Maebius Musings

Imagine this setting:

A young boy is playing a video game, involving the usual slaughter of fantastic creatures and gaining more and more power.  The character portrayed assembles a collection of allies to help fight, including a tall dark-skinned desert-warrior with a staff, and a strange moon-creature with a machine gun.

In this game, the characters carry a supply of water, which slowly is reduced over the course of play, and can be refilled by stepping into clear puddles, or purchasing in-game bottles of water.

Consider the fact that when they first join the party, the Desert dweller has a moderate ‘water supply’ limit, and can hold a few quarts of water before any special items increase that maximum.   The moon creature can only hold a small bottle.  This means the moon creature must use some special items to increase this water-limit, or risk taking more damage (due to thirst) or carrying a lot of inventory bottles to refresh the small amount he holds.

The kid smiles as this last character joins the group, and excitedly turns to his parents to confide in a conspiratorial stage-whisper that “the Desert guy obviously had more water since in the desert you need to carry water a lot and there’s not much room in the moon suit, right? Right? Cool, huh!”

Multiple choice test for all you readers.  No right answers, but I’d like you to honestly consider and discuss WHY you may choose a particular result.  (and yes, it’s biased, but that is intentional)

What are your thoughts on the above situation?

A)  Why is a kid playing so many video games? Running around killing imaginary things is not good lessons to learn.  Go outside and play!

B) Why is a kid playing so many video games?  Yes, they are fun, but you could be doing crafts and other family oriented activities.

C) That’s nice, but now turn off that game, and lets hit the Library to research Desert peoples, and the scientific feasibility of actually living on the barren moon.

D) You know, the kid’s pretty bright, to have made such a connection at something like a simple Video Game.  Do you sit and play with him, or just let him do his own thing until he asks for help?

E) Nice observation! Lets talk about deserts and moons (see # C) tomorrow after school.

…

…

Your grade, according to the local community educational institution, is apparently the letter of the choice you made.    Need a re-test?   :/

3 Comments »

This is a shorter post than I honestly want it to be, but I wanted to toss out a rough-draft for commentary and archival purposes, since I’m doing a bit more on the topic behind-the-scenes.

I’m guilty of it too, but why is it that people are so frikkin afraid of thinking for themselves?  Related topic: why are Debate clubs and such seen is such a negative light by the “cool kids” and harbor suck a “geeky” label?  Heck, in that regard, why are Geeks/nerds shunned so in our younger years when those same types often turn around and be “successful” on the corporate community?

I digress.

As a gamer, I enjoy the playing and discussion of various electronic games in various formats.   Yet all across the internet, stating a preference for one game almost invariably results in hostile commentary in the forms of “Us vs Them” from other game-preferring crowds.  Even among the same game (such as World of Warcraft) one faction is all but universally reviled as “the enemy” from players of the opposing faction.

Tobold makes a few points more related to this topic here: http://tobolds.blogspot.com/2009/09/art-of-discussion.html

Likewise, the recent speech by our president is shrouded in all sorts of “news-worthy” drama and incidents of blatantly ignorant avoidance. (ignorant in my opinion, which I do also understand follows my own Us Vs Them complaints).

Some schools refused to broadcast the event, to appease protesting parents and avoid in-fighting between the supporters and opposers of our President.  To me, this totally goes AGAINST the message itself.   His message was not controversial, unless I’m just failing to see how “Work hard, do better” is controversial.

Granted, Sharon Astyk mentions that perhaps the common school -> college -> consumer-job -> house+car+stuff is not the best option, but I still think that the message from our president was broad enough to work.  Hard work = good results. In today’s society, at least, school is still a very good indicator of opportunity.  What gets my goat is that some schools refused to show it, out of fear or something, in order to appease those who disagreed.

In my opinion, school is about learning.   Learning is more than just 2+2=5 [sic], or that Columbus sailed the ocean blue in 14-hundred 92.  It is about thinking bout things, and being exposed to (without being force-fed) concepts you disagree with, in order to figure out for yourself Why you disagree.

Even if your dream is to be a street-corner prophet, having a basic grade-school education will help your plans and influence public opinion more than a being a drop-out.

