Janissary

Janissary cruellest month, leading
Students out of holidays, feeding
Memories of desire, breeding
Dull Jacks with much work.

Jillian kept us warm, blanketing
Us with regretful nos, bleeding
Our little life with her rhubarb.

And so we were all surprised when Janissary
Came thundering over the hills
And Jill and Jacks fell through the downs
Wasted by pale coffee and flowers
Wondering where the waters and the carpeter
Went to kindergarten together.

For of course without a good carpeter,
You would have to train your own grey matter
To weave a tapestry of knowledge
From the waste land.

Still not a Blog

Still. Distill. Not a blog, no no. I remember the days when I was told blogs were evil. The very next year, the local Priesthood of the Book declared an inter-school blogging competition. So, not evil.

But this is still not a blog, no no. This is a sequential scrapbook. Of random thoughts. Of mice and beets, of cheese and dates; of history, myth, and potato chips; of distant encounters and disasters. Not a blog at all.

The last time I said so, I also said that there would be nothing here by January. Then people scolded me, as if I had said a small island should be sunk into the sea. So I left it floating here. But not, so not, so not a blog.

In other news, the mills of God continue to grind. The time of the Pharaoh's officers draws to an end, as Exodus 15 says.

Random Thoughts After Several Interesting Meals

Sometimes after many meals, you sit replete, with the memory of black cod fillet and garlic, or thinly-sliced green apple pie and cinnamon, or a delicate cappucino of mushrooms, in the part of the brain that contains the sensations of your mouth.

And sometimes, your brain rambles on with random words that intersect, dissect or transect the world around you.

If you are singularly fortunate, you end up like James Joyce and 'stream of consciousness' becomes part of the literary vocabulary. If you are singularly unfortunate, people delve into the Greek to describe your output, and find the word logorrhoea. What you might get may also be somewhere in between:

dies irae ides marching on not framed many web pattern man internet camwhore no methodism in madness citadel stalin bathtub shower trotsky escaped mexico this time of reckoning pe teachers and young lambs kids ogles and ogres and vivisection bio chemistry physics you may be asked to go china for your health breaking news like porcelain silk road silk route oh dear inappropriate questions and answers responses like watching a train wreck in slow motion across the deck of the ark royal with no harriers lear had three daughters good one sent away did not betray two favoured but not good old man had so much blood in him most unkindest leather office chairs fish tank tank tank no more programme how to ah the sisters and brothers better get along run along now boys no conspiracy theory the beer was flat what an idiot you must pay bill if you want service well hole in the ground has water needs pail fell down broke crown see what tumblring after this what you get for notchecking this i give tevya this your problem too lazar wolff the butcher take it on the chin doom doom in the depths fly you fools looking for good time in latin

It is all an indigestion and a pain really, especially if you flash back too many years and the forward likewise. Then how do you know what is stream of consciousness and what is merely self-consciousness?

Subject to Authority

We are all subjective. There is a reality that each of us perceives, and it is never the same as anyone else's. When we compare notes, and they seem to say the same thing, it is never the same, but we believe it is.

The colour I call red is certainly not what anyone else sees when they see red. But we can agree that an object is red because someone taught me that an object with certain properties is red and someone else taught the other person something similar. The same property gives rise to two different perceptions of reality, but because they derive from the same property, we say A is the image of B and C is also the image of B, so A and C are evidence that B is the same thing.

This is the fragile underlying structure that gives our reality authority over us. It is mutual agreement from different subjective perceptions of something we fervently hope is an object; that is, something outside us. If everything were inside us, it would be a terrible joke.

The standard defence against such solipsism is to wonder how on earth a solipsist could possess a contrary opinion, or even have the self-knowledge to wonder about solipsism. But there is no way out of the hall of mirrors.

You see, what makes you think about such things? How would you know it is not you? If you can answer that question, then you admit there is something outside your perception. And if you can admit that, then you open the door to authority that is not you.

Is it hard to accept that reality might not depend on you? Some say that this leads to religion. I disagree. I have no problem accepting that reality might not depend on me, not because of religion, but because it is a possibility.

It is also a possibility that I am all there is, and my humility is merely ignorance of that. That too I have no problem accepting, along with the possibility that having no problems accepting such things is also an artifact of whatever it is that I am.

