Friday 20 June 2014

Bootstrapping in a void

*
To set down such choice experiences that my own writings may inspire me–and at least I may make wholes of parts.
Certainly it is a distinct profession to rescue from oblivion and to fix the sentiments and thoughts which visit all men more or less generally... 
Each thought that is welcomed and recorded is a nest egg–by the side of which more will be laid. Thoughts accidentally thrown together become a frame–in which more may be developed and exhibited.
Perhaps this is the main value of a habit of writing–of keeping a journal. That so we remember our best hours–and stimulate ourselves. My thoughts are my company–They have a certain individuality and separate existence–aye personality.
Having by chance recorded a few disconnected thoughts and then brought them into juxtaposition–they suggest a whole new field in which it was possible to labor and to think. Thought begat thought.

Henry David Thoreau. Journal. Jan 22 1852
**

At first glance this seems quite an inspiring idea - to record 'choice experiences' in a journal, and then feed off them to develop more - as thought begets thought... The artist as hero of his own quest. 
But on reflection it is an attempted autonomy - a solipsism - that must surely lead to despair: to depend upon oneself alone... This is an early inkling of the modern nightmare in which (supposedly) each man is an artist creating his own meaning and purpose - and hope is bootstrapped from the void. 
If the mind falters for a moment - then everything collapses - all meaning and purpose: all hope. And to realize that all meaning and purpose depend utterly on not faltering is certainly enough to make it falter. 
*

Thursday 19 June 2014

For preference - Listen to Scripture (rather than reading it)

*

I don't usually link to other blogs, but this is good, and may be important to some readers of this:

http://moosenorseman.wordpress.com/2014/06/18/why-i-dont-read-the-bible/

The person whom I have met that seemed to know the Bible most deeply, told me he had done the same - listed to audio recordings several times.

So (unless you can afford to pay an actual living person to do it) this may be about the best and most Christian way to make use of the internet - Listen to Scripture!

*

Note: If I am listening for understanding (rather than for beauty) my favourite reader is Max McLean - who is dramatic, engaged, and gets the meaning across very well:

http://www.biblegateway.com/resources/audio/

McLean has read several versions including the King James/ Authorized Version - which I use because I believe it to be divinely inspired; the NIV which is easiest to understand and popular among Evangelicals (paraphrased verse by verse); and the ESV which is considered by some modern Protestant scholars of the 'Inerrant' tradition to be the most accurate translation by scholarly criteria, word for word.  

*


Cat People - is this the most important Mammal Right's issue of today?

*

[Satire alert]

*



You may think that the plight of people who believe that they are really cats is rare, and that such people are deluded - mentally ill. Deserving of pity, but not entitled to agreement.

In fact you might imagine that to agree with a deluded person may be to harm them - to encourage them to self-destructive extremes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalking_Cat

You may feel that the when somebody believes that he is a cat, this is just plain false; and that extensive body modifications do not change that fact - and that this would apply even when such people behave as they suppose a cat behaves, and that it would apply even if their internal physiology was modified with 'cat hormones' or some other chemical.

You might even suppose that - merely because it is factually false, therefore you were free to deny that such people really were cats; or that you were entitled to assert that it was better not to be a person who falsely believed he was a cat.

You would be wrong.

*

IN FACT (if you really think about it) people who believe they are cats are correct (in the ways that really matter); and therefore only a hater would deny it.

After all, there is no hard and fast line between cats and humans; the biological definition of 'species' is controversial, and poorly defined, and there is a grey area between so-called species, and hybrids may occur naturally or be created by scientists, and these may be fertile...

Plus there are many similarities between 'cats' and 'humans': both are mammals, both like fish, some 'cats' live in houses and some 'humans' live in the woods...

The difference is better perceived as a continuum and a matter of choice.  If a 'cat' chooses to self-identify as a 'human' (or vice versa) this is their basic Right and an equally-valid decision as conventional species-ism; and it is an act of hatred to say otherwise.

*

You may also suppose that 'humans' who believe they are 'cats' are rare - but you would be wrong about that!

Many such people are too oppressed to acknowledge their feelings and beliefs about cat-hood, too afraid of the vile hatred of those who insist on rigid species boundaries and the impossibility of crossing them.

(Probably) when children and adolescents are directly questioned by teachers, social workers, media reporters and authority figures, they would admit to sometimes 'believing' they are a cat, wishing to be a cat, playing cats in role play games, liking pictures of 'cat people', or having at some point  had a crush on Nastassja Kinsky (see above - she is the mammal on the left of the picture) - these people (grouped together) are counted as 'unsure' about their species; and should probably all be regarded as (in reality, secretly, too afraid to admit it) wanting to be cats and indeed covertly believing that they are cats - if only the cruelty of conventional society would allow them to express this.

Indeed, figures suggest that up-to ten percent of vulnerable children/ impressionable adolescents and docile minions of large organisations have exactly such beliefs/ feelings/ vague and fleeting notions (or will at least say that they may have such beliefs/ feelings/ vague and fleeting notions if they are directly confronted by a ranting, swivel-eyed zealot whom they suspect may have power to harm them).

*

THEREFORE in future any 'human' who self identifies as a 'cat' must be agreed with, must be treated as a cat (and vice versa, of course), and anyone who is accused of suspecting otherwise - or who does not offer Cat People privileged status and conditions... in fact anyone who does not sympathise with, praise, laud and worship Cat People to high heaven at every possible opportunity...

Well, any such person should by Law (and more importantly by bureaucratic practice and trial by mass media) be subject to severe and open-ended sanctions up to and including mob ridicule, sacking, fines, jail time and violence (and, with a bit of luck, they might be induced to kill themselves - which would be no worse than what many/ some/ a few... or at least one Cat Person (actual or plausibly-possible) has had to endure from the hatred of conventional society).

*


Wednesday 18 June 2014

Modern intellectual life is just a matter of Parroting in Chinese Rooms...

