Kevin's Watch

Posted: **Mon Apr 22, 2013 9:55 pm**

Shaun das Schaf wrote:Hi Linna, I would attempt to answer your question about the human preference for binary simplicity but I started thinking about it and it involved too many factors so I put it back unopened.

I know - doesn't it?!?
Hard to trace one factor that would be responsible for the majority of why we might be like this (or even why we are this way at this point in history; or what types of binary "good" and "bad" we choose).
Then you think, "okay, maybe I could try to find a factor that has a plurality," but still...
(you notice I didn't answer my own question!)

Perhaps someone whose brain is less broken will swing by to discuss the matter further.

Sounds like you've been doing some meta-thinking.

Less broken? ...by whose standards?!?

Our minds are probably all pretty broken... just in different ways.

Posted: **Tue Apr 23, 2013 5:37 am**

Linna Heartlistener wrote:
Shaun das Schaf wrote:Hi Linna, I would attempt to answer your question about the human preference for binary simplicity but I started thinking about it and it involved too many factors so I put it back unopened.
I know - doesn't it?!?
Hard to trace one factor that would be responsible for the majority of why we might be like this (or even why we are this way at this point in history; or what types of binary "good" and "bad" we choose).
Then you think, "okay, maybe I could try to find a factor that has a plurality," but still...
(you notice I didn't answer my own question!)

Perhaps someone whose brain is less broken will swing by to discuss the matter further.
Sounds like you've been doing some meta-thinking.

Less broken? ...by whose standards?!? Our minds are probably all pretty broken... just in different ways.

Haha, yes you dodged your own question. Well done!

As for broken brains, whilst I agree with your 'in different ways' kaput theory, in this case, my brain was in a physical fog from Lyme Disease for which I recently tested positive. (It has many delightful symptoms, cognitive impairment now and again, being one of them!)

Anyway, good luck either answering or continuing to avoid your discussion question.

Posted: **Tue Apr 23, 2013 4:46 pm**

Lord Ashcroft the Tory Peer and Conservative party donor (and serial tax avoider) is lauded for his generosity this week by The Sunday Times. He is to join the ranks of philanthropists Bill Gates and Warren Buffet by donating half of his £1.2 billion fortune to charity. I hope this time the British exchequer is to be included in his handouts. Still, I epect he'll manage to rub along ok on the £600,000,000 he'll have left.

Posted: **Thu Apr 25, 2013 10:08 pm**

(whoops, double-post)

Posted: **Thu Apr 25, 2013 10:11 pm**

peter wrote:
Linna Heartlistener wrote:I was thinking about the "good people / bad people" dichotomy...
From my own stand point Lina, which is about all I can answer from, as I get older I'm coming more to see that goodness and badness is a mixture that we all have in us...

I definitely agree with that.

peter wrote:..and [what we see as being one or the other in other people is] much more dependant upon our personal beliefs than I had previousely recognized.

Lately, I've been thinking that it's even more self-serving than that.
I think we attribute inordinate degrees of ill to others others' character and motives if they stand in the way of us (as individuals) and our (individual) agendas.

But part of it is I'm still turning over in my head a short story I read called "A Good Man is Hard to Find," in which the author hints at that even when we call others "good," we're often doing it for very self-serving reasons.

peter wrote:"So," I said, "Lets get this clear. Her bennefits are to be cut for not turning up for a job which she didn't have and for which she wasn't going to be paid.

Sounds accurate enough!

shaun wrote:As for broken brains, whilst I agree with your 'in different ways' kaput theory, in this case, my brain was in a physical fog from Lyme Disease for which I recently tested positive. (It has many delightful symptoms, cognitive impairment now and again, being one of them!)

I'm sorry!

So it's intermittent.. do you know if it's likely to be temporary, or persist long-term?

vraith wrote:The sheer size/expansion of our connections and relationship is orders of magnitude greater and more complex than it used to be. Yet the number of people we know well, thoroughly, deeply is much smaller...so the areas where we don't draw hard lines is shrinking.

this made me think... also, about not just the people whom we "know," but also about the people with whom we share consequences.
Putting yourself in a position where you are sharing the consequences of another's actions... that often forces you break through and admit to yourself what you "see" past the mask of who people merely say they are.

vraith wrote:En masse we probably know less about our own children than previous generations knew about their entire tribe/town.

I'm going to mimic Hashi's point here and point out, "Wasn't it often the case that those previous generations did not recognize the other tribes/towns as being actually properly human?"

And... ah, simplifying... yes; many days I despise inappropriate simplifications. (especially those in which the matter under question is the human condition)
The false certainty/confidence is a pain.

vraith wrote:...BUT the research shows that the students actually learning the most and performing the best say it is a little UNclear, doesn't quite make sense, only partly understood.

Well, if students are there to learn things they don't yet know, it should be no surprise if they often don't know what they don't know.
(where of course I really mean "they don't know the magnitude of how much there is they do or do not understand.")

Posted: **Thu Apr 25, 2013 11:23 pm**

Linna Heartlistener wrote: Well, if students are there to learn things they don't yet know, it should be no surprise if they often don't know what they don't know.
(where of course I really mean "they don't know the magnitude of how much there is they do or do not understand.")

