I have no idea where this random rant is going,
but the pic sure looked cool
anyhow
it's interesting that, though i enjoy the use
of technological devices, i still often crave
fresh air and seek to escape my comfy
little cave

i suppose that will do as a segue into one of my topics
of philosophy: existence

there is a physical reality
despite the incredibly compelling arguments given in 1984 (and i'm not being sarcastic here, i actually do believe they have a point)
for those of you who have deprived yourselves of such fascinating reading, not to mention philosophy, i'll summarize the claim:
essentially, what we know to be existence comes from one of two sources - our own senses and logic, or other people's interpretations of the same objects, events, people, or places
if all people agree on one interpretation, and truly believe it, then that is reality
kinda makes sense
the problem is that they created a world in which people practiced gross self-deception and denied what we know to be physical reality - hence the famous point abt 2+2=5

so, while i'd agree that our conception of reality is limited to our senses and those of other people, i'm not certain of the absulute power the Party claimed the collective human mind has
this may get confusing if you're relying on my summary, but i'll go on anyhow
we percieve things based on our physical make up
for instance - we see color because our eyes can distinguish between light from different parts of the color spectrum
many animals, like dogs or bats either don't see the color spectrum or rely on sound waves to "see" solid objects
given the amount of variation that actually exists, it's entirely possible that all of our senses give us a "false" belief of what reality is

for instance:
by some immeasureable process, we could percieve atomic structure (i'm probably phrasing this incorrectly, but i'll try to make it clear anyhow) completely differently than other organisms
take heat as an example
all organisms have a range of temperatures in which it is possible to live
ours is probably something like b/t -20 C and 50 or 55 C
some bacteria, on the other hand, have a range that goes higher than 100 C
similarly, different elements have different ranges of temperature
water is only a solid below 0 C but lead is solid until more like 70 C (i may be completly wrong on that one, but i know it's reasonably low but not so low that in comfortable room temperature it'd be melting. anyhow, that's my guess)
so, based on that alone, the "natural" form of materials would differ from organism to organism
for bacteria that live in faults in the ocean the natural state of lead (if there were any there) would be liquid, at least temporarily
so our assumptions of normalcy are based on our physical structure
but more than that
because of the way atoms consist of a nucleous and electrons floating around it
it's possible that density could be felt differently
i'm only tolerably good at a very basic level of physics and chemistry was hell, so don't take my speculation to mean much, but there are variations that would make matter feel differently
if it was possible for an organism itself to have an electrical charge then it'd feel other objects with a charge to either be larger (with the same charge the repulsion of the two would create a buffer area which we'd percieve as space, but likely they'd percieve as an actual layer of the object and with opposite charges they'd be lighter maybe? i'm not sure)
also, the organism would be much more sensitive to slight variations in electrical charges, which all atoms have with their annoying little electrons and compounds (is that the right word?) that are bent, like water
so if we had a strong charge one way or another, we'd think it natural for objects to jump toward us or away
but those circumstances, the combination of charge and sufficient sensitivity to notice such slight variations, are highly unlikely
other than the same charges point where objects seem bigger, i don't know how much that had to do with density, but it was abt perception
anyhow
this one is more so
i'm still trying to decide if the only way it'd be true is based on the size and strength of the organism, but anyhow
this is hard to explain, but wouldn't a very small creature think of somewhat warm gold as spongy? and a very large organism would feel like cold water was thicker than we see it... this is getting less logical the more i think about it
anyhow
just the whole idea of resistence
if larger objects have greater air resistence, and it effects the amount of work that they do to move forward, then theoretically that would be applicable to other substances as well
and since we define how solid something is based on how hard it is to change its shape, then that could be true of others as well
of course, that'd mean that they'd also have to percieve difficulty on the same scale we do, which is unlikely
but still
variations are possible
i read somewhere that it's possible life developed on other planets so differently that intellegent life could be very small - that by killing off bacteria we could be committing major intergalactic murder (granted, this was from Andromeda, or the Andromeda Strain or whatever the Crichton book is called, but it's interesting and serves my purposes)
perhaps it's not just a matter of intellegence, but instead of what physical reality is

going back to my original point, we do have tainted perceptions of reality:
we have assumptions of normalcy that don't always hold true
we have means of perception that aren't necessarily the only way to sense things

at a basic level, what reality really means is what humans percieve to exist
however, there are some constants that can't be changed
as much as i despise chemistry, it suits my purposes
there are substances that have certain properties
they react with one another in a predictable manner
gravity can be measured, evaluated and acts predictable
the basic sciences are objective enough that, so long as we keep in mind that we percieve only within the limits of our senses, we can still say that physical reality exists
of course
there's also the idea that i've heard where some moron claims that they're the only person to exist and everyone else is only a figment of their imagination - interesting but i refuse to believe it - in which case, i have an awfully elaborate imagination
that idea of reality as being a dream was actually built upon by "A Beautiful Mind"
great movie
Squirrel was disturbed, she was afraid there were figments of her imagination she believed to be real
the thing is
at a purely personal level, it really doesn't matter
so long as they don't make you kill yourself or do something similarly bad
(so in other words, don't take other ppl's advice if it's stupid)
your imaginary friends are good for you
despite that it's contradictory with my earlier premise, i really like this idea
while other people may not actually be there, they're still pleasant company
so i guess the only real way to reconcile the idea of schitsophrenia (spelling?) as manifested for the guy in that movie is to enjoy the good stuff
and hope that, when we die, we get to compare our imaginary worlds with other ppl

anyhow
let's return to the assumption that there are some things that can't be denied
that instruments that are misread due to a fucked-up collective self-deception do not create reality, but those that are read correctly do
blech
i've just backed myself back into a hole
ok
the whole Beautiful Mind thing
forget it
either you're a part of my reality and what i say is true is
or that's only a symptom of an illness and the rest of us don't suffer from it
so
1. there is a definitive reality
2. the collective human mind is not all-powerful (the individual human mind may be)

while reality refers to what we percieve, our perceptions are limited by our senses and our language, but i'm gonna save the language rant for another page b/c no one will read this through anyhow
it's very interesting though: i used to be most interested in how language effects the development of the human mind but now how language influences the development of a conception of reality is becoming more interesting

anyhow
one final though
think favorite colors
what if the same color is most pleasing to everyone
it's just that what i label "blue" is what my mom labels "red"?
all our tastes could be exactly the same, but our physical structure different...