Expression

The constant multiplying of a subject can become an intermixed jumble of happiness. A thought provoking wave of consistent shocks of joy will push individuals to express themselves in some way. The lack of expression on an individual basis is apparent. Expression is complicated, but it is complicated expression that allows each individual to truly explore themselves. Without self exploration then hope will be lost. Will self expression truly bring you to nirvana or an epiphany? For some yes and some no. The important thing to understand is that all of us are unique, and that conforming to one certain way or track is not necessary. By multiplying your thoughts and possibly sprouting a new thought (or as some would say original), you will begin to explore yourself on a new level, a level that has not been seen before, a level that you can take pride and joy in, and truly find yourself.

SOPA

██████ ███ ███ █████████ █ ██ █████ █████ ████ ██ ██████ ███ ███ █████ ████ ██ ██████ ███ ███ █████████ █ ██ █████ █████ ████ ██ ██████ ███ ███ █████████ █ ██ █████ █████ ████ ██ ██████ ███ ███ █████████ █ ██ █████ █████ ████ ██ ██████ ███ ███ █████████ █ ██ █████ █████ ████ ██ ██████ ███ ███ █████████ █ ██ █████ █████ ████ ██ ██████ ███ ███ █████████ █ ██ █████ █████ ████ ██ ██████ ███ ███ █████████ █ ██ █████ █████ ████ ██ ██████ ███ ███ █████████ █ ██ █████ █████ ████ ██ █████ ███ ███ ██████ ███ ███ █████████ █ ██ █████ █████ ████ ██ █████ ███ ███ █████████ █ ██ █████ █████ ████ ██ This blog post has been found in violation of H.R. 3261, S.O.P.A and has been removed.

Cannot be forced...

Constantly, the system is the problem with the cogs turning and coming together correctly. The constant grind of the cogs in a wheel missing and not fitting in place will constantly disrupt the general movement of the machine… The constant turning in hope that the cogs will someday just come together peacefully and agree will never happen, but it will happen in waves. When will it be that the elitists and people so high up realize that the cogs of this machine of life can not be ground down to fit together? How much grinding does it take until one of the cogs just stops and welds with another cog? The teeth of the cogs will not be ground down to fit together, they will only stay themselves as they are made of steel and will only fit together when the structure of the machine is well made! When the structure of the machine is well made, then and only then, will the cogs of the machine work together cohesively and with minimal problems, as all machines have…

A DATE TO REMEMBER, FRIDAY THE 18th OF NOVEMBER!!!

I usually don't post personal experiences like this on my blog, but I felt that this was necessary...

Thursday November 18, on the UC DAVIS main quad area where many students gather peacefully to talk and eat lunch and just generally hang out, was turned into Occupy UC Davis. At 3 o'clock, at the center of the quad around 70-80 UC Davis students put up 30 tents to occupy public space. By our rights as students and Americans we have the right to assemble, but putting up tents supposedly disrupted the daily activities of the public University. We made it through the night with the police watching vigilantly from all sides, but did not intervene due to a request from chancellor Katehi. We all awoke to a cold early morning and left our tents and did our daily business. Occupy UC Davis then held a general assembly at 12:00 noon to discuss future action. We were given an ultimatum to leave the quad at 3:00 o'clock. As most of the tents remained present even after the 3 o'clock deadline the atmosphere began to become unnerving. We were addressed by the chief of police of UC Davis to please vacate the area or be subject to arrest. Almost all stayed and held their ground. As 30 to 35 riot police armed with batons, pepper spray, and rubber bullet guns (and guns) started to march towards us, we took the majority of our tents threw them in a circle and surrounded them in solidarity with arms linked. The riot police began to approach our circle and showed the intention to arrest. As the circle began to chant "WHO'S UNIVERSITY, OUR UNIVERSITY" "WE ARE THE 99% and SO ARE YOU" it drew and motivated many other students to join in the cause. As the police began to rip through the human chain and disassemble and rip apart the tents in the middle of the circle, a new circle formed around the police and we the students began to chant "LET THEM GO" in hope to free the already arrested. The riot police at this point had no place to turn and with all the students chanting (peacefully) began to feel uncomfortable at the least. The main pathway to their paddy wagons and police squad cars had been blocked with a human chain. The police first threatened them to move to the side or they will be shot with rubber bullets, but then resorted to threaten us with pepper spray. Us the students taking up the main path of the police to get back to their vehicles then were pepper sprayed in the face with three big swipes!!! Fortunately, for me personally I was not shot directly in the face with pepper spray, but did catch the drift of it, which made me cough horrendously. Unfortunately, for many of my friends and comrades this was not the case and got direct shots of it... After this happened, the police made a dent in the human chain and began to move out of the circle. Students began to chant "SHAME ON YOU" and "WE ARE DOING THIS FOR YOUR CHILDREN"... As more and more students began to realize that this was a student cause and not just a bunch of crazy people camping on the quad of UC DAVIS they joined our cause with force and we had huge numbers chanting, "WHO'S UNIVERSITY? OUR UNIVERSITY!" Slowly the angered students began to chant and push the police out of the quad and recapture the space that is publicly ours!!! Eventually the police receded and the student body reclaimed the campus... 12 NOON on the Quad on Monday will be the beginning of a new Occupy UC DAVIS... It should be interesting!