*
http://iqpersonalitygenius.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/learning-to-parrot-modern-intelligence.html
*

The psychological roots of pacifism - genius plus egalitarianism

*

Pacifism is historically almost the primary and first type of recognizable Leftism - with the Quakers - but I think that psychologically Pacifism derives from already-established egalitarianism.

I take it that pacifism, as a political principle, is about men rather than women (since women are usually exempt from war) - and my intuition is that it derives from genius men.

In historical societies, I think the equivalent people to modern geniuses were shamans, priests, healers, advisers etc. In sum, it was recognized that geniuses were unsuitable for deployment as soldiers.

Psychologically, part of being a genius is a primary commitment to the importance of one's own work, above social ties and duties. So the genius feels, about himself: "I personally will not fight."

But when egalitarianism began to get a grip, geniuses saw that the logic was that either all should be conscripted for war, or nobody - and this, I think, led to pacifism.

In effect, the genius's own imperative to avoid war - plus egalitarianism - drove him to advocate pacifism as a universal principle; on the basis "I personally will not fight, but all should be equal - so what applies to me should apply to everybody; therefore nobody should have to fight".

I believe that this is the basis of genuine, principled (albeit wrong) pacifism.

Such geniuses constructed pacifism as a political principle - rationalized in various ways; and various other - differently motivated people - subscribed to pacifism until they made a vast majority.

But the origin of pacifism is, I believe, in the combination of genius with modern (i.e. post-medieval) egalitarianism.

*

Tuesday 17 June 2014

Are you *sure* you are in favour of eugenics, in light of the following?...

*
    http://iqpersonalitygenius.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/so-you-think-you-are-in-favour-of.html
      *

How can you find faith? How can this faith grow into certainty?

Transcribed and edited/expanded from the question time following a lecture by William Arkle given on March 16th 1992 to a group in Yeovil

From about 1:30 at:

https://www.wessexresearchgroup.org/audio-lecture-archive-page-4-wessex-research-group.html


The secret is to have faith in the quality, the feeling, the beauty of this Great Person up there. 

And once you have grasped that with your faith, then you will start to understand within yourself the sort of thing that person would be trying to give to you; which is the greatest thing that He can possibly give you. 

You have something in you which can give you exactly that essential faith. And that something is a little spark of God's own divine flame. 


It is there. 

To understand that God's own divine flame is there in you, is the most vital component of what you need to know about this process of mortal life; because once you can read that inner spark of God for yourself, then you can get all the necessary answers for yourself: and then your faith grows into certainty



**

Note added:

I believe this is a vital teaching for many modern Christians - that we have something divine (a spark) in each of us, something of God; that we can learn to 'read' that inner spark and to feel the validity of its guidance; and that this inner divinity and our responsiveness to its truth is the basis of anything we may hope for.

Mainstream Christians often neglect, or even deny, the divinity within Man; and downplay the Scriptural teachings on our destiny (should we accept it) to become Sons of God. These scriptural teachings are neglected, denied and downplayed because of fear that people will misunderstand this; that the idea of inner divinity will lead to pride and rejection of the need for the salvation of Christ, that it may prevent repentance of sin. 

These are, of course, real risks or possibilities - but there is no risk-free route through life. And it is just plain factually true that we have aspects of God in us, or else we could not be saved, we could not choose salvation, we could not become Sons of God. 

Modern people crave certainty, and this craving is stimulated and then used against them by prevalent secular Leftism - but misdirected to exclude Christianity and to lead people down into nihilism and hope-less-ness. 

But certainly is available (and, with it, hope) once it is understood that certainty is inner; certainty is subjective (my certainty is not your certainty - my certainty is not communicable to you, nor is it intended to be communicable - certainty is something each must find for himself); and when it is recognized that certainty is not to be found anywhere in the world but instead it dwells in the heart and therefore must be sought in the heart - and indeed will be found in the heart.


Lucky Philosopher: The Culture Vulture years

*

From http://luckyphilosopher.blogspot.co.uk/

**

When I first read Tolkien - which was sometime after I turned thirteen, it was a turning-point for me.

Cause and effect, no doubt, run both ways - I was at this point developmentally pre-prepared to read Tolkien, and Tolkien also had a permanent effect on me.

*

First it was The Hobbit. I held-off reading Lord of the Rings because I liked The Hobbit so much, and resented the idea of a book which did not have Bilbo as its main hero - but in the end curiosity, and satiety with re-reading The Hobbit - pushed me on to Lord of the Rings. The rest is history.

*

It was at about this time, as I was walking down The Main Road of the village, that I felt a change in myself - in my mind. It resembled the description given by some patients with schizophrenia who describe being in a perplexed state for a while - knowing something is going on that concerns them, but not what it is - then suddenly, in a wave of (apparent) insight, finding everything made clear.

With me it was a bit like waking-up, becoming aware of myself and the surroundings. The dawn of self-consciousness.

This never happened again - so I suppose that this was my experience of the process of mentally becoming 'an adult' - although physically I still had a couple of years to wait. I knew at the time it was significant, and I also knew the significance - that I had 'grown-up' inside - in terms of the essential core.

Since then 'me' has always been 'me' - and my pre-thirteen year old self is somewhat hazy, somewhat alien.

*

Four the next four and some years at school, my inner life was dominated by Tolkien's world, and by the implications I drew from it. As well as reading and re-reading and pondering - the Tolkien interest propelled me into other fascinations. After quite a long period of moths just immersing myself in Lord of the Rings - I turned my attention outward to seek something similar, something which expanded and extended the things I drew from that world.

I decided to read adult's literature; our house was full of good books - so I asked my Father for advice. I began with George Bernard Shaw's various works beginning with Androcles and the Lion and Everybody's Political What's What, and Robert's Grave's I Claudius/ Claudius the God novels.

This was the start of the Culture Vulture years - 13-21 especially, when I attacked The Western Tradition with great energy and a retentive memory; limited (it seems) more by constraints of availability than of time.