In my own life, our elementary school cut recess last year. The state mandates Phys-Ed (gym) a certain amount of time per day.  This didn’t fit the schedule so they cut free play-time.  For High-schoolers, this isn’t an issue, but for my own kindergarden child, I and many other parents protested. We lost, since the decision was that Gym was active time too. (I still disagree and the war’s not over…)

Yet there again is the point I’m thinking here.   Did you read any of the above examples and feel either a smug agreement or a trickle of bile at my “wrongness”?

Why is it that many topics, from games, to real philosophical issues, can be so hard to discuss fairly and intelligently?  Do our ape-subroutines kick in that hard, and emotions naturally still rule over rationality?

No wonder we are where we are at.  Such huge strides in some cultural sectors, such slow ruts in others.

Your thoughts?

5 Comments »

Due to some mis-planned lack of vacation over the course of the year, I found myself with over four weeks of paid time for work, which I needed to use up before the end of September.   The end result of this is I’ve been working either half-days at night-shift, or staying home completely for the last two weeks.

I noticed some interesting personal habits during this time, not least of which is that this vacation-time has been filled by camping, travel, and a surprising lack of actual “stay at home time”, which I had expected.

Initially, I spent the first day or two just lounging around.  I played on the computer late at night, I slept in (relatively speaking) with the kid during the day, and otherwise didn’t do a whole lot of anything that might be easily called “productive”.

Then the cabin fever started to kick in.  Either that or the guilt of letting dishes pile up.

The few days I was at work (today and tomorrow) actually feels enjoyable, which surprised me.   I also had found myself spontaneously making plans for chores around the house, like vacuuming the upstairs, mowing the lawn on my day off, and other such stuff that usually gets reserved for weekend free-time.

It’s actually kind-of neat, and strangely telling, how once the initial joy of non-work fades away after a few days, I naturally try to fill the time again with stuff resembling ‘work’ that is usually avoided when hip-deep in “real job” daily life schedules.

I’m not alone in this, according to many many anecdotal stories of self-employd people, retired family&friends, and other blogs.

Must be a natural part of the human condition, to constantly adapt to change, and fill that time with “stuff”.

It makes me realize a bit how before the modern 9-5 job was forced upon us as a societal norm, the old artisans could afford to spend hours and hours of their craftmenship.  Perhaps it was more than just working for a living, with a pride in their craft.   Perhaps it’s human nature to “do stuff”.

It’s just a matter of making sure the “stuff” we do is healthy, beneficial, and encouraging, lest we fall into bad habits.

Habits, after all, are habit-forming.  

No Comments »

I’ve hesitated to keep this entry private, or post it for commentary, because it’s a bit more personal and still feels a bit scary for me.  Paradigm shifts are tough.     Forgive any rambling uncoordinated phrasing and paragraph structure. I’ve re-written it twice now since last Tuesday…    It’s a wall of text.

I’ve always loved fire circles.  Sitting around a campfire,whether roasting marshmallows with friends and family, or drumming and dancing for alchemical transformation, are soothing and soul-healing events in any flavour. Continue Reading »

2 Comments »

I hope Hrafnkell Haraldsson does not mind me cross-linking his blog, but it is a wonderful read.

One of my own favorite parts of my studies to become a minister of my Lutheran church, was the deeper bible-studies through a scholarly lens, rather than the somewhat more important Religious lens.  I was lucky enough that my mentors wereopen minded, and understood the bible could betaken as fact, or as Myth, and challenged us to find our own perspective on it.

This, coincidentally, is what eventually led me away from direct adherence to a Lutheran themed Christianity, to a more polytheistic framework of spirituality.  To me, God exists, in all His glory, just like Allah and Kali, and the artist formerly known as Prince. ;P

So, it is without insult to the Good Book, that I enjoy these more intellectual trips down cross-reference lane.  It’s only be seeing the work honestly, that we can draw inspiration, or revulsion, or any deeper Meaning and Emotion to it. I personally see the stories in the Bible as historical Myth. There’s plenty of good life-lessons included if you don’t take things too literally. Others may disagree. I’m fine with that, and welcome your comments!

First, a comparison of Paul and certain details found in the book of Acts.

http://alheithinn.blogspot.com/2009/07/paul-vs-acts-of-apostles.html

Next, his Big List of Bible Contradictions.

http://alheithinn.blogspot.com/2009/07/my-big-list-of-bible-contradictions.html

Enjoy!