Please watch the two links I will post here...

The first from CBS Sacrmento which is located towards the bottom of the page, just press play... : http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2011/11/18/officers-arresting-occupy-protesters-at-uc-davis/

The second from youtube of one of the students recording what had happened: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmJmmnMkuEM&feature=related

This was an unfortunate event, hopefully this will help people realize the uneasiness we carry as students on a daily basis...

Truth

"The truth is lost among all the contradictions and absurdities" Bernardo Carvalho... The truth is something that can be so simply distorted. Distorted to the extent that will be manipulated to that person's benefit. The benefits of truth are something marvelous, but can be so difficult to obtain. The actual extent of truth that lies in this world is difficult to measure. The current problem with pinning down something to be 100% accurate or truthful, will be distorted by the person that has interpreted that subject and the person who will reinterpret it... These interpretations, in-turn, will then be flawed or changed to benefit that person or to possibly reflect the morals that this particular person embraces in every day life. This world is so full of hypocrites and people constantly contradicting themselves, it sometimes makes no sense at all. The truth is something that is obtainable, but at times can be difficult to grasp. Currently the human race is seeing a convergence of ideas on the international stage, with the constant compression downwards to suppress the modern human being. Currently, in the world, people from multiple countries all can relate to each other, and relate to each other well. With the relation between people being so easily established and having common morals and values in mind, a suppression towards the common person will be eventually unobtainable unless people continue to blind themselves towards movements and realities that exist. Sometimes people choose to accept what goes on around them, and sometimes people do not. It has proved again and again throughout history that a monumental event proves to be the turning point to human evolution. Possibly, the time is not now, but I am optimistic towards everything, and it is impossible to ensure that powerful organizations will always control the world. Awareness is key, and awareness will eventually lead to truth, at least we can hope for some part of the truth...

Words

Words can be used and abused and formed and deformed. Words can actually be dumped into your hands, and then you can throw them back into the air like pieces of confetti!!! Do whatever you want with them! Do as you wish and as you please. Do whatever want to please… Throw consonants, vowels, onomatopoeias, juxtapositions, transitions, compositions, anything you really want to. The limit that you feel is your limit is only the limit your own mind has placed upon your own personal limit! No human being has a real limit, unless you are dead? The true oppression is the mental oppression, the one that makes people believe that there is no possibility or ability of expansion. Limitations are made up in one’s mind, most likely from a mental block sustained from a previous experience. The previous experience being so detrimental that it knocked one’s equilibrium so far out of whack that one’s center seems so far from being graspable that it is seemingly lost. What does it take to knock someone’s equilibrium back into place? Does it take a dichotomy? Does it take a near death experience? Or is it simply something simple that brings something of a click into place that wakes someone up, making them understand that they already had the predisposition for this historic moment? Now mixing words with this realization can be a truly eye opening experience. The formation of words from your own mental capacity to possibly bring your own thoughts can be a difficult task to convey the message that is truly wanted out in the world. Sometimes words flow and sometimes they are slow. Sometimes they get mixed up and work like puzzles, each fitting with each other, but only after a lot of time of trial and error will they work together. Is it possible that words are what has caused the limitations to the human brain? If we completely abolished words and people possessed the power of telepathy would this be an advantage or would we lose the substance of what it means to be human? To be human means to fail daily and learn and grow from those experiences, if words were not there and it was so easy to convey the message to one another, could evolution as a species be truly possible?