It makes me happy to think otherwise. And in the end, the faith-based arguments must win, because everything is a matter of faith. It is all a question of whether you choose to cut the never-ending navel-gazing short, or not.

All of us really have a choice of one infinite loop or one still small voice. Odd then, that I should go against my experience and preference, and stick with the latter for once.

Science vs Religion (Again??)

I think it would be a poor sort of faith that shifted its positions based on new findings of empirical and experimental science. I also think it would be a poor sort of science that established its positions based on 'what ought to be' rather than 'what is'.

The problem in science has always, of course, been to establish 'what is' without allowing undue influence by 'what ought to be', because 'what is' is 'what ought to be'. For many religions, it seems to be the other way around — assertions of 'what is' without allowing undue influence by 'what ought to be', because 'what ought to be' is 'what is'.

The core of science is the idea that what we find consistent is actually related to reality. Absent any glitches, we have to assume the 'reality' model is consistent. If we didn't, things would be unreliable. We therefore have a human stake in believing that science gives reliable answers. This is why we believe in what is valid, what is reliable, and what is useful. This is also why we form theories and hypotheses and test them primarily for consistency.

Religions don't offer such consolation. In any religious system of belief based on a key text or a set of such, the words are treated as absolute, but because they are addressed to humans, the meanings are not. We don't even have the solace of proof, since a complete proof of any statement removes the need for faith and hence the burden of moral responsibility.

To put it another way, if we could derive a logical proof of a God or gods and a 100% certainty of the efficacy or truth of a consistent religious system with an all-or-nothing outcome, we would have no free will unless we were insane — you'd be mad to sacrifice everything to not conform.

June

How many Junes have I known?
More than blackbirds in a pie,
More than bones within my feet.
I am half as old as I am,
And twice as old as I was.
So this is a song for June.

How many moons have I seen?
More than the old Praetorians,
More than watchmen watch the night.
I am twice as wise as I was,
And half as wise as I am.
So I sing about the moon.

Radiology

I was listening to the car radio as usual with my 'peripheral hearing'. To my amusement, it was a Mandarin-language broadcast of rather soppy (and clichéd) content.

There was a woman who was obviously telling a man some home truths: "If I love you, I love you because I love you and not because you're wealthy; if I don't love you, I don't love you because I don't love you, even if you're wealthy. But I don't love you because in the depths of your heart all you care about is money and not love."

It's this kind of thing which leads me to believe that humans are basically irrational, and therefore when we invent things like science and mathematics and logic and so on, it's a sort of attempt to deny that fact. When we say 'human' we imply subjective and irrational; when we say 'mathematical' or 'scientific', we imply objective and rational.

A moment's reflection should disabuse you of these pretensions to rationality. Mathematics is only objective within the terms it has defined for itself; basically it says, "Here are my rules, and if we all play by my rules, I will always win." Science is less than that, because it says, "I assert the universe can make sense, now let's observe it and figure out what that sense is; I don't know what the rules are, but I am going to assume that all the games in the universe follow the same basic rules."

When humans attempt to use mathematics and science to solve problems, they can only solve the simple ones. That's OK, because if you build complex-looking problems out of simple ones, you can solve pretty complex-looking ones. It's like saying proteins are very complex molecules, and then asking someone to compare the molecular structure of haemoglobin to that of DNA, and then to that of a champagne diamond.

Then you take all that knowledge about molecular entities and say, "Yes, here is a cure for human stupidity, venality, and intransigence." Haha, so funny.

That's what I like about random radio shows. They have their own logic and it's not a very consistent one, but it shows human thinking. It's kind of radio-logical; you can use it to look into the human condition. In that sense, I suppose I can call myself a diagnostic radiologist...

Shifting

Shifting blame, shifting responsibility, shifting one's stand — these are all the habits of a complex world. I don't think of them as egregious character flaws, but as the necessary behaviours of a fallen race. It is not possible to live a life in a world that is constantly contradicting itself without either pandering to these sneaky angels of our nature or becoming a quiet schizophrenic sitting in a corner and metaphorically (or literally) drooling in slack-jawed incontinence.

But there are a few ways to reduce the shiftiness. One is to stake out one's claims in public and let others openly declare how shifty you are being. Unless you are a sociopath, this will curb the habit a little. Similarly, you can key your behaviour to a public standard such as a holy book; whether or not the book is consistent, people can check the book to see if you are sticking to it insofar as it is humanly possible.