The house was full of Good Books, there was a small (one medium-sized room) but well-stocked village library, and I was soon going into Bristol to swim among the endless stacks of the City library. I had the good fortune of a well-trained and enthusiastic English teacher from whom I learned to read Middle English and appreciate Shakespearian language - which opened-up 600 years of literature.

(I also borrowed a copy of Sweet's Anglo Saxon primer to try and add another chunk of time to my appreciation - but I could not make head or tail of it. Some people manage to 'teach themselves' languages; I have always been a mediocre linguist.)

*

Bristol had probably the best professional theatre outside London, and another teacher would take groups in a minibus during the evenings to see pretty much everything they did - so I began to accumulate an experience of plays - old and new.

Classical music took a while to kick-in. For quite a while I was mainly interested in Folk Music, and what little 'Medieval' (including Tudor) music I could hear - but an interest in the Recorder led to Bach and Telemann and then to the vast world of the Baroque and Classical eras (I was not so keen on later stuff, and still am not), and Gilbert and Sullivan led to Grand Opera which I would borrow in boxed LP sets from the City Library - by the time I finished school I had heard pretty much the whole of the pre-20th century standard repertoire, quite a bit of it followed with libretto or score (which could also be borrowed from the library).

*

All this cultural devouring was done on my own and for my own satisfaction - in some way. I didn't really have anybody to talk with about it - my best friend followed me quite a bit of the way, but he didn't want to analyse things in the way that I did. This led me to the secondary literature - criticism, scholarship, opinion, reviews and the like.

This was where I was, and am, different. Lots of people listen to classical music - but not many (except professionals) read books on the subject, its history, structure, biographies. Lots of people read novels or watch plays, not so many read about novels novels - and read plays and also literary essays - and biographies (plural) or the writers.

Clearly I was seeking more than diversion. Clearly, for me, it was a matter of trying to go inside the arts - and not simply in a practical way (by acting in plays and singing in classical pieces) but in a more philosophical way, indeed in a religious way: to get inside the world view of classical music, literature and so on, and in fact to stay there.

*

For me, High Culture was a religion. My hope was that my life and abilities would turn-out to be such that - eventually - I would be able to live inside literature and music, and see the world from that place; I would be inside - protected and sustained - and looking-out; and that that world would provide me with the necessities - work and love; money and status and enjoyable activity and human relationships.

There was little of this for the external observer to see - in the sense that this probably looked like a Hobby; recreation from my 'real' work of studying, passing exams and later training as a doctor.

But it wasn't - for me it was the most important thing because it was my hope of happiness, lacking any other religion it was my only hope - it was real life.

*

Monday 16 June 2014

Could the 'Flynn effect' mean *nothing*? Yes!

*
http://iqpersonalitygenius.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/could-flynn-effect-be-non-valid-yes-if.html
*

Smoking is a mug's game...

*

I saw this advert in the late 1960s in "Look and Learn" - a weekly educational comic for children.

Naturally, my favourite bit was the non-educational fantasy The Trigan Empire:


*

Thirty-fifth Anniversary of the Four-Day Wagner Ring-Fest

*

Almost exactly thirty-five years ago I listened to Wagner's opera sequence The Ring.

It was a memorable event, scheduled to come immediately after my medical school examinations but before I got the results. My companions were two music students - and they-block booked one of the sound-proofed studios in the bowels of the music department annexe - and all four volumes of the boxed set of The Ring in the famous 1958-65 version conducted by George Solti and featuring the Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra.

We therefore listened to these LPs on state-of the-art stereo, following the whole thing on scores, and with intense concentration. In the gaps between sections or operas, we continued to socialize, eat meals together, and discuss the operas; or else were reading books about Wagner.

Altogether it was a rather overwhelming experience, and I was dazedly wandering in a Wagnerian world for the next few months - whether walking in the Lake District, sweeping the corridors and cleaning toilets in a psychiatric hospital (as a summer job), or immersing myself in the Edinburgh Fringe Festival.

However, I have never done the same again - for the very good reason that the last part of Siegfried and the whole of Gotterdammerung were extremely disappointing to me as the supposed culmination of the cycle - being at a lower level musically, dramatically and spiritually than what preceded.

Indeed, my general feeling is that, qua opera, the first is the best - The Rhinegold; which has a visceral mythic power and unity. Some of the music in Valkyrie and Siegfried is more powerfully moving and appealing - but at a cost of some underlying incoherence. So my practice has been to listen to Rhinegold complete from time to time, but only to chunks of the second and third, and never again to the fourth.

*

Ralph Waldo Emerson on Dreaming

*

Edited from the beginning of Ralph Waldo Emerson's essay Demonology.


The name Demonology covers dreams, omens, coincidences, luck, sortilege, magic and other experiences which shun rather than court inquiry, and deserve notice chiefly because every man has usually in a lifetime two or three hints in this kind which are specially impressive to him. They also shed light on our structure.
 
The witchcraft of sleep divides with truth the empire of our lives. This soft enchantress visits two children lying locked in each other’s arms, and carries them asunder by wide spaces of land and sea, and wide intervals of time.
 
’T is superfluous to think of the dreams of multitudes, the astonishment remains that one should dream; that we should resign so quietly this deifying Reason, and become the theatre of delirious shows, wherein time, space, persons, cities, animals, should dance before us in merry and mad confusion; a delicate creation outdoing the prime and flower of actual Nature, antic comedy alternating with horrid pictures.
 
Sometimes the forgotten companions of childhood reappear or we seem busied for hours and days in peregrinations over seas and lands, in earnest dialogues, strenuous actions for nothings and absurdities, cheated by spectral jokes and waking suddenly with ghastly laughter, to be rebuked by the cold, lonely, silent midnight, and to rake with confusion in memory among the gibbering nonsense to find the motive of this contemptible cachinnation.
 
