Category Archives: abstract thought

The Blade Reboot

Standard

Very soon, or not so long ago, in either this universe or an adjacent one, Hollywood will green-light the production of a Blade reboot fitting for a generation that demands fan service. The following details are what I have managed to glean during my time in The Ether*:

In the opening scene, Blade will sneak into a studio, where a Trump-figure is giving a speech to a lone camera, and cleave the head of the Commander in Chief clear off his body. After which, Blade will utter something to the effect of, “four years of this shit is just too long”, right before kicking him off the dais. A brief fight will take place, where Blade will slice up the president’s human body guards until he is confronted by vampire secret service, which will lead in an elaborate chase scene where Blade will demonstrate his ability to run off of walls, and parkour off of buildings, as he tries to make a daring escape.

And just before he gets caught, an ally will swerve into his path and tell him to get in. (This is where Whistler is introduced.) Blade’s reaction will be something like, “you?”, to which Whistler will reply “you were expecting a grizzly biker dude? This is Thanksgiving ’07 all over again; get in”, (Typical of Hollywood trends, Whistler will be portrayed be a woman.) Blade will ask her how she knew how to find him, and she’ll indicate that it’s all over the news. Then she’ll ask what that was all about, and Blade will say something like, “Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall.” Whistler will just stare at him awkwardly and inquisitively. And Blade will reply, “and you know the rest”.

Later, Blade will go on to explain that Trump-figure was just a puppet; a part of a larger scheme, and that something more sinister is going on in our government, though just what that is will require more digging.

We will learn, that the U.S. government has been infiltrated and is being manipulated by a shadow government, composed of an elitist coven of ultra-fair-skinned vampires, and that they’re using religion to justify congress passing sweeping legislation that would ban the practice of abortion. Blade will comment about how the true purpose of organised religion has always been to manipulate the feeble-minded public.

We’ll come to learn that the abortion ban is a crucial step in a conspiracy to force women to unwittingly carry vampire spawn to term. Like Blade, these vampires be all be immune to the sun, yet a few experimental others will have been given genetic enhancements by their obstetricians during routine checkups. And, of course, none of the mothers would survive child birth. This tugs at Blade’s heartstrings, because he knows that his mother bore him at a time when women hadn’t yet won the right to choose.

Later, details of the locations of key facilities involved in the conspiracy are revealed, including that of the chief scientist overseeing the development of vampire spawn. Whistler will break into this facility and confront the chief scientist, andsay “I thought you scientists were supposed to be objective, seeing things more clearly; why are you doing this?” And the chief scientist (a female, and her equal) will say something like, “don’t you know that all lives matter?” And whistler will respond with, “that doesn’t apply to parasites” right before bashing up cylinders and petri dishes filled with zygotes and foetuses and various other experiments—absolutely wrecking the lab—until the scientist loses her temper and tries to strangle the vigilante. The scene ends with her dead, and the fate of Whistler uncertain.

Later, when Blade confronts the elitist vampires, they’ll talk about how they are ushering in a new age he should be on their side, as vampires are clearly the superior race. Blade will respond with something like, “every tyrant thinks he’s better than his predecessors, and that he’s offering something new to his people, but it’s always the same story. And now I find myself, once again, in the uncomfortable position of having to water the Tree of Liberty”. The leader of the elitists will quip, “history is written by the victors”, and Blade will respond with, “we’ll see about that”.

He’ll then begin to eliminate the elitist vampires, even as they try to overwhelm him with their numbers; yet using superhuman moves never before demonstrated outside of video games, he will overcome them. And then, when it comes down to the very last vampire, he’ll say something like, “It’s true what they say: history repeating itself. But this generation, it’s not going to put up with that kind of shit anymore,” before landing the killing blow.

*often, while engaged in activities that involve water, my mind slips into a realm where all ideas (past, present, and future) litter a river of collective thought known as The Ether.

Advertisements

♥ The Love–Glue Analogy ♥

Standard

I believe there is a difference between Love and Infatuation: Love is permanent while Infatuation is temporary; yet the two really only differ insomuch as their states. That is, Love is Infatuation that merely hasn’t finished bonding (also known as curing), such as glue or otherwise adhesive.

There is no doubt that Infatuation is wonderfully intoxicating and even elevating, yet it is also mesmerising, disorienting, and deceptive—often ridden with an over-whelming sense of complacency. To put it another, proverbial way:  It presents itself as the destination when, in fact, one has yet to get in the cab.

Returning to the glue analogy, imagine that you’ve just heard about Love; about what it is, what it does, what creates for you. And what you’ve learned is, this magic goop allows you to build and shape previously unimaginable wonders; erecting magnificent, monumental works of art in a marriage of form and function that seem to defy the laws of physics itself!

