My brain chatter never ends and I’ve always had (and am comfortable with) auditory hallucination. Also, my genetics stuff puts me in that ‘zone’. But also, I exhibit many autistic characteristics and people with aspergers often claim me. The imprinted brain theory posits a father/mother split between autism and schizophrenia, which reminds me of the “autism = extreme male, schizophrenia=extreme female” notions. But probably because I’ve always sort of seen myself as an “i-don’t-care much” when it comes to my gender — always what’d probably be considered a ‘mixture’, the notion of a teeter-totter autism vs schizophrenia doesn’t compute with my head.

My brain chatter never ends and I’ve always had (and am comfortable with) auditory hallucination. Also, my genetics stuff puts me in that ‘zone’.
But also, I exhibit many autistic characteristics and people with aspergers often claim me.
The imprinted brain theory posits a father/mother split between autism and schizophrenia, which reminds me of the “autism = extreme male, schizophrenia=extreme female” notions.
But probably because I’ve always sort of seen myself as an “i-don’t-care much” when it comes to my gender — always what’d probably be considered a ‘mixture’, the notion of a teeter-totter autism vs schizophrenia doesn’t compute with my head.
 Well, I think it’s useful to treat them distinctly for a lot of things. I imagine foundationalism as a chair on the ground with stuff stacked on top and coherentism as a floating structure made up of toothpicks woven together.
-====
But if you zoom the camera out of the room so you can see the floor and room and then the planet and solar system, you start to see coherentism.
Yet there -is- a floor and that’s gravity and friction in both cases.
 The wear patterns on my shoes are strikingly similar. Left shoe always gets a hole near the front after a year or two, the right does not.
===
How I am expressing plurality of what in the prior sentence is clear to me but I have a habit of choosing ambiguous phrases inadvertently. Body memory’s sense of humor typing such things distinct from my conscious awareness.
  • Like

===

 

I don’t think so. I have a habit of explaining what ought to be obvious things for my own understanding but aloud in case it’s also useful not just for myself. I don’t always know what I mean until I see myself saying it.
  • Like

=-===

I wouldn’t want to do that. I like our friendship. Maybe I am autistic. I think my self-talk is externalizing as I lack seem to lack a self-awareness and am continually surprised at consequences of my words and actions.

===

 

I wasn’t mocking. My toothpick analogy is how my mind sees wordclouds and the way concepts can be used to support one another. Small pieces of wood can create incredibly powerful structures.
  • Like

===

 

I’m confused most of the time so I’m usually in analytical overdrive. Sometimes I stumble upon a hint of self-awareness but it’s true – it’s all surface. I like to believe it’s deep but it’s not as I’m continually surveying rather than mining.
  • Like

—-

 

Pragmatist keeps me in the ugly yellow chair. Three times I wrote “Coherentism. Must be”. But I couldn’t put a foundation to it.
  • Like

===

 

Would a spectrum have opposites? that is difficult. It seems as if it must from a broad view. a high vs a low of “some” kind of quantitative metric.
  • Like

===

Yeah. Reminds me of mathematical duals. inversions. Spectrum is perhaps an inversion of opposites. One runs horizontal, the other vertical kind of thing.

===

 

My issue with quantity is it’s too evenly sized and spaced.
  • Like

===

 

The quality of quantity tends for it to be each equally distinct, equally sized and shaped. So a 1 and a 1 both must be identical for there to be a 2. Anything else is a lie and I think ultimately integers are lies. But pragmatic.
  • Like

==

 

“How does it feel to be in a place on a spectrum?” – that is what makes seeing opposite as difficult for me: I put myself within a spectrum and look around me. What would I consider opposite from within? It would be the first “not-me” I encounter.
For a broader, pulled back moon-to-earth view, I’d see a rainbow that I can fold in half and cause opposites to touch, with a “normal” at the fold of the rainbow, which I think is a green.
But that is a newtonian spectrum, which I think is probably less useful than Goethe.
  • Like

===

 

I’ve never been good with color. Lines. Pixels. Monochrome. Fuzzy edges that I try to sharpen. Outlines. Skeletons.
Colors always escape me. They have always been and remain a mystery to me. I know the science. I got the ‘gist’ of Goethe enough to appreciate his perceptual difference between yellow and blue, which I loved and was breakthrough for me.
But I can’t put colors together.
I can in my imagination. My dreams? Oh they are vivid and amazing. But I can’t produce any of it. It’s all in my head.
  • Like

 

I don’t know. It’s likely I would wait out the storm/ find calm waters and make my peace there for as long as I could.
  • Like

===

 

A ship needs a crew, my role would not be captain. Could I be the navigator? Perhaps I could but I could not perform all duties.
  • Like

===

 

I can act ‘as if’ the stars are fixed and the magnetic fields are dependable long enough to find shore, yes.
  • Like

-=—

 

I am sitting on an ugly yellow chair and the pauli exclusion principle is one of the main reasons my ass does not fall through to the middle of the earth.
It’s a principle – a notion – a wish and a hope that keeps my ass here at the computer on this chair.
I try not to think about it. Why are my arms not going through this table right now? SO I learn hard on tables, tempting them to give way, allowing my hands and arms to pass through. But they don’t. And that inspires a little confidence that perhaps the structure of matter will carry on just a little longer perhaps.
====
The absurdity is that any of this has any semblance of coherence.
  • Like

 

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


nine × = 54

Leave a Reply