Copying

Does it seems like many people enjoy to copy other people? With phrases, slogans, or something that brings back a certain memory? What point in history did we begin as a society to conduct ourselves in a manner where our daily speech patterns and the way we act and sometimes even move are copied from TV shows, Movies, or people we notice? Does every culture do this? Well according to social psychology some more than others. What makes it so that to be noticed a simple copy or reference to something that was previously performed will draw attention? This draws back to a prior thought that was all about originality, and if any thoughts, actions, or anything we do is actually original? I guess my big question is, does the mere copying decrease our originality or does it heighten it? Does it improve ourselves or restrict our mental capacity? Does simply copying or mimicking decrease our possibility to think outside the box? Obviously we do not walk around like complete zombies and constantly mimic and copy people with every action, but my broader question is, if copying or mimicking disappeared would more ingenuity or new ideas come about due to the disappearance of the habit of copy?

Inspiration

Today I had someone say, "you must have a lot of inspiration in the work and art you do because of the activities you do". Instantly I was tripping over my tongue not really able to follow up on that, and instantly I understood what did inspire me, and it was life! It is not the activities like surfing, biking, or playing a round of disc golf, but it was life in the general sense. It is the beauty of life that is truly my inspiration. It is not that someone has something more or better in their head, but we all have something amazing in all our heads. The innovation that helps people improve themselves and create something different. Inspiration is not fueled by a simple activity, but is fueled by the possibilities that exist. My inspiration comes from everywhere, and ultimately I think that is where most people believe it to come from as well. It is possible that we believe that our inspirations come from one small little thing, but ultimately how could you even perceive that certain thing without of understanding a very detailed and complicated history of many objects that ultimately led up to you understanding that exact moment in time that you actually became inspired. The collection of memories mixed with the new and actually truly understood and appreciated. Ultimately, it seems that inspiration is truly in some sense of an appreciation for something, expressed through your means of expression.

Theatetus of Plato

Thought I might put a paper that I did last quarter on the Theaetetus of Plato...


