|
Prometheus's Blog
Back to Blog Directory
Money and Dreams
posted at 11:21 am on 05-18-2005
Someone once said that money is what makes the world go ‘round.
That is true as long as one keeps in perspective that money is just a tool to reach a ends. Money, is in fact, the currency of dreams, not idle playboy fantasy but dreams of gigantic proportions. The dream of the automobile, the dream of the ocean liner, the dream of the 747, the dream of your washer and dryer, all made possible by this tool. The dreamer dreams, but only money and power can take the dream and create reality from it. With money, one can set dreams into reality by buying CNC machines, mills and stamp presses, and of course hiring skilled people.
Henry Ford dreamt that one day a working man would be able to purchase a car with his wages, and that has largely come true today.
Dreams are in turn a form of hope. Hope without any basis in reality is a very empty hope, such as the hope of a child for an outrageously expensive new toy when it is clear that the parents are not going to do so. More stirring is the hope of men who face impossible odds but actually have a realistic chance for survival, by taking actions that enhance their chances. This kind of hope is the greatest motivator that man has ever known, the hope that things will change for the better if I do such and such. And dreams are the more visible manifestation of hope. In turn, money transforms dreams into reality.
I dream of a day when the industrialization of space will make possible for those in 3rd world nations to enjoy a standard of living similar to that experienced in the UK or the United States. The Earth simply cannot supply what is needed for that standard, but the vast opportunities of space may enable us to do so.
(Comments)
History and Hallucinations
posted at 11:20 am on 05-18-2005
What we perceive is largely a function of what we want/expect to see. For example, read
Paris in the
the spring time
and most likely, the first time through one will see it as “Paris in the springtime”, when it is actually is “Paris in the the springtime”. Even when one catches the error it is assumed to be a mistake of the author, and thus is “corrected” to what it MUST mean. So in this way we rely on our preconceptions of what the world MUST be like in order to make sense of what we know.
Unfortantly the universe is complex in such a way that one can find just about anything he is looking for in it. I think the variety and differences in the ways religion attempts to explain the world easily attests to this “finding of the one truth” in our natural world.
Strangely enough this phenomenon has been creeping into the study of History for probably ever since a scribe somewhere began taking notes on what was occurring in the inner circle of power in some aciencnt city. A history is really not about anything other than ideals and power, which is why so much of history is concerned with politics, wars and revolution. The peace is only noteworthy if a struggle of politics occurs. Wars are a conflict of power and ideals, politics are a conflict of power and ideals, and revolutions are a conflict of power and ideals. Many people have complained about history not being concerned about everyday life, and they are correct in that regard. Where they go wrong is when they suggest history ought to cover the everyday struggle of the Everyman, of which I will summerize completely in the next paragraph.
Life is shitty. Enough said. See why this is not really covered in history?
Now, if one wants to see the semantics of exactly how shitty life is for different people, I suggest anthropology, which concerns itself with the everyday life in culture.
Now, what is the good in studying the record of power and ideals?
First, they give us some idea of what would probably work in our cultures and what was clearly rejected, and what is needed to sustain our cultures.
Secondly, they provide a background to the circumstances that produced our governments and give a understanding as to why they where created. In this function, history legitimizes and sanctions government by serving as a living social contract.
Unfortantly, with history serving as a social contract, the need to percieve things differently arises for different factions with different goals.
For example, just consider the different ways to read
Paris in the
the springtime
In order to resolve the problem of the two the’s, one can deliberatly ignore the first the. Another can ignore the second the. Yet another can read it and claim that the the’s cancel each other and it reads “Paris in springtime”
For the perfect example of this, look at politicians when they argue whether the founding fathers where devout and godly Christians or if they where deist rebels
(Comments)
thoughts on god
posted at 11:19 am on 05-18-2005
There are things in my life that I cannot begin to comprehend, as I believe I am destined for some great thing. Why is not important as what, but I think I must keep searching for it. I believe that I am supposed to bring about the industrialization of space, with the asteroids being mined and all.
Why? To make money? That can’t be right, as what I really want is glory, of a kind that Columbus, Glenn (well maybe not so much he) and de Gama all lusted after. And of course the attraction of power holds close to my heart. I dream of the power to change, to leave a mark on the world (hopefully for the better) so that I may live on in some way after death, a legacy of sorts.
I don’t know. All I know is I am here, and I must go forward with whatever I got, whatever I believe I have.
How do I know what these thoughts are? Are they just delusions of grandeur or some wild fantasy that a fool will concoct when in desperate straits?
At one time I believed in God + Christianity with all my heart and soul. Now I have doubts about his direct personal relations with humanity as a whole. How do I know the revelation of the bible is the revelation of the one true GOD set forth in the ontological argument? The revelation of the bible says it is grace, grace of god that alone that sustains faith. Oddly enough when I believed, or wanted to believe, I never truly understood what this meant until now. Is it really enough to believe in what one perceives? After all, hallucinations are when one does perceive something and essentially reacts inappropriately to it, such as mistaking a chainsaw engine for a motorcycle or the like. For the sake of sanity we assume many things(such as when our forefathers assumed the earth was flat, try suggesting otherwise to someone with no concept of gravity), but what does the assumption of god do for our sanity? The need to believe in something greater than ourselves? Why would we want to do so? Is it a reflection on our own frality and our desire to see or create something truly lasting in this world?
perhaps we respond to a great many things inappropiatly, whether we realize it or not. We fail to recognize a old friend after many years seprated and treat them as strangers for they have changed greatly. We mistake a stranger for a friend in many a crowd. I believe this is at the heart of my paradox with my belief with god.
(Comments)
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