2 Comments »

Nettle mentioned in a prior comment, that I tend to describe things in terms of “doing” rather than simply “experiencing” stuff when it comes to esoteric and metaphysical experiences.   This got me thinking about some other observations I’d had (which could be totally off-base).

With no insult intended to either group, I think this difference we have may have some roots in gender-differences, though whether it is genetic or childhood nurturing I can not say.

For myself, as I wrote previously, I have always wanted to “do” stuff with energy.  Tai Chi practice continually challenged us students to harness our inner Chi and direct it around ourselves as we went through our practices and Kata. Likewise, the bit of experience I have with Reiki was explained to us as reaching out to the Universal Light and gathering/drawing it down to the person we are healing.     Yet as much as I can see such things in my head, it is tough to feel a sense of physicality in such workings, beyond rare almost unplanned moments of successful synergy.

Outside the realm of those energy-practices, I’ve noticed similar trends within the fragments of pagan-scene I’ve been able to participate or observe.   I really enjoy Drum circles.   I mean Really.   I could probably live an entire month by myself, foraging for food and building a sleeping structure, and be totally happy if evenings included even the distant sounds of a drum circle.

Drum circles also tend to be predominantly ‘male’ things.    Granted, I know quite a few wonderful drummers who happen to be women, but they also tend to be, with no insult intended, more “butch” than the average lady.  More Yang than Yin, if that makes sense.

This dichotomy came up once before, many years ago at a gathering.  I tried attuning myself to the Universe through some pretty specific practices, and wanted only to spin glow-stick Poi all night.  I needed to move, to ‘dance’ as it were, and to Create something, even if it were only in my own mind and body.   My wife and friend prefered to sit more quietly in the tent, listening to the sounds of the wilderness, taking in the Lights and communing with the fabric of reality.   Receiving, in a sense, instead of Doing.

Interesting, hmm?

For this reason, I am putting out an intention to find a Male Mystery group sometime.  I’m curious what such a group would offer, (beyond talking sports, hunting prowess, and good-natured snarking about our wives).

Any other readers (men or women) care to comment on this topic as a friendly discussion?

5 Comments »

I’ll admit, other than a few rare times which seem almost completely out of my control, I find it hard to “manipulate energy” in the sense that I think most Martial Artists and Spiritual Practitioners think of when they do what they do.

I’ve gotten a Reiki attunement (level 2) but don’t feel that it stuck anywhere, since my 1st level was much more “real” and present feeling.   It’s odd, knowing at the core of my being that such things exist and seem to work for many people, but my own batteries and curcuits are not quite superconducting. In others, I have been able to feel the flow quite readily, and am always amazed at such ability.

My friend from high-school and I were playing around once, our hands touching,  and he set his focus on drawing energy from the solar system. At first, it was a nice little guided visualization experiment. We imagined ourselves swooping through the cosmos, and I relaxed quite a bit, like any positive de-stress meditation should.

Then we got to the sun, and he said he’d draw up some of that solar energy. I actually pulled my hands away from his at that point, feeling my wrists burned slightly.  This was before I was more solidly planted along this LifePath, and such a direct physical manifestation of Power was shocking to me.  It actually felt hot, and fiery.  His hands were warm, like he’d been holding a hot water bottle.   WoW!

Others have had similar experiences, and I have felt a flow of energy from others, most noticably in some Drum circles, or during group work.   Once the energy gets here, I often feel I can watch it and direct things slightly, but as an assist, rather than a source or outlet for such things.

Over the years, I’ve tried many times to make my hands hot, or cool, or envision myself a tree full of starlight and earthfire, and while the visual imagery is much easier than in the past, tactile stimulii are always unfound.   I try concentrating on a point in my body to gather energy there, I try relaxing and not-trying to gather energy there in hopes of letting it go there, and quite a few other types of practice I’d read about or been suggested.

I’ve started to wonder if, since everyone has different talents and techniques, I’m either approaching this from an entirely wrong angle, even if it’s described as the right way… or I need to focus on other aspects of energy work, since this one is not for me.

Hmm…..

