To the Moon and Back… 50 years later?

What is our relationship to Place when we leave the security of the stable, solid ground in order to journey to the edge of the Earth's atmosphere (the moon is actually inside Earth's atmosphere https://bigthink.com/surprising-science/the-moon-is-inside-earths-atmosphere-claims-study?rebelltitem=1#rebelltitem1) to behold it not only from above, but from without. It seems strange to ask this question 50 years after … Continue reading To the Moon and Back… 50 years later?

So You Think You’ve Got a Theory for Everything (Yes I Realize It’s Theory of Everything)

Theories right now are bullish, we are in the midst of an ideas and information boom. But before we oversaturate the market and cause a crash, let's take stock of what we know right now. It's easy to tear apart a theory, if on no other grounds than appeals to authority, confirmation bias, ad hominem … Continue reading So You Think You’ve Got a Theory for Everything (Yes I Realize It’s Theory of Everything)

Leibniz, Husserl, Godel

The following is an introduction to a future post on Gottfried Leibniz' characteristica universalis in the context of the philosophy (and mathematics) of Godel and Husserl, each making their own contributions to the larger TOE (Theory of Everything), see also: 'learning (intelligence) without a brain' https://wordpress.com/post/thetimeoftheplace.com/298 Towards the end of his life, Kurt Godel became … Continue reading Leibniz, Husserl, Godel

“Learning Without a Brain”

You don't need a brain... further evidence that physical objects are merely representations (symbols) of deeper levels of meaning... i.e. a purpose in life. Discussion of the following will emerge as useful (if not indispensable) in the formulation of the arguments to come. https://www.wsj.com/articles/learning-without-a-brain-11595527115 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-z81Ja30L9M **Please note: Ted is not my favourite go-to for information, … Continue reading “Learning Without a Brain”

On the Strangeness of Natural Things and the Naturalness of Strange Things

The distinction between nature-with-a-small-n and Nature-with-a-capital-N is confined mostly to literary theory and eco-criticism, where capital N represents the Naturalization of phenomena, while small n maintains its rightful place beneath and beyond our human categories as a thing-in-itself, or at least the thing itself: the strange in the familiar and the familiar in the strange.