Thursday, February 21, 2008
12:27AM - My Mother, and Other Things
As all or most of you know, I have recently realized within myself how the law of attraction works. Since this understanding has come to me, I have had nothing but a desire but to share this knowledge with every one of my friends, family members and even the strangers on the street I come across. I realize everyone isn't as receptive to this information, especially in the vocabulary that it is presented, and I haven't always used other vocabulary to help people understand it in a different way, but I have had a breakthrough with one or two with you by using other vocabulary, and found that you believe in the law of attraction when it is presented in this alternative vocabulary. This was the same fear that I had in exposing the law of attraction to my mother. What I failed to realize was that my excitement was so strong, that, when it came to my mother, she latched onto it right away. In her own words, she said that she had known this all her life, but didn't realize that she knew it. One of our little sayings we have with each other is "Now I know I know, and I know you know I know." It both amuses us, and we understand it, and it uplifts us.
Thursday, June 16, 2005
3:42PM - Abe Maslow and Bill Tozier
I'm working on an article based on the theories of psychologist Abraham Maslow. Also, I happen to occasionally read Notional Slurry, by William Tozier. Tozier referenced something he had written before, and when I read it, it reminded me of something I had read the day before in an article by Maslow.
Sarcastically attacking the collegiate system of 3-credit courses, Maslow wrote "Professor Pangloss would have been delighted by the fact that all human knowledge happens to fall apart into exactly the same three-credit slices, like the segments of a tangerine, and that they all happen to last for exactly the same number of class hours." Obviously, Maslow thinks you can't just chop up knowledge and categorize it like that.
Meanwhile, Tozier wrote: "Surely the people who complain about information overload are in the second. The people who are bothered when their TV Guide lists a hundred channels, who balk when they see music flowing between makers and customers unencumbered by the physical distribution system, who don't respond to people who send them emails. The people who feel Intelligent Design will be taught in the schools of the future, who feel pornography could be controlled, who have revived the notion of Manifest Destiny... They still imagine it's possible to categorize and formalize human endeavor and knowledge. Perhaps they don't go the next step and say that they want to control it, but they're willing to say that it should be the same as it's always been. Alas, as over-simplifiers who ignore all that messy implication in favor of the Big Simple ones, these are the people least suited to understanding how life and culture have actually been. Ever."
It seems here that Tozier is arguing the same point, that you can't simplify and control knowledge. It simply exists, boundless, running rampant, and you can't just chop it up and categorize it while ignoring the connections.
I don't know if this is a synchronicity, exactly, but I thought it was an interesting connection.
Thursday, October 14, 2004
I've had three related synchronicities lately. ( Read this whole entry.Collapse )
Have any of you noticed a pattern to your synchronicities? Most of mine seem to revolve around embedded cognition, and especially the book I've been mentioning. The ones thet don't seem to be centered on synchronicity itself. Perhaps there is a connection between embedded cognition and synchronicity. Perhaps I will write an entry on it. If you're interested, check my journal in the next couple of days to see if I do so.
Tuesday, July 13, 2004
Sunday, July 11, 2004
11:11PM - An introduction and an idea
Crownofspoons showed me a link here, and I never joined, having nothing to talk about; until now.
I'm not sure if this completely fits, but I think it is worth a shot. I'm currently writing a book, and have been working on it for about a good 6 months or so, hitting snags, rewriting etc... I used to have a notebook, that I wrote my thoughts and ideas for my book in, but it seems I can not find it any more.
It seems that the longer it takes for me to finish the book, the more similar things appear. Perhaps I'm overanalyzing, that's what most would say. I think that perhaps there is a section of creativity in a collective conscience, and multiple people will pull ideas out of it, sometimes at the same time, explaining similarities from things made at the same time. Though it also seems that this almost "idea theft" of sorts started to occur more often with the loss of my notebook, which was only a few weeks ago, but things take time to create. Perhaps it was a way to hold onto thoughts and ideas, and with its loss the thoughts go back into the collective pot?
Sunday, May 9, 2004
1:16PM - Situated cognition
Extending my previous entries here. I was thinking about ideas. I thought, well, what if we don't create ideas? What if ideas simply exist, external to the individual? What if they have always existed, like potential energy, waiting to be discovered? Then I began to think of memory as access to portions of the possible ideas concerning past events. Imagine those as a sphere of influence that surrounds you. Interacting with another, you can compare your spheres of influence, and, if open minded, achieve a greater amount of information and a greater degree of understanding.
The point of this is that my motivation professor, David Dai, actually talked about this idea in class, and called it Situated Cognition. I asked him after class if he knew of Andy Clark (see the first entry in this community), and he said yes, he had taken Clark's online seminar. Crazy, right? More and more arrows pointing me in this direction.
You can read more about this idea in my journal. Check this entry.
Sunday, March 28, 2004
I'm not really sure if this a synchronicity or just something kind of weird. A friend of mine, rubeslipprs, made this entry. Honestly, I didn't understand it, and despite my comment to the countrary, I still don't. However, fallibledragon made a comment that discussed the idea of "being in the zone", and as you can see from my reply to that comment, I was certain I had been in contact with that concept earlier in the day. I truly believed that I had read it, and so later poured over all the things I had read that day with excruciating meticulouslness. I found nothing. However, as you can see in a later reply I made on that same comment, I did encounter that concept two weeks later, and it directly related to the subject. I'm not sure if this counts as synchonicity, but I think that it is, at the very least, really cool.