PS:  Anyone able to confirm this new blog is updating RSS feeds properly now?  I see them in my google reader, as well as comments Feeding correctly.  Still curious if outside readers are having the same success.

2 Comments »

Over on Nettle’s Blog, a friend of mine Meme asked a few questions about her Definition of Magic. Here’s my thoughts, with his permission. These answers were written up without reading Nettle’s answers, though there does appear to be a good deal of similarity. Great minds, and all that, perhaps… I will use the term Magick, with a K, to mean what seems to be the implied concept of esoteric alteration of the universe through directed willpower, which is what Meme appears to be asking about. This differs slightly from my own definition, so my answers may reflect that difference.

Sorry for getting this post up so late. We went camping and I was off work a few days, so was online less than usual to do bloggy-type stuff lately. Most of this was written in notebook and later transcribed to e-format here.

1) Do you believe in chance? Does the fundamental nature of the universe include chaos and randomness? If so, how do you distinguish between answers to “prayer” and random occurrences?

I do believe in chance, and the answer of discerning the difference between prayer and chance boils down to awareness and internalized perception. Since Magick to me is not so much the action and result-based fulfillment of prayer, and is more the personal awareness of potentials, even random chance holds magick, like how one of those magic-eye images appear jumbled, but if looked at differently, may contain a hidden image/message. Chaos in it’s truest form IS the magick; that unbounded potential for anything to happen. Thus, as Einstein has been quoted, “Everything is a miracle, or nothing is”, and I prefer to choose the inclusive side of things.

2) What, if anything, makes your version of magick different than a christian who prays to god? Is it only a difference in who you’re supplicating? Would you say that Christians everywhere are practicing magick then?

My magick is not so much spellcasting or energy manipulation, and haven’t gotten a good definition of THAT type of working myself yet. however, I understand many people ascribe such workings as “Magick”. In that regard, I do think that most devout christians (my younger self included) practice a form of magick if defined as seeking change from a Higher Authority in their lives. Myself, I do not count that as magic, and prayer is a completely different beast than the more esoteric concept of my Magick. Not saying prayer serves no purpose, of course. Creating a pot-roast on the stove, and slapping cold meat between bread both make food to sustain our lives, but are not “cooking”, if that analogy helps, yet both provide foodstuffs in different ways.

3) If magick consists of praying or asking for intercession, why then all the other trappings? Why the ceremonies and meetings and dress and altars? Is it to put you in a state of mind to ask properly? Is it to put the intercessionary being in the proper mood? If so, why do you think you need to approach your higher power in a certain mindset or vice-versa?

Going with the definition of magic as a ritual, I ask why catholic Mass, or other liturgical trappings are useful? I think (personally) the whole showmanship aspect is more important to get your own mind “in the zone”, but are ultimately for the public. Such rituals if done in a group help to unify the group dynamics, and if done in a solitary manner simply help the ‘performer’ concentrate on the task at hand and direcct energy in a more efficient manner. For such circle-work, having the tools and trappings is simply more efficient, such as using a hammer instead of a rock to drive nails. Additionally, it shows a certain level of respect and commitment to the Otherbeing, if you use things they might like, similar to me visiting a friend to ask a favor, and bringing a bottle of wine or a freshly baked cake. The cake is not so much a “bribe” as it is a gesture of good-will or ‘bartering of energies‘, if that makes sense.

4) In your experience and estimation: Can magick produce any reproducible result? Is there any working or spell or prayer that always results in the same effect?

This one is tough, but my first instinct would be to say “no”. Magick as it seems defined here is a personal change or perception. Casting a healing spell may help the person get better, though no one can say with Absolute Authority that they might have gotten well without the prayer, or that knowing others were praying caused a “placebo effect”.

The hang-up here is that the “reproducable effects” are mainly internal/personal. If I meditate every day, I may lower my levels of stress and lead a generally healthier lifestyle as a result. My own health has nothing to do with an outside observer. Likewise, a “Healing magick” may improve the health of the sick person OR if they get more ill and die, the effort involved may allow the people praying for healing to accept the larger picture that this person is now at peace.

