i have a question which i believe is quite relevant to this site, which actually probably excludes it because it isnt actually random because there is an obvious link between this question and the topic name. but then that link may only exist in my mind which would make is random by the standards of other people. furthermore, its soo unrandom because of the ovious links, that it could be cnsidered more random. no, scratch that last one. anyways…
well i will throw it to the forum anyways. are there varying degrees of random?
my answer is NO but ill hear your opinions before i explain why.
I have already said that randomness is a failure to find order, it is the name given by scientist to name a new discovery, namely their inability at discovering order.
My cat was telling me how she prefers enya and
I like the music of bowling balls raining from the sky.
On the telly was a match between Narnia and mordor.
Some orc was being sent off for illegal use of crossbow.
I got some letter from hell telling me the answer to everything
was 42. And I replied it was the second breakfast of
saugause and ham. If only every day was tomorrow.
well my day was stranger. lonely wombats removed orange from the planet, they thought it clashed with their fur. but yougurt insisted the nightime was an illusion to confundle an ancient egyptian god. mice were the only answer.
exponential turkey was last. graham lost everything wagering on helmut… i told him helmut had no legs… no competition. but graham insisted and then ruby spyglass entered… and well… we all know what happened then. tragic.
So Howard Stern is leaving the public airways and moving to satellite. Naturally, all the markets that ran his show are now faced with the somewhat daunting task of replacing him.
So I’m listening to the station that airs his show, and on comes a promo for the replacement. It’s two men and a woman.
One of the men is making a comment on something about circumcision. The other man then says something relative to decapitation. “Ha ha ha, not decapitation, circumcision” blah blah blah … hillarity ensues; end of promo.
I understand Stern’s show isn’t exactly intended for PhD’s, but what marketing genius decided it’d be a good idea to promote a new show by broadcasting the fact one of the co-hosts is a moron?
Marketing Guy: “Okay, here’s my idea: We’ll use this cut of this dude being a total idiot.”
intersubjective truth and objective truth
our search for the invisible truth that we might make visible
our effort to connect with the Eternal Everlasting [EE]
the effort to connect to something ahistorical
does knowledge need grounding?
What is real beyond that which we can describe?
that is the hunt for EE. MAN exists only in the imagination he cannot be verified outside of the imagination he can only get described by fictions
the EE is part of the geography of the imagination
the search for immortality is a search for entrance into pure imagination
that is to become pure dream
different descriptions
Does “confession” produce “truth”
do you enjoy entertaining make-believe doubts?
Everything I see is a double-edge sword. There is a problem with every sentence. Virtually nothing holds up under intense inspection. Contradiction and tautology seem the rule. I don’t care what people think of what I say: I can take this conviction to the grave. I care more about what people think of what I say than anything: this is also true.
I have a wee bit of spare time on my hands, so I’ve decided to write something here, may it rest forever in the universal storage of thoughts, as testimony of the fact that today I had something to say and I said it.
