# ThoughtStream<sup>TM</sup>

## <a name="contents">Contents</a>

*Note: reposting for emphasis is preserved with redundant entries in the contents list below*

The contents themselves are part of the ThoughtStream. Ideas recorded are dated and if there is not a link it is self-sufficient to communicate an idea, but there is an expectation of elaboration if time permits. Anything linked in the contents has an elaboration, or antedates this strategy. This strategy began on Friday, November 24<sup>th</sup>, 2023, at the time of the first unlinked entry.

- [Author](#author)
- [Edit History](#edit-history)
- [Introduction](#introduction)
  - [Response to an online friend regarding his diety related argument](#response-to-an-online-friend-regarding-his-diety-related-argument)
    - Wed Mar 20 13:56:33 AKDT 2024
  - [Text Template for the Life Categories and Example Utilization](#text-template-for-the-life-categories-and-example-utilization)
    - Sat Dec 23 13:40:05 AKST 2023
  - [File Types and Required Accounts]
    - Sat 23 Dec 2023 12:13:41 AKST
  - [AK Activity Plans](#ak-activity-plans)
    - Fri Dec 22 22:34:24 EST 2023
  - [Post Bank Payment Plans, Set 1](#post-bank-payment-plans-set-1)
    - Tue Dec 19 22:04:17 EST 2023
  - [Donation Request Methodology and Printout](#donation-request-methodology-and-printout)
    - Wed Dec 13 12:26:10 EST 2023
  - [Upcoming Plan to Utilize just $100 as a Wealthy Homeless Camper for a Period of 1 Month](#upcoming-plan-to-utilize-just-100-dollars-as-a-wealthy-homeless-camper-for-a-period-of-1-month)
    - Sat Dec  9 10:12:19 EST 2023
  - Thorium Technology, and Lead Acid Battery Ships
    - Wed Dec  6 01:40:08 EST 2023
    - Researched with a hired consultant well earlier, excepting the lead acid battery ships, conceived of in a cross Canadian roadtrip through Northern Canada. To be dated later.
  - Redundancy in Technology and Nature
    - Wed Dec  6 01:38:14 EST 2023
    - Conceived well earlier and researched with a hired consultant. To be dated later. Approximately 2019.
  - Roughly equivalent content that is altered for the user to find it palatable, without the sender's knowledge, and vice versa
    - Wed Dec  6 00:49:26 EST 2023
  - [Backup and Redundancy Plan, and Unrelated Tasks](#backup-and-redundancy-plan-and-unrelated-tasks)
    - Wed Dec  6 00:43:53 EST 2023
  - A Less Arbitrary Coordinate System, with Wanattams
    - Wed Dec  6 00:04:20 EST 2023
    - Conceived in Phoenix in June, 2023
  - Segregation by Nation, and Including Diversity in National Treasures, and Culturally Themed Art Competitions
    - Wed Dec  6 00:01:46 EST 2023
  - The Pyramid is Not That Impressive and Regular Buildings, and Pyramids in Cubes
    - Tue Dec  5 23:58:28 EST 2023
  - Finding Warmth and Warfare by Europe
    - Tue Dec  5 23:54:43 EST 2023
  - Livelihood as a Source of Urgencies
    - Tue Dec  5 09:58:13 EST 2023
  - Testing Your Heart Rate With Two Beats Only
    - Tue Dec  5 09:56:52 EST 2023
  - Tasks, Doing Things, and Why You Can't Say What Retirement Is.
    - Tue Dec  5 09:54:38 EST 2023
  - What is Adventure and Who Are the Adventurers?
    - Tue Dec  5 09:53:58 EST 2023
  - Experimenting with Environments, Risks, and Who Does It
    - Tue Dec  5 09:53:18 EST 2023
  - Experimenting with Fitness, its Risk, and Who Does It
    - Tue Dec  5 09:52:30 EST 2023
  - Experimenting with Health, its Risks, and Who Does It
    - Tue Dec  5 09:52:04 EST 2023
  - Experimenting with Nutrition, its Risks, and Who Does It
    - Tue Dec  5 09:51:18 EST 2023
  - People Who Claim Loneliness and Their Hallucinations
    - Tue Dec  5 09:49:39 EST 2023
  - Detailed Artwork and Those Unable to State the Detail With Words
    - Tue Dec  5 09:45:20 EST 2023
  - On Not Knowing What Alone Is, and The State of Civilization
    - Tue Dec  5 09:44:25 EST 2023
  - Simple Real World IQ Tests, Like Clapping at a Screen at the Movies
    - Tue Dec  5 09:43:18 EST 2023
  - If you discovered that a social platform was media control, you would still use it, and Degrees and Types of Marginalization
    - Sun Dec  3 13:17:26 EST 2023
  - [The American Flag is only Blue and Red and is Basic](#the-american-flag-is-only-blue-and-red-and-is-basic)
    - Sun Dec  3 13:03:43 EST 2023
  - Caring About Public Figures Even Less, Until Knowledge Occurs in Marketing/Propaganda
    - Sun Dec  3 13:01:21 EST 2023
  - Families as "Doesn't Know Their Age Anymore" Arrested Development
    - Sun Dec  3 12:58:55 EST 2023
  - The Appropriate Degree of Ceremony and Celebration for Accomplishments and Milestones
    - Sun Dec  3 12:46:54 EST 2023
  - [Completion of the Mission of the Personal Form](#completion-of-the-mission-of-the-personal-form)
    - Sat Dec  2 21:50:50 EST 2023
  - [Affidavit of the Authenticity of The Book and Journal of Mattanaw at Mattanaw.org, as a Testament of Mattanaw for the Living Will](#affidavit-of-the-authenticity-of-the-book-and-journal-of-mattanaw-at-mattanaworg-as-a-testament-of-mattanaw-for-the-living-will)
    - Sat Dec  2 21:08:45 EST 2023
  - [Affidavit Concerning Vegetarian/Vegan and Water Lifestyle](#affidavit-concerning-vegetarianvegan-and-water-lifestyle)
    - Sat Dec  2 12:05:44 EST 2023
  - Pathways for asserting religious views and preferences in the United States, and recognized religions
    - Sat Dec  2 12:02:48 EST 2023
  - [Affidavit Concerning Mattanaw's Abstinence From Drugs, Sex and Alcohol](#affidavit-concerning-mattanaws-abstinence-from-drugs-sex-and-alcohol)
  - [Be Concise But You Missed This](#be-concise-but-you-missed-this)
  - [Authoritativeness and Uses of Single Forms of Identification](#authoritativeness-and-uses-of-single-forms-of-identification)
    - Fri Dec  1 11:30:02 EST 2023
  - [Affidavit Concerning Name Change of Christopher Matthew Cavanaugh to Mattanaw](#affidavit-concerning-name-change-of-christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-to-mattanaw)
  - [Affidavits Attesting to Living Autobiography](#affidavits-attesting-to-living-autobiography)
    - Thu Nov 30 17:21:59 EST 2023
  - [My Commitment to Chastity](#my-commitment-to-chastity)
    -  Thu Nov 30 12:42:23 EST 2023
  - [ID and bank activities and plans](#id-and-bank-activities-and-plans) 
  - [Gold Wiring](#gold-wiring)
    - Mon Nov 27 12:00:18 EST 2023
  - [Checklist for attacking the bank to provide my funds owed to me.](#checklist-for-attacking-the-bank-to-provide-my-funds-owed-to-me)
    - Sun Nov 26 10:59:53 EST 2023
  - You're positive so you're positive now and I discarded your religion.
    - Sun Nov 26 10:08:28 EST 2023
  - "You're in a bad mood, the real you appears shortly, I will wait" 
    - Sun Nov 26 10:07:35 EST 2023
  - The supply and demand of transactions themselves
    - Added Sun Nov 26 10:03:05 EST 2023, thought several days earlier
  - Small fees from government agencies and why is it not disincluded from taxes?
    - Added Sun Nov 26 10:02:55 EST 2023, added thought within last few days
    - Fixed with the logical "not": Tue Nov 28 06:26:41 EST 2023
  - Voting as the shortest communication received and it only says a name
    - Added Sun Nov 26 10:00:45 EST 2023
  - Which Priestism
    - Sat Nov 25 14:30:10 EST 2023
  - The Rich Don't Have Cash
    - Added Sat Nov 25 12:49:48 EST 2023, thought from two days prior
  - [Withdrawing Large Cash Amounts from Banks Issuing Their Own Checks, Refusals, and Pathways for Obtaining Cash](#withdrawing-large-cash-amounts-from-banks-issuing-their-own-checks-refusals-and-pathways-for-obtaining-cash)
    - Sat Nov 25 12:49:01 EST 2023
  - Legal Preparations and Social Organizational Graphs Utilizing Support
     - Sat Nov 25 12:46:42 EST 2023
  - Already True Dissertations Per Minute and Life Acqurired PhDs, and Relationship to Morality | Fri Nov 24 12:25:39 EST 2023
  - Postings of Non-Dissertative Ideas and Questions and Usage for Comparisons on Velocity of Significance and Ideation In the Population | Fri Nov 24 12:11:30 EST 2023
  - The Growth of Significance of Velocity of Significance and Ideation, as Evidenced in Creative Generation Lists, like this Contents and ThoughtStream | Fri Nov 24 12:10:42 EST 2023
  - The Utility of Decision Trees for Personal Planning in Advance | Fri Nov 24 12:08:51 EST 2023
  - Creative Generativity and Relationships to Accessible Neuro-Network Sections | Fri Nov 24 12:05:52 EST 2023
  - The Value of Ideas and Relationship to Me-time | Fri Nov 24 12:05:13 EST 2023
  - How to not stress idea loss | Fri Nov 24 12:03:46 EST 2023
  - Quantifying Creative Periods, and Want of More or Less in Others | Fri Nov 24 12:01:51 EST 2023
  - Extreme Creativity and Duration of Mining Interests | Fri Nov 24 11:59:27 EST 2023
  - Ad Finitum VS. Ad Infinitum, and Wanattams | Fri Nov 24 11:58:39 EST 2023
  - Chronic Bragging May Relate to Non-Acknowledgement, and Self-Knowledge | Fri Nov 24 11:57:19 EST 2023
  - Abstracts of Density of Non-Understanding Vs. Elaborations into Articles of Quality, and TLDR in the High IQ Community, and Complaints of Difficulty of Comprehension | Fri Nov 24 11:55:46 EST 2023
  - Lost Good Ideas that Return Vs. Are Lost and Their Frequency and Relationship to Tracking Conversations | Fri Nov 24 11:54:50 EST 2023
  - Imposing Comas on Patients | Fri Nov 24 11:52:11 EST 2023
  - Knowing Speed of Ideation, and Relationship to Velocity of Significance and Ideation | Fri Nov 24 11:46:12 EST 2023
  - Quantifying Dissertative Ideas Unrecorded Vs Recorded | Fri Nov 24 11:45:26 EST 2023
  - What can young children do natively that adults cannot, and utilization for human nature. | Fri Nov 24 11:43:11 EST 2023
  - When Creative Scribbles Become Organized | Fri Nov 24 11:40:19 EST 2023]
  - When Plain Playgrounds Were Amazing | Fri Nov 24 11:36:36 EST 2023
  - Insta TL;DR Articles of Dissertativeness and the Meaning | Fri Nov 24 11:32:38 EST 2023
  - Marriage as Protection from True and False Accusations | Fri Nov 24 11:30:41 EST 2023
  - Wanattam Glyphs | Fri Nov 24 11:28:20 EST 2023
  - Dogabuleebuseds | Fri Nov 24 11:24:36 EST 2023
  - Mental Editing Superiority | Fri Nov 24 11:24:36 EST 2023
  - [My Introduction to Mensa Sweden](#my-introduction-to-mensa-sweden)
  - [Accurate and Easy Descriptive Skin Complexion](#accurate-and-easy-descriptive-skin-complexion)
  - [Facebook and Using Sentiments in Marketing](#facebook-and-using-sentiments-in-marketing)
  - [Changing and Partly Disusing the Phrase "I am"](#changing-and-partly-disusing-the-phrase-i-am)
  - [Brain Dividedness as an Outcome of Non-Synonymous Multilingualism](#brain-dividedness-as-an-outcome-of-non-synonymous-multilingualism)
  - [The Need to Finally Understand Whale and Dolphin Brains](#the-need-to-finally-understand-whale-and-dolphin-brains)
  - [Updates to the Solution Regarding Wetness in the Field Study on Homelessness and Wealthy Camping](#updates-to-the-solution-regarding-wetness-in-the-field-study-on-homelessness-and-wealthy-camping)
  - [You are an organism, and you have organelles](#you-are-an-organism-and-you-have-organelles)
  - [Religion as the slowest education pathway with the least iterations](#religion-as-the-slowest-education-pathway-with-the-least-iterations)
  - [Plans for resolving some specific aforementioned homelessness and wealthy camping issues](#plans-for-resolving-some-specific-aforementioned-homelessness-and-wealthy-camping-issues)
  - [Backup Tasks](#backup-tasks)
  - [Problem solving issues of interested related to the study of homelessness and wealthy camping](#problem-solving-issues-of-interested-related-to-the-study-of-homelessness-and-wealthy-camping)
  - [Warfare Census and Demographics](#warfare-census-and-demographics)
  - [Falsifications and Infeasibilities of Histocial Methodology and Practice](#falsifications-and-infeasibilities-of-historical-methodology-and-practice)
  - [Population, Quality of Life, and Life and Death Plans](#population-quality-of-life-and-life-and-death-plans)
  - [Wealthy and Luxuriant Beach Camping](#wealthy-and-luxuriant-beach-camping)
  - [Aimless Behavior and Work-Labor](#aimless-behavior-and-work-labor)
  - [Broadening Synonyms of Anti-Prejudice](#broadening-synonyms-of-anti-prejudice)
  - [Common Retirement Struggles, Part I](#common-retirement-struggles-part-i)
  - [Reinterpreting the Role of Normalcy in Morality, and the Relationship to Determinism](#reinterpreting-the-role-of-normalcy-in-morality-and-the-relationship-to-determinism)
  - [The Full Extent of Marketing Practices and Making It Identical with Education](#the-full-extent-of-marketing-practices-and-making-it-identical-with-education)
  - [Stock in Nations and Single Combined Retirement and Basic Income Accounts](#stock-in-nations-and-single-combined-retirement-and-basic-income-accounts)
  - [Public Blood Storage and Replacement Stations](#pulic-blood-storage-and-replacement-stations)
  - [Oblivion in the Afterlife as Contrary to Equality, and Being Aligned with Hate](#oblivion-in-the-afterlife-as-contrary-to-equality-and-being-aligned-with-hate)
  - [Introduction to Mensa Sweden Under the Gaming Theme](introduction-to-mensa-sweden-under-the-gaming-theme)
  - [Color Palettes for Social Justice-Comfort](color-palettes-for-social-justice-comfort)
  - [Every animal is deformed already](every-animal-is-deformed-already)
  - [Cloud Surfaced Earth Hypothesis](cloud-surfaced-earth-hypothesis)
  - [On Partial Self-Marketing Removing Propaganda](#on-partial-self-marketing-removing-propaganda)
  - [Software Tasks](#software-tasks)
  - [Study of One's Symptoms as Knowledgeable Symptomology](#study-of-ones-symptoms-as-knowledgeable-symptomology)
  - [The Replacement of Pascal's False Wager is Easy](#the-replacement-of-pascals-wager-is-easy)
  - [The Idea of Lobbing in Business and Intelligence](#the-idea-of-lobbing-in-business-and-intelligence)
  - [Naturalistic Description of Attention](#naturalistic-description-of-attention)
  - [Thinking of me as a very old person is appropriate](#thinking-of-me-as-a-very-old-person-is-appropriate)
  - [It is possible to share everything](#it-is-possible-to-share-everything)
  - [Proving determinism with an approach of self-neural inspection in conjuction with introspection](#proving-determinism-with-an-approach-of-self-neural-inspection-in-conjuction-with-introspection)
  - [Planned completion of key workflow related functionality](#planned-completion-of-key-workflow-related-functionality)
  - [Planned update to publishing method of underlying software](#planned-update-to-publishing-method-of-underlying-software)
  - [Regret, and You Can't Even Want the Right Things](#regret-and-you-cant-even-want-the-right-things)
  - [Repetition of Example Uses of the My Moral-Attentional Processes](#repetition-of-example-uses-of-the-my-moral-attentional-processes)
  - [When what you are is not what you want](#when-what-you-are-is-not-what-you-want)
  - [Interview from Scott Douglas Jacobsen of Insight Journal](#interview-from-scott-douglas-jacobsen-of-insight-journal)
  - [arecentexaminationofothecalendaryear](#arecentexaminationofothecalendaryear)
  - [My Introduction to Mensa Sweden!](#my-introduction-to-mensa-sweden)
  - [Radioactive Data Storage, Radio Communication, and Increased Capacity](#radioactive-data-storage-radio-communication-and-increased-capacity)
  - [The End of Randomness, Randomness in Uncertainty, and Cryptography](#the-end-of-randomness-randoness-in-uncertainty-and-cryptography)
  - [Purely Intellectual Morality and Resistance to Application, and Learning](#purely-intellectual-morality-and-resistance-to-application-and-learning)
  - [Torque, Planning, Intelligence, and Unstealable Creativity](#torque-intelligence-planning-and-unstealable-creativity)
  - [Changing Processes of Morality](#changing-processes-of-morality)
  - [A strategy for creating a taste for your bag](#a-strategy-for-creating-a-taste-for-your-bag)
  - [You Should Have Thousands of STD Test Results](#you-should-have-thousands-of-std-test-results)
  - [Demographics You Don't Have that are You](#demographics-you-dont-have-that-are-you)
  - [Adding Philosophical Discourse to the High Intelligence Community](#adding-philosophical-discourse-to-the-High-Intelligence Community)
  - [Status on the Current Project Regarding Homelessness and Wealthy Camping](#status-on-the-current-project-regarding-homelessness-and-wealthy-camping)
  - [If the news isn't interesting, others likely became less interesting](#if-the-news-isnt-interesting-others-likely-became-less-interesting)
  - [Inability to Intuit that Significance Precedes Persuasive Language](#inability-to-intuit-that-significance-precedes-persuasive-language)
  - [The Life Categories, Language, and Brain](#the-life-categories-language-and-brain)
  - [The Intelligent Who Cannot Find Real Games to Enjoy](#the-intelligent-who-cannot-find-real-games-to-enjoy)
  - [Cannibalism and Wartime Disrespect](#cannibalism-and-wartime-disrespect)
  - [I didn't invent your privacy](#i-didnt-invent-your-privacy)
  - [People didn't solve conversation](#people-didnt-solve-conversation)
  - [Some comments in Mensa to someone claiming special knowledge on "real creativity"](#some-comments-in-mensa-to-someone-claiming-special-knowledge-on-real-creativity)
  - [Can you unpriest a monk, or is a monk alone a priest?](#can-you-unpriest-a-monk-or-is-a-monk-alone-a-priest)
