actuality. We must distingjish between the ACTUAL and the REAL, between ACTUALITY and REALITY --- they must be seen as two dimensions in mind. And what is MIND? I heard on TV that philosophers of psychology in this 21st century will be concentrating on MIND. Reality is in the abstract and Actuality in the concrete---two discrete dimensions in thought (thought as manifestation of mind: we create thoughts individually and profligately and then evaluate and justify them according to our prejudices and interests as we see them to be---we then call that SCIENCE. This may happen to have a claim to conform to what is now generally seen to be Science, and may give concrete results, like rocket science etc. But superstition is born and supported by an obvious concrete result, with the inference that a pattern of predictability has been found. The closeness of superstition to science has always been a curse on the human race. For one thing, we foolishly say how marvellous that everything conspired to produce us and this planet as it is---but I assume evolution is profligate, change is profligate, abstract life itself is profligate---it is not efficient in the sense of avoiding waste, it doesnot decide where it is going and then get there, or what it is achieving and then achieve it; it even cannot be said to grope, it merely profligately wanders and makes. We just happened to occur. I put into some water a jar and let it find its balance, so I remembered the word homeostasis. Ah, see, now TV about the Bonobo chimps. see ya later.clik 21jun01 06:03am The thing about ruffians is they distract the contemplative; that should not be allowed. One should not have to adapt to other people. Intelligent good people do not want to be violent, they want to amble with Ferdinand the Bull.

250701 16:15 There is something nifst (norwegian word meaning eerie) about Japanese liking for mobil fones etc---they seem to be anti personal ethnically, but that seems paradoxical, as they are Budhist, or am I silly?

260701 02:29 The horrible sound of the ocean, the stupid sound of the lake.

060801 22:36 People should be taught to use the concept vector : e g, when a broker says he has baught silver and that is why the price has soared.

070801 09:52 We should generally use the proper feathers for each task, not collapsing onto a task with our entire body.

150801 17:25 Note poem by e e Cummings bit: “A pretty girl who naked is, is worth ten million statues.” --- compare: in Plato guy who answers Socrates asking what is beauty with (not verbatim), “a pretty virgin”. I like Cummings, but not that Greek. and was there direct influence? well well.

290801 0520 The vexed problem in English/American, of whether to use “in” or “for”, when speaking of time lapsed: an interesting example: “...is about to achieve its highest level for fourteen years” vs “...in fourteen years” : “for” is better by far; but generally I object to that use of “for”. Anyway, I would like a better way to be found, in that instance also. (found=invented).

150901 1924 How does the fact that we stop in music at end of time alloted to the note, compare with the natural rhythms of speech?

061001 2016 Pretty line from tv science show: “In a tall eucalyptus grove in the outskirts of town near Natal”.

071001 0052 I hear on tv that there are 6000 languages and half will be gone in a hundred years.

0053 If you want to imagine that number 6000 think of the dead of the terror of Sept 11.

0055 We see people outside and hear their inside.

1410 In scholarly book, “The Mafia of a Sicilian Village”(p167-8) (I´ll get the author´s name later), is the freely translated letter to police by a man correctly expecting to get killed soon; last line: “Do not release this canaille, because tomorrow they will commit things which are worse than those they usually do”. Shbui.

shbui søndag 13. januar 2002 17:25 Some names I like the sound of; some of the Afghany names. Also, classical composers: Rodion Schedrin , Bohuslav Martinu.

shbui søndag 13. januar 2002 18:21 Perusing Tarot I see similarity to astrology in the sense that they both expatiate on personality, whatever one may think of their factuality. I am interested in the play of personality over the centuries in the sense of history of development of awareness of individual personality, ala Freud vs Jung; I consider Jung to be a throwback to a more primitive phase of contemplation of personality, not yet free of what Jung keeps refering to, and which I accept as valid but not a suitable guide to personal development. Tarot is a relief to me from reification of personality, as i call it: people are coerced from infancy into grooves of behavior including personalities imposed upon them (ergo, pseudo- personalities) and tarot encourages play of personality in the sense of backing away from such imposed traps, by suggesting views of personality over centuries and thru disparate cultures, thereby freeing one from compulsion to BE someone fitting in today all the time.

shbui søndag 13. januar 2002 19:04 A rainy day in Portugal.

søndag 27. januar 2002 19:13 Note that in Genesis (in the King James), the first page, differs in style from the second --- to the point that it seems to me that it really is two different writers, or translaters, and this would be interesting to check out.

19:17 It seems to me that Japanese culture tends to go away from interpersonal relationships, and that the products they have been successful with, have operated in that realm, of depersonalization (e g robots) --- this in spite of their slogan “I am you”. I wonder how this will play out in this century commercially internationally.

19:23 The whole attitude toward sex dominates the notion of taste in a society, and that is why the Brits are lost.