Saturday, 28 April 2012
Monday, 31 May 2010
I'm simply not social enough.
Perhaps if I Jazz it up, make lots of links, connect with people, and participate I could do better?
I really should market my product.
Its not about the content, its about the packaging.
Its not about meaning its about how many friends you have.
It doesn't value substance it requires something catchy,
Something that appeals to short attention spans... I could go on...
Admittedly, I'm not a good blogger.
Wednesday, 5 May 2010
"What is the function of the artist?" Amanda demanded of the talented trespasser.
"The function of the artist," the Navajo answered, "is to provide what life does not."
Incongruous it is to take value in what is not.
Art, it seems, surpasses what is true, exploring fable. This could be called the truth of art, its freedom to go beyond what is and yet to nonetheless be true. So much so, that by revolving full circle, one puts an apple on a stand and calls it art... it is an apple and yet is not. The call to say it it something else provides what life does not...
And then, we realize that this is just so much navel gazing, we are calling our art an art, and then we remember that it involves play.
Art is fun, within what is real is not.
It lives in dreams, dreams do not.
It exists beyond that which is given, calls what is not.
And dwelling upon it makes no sense,
Friday, 23 April 2010
Since pursuing a different field I have found that I achieve better results if I put in the minimal amount of my own understanding instead replicating as many resources that I can get my hands on putting them into different (some would argue their own) words. How is this a demonstration of academic merit or of grasping the subject?
I'll be happy to pass this degree knowing that my results have no baring on my abilities or understanding either professionally or academically and yet I question the way that assessments are measured if it does not reflect the understanding that a pupil has of the subject but merely reflects their ability to follow instruction and execute a prescribed response and formula. Knowledge management is hardly a factual based subject and yet it seems that thinking outside the box is hardly of any value? This, to me, makes very little sense.
As for references... they should be relevant and reflect ones understanding right? And yet, academic studies seems to encourage adding references for the sake of adding references... ?
Color me confused and dismayed at Academics, and more in agreement with Nietszche then ever, who described academic output as mummified texts rotting away on shelves (oh sry... i should include the reference for this right because otherwise what I am saying is unsubstantiated and of no value... right?)
Wednesday, 9 December 2009
Wednesday, 18 November 2009
Monday, 9 November 2009
Sunday, 4 October 2009
He heard it said, ‘mind your left side, what is held tight will eventually go, what is let free will hold.’
And he, as a young man, let go; he let things be as they were and built nothing, knowing a house of cards. He wandered wherever he may and came upon a field where a tall tree grew and rested under its branches. He thought he knew that since everything came from nothing only to later return again to nothing, holding possessions and building security was a vain project set to fail. So even though he acted responsibly for those he knew he took no personal responsibility preferring instead to dream.
But then one day, out of the blue vast empty sky, he spied a girl who could fly. And although the shade of the tree still blocked the heat of the sun and provided some degree of comfort, he all of a sudden wished he had built a ladder to the sky.
Monday, 31 August 2009
In this culture it’s generally taken to be the norm that people will eat meat unless they choose otherwise. I think this is why I first found vegetarian products that imitate meat to be a bit bizarre. I saw them somehow as reaffirming the above idea that meat was taken as the norm, vegetarianism seen as a derivative.
In fact sometimes people who advocate meat eating argue that eating meat is 'natural' in such a way as to imply that not eating meat is unnatural. However this argument, when taken to this extent, seems flawed; All we have to do to question its validity is to ask ourselves can we imagine that there could be a society that survived and thrived wholly on vegetables and survived so successfully that no one living in that society remembered ever having eaten meat... If we can imagine this to be possible, and can imagine that this society could thrive and be sustainable, then it follows that eating meat is not necessarily the only natural way for a society to be. This is true even in the face of arguments aimed to convince us that eating meat was necessary during some part of humanities evolution. For even if this is true it doesn’t follow that meat eating is the primary natural state or that it 'should' be. At this point one can see that often the claim that eating meat is natural is actually a claim that people should eat meat.
It follows then that there are two questions that are of equal importance, firstly ‘why do you chose not to eat meat?’ and secondly ‘why do you chose to eat meat?’
All this said thus far, what is it about eating or not eating meat that makes this a moral question that requires reasons and/or justifications? The usual response involves something akin the sanctity of life and yet isn’t it true that we live in a world wherein life feeds on life? Isn't this natural phenomenon? If it is, if lions and tigers and bears exist, then suggesting that killing and eating living creatures is essentially wrong suggests that all carnivores are sinners, and if you also believe that existence was designed or created by a divine being, then they were made to be... ? Accordingly I don't thing this argument adds up and yet...
Certainly today’s mass production cannot be justified as 'natural.' In this culture the amount of meat that is consumed seems possible only due to the implementation of technology and production and ironically mass production, while bolstering the ability to slaughter and prepare more meat then ever before, also has the potential to make more vegetarian products easily available. So the question of whether the edifice of production causes unnecessary cruelty for nothing more than our culinary pleasure seems like a reasonable and imperative question to ask and this lends weight to the idea that as equally true that one should ask why they chose not to eat meat they should also ask why they do.