Dreams are jealous of being remembered; they dissipate instantly and angrily if you try to hold them. When newly awaked from lively dreams, we are so near them, still agitated by them, still in their sphere,—give us one syllable, one feature, one hint, and we should repossess the whole; hours of this strange entertainment would come trooping back to us; but we cannot get our hand on the first link or fibre, and the whole is lost. There is a strange wilfulness in the speed with which it disperses and baffles our grasp.
 
A dislocation seems to be the foremost trait of dreams. A painful imperfection almost always attends them. The fairest forms, the most noble and excellent persons, are deformed by some pitiful and insane circumstance. The very landscape and scenery in a dream seem not to fit us, but like a coat or cloak of some other person to overlap and encumber the wearer; so is the ground, the road, the house, in dreams, too long or too short, and if it served no other purpose would show us how accurately Nature fits man awake.
 
There is one memory of waking and another of sleep. In our dreams the same scenes and fancies are many times associated, and that too, it would seem, for years. In sleep one shall travel certain roads in stage-coaches or gigs, which he recognizes as familiar, and has dreamed that ride a dozen times; or shall walk alone in familiar fields and meadows, which road or which meadow in waking hours he never looked upon.
 
This feature of dreams deserves the more attention from its singular resemblance to that obscure yet startling experience which almost every person confesses in daylight, that particular passages of conversation and action have occurred to him in the same order before, whether dreaming or waking; a suspicion that they have been with precisely these persons in precisely this room, and heard precisely this dialogue, at some former hour, they know not when.
 
 
** 

 Note - I only came across this essay a couple of days ago  - despite that I have been reading Emerson for about 40 years. It was bundled into the remarkably good value Delphi edition of the 'Complete' Emerson I bought for my Kindle reader. As a whole Demonology is incoherent and very variable in quality and subject matter - but the above beginning struck me as extremely astute in a typically Emersonian fashion - as well as being beautifully expressed.
*

Lucky Philosopher - musical instruments

*

From: http://luckyphilosopher.blogspot.co.uk/

My first musical instrument, at age ten, was a ukelele - the one that looks like a little guitar - and it cost one pound and one shilling; bought for me on impulse by my Dad, unplanned, from a shop in Bristol. It came with George Formby guide on how to play it.

Within days or weeks my then group of friends had formed a 'pop group' which we called The Shades. We wore sunglasses (naturally!), flared trousers and brightly coloured nylon shirts with cravats.

*

The Shades comprised an electric and pneumatic reed organ (which sounded like a motorised accordion), a steel strung acoustic guitar, ukelele and maracas - we had no amplification.

With such a bizarre line-up, I can only attribute our success to the musicality of the organ player - who could compose, arrange, and improvise a bit; and also that we must have had nice treble voices', because it was not long before we were playing 'concerts'.

We even played at the main Church service on Sundays - which was probably a couple of hundred people; and 'entertained' the old folks at the nearby residential home.

We were canny enough to fit the material to the audience, and I recall playing and singing such contemporary worship classics as Lord of the Dance and Kumbayah in front of a full house with that nervelessness and sense of entitlement of the pre-adolescent; and an old time song called 'After the Ball' which we learned for the Old Folk.

*

By this time I had upgraded from ukelele to ukelele banjo - which was much louder and cost five times as much (i.e. five pounds).

Then, with terrible swiftness, we recapitulated that typical late 1960s trajectory by electrifying and becoming 'progressive'...

The old, old, and typically 'sixties, story: loss of innocence - corruption interpreted as sophistication.

*

We stopped calling ourselves a pop group and claimed now to be Rock - we changed our name from 'The Shades' to ...Quarternion (meaning a group of four... clever, yes? That one came from our intellectual organist); and we learned a couple of heavy numbers including the 'meaningful' (a word we actually used) Child of Time as played by Deep Purple.

We listened to the Woodstock live album. We worried about the Vietnam War - or was it the Viet-man war? We became tortured artists with a social mission and a keen interest in girls.

We plugged our instruments into on old valve radio which served as combined amplifier and loudspeaker - well 'amplify' and 'loud' did not really come into it: this particular radio was apparently designed for a wartime family to gather around and listen to Churchill's stirring rhetoric, rather than creating a 'wall of sound'.

The electronic organ remained, but we added an electric 'lead' guitar (the classic Avon budget model, purchased from the Kay's catalogue), and I switched to playing 'bass' on the lower strings of another ordinary electric guitar - the whole being sustained by the solid beat of the same old maracas rhythm section...

*

I quit before it got to the stage of peace-and-love-ins, Hari Krishna, drugs and overdoses.  

*

No, we never did get a drum kit. And no microphones. To be honest, you don't need a microphone to make your voice heard over the sound of a 1945 radiogram, a pneumatic organ and maracas.

*

Sunday 15 June 2014

Lucky Philosopher: Adventures in ink

*

We used fountain pens to write with - I suspect that ballpoint pens were illegal; and this led to what might be described as Adventures with Ink: blotting and spattering.

Blotting is straightforward. The ink pens either had a reservoir of ink - with some kind of squeezing or plunger mechanism to load the ink from a bottle; or else they are cartridge pens when the ink was bought already inside a plastic tube - and inserting the cartridge would pierce the tube and allow the ink to reach the nib.

Either way, it was possible to compress the ink container and extrude a large blob of ink onto the work book of a best friend when their attention was diverted.

But this was rather dull - so the best effect was to make a deep blob - then covert it into a complex blot by pressing the pages together. If, then, the pages were slid back and forth, then the ink could be made to cover pretty much the whole of two sheets. If slimy spit was added to the mix, the lubrication led to even more damage.

Of course, this was a sort of 'nuclear option' only to be used in the case of extreme provocation or extreme boredom; and, analogously, liable to mutually assured destruction from retaliation.

*

One Biology lesson matters got completely out of hand. A group of four or six of us was sat around a table, doing some kind of practical work - look at plants down a shared microscope, or similar. It began when somebody like Jones blotted Tank's book - wit the full works: blob, blot and scrape. Tank deserved it for having his curly hair in a style which resembled headphones and for being generally a smug dandy.

