Podcast: Play in new window | Download | Embed
Adam Deng, MIT PhD student and “data alchemist,” joins us for this special episode of #SolutionsWatch where he interviews James about language. How can the non-literary and non-linguistically inclined learn to deal with language? How can they improve fluency and facility with language? How can they read faster, retain more, understand allegory and metaphor, and adequately interpret and summarize works of fiction? And what does all of this have to do with Ludwig Wittgenstein? Find out in this not-to-be-missed edition of #SolutionsWatch!
Video player not working? Use these links to watch it somewhere else!
WATCH ON: 
/ 
/ 
/ 
/ 
/ 
or DOWNLOAD THE MP4
Adam has been kind enough to create a Watch Guide for this edition of #SolutionsWatch with a summary/commentary of the discussion. You can download the Watch Guide from his web site BY CLICKING HERE.
Highlights of the guide include:
ADAM’S 6 QUESTIONS;
10 IDEAS EXPLORED IN THE CONVERSATION;
8 SOLUTIONS PRESENTED DURING THE CONVERSATION;
…And 3 miscellaneous observations that are worth reading, too!
SHOW NOTES:
Watch Along Guide for this episode – A detailed summary/distillation of this conversation created by Adam and available as a download from his website
MIT Students for Open Inquiry (Odysee)
I Am A Sustainable Free Trade Globalist!
“Hap” by Thomas Hardy
“Hap” by Thomas Hardy by James Corbett – my song, available as a subscriber-exclusive video
Tractatus Logico Philosophicus by Ludwig Wittgenstein
Philosophical Investigations by Ludwig Wittgenstein
Intelligence cannot be separated from human emotion. Artificial intelligence is a contradiction in terms.
Knowledge without intelligence is idle.
Intelligence without wisdom is volatile.
Wisdom without knowledge is hollow.
I noticed Adam has the dymaxion map hanging on his wall.
By the way, if you have paid attention to my posts (and remember them) ((I’m totally not pulling a James Corbett here)), you may remember where I talked about how people use highly ambiguous words whose sole purpose in the zeitgeist is to create confusion because their usage is solely connotative, abandoning their denotative purpose.
These are words like communism, socialism, capitalism, feminism, and so on (just to name the most frequently occurring offenders).
Studying multiple languages from different parts of the world is a good idea because it forces your brain to alter your understanding of words, not only through what’s different, but also through what’s the same. For example, understanding the “be” verb in each language is a good indication of the foundational thought processes of the language.
Along with this, etymological history is another must for an improved understanding of language. Language doesn’t change; there are merely errors that were never corrected, and there are many different ways these errors can take shape. One channel I watch in my efforts of linguistic reconstructionism is RobWords.
One thing that becomes important to understand is: what is the function of language? It is to convey ideas. James mentions about being verbose, and you will hear many say, “Brevity is the soul of wit.” Well, I got news for you; that may work well in comedy, but in reality, brevity is only the soul of wit if one’s idea is accurately and completely conveyed. Less said leaves more imagined, and that is not a way to govern a complex society of complex people. But the whole idea of less said leaving more imagined are the reasons why words like those I mentioned above, as well as overly-simplistic and ambiguous labels, are always pushed by those with large audiences, not necessarily for the misdirection, but definitely because they appease the desire to think less.
When it comes to things like reading between the lines, I will say what I’ve said to my students: Everything from a simple ‘hello’ to the Illiad is a psychological case-study. You pay attention to what’s being said, how it’s being said, and what’s not being said. But when it comes to the whole ‘oh, the author means this’, I have always considered this done in confidence to a projection of people’s own solipsism, and I never really found value in making a hard-line stance on my personal interpretations. After all, how many times does an artist say, “They don’t understand my work”? I even deal with that myself, as one of my editors thought an entire section of my story had to do with Democrats and Republicans.
Language is something I touch one in the book I’m finishing up now, Tapestry, as well as one of its prequels, Legacy. I intend to talk more about it either in Cynosure or Iconoclasm when I write them.
Yes I love the dymaxion map! I should’ve made it much bigger. Be it ever so jaggedy and incomplete (it’s definitely missing some parts of the globe), at least it preserves the sizes of countries. This particular edition colors the 30 largest countries by area and can be found on Wikimedia.
Regarding the “to be” verb, Russian has a tendency to skip it in sentences. See the top of watch guide page 3: “Это правда” = “This [is] true”; “Я китаец” = “I [am] Chinese.” Sometimes the verb is replaced with a dash instead of skipped. In fact, Chinese does this too—”他很帅” = “He [is] very handsome”—but not as often as Russian does. “Я здесь” = “I [am] here” while “我在这里” = “I am here”. And in German, you never skip “sein” = “to be”!
Etymology is helpful and a subfield I’d consider exploring, especially for explaining the oddities of foreign languages (and English). It explains why in Japanese, こんにちは is pronounced “konnichiwa” despite the fact that the final hiragana is は “ha”. (I myself am still hazy about it so don’t grill me on it haha.)
Also I hate brevity in both speaking and writing. When discussing ideas, I’d much rather lay out all the cards and leave no stone unturned than allow ambiguity to stay on the table. James and I are highly loquacious.
Great point with “you pay attention to…what’s not being said.” I’ll keep that in mind.
Yes, は is ‘ha’, but as the topic-identifying article, it is said ‘wa’. It’s because of the natural way to sound things out, as best as I can figure.
So many words we use are ambiguous. I used to tell my students this in my first lecture of each year. I would demonstrate with a personal anecdote that even the number “one” can be ambiguous.
Just one anecdote?
Realistically, the problem comes from the fact that all language is circular.
For those who haven’t paid attention to your posts, Vienticus, where do we find them? You say (well, I might add) several things I’ve been thinking about.
“highly ambiguous words whose sole purpose in the zeitgeist is to create confusion because their usage is solely connotative, abandoning their denotative purpose” Yes! This is something I’ve struggled to convey. It’s why Rule #2 of my ‘Have a Better Argument’ is state the question and #3 is define what YOU mean by the terms. #4 is ‘what does it matter’ but #1 is ‘like the person you’re arguing with’ 😉 Otherwise, what’s the point?
I’m also a word origin freak and have been known to travel with an etymology dictionary (by car, I’m not THAT crazy). I’ve been investigating the ways in which language was changed from evocative and loquacious–decidedly inefficient–to the abbreviated administrative languages of Hebrew and Latin, which has no mother tongue. And how that became a left-brained way of thinking, since we can’t convey or even conceive that for which we have no words.
Along with that, we have only imperial languages that dominate the world, a world in which domination is the rule. What other ways of being have been lost with indigenous languages? I explore that here: https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/when-words-die-worlds-die.
Linguistic reconstructionism, I’ll add that to my vocab. Thanks!
I don’t remember on which topic I’ve made the posts that I previously mentioned. All I can say is that it’s sometime after last summer.
For your rules of having a better argument, allow me to offer a different perspective. First off, that which you identify as rule #2 is a parity check (that thing that your computer does when transmitting data between its different parts). This is something you also do when you are teaching or, when in the military, about to execute a given command.