  - [A Pathway to Recovering Brain Material Related to Memories](#a-pathway-to-recovering-brain-material-related-to-memories)
  - [When can you sell a photograph?](#when-can-you-sell-a-photograph)
  - [Revising the Parenting Plan as Providing Reason to Live](#revising-the-parenting-plan-as-providing-reason-to-live)
  - [Modeling Skepticism](#modeling-skepticism)
  - [Updating Theorizing](#updating-theorizing)
  - [A comment in the HighIQ community regarding claims that certain rarities are really not so rare](#a-comment-in-the-highiq-community-regarding-claims-that-certain-rarities-are-really-not-so-rare)
  - [If we don't ever do it we're patterned away from it](#if-we-dont-ever-do-it-we-are-patterned-away-from-it)
  - [Explorations in Greater Freedom](#explorations-in-greater-freedom)
  - [My History of Writings in the High Intelligence Community](#my-history-of-writings-in-the-high-intelligence-community)
  - [A Mathematical Proof-like Demonstration of Preference of Youth to Age in Aesthetics from Sexual Preference and Cultural Example](#a-mathematical-proof-like-demonstration-of-preference-of-youth-to-age-in-aesthetics-from-sexual-preferences-and-cultural-example)
  - [Making good encyclopedias available offline](#making-good-encyclopedias-available-offline)
  - [Mattanaw says you need not join moments of somebody else’s silence](#mattanaw-says-you-need-not-join-moments-of-somebody-elses-silence)
  - [Plans for the Evening](#plans-for-the-evening)
  - [Suffixes and Prefixes, and Interfixes that didn’t Dictionary](#suffixed-and-prefixes-and-interfixes-that-didnt-dictionary)
  - [Mocking Shit Faux-Jargon like “Boomer”](#mocking-shit-faux-jargon-like-boomer)
  - [Redoing strange grammatical constuctions, like variations on 'lay'](#redoing-strange-grammatical-constructions-like-variations-on-lay)
  - [Firsts of the Author and "Firsting" Behavior](#first-of-the-author-and-firsting-behavior)
  - [New reading of Schopenhauer](#new-reading-of-schopenhauer)
  - [What internal implementation disputes exist in the brain, and how does the brain resolve those for us, with or without our participation?](#what-internal-implementation-disputes-exist-in-the-brain-and-how-does-the-brain-resolve-those-for-us-with-or-without-our-participation)
  - [Knowing if and when processing is parallel](#knowing-if-and-when-processing-is-parallel)
  - [Upcoming Thoughtstreams: Self-Created Textiles on an Animal-Creativity Spectrum...](#upcoming-thoughtstreams-self-created-textiles)
  - [Pretending one is not Procrastinating, and Unchangeable Occlusions](#pretending-one-is-not-procrastinating-and-unchangeable-occlusions)
  - [Practentice](#practentice)
  - [Automatic Weight Loss and General Life Excellences](#automatic-weight-loss-and-general-life-excellences)
  - [Book and Journal of Mattanaw as Uncharacteristic of the Views of Others](#book-and-journal-of-mattanaw-as-uncharacteristic-of-the-views-of-others)
  - [Ends and life-cycles](#ends-and-lifecycles)
  - [Pattern-history of Your Tissues](#pattern-history-of-your-tissues)
  - [Thinking of Salt as a Drug and Not a Mineral Nutrient](#thinking-of-salt-as-a-drug-and-not-a-mineral-nutrient)
  - [Nearly Free Air Insulation in Clothing](#air-insulation-in-clothing)
  - [Quick Remark on What Some Call Lateral Thinking](#quick-remark-on-what-some-call-lateral-thinking)
  - [Development on Homelessness Solutioning and Example of My Attentional Management Process](#development-on-homelessness-solutioning-and-example-of-my-attentional-management-process)
  - [Comment and response to "Cyclical Euphemization Process and Anticipated Word Expiry"](#commant-and-response-to-cyclical-euphemization-process-and-anticipated-word-expiry)
  - [Cyclical Euphemization Process and Anticipated Word Expiry](#cyclical-euphemization-process-and-anticipated-word-expiry)
  - [Familiarity with Self is Not a Clarified Representation](#familiarity-with-self-is-not-a-clarified-representation)
  - [Combining Widely Separate Situations and the Brain's Reactions to That](#combining-widely-separate-situations-and-the-brains-reactions-to-that)
  - [Upcoming initial postings](#upcoming-initial-postings)
  - [Cohesive Visions, Plans, and Post-Editing](#cohesive-visions-plans-and-post-editing)
  - [Paper and Energy](#paper-and-energy)
  - [Notes on Objectivity in Symbolic Ritualization for More Probable Recollection](#notes-objectivity-in-symbolic-ritualization-for-more-probable-recollection)
  - [Sharing of Tasks and Plans](#sharing-of-tasks-and-plans)
  - [I'm not that into relationships.](#im-not-that-into-relationships)
  - [Solving *your* problems by calling each other Brother or Sister.](#solving-your-problems-by-calling-each-other-brother-or-sister)
  - [Making the morning and evening routine mnemonic connect with the memory journey methodology](#making-the-morning-and-evening-routine-mnemonic-connect-with-the-memory-journey-methodology)
  - [Foolishness of the Common Trust in Voting.](#foolishness-of-the-common-trust-in-voting)
- [Prior ThoughtStream. August 15<sup>th</sup> 2018, through  November, 17<sup>th</sup>, 2022](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html)
  - [Communion with Cactuses](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#communion-with-cactuses)
  - [Cheap Camera Eyeballs and Your Citizenship](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#cheap-camera-eyeballs-and-your-citizenship)
  - [Doing without cell phones again.](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#doing-without-cell-phones-again)
  - [Holidays control how you reflect and think, and remember](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#holidays-control-how-you-reflect-and-think-and-remember)
  - [911 Remembrance slightly off schedule](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#911-remembrance-slightly-off-schedule)
  - [Technological shifts and generations](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#technological-shifts-and-generations)
  - [Amateur vs. Professional, Work vs. Leisure](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#amateur-vs-professional-work-vs-leisure)
  - [Ridding of the generation concept for current and future population groupings](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#ridding-of-the-generation-concept-for-current-and-future-population-groupings)
  - [My response in a conversation on reverse engineering meaning unicode sensors and sensors](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#my-response-in-a-conversation-on-reverse-engineering-meaning-unicode-sensors-and-sensors)
  - [Challenging Claims of Ignorance](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#challenging-claims-of-ignorance)
  - [Since your heads are separate you can’t see that mutually you’re nonsense](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#since-your-heads-are-separate-you-cant-see-that-mutually-youre-nonsense)
  - [Pat yourself on the back into the afterlife](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#pat-yourself-on-the-back-into-the-afterlife)
  - [The Assumption that Human Life Needs to Continue](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#the-assumption-that-human-life-needs-to-continue)
  - [How beautiful are paper stacks?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#how-beautiful-are-paper-stacks)
  - [James Dean and Identifying Good Acting](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#james-dean-and-identifying-good-acting)
  - [Nonaesthetics of Books and Aggregates of Paper<](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#nonaesthetics-of-books-and-aggregates-of-paper)
  - [Textiles that are never the same.](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#textiles-that-are-never-the-same)
  - [Finding the relationships between manipulation and leadership](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#finding-the-relationships-between-manipulation-and-leadership)
  - [Higher Order Attention, Notes](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#higher-order-attention-notes)
  - [Exploring Distance to Town in Provisioning of the Camping Traveler and the Homeless](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#exploring-distance-to-town-in-provisioning-of-the-camping-traveler-and-the-homeless)
  - [Factors in basic travel and homeless life provisioning, continued](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#factors-in-basic-travel-and-homeless-life-provisioning-continued.)
  - [Factors in basic travel and homeless life provisioning](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#factors-in-basic-travel-and-homeless-life-provisioning.)
  - [Finding places to sleep as a hobo or traveler](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#finding-places-to-sleep-as-a-hobo-or-traveler)
  - [You Lived in Dogsgrace](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#you-lived-in-dogsgrace)
  - [Are you infurriated?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#are-you-infurriated)
  - [LGBTQMATTANAWIRN+](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#lgbtqmattanawirn)
  - [Has anyone created a science of facial manipulation?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#has-anyone-created-a-science-of-facial-manipulation)
  - [Welcome to the Dogolocaust](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#welcome-to-the-dogolocaust)
  - [You’re Infuryier, You Furrier!](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#youre-infuryier-you-furrier)
  - [I don’t recall wanting to forget, or blot out](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#i-dont-recall-wanting-to-forget-or-blot-out)
  - [Harnessing Lack of Death-fear in Children](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#harnessing-lack-of-death-fear-in-children)
  - [Permanence of Placement in Gifted Schools](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#permanence-of-placement-in-gifted-schools)
  - [Who’s checking on Vietnam?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#whos-checking-on-vietnam)
  - [Salvationstony](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#salvationstony)
  - [Deathtiny](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#deathtiny)
  - [You pretended harder with your love on dogs](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#for-dog-lovers-christians-and-equalitarians)
  - [You are disallowed in public](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#you-are-disallowed-in-public)
  - [Suboptimal Sun](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#suboptimal-sun)
  - [Positive Health Event and Planned Time Away from Social Media](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#positive-health-event-and-planned-time-away-from-social-media)
  - [Ordering and Paying at the Outset at Restaurants](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#ordering-and-paying-at-the-outset-at-restaurants)
  - [Who’s checking on Niger?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#whos-checking-on-niger)
  - [Unthinking Hearts that Save](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#unthinking-hearts-that-save)
  - [When is being a “guest” over?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#when-is-being-a-guest-over)
  - [How transitional is your mind?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#how-transitional-is-your-mind)
  - [A Brief Summary View of Positive Psychology](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#a-brief-summary-view-of-positive-psychology)
  - [Humancan, Add or Mod the Solution, or Related Problem Statement](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#humancan-add-or-mod-the-solution-or-related-problem-statement)
  - [Attending to your own mind versus having your head pointed by others](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#attending-to-your-own-mind-versus-having-your-head-pointed-by-others)
  - [I’m still an elitist](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#im-still-an-elitist)
  - [You’re not a scientist](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#youre-not-a-scientist)
  - [Hardware Supply as Scientific Supply for the Learning Population](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#hardware-supply-as-scientific-supply-for-the-learning-population)
  - [Responding When Stopped by Police](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#responding-when-stopped-by-police)
  - [Fetal Alcohol Syndrome. Your Religion Didn’t Fix Your Habits](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#fetal-alcohol-syndrome-your-religion-didnt-fix-your-habits)
  - [Modern on your technology but not on your Moral Technology, or](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#modern-on-your-technology-but-not-on-your-moral-technology-or)
  - [Adding Detail to Nature](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#adding-detail-to-nature)
  - [More detailed than nature](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#more-detailed-than-nature)
  - [Social Snippet, No Need to Respond](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#social-snippet-no-need-to-respond)
  - [Calculating temperature with digital photographs](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#calculating-temperature-with-digital-photographs)
  - [Insectivory and Earthworm-eating as Early Market-forcing Regulations](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#insectivory-and-earthworm-eating-as-early-market-forcing-regulations)
  - [Did anyone check on Uruguay?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#did-anyone-check-on-uruguay)
  - [When is a nation a property of a thing](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#when-is-a-nation-a-property-of-a-thing)
  - [Metals with Nationalities?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#metals-with-nationalities)
  - [What can you disable in your mind?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#what-can-you-disable-in-your-mind)
  - [People who have interests that are not worthwhile](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#people-who-have-interests-that-are-not-worthwhile)
  - [“Survival of the Fittest”](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#survival-of-the-fittest)
  - [Jobs as Internment Camps Where people can concentrate](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#jobs-as-internment-camps-where-people-can-concentrate)
  - [Life is Easy, Contrary to Your Worldview](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#life-is-easy-contrary-to-your-worldview)
  - [Homosexuality creates a survival advantage because you actually like yourself](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#homosexuality-creates-a-survival-advantage-because-you-actually-like-yourself)
  - [Were you creative?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#were-you-creative)
  - [You depended on everyone else for your morality](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#you-depended-on-everyone-else-for-your-morality)
  - [Wanting to die “as is”](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#wanting-to-die-as-is)
  - [Death and Your Mind Right Now](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#death-and-your-mind-right-now)
  - [Justify your sex, and Discover Your Lack of Moral Sophistication](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#justify-your-sex-and-discover-your-lack-of-moral-sophistication)
  - [Avoiding “Who, What, Where, When, Why, and How” for all things](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#avoiding-who-what-where-when-why-and-how-for-all-things)
  - [I don’t know who me am, but I know some who me were](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#i-dont-know-who-me-am-but-i-know-some-who-me-were)
  - [Final Thoughts, Fear of Death, and Death Plans](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#final-thoughts-fear-of-death-and-death-plans)
  - [“I didn’t realize Mattanaw was a diety, until moments before I died”](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#i-didnt-realize-mattanaw-was-a-diety-until-moments-before-i-died)
  - [Losing fear of death, because your life is TV](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#losing-fear-of-death-because-your-life-is-tv)
  - [Social Snippet, The Error Hunting of those Who Don’t Understand](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#social-snippet-the-error-hunting-of-those-who-dont-understand)
  - [How Universal is Personal History Alteration?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#how-universal-is-personal-history-alteration)
  - [Earlier and Later than Your Religion](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#earlier-and-later-than-your-religion)
  - [Pretending Equality in Advance, and Truthfulness of Halves of a Dichotomized Species, in the Animal Kingdom.](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#pretending-equality-in-advance-and-truthfulness-of-halves-of-a-dichotomized-species-in-the-animal-kingdom)
  - [High Culture, versus Low People](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#high-culture-versus-low-people)