But Tank could not get at Jones's book to retaliate; so the conflict escalated into spattering. Tank raked his fountain pen in a sweeping arc in front of Jones, whose head, neck and white shirt-front were diagonally machine-gunned with multiple blobs of ink.

Unfortunately, as so often in war, there was collateral damage - and some other got spattered by Tank's scything gesture; therefore the counter-attack was multiple and devastating. Jones plus others combined to empty their fountain pens, using short criss-cross sweeps, onto the cowering, muttering Tank.

I observed all this through a small crack in my school blazer - because I had seen the conflict brewing and retracted my head into the unfolded lapels of my dark navy blazer, upon which the ink storm spattered invisibly.

*

I was sufficiently impressed by the effect of the ink to hatch a wizard wheeze. I discovered that - if the ink was diluted sufficiently, it looked like ink, but did not stain. How I convinced myself of this is hard to imagine -  but I believed I had discovered a recipe for create apparent ink havoc which after a few seconds would simply disappear like water.

And it seemed to work! I spattered various people and things, creating a sensation - but then before they could retaliate I showed them that it was a fake. Hilarity ensued.

Within about an hour the craze had spread, and a group of us found ourselves in the boy's toilets armed with pens charged with ultra-dilute ink and washbasins full of water for swift re-loading.

Chaos! Within ten seconds everybody was covered in the dilute ink, and so were the walls and ceiling of the bathroom.

At the time I insisted that the real problem was some stupid boys had failed to dilute their ink adequately - probably Roberts, because that would have been typical.

At any rate, when the Deputy Headmaster walked in (Why? - I never knew) there was a situation of apparent carnage. He was so angry that wouldn't listen to my protestations that things were not as bad as they appeared to be - and we all had lunchtime detention to clean the room and restore normality.

Whether it was because the ultra-dilute ink had dried in the meantime, or because of some flaw in my reasoning was never clear - but in the event, when we had to do it ourselves, it turned-out to be surprisingly difficult to remove the 'fake' ink spatters - it was almost as if they were real ink spatters.    

*

Lucky Philosopher - Youth cult interlude

*

Immediately before the Tolkien era there was a brief period - a few months, maybe half a year - when I began to be pulled-into the mainstream world of youth groupings and cults; and I was in danger of becoming normal.

(Normal, that is, for a thirteen year old boy at that time and place.)

There are a few residual signs of this. A single photograph of me standing in a family group with 'long' hair - that is to say, halfway down my ears, and beginning to curl-up like a watch spring. Curling-up, that is, despite my best efforts; which included washing my hair just before bed-time, plastering it down flat, then sleeping the night in a woollen balaclava helmet.

This photo also depicts me wearing a lavender coloured T-shirt and 'Loon' pants - which were denim jeans tight to the knee, then with a V-knee seam and the bottoms flaring out to 24 inches so they would completely cover and conceal the shoes - which were baseball boots.

All this indicates I was trying to be a Hairy - which was the slang term for the contemporary incarnation of 'Hippies' and devotees of 'Heavy' or Progressive Rock; and what confirms the interpretation is my head-hanging-forward, round-shouldered stance - as immortalised by Shaggy in the Scooby-Doo cartoons.

*

The Progressive Rock craze incorporated groups such as Led Zeppelin, Jethro Tull, Pink Floyd  and (from the USA) Mountain - we listened to these (borrowed from a friend's older brother) on a little portable record player supervised by an older kid who wore black velvet 'Flares' (a less extreme version of Loons) as part of his school uniform - but who had spent so much time slapping his thighs in response to 'the beat' that he had oval bare-patches on the front of the trousers. We therefore nicknamed him Frix, which was short-for Friction Pants.

Also, I attended a few school discos in the evenings (which I never did in later years); where I stood around trying to appear sophisticated by holding my chin in my cupped hand - even though I was standing-up. This was something I had seen being done by Steve Peregrine Took - who played bongos next to Marc Bolan in the Tyrannosaurus Rex combo. I believed it made me look thoughtful, enigmatic and sophisticated; so that girls would be compelled to come up and ask me what was on my mind.

*

The only part of the discos I actually enjoyed was dancing to the Hawkwind single of Silver Machine with the strobe lights on - which caused a dissociative trance state.

This led to what later stood as an anomalous album by Hawkwind nestled in my accumulation of Long Playing records. I tried hard to like it, especially having spent so much pocket money on it; but something about the music, the graphics and the text actually sickened me, and after a while I just hid it away and pretended it didn't exist.

*

Most of the music I listed to was recorded 'live', on a tiny portable cassette tape player, from friends albums - but after a few months hard usage, these cassettes would get slower and slower, then jam solid and become useless.

I also tuned into late night radio, lying in bed with my little transistor and single earplug, when the likes of John Peel and Bob Harris would play the latest exotica from the edge of Rock - which was in these early 1970s at the most pretentious level it ever attained - as epitomised by the double or triple LP 'concept album', and the inclusion of ten minute improvised solos on bass guitar, or drums.

Heavy Rock on a tranny via a tinny earplug does sound like a contradiction in terms - the apparatus was only a small step-up from a crystal set - but this was irrelevant, because the whole thing was almost entirely a symbolic gesture of belonging to 'youth'.  

*

Anyway, by good sense or good fortune, I was rescued from this path by Tolkien; who triggered changes that made me step outside of the world of mainstream youth culture and into something altogether larger, more suited to my nature, and more nourishing.

*

Saturday 14 June 2014

Bad things happen - therefore there is no God... The paradox of this argument

*

I often hear it said, and I believe it is true - although how common it is, I don't know - that modern people lose their Christian faith when bad things happen to them.

This is, however, very strange - because in the olden days when bad things happened to people, it apparently seemed to do the opposite: to increase their faith. Or even if it didn't do this, bad things did not seem to lead to widespread apostasy.

