the fundamental difference in the attitude of science and that of art - if i might attempt to make a distinction, is that the mind of science lets go of the present to take hold of the eternal, knowing that the present is in the eternal, while art, is letting go of the eternal to take hold of the present, knowing that the eternal is in the present.

if life is about the experience - then hey, there's nothing to lose!

dignity is invented by humans for the living. decay is the shizentai of nature.

i think religion is an idea on which we weigh all our sensory perceptions in order to transform them into a congruous system of experiences, in order to derive a method of thinking about things, a system of thinking that can be made to stay constant in a world of chaos.

based on this definition, let me speculate:

1. this method of thinking is what human beings have chosen through natural selection, to deal with the ever-changing world. perhaps, in the past, there was some kind of evolutionary pressure for human beings to come to rely on this systematic method of thinking, and subsequently develop a huge brain. or is it the discovery of the bone marrow that gave human beings a big brain, and that propelled them to use the big brain to their advantage?

2. yes, this systematic method of thinking has taken many names - logic, reason, religion, science, hope, faith, philosophy, superstition, maths.... but let me propose that it is all the same thing. it is not the only way for a
species to survive, but it is what our species has chosen.

3. maybe, just maybe, religion in its most primitive incarnation, was what made the human species different from all the other species on earth today. we define "success" in our own terms and think that we're the most successful species on the planet.

4. but for all our progress and technology, perhaps we're not really any "better" than all the other species. just "different". until we are able to simulate all evolution and work ahead to wipe out species that don't work well for us, the same rules of the game still apply to us.

5. The environment can also change drastically - it has happened before. Environment change, perhaps, is not so much about the health of the earth, as much it is about how incapable human beings are, to live in a climate that is dramatically different.

spiral 4

spiral 3

spiral 2

spiral 1

A.

1. The brain is whatever we make it practice to be.
   It takes in input as stimulus and the survival demands we put 
   on it make it what it needs to be.

2. I think we have 5 senses because the brain is an error-prone 
   device. having more input signals to the same reality 
   balances out the errors. this changes the brain from being 
   error-prone to being error-resistant, but it also adds new 
   dimensions to the brain. 

B.

see in your brain, and it's imagination.
touch in your brain, and it's empathy.
taste in your brain, and it's memory.
smell in your brain, and it's nostalgia.
hear in your brain, and it's conviction.

※肯定的に自分を評価して変化＝REVOLVE、否定的に自分を評価して変化＝EVOLVE

words. make them count.

there are words in silences, as there is music in silences. words start to count when you start to really hear what's in the silences, because silence is not the absence of sound, but the breath that we breathe into every word we write, every song we sing. making someone speak before his breath, is not communication. only when you let him breathe his breath into his words, are his words connected to him.

life is not about winning the fight or rising above the fight:
life is the fight, and the fight is life.

being alive is about being in a constant war against decay.

dying is the unseen part of living. my guess why the earth is not one single life-form but divided into individual creatures is so that each creature is the growth endpoint for its own cancers.

nature is neither kind nor unkind.
nature is the so far the only proven way how things can sustainably work.
and in this proven way, you are to fight - or be the endpoint of your own decay.

we find comfort in numbers because nothing distracts us from life like counting.

2 million years into the future.
i hope human beings and all our civilizations can be gone by then.
and i hope whoever takes over, is better at giving way.

are human beings obsessed with being human, or is that what all species do?

how i see it is that human beings can't quite come to terms with their desire to own the earth and all that is in it - yes, they split the earth amongst themselves, but they're struggling to find a basis, for why they are not the same as "mere" animals, and why they rule above them.

it's an eternal struggle, trying to forget that we were once part of the food web - that being attacked and eaten by an animal, is a natural occurrence - more so than dying in a traffic accident. it's a struggle, trying not to imagine that another species can take over the planet in a way were are unable to prepare for. we think viruses as bad things, that they are not forms of life - and do not want to consider that they may one day become a life on their own right.

but let us consider this.

we human beings have chosen to have longer lifespans, so that individually we get to live through more. we focus our progress on our intellectual and technological dimensions. but do we not remember, that species that evolve, do so by dying, and giving way to the next generation? something tells me that we're resting on our laurels, and all other species are evolving ahead of us. we find other ways to deal with evolutionary pressure so our bodies do not change. is "technology" really where we should place our bets? but then again, we don't think of "us" as a species - we think of us in terms of individuals, families, countries. there's always a "them" every time we think of ourselves as "us".

let us consider this.

that each species is simply an expression of life. that in every situation, there are more than one way to walk through it.

i hate the saying "let us agree to disagree". i think it's more like every expression of life has its own grammar that makes it exceedingly difficult for one to really understand another in a deep way.

i think we should instead say, "let us admit that we cannot understand how things work out for you". and i think that applies to other all other species we share this planet with. that we cannot begin to understand how they live through all the recent changes we humans think of as "progress".

let us consider this.

homosexuality and euthanasia receiving mainstream attention is a manifestation of evolutionary pressure - that we human beings are getting over-populated. and i think it will only be intensified when medical science goes on to its next step, when we can fix problems at genetic level, and when people are able to live so long - they refuse to die.

let us consider this.

that the very fact we need to even think about pollution issues, is an evidence that we are overpopulated.

if we were suddenly one-tenth of our population on earth, we could still be living the same way, and we would have cut 90% of our emissions.

let us consider this.

that life is as much about the dying, as it is about the living.
gods do not die, but they do not live either.
the only thing that lives and does not know how to die, is cancer.
and yes, we're the most cancerous species on earth.

Suppose we have four currencies:

E$, for the amount of effort a person puts in,
V$, the value of effort delivered,
P$, the perceived value of a product,
M$, the amount of compensation one gets for the effort, and

And suppose it takes M$20 to make a decent living in this country, where

Andrew in an unskilled worker. He puts in E$20 every month to deliver V$20 of work a month and gets by with M$20 every month. To his boss, Andrew's work in worth P$20.

Benjamin is a semi-skilled worker. He puts in E$10 every month to deliver V$20 of work a month. To his boss, his work is worth P$20.

Charles is a skilled worker. He puts in E$20 every month to deliver V$60 of work a month. To his boss, his work is worth V$60.

Andrew, Benjamin and Charles work for Daniel. Daniel is a management-level worker, and puts in E$10 every month to deliver V$5 of work to coordinate Andrew, Benjamin and Charles. Together they deliver a total of V$300 a month. To Daniel's boss, this work is worth P$300.

Edna is an investor. She puts in E$10 of work every month to deliver V$1 of work every month. Andrew, Benjamin, Charles, Daniel and Edna together deliver a total of $V301, but by strategically positioning Daniel's work, she can deliver a product to 10 people, to each of whom the product is worth a value of P$400.

How should society compensate Benjamin, Charles, Daniel and Edna for their contribution?

why do the days feel so long and yet the years so fleeting?

i think it is a flaw in the human memory, that it is selective, and selects at a level that is not directly accessible to what we can consciously process, such that we are able to recall only key events, and not the in-between periods that really run the hours by.

i think it is another flow that we tend to have a bias, to remember the good or the bad things. based on general or first impressions - conclusions jumped at without proof. and i think this memory helps people come to terms with life, and help them think that everything is worth the sweat, blood and tears.