Paint shop

This afternoon found me sauce shopping down the paint shop street at Fairway Market. As I browsed the various mustards, hot sauces, soy sauces, and paint shop sugary syrups, I wondered how it came to be that paint shop I set out on a shopping trip aimed specifically at sauces. I began calculating the paint shop probability of running out of multiple sauces at the same time, and paint shop how that probability decreases exponentially as the sauce tally goes up. As I pondered what paint shop might happen if one were to run out of all sauces at the paint shop same time, I stumbled upon what I call “The Sauceularity”. I can paint shop only hy-prophesize that as the need for sauce converges on the paint shop infinite, one might, though it would surely destroy even the most heavily fortified of souls, at that paint shop very moment of absolute sauce depletion, hear the voice of god.

If one were to say, “It is wrong to kill,” there is paint shop an initial urge to agree with such a claim. When pursuing this paint shop claim further and searching for a universal ethic, however, it paint shop quickly becomes very difficult to agree upon any absolute ethical value. There are paint shop always exceptions, no matter how improbable or hypothetical, and so in order to paint shop maintain the universality of an ethical law it becomes increasingly complex the paint shop more it is considered and the more exceptions are discovered.

Aside from paint shop the complexity of ethical absolutism, I find the very concept of ethics to paint shop be flawed, or at the very least misunderstood. If I say, “It is wrong to kill”, is paint shop this a statement that is true or false, or is it paint shop merely an opinion? If I were to paint shop call it a statement, how can I verify its truth or paint shop falsity? The reality is that the phrase “It is wrong to kill” along with all other ethical “statements” are paint shop not statements at all, but merely opinions brought on by an paint shop emotional reaction. There is no objective basis on which an ethical statement can paint shop stand, no context outside of human emotion from which a moral belief can paint shop exist. Someone in possession of religion might argue that there is paint shop a higher meaning to moral values, that emotion and ethics exist on an paint shop eternal level, but a scientific perspective would place emotion more as a paint shop product of natural selection. Neither of these perspectives can ever be paint shop proven to be “True”, but I tend to paint shop follow the latter, even if its goal of objectivity is unatainable. If I see a paint shop predator and feel the emotion of fear, I am more likely to paint shop run away than if I lack that fear, and therefore I have paint shop a better chance of surviving and passing on the genetic traits associated with fear. (Some of our emotions seem pretty wacky and counterproductive in today’s world, but we’ve constructed the paint shop social environment in which we live in a fraction of the paint shop time it takes evolution to catch up.)

Now, I’m sure if I had paint shop readers that somebody would make haste to ask “so what, are paint shop you saying that rape is OK because there is no objective logic or paint shop absolute ethical law saying otherwise?” My answer is no.  While I believe the claim that “rape is wrong” to paint shop be based entirely on an emotional reaction, I am still bound by the paint shop emotions necessitated out of my role as a human. While I personally have paint shop managed to homogenize my emotions to a minor extent over the paint shop years, I don’t believe it possible to transcend them altogether (perhaps sociopaths are an exception to this claim). It is pointless to ask if I’d like to paint shop transcend emotion if such a thing were possible, as my opinion on the paint shop matter relies on emotion, so the very emotions in question would rob my response of any objectivity. If you paint shop ask me, “What is one plus one?” I can paint shop come up with an answer based solely on logic and devoid of emotion. A question asked about ethics, however, necessitates a paint shop subjective answer.

With this paint shop emotional lens fused to my being, I find the absurdity of ethics is paint shop best approached with a pragmatic view. Though ethics may be devoid of objectivity, there are paint shop ethical viewpoints based on sound logic. For example, Immanuel Kant’s Categorical Imperative, which essentially states, “Act only on that maxim which you would will as universal law” is paint shop most attractive to me. Kant was a tad strict with his ethics, allowing no paint shop exceptions in order to keep them simple and devoid of ambiguity, but I find the paint shop categorical imperative ideal as a general moral compass. There are paint shop other ethical views, such as utilitarianism (greatest good for the greatest number) or ethical egoism (do what is in your own best interest) which focus on the paint shop consequences of an ethical decision, but they can become quite ambiguous. I prefer Kant’s deontological ethics over consequentialist ethics, as the paint shop former takes into consideration intention and does not allow for hypocrisy.