Either way, the effect is not directly reproducible in the same way that a chemistry experiment is reproducible. It’s more probability-based or personal-driven, which is hard to quantify except in the large-scale. Each situation is different, and only aggragate results show a hint of “reproducible results” to outside observers. You can’t measure a single prayer or spell and extrapolate to include all prayers or spells. The nature of the thing being measured makes such an attempt invalid, like using a metric ruler to guage your favorite shade of green. Green can be measured, in some other form, usually by comparing other types of green, but not by itself.

5) If the answer to 4 is no, then how do you personally determine whether something happening was caused by Magickal intervention or pure chance? I’m sure you are familiar with experiments on human pattern matching. Why do you think what you experience is magick and not chance or luck that anyone could have? Why do you think that some people get what they desire/need/want without prayer or intercession?

This is a tough one, mainly since I define magick differently from the assumed topic being questioned here. However, I would answer that I simply do not determine the difference between chance and magickal intervention. If I pray, or enchant some trinket to get a result and it happens, then I do not automatically assume it was purely because of my efforts. I merely assume that I MAY have helped that outcome by my efforts. The converse of that still fits my worldview, and if everything is random, then our own personal mission in life is to make sense from the cards we are dealt. Some folks try to play the cards one way, some folks just play them as they are dealt, and neither is “correct” in the larger scheme of things. For the individual, though, I feel it means more if you try to be smart about which card is played next, but there’s nothing stopping others from simply letting them fall. Also with this view, I may not get the ace of spades, and you might, which fots the analogy of why some folks get lucky or unlucky, even with their [lack of] efforts.

6) Does magick demand faith? If so why?

Absolutely, though again, it seems Meme’s questions include a definition of magick=Prayer. However, faith, being a belief in some higher power, or a certain aspect of Reality, would be a type of magic in my definition, in that it allows the forming of a relationship with something Outside our own selves. Creating that bond is the magick, just like that indescribable feeling when you meet a new friend. Wether that Otherthing be a god, a spirit, or science, the fact that is exists beyond our humble human bodies, is the important magical part.

I read somewhere, “If you believe a truck is coming toward you, you will jump out of the way. That is belief in the reality of the truck. If you tell people you fear the truck but do nothing to get out of the way, that is not belief in the truck.” Having faith in something means you act according to that faith. If magick exists, then you have faith that is does. You could be deluding yourself, of course, but Faith in and of itself, is a type of magick, so exists for me and is esssential for the thing itself. Sorry if that makes no sense. Even if your magick is the fact that invisible electrons flow through metal and make sparks, you have faith that each time electrons flow, you get a spark somewhere. Faith in electricity does not exclude faith in hydrodynamics, or esoteric Faeries in the woods. Apples and oranges, they are. The Magick in my worldview is that you have absolute Faith in something, and it works for you. The details are merely details.

7) Would you agree with the statement “Magick is whatever you want it to be.” ?

I would have to disagree with this statement, but not quite sure why as it seems like an invalid question. I think my issue is a difference in semantics with our concept of “magick”, but am unsure how to answer this properly. I defined my magic elsewhere, and in defining it, automatically negates your question or answes it in the negative.

That said, I think you were asking something deeper here, but can’t wrap my head around what it could be…. sorry.

If any type of prayer to any being/force/power is magick, would you say that everyone has access to magick to the exact same depth as everyone else? Do some people have more? if so why?

Again, slightly differing definition I use, but appealing to an Otherbeing is possible by anyone equally, at first. I say at first, because it is absolutely permissible to try and establish a relationship with that person. Like any random peson you meet on the street, though, some folks you’ll get along with better than others. It is the same with Faeries, Gods, Goddesses, or spirits. You can ALWAYS say hello, but some folks will always have a different rapport with certain ones and shy away from others.

I suppose it’s like our jobs. Anyone could try to learn program-code, but not everyone has the natural aptitude or mindset to get really into machine-language, and stops are learning BASIC or C++. With effort, anyone probably could program in PASCAL, but not everyone will ‘want’ to.

This means, while anyone can potentially have deep relationships with a certain deity or Otherbeing, it takes work, (and a bit of Faith that it works.. see what I did there?!) and a natrual inclination to persue that to begin with.

And lastly 9) So my question is, do you apply your skeptical thoughts to your own experiences or do you accept them as they are? Was there a point when you did critically examine whether they could be something other than magick, whether pyscological, neurological, pysiological, etc?

