For some extremely loose definition of science fiction. Star Wars had fiction but no science. It is sword and sorcery in space.
Irvin Kershner, director of Empire, himself said Star Wars is not science fiction -- it is a fairy tale. It is mythology in the truest sense. Joseph Campbell remarked at length about the mythological qualities of the original trilogy, calling it a modern mythos for our time, and the primary reason for its success. It embodies many of the mythological themes that remind us of the essential adventure of life. We need good, solid human stories told in fantastic settings featuring great heroes to embolden us to bring just a little more of the fantastic into our regular lives, to be the heroes we need to be for our families, friends and communities. The original unmodified trilogy did just that and, IMO, everything since has been trying to ride the coattails of the power of that original mythology.
No mod points, and you're at a score 5 anyway, but I wanted to throw out my appreciation for what you've written here. Very apt summary and analogy of MS's business follies. Nicely done.
Some veterans experience symptoms, such as memory loss and anxiety, without noticeable physical signs of brain injury.
I would think most people would suffer memory loss and anxiety (among many other concomitant symptoms) after experiencing round after round of painfully loud explosions, watching their buddies get blown apart and having to kill other human beings, simply due to the unbearably intense psychological strain. Looking at it as purely a physical matter seems to be missing the point a bit. Is physicality causing the mental stress, or is the causation the reverse?
Levels of a certain lipid spike in the brains of mice exposed to mild explosions
I'm picturing mice dressed like Indiana Jones and James Bond running madly from a small toy boat loaded with black cats yelling in high pitched squeaks: "Get down! She's gonna blooowww!!"
Back in 2000 Aaron and I worked together for an organization called Chicago Force (chicagoforce.org), a Star Wars fan club that organized around the prequels to generate income for charities.
I still have a slew of old emails of him and I discussing the design and development of the original web site. He was always very cheerful and easy to work with, and incredibly bright for 13. The world has lost a brilliant young man.
Samson: (John Cleese) Blood donors that way, please. Donor: Oh, thank you very much. Samson: Thank you. Grimshaw: (Eric Idle) (whispering) Samson: What? Grimshaw: (whispering) Samson: No, no. I'm sorry, but 'no'. Grimshaw: (whispering)
Samson: No, you may not give urine instead of blood. Grimshaw: (whispering) Samson: No. Well, I don't care if you want to. Grimshaw: (whispering) Samson: No. There is no such thing as a urine bank. Grimshaw: Please. Samson: No. We have no call for it. We've quite enough of it without volunteers coming in here donating it. Grimshaw: Just a specimen? Samson: No. We don't want a specimen. We either want your blood or nothing. Grimshaw: I'll give you some blood if you'll give me... Samson: What? Grimshaw:...a thing to do some urine in. Samson: No, no. Just go away, please. Grimshaw: Anyway, I don't want to give you any blood. Samson: Fine. Well, you don't have to, you see. Just go away. Grimshaw: Can I give you some spit? Samson: No. Grimshaw: Sweat? Samson: No. Grimshaw: Ear wax? Samson: No. Look, this is a blood bank. All we want is blood. Grimshaw: All right. I'll give you some blood. (produces some blood in a jar) Samson: Where did you get that? Grimshaw: Today. It's today's. Samson: What group is it? Grimshaw: What groups are there? Samson: There's 'A',-- Grimshaw: It's 'A'. Samson: (sniffs blood) Wait a moment. It's mine. This blood is mine! What are you doing with it? Grimshaw: I found it. Samson: You found it?! You stole it out of my body, didn't you? Grimshaw: No. Samson: No wonder I'm feeling off-colour. (drinks from bottle, Grimshaw takes it from his hands) Give that back! Grimshaw: It's mine. Samson: It's not yours. You stole it. Grimshaw: Never. Samson: Give it back to me. Grimshaw: All right...but only if I can give urine. Samson: Get in the queue...
Voting at 3pm went quite smoothly. Very little waiting. However, a couple of the older staff helpers seemed to be easily confused. I was handed the wrong ballot sheets and they forgot to write in the ward/precinct numbers. The gentleman after me also was given the wrong sheet. The woman at the table seemed genuinely flustered. Thankfully, by the time I had finished voting there were sharper, more competent people supervising the event.
Still voting with a pen and not a computer. I dig it.
Only Glorious Red Rivers for Glorious Red Chinese Communist Republic! Soon all waters and newborn babies everywhere will shine triumphantly with Glorious Red Hue!