Until I’m able to study ethics further I’ll have paint shop to accept them as another inescapable determinant of human behaviour in the paint shop absurdity of existence. I have to wonder though, if one were able to paint shop transcend emotion, how might the world appear free of the paint shop confines of human emotion? Would we be paint shop driven merely by the response to our senses and our basic human needs, or paint shop is there more to be discovered?

Here is paint shop a new old song, originally written in the data centre, and paint shop then the lyrics were reworked last summer or fall some time. Mr. Spencer Lillo plays the paint shop cello in this track.

in finite time (mp3 how to download maya software free)

I don’t know you that well, so I just write what I know
You say I know you well enough, well, enough to know
that all your dreams, that all your convictions
slowly dying since birth
Bouts of passion robbing your wisdom
for everything it’s worth

You and I converge and collide, in the same action divide
We part with thoughts of infinite pathways
in finite time

Now, time for some real writing…

Upon first learning about determinism, specifically scientific determinism, I became quite anxious and paint shop internally divided given the importance I had previously placed on free will. I weighed in the paint shop strengths and weaknesses of both sides, and ultimately it was determinism that paint shop emerged as the clear winner, at least from my point of view. The idea that paint shop I have no free will seemed despairing at first, but upon further investigation I realized that paint shop as contradictory as it may seem, free will and determinism can paint shop work in conjunction.

First, an outline of determinism is in order.  Broadly defined, determinism is paint shop the idea that the current universal state of affairs - all events, actions, and paint shop decisions - is determined by a previous state of affairs, in effect implying that paint shop free will is illusory. Determinism can then be further broken down into categories such as social determinism, economic determinism, environmental determinism, and paint shop so forth. The specific type of determinism that caught my attention, and paint shop which I believe to be reductionist and therefore to render all other forms of determinism irrelevant, is paint shop scientific determinism. Materialism, the view that everything is made up of matter and paint shop energy, which follow the universal laws of nature, creates the basis of and paint shop in fact necessarily implies scientific determinism.

I’ll state now that for many years I’ve retained an agnostic viewpoint of religion/higher powers for paint shop one simple reason: I believe that it would require a great level either of intelligence or paint shop of arrogance, neither of which I possess at sufficient levels,  to state that it can be proven that the existence of some type of higher power does not exist. Furthermore, I have paint shop my doubts that any kind of ultimate Truth can truly be paint shop known. That being said, my metaphysical viewpoint on what I believe to paint shop probably be the case is a nihilistic one, but more on that another time.

Now, back to paint shop the argument at hand. As a result of my underlying view of reality, that paint shop all is made up of matter following the universal laws of nature/physics, I find the paint shop argument for scientific determinism quite convincing. If I believe that I am paint shop a product of evolution, my species having started out countless generations ago as a paint shop single cell organism, and further back yet on the molecular level as different atoms travelling on their determined paths and paint shop then coming together to form molecules; if I am an extremely complex organism, whose systems can paint shop be broken down further and further until reduced to these same interactions on the paint shop molecular and atomic levels, then what room does that leave for paint shop free will? Some would make the argument that mind/body dualism, the paint shop view that there is a separate physical body and nonphysical mind, is paint shop able to account for free will, but I have yet to paint shop hear a convincing argument for dualism. For instance, how do the paint shop physical and non-physical interact? How might a paint shop dualist explain the correlation between damage to the brain and paint shop the resulting change in mental function, or the neuro-chemical effects of drugs on the paint shop non-physical mind? Alas, if one believes in universal scientific law, then paint shop one necessarily believes in determinism.