Accountability, standards... two legs were never enough for complete stability, although better than one. The third leg of the tripos is principle. This is how it works: you must be able to give an account of yourself (work, life, faith, whatever) in relation to certain fixed standards. But because standards are fixed and the world moves, there must be leeway for interpretation. At the same time, interpretation also has its rules, and these are called principles. This ensures that the standards are interpreted at least according to some meta-rules that you can also be held accountable to.

One example is a legal system: one is held accountable to standards called laws, which result in yes/no consequences; i.e. if you breached the law, you get punished and if you didn't you don't. However, the interpretation of the law by agreed principle is the basis of two parts of the system — is the evidence sufficient to confirm or deny a breach, and how much punishment should then ensue if the breach is confirmed.

Similarly, religious life should also show these three things: one is held accountable to one's religious dogmas, which should then allow people to hold you accountable in social, cultural or legal ways (it depends on how advanced a society you live in). However, those dogmas (technically 'dogmata', I suppose) normally require interpretation, and this is the logical domain of consistent principles called 'hermeneutics'.

Educational systems are not exempt. Any system must be explicable in terms of clear standards and accountability to those standards. The interpretation of those standards by established principles which are also agreed upon provides some flexibility. However, some behaviours are clearly beyond the pale: forging documents and making unjustified claims, removal of evidence, ill-treatment of students.

Here's a final note on 'arbitrariness'. Quite often, people complain about 'arbitrary' behaviour. Well, this is perfectly all right to me as long as the person displaying arbitrary judgement is indeed qualified to be an arbiter in the given situation. A good arbiter knows all the rules and has extensive knowledge of how to apply accepted principles of interpretation to those rules in cases where the operation of the rules may seem insufficient, unusual or inaccurate. He is accountable for his arbitrations in a way that is open to public debate. This can be seen in mostly in transnational bodies, where arbitration is a respectable activity.

In religion, of course, co-religionists should at least agree that their God, gods, or cosmic principles will in time carry out the required arbitration. In Christianity, we are all accountable to God for our actions and intentions. The unusual thing about religion is that by definition, eternal verities and sagacities are not accountable to the adherents of a faith; in that sense, God is 'allowed' and even defined to be the ultimate Arbiter, beyond accountability and hence fully arbitrary.

Which brings us back to the beginning. In a universe in which more than one thing exists, the potential for a shift in state exists and is hence part of the universe. Shifting then becomes an established principle. It does not mean we have to condone every shift, or that all shifts are morally or logically equal. But they must exist, and they must be appraised by a critical mind. Unless mind is an illusion, in which case it doesn't matter. As some anonymous sage once said, "Mind over matter: if you don't mind, it doesn't matter."

Random Thoughts on US Election Day 2008 (Part III)

Polls just closed over the entire great country (excepting the secessionists of Alaska). More random thoughts come to mind...

• Alaska is a huge place. It's the largest state in America, about 1.7 million square kilometres of mineral goodness. The Yanks bought it for what in this year's US dollars would be $360m. It boggles the mind.
• Haha, the moment polls closed, they gave the West Coast to Senator Obama. He's at 324 electoral votes now and counting.
• In retrospect, this marks the true beginning of the Internet Era. The anti-Internet, anti-blogging, anti-freedom-of-speech, anti-intellectual cabals and agencies of the past age have just lost one major battle in the culture wars.
• Apple machines are very cool. And so is Apple stock.
• The senator from Illinois may yet hit 378 EV. They haven't quite called Indiana, North Carolina, Missouri, Montana, Colorado, or Nevada yet. Soon.
• Obama will have won a victory 'from sea to shining sea'.

Actually, you might as well have the full lyrics. America isn't always quite so beautiful, but it sometimes can be.

O beautiful for spacious skies,
For amber waves of grain,
For purple mountain majesties
Above the fruited plain!

America! America!
God shed His grace on thee,
And crown thy good with brotherhood
From sea to shining sea!

O beautiful for pilgrim feet
Whose stern impassion'd stress
A thoroughfare for freedom beat
Across the wilderness.

America! America!
God mend thine ev'ry flaw,
Confirm thy soul in self-control,
Thy liberty in law.

O beautiful for heroes prov'd
In liberating strife,
Who more than self their country loved,
And mercy more than life.

America! America!
May God thy gold refine
Till all success be nobleness,
And ev'ry gain divine.

