I said in the previous entry that I would write about why everybody should just commit to absolute subjectivity. Good, since I have no idea what to write about. Bad, because wth did I mean with that?

I guess the idea was that since that which is considered objective is decided by a majority of subjectivities anyway, then to label anything objective is in effect just an exercise of power. Big statement. So much to untangle.

First, the underlying assumption is that thoughts arise only from configurations of matter capable of introspection, those with self. But to imagine objectivity is to imagine the gaze of an absolute non participating third party, one preferably without a self, because otherwise that is just another subject.

It’s like, oh well. Maybe I’d continue this tomorrow. There’s a thought that requires the use of a word I cannot recall at the moment, but pretty sure it already exists. Meh.

Enough for today.

Some things I noticed 01/19/2020:
  1. What is Sisyphus, deprived of his boulder?
  2. Flerken was a pretty clever metaphor, very anti-Freudian. Also very subtle. (Or maybe not, for the natives.)
  3. Of course, there’s a ppa for haskell! I was just lost in the leaves again, mucking around with sources. Note to self: from the roots, always.
  4. When young uns dare to cross the fence to steal fruit, I root for them secretly. It’s just fruit. The opportunity to experience doing that seem to only get much rarer. Of course, kids with foresight brought up in a safe environment where they feel free to ask are better. Or are they? Self, stop debating self.
  5. If SNS is for the KSP, this medium is for the GGSS. As long as self aware. Roger that.