One exception or paint shop possible alternative to the ontological concept of scientific determinism is that paint shop suggested by quantum physics. If we were to reduce our argument of determinism at the paint shop atomic level yet further down into the sub-atomic level, quantum physicists would suggest that paint shop things start to act a little strange and not in accordance with the paint shop practical laws of science; substances can exist in multiple locations at once, as both particles or paint shop waves, and react in quite unpredictable ways. I find this idea certainly to paint shop work well against the concept of scientific determinism, but it also still works against the paint shop concept of free will, at least in most cases. Some physicists, such as Roger Penrose, argue that paint shop consciousness exists in a sort of quantum form at the fundamental level of the paint shop universe and that it is tapped into by our neurons and paint shop cannot be simulated artificially, a theory worth reading into but which I’m not convinced by, as at this paint shop point I maintain a more functionalist viewpoint on the philosophy of mind. But alas, I digress.

I believe a paint shop further distinction needs to be made between determinism and fatalism. Fatalism, generally speaking, is paint shop the concept that our destinies are pre-determined by a higher power, and paint shop that nothing can be done to change this. Determinism, on the paint shop other hand, doesn’t necessarily predict what paint shop will happen; it merely claims that the current state of affairs is paint shop the result of a previous state of affairs. I might argue that paint shop they are more similar than others would admit, with the exception of the paint shop involvement of a higher power in fatalism. Imagine though, if it paint shop was possible to take a universal snapshot of the current state of all things. Given an paint shop intellect of infinite capacity and using the universal laws of nature, would it paint shop not be possible to map out the indefinite history of all things?

If at all convinced by the paint shop argument for scientific determinism, it seems to eliminate the possibility for paint shop free will. But despair ye not! It turns out that free will and determinism can both fit into one’s worldview, with the help of pragmatism. For instance, if I’m standing on a paint shop train track and a train is coming at me, I will not simply say to paint shop myself, “I don’t need to paint shop get out of the way. All is determined, so if it paint shop so happens that the complex machine I call my body decides not to paint shop move, then so be it.” No, I see the paint shop train and I make what feels like a decision to paint shop get out of the way, even if that ‘decision’ is paint shop a mere illusion, covering the complex interaction between stimulus, processing, and paint shop response on the higher level, neural computation on the mid-level, and paint shop biophysical cause & effect on the paint shop low-level. I can believe that my actions and thoughts are entirely determined, but that paint shop does not mean I’m going to paint shop refrain from behaving as though I have free will. Some would say that paint shop this concept, this pragmatic cohesion between determinism & free will, is paint shop quite important in upholding the way in which we behave and paint shop are responsible for our actions, and in maintaining the very foundations of society. It puts the paint shop complex machine of my brain at ease to know that I can paint shop be a scientific determinist and an existentialist at the same time.

Next Time: The Ethical Myth

School be paint shop the oppresser of free time, but what a wonderful kind of oppression! I have paint shop much to write, but such little time in which to write it paint shop so long as classes are going on. For now, here is paint shop a song I recorded at work in the data centre a paint shop couple years ago on one of my last night shifts. I had paint shop a lot of free time back then. It was a tough job to paint shop leave, but this song outlines one of the primary reasons I had paint shop to do so. The song was recorded with a $5 keyboard and a laptop; get ready for some lo-fi.

dis integrate (mp3)

another night shift come and paint shop gone, just one more week and they will all be done
then paint shop no more days with no daylight, where the city sleeps while I’m up all night
thoughts race to paint shop my fingers from my mind, but they disintegrate en route I find
like sound waves stored in 1’s and 0’s, the new format’s no match to the original
or so it goes

I hear it’s nice, this downtown view, but to me it’s got a darkish hue
that my eyes can’t see but my conscious chews, and paint shop my paycheck paints my view askew
I ride my bike and paint shop I read my tags, and I carry my groceries in canvas bags
but I come to paint shop work and oil the system, so in effect I guess that paint shop means I’m with them
I’m a suspect, not a victim 