The different point of view I would like to offer for your rumination is: why have an argument?
People will often say, “The solution to bad speech is more speech.”
Allow me to ramble in response.
What is bad speech? Who determines speech is bad? Is it like you-must-be-this-tall-to-ride-this-ride requirement, or is it obtained through consensus?
But why would the solution be more speech? If the speech is bad, is it not defined so by its own merit? Is the more speech someone pointing it out? Is the solution simply a shouting match akin to the scene in Gremlins 2 where the two gremlins are in the stock room? Is this ‘more speech’ even accurate considering that the original speech may not have been accurately conveyed? If it is not accurate, would that also be ‘bad speech’?
Does this ‘more speech’ need to come from a second source? Why should it not simply be a continuation of the first speaker?
In many events, the who, what, when, and where are the things most pointed to, but how important are they really? Personally, I find the how and why much more important, if not interesting. And I would argue therein lies your solution to ‘bad speech’. These two simple little words, when spoken all alone, can cause a speaker to reveal so much, thus laying out hidden schemes or logical holes all by themselves, and all you had to do was ask one of two simple, one-syllable words. So why argue?
As far as etymology in general, besides the idea of linguistic reconstructionism I toy with, I’m also writing a series of fiction novels (which I don’t remember if I mentioned above and am currently too lazy with optologically-dilated pupils to look at) that are historical, mild-fantasy fiction in nature. Looking up the roots of old words to throw them in the story to cram into readers’ brains is fun.
I’ll check out your substack when I get a chance.
Thanks for that informative reply, Vienticus. To apply my system to the question:
1) Like who you’re arguing with. Check!
2) State the question: https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/why-argue?
3) Define what the terms mean to you: An argument is a productive disagreement.
4) Why does it matter? Some excerpts:
All learning starts with a disagreement in the mind: a new fact is introduced or new logic, and you choose to shift your mind to include it or you enclose it within the constraints of other facts and logic that contradict it.
There’s an internal argument that goes on between the existing organization of thoughts and the thought that disrupts that organization. In a healthy mind, learning happens no matter which side ‘wins’ because the system of thinking expands to fit the new idea within it or counters it with its own logical consistency.
A healthy argument between people simply takes this outside the mind and into the dynamic of relationship. Each person is presenting a hypothesis that makes sense, to them, of the sphere of known facts.
Rather than arguing for our final conclusion, a true argument takes the point of disagreement down to its prime number, its lowest common denominator.
We don’t have good role models for people changing their minds in dialogue with an equal.
But for the fun memes, you have to check out the stack 😉
It may not be an equation of love, but…
Relationships = Time * Money
Business: Time = Money
==> Relationships = (Money) * Money
==> Relationships = Money ^2
Religion: Money = sqrt(Evil)
==> Relationships = (sqrt(Evil)) ^2
==> Relationships = Evil
“Language is something I touch one in the book I’m finishing up now (…)”
If you touch one, i’ll touch the other 😉
giggity
I know about the way to remember numbers to convert them to words but Adam does it the other way around. A pyramid is 3912, how does that work?
It varies significantly based on the object. In my case, pyramid = 3912 has one of the longest and most indirect memory routes.
Sitting in the car a few years ago I was listening to the famous Elmo & Patsy Christmas song “Grandma Got Run Over by a Reindeer.” The song is in E Major, which reminds me of a sunny, dry climate, specifically that of Egypt and its pyramids. I happened to look at the screen and at that moment, the CD was playing at 39 minutes and 12 seconds. Noting that 39 is divisible by 3, that 39 is 3 to the 3rd plus 12, and that pyramids have four triangles, I equated 3912 with pyramids.
Several things come to mind in this creative literary exercise.
1) The Newspeak of George Orwell’s 1984. Adam reminds me of Syme talking about the destruction of words or a simplification of language. It’s a sort of doubleplus good for emphasis replacing the words: very, extremely, incredibly, etc.
2) The Movie “Short Circuit 2” where Johnny Five (a super speed reader) carefully reads Frankenstein & Pinocchio.
3) The Borg Queen dynamic aspect of the Borg Collective in Star Trek:TNG
Come in, have a seat here on the couch. Prop your feet up, lean back and get comfortable. There , now look at this pendant. Look at it closely, focus on the object as it swings back and forth, back and forth… Back and…….forth. You are getting sleepy, very…sleepy….sleep….
Adam Deng,
I’m not a doctor but I play one on tv.
You have stumbling blocks. Points You know where they are , they exist in the present and were created in your past. Those points interfered in your development. Many English language learners, English as a second language , have those moments that are paradoxical. Your self, your intelligence was constructed of your native language. Now you find , reality, intellect , emotions must be described in a second, less satisfying code, lagging behind that speed your intelligence is capable of operating . Frustrating you.
Love your second language as you would visually love looking at a Van Gogh painting. You must know it’s just a representation, an alternate reality that you won’t stumble through; Mastering mind and being filled with pleasure. Good luck !
Now, look at this pendant, this crystal… clear… pendant swinging back…and forth… Now Counting backward from 10…9…8..7…….
What a ‘quant’! Adam is very well spoken and has an excellent vocabulary. But I heard almost no understanding of ‘quality’. Kudos to him for recognizing this lack and asking James for help.
Did he ask for help? Or did he do a neurodivergent brag? Even his ending, “Now I’m realizing …” was clearly pre-planned. I’m not sure he heard anything that James said while waiting for his cue to launch into the next point he wanted to make. And I would say that his point is “We left-brained beings who are a synapse away from being machines just need a few clues about how poetry and fiction works and we can do that better too.”
Notice how he set up the question about speedreading so he could slip in that he was in the top 20%? I agree with you about his inability to recognize quality. Even his comment that he could walk into a room and know how people will react to him–are they people, in his mind, or parts of a machine? If someone thinks they know me without ever having met me, I’m reduced to a sum of parts, not a human.
Your scorn and cynicism are as intense as the ease with which your claims and assumptions about me can be dispelled, and your questions answered.
“Did he ask for help?” Yes, I asked for help. Near the start I say that I asked many “people I consider to be great at words” for help on improving the verbal, and that James was one of them. And I said “I wanted to thank the eight people I sent these six questions to.” James at the start expressed that “I am going to be subject to some questions that I have seen in advance, but I have not prepared my answers.”
“Or did he do a neurodivergent brag?” If I really wanted to brag about myself, why would I discuss an obvious weakness of mine (literary faculties)? Instead I said “we can all learn from James on how to, indeed, crack the verbal puzzle and to see what we can do”, and “the aspect of the verbal I am here to learn from you about is what I call fundamental verbal.” The episode is called “Leveling up Your Language”, not ‘Look how great Adam is.’
“Even his ending, ‘Now I’m realizing…’ was clearly pre-planned.” No it wasn’t. My ending—that different modes of thoughts, especially those with divergent contexts and applications, can be analyzed with similar techniques—was certainly not my perspective on knowledge before I had this conversation.