This story reflects the fundamental bias of science -- that the Universe is objective. Without that bias science as we know it would be radically different, but that doesn't mean the bias is accurate. There is no evidential reason to make us decide that the Universe is an objective, mechanical place, governed by rules arising from randomness and chaos, or that life evolves solely out of random mechanical mutation. If we take it as read that everything within the Universe arises subjectively, that is, it emanates from consciousness instead of consciousness emanating from matter, then it not only becomes a much more interesting place, but we can better understand phenomenon like the rapid pace of biological evolution, dreams and "paranormal" experiences, as well as physical death and what may or may not proceed it. It also resolves the problem between "God or no-God" -- if matter is energy and energy is consciousness, then an external God cannot exist, and yet "God" becomes pure consciousness, the thing itself that animates all reality.
At this point in the game I don't see why it's so much trouble to simply try switching the bias from objective reality to subjective, from mechanical to conscious. I realize the objective approach is connected to the necessary split that had to occur between religion and science, that science had to distance itself as much from matters of God as it could to avoid persecution, and this led science to dismiss any inherent consciousness to matter. In the end, though, I think we'll find that a subjective Universe is actually a more intuitive bias.
No one with a basic understanding of Mayan mythology would say that the Maya were predicting "the end of the world" in 2012, unless by "end of the world" (actually, "end of time") you mean the end of the world as we have thus far known it. The Maya were tuned in to the baktun cycles reflecting major evolutionary shifts on the planet. And it's not a major singular event, the end date marks a mid point within a slightly larger time cycle that denotes a gradual shift. It is an accelerated shift, but not a sudden one.
2012 apocalyptic hysteria is simply an expression of the mass consciousness egoic fear of change. Deep down we all know major change is happening and more on the way (climate change, social change, change in governance, economy, labor structures), which is going to require letting go of a lot of our old ways of being and doing, which is very scary for most folks, and looks like apocalypse. The forest has to burn to stay healthy. We're all gonna be fine.
Yeah, that's exactly it. That you didn't come up with a plan or over think an agenda, you simply went with your heart and followed the truth without letting your head get in the way. I mean, of course you needed to think about how to tell your story and what to write on your sign, but the impetus wasn't a formulated plan, you were spurred on by a silent but powerful truth that you couldn't ignore. To me, that's the place from which we can create the most effective positive change.
I think it's becoming clear that shouting at the powers that be simply doesn't work, and certainly violence makes things worse. The powers that be (bankers, CEOs, news media, presidents, Nazi leaders) are too insulated, untouched by the shouting, and can easily overpower any attempts to use force for change. Yet by courageously following our own truth without dressing it up in big agendas and sensationalist language we set more subtle forces in motion that will play out in ways we can't even begin to imagine. I wonder how many people were touched by your message and then passed it on. Perhaps there's a bit less hate in the world thanks to your simple act.
More bad news comes from Apple's iDevice manufacturing partner Foxconn that is sure to ruffle the feathers of Apple fans.
Really? Are we such a deadened society that we think product allegiance equates to willful negligence of human rights?
Somehow I get the feeling most "Apple fans" also care about the humane treatment of other human beings. Implying that loyal Apple users care more about the image of their chosen computer company than human rights is just silly sensationalist headlining.
I'm a bit late to the posting party, but I wanted to thank you for your story. Speaking the truth, with integrity, and not shoving it down anyone's throat, instead attracting folks to your story with a simple callout. My own experience with protest is that even if the cause is good, many people are using it as an excuse to vent anger at somebody, and who better to yell at than someone committing a real crime. But then that's not serving the truth, it's only serving an avenue for hate. I think you've modeled a highly effective form of protest, or what protest should really be about.
...after a background check for a possible appointment by former President George H. W. Bush...'Several individuals questioned Mr. Jobs' honesty stating that Mr. Jobs will twist the truth and distort reality in order to achieve his goals'
We eat food because we're animals. We seek knowledge because we're humans.
And does anyone else here share the stupendous wonder at life evolving with such a profound desire to know itself and its environment's outer reaches? So profound, in fact, that even in the midst of our darkest hours we still look to the stars for knowledge and the discovery of unimaginable beauty.
We are stardust evolving into self knowledge as we marvel at our own nature. There's little else that is quite as miraculous.
Slashdot Mirror
At least that nice NSA officer was friendly enough to hit the Submit button for you.