  - [Sentences about yourself, if honest](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#sentences-about-yourself-if-honest Sentences about yourself, if honest)
  - [Solidified in ceremony](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#solidified-in-ceremony)
  - [An Intolerable thing about Marriage](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#an-intolerable-thing-about-marriage)
  - [Philosophical Questions, Not Very Puzzling](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#philosophical-questions-not-very-puzzling)
  - [Special sentences are a rarity](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#special-sentences-are-a-rarity)
  - [Social Snippet, No Analysis, Assumes Complete](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#social-snippet-no-analysis-assumes-complete)
  - [Social Snippet, Confined Criticism](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#social-snippet-confined-criticism)
  - [Grouping and ungrouping frequencies?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#grouping-and-ungrouping-frequencies)
  - [significance-of-mind-and-the-plausibility-of-the-conception-of-will-to-power-in-nietzsche](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#significance-of-mind-and-the-plausibility-of-the-conception-of-will-to-power-in-nietzsche)
  - [Social Snippet, Sharing Thoughts](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#social-snippet-sharing-thoughts)
  - [Social Snippet, Say Trolling](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#social-snippet-say-trolling)
  - [The Significance of Ideas and Creativity](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#the-significance-of-ideas-and-creativity)
  - [All Local Examples as Metaphors for the Universe](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#all-local-examples-as-metaphors-for-the-universe)
  - [Efficacy of Wishes and Prayers](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#efficacy-of-wishes-and-prayers)
  - [Wishing Wells for Morons that Were Everyone](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#wishing-wells-for-morons-that-were-everyone)
  - [Paste Dictionary](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#paste-dictionary)
  - [Keep splaining, agesplainer](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#keep-splaining-agesplainer)
  - [Pretend Strategies and Algorithms that are Christian](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#pretend-strategies-and-algorithms-that-are-christian)
  - [Making Death Plans so It Becomes a Rational Choice](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#making-death-plans-so-it-becomes-a-rational-choice)
  - [Social Snippet, Say Again](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#social-snippet-say-again)
  - [Social Snippets](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#social-snippets)
  - [Explanations on this Work in Conversation Format](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#explanations-on-this-work-in-conversation-format)
  - [“Two wrongs don’t make a right.”](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#two-wrongs-dont-make-a-right)
  - [Being Vegan at Kaladi Brothers Jewel Lake, Anchorage](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#being-vegan-at-kaladi-brothers-jewel-lake-anchorage)
  - [When you loved your own post, did you “Love you but not like you?”](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#when-you-loved-your-own-post-did-you-love-you-but-not-like-you)
  - [Did you ever feel weird for loving your own post?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#did-you-ever-feel-weird-for-loving-your-own-post)
  - [Have you ever had a moment lost, because you were focused on a defect?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#have-you-ever-had-a-moment-lost-because-you-were-focused-on-a-defect)
  - [Could it be that Ebonics is just English?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#could-it-be-that-ebonics-is-just-english)
  - [When You are Saved by Complete Iefficacy of Prayer](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#when-you-are-saved-by-complete-iefficacy-of-prayer)
  - [Enabling the Dalai Llama](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#enabling-the-dalai-llama)
  - [The Presence of Children](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#the-presence-of-children)
  - [The time it takes to get off of religion will relate to](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#the-time-it-takes-to-get-off-of-religion-will-relate-to)
  - [Ending religion in the western world should be easy](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#ending-religion-in-the-western-world-should-be-easy)
  - [Ability to answer direct questions and religion](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#ability-to-answer-direct-questions-and-religion)
  - [The Friend Lists of Christians](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#the-friend-lists-of-christians)
  - [Would it be worth discarding religion if it secured “love”](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#would-it-be-worth-discarding-religion-if-it-secured-love)
  - [We use our toys to indicate our civilization and not ourselves](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#we-use-our-toys-to-indicate-our-civilization-and-not-ourselves)
  - [What is the facial expression that corresponds to love and how long does it last?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#what-is-the-facial-expression-that-corresponds-to-love-and-how-long-does-it-last)
  - [Announcing the Mattanaw Certification Program](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#announcing-the-mattanaw-certification-program)
  - [Cageism](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#cageism)
  - [My wants don’t change much](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#my-wants-dont-change-much)
  - [My wants don’t change much](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#my-wants-dont-change-much)
  - [Pretending you’re backed by science, and “Recollection People”](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#pretending-youre-backed-by-science-and-recollection-people)
  - [Races as Early Speciation, and Penis Size](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#races-as-early-speciation-and-penis-size)
  - [You didn’t make your bias, so your opinion is recollection](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#you-didnt-make-your-bias-so-your-opinion-is-recollection)
  - [Biases arise](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#biases-arise)
  - [Bringing topics to rest with papers, via incentives](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#bringing-topics-to-rest-with-papers-via-incentives)
  - [Pseudo Chirality](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#pseudo-chirality)
  - [Radio Towers, Premade and Fabricated](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#radio-towers-premade-and-fabricated)
  - [Loosen the coupling between yourself and history](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#loosen-the-coupling-between-yourself-and-history)
  - [Good Bartenders](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#good-bartenders)
  - [End of Chess: Victory to White](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#end-of-chess-victory-to-white)
  - [The “Soul” is as primitive as you can get, you Animist!](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#the-soul-is-as-primitive-as-you-can-get-you-animist)
  - [Omission reveals suicide is the norm, unless you don’t make any decision at all.](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#omission-reveals-suicide-is-the-norm-unless-you-dont-make-any-decision-at-all)
  - [Think of a verb as a stored procedure](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#think-of-a-verb-as-a-stored-procedure)
  - [Minimum structures extending into space](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#minimum-structures-extending-into-space)
  - [Direct to space transport](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#direct-to-space-transport)
  - [“Clinched that debate barely thinking about it, did you?”](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#clinched-that-debate-barely-thinking-about-it-did-you)
  - [Tombstones](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#tombstones)
  - [More on Determinism](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#more-on-determinism)
  - [Swap your language with a small language](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#swap-your-language-with-a-small-language)
  - [Abraham lived 900 plus years? And the biologist believes it](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#abraham-lived-900-plus-years)
  - [Suppose you learn logic](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#suppose-you-learn-logic)
  - [Reconsider your baby. Reconsider your LIES](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#reconsider-your-baby.-reconsider-your-lies.)
  - [Proactive, Retroactive, and Along the Way](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#proactive-retroactive-and-along-the-way)
  - [TO SEARCH, TO BE EXPOSED TO IT RANDOMLY, OR TO KNOW WHERE IT IS](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#to-search-to-be-exposed-to-it-randomly-or-to-know-where-it-is)
  - [We are not “one”](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#we-are-not-one)
  - [Your Equality Was Founded on Appearances](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#your-equality-was-founded-on-appearances)
  - [Personal Identification, Naming, and Species Membership](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#personal-identification-naming-and-species-membership)
  - [Reality Probability or Reality Feel](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#reality-probability-or-reality-feel)
  - [Cumpleañosiphilia](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#cumpleañosiphilia)
  - [Homo Sapiens Sapiens Mattanaw](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#homo-sapiens-sapiens-mattanaw)
  - [Low Probability Next Thought, or High Probability Next Thought](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#low-probability-next-thought-or-high-probability-next-thought)
  - [Turning parts of electronic devices off, and Computers containing numerous separate systems.](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#turning-parts-of-electronic-devices-off-and-computers-containing-numerous-separate-systems)
  - [“My idea versus true idea.”](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#my-idea-versus-true-idea)
  - [Allowed to hate](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#allowed-to-hate)
  - [“Money Beginnings”](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#money-beginnings)
  - [Sharing what starts in your head, versus secrecy](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#sharing-what-starts-in-your-head-versus-secrecy)
  - [“You should see my little scabbies.”](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#you-should-see-my-little-scabbies)
  - [Equal to the Disabled](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#equal-to-the-disabled)
  - [You’re 1/1ths a Person](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#youre-one-oneths-a-person)
  - [How Important is Listening?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#how-important-is-listening)
  - [Homo Sapiens Sapiens](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#homo-sapiens-sapiens)
  - [The relationship between knowledge and action](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#the-relationship-between-knowledge-and-action)
  - [Priveleges and Not Serving](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#priveleges-and-not-serving)
  - [Dead Totalitarianism and Your Leaders](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#dead-totalitarianism-and-your-leaders)
  - [Cycling vs Walking](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#cycling-vs-walking)
  - [The United States is Multicult](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#the-united-states-is-multicult)
  - [Math Professors and Mathing their Occupations](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#math-professors-and-mathing-their-occupations)
  - [Confirming mathematical answers in professors and math texts](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#confirming-mathematical-answers-in-professors-and-math-texts)
  - [Not Utilizing Rooms Per Capita for Social Distancing](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#not-utilizing-rooms-per-capita-for-social-distancing)
  - [Covid Didn’t Affect Birth Rates Substantially](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#covid-didnt-affect-birth-rates-substantially)
  - [With enough content you may finally feel content](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#with-enough-content-you-may-finally-feel-content)
  - [Autocurrect now exists](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#autocurrect-now-exists)
  - [Animal Cruelty via Reptiles](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#animal-cruelty-via-reptiles)
  - [More on Interpersonal Differences in Individuals and in Aggregate and Elimination of Equality as the Justification of Social Justice.](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#more-on-interpersonal-differences-in-individuals-and-in-aggregate-and-elimination-of-equality-as-the-justification-of-social-justice)
  - [“Did I stutter.”](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#did-i-stutter)
  - [More on Equalization Bias](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#more-on-equalization-bias)
  - [The “Garbage-in, Garbage-out” problem and Richard Feynman](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#the-garbage-in-garbage-out-problem-and-richard-feynman)
  - [More on the Art of Defects](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#more-on-the-art-of-defects)
  - [An Art of Defects](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#an-art-of-defects)
  - [Same religion for everyone in a society](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#same-religion-for-everyone-in-a-society)
  - [Coping With Non-holism. A Start. Part I](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#coping-with-non-holism-a-start-part-i)
  - [Sawing Bicycles in Two](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#sawing-bicycles-in-two)
  - [Where would you expect to find a non-pattern?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#where-would-you-expect-to-find-a-non-pattern)
  - [Which diversity to continue?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#which-diversity-to-continue)
  - [“Love versus Hatred” and other such excessively basic behavioral comparisons](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#love-versus-hatred-and-other-such-excessively-basic-behavioral-comparisons)
  - [Kilauea, Volcanoes, and Earth is Old and Just Nature](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#kilauea-volcanoes-earth-is-old-and-just-nature)
  - [Quantifying Influence and “What to learn next](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#quantifying-influence-and-what-to-learn-next)
  - [“Amen” and other PUNCTUATION marks](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#amen-and-other-punctuation-marks.)
  - [Has a female ever clogged a toilet?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#has-a-female-ever-clogged-a-toilet)
  - [The consequences of Dough-mastication](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#the-consequences-of-dough-mastication)
  - [How patient are you with your censors?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#how-patient-are-you-with-your-censors)
  - [Parental Perversion by Default. A Diatribe](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#parental-perversion-by-default-a-diatribe)
  - [What kind of rejection do you have?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#what-kind-of-rejection-do-you-have)
  - [“I don’t know what thoughts to have”](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#i-dont-know-what-thoughts-to-have)
  - [Earth chose another animal](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#earth-chose-another-animal)
  - [You hid the handicapped](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#you-hid-the-handicapped)
  - [Inability to create meaning](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#inability-to-create-meaning)
  - [Omelettes are just egg tacos](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#omelettes-are-just-egg-tacos)
  - [“Skepticism” is not a strategy](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#skepticism-is-not-a-strategy)
  - ["Woah, he's Scrumpty."](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#woah-hes-scrumpty)
  - [Celebrating 4 years in business for myself](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#celebrating-4-years-in-business-for-myself)
  - [Stuttering, sweaty, awkward, hard, uncomfortable truth and honesty](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#stuttering-sweaty-awkward-hard-uncomfortable-truth-and-honesty)
