[Un]mutable files
you have to smooth them out sometimes, re-aligning and tucking in the ragged edges, pruning in order to promote [healthy/dubiously healthy] growth. Pesky areas of scattered information, nonsensical in its' scattered array, becomes essential in its' congruent form.
But those pesky areas of green [un]movable files; tiny ideally, just a few, you'd think, enough to anchor a being to. This is me, that is you. We are not simply data collected similarly in different areas...admittedly with different operating systems?
It's fashionable to have large areas, more fashionable as the time goes on it seems, but perhaps that's me growing old, of [un]mutable/movable files. Genuine, personality, self even.
Un-Apologetically me
sifting through one after another moving from place to place, nothing really seems concrete, and yet there is a me. and a you... this is unrelated to there being no you, which is preposterous even to think of.
But what makes your mind work so very differently from mine? Is that too broad an assumption to make based on behaviour?
Do you know what bothers me the most at the end of the day? The little throwaway comments that I've made to people that aren't true.
I think: how can I interact/know/look at that person now that I've said something that isn't quite, isn't completely, wasn't completely true? Will it come up in conversation? Will it be confrontational? What should I do? Does admitting that it was untrue take away some sort of unmovable bit of me? Is that so terrible?
oh grow up, you're not immutable.
I always hit a snag with it's wrong to want to change people.......because somehow it loops around to mean that it's wrong to have people change. People shouldn't be expected to change. I've always thought I changed dramatically each year. Somehow this puts me at odds with a large portion of the population whose volume of unmovable files seems to grow with each year - sure they change, but the difference is new set routines, behaviours or thought processes, as opposed to defragmenting and freeing up space they seem to be almost entirely focussed on creating some sort of seperate abstract concept of self which they project and defend with their massive unmovable (solid?) foundations.
This is sounding a little critical, not meant to be, simply observation and questioning, which often seems to be met with anger, possibly because of my [scattered/unorganized/circular] method. I resent that I've been bullied into thinking my method of thinking is scattered and unorganized. It is how I think, it is my unmovable and it's not a chunk of data or a learned behaviour, maybe it really is what people mean [or should mean?] when they say you can't change your nature? Incidentally, I like how I think.
There's a type of personality that I like, but it's not so much an assortment of collected material as a method of interaction/information gathering/learning. I will never be able to think like these people. I do not think along quick moving conventionally logical lines, and yet I (would like to think that I) am not stupid.
[addendum: nor do they, exactly...perhaps I've come to think of their method of thinking as conventional simply because I am drawn to it. It tends to be described by people I don't know as blazingly intelligent or quick witted or sharp. Something that, apparently, most people aren't. Funny thing is I've always just thought of it as perfect pitch in method form. It is, not coincidentally, often coupled with perfect pitch.
It's an odd thing, perfect pitch - It doesn't make you a musician in any way shape or form, though of course there are excellent musicians who have it, a few, anyways, but it's a bit of a curse, I would think, as much as a blessing. People without tend to be instantly resentful of those who have it, resentment swelling from insecurity and fear mostly, I'd think. Achievements by those who have perfect pitch in music are often commented on in the format of well, she has perfect pitch... as though this negates any sort of effort on the musician's part. This has always bothered me in the same way that comments that flow along the lines of it's only imitation* in regards to music created by those who are autistic bother me. What the fuck?! has always been my reaction, but at the same time, when I go to reach for an appropriate, slap them in the face with their own stupidity comeback.......well it's not there..
...why isn't it there? My strange friends of the logic stacking/auto-fire argument making/castle of glass building type would have something right there, even if they wouldn't enter this particular discussion, there'd be something to reach for if they wanted to.
I often think of exactly why I think such and such a concept is bullshit, but stop myself from saying it because I don't have concrete evidence of it - it's a gut feeling, an opinion, someone else's opinion, a fact I read somewhere but I can't remember where and the source might be out of date, or sometimes just sympathy, which is really hard to argue with...it's irresponsible to argue with these sorts of ideas, or, at the very least, uncomfortable for me.
I have to fight like mad to keep a line of text straight in my head, numbers are a mismatched combination of easily memorizable in long streams and impossible to remember in short combinations, and sometimes vice versa. Dates are numbers unless they are made significant through combinations of imagery and often more complex number amusements - ie. if I were to take three dates that I had to remember I could probably do it if I worked out an equation where something was subtracted from one to equal the other, perhaps a random combination of numbers from the third one which I would, in turn, use to remember it......but if I wrote them over and over again or tried to remember what they were attached to....no way.