“And I would say that his point is ‘We left-brained beings who are a synapse away from being machines just need a few clues about how poetry and fiction works and we can do that better too.'” It is bitterly ironic that you dislike being “reduced to a sum of parts, not a human”, and yet you liken “left-brained beings” to “machines”. Nowhere do I suggest that I can do poetry and fiction better than those who work with it. Your characterization of my perspective says more about you than about me.
“Notice how he set up the question about speedreading so he could slip in that he was in the top 20%?” Due to this question we addressed modes of reading (skimming, deep dives), the importance of drafts, the issues with procrastination, and scheduling/deadlines versus spontaneity/timelessness. But yeah, let’s just ignore all of that and focus instead on how Adam mentioned he was a fast reader.
“Even his comment that he could walk into a room and know how people will react to him–are they people, in his mind, or parts of a machine?” No; quite the contrary. “Feel[ing] the atmosphere of what people are like”, “predict[ing] what they’re going to say to a small extent”, and “think[ing] about what they’re going to react if I do this or do that” are elements of emotional intelligence, as I myself say. To consider events from others’ perspectives—aka theory of mind—is the very antithesis of objectifying people. Moreover, near the end of this discussion, I explain that a fundamental distinction between humans and machines is that we have creative imagination, while machines don’t. So no, I do not think of people as machines.
Do with this information what you will.
I apologize, Adam. You’re right, I did objectify you. You do dispel my assumptions in your reply and you likely know the saying about ‘assume’ making an ass of u and me, in this case I would just say me.
Your verbal fluidity, despite your protests that you’re not, led me to ‘assume’ you’d planned your responses in advance of James’ comments. And honestly, I wouldn’t have blamed you for that. I don’t think I’d go on an interview, on either side of the table, without being as prepared as possible.
There was one place I disagreed with James, and perhaps it’s related to where I got off on the wrong foot with you. He says that meaning is created, not discovered.
I think that either meaning exists, independent of our understanding, or it doesn’t at all. You can’t ‘make’ meaning. And, to me, meaning, purpose, truth and God are all synonyms. I don’t believe they exist or don’t exist. But to say that I create meaning would be admitting it doesn’t exist.
Meaning exists (if it does) in the space between words, in the ‘and’ in ‘you and I’ as the Sufis say. It exists in the relationships between numbers–I think that algebra has a lot to teach us about how to formulate an ethical statement: reversible around the equal sign, any variable with the same properties can be substituted.
My criticism of you said more about me than you, as you say. It spoke to my fear that meaning, nuance and relationship is being lost in translation. Is getting the human interaction out of gov’t going to be a good thing? I think we’re going from a puppet gov’t to a robot gov’t, that can’t be reasoned with and will never go rogue on your behalf.
And I woke up realizing that the 15-story luxury cellblock apts in my beachside town aren’t being built for us. People in the US aren’t going to live in $4K/mo 800 sq ft beehives with no parking.
I think we’ve already been promised to China, and the fires/ tornadoes/ escalating prices/ shrinking job market are here to clear us out. As the petrodollar plummets, US real estate is the last thing that Treasury bills can buy.
In my morning mood, you embodied the future: young, Chinese, AI-enabling, left-brain dominant. That clearly wasn’t fair to you. I’m sorry.
Thank you for your clarification. It is alright, I hold no grudge against you. Also, I subscribed to your Substack recently; some of your articles have been shared by various people/channels (including, ironically, Robert Malone)!
The descriptive and qualitative verbal realm is important to me for many reasons.
First, the best, if not all, arguments in defense of human uniqueness and potential come from philosophical and emotional perspectives. At a surface level, it explains why writings (articles, books, etc.) on conspiracies so often start with an author or philosopher’s quote, and why the audience of the average conspiracy research website/show is dominated by “word people.”
Second (the flip side of the first), explaining the evil of a technocratic agenda or the tragedy of losing freedom (of movement, speech, etc.) requires skills in debate, literary synthesis, and qualitative conceptual understanding.
Third, the verbal and its derivatives—emotion, philosophy, social connection—are very rich. They can give you satisfaction, dread, confidence, comfort…if you grow your knowledge in these areas, you will enjoy their treasures. A particularly modern complaint, especially among the youth, is that life seems adrift and meaningless. I think it’s because wonder has been lost, and with it, greater meaning. The best way of recapturing it, in my opinion, is to read literature and grow one’s capacity to internalize nuance, particularly by distinguishing between “shades” of synonyms and having under one’s belt a large list of stories, metaphors, etc.
I believe that a big reason humanity is falling to hidden agendas, especially technocracy (ushered in by controlled opposition trump and musk), is because we have lost the right brain, particularly qualitative and imaginative faculties. You (and Flex) are correct that my understanding of quality is limited. I do often feel like there is some “other world” out there in which beauty to be discovered in a non-linear, time-transcending fashion, but I can’t express what that world is like or how I can interact with it. (Now I know how to solve this: read more fiction, philosophy esp. Wittgenstein, books people recommend me, etc. and then reflect on it.) My current struggles mirror those of a world stripped of its literary dimension. When words become cheapened or less explored, the best mechanism we have for uncovering the truth is compromised, and we suffer a crippling reduction of consciousness, especially in our ability to connect the dots.
Improving the verbal is a journey I am willing to embark on. It will open me up to new dimensions, humble me, provide solace and answers to existential questions, allow me to contextualize my struggles and my environment’s in the “comfort” of history, improve my empathy, and grant me a larger (in kind, not degree) toolbox to analyze situations and discover new ideas.
Back to the drawing board. I’ll keep an eye on your Substack.
Lasco,
Words, new words are part of the journey to enlightenment, discovery. It can be exhilarating to discover new words. Words having no equivalent across many languages. If you truly want to transcend those last two paragraphs you wrote , and I really believe you do cause you asked
There is a right brain art to asking and I recognize you as a seeker of knowledge and admire you for having the ability to ask.
The other world, non linear,time transcending fashion of coming to know beauty may require new words, as you alluded to.
The word exists to explain that beauty though you may have not ever heard it is
Sophantsicate
Sophantsication, sophantsicated, pronounced-
So fawns eh Kate,- ed, tion,ing
From the linguistic creation of Lee Ellison .
State of being, greater than the constituent parts overwhelming the senses and emotions. Gastault of being, by interaction with reality triggering an uber- reality. Nirvana like.
Use it freely.
I noticed that you’d subbed and it made me smile that you’d accepted my apology. But it wasn’t until reading your comment that I was truly honored. I don’t think it’s possible for me to have picked on anyone who could have proven me more wrong.
In the first place, you’re approaching words with a ‘beginner’s mind’ of learning. What could be better? Second, you’re going about it systematically–something that those who already swim in words don’t do. And then you very articulately state why it matters. Clearly, I have much to learn from you!
Ursula K LeGuin has a book of essays called ‘Words Are My Matter.’ On the metaphysical plane, I wonder if words are the only matter, the only reality. In these, I explore that premise:
https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/changing-our-story
https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/and-the-flesh-was-made-word
But I was also thinking, since our conversation, that numbers are the words of another language. The philosophy of mathematics fascinates me. I’ve gone, in my life, from hating numbers to playing with them as one of my guilty pleasures.
You may have seen in my bio that I’ve written a book on geo-economics. It ends with how we could reconfigure the economy into an interfluid matrix of small scale sovereignty.