I have been reading the great Medieval English poets Geoffrey Chaucer and William Langland recently - who lived through the Black Death when half the population of England died in a few decades, a catastrophe of world historical severity.

http://charltonteaching.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/was-black-death-necessary-cause-of.html

More than two million people died, and the population took three hundred years to recover.

Yet Chaucer and Langland barely mention the fact. And certainly it led to no great loss of faith in England - if anything it increased the zeal among the proto-Protestant Lollards.

Why should this be - I wonder. That misfortune used to strengthen faith but now weakens or destroys it?

*

Lucky Philosopher - The Airfix Years

*

The latest installment from:

http://luckyphilosopher.blogspot.co.uk/

**

After Primary School came high school, or The Comprehensive School as we called it, and a new set of friends with a new set of interests.

At primary school my focal interest in friendship was football - and for much of the time I took it for granted that my first job would be working for a few years as a professional footballer, before becoming a doctor-scientist and doing Nobel prizewinning research. 

In retrospect, it seems clear that while I was good enough to get into the school eleven a side team - which placed me in about the top two thirds of the class - I was not picked for the six a side team - which meant I was not in the top one third. The basis for a professional career was... lacking. But the time, I simply felt this as an injustice and a failure to appreciate my specific skills.

Anyway, at The Comprehensive School, it soon became clear that change was desirable. Football (i.e. Association Football or Soccer) was not taken seriously by the teachers (who handed over the selection for the school team to one of the pupils, who came from a different Primary School and picked all his friends); and Rugby was what we supposed to be keen on.

Still, many of the boys played football all through breaks and lunch times, using a stone instead of a ball. Consequently I wore holes in the toes of my brand new school shoes in a very short time - and was told by my mother to stop.

But I was keen to stop anyway, since football caused fights, and I had already been in three fights in the space of the first month. I 'won' two (by popular acclaim) but would certainly have lost the third if it had not been stopped by the end of lunch break. With a kid from the Children’s Home I had met my match - and I can still recall the shock and awe I felt when he landed a punch on my jaw: it was so heavy.

I got out with a swollen eye and a thick lip and decided that enough was enough, and to make some new friends.

*

And so began The Airfix Years.

The first two and a half years at The Comprehensive were focused on the hobby of making plastic models, mostly of aircraft - and of talking, reading and playing about aircraft. It was a long and avid 'craze' - one of the earliest of many crazes, which spilled-over into my adult academic life.

I was never good at making the kits. At first I did not bother with instructions, but put together the interesting looking items in what seemed like a reasonable order.

Later I graduated to following the instructions - but was always reluctant to make a choice between optional weapons. If cannon, rockets and bombs were provided as options (to represent different uses of a WWII aircraft at different phases of the war) then I would naturally want them all - and since sufficient mountings were not provided, I simply cemented them here and there, wherever there was space.

I was never keen on painting the models, since that delayed construction. Each colour of paint would sometimes require separate application, and many pieces needed to be done before assembly. Much better to make the things, then paint the completed model as best could be managed.

The transfers, or decals, were again usually provided in several versions - but as the model was unpainted or inadequately painted, I felt it looked best if all the transfers - maybe three sets of them - were applied in order to cover as much of the surface as possible. 

I suppose the result must have been a mess, to an objective eye - but my eye was not objective; and the completed model served the purpose of stimulating the imagination both during construction and afterwards in a kind of Neee-Yow play with chugga-chugga sounds for machine guns, chung-chung for cannon, and a sort of Whump inside the mouth and bursting out from closed lips to indicate bomb explosions.

*

My reading was initially focused on the innumerable Biggles books, which described the adventures of an unageing pilot who fought in fighter planes in both the 1914-18 (Sopwith Camel) and 1939-45 (Spitfire) wars - and between the wars flew around the world having adventures.

Later I moved onto non-fiction and memoirs of pilots (Douglas Bader,  Ginger Lacey, 'Cats Eyes' Cunningham in his night fighter), and accounts of particular campaigns such as the Dambusters and my absolute favourite: 633 Squadron by Paul Brickhill, about the Mosquito bombing raid on a Heavy Water factory - which I once listed as the best book ever written.

*

It is hard to recall how all this was integrated into our socializing and play - but the key to the era was messing-about and having-a-laugh.

At this stage I had nothing whatsoever to do with girls - although there was always one or two of them I 'fancied' secretly, thought about with yearning, and kept an eye on.

In many respects the early years at high school were a return to childhood after a kind of early and transient pseudo-maturity in the last couple of years of Primary School when there had been a lot of semi-formalized 'snogging' - which is what we called kissing on the lips, mouths closed, eyes closed - rather like in Tom Sawyer.

The snogging mostly took place in kissing games at parties - the most popular was Postman's Knock. I can't remember what happened, but it was a semi-random way of getting boys and girls to kiss but preventing them from choosing each other.

Anyway, all this stopped at High School - and I was generally much happier and cheerier once I had found a congenial group of boys among whom I could be silly.

*

To be called silly was, in fact, regarded by us as a compliment.

The whole thing was based - so far as I was concerned - upon an ability and a tendency to laugh unrestrainedly and uncontrollably.

I suppose my disciplinary record at school was actually not very good, in the sense that I can remember having detentions quite often, being sent to the Headmaster and the deputy Headmaster etc.  Literally all of these punishments were for laughing.

We would whip each other into such a frenzy of laughing - usually by picking on some small incident, some very small incident of almost inconceivable triviality, and repeating it with exaggeration, in a funny voice, or with fantastic elaborations - until we were all literally rolling around gasping for breath and unable to speak.

I can recall being told off for kicking a piece of wood around the playground - this piece of wood had been broken off the arm of a slatted seat - but not by us: we just found it. The 'humour' of the situation was that the teacher had accused us of 'kicking wood around' and 'Wood' was the surname of a boy in our class - and so that was it...

Eventually we were lined up and told to be silent, in an area outside the official playground and near to the Staff Room and school offices.