Irvin Kershner, director of Empire, himself said Star Wars is not science fiction -- it is a fairy tale. It is mythology in the truest sense. Joseph Campbell remarked at length about the mythological qualities of the original trilogy, calling it a modern mythos for our time, and the primary reason for its success. It embodies many of the mythological themes that remind us of the essential adventure of life. We need good, solid human stories told in fantastic settings featuring great heroes to embolden us to bring just a little more of the fantastic into our regular lives, to be the heroes we need to be for our families, friends and communities. The original unmodified trilogy did just that and, IMO, everything since has been trying to ride the coattails of the power of that original mythology.
No mod points, and you're at a score 5 anyway, but I wanted to throw out my appreciation for what you've written here. Very apt summary and analogy of MS's business follies. Nicely done.
Judging by the slug in the URL:
http://reason.com/blog/2013/02/04/someone-just-leaked-obamas-rules-for-ass
Whoa! Prez got back!
I would think most people would suffer memory loss and anxiety (among many other concomitant symptoms) after experiencing round after round of painfully loud explosions, watching their buddies get blown apart and having to kill other human beings, simply due to the unbearably intense psychological strain. Looking at it as purely a physical matter seems to be missing the point a bit. Is physicality causing the mental stress, or is the causation the reverse?
I'm picturing mice dressed like Indiana Jones and James Bond running madly from a small toy boat loaded with black cats yelling in high pitched squeaks: "Get down! She's gonna blooowww!!"
Back in 2000 Aaron and I worked together for an organization called Chicago Force (chicagoforce.org), a Star Wars fan club that organized around the prequels to generate income for charities.
I still have a slew of old emails of him and I discussing the design and development of the original web site. He was always very cheerful and easy to work with, and incredibly bright for 13. The world has lost a brilliant young man.
I'm starting to think The Onion has more power to bring down dictators than any military action.
The Monotheist: God is transcendent.
The Buddhist: God is immanent.
The Atheist: God is phenomenological.
The Philosopher: God is cosmological.
Everyone believes in some kind of "God" in some form. The battle is really just over the name.
Samson: (John Cleese) Blood donors that way, please. ...a thing to do some urine in.
Donor: Oh, thank you very much.
Samson: Thank you.
Grimshaw: (Eric Idle) (whispering)
Samson: What?
Grimshaw: (whispering)
Samson: No, no. I'm sorry, but 'no'.
Grimshaw: (whispering)
Samson: No, you may not give urine instead of blood.
Grimshaw: (whispering)
Samson: No. Well, I don't care if you want to.
Grimshaw: (whispering)
Samson: No. There is no such thing as a urine bank.
Grimshaw: Please.
Samson: No. We have no call for it. We've quite enough of it without volunteers coming in here donating it.
Grimshaw: Just a specimen?
Samson: No. We don't want a specimen. We either want your blood or nothing.
Grimshaw: I'll give you some blood if you'll give me...
Samson: What?
Grimshaw:
Samson: No, no. Just go away, please.
Grimshaw: Anyway, I don't want to give you any blood.
Samson: Fine. Well, you don't have to, you see. Just go away.
Grimshaw: Can I give you some spit?
Samson: No.
Grimshaw: Sweat?
Samson: No.
Grimshaw: Ear wax?
Samson: No. Look, this is a blood bank. All we want is blood.
Grimshaw: All right. I'll give you some blood. (produces some blood in a jar)
Samson: Where did you get that?
Grimshaw: Today. It's today's.
Samson: What group is it?
Grimshaw: What groups are there?
Samson: There's 'A',--
Grimshaw: It's 'A'.
Samson: (sniffs blood) Wait a moment. It's mine. This blood is mine! What are you doing with it?
Grimshaw: I found it.
Samson: You found it?! You stole it out of my body, didn't you?
Grimshaw: No.
Samson: No wonder I'm feeling off-colour. (drinks from bottle, Grimshaw takes it from his hands) Give that back!
Grimshaw: It's mine.
Samson: It's not yours. You stole it.
Grimshaw: Never.
Samson: Give it back to me.
Grimshaw: All right...but only if I can give urine.
Samson: Get in the queue...
>>AC is indeed his own Grandpaw. Or hers. Its.<<
:::Cue Liberty Bell March:::
Voting at 3pm went quite smoothly. Very little waiting. However, a couple of the older staff helpers seemed to be easily confused. I was handed the wrong ballot sheets and they forgot to write in the ward/precinct numbers. The gentleman after me also was given the wrong sheet. The woman at the table seemed genuinely flustered. Thankfully, by the time I had finished voting there were sharper, more competent people supervising the event.
Still voting with a pen and not a computer. I dig it.