I think any economic designer who doesn’t deal with numbers (cough, cough … Eisenstein) is a fraud. So being a data-junkie was practical.
But for the system I want, I spend an inordinate amount of pleasant time trying to make my numbers elegant. It’s an aesthetic, like colors that create something new in contrast.
So I’m retracting my statement that numbers, and by implication you, are a left-brained function. I think that, like words, they go back and forth between the abstract imagination and testing them out in relationship to logic.
In short, it will be a joy to have you reading my stack.
ps That’s very curious that Malone linked something of mine. I’m guessing you’ve seen that I’ve done 17 episodes analyzing the discrepancy between what he actually says and who he presents himself to be. Do you happen to have a link? Thanks again for your graciousness.
I will check out your two links (and much more).
Malone, in his Telegram channel (“Robert W Malone, MD” – https://t.me/RWMaloneMD, 135k subscribers), linked to your work twice, both times in 2022:
March 20, 2022 – to your article “Ukranian [sic] Peace & US Petropocalypse” – description “Tereza Coraggio is very articulate and has some very good insights.” (https://t.me/RWMaloneMD/2423)
October 7, 2022 – posted the link to “Muskrat Love & Anarchy”. (https://t.me/RWMaloneMD/5072)
So, Adam Deng tells us we are living in a “square year.” (The square root of 2025 is 45.) I guess he should be been around in 1764 ( . . . the answer is 42).
I have composed lots of poems, including dozens of villanelles (19 line poems with a particular repetitive rhyming scheme). I believe I like writing villanelles because my mind, somewhat like Adam’s, works on a mathematical plane (many levels lower than Adam’s, BTW). I would like to share one (entitled “Clouds”) just to see if it sparks in Adam a response based in imagery rather than numbers:
Clouds are the murals God paints on the sky;
whatever you envision is yours to keep!
Look up, my friend, before they pass us by.
Let us lay in this field, just you and I,
and rest for a while —like two lazy sheep.
Clouds are the murals God paints on the sky.
Today’s brazen sun is anything but shy—
thus, cautious we’ll be, and vaguely we’ll peep.
Look up, my friend, before they pass us by.
Let us contemplate together as we look on high.
Oh, the breeze is easy, so the billows just creep.
Clouds are the murals God paints on the sky.
“There’s a dog and a ship —oops they’re gone,” I sigh,
as the pillowy forms rearrange in a heap.
Look up, my friend, before they pass us by.
The afternoon wanes; we share what we spy,
and by and by we fall serenely asleep.
Clouds are the murals God paints on the sky;
Look up, my friend, before they pass us by!
Through your villanelle I did indeed envision images rather than numbers: of clouds and two people. Two, as I imagined you (the author of the poem) and me (“my friend” and plural first person).
In my mind came also two cartoons/videos. The first is the well-known “The American Dream” by The Provocateur Network, which exposes the federal reserve and its fractional banking system. The second is the Smurfs episode “Smurfs At Sea”, in which Papa Smurf tells his Smurfs about an adventure long ago, when Dreamy and a few sailors set sail on a quest to find treasures and comes back unexpectedly with Smurfberry seeds. When Papa starts telling his story, the video shows the Smurfs idly watching the clouds and associating their shapes with different objects.
Numbers usually pop into my head as a result of social interactions and diplomacy; images, abstract ideas.
Considering the short attention span in the pop culture world, and many folks in general from basic lack of reading much beyond comment boxes, text talk, directions, etc., IMO…
Forge simple words children can understand. Not childish talk, just simple talk.
Common language and conversations are not some competitive game but rather the object of communicating one’s thoughts and ideas. So using “show off” word play is just that, ego chat.
World wide the agenda at stifling free speech is at hand.
GONNA BE SOME HARD TIMES (song)
https://old.bitchute.com/video/MHeQZ0oHjAHj/
As they used to say: “Ripped from today’s headlines”…
American broadcaster CBS followed German police as they raided homes for speech crimes, such as posting a “racist cartoon” on the internet, which prosecutors in the country defended as a supposedly necessary safeguard to protect democracy.
https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2025/02/17/vance-vindicated-cbs-follows-german-police-on-raid-over-racist-cartoon-posted-online/
Bernoulli being both a Mathematician and a Physician (and a Christian) did thank God for giving him the idea for the equation of a fluid in motion. Since Math is a language, and a perfect one, arguably Math can be God’s love language to the Universe and humans, allowing us to achieve many great feats as humans, so why not make Math the de facto “love language’, withou needing to prove itself, just by mere existence?
Like one Math3matician once said “ if we are to doubt of the existence of God as christians, then we absolutely can’t as mathematicians’.
I wonder if Deng will come back to this comment section to follow up on his life changing coversation.
Here is a link to other quotes by christian mathematicians
https://pillars.taylor.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1015&context=acms-2017
@muri
It has to sink in at some point:
There is absolutely no historical evidence that “JESUS”, JOSEPH, MARY, MATTHEW, MARK, LUKE, JOHN, Peter, and others EVER existed, that ANY of the biblical events really happened. None. Go find it, become famous without using the “Bible” as one’s reference.
The God of the Bible is a whinny, vindictive, petty, cruel, murdering, jealous, insecure, unforgiving, baby killer who promotes rape, cannibalism, genocide, bloodshed, butchery, and massacre.
Is this the stuff of a loving creator of all that is? Or is this the reflection of demented humans seeking power and control over the masses? They certainly are not spiritual things. The religious church state was and is to this day, a hostile, anti-female take-over of the life affirming, Goddess, Pagan, and Tribal spiritual expressions.
These spiritual ways had existed with social equality and in peace long before the invention of a male, off planet god, and a male dominated war culture that offered promises of eternal bliss, in some mythical, far away utopia, or everlasting punishment for “sinners.” ‘Believers” can’t be convinced of anything because their belief is not based in fact, just a deep-seated NEED to believe.
“You believe that a cosmic Jewish Zombie, who was his own father, can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a woman made from a rib was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree?”
Michael Rivero
Organized religion is a mind control game used for power and control. Spirituality is a humbling of one’s perception and giving thanks to the Universe for all its magical gifts of life and beauty without attribution to some entity.
That was quite eloquent. I agree with your short summation at the end.
Personally, I am not an atheist, as that requires blind faith, without evidence, that we are merely physical phenomena, that has no consciousness or purpose beyond physically measurable signs. The religious fervor and irrationality displayed by atheists repels me, as it is stupidly hypocritical. They can be more narrow-minded and dumber than the religious people that they scorn.
I guess I am agnostic, as I have had so many significant ‘miracles’ in my life, but I know that the deities offered to us are ridiculous explanations. So, I don’t know the clear shape of so much of the invisible forces we live with, but I do know that there is something there. The weak or lazy mind will seize on a certain god, or an atheistic view, and be done with it.