When making claims to knowledge, if the past or future is not considered or taken into account, then an important part of any argument has been forgotten. Protagoras claims to be an expert in teaching virtue. As carpenters teach the trade of carpentry, Protagoras taught rhetoric and how to be successful in the eyes of the public. Protagoras being one of the first great sophists he distinguished himself as being an expert in the field and is widely known for his idea behind the measure doctrine. In the Theaetetus, Protagoras states that ultimately all our beliefs are equally true and truth is relative to the individual. Ultimately, Protagoras’ claim to expertise is not in agreement with the idea that all beliefs are equally true, to better convey this I will use Socrates’ objection that you cannot apply the Protagoras’ claims to future judgments, which in-turn displays how Protagoras’ claim is self-refuting.
If Protagoras claims to be an expert then he possesses knowledge that is more true than the knowledge another person possesses, but if he claims that all our beliefs are equally true then nobody can be an expert. If truth is relative to a person and a person thinks and believes their thought is true, how is it that Protagoras’ thought or belief is truer than that person? The better understanding of what it means to be an expert is necessary in this case. To be an expert entails that the certain person knows extensive and in depth knowledge on the subject that they are preaching. To be at the level of an expert, a person will be looked up at in the eyes of the public and offer something that others cannot. An expert is someone who believes they either understand or possess knowledge that can be beneficial to other people and their understanding of something will help other people understand that particular subject. This is when crossroads meet: by Protagoras stating that he is an expert entails that he has beliefs in which are truer than other people’s beliefs, but according to Protagoras stating that he believes in something also states that he believes that another person’s beliefs that Protagoras’ beliefs in something is false, is true.
In the Theaetetus, Socrates takes on the role of Protagoras and sheds light on how Protagoras would defend his position on expertise and his understanding of beliefs. Burnyeat conveys how Protagoras’ idea that all our beliefs are equally true and that being an expert does not affect this. By comparing Protagoras to a doctor, it understands the idea of an expert as someone who makes one’s perceptions overall better or improved. It is also understood that this does not conflict with the measure doctrine because what we feel and think is true for that person is still true for that person, but is better at this point (pg. 23). The important point to understand with this position is that the overall the expert does not wish to change one’s perceptions because their perceptions are true for them, but only make an improvement on the perception. Burnyeat uses an analogy that seems to fit well: as if one’s eyesight is improved. According to Protagoras an expert overall is someone who can change bad appearances to good ones. He then uses the example of a sick man who sees food as being bitter, and the healthy man as seeing food as scrumptious (166de). Therefore the expert in this situation would be a doctor. The doctor does not change the perception of food as a whole, but makes it better. He creates the perception of food as being good with the use of drugs and help people have a better perception towards a specific situation. Protagoras at this point though would make sure of distinguishing the difference between something that is better and something that is truer. Protagoras according to Socrates would explain that the expert is not making anything truer, but he is simply making it better. Truer is the idea that something is different or has to take on a different role in a perception or change the perception, not necessarily making it solemnly better (167c). It seems that, at this point, Protagoras would have made himself clear at what he has meant to convey as someone being an expert. This in turn to him does not conflict with the measure doctrine or what is seen as all our beliefs are equally true, because he still regards all beliefs as being true, just that he, an expert, can make true beliefs somewhat better in a fashion. Protagoras’ position would then be to save his measure doctrine theory by taking the path “In this way we are enabled to hold both that some men are wiser than others, and also that no man judges what is false” (167d). By not being able to judge the wiser, man is not able to accuse someone of false perception, and accuse someone of being incorrect. Therefore, at this point all perceptions are still correct, but the expert, or wiser person, can build upon a perception and make it better or somewhat alter the perception. Socrates’ main objection to Protagoras’ claim is that you cannot apply it to future judgments.
In particular, Socrates’ main argument towards Protagoras’ is one of future judgments, and that future judgments are based around the idea of objective truth. Socrates makes a point of conveying how are we to understand the future if we cannot be in the future at that moment. Socrates begins with the example of heat, and how one man might believe that he will get a fever, but a different man, a doctor, believes in the opposite that the man will not get a fever. Socrates then makes it clear that how this would not be possible to happen at the same time. For if all perceptions are true perceptions, then both perceptions of the future cannot happen at the same moment, and both men cannot be equally correct if the man will have a fever or if he will not. (178c). If there are two men, and they can both have judgments about the future and what it will come to be, how is it possible that both of them can be correct about a future judgment? Therefore, these people are not depending on the mind for an actual judgment, but merely making a prediction about what is to be, eventually. “Protagoras’ stance would then be: no prediction is ever proved wrong, just as no memory is ever inaccurate. All that happens is it seems to one self at one time that something will be true (or has been true), and seems to another self at another time that something different is true” (SEP). This claim will be then falsified if the man does not have a fever in the future, maybe tomorrow, or will be falsified if the doctor was incorrect and the man did eventually have a fever. At this point the future perspective of an individual is not of importance, because if the future self is correct then he happened to be correct, but was not considered knowledge, but what would be called a prediction of what was to be. If the individual incorrectly perceived what was to be in the future by looking back to the past, then the individual had a false belief. To help shed light on Socrates’ overarching idea he uses Protagoras’ profession as an example, “No one would have paid large fees for the privilege of talking with him if he had not been in the habit of persuading his pupils that he was a better judge than any fortune-teller—or anyone else—about what was going to be and seem to be in the future” (179a). By Protagoras’ viewpoint being, an expert is one that will be able to facilitate the possibility of understanding the future and well being of the future. The problem with this is the future, and, if incorrect, then the expertise of that person has been negated. Therefore, if the man believed that he was going to get a fever in a week, but the man was incorrect, then Protagoras has no way of defending the perception of a false belief that would happen in the future.
The understanding of Protagoras’ Measure doctrine and the combination of expertise is ultimately self-refuting. If an individual has one perception on how they will be in the future as one way, but someone makes a judgment of how that person will be in the future a different way, then a belief of the future cannot be in alignment with all beliefs being equally true.