  - [Anytime anyone chooses a new fashion, they can be considered inauthentic](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#anytime-anyone-chooses-a-new-fashion)
  - [Can you massage my palms please?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#can-you-massage-my-palms-please)
  - [I am everything except what you don't want, and more](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#i-am-everything-except-what-you-dont-want-and-more)
  - [Did Jesus or Buddha need editors?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#did-jesus-or-buddha-need-editors)
  - [Coronavirus Deaths Were Not "Deserved"](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#coronavirus-deaths-were-not-deserved)
  - [Coexist is not a strategy, II](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#coexist-is-not-a-strategy-ii)
  - [Coronavirus was your religion's fault](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#coronavirus-was-your-religions-fault)
  - [Mattanaw is a revelation](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#mattanaw-is-a-revelation)
  - [Before he became man, he was trout](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#before-he-became-man-he-was-trout)
  - [What language is required to permit inferences about how someone feels?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#what-language-is-required-to-permit-inferences-about-how-someone-feels)
  - [Re-use the alcohol one million times](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#reuse-the-alcohol-one-million-times)
  - [My grocery list for tomorrow](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#my-grocery-list-for-tomorrow)
  - ["I died and went to heaven!"](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#i-died-and-went-to-heaven)
  - [Mattanaw is an Animal](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#mattanaw-is-an-animal-three)
  - [It's an American Virus. Own it](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#its-an-american-virus-own-it)
  - [Wield the opportunity for your goals in waiting](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#wield-the-opportunity-for-your-goals-in-waiting)
  - ["Be careful what you wish for."](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#be-careful-what-you-wish-for)
  - [Lack of Concern about Overpopulation](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#lack-of-concern-about-overpopulation)
  - [Saying Something Truthful With "We"](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#saying-something-truthful-with-we)
  - [When you do not receive adequate recognition](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#when-you-do-not-receive-adequate-recognition)
  - [Happy Thoughts, or More Complete Analyses](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#happy-thoughts-or-more-complete)
  - [Mood of a Conversation and Narrow Mindedness](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#mood-of-a-conversation-and-narrow-mindedness)
  - [The height of "heartlessness" to me is](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#the-height-of-heartlessness-to-me-is)
  - ["Wakey, Wakey, Morning Earthquakey"](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#wakey-wakey-morning-earthquakey)
  - [When are you irrationalizing?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#when-are-you-irrationalizing)
  - [Two Ways to Rationalize](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#two-ways-to-rationalize)
  - [Excitement Trumps Rationality](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#excitement-trumps-rationality)
  - [You just wanted to say that thought you had](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#you-just-wanted-to-say-that-thought-you-had)
  - ["I do not like the messenger](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#i-did-not-like-the-messenger)
  - [And that's the final thought. Amen](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#and-thats-the-final-thought-amen)
  - [Instant Motivation, Part One](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#instant-motivation-part-one)
  - [Bird Kiting](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#bird-kiting)
  - [Sometimes broken software, is better than working software](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#sometimes-broken-software-is-better-than-working-software.)
  - ["Practice makes, whatever practice makes."](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#practice-makes-whatever-practice-makes)
  - [Naming your other selves](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#naming-your-other-selves)
  - [Have a mentor for the right reasons](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#have-a-mentor-for-the-right-reasons)
  - [Deciding When to Retain Knowledge](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#deciding-when-to-retain-knowledge)
  - ["Priby Proboscis"](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#priby-proboscus)
  - ["You've been Musked"](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#youve-been-musked)
  - [Fatty Pigeon Ranch](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#fatty-pigeon-ranch)
  - [9/11 War Advocates](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#911-war-advocates)
  - [Jesus would be killed again](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#jesus-would-be-killed-again)
  - [Old Cars are, Oddly Comforting](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#old-cars-are-oddly-comforting)
  - [Parents and Mentors Remove Obstacles (And Other Stuff)](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#parents-and-mentors-remove-obstacles-and-other-stuff)
  - [What is the value of coronavirus news, per capita?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#what-is-the-value-of-coronavirus-news-per-capita)
  - [Pretend to be Responsible, so You Can Pretend to be Special](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#pretend-to-be-responsible-so-you-can-pretend-to-be-special)
  - [Mattanaw's Academic Papers](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#mattanaws-academic-papers)
  - [Typod Forevr. When the Editor Who Can, Chooses Not To](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#when-the-editor-who-can-chooses-not-to)
  - [When big data, is just data](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#when-big-data-is-just-data)
  - [Called the coperator, and they did not coperate](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#called-the-coperator-and-they-did-not-coperate)
  - [The Cure to Fatty Clogs of Death](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#the-cure-to-fatty-clogs-of-death)
  - [My Political Tendency Test](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#my-political-tendency-test)
  - [I'm empathetic, and that's why you're going to manage your own emotions](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#im-empathetic-and-thats-why-youre-going-to-manage-your-own-emotions)
  - [When "Never give up" is not the answer](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#when-never-give-up-is-not-the-answer)
  - [Dying Speech of an Old Philosopher](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#dying-speech-of-an-old-philosopher)
  - [Let's Change Marketing Together](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#lets-change-marketing-together)
  - [Creating an oxygen rich living environment](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#creating-an-oxygen-rich-living-environment)
  - [Can you see the root?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#can-you-see-the-root)
  - [Our emotional dance with reality](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#our-emotional-dance-with-reality)
  - [If I do it, or I don't do it, is already determined](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#if-i-do-it-or-i-dont-do-it-is-already-determined)
  - ["Hey! I thought we were fwinds!"](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#hey-i-thought-we-were-fwinds)
  - [See you later, potential friend](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#see-you-later-potential-friend)
  - [Sleeping as much as I need to](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#sleeping-as-much-as-I-need-to)
  - [You and everyone you know as a public notary](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#you-and-everyone-you-know-as-a-public-notary)
  - [A current interest in logic and mathematics](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#a-current-issue-in-logic-and-mathematics)
  - [Process diagram your way to the mathematical answers](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#process-diagram-your-way-to-mathematical-answers)
  - [The Software is Botched](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#the-software-is-botched)
  - [Can you ever really tell, if you need more,](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#can-you-ever-really-tell-if-you-need-more)
  - [Ever notice that the "best" option for a decision](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#ever-notice-that-the-best-option-for-a-decision)
  - [Yergonnadecryptit](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#yergonnadecryptit)
  - [I<sup>th</sup> Cotomies](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#ith-chotomies)
  - ["Fight for your rights!"](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#fight-for-your-rights)
  - [If you are not deep, you are, well](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#if-you-are-not-deep)
  - [Mixed origins of culture, and the "You have no idea where it came from."](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#mixed-origins-of-the-culture)
  - [Karma is not in your religion](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#karma-is-not-in-your-religion)
  - [Your maturation will happen inevitably](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#your-maturation-will-happen-inevitably)
  - [Procrastinating? You are on more than one cycle of activity and inactivity](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#procrastinating-you-are-on-more-than-one-cycle-of-activity-and-inactivity)
  - [Scientists achieve warm goals through cold logic](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#scientists-achieve-warm-goals-through-cold-logic)
  - [Empathy and Grounds for Rejecting It](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#empathy-and-grounds-for-rejecting-it)
  - [We Are Empty Space Now?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#we-are-empty-space-now)
  - [USA: The Extractive International Customer](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#usa-the-extractive-international-customer)
  - [Your eyeball is always slightly downward, or upward, compared to the other](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#your-eyeball-is-always-slightly-downward-or-upward-compared-to-the-other)
  - [Honor Veterans with the truth](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#honor-veterans-with-the-truth)
  - [It wasn't brilliant](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#it-wasnt-brilliant)
  - [Survivable enough](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#survivable-enough)
  - [What's the size of your clan?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#whats-the-size-of-your-clan)
  - [Say nothing](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#say-nothing)
  - [Yer that word](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#yer-that-word)
  - [Cause-Effect is not Thought-to-Inference](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#cause-effect-is-not-thought-to-inference)
  - [Having the thoughts of others vs. Truth](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#having-the-thoughts-of-thers-vs-truth)
  - [I agree that is a quote](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#i-agree-that-is-a-quote)
  - [Quotes that are really old, Part I](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#quotes-that-are-really-old-one)
  - ["I don't like what you said therefore I can do anything I want to you." Part II."](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#i-dont-like-what-you-said-therefore-i-can-do-anything-i-want-to-you-part-ii)
  - [Fasting Undefined](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#fasting-undefined)
  - [Fact People](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#fact-people)
  - ["Equality is Real"](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#equality-is-real-what-about-preferences)
  - [Cultures with Mansplaining Built in](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#cultures-with-mansplaining-built-in)
  - [Public Opinion is Not a Process](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#public-opinion-is-not-a-process)
  - [Unremember the Word](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#unremember-the-word)
  - [Hey Troll!](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#hey-troll-i-wasnt-thinking-about-you)
  - [The Uninitiated Don't Know](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#the-uninitiated-dont-know)
  - [The Winter Holiday Season May be Simply for Tolerating the Winter](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#the-winter-holiday-season-may-be-simply-for-tolerating-the-winter)
  - [Relief comes soon after you get real](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#relief-comes-soon-after-you-get-real)
  - [Head Start Means Started from Behind](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#head-start-means-started-from-behind)
  - [If we were to give up on inheritance](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#if-we-were-to-give-up-on-inheritance)
  - [Single people get made fun of](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#single-people-get-made-fun-of-for-masturbation)
  - [First there was the gesture](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#first-there-was-the-gesture)
  - [Who are all these people who are having internal struggles against doing "evil"?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#who-are-all-the-people-struggling-with-evil-inclinations)
  - [In the beginning, there was the wordss](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#in-the-beginning-there-was-the-words)
  - [Nothing is as demonic as two thirds?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#nothing-is-as-demonic-as-two-thirds)
  - [When lying for a higher purpose](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#when-lying-for-a-higher-purpose)
  - ["Grateful" often means "I don't plan on doing anything"](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#grateful-often-means-I-dont-plan-on-doing-anything)
  - [Signatures, handwriting, and hand-markings](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#signatures-handwriting-and-hand-markings)
  - [Fault the Earth for what it does to itself,](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#fault-the-earth-for-what-it-does-to-itself)
  - [You don't reject what doesn't exist](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#you-dont-reject-what-doesnt-exist)
  - ["When to think, and when to remember?"](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#when-to-think-and-when-to-remember)
  - ["If it permanently ain't broke, don't fix it."](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#if-it-permanently-aint-broke-dont-fix-it)
  - [Using AI and Machine Learning to verify what works of religion are fictional](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#using-ai-and-machine-learning-to-verify-what-works-of-religion-are-fictional)
  - [Can I get a "Yeah right."?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#can-i-get-a-yeah-right)
  - [Just Saying "Smartness"](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#just-saying-smartness)
  - [Be Authentic, but that's Unbecoming](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#be-authentic-but-thats-unbecoming)
  - [Your Heart is a Blood-pumping Organ](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#your-heart-is-a-blood-pumping-organ)
  - [Not having a better way to say it](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#not-having-a-better-way-to-say-it)
  - ["Life is Empty"](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#life-is-empty)
  - [That Centenarian who slanders their way into heaven](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#that-centenarian-who-slanders-their-way-into-heaven)
  - ["Hello there", from the car](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#hello-there-from-the-car)
  - [Honesty is not extreme](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#honesty-is-not-extreme)
  - [I'm immune](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#im-immune)
  - [Uncage your animal, you animal](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#uncage-your-animal-you-animal)
  - ["I'm not a masochist, but hey, falsepath me anyway."](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#im-not-a-masochist-but-hey-falsepath-me-anyway)