O beautiful for patriot dream
That sees beyond the years
Thine alabaster cities gleam
Undimmed by human tears.

America! America!
God shed His grace on thee,
And crown thy good with brotherhood
From sea to shining sea!

Random Thoughts on US Election Day 2008 (Part II)

Woke up early enough (ha, that sounds odd) to catch the beginning of the election results stream. I've always marvelled at the way pollsters and pundits extract solid opinions by extrapolation from virtually nothing. In Vermont, the data from less than 1% of the voting results allows CNN to call it for Senator Obama, while in Kentucky, it takes 13% to call it for Senator McCain.

More random thoughts:

• More women vote than men; it is the crowning glory of the suffragette movement.
• I'm struck by how stable the Biden and Obama families look; in contrast, the Palins look manic and the McCains look synthetic.
• There'll be a whole new generation of young people singing along with John Denver, "Where's Virginia? Mountain mama, take me home..." (OK, that was a bad pun.)
• Then again, some people might confuse John Denver with Denver, Colorado.
• In South Carolina, McCain is projected to win from the fact that at the moment, Obama is leading 55-44 with 1% counted.
• I have sinned; I am drinking ginger extract with my coffee.
• The stock market seems to have made me some money.
• I kept having dreams of stuffed bird toys; it is all Speedcuber's fault.
• I'm wondering what McCain will say at his concession speech, and at what time Obama will make his victory speech.
• Michael Fullan's The New Meaning of Educational Change is on my desk; the title is beginning to take on new significance.

I'll be adding more to this list.

Random Thoughts on US Election Day 2008 (Part I)

I've been having random thoughts all day, in between assembling my review on global educational reform. Educational reform and national policy may be very interesting, but it can't compete with one of the largest quadrennial shows on earth (bar the Olympics).

So here are my thoughts:

• James Carville looks perpetually malevolent; he ought to act in fantasy horror movies.
• Sarah Palin reminds me of the Nanny (Fran Drescher) in the eponymous comedy TV series. Fran's more attractive, though. And she's from Queens.
• Obama is actually pretty buff compared to Arnold Schwarzenegger (the evidence is here).
• The majority of American states have 'minority' language names, i.e. non-English.
• McCain v Obama reminds me of any number of ancient dinosaurs desperately holding on against the tide of change and trying to establish a legacy based on quicksand.
• I am predicting that Obama will get 393 electoral votes. I'm probably wrong, but one ought to dream big dreams.

I'll update the list as we go along...

Autolycus

Haha, today I picked up yet another way of explaining this Greek word. The wolf has a driving license now.

Kings & Ashes

From the ashes a fire shall be woken, a light from the shadows shall spring;
Renewed shall be blade that was broken, the crownless again shall be king.
– J R R Tolkien

It's been thirty days of night here at Zombie Central and we have smelled the exhaust of the passing of brimstone and the velocity of the fall. You shall know them by their redundant meticulation and the razor ice of their cold and barren wombs. We have won not by might nor by power but by the spirit and everyone is humbled, you can feel it by the fire of the light.

Maybe, maybe, maybe it is time for a new wave. Fluctuat nec mergitur, we shall surf and not be serfs, we shall ride and not be ridden, we shall be a wild hunt and a brave one. And the armies of memory, the hosts of twilight, they shall be with us, and the past shall win a glorious victory. For the best is yet to be.

Random Thoughts

Sometimes your brain just spills over. They aren't even stubs. Maybe shrubs.

Why is she 1/12 now? Is she inching her way to some sort of apotheosis? Or is she just bigger than when she was 1/15, and of that, a flyhalf to boot? Ah, who am I to complain (explain?) - I used to be a hooker myself.

Why do some people have such expressive lower lips? It isn't as if they need them. Sometimes God hands out His bonuses in such a quirky way. Or is the plural of bonus actually boni? Viruses -> viri, then. But vir means 'man'. Argh.

Nobody remembers that old TV series, That's Entertainment. But someone seems to have reinvented it. Oh ho ho. I enjoyed myself. And someone, when I learnt it was accidental, it tasted even more delicious.

What is the difference between suaku and ulu? Wait a minute, I actually know this. Wow, I will pass this test with flying colours! Errm. It isn't a test. It's only a survey. I am so disappointed.

I no longer make much fun of the boys. I have made fun of so many of them for so many years. And that includes myself.