As we stood, not talking, various of us would make deniable 'noises' (without moving mouth, without change of facial expression) - such as sighs or peeps or, whatever - but this kept us all in a suppressed state near the edge of hysteria.

Then the ancient Deputy Headmaster - nicknamed Gobber, because he spat when talking - lumbered out to give us a telling off; and something about the way he lumbered broke the dam for me and I launched into such an hysterical outburst that I was unable to speak, unable to answer his questions; and in short disgraced myself.

All I can remember is looking up to find the Deputy standing right in front of me, asking why I was laughing - which was, of course, the one thing I could not tell him - and anyway by that point I could not say anything. It was taking all my best efforts to remain standing. 

Nothing bad happened to me - indeed I think the teachers were remarkably tolerant; since there is not much more annoying than a bunch of boys laughing uncontrollably at inappropriate times - especially when they are laughing at you.

*

But that was life. Everything was grist to the mill of making a joke - and it is amazing how many I remember.

There was a special status, a kudos, for the skills involved in having a laugh. For example sound-effects. Boys who could make funny or realistic noises, or enact little scenarios, were popular.

One new boy became an instant success in the space of a lunch break for doing an impression of a man being lifted up by a crane with a hook through his nose; he just went from group to group demonstrating this fascinating drama.

First the hook was made with a thumb, and the crane was indicated by whirring sound and robot-like movements of the arm; then there was some palaver of engaging the hook into the nostril; and the great thing was when the hook started going upwards, apparently dragging the distressed man onto his toes, hauled by the merciless hook...

This chap soon after became my best friend - so it goes to show how important these things were.

*

At a lower level of skill, another boy was 'famous' for barking-out the work BOC! in situations where we were supposed to be silent.

The word Boc came from a drama lesson, where it had been used as the sound made by an axe felling a tree. We thought this was amusing, and were looking for some way of using the word.

The breakthrough came when everybody was sitting at desks, heads-down and supposed to be writing, in the school library; when someone (it may have been 'Wood') shouted BOC! - very short and sharp; without making any movement or change of expression.

Presumably, the librarian (an extremely tall, skinny, bald American) looked up to observe a motionless sea of bowed heads and no indication whatsoever of who had made the sound, nor even where it came from. Understandably, but unwisely, he demanded "Who shouted Boc?" and that was it, chaos ensued - and the business of shouting Boc! became a craze, guaranteed to provoke a mini-riot of hysteria.

*

So, the main thing in life during the Airfix Years was these incidents, which could then be recounted again and again - elaborated, extended in fantastic ways.

This was life - until at the age of thirteen over the pace of just a few months; something changed inside me, almost palpably - and simultaneously new vistas opened-out with The Lord of the Rings.

*

Friday 13 June 2014

Lucky Philospher - Ritualistic groups games and food in Primary School

*

Todays instalment of

http://luckyphilosopher.blogspot.co.uk/

**


At playtimes in primary school, we would gather in large mixed groups to perform ritualistic singing and chanting games such as Oranges and Lemons, or the Farmer's in his Den.

I used to get a strange and excited feeling from engaging in these, because they seemed incomprehensible yet significant. Why was the farmer in a den? Why did the Farmer song end with patting a bone? Why did Oranges and Lemons end with someone having their head chopped off?

One factors was the frisson of playing with "the girls" en masse - of having an excuse to play with girls. There was a strange thrill from dancing hand in hand, or being the farmer then choosing a 'wife' in the Farmer's in his Den.

The whole thing was bizarre - almost as if we kids had-to perform these things for a forgotten reason: it was our special job in a way that did not apply to the normal free-for-all games or the chasing-and-catching games (like Up-and-Down or British Bulldogs). Certainly, they left behind a special satisfaction when completed.

Some scholars have suggested that these games are garbled pagan or magical religious residues - this may not be true, but certainly it felt like that.

*

Many of the most significant childhood experiences were up on The Hill in The Woods. We would wander and explore here - and what was remarkable was how often we came across something new. One time it was some donkeys grazing - who were friendly enough to accepts being patted. Another time it was a strange rock that looked like a toad.

Once we found an iron crucifix about eight or ten feet high - a beautifully wrought statue buried among the young trees of a recent forest plantation and with its head looking down on the village below.

The next time we looked for it, it could not be found - and then later again, it could. The path seemed to come and go.

*

But life was not all good at Primary School, and the main source of suffering was school dinners and school milk.

Food in England of the mid-1960s was still in the era of World War II and rationing. There was a minimalist approach to quality, which - over the years - had been corrupted into a sub-minimalist approach. School nutrition was about as bad as it was possible to be outwith a situation of active and prolonged siege.

The school milk was supposed to provide as essential dietary supplement for a population near subsistence level during the Great Depression - and in the actual context of a prosperous middle class commuter village in Somerset, this meant that the only way to get children to drink the milk was to make it compulsory.

Having provided the milk - in 1/3 pint bottle - the authorities regarded the task as having been done; and from that point onwards the milk was treated as if it was any other commodity like sandbags or bricks. The concept of a 'cold chain' was unknown.

In other words milk was transported to the school in open-backed vans, and left outside exposed to the elements until we drank it, mid-morning.

This meant that in winter the milk was frozen solid, with the silver metal top pushed off and a column of translucent white ice extending and inch or two from the neck. Before drinking it, the milk had to be thawed next to hot pipes or a radiator. It wasn't very nice.

Even less nice was the milk in summer - which had often been kept for several hours (maybe days?) at about 22 degrees Celsius, or even 28 or more, if it happened to have been standing in the sun. The cream had separated into such a thick yellow plug that often the milk would not pour-out until a hole had been excavated into it with a cardboard straw; and to say it was rancid is putting it mildly - itand the texture was forbidding: lurid blobs of sour cream floating in a thin, yoghurty slop.

Summer milk was almost visibly seething with bacteria and tasted so vile that it would linger for hours.

*

Then there was school lunch.