Education in the United States

Here at the U.C. system students are expected to pay astronomical fees and take out loans, if the money is not around or had been dealt to you through family. Most countries in the world have a system that revolves around the idea that education should be provided to the ones that are willing to work hard and not ones that are able to simply pay. This is why I would like to declare U.C. to stand for Uninhibited Capitalism!!! I mean paying astronomical fees only perpetuates the capitalist system and limits our freedom to pursue what we truly wish to do. We go to school, take out loans, then get a job as quick as possible so that we will be able to start paying them off and not be charged extra. The cost of a decent reputation will potentially cost you the rest of your life, or in a sense cost you your life. The perplexities that are intertwined within our system are ones that automatically perpetuate the system. It is not only in the UC system it is very much apparent within the united states in general. How is it possible that wages have no possibility to keep up with rising tuition? I understand that currently California is having some problems currently, but wouldn't it just make sense to just tax the movie industry and casinos more? When the government expects the university to act as a single entity within the system and only receive some support, doesn't it seem like there is something wrong with that system? It seems that it is being run to stay afloat, when automatically you would think the government would want to invest in the future and invest in the population that will eventually run a company, oops I meant country! Does this mean that in the United States morality is possibly missing? Investing in my educational life with monetary funds ultimately seems like an incredible hypocrisy! No wonder people are not going in to get a degree a lot of the time, when you have a system that forces you to invest something that will take you a good percentage of your working life to pay back...

Theory

What is the essence of a theory? Is it an idea of originality? Is originality the key factor present within a theory? The most important pieces of the puzzle to the understanding of a theory is an open mind? While all of these are questions to understand when thinking about a theory, from my perspective the most important thing to grasp when beginning to try to understand a theory and with trying to understand any subject matter is to look at it in the most basic form possible. When understanding water what do we look to? The basic components of it which are H20... Through this set of systemic processes you are able to understand how the simplicity can lead to the larger. The inherent drive within all people is the understanding of all things abstract. Through the understanding of the abstract the possibility of enlightenment of knowledge can truly be possible. The many pieces of ideas that it takes to create a theory can be immense, but a wondering that I have is the possibility of a simple theory. One that is created from a very simple set of ideas, but facilitates the possibility of curiosity and wandering... Theory is what our world revolves around and has for centuries. Everything that exists in this world is constantly being thought out and specifically theorized in the abstract. So really it seems that only through the abstract are we able to understand simplicity...

Manifestation of a thought....

The thought that is manifested within comes from which location? Which location does a thought originally come from? The most simple and plain answer that I can come up with is past experiences. You might not see it, but the thoughts we are constantly producing is only the combination and culmination of many thoughts to create an overall great thought. The epitome of a thought comes down to multiple pieces of a puzzle to create one finalized puzzle. The difficult thing as with any thought is the changing of the picture on that puzzle. Thoughts change and evolve constantly, kind of like an ever ripening fruit, but it is only later that you will find out if that fruit has been eaten or decomposed and rotted away. The funniest part of understanding what a thought is and the culmination of a thought is the idea of how our thought process thinks out a thought and how it is actually mentally manifested as well. Without the alter ego to support your thought, question, second guess, and analyze this thought you would not be able to have any thoughts. As soon as you think of something the human mind is constantly analyzing and scrutinizing this thought and wondering if it will be acceptable in the realm of society where you have grown up or currently reside. Without having an alter ego you wouldn't have many good thoughts at all, and I would go as far as to say that you might not actually have any coherent thoughts at all. As human beings like to attribute and understand themselves as constantly being stable in their mind and somewhat normal we are all really just a little bit crazy. Don't we all speak to ourselves, whether it be on a subconscious level or on a conscious level? Just by thinking out loud or in your head you have really just established a second person because at that point are you speaking in the second person? Are you saying I? I know that when I think to myself I am constantly speaking towards myself through the you and I, as in the first and second person. The realization of how a thought is procreated only helps the individual scrutinize their own thought, but since you have already subconsciously scrutinized your thought then most likely you have already a somewhat polished thought that is only being polished consciously.