In defense of my way of thinking......I hit a blank filled with trees and colour and no words. hm. Not particularily helpful when interacting with those who revel in the use of words and logic - no communication without them, so learn to use them.....or something. I am finding it slightly less vulgar to put words to concepts now, though I still mostly prefer the wordless feeling in my mind, music of thought, or simply music. Text is easier, but then lifeless compared to spoken word.
There is a man who frequents the drive who has a set piece he does to try to interact with people...[it's about colours and ancient languages, quite an interesting listen, particularily if you note and keep track of the gaping holes and then take them up with him at the end of his speech] and he makes what was [is] a startling assumption to me - he assumes that everyone goes home to a music collection that is primarily lyric/word based [he has a percentage, which actually made me laugh]. This blew me away. It's very odd how some people allow themselves to believe that everyone thinks the same way they do - the old 'we're all human' used to turn a sparkling range of methods into a grey, uninteresting landscape void of anything potentially harmful. ha.
Colours being significant makes sense to me, but only on an individual level. Language, I believe, flows intuitively from a way of thinking common to an area/group of people.
Could there have been One Original language? To me that's somewhat similar to asking if there is a god, which, I know, a great many people have ready answers to. Incidentally, on that topic, my mind has, over the years, sneakily blurred my idea of what the word 'god' actually means to the general public. I was told, by I can't remember who, at sometime in the fairly recent past, that using the term 'god' indicates that you are referring to a being who has sentience on or above (I would certainly hope above if you're going to tie the rest of the associations up with it...though actually, if it were less than it'd be easier to manipulate right...pay off for entrance into heaven or somesuch.....but I digress potentially hazardously) that of a human being.
I'd somehow slipped into being pretty comfortable with thinking of the word 'god' as representing either any number of supposedly sentient beings, or simply a force of some sort. Early on, when I used to actually go to sunday school (very early on) I remember someone talking of God as being 'a force of love' - this made a sort of intuitive sense to me, it[god] was an abstract concept, a bit of a hippyesque vision of shared kindness/love/whathaveyou. If you follow it a little further and think, ok, God is a force, so the universe was created by this force [of love, in this case]. well...that's not so hard to believe...but add sentience and it gets weird. So I'm alright being agnostic if you say god's a force with no sentience, but if you start adding commandments and rules and etcetera....well....I tend to raise my eyebrow a bit. Makes me a bit of a cynic, might make me actually atheist...I don't really care [which is why agnostic makes sense for me], but others seem to.
Incidentally, if you define sentience as simply the ability to sense or percieve, it makes a bit more sense [to me]. That makes the concept of naming and worshipping a force[abstract force of love] a little more...well, it gives it perception, to state the obvious, and so maybe you want to thank this force for creating you, and because it can percieve (somehow) your thanks, it perhaps feels pleasure and this pleases you...ok. Well, that makes sense...I guess.
I used to write poetry in absolute value tables before I figured out what different screen sizes did to it. When I was in the mood I loved to rearange the meaning; spoken word is like that to me, and I've never quite mastered the state of mind where I don't worry where the words will fall in other people's concept of my [supposedly] fixed value.
Perhaps that's why I can never allow myself to be flippantly nasty without feeling bad afterwards...I simply can't trust that it won't be taken [un]seriously.
Very few comments, nasty or otherwise, have very much impact on me....of course some have huge impact, but it's a matter of person, time and place....as always? I can't bring myself to be reactive to things that don't......affect me. Similarily, though I resent stereotypes, I can't bring myself to stop things that fit into them.....why should I? Alternately it could be said of me that I deeply resent falling into stereotypical models and rebel against it. Well...I do sometimes....It's kind of amusing, and I don't really care that much if I am or I'm not a stereotype...
...though it'd be interesting to see which ones different people feel I fall into.
Your nature though, can you change your very nature......and what exactly is that? Your nature....a particularly bad habit, a leaning towards violence, a like of strong cheese? People tend to say this while looking wise and talking about someone bad, or something they're unwilling [unable?] to let go. Weak? Perhaps.
We're/I'm only human......[prone to error/I'm sorry I broke it/I wanted to so I couldn't help it]
This is not meant to clarify anything for you. This is not unmutable [I am not unmutable?]
you have been weighed, you have been measured, and you have been found wanting
...and on that same day...
- was the King -
- Belshazzar -
SLAIN!