PS Our discovery and, subsequent mastery, of electricity is a good example of invisible forces that are no longer in the purview of the old magic and miracles. The undeniable scientific and technological advances in these fields does not preclude the possibility of even more fundamental realities underlying our lives, as well as all of creation. This is an example of the formal logical fallacy known as false dichotomy, or the either-or dilemma. (Like the left-right paradigm) People who argue these issues always use the other classical fallacies, such as red herrings, straw man, and ad hominem attacks, as well as arguments from ignorance. I am endlessly curious, yet can humbly and peacefully accept that there can remain so much that is ineffable and transcendent.
@Hanky
>>That was quite eloquent. I agree with your short summation at the end.>>
Thanks, my stage name is Mr Smartipants 🙂
>>Personally, I am not an atheist>>
Neither am I, I just don’t believe in myths of dominance, punishment, and no proof.
>>The religious fervor and irrationality displayed by atheists repels me, as it is stupidly hypocritical.>>
Indeed. IMO, “non believers” should be pointing out the darkness of all those religions who want to kill you for not believing, stultifying natural growth exploration, etc.
Not “My non belief is better then your belief.” 🙂
>>I guess I am agnostic>>
One’s miracle may be just common experience to others.
Exiting a Bay Area freeway off ramp on my motorcycle, I came up to the access road, dropped into a lower gear to run the stop sign and I stalled out. The next second a speeding car went by…destiny/guardian “angels,”/ miracle/guides/ or just luck?
>>I am endlessly curious, yet can humbly and peacefully accept that there can remain so much that is ineffable and transcendent.>>
From my book The Urban Shaman:
In his book Myth and Reality, Mircea Eliade says:
“Myth narrates a sacred history; it relates an event that took place in primordial Time, the fabled time of the ‘beginnings.” In other words, myth tells how, through the deeds of Supernatural Beings, a reality came into existence be it the whole of reality, the Cosmos, or only a fragment of reality—and island, a species of plant, a particular kind of human behavior, an institution.
He adds: “…in societies where myth is still alive the natives carefully distinguish myths—‘true stories’—from fables or tales, which they call ‘false stories.”
Since I have been and explorer of consciousness for a long time I seem to have a song for lots of stuff. Here is one from 1977…
BLUES IN THE PULPIT (song)
https://old.bitchute.com/video/q8ZG6femxLgj/
Interesting lyrics to the song.
What do you make of the current large MAGA movement’s insistence on Christianity for the whole nation?
@Hanky…Thanks.
That MAGA religious thing has been what I have been observing for a while now and it is very disconcerting.
I see this god/jesus/bless this and that stuff not only on Fox with the various gov interviews but the interviewers themselves wearing religious jewelry.
The Gate Way Pundit commenters are disgustingly full of that stuff. They want to be hip or alternative, etc. yet they are asking for some non provable creator of all things to bless this or that.
The danger as I see it is people are giving up their autonomy, their sovereignty to address life’s challenges using the inner knowledge we all possess. To find their own understanding of what life is about.
This creates a cognitive bias, a subjective reality to leading to perceptual distortion, inaccurate judgment, illogical interpretation, or what is broadly called irrationality.
And of course we know what that sort of religious righteousness leads to :-/
With Donald sucking up to the Zionists so much and all the media talking about the “poor” jews being harassed by the Palestinians, when in reality it was the Rothschild “Round Table” fellows who gave them the “nose under the tent” in Palestine in return for financing the war, it only frustrates me more.
I try to use my music and essays to help folks get a better view of reality. Good chatting wit u 🙂
Will we evolve in a good direction?
Humanity, at large, seems currently incapable of discerning simple facts, and their relevance, from corrosive, mendacious narratives.
This, too, will pass. But it seems like a multi-generational thing, at best. We are still so easily, and radically, polarized. I, too, keep talking and writing songs, but I am resigned to realizing how big the problem is, and how small my immediate visible effect is.
hanky, none of us will get to live long enough to see this evolution. It is what it is.
Your reply button below is missing.
In my 1960’s many Bay Area folks shared incredibly interesting for the times, face to face discussions and cooperative musical efforts. Experimental journeys of stretching the boundaries of the everyday world.
>>Will we evolve in a good direction?>>
Of course the first assumption is to find out who we are.
The recent Matrix push is lame. My lot is cast with the old school teachers, healers, Shaman, Medicine Men and Women, etc. This so-called “new” path or digital dream for me has far too much nonsense about the future this or that, but not acknowledging, through thought and behavior, the magnificent here and now.
The 60’s movement began to explore too much and got high-jacked by the controllers, protecting their power (Hidden Knowledge/Truths). The history of all the true heroes of the time is stupidly represented in movies and TV specials, or ignored, and rarely authentic.
>>Humanity, at large, seems currently incapable of discerning simple facts, and their relevance, from corrosive, mendacious narratives.>>
IMO, from a past therapist’s POV, all of our brothers and sisters are victims of the brilliant propaganda and mind control of the psychopathic controllers. In need of forgiveness, within reason.
>>This, too, will pass. But it seems like a multi-generational thing, at best.>>
Ignorance of our true past human history or generations limits us from any real “ammo” for prognostication. The Mud Flood, Mandella Effect, and Tartarian truths are ripping at the fabric for sure. For the naysayers: Some things are easy to make fun of but it doesn’t mean they aren’t important.
>>I, too, keep talking and writing songs>>
Cool, any links?
>>I am resigned to realizing how big the problem is, and how small my immediate visible effect is.>>
If you embrace the idea we create our reality, then a simple off switch to that and seeing yourself as a force for truth, change, and good to those around you will emerge, so warp 5 on that Scotty 🙂
@Hanky
mkey’s cutting in line to spread doom and gloom is just the sort of nonsense that occurs out here in the digital world. That 1st Amendment thing.
Stay in the light and write music, get together with like-minded folks to talk about how to organize.
Check out my essay for some good ideas:
SOLUTIONS (essay)
https://old.bitchute.com/video/TsqcMC9tPGg2/
Don’t let others nonsense drag you into their world.
“ejdoyle” thinks he can sort this shit out by brute forcing it with his overwhelming ego. While his ego is indomitable, that won’t work.
Mkey
It’s a matter of forcing. Frustrated by the numbness that isn’t wanted. Not writing about it is worse than letting it out.
Catlin Johnstone wrote this essay here not because she wanted to but that she had to. There’s so little ‘ had to’ left in the US. All the while this goes on. Best essay I’ve read, or listened to in a while. You can’t say this in Germany but can say this on YouTube. A quote I read this morning somewhere, Confusus ? The wise man points to the moon and the dumb man inspects the finger.
https://youtu.be/ANGdJmVgi_0?si=lndHy3Bh62QFldhu
Have I somewhere put forward that people should stop trying? One of the biggest problems floating around is reading comprehension.
Mkey,
I believe it was what it was . There in was, the is what it is. Depends on what is…is. But that’s not why I hung the sandwich board on you. You where just at the right place at the right time.
The Caitlin Johnson’s’ article was disturbing , so much so that forcing was the issue. The IDL is forcing anti-Semitism on us. They need to be carpet bombed back to the silk road caravan days. So apologies to putting that kick me post it note on your articulate English back. And here again maybe countering that reading comprehension flaw , listening may be easier to comprehend.