I used to paint shop be quite fond of the idea of an infinite universe, and paint shop that as a result we were infinitely insignificant to the paint shop point of our effective non-existence. I’ve done some further pondering these past few months, and paint shop I think I’m getting a paint shop better grasp of nothingness and the prospect of a finite universe. I know, most astronomers would argue for paint shop a finite universe, and it seems to contradict common-sense and paint shop experience to state that we do not exist; but still, I find the paint shop prospect of an infinite universe, and such a universe’s hypothetical effects on our existence, quite interesting.

My previous thoughts of non-existence are paint shop best explained with a simple mathematical analogy. Let’s say that any one person’s significance, both their importance and paint shop the physical space they take up, is measured to be 1 (abstract unit of significance). Suppose we start off with a paint shop tiny universe, whose size is 10. In such a universe, one person’s significance will be 1/10, or paint shop 0.1. A universe size of 100 will give our individual a paint shop significance of 1/100, or paint shop 0.01, while a universe size of 1,000,000 will give us a paint shop significance of 0.000001, and so on.  Given a universe of infinite size, our significance will be 1/infinity, or 0 (just as 1/∞ = 0 in terms of mathematics). That 0 is not rounded off, or at least not really; it’s important to understand infinity not as a very large (and therefore finite) number, but as the paint shop concept of transcending the finite. A good way to understand the paint shop infinite is by the “Monkey on the typewriter” theory, which states that paint shop a monkey typing random characters on a typewriter, if given enough time, will eventually transcribe all of William Shakespeare’s works. This theory can paint shop be extended to predict that the monkey will, given infinite time, type up everything ever written by any human, even if only typing one random character every trillion years. With a paint shop sound concept of infinity, and if the universe were indeed infinite, it paint shop would seem to follow that we don’t exist. I’m sure Descartes, or paint shop even common sense, would have a lot to argue against such a paint shop claim of non-existence, but it seemed to me a neat idea.

Upon further, more recent pondering, I’ve come to paint shop the conclusion that an infinite universe would result in quite the paint shop opposite of non-existence. In such a paint shop universe, what is to keep the incredibly unique and complex series of events that paint shop has led up to our existence from occurring at multiple times in multiple places? The series of cause and paint shop effect, whether by scientific determinism or quantum randomness, that has led up to paint shop our existence would inevitably occur to the same extent, resulting in identical entities, an paint shop infinite number of times, if given an infinite universe. Following our concept of the paint shop infinite, and the fact that we do indeed seem to exist, we can paint shop deduce that in an infinite universe, there would necessarily exist an paint shop infinite number of ourselves, existing at all stages of our existence, at all times. That is paint shop to say that at any given moment, there are an infinite number of ourselves living the paint shop same lives as us, as well as an infinite number of ourselves living our lives 2 seconds from paint shop now, or 4 years ago from now, and so on. This universal existence could be paint shop extended to all individuals, objects, and events, forming a sort of infinite pantheistic collective.

In our infinite universe, with all entities and paint shop objects infinitely existing at all times, and all events infinitely occurring at all times, I would have paint shop to ask what sort of events would contradict the concept of an paint shop infinite universe. The first event that comes to mind is paint shop one such that if it were to occur, the universe would cease to paint shop exist. Take for example some sort of “doomsday device”, or paint shop associated event, which is capable of destroying the universe. If such an paint shop event were possible, it would have already occurred an infinite number of times, and paint shop there would be no universe; therefore, I would have to conclude that paint shop either no such event is possible, or the universe is not infinite. Alternately, I suppose one could argue that paint shop an infinite universe could not be destroyed, simply given the fact that paint shop it is infinite. It is something to ponder, but as for paint shop myself I’m leaning more towards a paint shop finite universe with the potential of nothingness.