------
Examining the mirror you view the people beside you with is perhaps wise, from time to time. Mine has curves and pits....yours?
*I always misspell imitation - It really should have two M's...don't you think?
But those pesky areas of green [un]movable files; tiny ideally, just a few, you'd think, enough to anchor a being to. This is me, that is you. We are not simply data collected similarly in different areas...admittedly with different operating systems?
It's fashionable to have large areas, more fashionable as the time goes on it seems, but perhaps that's me growing old, of [un]mutable/movable files. Genuine, personality, self even.
Un-Apologetically me
sifting through one after another moving from place to place, nothing really seems concrete, and yet there is a me. and a you... this is unrelated to there being no you, which is preposterous even to think of.
But what makes your mind work so very differently from mine? Is that too broad an assumption to make based on behaviour?
Do you know what bothers me the most at the end of the day? The little throwaway comments that I've made to people that aren't true.
I think: how can I interact/know/look at that person now that I've said something that isn't quite, isn't completely, wasn't completely true? Will it come up in conversation? Will it be confrontational? What should I do? Does admitting that it was untrue take away some sort of unmovable bit of me? Is that so terrible?
oh grow up, you're not immutable.
I always hit a snag with it's wrong to want to change people.......because somehow it loops around to mean that it's wrong to have people change. People shouldn't be expected to change. I've always thought I changed dramatically each year. Somehow this puts me at odds with a large portion of the population whose volume of unmovable files seems to grow with each year - sure they change, but the difference is new set routines, behaviours or thought processes, as opposed to defragmenting and freeing up space they seem to be almost entirely focussed on creating some sort of seperate abstract concept of self which they project and defend with their massive unmovable (solid?) foundations.
This is sounding a little critical, not meant to be, simply observation and questioning, which often seems to be met with anger, possibly because of my [scattered/unorganized/circular] method. I resent that I've been bullied into thinking my method of thinking is scattered and unorganized. It is how I think, it is my unmovable and it's not a chunk of data or a learned behaviour, maybe it really is what people mean [or should mean?] when they say you can't change your nature? Incidentally, I like how I think.
There's a type of personality that I like, but it's not so much an assortment of collected material as a method of interaction/information gathering/learning. I will never be able to think like these people. I do not think along quick moving conventionally logical lines, and yet I (would like to think that I) am not stupid.
[addendum: nor do they, exactly...perhaps I've come to think of their method of thinking as conventional simply because I am drawn to it. It tends to be described by people I don't know as blazingly intelligent or quick witted or sharp. Something that, apparently, most people aren't. Funny thing is I've always just thought of it as perfect pitch in method form. It is, not coincidentally, often coupled with perfect pitch.
It's an odd thing, perfect pitch - It doesn't make you a musician in any way shape or form, though of course there are excellent musicians who have it, a few, anyways, but it's a bit of a curse, I would think, as much as a blessing. People without tend to be instantly resentful of those who have it, resentment swelling from insecurity and fear mostly, I'd think. Achievements by those who have perfect pitch in music are often commented on in the format of well, she has perfect pitch... as though this negates any sort of effort on the musician's part. This has always bothered me in the same way that comments that flow along the lines of it's only imitation* in regards to music created by those who are autistic bother me. What the fuck?! has always been my reaction, but at the same time, when I go to reach for an appropriate, slap them in the face with their own stupidity comeback.......well it's not there..
...why isn't it there? My strange friends of the logic stacking/auto-fire argument making/castle of glass building type would have something right there, even if they wouldn't enter this particular discussion, there'd be something to reach for if they wanted to.
I often think of exactly why I think such and such a concept is bullshit, but stop myself from saying it because I don't have concrete evidence of it - it's a gut feeling, an opinion, someone else's opinion, a fact I read somewhere but I can't remember where and the source might be out of date, or sometimes just sympathy, which is really hard to argue with...it's irresponsible to argue with these sorts of ideas, or, at the very least, uncomfortable for me.
I have to fight like mad to keep a line of text straight in my head, numbers are a mismatched combination of easily memorizable in long streams and impossible to remember in short combinations, and sometimes vice versa. Dates are numbers unless they are made significant through combinations of imagery and often more complex number amusements - ie. if I were to take three dates that I had to remember I could probably do it if I worked out an equation where something was subtracted from one to equal the other, perhaps a random combination of numbers from the third one which I would, in turn, use to remember it......but if I wrote them over and over again or tried to remember what they were attached to....no way.