  - [Getting real in the debate team](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#getting-real-in-the-debate-team)
  - [Saw it coming](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#saw-it-coming)
  - [Vetting the "remnant"](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#vetting-the-remnant)
  - [Obstructing Corporate Turnover](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#obstructing-corporate-turnover)
  - [The views of your ancestors](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#the-views-of-your-ancestors)
  - [Do you have the patience and open mind to receive a new Revelation?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#do-you-have-the-patience-and-open-mind-to-receive-a-new-revelation)
  - [It's brutal because you weren't honest with yourself](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#its-brutal-because-you-werent-honest-with-yourself)
  - [The Whole World is Stuck Here](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#the-whole-world-is-ok)
  - [Advice Dynamics](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#advice-dynamics)
  - [The ThoughtStream is also a Punching Bag](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#the-thoughtstream-is-also-a-punching-bag)
  - [Most are stuck here](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#most-are-stuck-here)
  - [Ignoring What is Definitely False](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#ignoring-what-is-definitely-false)
  - [Busy Bee](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#busy-bee)
  - [Tension between preservation and letting go](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#tension-between-preservation-and-letting-go)
  - [My website is a mandala](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#my-website-is-a-mandala)
  - [What? Solution-problem it?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#solution-problem-it)
  - [Laundry and Time](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#laundry-and-time)
  - ["It's a blessing and a curse."](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#its-a-blessing-and-a-curse)
  - [Heartwarming Somethings, One](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#heartwarming-somethings-one)
  - ["I don't have a favorite."](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#i-dont-have-a-favorite)
  - [Be 90 now](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#be-90-now)
  - [You're Woke so You're a Determinist Now](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#youre-woke-so-youre-a-determinist-now)
  - [Aligning Yourself with Probability](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#aligning-yourself-with-probability)
  - [Movie Ideas for People Who Can Make Movies, One](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#movie-ideas-for-people-who-can-make-movies-one)
  - [Remember Cryogenics?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#remember-cryogenics)
  - [Ignorance is Bliss?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#ignorance-is-bliss)
  - [Let R.I.P R.I.P](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#let-rip-rip)
  - [Nice job at the gym. I see you accomplished veins](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#nice-job-at-the-gym-I-see-you-accomplished-veins)
  - [Focus on yourself because you like you, right?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#focus-on-yourself-because-you-like-you-right)
  - ["Dr. Lunch", Part One](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#dr-lunch-part-one)
  - [Do you ever wish you could sing like a woman and a man?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#do-you-ever-wish-you-could-sing-like-a-woman-and-a-man)
  - [When Your Negative is My Positive](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#when-your-negative-is-my-positive)
  - [As a heuristic device, I don't listen to anyone](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#as-a-heuristic-device-i-dont-listen-to-anyone)
  - [Logic teachers have the responsibility](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#logic-teachers-have-the-responsibility)
  - [Sanest, not a Sadist](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#sanest-not-a-sadist)
  - [Nunavut is real](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#nunavut-is-real)
  - [Every logic course in history was incomplete](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#every-logic-course-in-history-was-incomplete)
  - [Challenge III. Find words that don't appear in true statements](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#challenge-three-find-words-that-dont-appear-in-true-sentences)
  - [Risks of not knowing your rights, and not really having rights](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#risks-of-not-knowing-your-rights)
  - ["Esquired and Exchequered, Bro."](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#esquired-and-exchequered-bro)
  - [On what cycle should I consume your recommended ingredients?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#on-what-cycle-should-I-consume-your-recommended-ingredients)
  - [You've been miscellaneoused](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#youve-been-miscellaneoused)
  - ["I did exactly what my parents told me to do"](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#i-did-exactly-what-my-parents-told-me-to-do)
  - [Don't be a sock blocker!](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#dont-be-a-sock-blocker)
  - [Legacy in the eternity?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#legacy-in-the-eternity)
  - [Inspired by Women](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#inspired-by-women)
  - [Complain with a solutionss](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#complain-with-a-solutionss)
  - [Disruptors are already out](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#disruptors-are-already-out)
  - [Sleep on it twice](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#sleep-on-it-twice)
  - [Elite Privileges](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#elite-privileges)
  - [Plural plurals](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#plural-plurals)
  - [There has to be a reasons](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#there-has-to-be-a-reasons)
  - [How to get out of caring about waste](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#how-to-get-out-of-caring-about-waste)
  - [What medium does your strategy take?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#what-medium-does-your-strategy-take)
  - [What form does your strategy take?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#what-form-does-your-strategy-take)
  - [Perfection is not a thing](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#perfection-is-not-a-thing)
  - [Where did this thought come from ultimately?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#where-did-this-thought-come-from-ultimately)
  - [Freedom in Politics. Being Independently Minded as an Independent](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#freedom-in-politics-being-independently-minded-as-an-independent)
  - [EstEst](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#estest)
  - [That Political Candidate Placed in Front of You](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#the-political-candidate-placed-in-front-of-you)
  - ["Every little bit counts" when you are on a false path too](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#every-little-bit-counts)
  - [Time Versus Logic](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#time-versus-logic)
  - [You programmed me!](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#you-programmed-me)
  - ["How do you handle ambiguity?"](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#how-do-you-handle-ambiguity)
  - [If hindsight was 2020](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#if-hindsight-was-2020-we-would-know-how-to-distribute-blame-correctly)
  - ["That's what he said"](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#thats-what-he-said)
  - [Infinite Recursion Continued..](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#infinite-recursion-continued)
  - [Infinite Recursion is Fine, and Freedom](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#infinite-recursion-is-fine-and-freedom)
  - [6 Degrees of Correlation or Causation](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#six-degrees-of-correlation-or-cuasation)
  - [When does one decide to get a flu vax? Before it doesn't work or after?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#get-the-flu-vax-before-it-doesnt-work-or-after)
  - [Determinism is a Comfort](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#determinism-is-a-comfort)
  - [We need to challenge and push each other to higher levels. Volunteer to be offended!](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#volunteer-to-be-offended)
  - [The un-newsification of the news seems to be nearly complete. Boycott time?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#the-un-newsification-of-the-news-seems-nearly-complete)
  - [What if you didn't actually "believe" anything, that you didn't instinctively act on?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#what-if-you-didnt-believe-anything-you-didnt-instinctively-act-on)
  - [Lose Weight to See Your Body](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#lose-weight-to-see-your-body)
  - [Saving as Investing](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#saving-as-investing)
  - [Optimism as a Buzkill](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#optimism-as-a-buzkill)
  - [Effort in Education, and Work](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#effort-in-education-and-work)
  - [Would you join a company called "Success Pyramid?"](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#joining-success-pyramid)
  - [A quality I value highly now: time to realization of incorrectness](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#time-to-realization-of-incorrectness)
  - [Learning is Real, So Equality Isn't](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#learning-is-real-so-equality-isnt)
  - [Determinism and the Swayed Vote](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#determinism-and-the-swayed-vote)
  - [A Field for Taboo Elimination?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#a-field-for-taboo-elimination)
  - [Agreement is just a partial analogy](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#agreement-is-a-partial-analogy)
  - [Dodging Undesirable Tongues](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#dodging-undesirable-tongues)
  - ["Fitting In"](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#fitting-in)
  - [Pre-meditation for Defense](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#premeditation-for-defense)
  - ["Resolutions that Happen"](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#resolutions-that-happen-repost)
  - [Degrees of Attachment to Present Thoughts](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#degrees-of-attachment-to-present-thoughts)
  - [Knowing someone's plans doesn't mean you inherited their gifts](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#knowing-someones-plans-doesnt-mean-you-inherited-their-gifts)
  - [My Dad Knows Better Than Your Dad](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#my-dad-knows-better-than-your-dad)
  - [Elders Tend to Lie, When the Topic is of Great Importance](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#elders-tend-to-lie-when-the-topic-is-of-the-greatest-importance)
  - [How I Inhibited My Fear of Death](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#how-i-inhibited-my-fear-of-death)
  - [EstEst](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#estest)
  - [You are the mostest special person in the whole world](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#you-are-the-mostest-special-person-in-the-world)
  - [History is not very actionable](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#history-is-not-very-actionable)
  - [Finding Change Levers by Creating Public Systems Models](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#finding-change-levers-by-creating-public-systems-models)
  - [Alternative Grading Methodologies](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#alternative-grading-methodologies)
  - [Our civilization is cultures](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#our-civilization-is-cultures)
  - [Activists of Inequality](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#activists-of-inequality)
  - [Challenge Two: Find texts that don't make the mistakes of challenge one](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#challenge-two-finding-texts-that-dont-make-the-mistakes-of-challenge-one)
  - [More where that came from](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#more-where-that-came-from)
  - [Is the urge to finish things the result of the escalation of commitment bias?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#is-the-urge-to-finish-things-the-result-of-the-escalation-of-commitment-bias)
  - [Increased Justice and Understanding What Justice Actually Is](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#increased-justice-and-understanding-what-justice-actually-is)
  - [Which party does a business decision belong to?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#what-party-does-a-business-decision-belong-to)
  - [All Quotes Must Include My Errors](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#all-quotes-must-include-my-errors)
  - [What is Trivial?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#what-is-trivial)
  - [Mattanaw Acts Alone on the ThoughtStream](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#mattanaw-acts-alone-on-the-thoughtstream)
  - [Origin of the Thoughts](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#origin-of-the-thoughts)
  - [When Will Genesis Ever End, Really?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#when-will-genesis-ever-end-really)
  - [Employment Relationships are Not Romances](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#employment-relationships-are-not-romances)
  - [Challenge One: Say "Best" or "Worst", only when it results in a true statement](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#challenge-one-avoiding-logically-risky-words)
  - [Record a commitment](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#record-a-commitment)
  - [A wave can be an oath too](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#a-wave-can-be-an-oath-too)
  - ["You are funny"](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#you-are-funny)
  - [A teacher takes you through all the steps](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#a-teacher-takes-you-through-all-the-steps)
  - [Thoughts are distillates](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#a-message-comes-out-of-a-funnel)
  - [Faith disappears,](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#faith-disappears)
  - [Prayer Overlaps Meditation so You are Part Buddhist](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#enlightenment-has-evolving-meaning)
  - [Enlightenment has Evolving Meaning](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#enlightenment-has-evolving-meaning)
  - [Faith disappears,](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#faith-disappears-but-then-it-returns-again)
  - [See no evil. Hear no evil. Speak no evil](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#to-think-fewer-evils)
  - [Kind Hearted Amusement is its Own Reward](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#kind-hearted-amusement-is-its-own-reward)
  - [Everyone gets confused](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#everyone-gets-confused)
  - [Publishing Plans and Results, If There Are Any](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#publishing-plans-and-results-if-there-are-any)
  - [Let's look at the learning intervals](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#its-easy-to-become-envious)
  - [It's easy to become envious,](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#its-easy-to-become-envious)
  - [The ThoughtStream is Enough](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#the-thoughtstream-is-enough)
  - [Maturity Models in Daily Life](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#maturity-models-in-daily-life)
  - [The first rule for choosing a mentor,](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#choosing-a-mentor-who-exists)
  - [The Best Mentors,](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#the-best-mentors-track-your-life-categories)
  - [Assume this blog is not about you](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#assume-this-blog-is-not-about-you)
  - [Beware of the Diagnosers](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#beware-of-the-diagnosers)
  - [Saving face, and No-sin](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#saving-face-and-no-sin)
  - [Creating problems for others](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#creating-problems-for-others)