Taking a Break

What is in a break? Is a break a moment away from life? Isn't this your life? What exactly are you breaking from? Breaking from thinking too hard? Thinking too much? Thinking too long? So you have worked hard all day and you say you deserve something, what is it, possibly a break? Why do you deserve a break? Is a break the escape from reality into the dream world or second reality that people wish to live in daily? What are the things that entertain you, distractions? So when you take a break are the distractions that are helping you take a break really just a distraction from true reality? Do you want to live in a dream land or on earth? Does the abstraction of reality through distractions regress your intelligence? The understanding that we all live presently on this earth in this space and in this time is incorrect. Every person has their own space and own time due to perception, so can I even say that a distraction is for you as it is for me? Is it truly a distraction from reality if two people agree on it? If society perceives it as entertaining and manipulates our reality do we actually at that moment agree upon a truth and what is something? A break is in the mind. It is an abstraction of your consciousness and how you perceive reality. I took a break, but what did I take a break from?

To Each His Own?

A gripe with the phrase “To Each His Own”. I have a problem with the phrase “To Each His Own”. I mean truly everyone, think about it, what does that term actually mean? Isn’t it that it is an actual laziness to actually stating one’s opinion and is truly just the typical American attitude of everyone lets just get along. We are a melting pot and the only thing that will help us prosper is just accepting other people and their ignorant opinions? I agree with peace absolutely and it is one of my fundamental ideologies in life and a want for the world to act peacefully towards each other. The problem I have with “To Each His Own” is the idea that it bypasses true great conversation that can end up to be thoughtful and detailed conversation that makes people think and actually have cognitive processes and the discovery of other people’s cognitive processes. When I have an opinion and someone doesn’t like that and tells me, “To Each His Own” Really? Come on! Argue against me, tell me that you don’t agree with me, don’t tell me “To Each His Own”. That is a passive mind that really has no interest to experience life then. One important thing to distinguish for this, is, the fact that I am not writing off all people’s opinions and the minor ones that are irrelevant in daily life or about personal opinions about certain things for example, food, or personal taste, or personal perceptions of objective goodness. Basically, when I hear someone say to me “To Each His Own” has basically run out of things to say and has no strong arguments or really does not have much of an opinion and is possibly distracted by things that are irrelevant to things that are in the moment and the present space you are occupying in time. If you cannot argue and discuss subjects and try to consider both sides of the picture and possibly open your mind to a new perception, or try to influence another’s within the seconds of our lives that dictate our attitudes towards the outside world and eventually manifest themselves, then I cannot say that I wish to have a conversation with you. Be argumentative, say something back and disagree. You should not think that you cannot be friends with someone because they have some different opinions. Isn’t it important to surround yourself with peers that somewhat do not always agree with you? That way you can keep your mind open and realize that you are not always correct! Nobody is always correct and nobody is always wrong. When you strive closer to understanding this, then you will realize that through the collaboration of argument and discussion new paradigms will develop, which will only lead to a higher understanding of life…

Originality?

Does originality exist? Has originality or the mere thought of originality been merely constructed to form an illusion of greatness? An illusion of greatness that we can be and will be different and therefore perpetuate the continuance of the ideologies of society? I believe that in some sense true originality does exist, but then again true originality does not exist. The problem with something being able to exist and not exist at the same time is that how can something be and not be at the same time? It is because specifically dealing with time and the moment in space time that something can be and not be at the same time. Therefore, originality does exist sometimes and does not exist other times. Is originality simply a compilation of ideas put together in a new order to claim the right to originality? Or is it simply a brand new thought? It seems to imagine that anything could actually be a brand new thought because how would we know if these so-called original thoughts might be stemming from our subconscious? The point that I would like to make is that originality is perception.... Perception is what purely drives originality and how that originality is viewed by society. Is it not what others believe that dictate how your own idea or supposed originality is original? Originality, do I have any? Do I need any? Does anyone need any?