And so, prove me to yourself ...

 This could go different ways, but it is your standard digression, and it's mostly about proof.  Having spent a good deal, if not most of my life trying to prove things, or studying how other people prove other things, this issue has really been a big focus for me.  In fact, my interest in mathematics is mostly concerned with this issue and mathematics mostly falls apart, or turns into something else entirely with out it.   Of course, it becomes of great concern when we enter the realm of judical practices, where in fact somebody has to make a decision about what has been proved, to their satisfaction, and what has not been proved.  Usually, there is more than one person involved, which makes the whole thing perhaps more reliable, but nevertheless, not so easy.  

For example, if you could prove ' me ' to ' yourself ', that is for example, if you could anticiapte what I would do next, then I should be able to do the same thing to you, and that does seem reasonable.  But in this particular dynamic , it's totally abstract, as I have some vague idea about ' me ',  but certainly don't know ' you ' as well, becasue, at least for ' me ' , you is highly abstract. I assume ' you ' is pretty much like  ' me ', but I generally don't have that much information, and even though I have much more information about ' me ' it seems, I would have a very difficult time proving ' me ' to ' myself  ' , well at least to my ' satification ', and so probably would not really try or not try that hard.  

So, obviously you are observing a person procrastinating about writing a dialogue between two women and two men , on a spring evening in New York.  How hard could that possibly be ?

Well, I guess , you would have to prove ' me ' to ' yourself ', before you would have any idea about that.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Synchronicity

 So, this strange, word, which suggests something like, two things happening at the same time, which are seemingly disconnected.  So, that may appear first mostly in the works of Carl Jung, and the formulations of many of his concepts related to applications of phycology.   Now, to the best of my understanding, Irwin Schrodinger, in the late 40's and early 50's kind of latched onto this " concept ", in relation to describing the " kind of " physics, connected to biologicals processes.  So maybe this is funny or not, but during this same time Schrodinger was supposed to be working with Einstein on the >>> Unified Field Theorem <<< , I guess, the " Theorem " gives it all away.  At some point , Schrodinger may have given a >>> press conference <<<  in which he announced that " they ", had been successful.  Well, he had not previously consulted Einstein, and apparently Einstein response was, okay we are don...
Read more

Perplexity, absurdity, and power

 So, when you consider or imagine " absolute " power, you must also consider the issue of " infinite " work.  In other words, without the results or effects of power, you really don't know anything about it. Nevertheless, throughout most of human history, we have labored under this concept of " absolute " power, which in and of itself produces very difficult logical or mental conundrums.  Of course, Dr. Einstein was fairly successful in dispelling some of these odd conundrums in particularly as regards some of our notions related to the physical world and our " environment " so to speak, however, that required a life time of work, and the help of many colleagues over the years. But simply, even if you do consider the >>>> universe <<<<< to be an infinite amount of work and therefore requiring an infinite/absolute amount of power, well, if you're going to try and rustle up numbers that actually make sense, you ar...
Read more

Something, something, reality

 Now, when we reflect back on " reality ", most people will agree, >>> it's hard to do without it <<< Now, we might be able to figure out how Godel's Proof , ties back to all this stuff, but it seems to me that if you want to describe some kind of reality, then you pretty much have to talk about diversity, and so probably, possibly what you are really talking about is the " ability " to sort out, elements of diversity as being a substantive process which it kind of seems like is persistently .occurring.   This might occur through action like --->  back actions <--- of some different processes or  even ---> front action <----, which might be easier to comprehend. So , if you are an automobile, and you can travel to pretty much anyplace in the world within 1 hour, then, things might look a bit different, particularly if you are into variation and transformation.  So, for example, Ralphy will rarely go to Africa, unless, it's l...
Read more