A more disturbing doge, Ai, transhumanism discussion between Ana Mehalcea and Karen Kingstone. It’s long , and not for the faint of heart. It borders on the woo-woo but that’s not at all the disturbing part, it’s the part that might counter what the Ai corporations with government consent are doing that’s disturbing. Owe you a Karlovacko or two.
https://anamihalceamdphd.substack.com/p/doge-ai-and-transhumanist-agenda?
GBW, that you know about karlovacko (as oposed to ozujsko) way over there in Oklahoma is very gratifying. Ozujsko is absolute trash. But we have some very nice beers, some areas have beautiful clean water that leaves a lasting impression on the beer.
I, of course, also see this as the state of affairs that we have to deal with in this lifetime. But, I want to counter the tendency towards feeling or projecting “gloom and doom.” I think that it may have something to do with having children and grandchildren.
PS Ego is a loaded word. It has several connotations, many of them disparaging. I am going to stay out of that particular briar patch. Except to say, that it is the focus of my hopes for meaningful evolution. A refinement, and better understanding, of personal and collective ego is key.
I actually used that word in this very thread. I am going to have to clarify my ideas. Fortunately, I will have the opportunity ,as the subject of my comment seems quite open to dialogue.
The Christian mathematicians link seems awesome, I’ll read it, thank you.
Right now I’m catching up with the comments, but I will probably come back again to this comment section in a few months…
Good for you! For following the link!
The real issue with the commentators up the original comment is that they believe that because they are “atheists” that they are actually non religious.
There’s no such thing. Everyone believes Something. Atheists not believing IS a religion. It’s kinda like the paradox of communication by Jakobson “non communication IS communication”.
I wonder why they set up themselves in that high horse as saying “Jesus didn’t exist”. Shows tremendous ignorance of the Histoey of European Science and Theology…
Evolution has certain paradoxes too other than the most obvious ones:
“Something can’t come from Nothing” (aka Big Bang)
Evolutions Dogma:
1- evolution of Animals themselves: complex beings from microbes
2- evolution of chemistry: organic from inorganic compounds
3- evolution of thought: morale and rational thinking, free will has no biological “use”.
4- evolution of matter: something cannot come from something
But I guess the darwinists in this comment section are either too robotic to amend or pre-historically barbaric to convert.
Good Grace! Good Grief!
I lived life once like them, until I was found, like a little boy lost in the woods…
There was/is? a group of linguistics holding the view that there is one source of all languages. That words arose from making movements and sounds in the mouth that mimic the perceptions of objects or actions.
From a Linguistics class ~1965 UCBerkeley.
I’m inclined to agree. After all, human languages differ by at most two fundamental levels: diction (what word represents an idea or asset) and syntax. The rest is memorization, acclimation such as thinking in that language and practicing with native speakers, etc.
Onomatopoeia will free ya.’
CBS Host Says Holocaust Happened Because of Free Speech
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onHvbQKwGps
Another legacy media doozie.
Margaret Brennan says: Well, he was standing in a country where free speech was weaponized to conduct a genocide. And he met with the head of a political party that has far right views. And some historic ties to extreme groups. The context of that was changing the tone of it. And you know what. That’s censorship was …
Watching this woman’s eyes, I have to come to an understanding that she’s likely under the influence of psychotropic “medication”. My first impression was that’s she’s drunk, but I don’t think that’s it.
Lets hope at least her grandchildren will get the change to publicly denounce the ole crazy grandma’s insane rhetoric.
https://youtu.be/-bMzFDpfDwc
The beat goes on…
This seems easy to decode. Thanks Mkey. Thanks Hanky
This is a doublay as we say in golf.
Rubio is nailing down the myth that the news caster is teeing up for the kill shot.
Banker trick. The Holocaust happened, free speech made the Holocaust. No free speech didn’t. Hitler made the Holocaust, no more questions please. No bankers were involved and capitalists were not involved in anything the zionists said that caused the deportation and ethnic cleansing of Europe. Go back to sleep now.
You got to give James Corbett credit for all this mind expanding space.
Sad times. Looks like libgen bit the dust.
https://www.reddit.com/r/libgen/comments/1iol3i6/rip_libgen_my_friend/
Interesting and thought provoking. Thanks, James!
Enjoyed this talk. Rarely do we talk about language, or how “we think” our thoughts.
I wanted to add a few ideas.
If you want to strengthen your ability to read emotional language… go to an art museum and “talk” about different artworks with someone. The ideas, thoughts, and feelings that come from talking about what art means to us… as a bridge, can help us to better understand language as it is.
Something I pondered, a while ago… have you ever looked at how some words identify an image in your head, that also sounds like the word said aloud? For instance, the word tree. The thought of the word, can evoke the image… and vice versa.
Last… this is a thought exercise, and not meant to anger anyone.
If you were to say to someone, “we make up god.” we (as peoples) will most likely say yes, we make up God. He is in our imagination…
OR
say the same words, “we make up god” and another person, will think… Yes, we “the human race” together make up the existence of God.
Rarely, however will we catch that both ways exist simultaneously in the moment of being asked.
I found it interesting how something as simple “as the way we hear something” is deeply engrained in processes, and fundamentals we are highly unaware of to this very day.
Thanks for the solutions!
Great idea with discussing art. I’ll have to try it!
Regarding similarity of {the image a word’s sound evokes} and {the image the word describes}, it rarely happens to me. But some words do have this property. English: “bottle” and “circle”. Chinese: “人” (rén, people) and “山” (shān, mountain). German: “Brille” (glasses) and “schoß” (1st-person singular and 3rd-person singular past tense of “to shoot”).
The simultaneous existence phenomenon is the reason most jokes are funny. “Why can you never trust atoms?” “Because they make up everything.” In that instant you are forced to come up with both definitions.
To me, hearing language is highly important to making sense of it. Well, that’s a solution, isn’t it? Speak what you are reading out loud! That gives you an extra dimension upon which to process verbal information. With foreign languages, I make far more progress when I say the words to the best of my ability rather than try to piece it together in my head. With Japanese (which I am learning) it is impossible for me to “shove” all the kana in my head and hope it somehow makes sense. I have to sound it out.
Onomatopoeia.
Double entendre in humor is aka a pun.
It is often called the lowest form of humor, but that is not a good description.
The punny, double entendre stuff can be found in the heart of most humor, even physical comedy, or successful professional level comic routines.
The stupid computer ate my homework!!
I liked this episode. It really is something I have had interest in for 6 decades. My family is full of Math and Science PhDs, but I turned out to be an artist and musician (after dropping out of Engineering at University). The PhDs came at the cost of some common sense, taken by the world of academia. It wasn’t just the over-application of linearity of thought, but also the political peer pressure.
I feel for the very intelligent Mr. Deng’s real challenge. He will eventually have to address his ego and insatiable desire to acquire more knowledge and mastery to find any peace.
I am a ‘born artist,’ if ever there was one, doing professional realistic sculptures and paintings. But I also do geometric work, for the sheer beauty of it. Beauty is impossible to nail down in words, but it is very real and powerful, anyway.