So you hit the books, you discuss the subject with your peers, and you engulf yourself in your (borderline obsessive) research, as you wrap your mind around various conceptual designs and models, and eventually come up with your own; one that will not only stand out amongst the crowd, but withstand the tests of time. It’s then that you start collecting all the pieces you’ll need, with exception of that one, which you will get from that special someone. And then you find it.

Now, imagine you have stayed up all night, tinkering and assembling this magnificent artifact. And the final stage, right before employing this artifact is gluing all the pieces together. Now, the glue might need to cure for a few hours, possibly even days. Yet, for some reason, you are either too impatient or otherwise unaware of how long it takes for glue to finish curing (in your defense, it’s not as though the instructions were written on the tube or package) so you put your artifact right to work. And, for a few short moments, it works splendidly—better than you’d hoped or imagined! But then, all of a sudden, for reasons beyond your comprehension, your design appears to have failed as it falls into pieces right before your very eyes. (The horror and dismay that befalls you!)

And, to add insult to injury, as they say, now it’s not only all over the floor, it’s all over you. And worse, you can’t seem to shake it off. Yet, instead, with great grief, you have to try and rip it off; dried remnants of glue, stuck all over you, that lasts for days.

Later, after you have collected yourself, you may try again, reusing many of the same pieces from before, except that the old glue is still there. You try scraping it off, but you dare not try too hard, because you want to minimise any obvious scratches, and you still want this model to be perfect. So you try applying a fresh, wet layer over the dry one, but it just doesn’t fit as well.

I suppose what I am trying to say is, because we are so eager and impatient to put our creations to work before they have finished bonding, we have the tendency to make a mess of ourselves. And it’s tragic because, when we first learn of Love, we don’t learn about its properties and how to work with it, but how to work it; what we can do with it. This is a hard lesson I have had to learn for myself, but I hope that perhaps, my words here might be echoed, that others learn better and avoid making hasty decisions with love; saving themselves both time and grief.

Ego vs Conscience

Standard

Lately I have found myself struggling with individuality. Not mine, per se, but of others. Now, allow me to quickly dispel any notion that I’ve gone Communist on you, and explain myself, for a moment. You see, it’s not so much as individuality, as it is Individualism that I have a problem with: Individualism taken to an extreme, mutating into a cop-out philosophy of relativism that defends one’s selfishness as an expression of one’s being. That, now that is what I have problem with. And why? Because it writes off its opponents as “haters” (deeming them the immoral ones) for attacking  their (the Individualists’) freedom of expression.

Anyhow, as this mindset is becoming increasingly more prevalent, I find it necessary to share with you my perspective on the Human Ego. But first, a fable often attributed to various Native American tribes that I believe echoes my sentiments quite well. It goes something like:

“An elderly Cherokee Native American was teaching his grandchildren about life…

He said to them, “A fight is going on inside me, it is a terrible fight and it is between two wolves.

One wolf is evil — he is fear, anger, envy, sorrow, regret, greed, arrogance, self-pity, guilt, resentment, inferiority, lies, false pride, competition, superiority, and ego.

The other is good—he is joy, peace, love, hope, sharing, serenity, humility, kindness, benevolence, friendship, empathy, generosity, truth, compassion and faith.

This same fight is going on inside you, and inside every other person, too.”

They thought about it for a minute and then one child asked his grandfather, “Which wolf will win?”

The old Cherokee simply replied: “The one you feed”.”

http://www.turtlezen.com/twowolves.html

Right. Jolly good. Well said. Message received loud and clear. At least….I hope. And, if not, perhaps this explanation will help clear things up a bit. (Or muck it up. I really can’t be sure anymore.) In any case, it makes sense to me, as I wrote it:

It is my belief that the Ego is that remnant that we inherited from our hominid ancestors, prior to evolving into humans through the development of the conscience (i.e. the Human Spirit). Therefore, to cultivate it (the Human Ego) is to grow and develop that part of ourselves that is most beastly in nature. Yet doing so suffocates the Spirit, muffling its cries in the process.

Incidentally, I do not believe that Humanity is a given, but a delicate and slippery goal that we must always strive to grasp. And this can only be achieved by overcoming the compulsions of Ego. Should we abandon this goal, Ego would inevitably take over, and evolution would lead us back to a state of lower comprehension and revert to a beastly form.

And the beast is a short-lived creature, for it does not plan that far ahead—if at all—but satiates himself in the now; living his life on a day by day basis. To feed the Ego is to resign ourselves to this beastly lifestyle. In doing so, we surrender our autonomy as we become creatures of habit, either through routine, or compulsion to seek familiar comforts and pleasures; often with exceeding intensities. Such trains of thought are confining, and are what ultimately limit even similar beasts from attaining our levels of comprehension.

