Quantum Theory

If I were an earthworm
I say that rhythmically
as if I were singing "rich man."
.
If I were an earthworm,
there would only be WHEN..
.
Life would be time
as light and dark would
come and go and my gut
would feed as if I had
a tube to my stomach.
.
Life would be
a tunnel of passing.
My muscles modelled in my nerves
would create my space.
.
How different would be
the confounding universe,
if I were born
not a man?

Time Factory

The human brain
has an organelle
.
that stacks heartbeats
end to end
and synthesizes time.
.
We are conscious
because we
make moments.

Dreams

The funny thing about dreams is that we make them up as we go along. We put these images together like sentences. It's the visual language of talking to yourself. However, when we model in this way, the images have a life of their own and our own experiments often frighten us. Then we have to say, enough--just like Alice did in Wonderland.

Phenomenology of a Social Uncertainty Principle

by Don Schaeffer, Ph.D.

The glue that binds people into encounter and love is like the glue that binds atoms. Neither can be seen.

Observation of the basic particles of the universe will always cause a distortion in the way they function. Observation and measurement will always give a false impression because the tools of observation will interfere with nature. That is roughly the uncertainty principle as stated by Heisenberg.

Likewise, logicians will not be able to observe the nature of a smile and the forces that create meaning in the encounter among human beings. When you look too closely at social life, you take away its heart. Smiles appear to be neutral expressions. Your observation will not account for the social energy that passes between smiler and recipient. The warmth appears as illusion easily explained away. The observer is sickened by his observation. Encounter requires a naive mind.

How to see things differently (question on a photo forum)

well for one thing as a scientist you need to keep a distance from your subject. That's why many psychologists study rats. As a social scientist, you have to keep your distance from human beings and see them in way outside the influences of convention--as animals for instance. That's what science and art share. Scientists who are usually pretty well adjusted have to make a conscious effort to achieve distance, Artists are usually aloof or frightened and shy as a matter of character, so they achieve distance naturally. I am both. (you wanted to know).

De-Centering

Religious Civil Law

I pray for health
and that offends
the god of the parasite.

I want to kill the plagues.
But the grasshoppers also
have a god.

We are told we have
dominion over the earth
but other gods disagree.

We are told there is only One
and that is the one only for us.
Our chaos is our God's chaos.

But the god of chaos
has other plans
and advocates for our enemies.

In the great civil law suit of the universe,
does our God defend us
or do we defend our God?


First of all this is meant to be light, not heavy. It's logic is poetic logic (which resembled talmudic logic). With that in mind, this is what led me to it.

When I taught social psychology I used to teach that the civil justice system in many tribal cultures is witchcraft where witches serve as advocacy attorneys. Each tribe has a god or number of specialized gods to look after its interest and protect it. The witches were the agents of the gods. They would work to get their god to overcome the arguments of the other person's god.

Our world was not so different during the biblical period. We picked God (or allowed God to pick us) and then God was our God--representing God's interests through our interests (it's complicated hence the last verse). But when we kill our enemies, the god of our enemies is offended or defeated. Who's to say our interests are above those of our enemies.

The poem is about de-centering, taking the point of view of others, each of whom has a god.

Where Is the Center?

The pathogen rises
in its morning,
has its meal of
carbon rendering and
changes. Modifies
some DNA. It feels good.

Pathogen and mate
converse alien-fashion
about an earth beyond
what we can understand
(but still the earth).

As their meals
make themselves relevant
the pathogens flip
through information tunnels
and say their daily prayers.

Outrage: Don’t Smoke It

Outrage is a narcotic, circulated in poor neighborhoods, peddled by publishers of cheap daily newspapers and commercial television stations. Once sampled, outrage is irresistible and the victim is quickly addicted. The outrage addict needs regular doses of quickly conceived public condemnation, implication by rumor, plots and conspiracy, the very things commercial news media are so good at drumming up. In the addicted state, the outraged subject is bereft of disciplined thought caught in the zealous quest for miscreants, finding them everywhere. The more wickedness they find, the more the gratification. Each righteous pleasure magnifies the addiction. Soon the world is awash with crime and citizens are pouring their resources into rapid judgments and final condemnations.

Outrage is an addiction largely of those with less than perfect intellectual discipline. It is a symptom of least-common-denominator education, education to the level of quick newspaper reading and talk show radio discourse. Where in England during the last century at least, for example, diction and local dialect were limiters of mobility, in modern democracy, it is the presence of self-righteousness derived from addiction to outrage.