This question was more specific to Nettle, but I understand where it’s coming from. For myself, I am skeptical of everything I do, to a point. More specifically, I ask myself at times “Does this work for me?” and if the answer in my head is affirmative, then I act accordingly.

Your second point, I can answer better. In my youth, I was an assistant minister. I felt the communal energy at church, how the gathering of people there for worship made me feel somewhat in awe or at least ‘different’ than when I sat at home and tried to pray to God. I figured, if I noticed the power of my congregation affecting me on some physiological level, then there must me soemthing to this God/prayer thing. It felt more “Real” in church than alone at home, so I started studying ministry on my own and eventually got to read lessons and hand out communion wafers.

Yet, the more I read about the bible, Koran, and other sacred texts (since I was taught a bit about other monotheistic religions so I could argue my own better with ‘non-believer’ skeptics) the more I started to notice that there were inconsistancies, or flaws in the ‘logic’ of my church. I understood that the church congregation itself was a useful SOCIAL construct, for everyone to gather together, but my core Faiths were starting to be shaky. I started to essentially phycho-analyze my relationship with God, and about this time discovered neopagan concepts.

I didn’t entirely believe them either, but it was the first non monotheistic faith-based lifestyle I stumbled across, and as such, allowed me a borader framework to critically examine my beliefs, and restructure my own thoughts into something resembling my current Spiritual Outlook. I still believe in God, but added a few other concepts to that belief, magick being the biggest one.

Even today, any new thing that I come across, be it Qaballah, Hindu, Jewish, or any other spiritual practice, I am willing to do a bit of reading and see if anything sounds logical. Mainly, it doesn’t. But as you probably guess from the last two years of blog-posting, I periodically still question things and turn a critical eye on what I’ve been believing, which will never stop. Questioning myself (or ones-self) is an important part of any spiritual practice, so you can tell if it’s not working right.

Unfortunately, such critical navel-gazing doesn’t lead you to a better path, but at least lets you know you may need to step off the current one.
Hope that helped you get a different viewpoint.

PS: I do also enjoy philosophical debates on the nature of spirituality. (See God’s Debris, which is a cool little read that I dont’ agree totally with, but does have nuggets of Truth-for-Maebius inside it’s pages) My wife will also tell you how much I banter and scripture-quote with the Jehovah’s Witnesses. I do it not out of spite, but to show them I’ve thought of their message and can not bring myself to join it. Knowledge is power, and all that.

2 Comments »

I am enjoying a little discussion going on currently on the AODA mailing list, regarding “Definition of Magic” and only after-wards realized I made a similar comment about Alan Moore’s definition post back in October. At the very least, this shows I have not changed my position on the topic too much!
I’ll toss out my own definition, as best I can. (also with Nettle’s excellent “Merely my opinion” caveat)
Magic is Creation. Period.

*cackles* To broaden the analogy a bit, I see magic as the unnamed force, power, and unknowable spark of divinity that happens when we make something happen. In this regard, calling the quarters, casting a circle of power, and summoning spiritual/aetheric entities is magic, which is directed towards a goal. Ritual magic, in a sense. We change ourselves and adjust our probabilities towards a desired result.

Also, talking to faeries and plant spirits, building up a relationship, and joining those energies with ours to a goal (protection, healing, et al) I also describe as “working magic”. However, in my paradigm, the actual ‘magick’ is not so much the direction of energies, it’s that immensely-hard-to-put-in-words concept of forging the connection with the spirits themselves. The working part is the goal/intent and maintaining the relationship through proper honoring and respect for those entities, but the Magic itself is when that bond formed where it had not been before. Shaking hands with the nearby angelica-fae sparks that magic, but is not the magic itself. Re-affirming the connection is re-making the magic too.

Again, same words, different meanings, and I love the architects analogy. Give each of us an identical bowl of sticks and flowers and tell us to make a festive wreath, they will each look different, using the same materials. The magic itself is the formative process that converts the Will (idea) into manifested Stuff. That primal creativity that allows you to see a pile of sticks and envision a wreath. To watch the sunrise and sense a new day is dawning full of untapped potential. To just watch a baby exploring hte world for the first time. It’s Creation, in its many-faceted glory and awesomeness.