  - [Zen doesn't care what you call it](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#zen-doesnt-care-what-you-call-it)
  - [When you don't know what you're witnessing](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#when-you-dont-know-what-youre-witnessing)
  - [Freethinking is My Religion](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#freethinking-is-my-religion-second)
  - [Ask for the Rainbows](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#ask-for-the-rainbows)
  - [Memorial Day Thoughts](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#memorial-day)
  - [Work is Play](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#make-work-play)
  - [Speakdream it](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#you-can-speakdream-whatever-you-want)
  - [There is freedom in the ThoughtStream](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#see-that-the-math-logic-is-in-all-good-things)
  - [See that the math-logic is in all good things](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#see-that-the-math-logic-is-in-all-good-things)
  - [Brief insights and fallacies](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#brief-insights-and-fallacies)
  - [Wisdom Can Be Taught and Cannot Be Taught](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#widson-can-be-taught-and-cannot-be-taught)
  - [Lights from profound minds](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#lights-from-profound-minds)
  - [The light shines in to the darkness, but the darkness was not overcome](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#the-darkness-was-not-overcome)
  - [Is it Really an Analogy?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#gaps-in-language-and-missing-or-impossible-analogies)
  - [Natural Patterns that Repeat, are Expected to Repeat](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#natural-patterns-that-repeat-are-expected-to-repeat-again)
  - [The ThoughtStream is Technical and Not](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#the-ThoughtStream-is-technical-and-not)
  - [Real Feelings](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#real-feelings)
  - [Tabula Rasa Pseudo-math. Escaping the Founders' Many Errors](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#tabula-rasa-pseudo-math)
  - [My questions are disallowed](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#my-questions-are-disallowed)
  - [Beware of the Rankers](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#beware-of-the-ranker)
  - ["We can fire you, or deny you services, at any time, for any reason, or no reason."](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#for-any-reason-or-no-reason)
  - [Unlocking our Journals](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#unlocking-our-journals)
  - [There are novelties in my "errors"](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#novelities-in-my-errors)
  - [Behavior and My Face](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#behavior-and-my-face)
  - [Looking up simple terms](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#revisiting-simple-terms)
  - [The judgments are premature](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#premature-judgments-for-artworks-incomplete)
  - [Selective Innovations](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#selective-innovations)
  - [Mattanaw is Races](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#mattanaw-is-races)
  - [Mattanaw is Races](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#mattanaw-is-races)
  - [AI to Create Fake Videos Versus AI to Detect Fake Videos](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#ai-to-create-and-detect-false-images-and-videos)
  - [Censorship is Talking Too](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#censorship-is-talking-too)
  - [It is important to me to talk about what gets avoided](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#it-is-important-to-me-to-talk-about-what-gets-avoided)
  - [Math is not democratic enough](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#math-is-not-democratic-enough)
  - [The ThoughtStream is Terse](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#the-thoughtstream-is-terse)
  - [You do not edit your speech](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#you-do-not-edit-your-speech)
  - [Impartiality is Prior to Equality](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#impartiality-is-prior-to-equality)
  - [Arrogantly Eternal or Eternally Arrogant](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#arrogantly-eternal-or-eternally-arrogant)
  - [National Narcissism](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#national-narcissism)
  - [Familiarity breeds imagination time](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#breeds-imagination-time)
  - [Do you ignore the language spectra?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#do-you-ignore-the-language-spectra)
  - [I Don't Know Personlanguage](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#i-dont-know-personlanguage)
  - [My "You"s are for you, and for me.](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#my-yous-are-for-you-and-for-me)
  - [Emotions are important enough to own](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#emotions-are-important-enough-to-own)
  - [Time for the Regular](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#time-for-the-regular)
  - [Display the People](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#display-the-people)
  - [Untruths of the Disciplines](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#truths-in-the-disciplines)
  - [Conceptlessness and the Buddha Nature](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#intralanguage-whorfianism-buddha-nature)
  - [Planes, with Turbulence as a Human Control Feature](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#turbulence-as-a-human-control-feature)
  - [Homage to Animal Grandma](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#pay-homage-to-animal-grandma)
  - [The goal of getting "straight-As" is not economical](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#goal-of-getting-straight-as)
  - [Determinism in the Procrastination](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#determinism-in-the-procrastination)
  - [Controls Against Indoctrination](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#controls-against-indoctrination)
  - [Founding Fathers, and Great Grandma Australophithecus](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#founding-fathers-and-great-grandma-australopithecine)
  - [Uniqueness, Analogies, and Absurdums](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#uniqueness-analogies-and-absurdums)
  - [Iterative less is more, for the sake of more, that is still less](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#iterative-less-is-more)
  - ["Disruptive Change Agent"](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#disruptive-change-agent)
  - [ResolutionsThatHappen](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#resolutions-that-happen)
  - [Few are "Woke"](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#few-are-woke)
  - [Details in the Diversity](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#details-in-the-diversity)
  - [Care to join me for dinner-breakfast?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#dinner-breakfast)
  - [Who makes this music?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#who-makes-this-music)
  - [I shall not repeat](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#i-shall-not-repeat)
  - [Indoctrinate the same you want to see in the world](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#indoctrinate-the-same)
  - [VICARIOUSLIVING](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#vicarious-living)
  - [Infer me from this message](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#infer-me-from-this-message)
  - [Equality in the Unevaluated?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#equality-in-the-unevaluated)
  - [Happy Whateversauce, and Merry Christmas too](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#happy-whateversauce)
  - [Enjoy the Christmas of Your Conquerors](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#end-the-christmas-of=your-conquerors)
  - [Political Non-affiliation](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#political-non-affiliation)
  - [Your life is a compulsion](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#your-life-is-a-compulsion)
  - [When advice becomes biological](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#when-advice-becomes-biological)
  - [Be the strange you want to see in the world!](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#be-the-strange-you-want-to-see-in-the-world)
  - [Your quote is contradicted by these other quotes..](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#quotes-contradicting-other-quotes)
  - [Your religion said to serve only one master](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#the-god-nation)
  - ["If me can't say't simple, me don't know't good."](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#me-dont-knowt-good)
  - ["Good" doesn't fit naturally into my vocabulary](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#my-philosophy-is-good)
  - [How I appear today,](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#who-ive-been-yesterdays)
  - [Assumptions are superficial](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#not-superficial-enough)
  - [Allthetimeliness](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#all-the-timeliness)
  - [What do you need to be undermined?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#what-do-you-need-to-be-undermined)
  - [Needless voting for the needless](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#needless-voting-for-the-needless)
  - [Buy Whatever](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#buy-whatever)
  - [Wisdom in the Heap](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#wisdom-in-the-heap)
  - [The News is a Mess](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#the-news-is-a-mess)
  - [Give me time](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#give-me-time-ill-help-put-your-mind-at-ease)
  - [Unedited Beauty](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#unedited-beauty)
  - [The ThoughtStream has few expectations](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#the-ThoughtStream-has-few-expectations)
  - [We had few books](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#we-had-few-books)
  - [Ignorance has few details](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#ignorance-has-few-details)
  - [What's a Vegan?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#whats-a-vegan)
  - [Profundity is Unwanted](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#profundity-unwanted)
  - [Prophesy the Offended](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#prophesy-the-offended)
  - [Fathom the Unfathomable](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#fathoming-the-unfathomable)
  - [I will use more words](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#i-will-use-more-words)
  - [The Earth shall be inherited by the Earth](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#the-earth-will-be-inherited-by-the-earth)
  - [Man created the binary in god and then judged it in binary](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#god-said-it-was-binary)
  - [Wait for It](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#incomplete-artworks)
  - [Freethinking is My Religion](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#freethinking-is-my-religion)
  - [Share the Thoughts](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#share-your-thoughts)
  - [Utterances do Not Reveal Essences](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#utterances-do-not-reveal-essenses)
  - [You Wanted this Guy](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#you-wanted-this-guy)
  - [A Lesson in Creating Specific Sentences](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#a-lesson-in-creating-specific-sentences)
  - [Completion is Immanent](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#nearing-completion-government-waste)
  - [What if You Didn't Believe?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#what-if-you-didnt-believe)
  - [Creative Generativity as Coping](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#creative-generativity-is-coping)
  - [I See the Diagrams](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#i-see-the-diagrams)
  - [Somethingelsiness](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#something-elsiness)
  - [Punctuated Agilibria](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#punctuated-agilibria)
  - [Sawse of the Awesome](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#sawse-of-the-awesome)
  - [Feelings are not valid inferences](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#feelings-are-not-valid-inferences)
  - [Spouses Who Vote Together](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#spouses-who-vote-together-betray-elections-together-and-are-also-fish)
  - [A few minutes in the life of a creative soul](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#a-few-minutes-in-the-life-of-a-creative-soul)
  - [Qualify it to death. Qualify it to life](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#there-is-no-end-to-the-qualification-the-logician-knows-the-difficulty-of-truth)
  - [The "philosopher" who only remembers is the historian-mnemologist](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#the-philosopher-who-only-remembers-is-a-historian)
  - [The editor god only edits](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#the-editor-god-only-edits)
  - [The roads to salvation terminate at the corpses of dead liars](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#the-road-to-salvation-is-through-the-dead-liar)
  - [Euphemize yourself mindless!](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#euphemize-yourself-mindless)
  - [Is your life the flux?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#is-your-life-the-flux)
  - [Freedom is in my art](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#freedom-is-in-my-art)
  - [Confirm the Mannequin](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#confirm-the-mannequin)
  - [There is no anger in my anger](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#there-is-no-anger-in-my-anger)
  - [Would you have thought? Is it possible for YOU?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#would-you-have-thought-is-it-possible-to-you)
  - [Witch Hunts Were Run by Unselfbeknownst Witches](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#witchunts-run-by-unselfbeknownst-withches)
  - [Mentors Waiting for Their Mentors](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#mentors-waiting-on-mentors)
  - [Citation Gossip Soup](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#citation-gossip-soup-there-are-no-citations-in-my-knowledge)
  - [Have the War Mind, yet be peaceful too](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#have-the-war-mind-and-yet-be-peaceful)
  - [Skepticism is Not Celebrating Foundational Knowledge Too Early](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#skepticism-is-not-celebrating-too-early)
  - [The Lady Who Cried "Ad Hominem"](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#the-lady-who-cried-ad-hominem)
  - [Producing "One Small Step For Man"](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#producing-one-small-step-for-man)
  - [Genesis, the Revised Version](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#genesis-the-revised-version)
  - [Disagree to Agree](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#disagree-to-agree)
  - [Detecting Rigged Designs](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#detecting-rigged-designs)
  - [Americans Competing Secretly](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#americans-competing-secretly)
  - [Don't Have a Baby I Mean Have A Baby](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#dont-have-a-baby-i-mean-have-a-baby)
  - [Stuck on Proper Nouns](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#stuck-on-proper-nouns)
  - [Can you fanchild me?](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#bizarre-social-media-can-you-fanchild-me)
  - [Diversify the goals](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#diversify-the-goals)
  - [Wisdom is in the details](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#wisdom-is-in-the-details)
  - ["Never go full architect."](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#never-go-full-architect)
  - [See the relationship!](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#see-the-relationship)
  - [Information asymmetry in relationships](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#information-asymmetry-in-relationships)
  - [Pile of Advice](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#pile-of-advice)