Only Glorious Red Rivers for Glorious Red Chinese Communist Republic! Soon all waters and newborn babies everywhere will shine triumphantly with Glorious Red Hue!
Oh that's a classic. Thanks for that old chestnut.
This story reflects the fundamental bias of science -- that the Universe is objective. Without that bias science as we know it would be radically different, but that doesn't mean the bias is accurate. There is no evidential reason to make us decide that the Universe is an objective, mechanical place, governed by rules arising from randomness and chaos, or that life evolves solely out of random mechanical mutation. If we take it as read that everything within the Universe arises subjectively, that is, it emanates from consciousness instead of consciousness emanating from matter, then it not only becomes a much more interesting place, but we can better understand phenomenon like the rapid pace of biological evolution, dreams and "paranormal" experiences, as well as physical death and what may or may not proceed it. It also resolves the problem between "God or no-God" -- if matter is energy and energy is consciousness, then an external God cannot exist, and yet "God" becomes pure consciousness, the thing itself that animates all reality.
At this point in the game I don't see why it's so much trouble to simply try switching the bias from objective reality to subjective, from mechanical to conscious. I realize the objective approach is connected to the necessary split that had to occur between religion and science, that science had to distance itself as much from matters of God as it could to avoid persecution, and this led science to dismiss any inherent consciousness to matter. In the end, though, I think we'll find that a subjective Universe is actually a more intuitive bias.
Reality is an illusion we are hardwired into.
Based on what evidence? I'm going to boldly assume you've never been dead before.
Indeed, wouldn't the outright rejection of most patent applications help reduce the workload on the overworked and understaffed patent office?
Maybe the air inside was highly phlogisticated.
No one with a basic understanding of Mayan mythology would say that the Maya were predicting "the end of the world" in 2012, unless by "end of the world" (actually, "end of time") you mean the end of the world as we have thus far known it. The Maya were tuned in to the baktun cycles reflecting major evolutionary shifts on the planet. And it's not a major singular event, the end date marks a mid point within a slightly larger time cycle that denotes a gradual shift. It is an accelerated shift, but not a sudden one.
2012 apocalyptic hysteria is simply an expression of the mass consciousness egoic fear of change. Deep down we all know major change is happening and more on the way (climate change, social change, change in governance, economy, labor structures), which is going to require letting go of a lot of our old ways of being and doing, which is very scary for most folks, and looks like apocalypse. The forest has to burn to stay healthy. We're all gonna be fine.
Yeah, that's exactly it. That you didn't come up with a plan or over think an agenda, you simply went with your heart and followed the truth without letting your head get in the way. I mean, of course you needed to think about how to tell your story and what to write on your sign, but the impetus wasn't a formulated plan, you were spurred on by a silent but powerful truth that you couldn't ignore. To me, that's the place from which we can create the most effective positive change.
I think it's becoming clear that shouting at the powers that be simply doesn't work, and certainly violence makes things worse. The powers that be (bankers, CEOs, news media, presidents, Nazi leaders) are too insulated, untouched by the shouting, and can easily overpower any attempts to use force for change. Yet by courageously following our own truth without dressing it up in big agendas and sensationalist language we set more subtle forces in motion that will play out in ways we can't even begin to imagine. I wonder how many people were touched by your message and then passed it on. Perhaps there's a bit less hate in the world thanks to your simple act.
Really? Are we such a deadened society that we think product allegiance equates to willful negligence of human rights?
Somehow I get the feeling most "Apple fans" also care about the humane treatment of other human beings. Implying that loyal Apple users care more about the image of their chosen computer company than human rights is just silly sensationalist headlining.
Oh yeah. Slashdot. I must be new here.
I'm a bit late to the posting party, but I wanted to thank you for your story. Speaking the truth, with integrity, and not shoving it down anyone's throat, instead attracting folks to your story with a simple callout. My own experience with protest is that even if the cause is good, many people are using it as an excuse to vent anger at somebody, and who better to yell at than someone committing a real crime. But then that's not serving the truth, it's only serving an avenue for hate. I think you've modeled a highly effective form of protest, or what protest should really be about.
In other words Steve was perfect for the job.
And does anyone else here share the stupendous wonder at life evolving with such a profound desire to know itself and its environment's outer reaches? So profound, in fact, that even in the midst of our darkest hours we still look to the stars for knowledge and the discovery of unimaginable beauty.
We are stardust evolving into self knowledge as we marvel at our own nature. There's little else that is quite as miraculous.
Looks like I can't type faster than the speed of bad jokes. I guess I'll just go back to sucking cocks.