We “work magic” by taking those potentials and manifesting them somehow. “Change according to Will” fits the definition, but I always read that phrase with a more immediate and ego-filled connotation, seeing the results rather than the source. (Ego as in self-aware, not self-ish, and not insulting at all.)

Yet, as always, english words don’t quite capture the sublety of the concept., which is why each person seems to wrap it in analogy and poetic prose. Putting the wordless into words, which is pretty magical too.

To be intentionally vague and scientifically geeky, the box Schrödinger put a cat in was full of magic when it was closed.

Paradoxically, this definition of mine also sees magic in destruction, if you take “creation” literally. Allowing something to die off, stepping back, and other non-actions can be magic, as they create open possibilities for the universe just as much as forging your ideas into reality. Compost is jsut as important as sproutlings, and I’ll feed worms someday.

Heck, This email itself started as a blank white field. Look what it turned into when you read it!
-Nate

3 Comments »

First, sorry for the lapse in posting. We’ve had a cycle of pneumonia, flu, and other plagues that worked its way through the entire family, and back through.. again. Poor little one was out of school all last week with a fever, and we are finally on the upside of illness, though not quite totally healthy yet.

Now on the the musing!

In this age of Facebook, ubiquitous mobile cell phones (is it even Cellular anymore?), and bluetooth Live Online IM (“I AM” not, thank you), it seems like the youth and upwardly mobile of today are more connected to each other’s personal daily lives than ever before. Folks are commonly known to Text, Twitter, Twirp?, and such from almost anywhere, any time.

In relation to this information overload, I’ve heard and read Op-Ed articles ranging the topics from the invasion of personal privacy, to the detachment to personal relations.

Yet one thing I pondered this weekend, which I had not really seen on the media sites I frequent, is that this interconnectedness and online availability of personal frivolities, may simply be a return to the small town community, redefined by current technology.

Back in “The Good old Days”, you hear some talk of the small towns, where everyone knows everyone, and the gossip grapevine bore plentiful fruit. It may have been true that everyone KNOWS old man Maebius likes to play some damned MMO computer game or hated tomatoes, but it didn’t matter in the overall scheme of things, since if you alternately needed gardening advice or cheap farm-fresh eggs, Maebius could hook you up.

I don’t recall the recollection-minded mentioning huge inroads on the personal privacy lawn, like online information does now (except in references to Big Brother or “the commies” depending on era).

Today’s mobile-connected are looking more and more like those communities, where the intimate details are available if you care to look, but most people aren’t looking anymore, because it’s so available. The communities are essentially becoming the Small Town Mind again, but instead of geographical locality as a border, it is self-limiting by Network Interest.

Imagine, if you would, if technology advanced to where sunglass cameras, or RFID devices on every person’s common gadget were hooked up to a Global Database. At a glance, if you wish, you could pass by some stranger in the hall, queue up their info, and instantly know marital status, favorite hobbies, and name (as described by that person’s self-described bio profile).

To make it more current and specific, the cellphone signal on that guy next to you on the bus would load their Facebook page and display it on your phone, if you loaded the appropriate app. In this case, nothing you would find out would be “private” as it is culled from the stranger’s public profile. They could even lie about things.

But why would you care? Just because information is available, does not mean it is necessary to see by everyone and by everyone at all times, like some folks have stated while decrying such social networking sites.

Such transparency in your personal life is only created, if you, yourself, choose to create it. And in doing so, you join the Little Big Town of today’s Network-Now.

I think overall, this just shows humanities intrinsic desire to belong to a Clan/Tribe/Family. We just keep shifting the lines on who gets included to ours, and how it is defined.

The trick though, is to forge communties as best we can, using whatever method we can. For those of the druidic persuasion, that may involve physicality again for the event of a technological network outage. For some folks though, such a situation is too far in the future, and the online communty still has value Now.
In the end, I don’t think it’s that big a deal, potentially knowing the minutiae of Maebius. I don’t update my Facebook anyway.

…and if you do need fresh eggs, stop over to Everthorn Farms for a cup of mint tea from my garden. I’ll share that with you strangers anytime.

2 Comments »