Thus, if we wish to be free, we must abandon the fallacies demanded of the Ego. That is, for those of us who appreciate our humanity for what it is. For those who don’t, please try to keep it down, as you rattle your cages in anxiety and despair? One may only feed you so many times before she or he grows weary of getting bit.

Fin

So, there you have it. My perspective on the Ego and Spirit in a nutshell which just so happens to embrace evolution. But I think it fits, and I hope you do too. Like last time, until next time, please feel free to rate, comment, and share.

Good night, for now!  ^‿^

The Path of Excess

Standard

Recently I have begun to notice that many of my friends have embraced the  false-virtue of Individualism as an excuse to justify their excessive lifestyles.

Among them, many have argued that their excessive lifestyles are not immoral, yet are merely the means by which they express the core of their personhood, through which they expect to attain both happiness and fulfillment. Moreover, they consider admonishment toward these lifestyles as affronts on their very being, as they are only “being true to themselves”. It almost sounds like a religion, when you think about it, but I’ll leave that one be, for now. At any rate, this is my reply:

It has been said that “the Path of Excess leads to the Tower of Wisdom”.  I must concede, this is probably so, but only after rendering the exorbitant toll of Regret; thereby depleting one’s treasury of Spirit; leaving one wholly dissatisfied.

Given such a price, it is no wonder that so many are inclined to leap from the top — ‘diving off the deep end’, as it were — in the misguided hopes of ‘just getting it all over with’.

No, to be brutally honest, Humility is the only prudent path: by virtue of  staying on course, one carves out a deeper sense of appreciation within oneself, and ultimately arrives with a greater sense of satisfaction. And the only cost is that of the Ego — of which, we each possess an inexhaustible surplus.

I will post more on my concept of Ego and Spirit in the  next post. Until then, feel free to rate, comment, and share. ^‿^

Worth The Price

Standard

[click image to enlarge]

I’ve noticed a rather disturbing trend, and I suspect it is neither recent, or isolated.  I believe it is a common view, shared by many. (Liberals and Conservatives alike.)

I have just one thing to say about it, and I’ll leave it at that:

How are we going to blame BIG BUSINESS, Corporate America, for putting a number on our heads, our lives; viewing us as little more than figures, dollar signs; as they gut our pay, slash our benefits, or sever our employment—all for the sake of the bottom line—even while we’re doing it ourselves?

Is this a symptom of corporate culture seeping into our private lives, changing our autonomous psychology, or is it something subtler, perhaps more sinister?

You decide.

Straw Dogs

Standard

Many have asked me: “What is your obsession with context and the bigger picture? Why does it matter why we think the way they think? Why do we need to know why we’re right and they’re wrong? Shouldn’t just being right be enough?”

Well the answer is simple:

My biggest problem is that sometimes we join the right side, or arrive at the right conclusions, for all the wrong reasons. And to me, that’s tantamount to working for the other side, because it ultimately leaves us vulnerable to the opposition: either by our inability to formulate a solid argument in our defense, or by our incredibility as a witness.

And this does happen to us, mind you, time and time again: The weakest among us are often selected as straw dogs by major networks, easily knocked down by tactically chosen, well-paid, veritable bulldogs on national television.

No, if we truly wish to be positive witnesses, it should be to educate ourselves as much as possible in those things that we openly admit we believe in. And if not, it is better that we should bite our tongues, lest someone call us out on the subject—whereby we would betray not only ourselves, but also our beliefs and those that share them.

Science In Context

Standard

I realise this is a reiteration of my previous blog, I’ll Have What She’s Having, but I think this perhaps simplifies the matter a little better.

Written along the lines of children’s catechism, a brief Q & A.

Q: What is science?

A: Whatever the experts tell us it is.

Q: How do we know that science is true?

A: By following the scientific method.

Q: But a lot of science is beyond the grasp of laypersons, such as myself.

A: Then become an expert: Dedicate your life to studying the fields of science.

Q: But what if I don’t have time to dedicate my life to the fields science?

A: Then you’ll just have to trust those who do.

The moral of the story is: We’re all sheep, but we’re sheep by choice—more or less.

We all defer to the experts. It’s just practical, really. Who has time to study these things but the professionals, themselves? We are a specialised society, and we can only perform so many functions at a given time. So just as we trust our electricians, when they tell us not to flip that switch; our mechanics, when they insist this engine needs an overhaul; our politicians, when they say it’s time to take on a new and menacing threat; we must trust our scientists and our theologians for the answers that we, ourselves, do not have the time or resources to answer.

Not to say that any of this is right or wrong—that’s for you to determine on your own—but there you have it; it’s all we have to work with, at the moment.

Who knows, perhaps one day we will achieve great wisdom, albeit not as individuals, but as a collective consciousness. Then again, if Twitter and Facebook are any indication, perhaps it will be our own undoing.