There were three problems with school lunch: bad quality ingredients, bad cooking, and bad handling. (Other than that, it was fine...)

The ingredients were appalling - when I read about starving people eating leather I have an inkling of what it was like. It was not just a matter of poor quality meat - it was that mostly the stuff wasn't meat at all but sawn-off bone-ends. We called it gristle, and assumed it was a tough kind of meat - but it wasn't - it was the cartilaginous part of bone: un-chewable, indigestible, of zero nutritional value.

This would have been bad enough, but the education authority paid some old women called 'dinner ladies' to hang about the food hall, and try to force us to eat this inedible substance.

As for cooking - the cabbage provides the best example - not least because cabbage was dished-up with most meals. When I was given properly cooked cabbage some years later, I literally did not recognize it. What we had resembled a dilute solution of semi-composted grass - but tasted a lot worse.

This cabbage had been boiled until it lost all texture and substance, then it was boiled some more until it lost all belief in itself as cabbage - then it was boiled some more until it began to degrade into its primary atomic particles. Then it was sent to my school.

*

But this stage took a long time - a looong time.

The dinners had been cooked several hours earlier, we were told four or five hours, on the other side of Bristol; and brought fifteen or twenty miles in the back of a slow van - in a tepid state - to be re-heated, and to wait another hour or two before being consumed.

I expect most people have observed the skin which forms on the top of ersatz custard made from powder? After a few hours of the above treatment, the skin is the custard - or most of it. And the small proportion of liquid which remains was made with water instead of milk - and so lacks both texture and taste.

All that can be said in favour of this 'custard' was that it was not actively offensive, and was probably not dangerous to health (because, since it contained no milk, it could not really go-off).

The combination of poor ingredients, poor cooking, and poor handing meant that nothing whatsoever about the school dinners was enjoyable - and quite a lot of it was simply unsuitable for human consumption.

Once you had accepted that home cooked breakfast (substantial and delicious: cereal and milk, bacon or sausage and egg with fried bread and a cup of tea) would have to last all day until you got home in the evening, then the main problem was trying to avoid as much of the school dinner as possible - by eating the minimum amount of the least toxic items and rearranging the unconsumable residue to as to look as small as possible.

So school milk and school dinners were hazards to be negotiated, rather than pleasures to be anticipated; and the substance provided under the rubric of 'food' were not merely low or lacking in nutritional value, but an active threat to human survival.

*

Thursday 12 June 2014

Lucky Philosopher - a subjective autobiography

This book will be written incrementally at:

http://luckyphilosopher.blogspot.co.uk/

Any comments should be made here, please.

How wrong can you be? - Saul Bellow writing 24 years ago (pre-internet)

*

Tocqueville predicted that in democratic countries the public would demand larger and larger doses of excitement and increasingly stronger stimulants from its writers.

He probably did not expect that public to dramatize itself so extensively, to make the world scene everybody's theatre, or, in the developed countries, to take to alcohol and drugs in order to get relief from the horrors of ceaseless intensity, the torment of thrills and distractions. 

A great many writers have done little more than meet the mounting demand for thrills. 

I think that this demand has, in the language of marketing, peaked.

**

Saul Bellow, writing in 1990 - i.e. before the internet. Far from having 'peaked' the public continues and continuesto demand larger and ever-larger doses of excitement, and increasingly stronger stimulants.

An essay called The Distracted Public - in It all Adds Up, 1994

*

How can imagination provide objective truth and judgement? The metaphysics of the heart

*

For imagination generally, and spiritual or meditative experience in particular, to provide real, objective, valid knowledge and guidance - there needs to be some explanation of why.

Where, in particular, does this knowledge and guidance come from; why should this be 'within' us, and and why should it be valid?

*

My answer is that it comes from the Heart, and (to put matters bluntly and simplistically) The Heart is made of two things - our eternal selves and a piece of God.

Since these are eternal and God is divine, they may, in principle, provide valid and true guidance.

Ideally these two things should be in perfect harmony, in practice the essential self may dissociate itself from God and go against God - and we call that pride - or some people call it original sin, because it is structural.

*

I have been writing for some time on the importance of The Heart in discernment - for example:

http://charltonteaching.blogspot.co.uk/search?q=%22the+heart%22

I think I can now say a bit more about how the Heart may be conceptualized - and just 'what it is' that we consult when we look within ourselves for guidance.

*

First, it seems clear that The Heart is within us - this is not a matter of tuning-into some external guidance.

So, what could be within us that is capable of guiding us? 

I put forward a metaphysical schema which seems to me to account for things and lead to acceptable inferences:

http://charltonteaching.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/the-basic-components-of-reality-back.html

*

This scheme has it that within each person is an unique individual essence (what I called an eternal flame of agency); and also a divine flame - it could be expressed as a piece of God-within-us.

I propose that these two eternal essences are what is consulted when we look within ourselves to make a discernment of The Heart.

The objective validity of the knowledge and judgement of The Heart comes from the fact that these are eternal in origin.  

*

But these are two things. Theosis, the becoming divine (Sons of God) which is the great task of each one of us, is about our essential selves and God coming into harmony, into communion, into perfect accord; but the problem is that we can (and often do) distinguish our 'selves' from God, and increase that distinction (instead of diminishing it) by following the discernment of the self and not that of God-within-us.

The fact that this distinction is possible could be termed original sin, because it is built-in - our temptation to do act of separation could also be original sin because it is gratifying in the short term.

The subjective feeling of 'pride' is the name for this gratification - our pride is at being able to discern what God wants, and then NOT doing it - pride is the gratification of defying our creator.

*

Anyway, this is what seems to be meant by The Heart - these eternal things within us: the essential pre-mortal self, and a piece, shard, fragment or little flame of and from God.

Something of the sort explains why The Heart can be our guide - indeed should be our guide; and also explains why it can all go terribly wrong: when we consult our Heart but choose to obey the discernment of our Self even when, or especially when, the Self is in defiance of God-within-us.

*