Some links to my work…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6wPpKkhK7o
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OK4tOjnuUhQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmLvJP2w0yQ
https://hankblackart.com/index.php?page=portfolio
LINKS to Hank’s work
Thanks for the videos, Hank.
“Log On Boy” is kind of a catchy song. I liked it.
Your portfolio website has some very cool stuff!
I thought of you the other day with the Associated Press article about 9/11 Truth which has your photo.
https://corbettreport.com/the-war-for-bankocracy/#comment-173734
Good point about the narrowness of PhD linearity. The world at large is not linear; it has simultaneous threads and many concepts that transcend time or deduction.
What does the political peer pressure look like—the desire to retain a job? academic reputation? something else?
John Beaudoin, Sr. (1) has a famous meme in which the tunnel vision of the “experts” causes them to be unable to see the solution which is just outside their narrow perspective, while the generalist, who has taken a step back, can easily see the solution in his peripheral vision. I’ll put the link when I find it.
You have a great and robust portfolio! My favorite was your 7-foot football. Large construction fascinates me.
I’ve also painted; you can see some works at https://adamdeng.com/arts/artwork.html .
(1) legal and statistical researcher, mainly in the plandemic fraud; see https://therealcdc.substack.com
Adam talked briefly about ‘noisy data’ at the beginning. I found it ironic that background noise was audible in his mic throughout the episode. 🙂
As James was talking around 19:00, I thought of a professor I had when going to Teacher’s College.
The biggest concept he tried to convey to us while taking his English course was to always simplify what we are writing.
Forget the flowery words. Just drill down to the essence of what you want to express, and say it with the fewest, most basic words that everyone will understand.
That lesson has stuck with me to this day.
Oh shit! (Basically)
Aiming for simplicity often results in voluminous writing.
The issue wiyh simple language is that it lowers the bar and over time you end up loosing nuance and meaning.
You can end up having to reinvent the wheel and explain your meaning all over again rather then use an appropriate word that already exists
Yes I can see your point.
I’m not suggesting that James, for example, should abandon his style of writing.
But rather, when you set out to write a piece or make a point, say in this comment section, you try to keep it simple instead of using long-winded prose.
More people will become engaged.
Try it, you might like it. 🙂
It’s NOT a that your wrong, but at the end of the day there are levels of understanding… a well educated chap once told me about the three levels of joke in Shakespeare plays made the three classes of people laugh at different times.
Not everything is for everyone, the fact is there are plenty of stupid people who can’t read an essay and compare two ideas contained….. at the end of the day there is not much point in making such people feel like they are informed because they are NOT….. better that they go “huh??” And grow smarter rather than think they know something.
Short words are good for propaganda program ing, I guess.
Duck we do see eye to eye on this for the most part.
This conversation we are having
can be instructive to many people.
I think you first have to decide on what your intention is with the piece you are writing/recording etc.
Are you interested in appealing to the largest possible audience or just a niche audience?
Generally speaking, the larger the audience you are trying to address or appeal to, the more you will need to ‘dumb down’ your content, i.e. make it less flowery.
In addition to ‘dumbing it down’, brevity is equally important. Try to cut to the chase.
The larger the group the less value its members haveexcept as servitors.
Short and sweet, lolllolol
😉 But more seriously you do bring up a good point about how wide an audience people are aiming at fixing the level of language and ideas that can be dealt with.
Two points being
A) the Lumpen Proles are unreachable unless you control the Means of Producing Gibbs
B) over half of the population at this point is basically working at the level of the Lumpen proletariat even if they have university degrees.
This is an interesting problem, since an informed and virtuous people are the only kind that can operate a republic or democratic system….. do you have a solution?
“do you have a solution?”
Hmmmm…. let me see.
Target the Lumpens with ‘dumbed down’ stuff
and the informed and virtuous with more flowery prose. 🙂
You don’t understand the nature of a lumpen prole… like I said we even have university educated ones now.
Like I said…. To control such people you need to control the GIBs…. TRUTH is not relevant. They are the descendants of the peasants and they embody the serf nature.
They will send their kids to schools that harm them, Jab their kids with excessive vaxes so they get free day care in school, And go along with almost anything as long as it’s SLOW kill so long as they can keep
Life
Easy
And
Comfortable
Do you recall the chap who got the jab because his wife told him to since she couldn’t take the social pressure (interacted with him on the comments back then) cares if you tell him the truth?
Does the guy who doesn’t want to loose his BS job care about truth and waste of Gov money? Does the teacher who has to teach to the test really care about truth? I would literally be ashamed to teach in most public schools.
I don’t wish bad on such people but at the end of the day whomever gives the gibs out owns them…. They are irrelevant and not worth trying to “reach “ with a message because they will pretend to sleep thru it.
They are the slave class, they want to be slaves- unless you are prepared to own them you can’t do anything for them.
I was just talking to RexLeoNum who thinks he embraces master mentality by “deciding what’s right and wrong” himself but that’s just a more bombastic version of being a slave.
That was an OK way to stay alive for a long time but I don’t think it will serve them much longer unless we get a much more traditional ruling class
I’m with you on the futility of trying to reach a ‘lumpen prole’ as far as converting them truth-wise.
But when I suggested:
“Target the Lumpens with ‘dumbed down’ stuff
and the informed and virtuous with more flowery prose. 🙂”
I wasn’t thinking about any specific message I was trying to promote/discuss.
It could be about gardening, bee-keeping, jujitsu or skydiving. 🙂
But if you are saying some Lumpens are able to digest flowery prose, the more the merrier for those who can write in that style and want to broaden their audience.
I still think KISS is the way to go though when trying to convey important messages/ideas.
My computer’s fan loves to whirr whenever CPU-intensive video applications are active.
I’d like to imagine that I’ve done better with concision and precision than in previous years. (See an essay “Concision and Precision” I wrote on this two years ago: https://AdamDeng.com/essays/precision.html) Technical writing for research papers in particular demands a high level of precision.
Verbosity doesn’t necessarily alarm me. But flowery words will catch my eye immediately, including “enhance”, “humanity”, “impact”, “real-world”, “tolerant”, “compassion”, inclusive”, “diversity”, “revolutionize”, “making a difference”, “proactive”, “meaningful”, “significant”, “important”. Removing meaningless adjectives and swapping adverb-verb pairs for verbs are two of my main exercises in writing.
you might try having compassion for the word compassion.
a compassionate perspective is one of if not the most potentiated antidote to humanity’s suffering.
Hey Adam, interesting essay on “Concision and Precision”.
It is certainly closely related to what I mentioned above.
As far as the “flowery” words you listed are concerned,
I wouldn’t consider them as such. In my books they are all
fair game to be included in simple and effective writing.
For “flowery” I’m thinking more along the lines of:
-postulate
-vacuous
-vociferous
-temerity
-putrefy
-cryptic
-tangential
-transmogrify
-obtuse
-perfunctory
etc.
Those all look like perfectly usable words to me. I don’t need to look them up, but with Dr EM Jones books I often need a dictionary to check a word and those are some of the best books ever.