Naturally, but not the point.
My point was that we're remaking structurally such that we reward systems, teachers and, worst of all by far, STUDENTS to "know" what they, in fact, do NOT know...but because they think they DO, they cannot learn more, or learn differently.
The tests of students and tests of teachers are not just off a bit...they are total horsepucky.

Posted: **Fri Apr 26, 2013 3:12 pm**

Linna Heartlistener wrote:Well, if students are there to learn things they don't yet know, it should be no surprise if they often don't know what they don't know.
(where of course I really mean "they don't know the magnitude of how much there is they do or do not understand.")

There are things that you know, such as the answer to the arithmetic question "1 + 1 = ?".
There are things that you do not know but you can find out, such as "∫{0 to ∞} e^(-x2) dx = ?". (psst--the answer is sqrt(π)/2).
There are things that you do not know that you do not know--or at least did not realize you did not know because you never though of it before now--but that you will someday know, such as "what will be your mailing address after the next time you move?".
Finally, there are things that you do not know that you do not know and will never find out, such as "what is the object sitting next to my computer on my desk here at work?".

It isn't worth worrying about what you don't know, especially the things that you do not know that you do not know at this point in time. If you ask the right questions, however, you can learn the things that you do not know right now. Sadly, there are some things that we will never know, such as "how would things have turned out had I gone to my senior prom with the girl I liked rather than working?".

Posted: **Sat Apr 27, 2013 4:19 am**

Vraith wrote:Naturally, but not the point.

Point..

Vraith wrote:My point was that we're remaking structurally such that we reward systems, teachers and, worst of all by far, STUDENTS to "know" what they, in fact, do NOT know...but because they think they DO, they cannot learn more, or learn differently.
The tests of students and tests of teachers are not just off a bit...they are total horsepucky.[/color]

*nod* I heard that..
Yes... it would be bad if something claimed to be "to improve the system" and was useless. But this sounds like this one's likely to systematically send things in the other direction. Rather sickening to think about.

hashi wrote:(psst--the answer is sqrt(π)/2).

If you inferred that I didn't feel like doing that integral for no external purpose, good.
Also, I'm not sure what you entered that came out as "n." (e?) Needs to be a constant in there.

It isn't worth worrying about what you don't know, especially the things that you do not know that you do not know at this point in time.

Right... though in some situations that seems to be all we humans obsess over.
Rather more true for me more often than I'd like to admit..

Posted: **Sat Apr 27, 2013 8:59 am**

Linna Heartlistener wrote:
Vraith wrote:Naturally, but not the point.
Point..

Vraith wrote:My point was that we're remaking structurally such that we reward systems, teachers and, worst of all by far, STUDENTS to "know" what they, in fact, do NOT know...but because they think they DO, they cannot learn more, or learn differently.
The tests of students and tests of teachers are not just off a bit...they are total horsepucky.[/color]
*nod* I heard that..
Yes... it would be bad if something claimed to be "to improve the system" and was useless. But this sounds like this one's likely to systematically send things in the other direction. Rather sickening to think about.

hashi wrote:(psst--the answer is sqrt(π)/2).
If you inferred that I didn't feel like doing that integral for no external purpose, good.
Also, I'm not sure what you entered that came out as "n." (e?) Needs to be a constant in there.

It isn't worth worrying about what you don't know, especially the things that you do not know that you do not know at this point in time.
Right... though in some situations that seems to be all we humans obsess over.
Rather more true for me more often than I'd like to admit..

Some of the best teaching I do is asking questions so that students make connections between what they know. I love that "Oh!" moment when THEY put the pieces together. Their excitement is the best teacher they have.

Going back to the "binary" thing. I'm not sure what age I was when I understood that heroes and villains aren't always separate people. When I was younger, I never could have enjoyed the Chronicles of Thomas Covenant because as a rapist, he would have been in the "evil person" category and I would have resented him, even felt it wrong to empathize. Factors in my early life led to such rigid thinking. I did not know how to forgive. Never knowing grace, I did not know how to have it toward others.

Some time later on, through life experiences and (I almost shudder to say it) books, movies, and TV (even the Bible has few "perfect" heroes), I learned that people are selfish and murderous; but also kind and self-sacrificing. Hitler and Mother Teresa are the exceptions; most of us are both heroes and villains. And we'd better forgive each other, or we miss out on life.

Having learned this about people, I find them paradoxically worse and more lovable than I had imagined. Which makes them far more interesting. Categorizing people as "good" or "bad" is for the most part a defense mechanism. We don't think we can handle the complication. But that;s what makes it interesting, after all.

Posted: **Sun Apr 28, 2013 2:25 pm**

My work-mate the other day made the observation that he couldn't see the advantage of a small step toward harnessing the power of fusion because we "already have nuclear power don't we."

He's 21 y.o. and should be better informed about things that might affect his future - at least *I* think he shlould. I decided to try to explain how it all comes down to energy and how it was that the sun had been able to burn for 5 billion years without a fuel topup. Here's how the conversation went.

"Berwyn (his name), how old is the Universe?"