In defense of my way of thinking......I hit a blank filled with trees and colour and no words. hm. Not particularily helpful when interacting with those who revel in the use of words and logic - no communication without them, so learn to use them.....or something. I am finding it slightly less vulgar to put words to concepts now, though I still mostly prefer the wordless feeling in my mind, music of thought, or simply music. Text is easier, but then lifeless compared to spoken word.
There is a man who frequents the drive who has a set piece he does to try to interact with people...[it's about colours and ancient languages, quite an interesting listen, particularily if you note and keep track of the gaping holes and then take them up with him at the end of his speech] and he makes what was [is] a startling assumption to me - he assumes that everyone goes home to a music collection that is primarily lyric/word based [he has a percentage, which actually made me laugh]. This blew me away. It's very odd how some people allow themselves to believe that everyone thinks the same way they do - the old 'we're all human' used to turn a sparkling range of methods into a grey, uninteresting landscape void of anything potentially harmful. ha.
Colours being significant makes sense to me, but only on an individual level. Language, I believe, flows intuitively from a way of thinking common to an area/group of people.
Could there have been One Original language? To me that's somewhat similar to asking if there is a god, which, I know, a great many people have ready answers to. Incidentally, on that topic, my mind has, over the years, sneakily blurred my idea of what the word 'god' actually means to the general public. I was told, by I can't remember who, at sometime in the fairly recent past, that using the term 'god' indicates that you are referring to a being who has sentience on or above (I would certainly hope above if you're going to tie the rest of the associations up with it...though actually, if it were less than it'd be easier to manipulate right...pay off for entrance into heaven or somesuch.....but I digress potentially hazardously) that of a human being.
I'd somehow slipped into being pretty comfortable with thinking of the word 'god' as representing either any number of supposedly sentient beings, or simply a force of some sort. Early on, when I used to actually go to sunday school (very early on) I remember someone talking of God as being 'a force of love' - this made a sort of intuitive sense to me, it[god] was an abstract concept, a bit of a hippyesque vision of shared kindness/love/whathaveyou. If you follow it a little further and think, ok, God is a force, so the universe was created by this force [of love, in this case]. well...that's not so hard to believe...but add sentience and it gets weird. So I'm alright being agnostic if you say god's a force with no sentience, but if you start adding commandments and rules and etcetera....well....I tend to raise my eyebrow a bit. Makes me a bit of a cynic, might make me actually atheist...I don't really care [which is why agnostic makes sense for me], but others seem to.
Incidentally, if you define sentience as simply the ability to sense or percieve, it makes a bit more sense [to me]. That makes the concept of naming and worshipping a force[abstract force of love] a little more...well, it gives it perception, to state the obvious, and so maybe you want to thank this force for creating you, and because it can percieve (somehow) your thanks, it perhaps feels pleasure and this pleases you...ok. Well, that makes sense...I guess.
I used to write poetry in absolute value tables before I figured out what different screen sizes did to it. When I was in the mood I loved to rearange the meaning; spoken word is like that to me, and I've never quite mastered the state of mind where I don't worry where the words will fall in other people's concept of my [supposedly] fixed value.
Perhaps that's why I can never allow myself to be flippantly nasty without feeling bad afterwards...I simply can't trust that it won't be taken [un]seriously.
Very few comments, nasty or otherwise, have very much impact on me....of course some have huge impact, but it's a matter of person, time and place....as always? I can't bring myself to be reactive to things that don't......affect me. Similarily, though I resent stereotypes, I can't bring myself to stop things that fit into them.....why should I? Alternately it could be said of me that I deeply resent falling into stereotypical models and rebel against it. Well...I do sometimes....It's kind of amusing, and I don't really care that much if I am or I'm not a stereotype...
...though it'd be interesting to see which ones different people feel I fall into.
Your nature though, can you change your very nature......and what exactly is that? Your nature....a particularly bad habit, a leaning towards violence, a like of strong cheese? People tend to say this while looking wise and talking about someone bad, or something they're unwilling [unable?] to let go. Weak? Perhaps.
We're/I'm only human......[prone to error/I'm sorry I broke it/I wanted to so I couldn't help it]
This is not meant to clarify anything for you. This is not unmutable [I am not unmutable?]
you have been weighed, you have been measured, and you have been found wanting
...and on that same day...
- was the King -
- Belshazzar -
SLAIN!
------
Examining the mirror you view the people beside you with is perhaps wise, from time to time. Mine has curves and pits....yours?
*I always misspell imitation - It really should have two M's...don't you think?