Some things SHOULD be harder- just like writing by hand or using a more difficult font to read something makes the content more memorable
The LIE of the modern world / info age is that knowledge can come easily and be understood and digested without effort
I’m only half way through this interview, but had to take a break from the avalanche of thoughts shooting forth as comments and questions.
no one here has yet mentioned T. McKenna’s rave on “words” so I’m compelled, given his prescience on the subject.. with pre-apologies for any malapropisms: I cant quote, but will try to convey his gist:
adapted from T. McKenna,
words are a compounding of small mouth noises, for which we each carry a dictionary. As we listen to anothers compounding, we make a quick search and register that the pattern checks out, thereby confirming a communicated yet varying level of understanding. It is a crude form of telepathy, that transmits thoughts from one brain into another.
,,some people think the world is made of quarks and bosons, but I think the world is made of words; and if you know the words the world is made of, then you can make of it what you wish.
at the 6min mark in this rave, he talks about language:
https://www.google.com/search?q=terrance+Mckenna+on+words&rlz=1C1GCEA_enAU1036AU1036&oq=terrance+Mckenna+on+words&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIICAEQABgWGB4yCAgCEAAYFhgeMg0IAxAAGIYDGIAEGIoFMg0IBBAAGIYDGIAEGIoFMg0IBRAAGIYDGIAEGIoFMgoIBhAAGIAEGKIEMgcIBxAAGO8FMgcICBAAGO8FMgoICRAAGKIEGIkF0gEIOTcyNmowajeoAgCwAgA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:dfaa9b1b,vid:A0omxRx-8S4,st:0
Thanks for sharing that interesting Japanese term for something we have lost/left behind (for which there is no english equivalent word) James.
This is something I was discussing with a friend (and fellow Corbetteer) on substack recently. I have been learning more about my Welsh, Irish and Scottish ancestry and learning about words in their languages that do not have an English equivalent (such as the Welsh term “Hiraeth”.)
Another interesting term with no English equivalent is the term “Puhpowee” from the Potawatomi language which means “the force that causes mushrooms to push up from the earth overnight” (It can also refer to the unseen energies that animate everything).
For anyone interested here is the thread:
https://substack.com/@gavinmounsey/note/c-86871248
For some other interesting Japanese terms that offer unique cultural threads and lenses of perception check out this article:
https://theenergeticecologist.substack.com/p/at-the-intersection-of-animism-and
The author is a woman with Japanese heritage now living in the US and she writes about ancient Japanese Animism viewpoints and discusses concepts such as “kami” and “tsukumogami”.
from the post above:
“For example, in traditional Japanese culture, place is something we as humans are constantly in relationship with. The home/place of dwelling, is understood to be its own kami, or spirit. Additionally, there are many other spirits that people will typically invite into their home to ensure safety from malevolent spirits that reside outside the home, keep the family healthy, and so on… …Because the home is understood to have its own spirit, it is apart of daily life to tend to the home, clean it, and take care of it so that the spirit will be happy. In contrast, homes that are abandoned have a whole different spiritual trajectory of their own, tsukumogami, kami spirits of homes and objects that have been abandoned. The concept of these place-based spirits is an extension of land-based spirits, which proliferate and vary region to region.”
My wife asked me if they got into the left brain vs right brain thing. Somehow, it seemed that it was passed over completely.
As was the all important question of ego, and its proper use. That is something I think about often. It certainly is connected to so much blindness and conflicts.
Oops, indeed I missed left brain/right brain.
In a more general discussion, as opposed to a tightly-defined, highly-structured Solutions Watch like this, there’s more to say about the relationship between mathematics and literature. I would also be interested in exploring the relationships between: tangible math (~ numbers), abstract math (~ definitions), fundamental/philosophical versus technical, similarities in approaching learning in different fields (I said this in Idea 10 at the very end but did not expand on it much), and so on.
I am interested in hearing your thoughts about ego.
Talking about the ego is a vast and nebulous topic. It is commonly used as an unpleasant or insulting term. I apologize for posting something that can be construed as disapproving of your performance or personality.
For here and now, I would like to say that you did NOT display a monstrous ego in the short time I saw you. I do, however, see definite pitfalls in this area for you. Everyone possesses an ego, and it can even often be called healthy. In your particular case, there are particular challenges that come to those who are obviously accomplished and talented, especially with great intellect. If you are interested, we can get into this further, in a more private venue.
Here is another clip of my work from 20 years ago. It was sent to Tokyo for a competition called ‘The Art and Science of Color.’ (We didn’t win). My son is narrating, along with me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7W5HoUCi80
I thought your posting about ego was fine; no need to apologize.
Which came first, the chicken or the egg?
The cock!
1+1=1
neat convo. i learned there are in fact other people who love music but can not understand the emphasis on lyrics or the attraction of poetry generally. Meter i can understand (because it contributes to & accents rhythm) but Anthony Keidis word salad is fine to my ear. I may also enjoy a particular artist more (or hate them) based upon what the words have to say in retrospect, but only after i’ve already (dis)liked the piece.
I assume Adam was driving at modeling a form of wisdom (aka reading between the lines). Wisdom would seem to arise through supervised learning via interaction with the material world where the process of accruing wisdom is necessarily costly – we must first receive feedback on our faulty thought/action (eg. touching fire) via experience negative consequence (eg. burning). Probably not a practical approach for training AI.
But we can also gain something approximating wisdom by studying other people’s mistakes (eg. Aesop’s fables) which could at least conceptually be represented as some training data set of our own errors.
Yes, music-but-not-words lovers like us do exist! On average I enjoy piano and orchestral music more than opera pieces, as opera puts more emphasis on words and expressing them as opposed to sheer music. (In particular, early Baroque music was verbally rich but musically boring.) There are notable exceptions like the Queen of the Night aria in Mozart’s “Die Zauberflöte” because its melody is so catchy.
Context of the song can also be important, especially if visual. For instance, the sight of sick and injured Chinese soldiers in the movie 上甘岭 (Shangganling) makes the song 我的祖国 (My native land) all the more moving. The music and singing alone is sad enough, but the history overwhelms. Even so, music always trumps context. I laugh whenever I hear rock-and-roll or speedy versions of 我的祖国. Pathos just went down the toilet!
Poetry is probably a lost cause. Sorry James, I’m not infinitely elastic. Unless it rhymes and is funny, or can be put into song form. Marty Robbins’ ballads are fun to sing.
It would be interesting to develop a system which could read social and other non-mathy situations and analyze the best moves. Such an AI would have to contend with much larger “fog of war” aka uncertainty/unknown information than in quantitative problems. It also has to deal with multimodal slippage: the inevitable loss of accuracy that accompanies situations that are 1) drawn-out, 2) contain many different communication modes (visual cues, text-based documents, verbal communication, voice subtleties, etc.), and 3) have no clear “right answer” or multiple good paths. Indeed, as you pointed out, reading might be the best way we have of studying and avoiding others’ mistakes. Not everything can be turned into AI, and not everything should.
in my experience, “wisdom” is accurate knowledge in action,
and
it cannot and will not be televised, nor hyper-plagiarized (which is all that these chatgpt type programs do,,, arti-intelligence indeed, yeah-nah)
What’s her face is back. Offers some key insight after being away for a year.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kksKOLA6P6Y