<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="author">Author</a>

*Author: Dr.<sup>[9](notes.html#9)</sup> Mattanaw, Christopher Matthew Cavanaugh, Retired*

Interdisciplinarian with Immeasurable Intelligence. Lifetime Member of the High Intelligence Community.<sup>[6](notes.html#6)</sup>

- Masters Business & Economics, Harvard University (In Progress)
- Attorney, Pro Se, Litigation, Trial, Depositions, Contracts (E.g. State of Alaska v. Pugh, et. al.)<sup>[4](notes.html#4)</sup>
- B.S. Psychology, University of Maryland, 4.0, Summa Cum Laude<sup>[1](notes.html#1)</sup>
- B.S. Computer & Information Science, University of Maryland, 3.91, Magna Cum Laude<sup>[2](notes.html#2)</sup>
- B.A. Philosophy, University of Maryland.<sup>[3](notes.html#3)</sup>
- G.E.D., State of Maryland, Montgomery County, 1999.


Former Chief Architect, Adobe Systems

Current President/Advisor, Social Architects and Economists International.

Contact:

- [cmcavanaugh@g.harvard.edu](mailto:cmcavanaugh@g.harvard.edu)
- [christopher.matthew.cavanaugh@member.mensa.org](mailto:christopher.matthew.cavanaugh@member.mensa.org)
- [mattanaw@mattanaw.org](mailto:mattanaw@mattanaw.org)

Resumé

- [Professional Resumé](resume.pdf)

## <a name="edit-history">Edit History</a>

Often edited in the addition of new ThoughtStreams, but all prior ThoughtStreams are permenantly uneditable, in intention but not necessarily in data security or data immunity from tampering. See [Editing](editing.html).

## <a name="introduction">Introduction</a>

*The thoughstream is thoughts as they occur in a living autobiography, with freedom of expression.*

The ThoughtStream, from its inception, was intended to be an outlet for writing and publishing thoughts of interest as they occurred. Only being able to write and speak thoughts, and not have thoughts appear directly in a typed or written format, one can only quickly write thoughts as they come to mind. A stream of consciousness into writing is not currently possible, and is perhaps not desirable. With my typing skills, I am able to somewhat stream from my thinking though my fingers directly into type without much alteration, and in fact, I resist editing and alteration. Many postings will be found that have small blemishes which I would like to preserve.

This work is well-known in the High Intelligence Community. Thoughts from this page were shared with millions of views. Postings here have been read thousands of times in the High Intelligence Community globally.

If there were a method of streaming thoughts directly into type, I might choose to use that in addition to, but probably not as a substitute for typing. There is a deliberateness in typing, that allows for writing what one would like to say, in a way that is somewhat consistent with how one would like to think; whereas, thinking would have more non-deliberate inclusions which may be blemishes from not writing. Thinking to oneself in a dictation mode may overcome this, but then the same issue exists when one is not in "dictation mode". Ways of thinking between these deliberate ways of communicating would have blemishes that might confuse, and arguably would only be wanted for evidence about how people really think. I'm not opposed to sharing how my brain functions real-time, and I would be fine with sharing how my thinking is at all moments; but I would also want to be able to separate out deliberate thinking and be clear with the reader what my more committal thoughts are.

The current ThoughtStream is now intended to not only be an outlet for my thoughts in a stream of consciousness sort of way, in which I allow blemishes and freedom of expression, even for things which might be provocative from myself that I don't really agree with or wouldn't commit to completely, but a page intended to be my "thinking shares," as part of my Living Autobiography. 

A living autobiography would consist of your thoughts as you live, if it were totally complete. If artefacts from a persons life were used by that person to create an autobiography, it would include writings and photos, which would be laid on a timeline, to show a series of one's thoughts shown in communications and recordings. Even images are, in a way, part of the thoughts that happened along the way in one's life. If it were entirely complete, it may be what people mistakenly but wishfully attribute to themselves in an ability to see one's whole life, even reliving it in one's last moments (In a flash, some will say, of course inexactly and erroneously). This is what I'm intending to use this page for, to develop my Living Autobiography, at least as it relates to written thoughts I'm wanting to share, since the creation of the page, and onwards until I die. 

The Living Autobiography in which these thinking shares are included, contain other categories of shares which also provide written material, videos, images, and so forth, and of course, the entire site is part of this living autobiography. The other pages which relate are in the contents under "living autobiography", and are:

- [Thinking Shares (aka ThoughtStream)](thoughtstream.html)
- [Experience Shares (aka SocialNuggets)](mattanaws-social-nuggets.html)
- [Bodily Shares (aka OpenHealth)](open-health-and-identity.html)
- [Spatial Shares (also Nature Shares)](scenic-nature-videos.html)
- [Learning Shares (also Reading)](reading.html)
- [Writing Shares (also Site History)](site-history-archive.html)

The ThoughtStream is now approaching 700 postings of good length, and includes over 237,104 words, which is approximately 1000 pages of manuscript. This includes some minimal page structure and content, and was calculated with unix wordcount (wc -w), on Sunday, November 5<sup>th</sup>, 2023.

Posts from this page were shared with millions of views. Postings here have been read thousands of times in the High Intelligence Community globally.

It will never be changed or edited.

<pre>&ndash; Mattanaw</pre>

- *November 28<sup>th</sup>, 2022, Cairns, Australia.*

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

<!-- ThoughtStream posts -->

## <a name="response-to-an-online-friend-regarding-his-diety-related-argument">Response to an online friend regarding his diety related argument</a>

*Wednesday, March 20<sup>th</sup>, 2024*,&nbsp;<time>1:58pm, Tempe, Arizona</time>

Commentary of the Logical-Scientific Proof for a Diety by Mr. Iakovos Koukas

This posting is in response to a recent brief article provided by Mr. Iakovos Koukas, who wrote initially two attempts at a logical proof for a deity, following up with what he believes to be a logical-scientific proof for the Abrahamic Deity. My perspective happens to be that no such proof can be created, that such a proof created will be stronger if atheistic terms are substituted, and that ultimately the atheistic perspective is the one that has the full science and logic behind it.

My perspective differs from that of Mr. Koukas, in that I'm convinced that there is no tenable pathway for the development of a purely logical argument, and additionally that there is no logical-scientific argument that will be successful.

I promised Mr. Koukas a response to his proof, and here I provide a summary response with some primary criticisms of interest. My response, however, is long and elaborate, and instead of being written in an article format, it will simply become a new published book of mine. I'm averse to providing fast responses to arguments if there is an opportunity to create finality to a subject and to provide a fuller expression of my ideas. Concise responses don't address the full complexity of my thinking and a really good handling of the subject matter. 

Somewhat recently I was approached for interview by Insight Journal, by Mr. Scott Douglas Jacobsen who is an interviewer of the Extraordinarily Intelligent. Instead of writing a normal interview response, I wrote and published an entire book of it. That book, [The Velocity of Significance and Ideation](http://mattanaw.com/velocity-of-significance-and-ideation.html) can be found below. The book is relevant because it addresses the analysis of intelligence using informal conversation and the ability to at high velocity develop and ideate at high significance. The conversation between myself and Mr. Koukas can be used as another datum usable for that particular thesis. Transactions within the High IQ Community sometimes fail to exhibit transactional ideation at increasing sophistication and meaningfulness. At over 200 pages, Mr. Jacobsen commented that it is the longest response he has received to date from any extraordinary member of any High Intelligence Society. In a similar way to my response to Mr. Jacobsen, I intend to respond to Mr. Koukas elaborately and at length. This will deal with the arguments Mr. Koukas has provided, but more importantly will handle all similar arguments in the History of Philosophy that have been written, like Anselm's Argument and the The Ontological Proof. In this way I will be able to refute the argument of Mr. Koukas in detail but also refute the direction, putting an end finally the perspective that there can be such a successful line of argumentation.

This is the related book:

http://mattanaw.com/velocity-of-significance-and-ideation.html

Since that is underway but will take some time, I wanted in the meantime to provide a briefer response that readers of Mr. Koukas can use for the analysis and evaluation of his argument, and to provide Mr. Koukas some valuable feedback.

In earlier conversations with Mr. Koukas I impressed upon him the need to formalize his proof, since earlier proofs he provided were only in natural language and did not provide the requisite proof-like form. The comment was intended to show that the proofs earlier provided were interesting, but were not yet in that format anticipated within the field of Professional Philosophy. Mr. Koukas kindly developed his argument further getting his draft closer to a developed article that would be more acceptable within the field. Here I argue that while it is more developed, it is still not complete.

Here are the primary points of argument given my review of his argument, which can be found below. These are not all the arguments I have contrary to this paper, and as I said it will take a while to fully explain the entire rationale in book format. But in the meantime I've provided some critical objections.

1. A list of equations close to the fundamentals of science does not demonstrate anything in particular. But can confuse readers to think that since there was an appearance of technical detail, it is something to be trusted. However, these formulae are listed but not employed.

2. The list of specific premises and arguments, while they provide logical formulae in the form of the Predicate Logic, do not actually take the form of a deductive proof. They are a list of formulae only without any deductions or inference steps being shown, or any relationship between them. As such, its not a logical proof.

3. The choice of the Predicate Logic is questionable as it does not have the proper truth preserving characteristics to determine validity such as Sentential Logic. This would be clarified as the proof itself is finally completed (if completed) with the chain of thought, and modes of transformation shown.

4. Terms do not have the appropriate operationalization or clarified meanings that make them suitable for inclusing within the logical symolism or natural language arguments. We have a definition for the deity using words like "omnipotent" which simply are not usable.

5. Proposed mathematical formulae do not have a clear explication as to their representation. These formulae appear to have been prepared to give the impression that such a formula exists or is representative, but intead it appears to be a start at trying to mathematize abstractly a concept that doesn't appear truly represented by that mathematization. The formula I have in mind in particular is Mr. Koukas's Integral from infinity to infinity with abstract parameterization expectations of dimensional and dimensionless parameters of any kind. 

6. The Predicate Logic expressions appear to be trending towards an attempt to copy an existing proof, with a plain substitution of the actual terms to use his own. This is to be confirmed. In other words, it doesn't appear to be a unique development but rather an attempt to take a existing formulae that appear to work separately and plug in terms relating to religion. This would happen when the attempt at a logical proof is not one that is original, or ready for proving, but instead finds a proof and simply inserts values, so the proof form that couldn't otherwise be achieved is simply reused. If this is the procedure it will be obvious that the logic was borrowed from a source in which the proof was correct, but new terms relating to religion were input instead of the original inputs. It would have been correct or nearly correct in the original context but incorrect in the new usage. 

7. There is a fundamental circularity to his argument. Science and logic, if it proves the existence of a diety, should build up the existence of that deity in the argument. Like proving the existence of a particular entity like miscellaneous atomic particles or the electron. In other words, the argument identifies what is to be defined. But Mr. Koukas simply defines it, immediately employs it, then states that it's been proven. As defined he's already convinced it exists without any additional proving.

My initial conclusion regarding this brief article is that it is simply incomplete, but also that it does not appear that it could be completed. I think it will be abandoned in development. I think this article is an example of an honest attempt trying to press it towards Professional Philosophy, and it's on its way in that direction, but is not quite there in its execution, and I'm pretty certain upcoming obstacles will cause a desire to discontinue that development. The mathematics appears to have been plucked out from elsewhere and included, but not utilized, and I think it will be truly difficult to utilize in a way that brings required rigor of argument. In my estimation it appears a reference or study list on certain formulae of the sciences, and an explanation of inputs, but these are out of context and do not figure into the argument in a way that is traceable to a logical argument. They are listed but are not used. Mr. Koukas uses them to explain how the formulae relate to orderliness, but that is something that is agreed upon already, that science illustrates orderliness. Nearly any fundamental equation could be used for this purpose and the selection appears somewhat arbitrary.

Within the article, Mr. Koukas discusses several formulae he thinks relate to fine-tuning which I would agree relates to orderliness of the universe. He explains these and provides some details about the variables as inputs. But then he simply states that these indicate orderliness of the universe. This is no different than if someone, an Atheist, argues that the universe is simply orderly, and provides the very same mathematical formulae or any number of additional fundamental formulae. For example, I could write an atheistic version of the same argument exchanging terms and providing in my list of formulae such as one relating to the fine-structure constant, that I was recently studying from the CRC Handbook of Physics and Chemistry:

In terms of other fundamental physical constants, α may be defined as:

α = e^2/4πε0ħc 

e is the elementary charge (1.602176634×10−19);
h is the Planck constant (6.62607015×10−34);
ħ is the reduced Planck constant, ħ = h/2π (1.054571817...×10−34)
c is the speed of light (299792458 m⋅s−1);
ε0 is the electric constant (8.8541878128(13)×10−12 F⋅m−1).

Here I've done that in seconds merely copying from Wikipedia, which is similar to what he would have done. The explanation of the constant would simply be a summary of what is provided by Wikipedia or the CRC Handbook. Including it for relevance the purpose of developing it into a fuller article is reasonable, and Mr. Koukas is being transparent about sharing his developments this way which is appreciated, by including the formulae he wants to focus on and use. But it has to be admitted that listing them as he did in the prior article is an indication that it is in a draft state and not a complete state, and as is they are simply usable to see where he is going with his argument, but don't constitute any part of a proof that actually utilizes them. They are simply mentioned.

I could list interesting formulae again and again and it would be a mistake to think such a list simply justifies any particular conclusion relating to orderliness, other than what it happens to describe on its own, or in conjunction and concert with related formulae.

It will be interesting to see what Mr. Koukas's finished production will be regarding his logical-scientific attempt at a proof. My expectation is that he will arrive at an issue in choosing the appropriate logics for his deductions and will fail to weave in the mathematics, in a way that takes it from providing an ostensibly good argument that other Christians will accept, to one that is a really good argument that scientists would accept.
I don't think it will be possible to arrive at a cohesive proof. Most importantly I don't think he'll arrive at a good definition of terms, which is more damning because without such definitions the proof is meaningless, and of course, atheists argue that the terms relating to dieties are vacuous. I happen to argue they are fictions. 

After this commentary, the next refutation of Mr. Koukas's argument and similar arguments that have appeared in the history of Philosophy will be in book format. This will take some time but it will be circulated within the High Intelligence Communities. There will be no additional commentaries between now and that time.

