He is flesh and bones, he is cells, electrons and atoms, he is the physical, chemical and biological, he is rational and empirical, he is cause and effect. He is a scientist. Today he was asserting the complexity and sophistication of DNA. He himself was so awed and perplexed, despite his contract to biology, that he looked away boggled and overwhelmed and said, as if with no resolution, 'This makes me believe in God.' 'Whaaaaaa' I, the product and consequence of his atheism, said, in shock of his resigned meekness. The belief in God, or what have you, is ultimately the search for an explanation- and don't worry I don't think I'm being profound, it's just what it is, I can't say less and I can't say more. When you sequentially read the words "search for an explanation" "search for an explanation" "search for explanation" "search for explanation" "search for an explanation" and then think about the significance that is "searching for an explanation" the notion of an answer spirals out of control, reflecting in on itself. The notion of an answer becomes un-linear and un-signified, something absurd, something that hangs in mid air. It is unpicking the stitches, it is peeling away the skin of everything and anything, something and nothing, this and that, up and down. Why explain? Explanation assumes an Ultimate, Ultimate assumes Purpose, maybe, just maybe Mdmajetrocket assumes Sauerkrautimpotence and our purpose is Lollydoggytail? Explanation is a euphemism for simplification. Religion paraphrases. But somehow religion is undoubtedly the most complex notion in human civilisation. I mean, I think of the mindfuck that is Israel and Palestine, what the Jesus Christ do you do- I mean seriously what the Christ of Jesus do you do?! But I'm not here to talk politics, I'm here to talk nothing. Yes, this that jibble jabble rumble rumble. But seriously... jibble jabble rumble rumble. If you were to collate the keywords in people's prayers to God (or what have you),'why' would be the keyword. "Why God why?" is what a thousand people are preaching this second, with ten thousand fingers interlaced. The why asked in a prayer is very different to the why asked in science. In prayer you ask a question in anticipation of a fixed answer that is based on dogma, whilst in science you ask a question in anticipation of an evolving answer that is based on sequence and pattern. Yes science searches for an explanation. And for the sake of not talking absurd jibberish to prove a point let's assume there is an explanation. In explaining the explanation, the Bible tells me God explains, whilst science tells me the observable world explains. The Bible tells me that the Ten Commandments explain whilst chemistry tells me a little over a hundred elements explain, the Bible tells me that everything was created in six days whilst physics tells me that the observable Universe is made up of 10^83 particles, The Bible tells me laws are based on Man whilst science tells me laws are based on Nature. I can't give you a more awesome explanation than your explanation, God (or what have you), because your explanation is as awesome as you think awesome can be. But if you are searching for an explanation, looking to a higher power or a dogma is a meek way of explaining things, a resignation of sorts. Don't fear the unexplained, but if you do then earnestly question the truths that you are told.
Peace Love and Mung Beans, A
Peace Love and Mung Beans, A
drops of protein, spermatocysts, watch-hands, thermostats, tiny valve pipes, air, odometers, gel, ccm, atmospheres, ions, magnets, electrolytes, bicycle spokes, honey-combs, fish fins, urine, test tubes, positive poles, negative poles, parchment, amniotic sacs, egg shells, leaf patterns, protozoa, gills, tooth enamel, ether, celluloid, isotopes, cepeid variables, gamma rays, idioplasm, perpetua mobilia, quintessence, radioactivity, signs of the zodiac, gonococci, arsenic, water wheels, alizaris, hieroglyphics, deuterons, nerve tracts, mother of pearl, jellyfish, 5 degress, pollen, meridians, hygrometers, alveoli, quinine, spectrum lines, glass fibre, parallaxes, ears, nematoblasts, flickering, bronze, footnotes, ellipses, leiden jars, phlogiston, gun powder, gravity, primodial sea, selenium, systoles, eye-balls, heliozoans, chrysoprase, fossils, units of length, cyclotrones, spawn, glaze, nothing, paleolithic era, polyps, chalcedony, CaCo3, division signs, spirit of wine, ammonium, graphite, larynxes, gall stones, WORDS.
I swim, swim in a flickering. the relays clatter in my head…dreamy phase! i race through the convolutions of my brain, i look through the vitreous spheres of my eyes…exquisite speech bubbles burst in my brain, bespatter my perception, drip from furniture. In a rabble of words from condensed perceptual mist! the echo of the anthropomorphic shit resounds from every atom, to form calcified vessels. my watch ticks…tic-toc, like a small bird in a steel case, my head is a glass bubble through which one can glimpse a frantic ticking cog wheel mechanism — and here, here in my pocket i have a little key with which i can set this mechanism in motion whenever i want.