He thought for a minute and then spoke. "What year is it? - No, hang on - you've got B.C. as well. It's got to be a pretty old place. You're kidding me - No-one can know how old the Universe is - like what year it started? No-one can know that!"

I didn't persue the conversation but feel it has resonance in terms of the preceeding discussion about knowing what one does not know.

(Berwyn *is* however a good kid with a kind heart whose company is a pleasure on any day irrespective of what he does or does not know.)

Posted: **Sun Apr 28, 2013 6:35 pm**

Linna Heartlistener wrote:
hashi wrote:(psst--the answer is sqrt(π)/2).
If you inferred that I didn't feel like doing that integral for no external purpose, good.
Also, I'm not sure what you entered that came out as "n." (e?) Needs to be a constant in there.

I mistyped it, anyway, since it was supposed to be the integral of e^(-x^2). *shrug* The "n" is actually a pi; I have a Word document with all sorts of math symbols on it for easy cut/paste when answering question on yahoo answers: mathematics.

Many of us have the mistaken notion that we can know all that there is to know if only we ask enough of the correct questions. Sadly, this is not the case, which is why I advise not worrying about the things you do not know. I didn't say "don't stop learning or asking questions", though, only "you will never know everything".

Posted: **Mon Apr 29, 2013 9:55 am**

Knowledge in this sense is an infinity and therefor by definition can never be known. While an individual human can never know 'everything' he or she can always add to the collective knowledge of mankind. While we may not be able to know everything, we humans are however capable of knowing anything that is knowable. There are no questions that can be asked to which we would not, if we apply ourselves hard enough and long enough, be able to give answer to. (Said by the Rationalist part of me while the Idealist part gnashes it's teeth in furious disagreement

)

Posted: **Mon Apr 29, 2013 4:00 pm**

peter wrote:There are no questions that can be asked to which we would not, if we apply ourselves hard enough and long enough, be able to give answer to. (Said by the Rationalist part of me while the Idealist part gnashes it's teeth in furious disagreement )

Why are hot dogs sold in packages of 10 while hot dog buns are sold in packages of 8?

What does it look like inside the Schwarzchild radius of a black hole?

Who was the Babushka Lady and where are the pictures from her camera?

Posted: **Mon Apr 29, 2013 4:39 pm**

Hashi Lebwohl wrote: Why are hot dogs sold in packages of 10 while hot dog buns are sold in packages of 8?

If the buns were sold as a baker's dozen you'd have 5 empty buns. But if you only have 8 buns then two people can have two sausages.

Posted: **Mon Apr 29, 2013 5:04 pm**

Iolanthe wrote:..... then two people can have two sausages.

Iolanthe! I'm shocked

u.

Posted: **Mon Apr 29, 2013 5:31 pm**

Hashi Lebwohl wrote:Sadly, there are some things that we will never know, such as "how would things have turned out had I gone to my senior prom with the girl I liked rather than working?".

I am uncertain if I want to know more about Iolanthe and her two sausages.

Incidentally, I realized that I asked the wrong question because I actually know the answer to that one--I married her. Sure, it took 20 years but it all worked out in the long run. Still...I wouldn't be where I am had I made different choices so I suppose the uncertainty still exists.

Posted: **Mon Apr 29, 2013 7:07 pm**

ussusimiel wrote:
Iolanthe wrote:..... then two people can have two sausages.
Iolanthe! I'm shocked

u.

Aim quaite sure I do not know to what you hare referring to. However, if you go and buy more buns you will have 16, but only 10 sausages. It will then be necessary to cut up your sausages and divide them between the available buns.

Posted: **Mon Apr 29, 2013 7:41 pm**

Iolanthe wrote:However, if you go and buy more buns you will have 16, but only 10 sausages. It will then be necessary to cut up your sausages and divide them between the available buns.

The obvious answer to this dilemma is to buy 4 packs of sausages (40 in total) and 5 packs of buns (also 40 in total). This will ensure sausage equality for all, and maintain the integrity of all the sausages (which is obviously to be desired (especially by the male members

)).

u.

P.S. Hashi, this is all your fault! Careless thoughts can cost wieners (or drive up your barbecue bill

).

Posted: **Mon Apr 29, 2013 7:48 pm**

I prefer Iolanthe's original solution. In fact, this is Menolly's preferred approach for bratwurst. She refers to it as a Sheboygan Double and claims she learned it from Hyperception's dad.

Those who experienced this sandwich (replete with onion, pickle and coarse mustard) at the Friday night Elohimfest cookout can attest to the goodness thereof.

Posted: **Mon Apr 29, 2013 8:34 pm**

ussusimiel wrote:P.S. Hashi, this is all your fault! Careless thoughts can cost wieners (or drive up your barbecue bill ).

Careless thoughts...careless actions...either way, I would prefer to avoid those and not be skewered.

Savor Dam wrote:Those who experienced this sandwich (replete with onion, pickle and coarse mustard) at the Friday night Elohimfest cookout can attest to the goodness thereof.

Except for the fact that I would have to pass on the pickled cucumber slices, that sounds like an excellent sandwich. I would probably substitute some sauerkraut on it, though.

Kevin's Watch

What Do You Think Today?