- Autobiography of Albert Einstein, Gerhard Roth
"The term Anthropocene suggests that the Earth has now left its natural geological epoch, the present interglacial state called the Holocene. Human activities have become so pervasive and profound that they rival the great forces of Nature and are pushing the Earth into planetary terra incognita."
Dr Crutzen
I wonder whether this an ego driven theory. Regardless, I can confidently predict that the term anthropocene and anthropogenic will be kicked around by environmentalists, politicians, lobbyists and well, anyone who wants to convince you of anything. Perhaps even philosophers? More so than a geological shift (which I don't really care for), it is an ontological shift, that will superlatively affect how we interpret the meaning of our existence and our relationship with the natural. As a kid, I thought my existence and really the existence of mankind was trivial in the "grand scheme of things" and not because I was a clever kid who contemplated her own ontology but rather because it was a line from a film. A solemn character who features in an equally solemn film, who is in the midst of contemplating his mortality in a prison cell, enlightens his other inmates, "Mankind is an insignificant speck in Earth's time line". For ages I considered people and mankind as peripheral. And science dictated so, Copernicus relegated Earth from the center of the universe and Darwin placed human species onto a single twig of the evolving tree of life. But in light of anthropocence my somewhat inconsequential life is actually quite consequential. We are actually a gargantuan agency. (Massive human ego trip)
As much as I have an affinity with Buddhism, the Cosmos and generally the idea that we are mere insignificant spirits or particles in space I appreciate Anthropocene's Brave New World-esque prophecy. I use Brave New World as a prophecy point for everything but I do think it is particularly relevant to human separation from nature. The dichotomy of nature and man. In Brave New World, Man is the progressive and Nature is the savage. In the distant future kids will learn that they evolved from monkeys and think it absurd, that humans were once symbiotic with the natural world. Will kids in the distant future understand the concept of ecosystem and ecology- will such concepts exist? I find myself resenting man made structures and environments and yearning natural environments; but even then it is still man made nature. Ski resorts, beaches, national parks; man-centric.
I briefly mentioned politicians because in our current economic, political and social climate where sustainability and environment are massive buzzwords, anthropocence will be mixed into this green salad. Environmental consciousness has led to growing trend in literature, titled such as, 'An Economic Ethics for the Anthropocene.' More interestingly when I Googled "Anthropocene + Ontology" I accidentally came across Oxford Literary Review calling for papers on the deconstruction in the Anthropocene (here) to be published in 2012. Eco-criticism is obviously a rising academia field. I found this paragraph pretty captivating: "OLR is particularly interested in papers that take up the challenge of the Anthropocene in relation to the following questions. In what ways does thinking currently associated with deconstruction and the work of Jacques Derrida now take on new force, re-interpret itself or become anachronistic? Does thinking through the challenges of the Anthropocene tally with a turn to a more thing- or object -oriented ontology, the need to acknowledge the separate incalculable agency of the nonhuman, that “All reality is politics, but not all politics is human”"
Anthropocene will perhaps empower mankind with a new sense of responsibility, but also a fearfully large sense of duty too.
I am as ignorant to the exchange rate as I am of the interest rate on my credit card. In both circumstances ignorance has been bliss; I shop online, ignoring the fact that the AUD to the Pound is 2:1 and I make cash transfers from my credit card, ignoring the fact that there is 20% interest. Absurdly, the only way I manage to comprehend finance jibberish is via cheeseburgers. When I was backpacking, cheeseburgers were a staple food in my diet. They were so delicious, somewhat nutritious, and importantly convenient and cheap. As a cheeseburger enthusiast and ex-McDonald's employee I was conscious of the differences in cheeseburgers from Paris to Buenos Aires to Tokyo- especially in their price difference. My somewhat unused left brain got to thinking about how such prices differences were indicative of perhaps, that country's economic climate and currency strength. In that light bulb moment, for me, a McDonald's cheeseburger became more than a patty between two buns and more so a universal symbol for food prices. As much as I was proud of myself for somewhat grappling the idea of purchasing power parity, the correlation seemed a bit amateurish. BUT ALAS! I was happy to see The Economist, an immensely credible and legit journal, collate a Big Mac Index.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Mac_Index
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)