## <a name="text-template-for-the-life-categories-and-example-utilization">Text Template for the Life Categories and Example Utilization</a>

*Saturday, December 23<sup>nd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>1:41pm, Anchorage, Alaska</time>

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

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="file-types-and-required-accounts">File Types and Required Accounts</a>

*Saturday, December 23<sup>nd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>12:14pm, Anchorage, Alaska</time>

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

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="ak-activity-plans">AK Activity Plans</a>

*Friday, December 22<sup>nd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>10:35pm, Anchorage, Alaska</time>

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

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="post-bank-payment-plans-set-1">Post Bank Payment Plans, Set 1</a>

*Prepared: Tuesday, December 19<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>10:05pm, Dallas, Texas</time>

To Add

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>


## <a name="donation-request-methodology-and-printout">Donation Request Methodology and Printout</a>

*Prepared: Wednesday, December 13<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>12:27pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

*To Add*

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="upcoming-plan-to-utilize-just-100-dollars-as-a-wealthy-homeless-camper-for-a-period-of-1-month">Upcoming Plan to Utilize just $100 as a Wealthy Homeless Camper for a Period of 1 Month</a>

*Saturday, December 9<sup>nd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>10:15am, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

After a period of approximately two years fully retired, living off of cash on my person, I've come to a point in which all of my assets have been depleted. For a period I will now not only be experimenting with homelessness, camping, and such, I will be *actually homeless*. I was not expecting or fully anticipating this scenario, and humorously, in my possession is a $393,000 dollar check that I've been unable to cash or place in a bank account, due to a combination of withdrawal and depositing rules with banks here in Florida that have not been helpful, and my name change to a name that I only now discovered is too long for banks to want to see on checks. Authentic IDs like Passports and Social Security Cards still truncate names, because of data and print limitations created by the agencies that issue the cards. My name is much longer than what my official IDs show. One might think the banks would allow longer legal names to appear on checks, but they don't want to see your real name, just what matches a passport or other ID card. The large check in my possession was received after a very lengthy land transaction, regarding my property in Alaska. I signed the title documents using my full legal name, and the new Deed for the buyer has my full name as well. The title company said they can only use the name that is shown on the deed and the signature in the transaction, and unfortunately that name cannot fit on any ID card, and because of that the banks cannot deposit or cash my check!

My full name for those who might be curious is "Mattanaw Christopher Matthew Cavanaugh Mattanaw" and that is what the check shows.

Because it took so long to get the sale, and to receive the check, I depleted all my remaining assets that I did not think I would deplete. While this is an undesirable situation, it is fortuitious for my study, that I already entitled "On the Overlaps of Homelessness and Wealthy Camping". I also have a scheduled talk in May 2024 for Mensa Sweden on this subject. Before it was a field study only guided by the recognition that my travel experiences as a high income person resembled the travel experiences of campers, and both resemble homelessness. But now in this situation I am really a homeless person with wealth. The wealth just happens to be temporarily unusable and inaccessible.

Currently I have only $120 dollars in my pocket and intend to spend 20 today to have only $100 remaining. I intend to try to stretch the $100 for a period of one full month, to prove a plan around high frugality, that also includes planning around food selection and nutrition. For a long while I was thinking that a combination of foraging and very inexpensive food purchases would allow for a *very inexpensive* and sustainable way of living, that would enable a "homeless person" to have a good quality of living that is incredibly inexpensive.

But there are definite risks to this arrangement and plan, and I do anticipate some challenging conditions, and perhaps some mishaps. If there are any mishaps I will need to actively ask people for food funds like a normal homeless person for a period, but this will be informative. It may even be necessary for entirely understanding homeless living. I have plans for my method of requesting that will include pointers to my current work underway for the study, so any requests I make will not appear to be as basic as that of a standard beggar. This I have related earlier to the relationship between homelessness and intelligence, and I believe that this is an inverse relationship. This explains why the signage we see from homeless people is of such poor quality, and includes messages that are not those that people would be well inclined to give for. Additionally, my habits are quite good, and my appearance is clean and tidy. I also have some good looks and a good level of fitness. Not being homeless a long time, I cannot say what reduction would happen if I were living that way for years, so I don't want to be too judgemental. But I do want to mention that smart planning and living can lead to a homeless experience that is probably irregularly normal and apparently healthy, and I would attribute this to my mind and level of intelligence. This might seem a sensitive topic, but if we are to resolve homeless conditions, we are going to have to acknowledge uncomfortable issues. Firstly, those who are homeless and in a poor condition may simply be handicapped, mentally retarded, or may have a diminished IQ or acquired decline in cognitive capacity. I have no such issues and this would explain greatly why they are in the condition they are in and I am not, and likely would not ever be in, depending on circumstances.

I will leave more about this in my upcoming book on the topic that I expect to complete within a year.

After the one month period, if there are not further banking issues, I will have nearly $400,000 in my bank account again, and this will greatly change my circumstances so as to explore the overlaps again from the perspective of the wealthy traveler. For this I will simply resume my travels in North America and abroad like I've been doing recently, before this predicament, in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and Mexico.

Now, regarding the $100 dollars. Here is the plan regarding food and weight.

Currently I weigh a little over 180 pounds and want to reduce anyway to around 150. I've been wanting to experience being much thinner, although I do like the bodyweight I'm at, and wanted already to reach my goal of being 150 pounds, when I was in Hobart Tasmania. This means I have 30 pounds to lose, which equates to 3,500 calories per pounds or 105,000 calories. This is all part of my food supply, and so I am entering this food into my dietary planning.

I am wanting to consume a relatively unsustainable average daily amount of calories near 1,200 calories per day. For days I feel I have an aggressive hunger, I will eat substantially more. For other days, I may eat less. I am unopposed to having no food at all for some days in this upcoming month. It does not harm one at all to have no food for a day or two.

The 1,200 calories per day for 30 days, amounts to 36,000 calories of food, that I will need to buy using the $100 dollars. Combined with my self-eating with weight loss, that is 141,000 available food calories for the month. Only 36,000 calories have to be paid for at the grocery store or with any possible foraging. Since I'm fairly unaware of the foods that are locally edible in Florida, I know I will greatly depend on the grocer, but there are some foods I've located that I know I can eat like dates from palm trees, and I will consume those to add additional nutrition. The 36,000 calories I need to buy have to be purchasable with $100 dollars. I have considerabl experience with eating frugally so I do not anticipate issues or unsuccess, although I do anticipate some discomfort. Here are the foods I plan to purchase:

- Oatmeal, instant, here about $5.00 per bag, supplying 3,000 calories per bag.
  - oatmeal has extremely good quality protein, coming close in quality to that of milk. Additionally it will supply the required carbohydrates.
- Flour, whole or white. I have not yet checked the cost but estimate it will be $2.00 per 2lb. bag here.
  - Flour will provide the inexpensive calories, also in carbohydrate form, and some protein.I am not averse to eating plain flour with water, or making cakes that would be similar to what would be prepared for crackers, and dough that is similar to that which would be prepared for noodles.
- Oil. The most inexpensive oil although olive oil is my preference. Unknown cost at present. I will update here once I shop the local markets. This will supply the requisite fats.
- Cans of beans and vegetables. This will supply additional protein and nutrients that are omitted above in the other plain ingredients.
  - Cans of chickpeas or beans range from $1.00 to around $2.50 for standard sized cans. It is expected that cans will be less than 2.50 for any can I would buy. I do not intend to eat canned goods every day. Instead, I will eat canned goods on days in which I think the nutrition is required, given earlier days of eating very simply.

I have estimated every 5 days I will need $12.00. If this is accurate, in 30 days I will spend $84, and will have $16 dollars remaining for emergency purchases. 

This will be the most frugal I have ever been in my life although I have been very frugal in the past. I consumed primarily oats in New Zealand and Australia for sustained periods and had very good health and weight loss. I have also gone periods with no fat consumption at all. In my view we have excessively tied nutrition to daily requirements that are about averages needed for consumption over longer periods. The daily requirements do not entail true daily needs. One can easily not eat for five straight days and have excellent health. True nutritional requirements appear to not be well understood, but certainly are about maintaining health and vitality over a number of days and not just one. For example, I know in this diet I will be lacking certain nutrients like copper. But how much copper do I require for a month? I think none. But how much copper do I need for any particular period of time? Well that is related to the way my body utilizes and depletes copper gradually. It is not related to any immediate need of copper.

This plan begins tomorrow. It begins tomorrow not from choice as I indicated. I actually need to do this or I will experience actual mishaps as a homeless person, who happens to have a check for $400,000 dollars.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="backup-and-redundancy-plan-and-unrelated-tasks">Backup and Redundancy Plan, and Unrelated Tasks</a>

*Wednesday, December 6<sup>nd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>12:35am, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

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

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="the-american-flag-is-only-blue-and-red-and-is-basic">The American Flag is only Blue and Red and is Basic</a>

*Tuesday, December 5<sup>nd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>9:03pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

The love of flags is contrary to the time required to create them, their excessiveness basicness, lack of beauty, childishness, and degree of unconcern in their creation.

If you don't believe me, recall quickly, if you can, the flags you've seen to date.

Stripes, few geometrical figures, and very little artwork exists within them. 

In fact, it appears what is common to them is a kind of stupidity of art.

Some will tell you that flags contain white. They do not. Rather, there is a canvas of white envisioned already. On these canvases of white, simple rectangles are drawn, or quilted. Attached to fabrics without color. Canvas.

Any child can create some of these flags. Any elementary school child can make a block of red, and block of green, and place them on a white canvas.

Flags of all nations are basic creations. Salutes and so on to flags are a kind of abomination.

The flag of the United States is no exception. Our groups are international so those of the United States have no cause to think this is offensive. It is one simple flag among others.

Here is a way to think about the original creation of the flag of the United States.

- Cut a large sheet of paper into the dimensions of all other flags (non-unique).
- Place a blue square in the corner.
- Use a ruler to place 13 red rectangles.
- Cut from the blue square a single star. Use that star again and again, to place 50 stars.

Job done!

I bet you can think of other childish ways to remake it with ease.

The American flag is blue and red.

It is excessively simple.

It is hardly any art or effort at all!

Put anything up the flag pole and force the meanings! And it will be something people will think they need to protect!

Has anyone noticed that flags are moronic? Your nation has a rectangle?

Then you forgot earthday with planned warfare!

Flag the earth now with another rectangle?

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="completion-of-the-mission-of-the-personal-form">Completion of the Mission of the Personal Form</a>

*Sunday, December 3<sup>nd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>12:06pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

The personal form, as recorded at

[http://mattanaw.com/mattanaws-personal-form.html](http://mattanaw.com/mattanaws-personal-form.html) | [PDF](complete-16102019-personal-forms-all-christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-mattanaw.pdf)

had many different objectives to innumerable to relist here, but the primary objective of attaining a level of personal discipline and completeness in reduction of behaviors to only those that are desired is now complete.

Much was realized and made successful along the way as there were gains made, and goals completed. However, in the course of collecting personal data, and trying to obtain specific goals in different categories of life, it was noticed that discipline would flag in one category that was gaining insufficient attention, while another was being improved upon. There were weightloss goals completed along the way, financial goals, career goals, fitness goals, etc... completed. But it was found definitively that an all-at-once completion was not possible. Instead incremental categorical goals were possible while others would have to wait until later for completion. There were improvements and regressions.

However now I can state that full attainment of the primary goals have now been definitively achieved. If there is any regression from this state I will record the regression here, but it is not anticipated that any meaningful regression will occur.

The primary objectives were to be entirely plant-based, drink only water, maintain weight, nutrition, finances, stay clear of alcohol, live free independently of debts, achieve retirement, achieve career success, academic success, remove the need to masturbate, remove the need for pornography, &c... Masturbation was not explicitly listed because it was thought that would provide too much information on the form later upon being read by others, but this goal was encoded as "-m", which is the negation of masturbation. I'm not opposed to masturbation, and actually advocate *for* it, but for my own personal progression I did revert to my earlier view that I would simply prefer to not do it at all. Much can be said on this and I expect to say more on my page about sexuality.

The most important goal of all was to be water and plant based only. No alcohol, no coffee. At the time of the writing of the personal form alcohol was not an issue. Coffee was not considered an issue. But coffee became an issue since I excessively drank it from youth. Alcohol became something to be concerned about later but nothing even close to alcoholism. Just habitual beer drinking for leisure and fun. Nicotine more recently became an issue with dabbling in cigar smoking in Las Vegas. This switched to a brief period of cigarette smoking, which is still mostly disgusting to me, and finally vaping, at a small amount of nicotine. Completion of this elimination is now done.

I now only ingest water and plant matter, but permit myself dairy on occasion, if I want it. That is a choice made upon long maturation as a vegan, thinking that some small quantity of dairy in my behavior is still an insignificant negative as compared to life contributions to that cause, and health attained in regular vegan behavior. More will be said later about this as I share more about the vegan lifestyle which I think is not totally opposed to the lifestyle of meat eating people. I've discovered a large convergence that requires rethinking how one discusses the topic and the differences in commitments people have. But that is tangential and the more important point is that I've completed entirely this mission of only having plants and water. I've been successfully vegan and vegetarian though since year 2000, 23 years ago.

The start of the personal form was approximately June 2006. This means it took 17 years to bring this effort to a finality. More will be said on the chapter on the personal form and data collection about the long path of habitual changes and discipline required to get to this point. The dedication towards this goal I think is unusual considering the total human population.

An interesting point regarding the finality of this arrival of this goal is that the goal itself is not quite as important now, and instead the mission with the personal form has transferred to the mission of managing attention and increasing writing and media productions. The attentional [architecture](architecture.html) includes objectives that exceed those of the personal form but are an outgrowth of the personal form. But even this has progressed to such an extent that the behavioral goals associated with it are already complete, and that anything extra is extra.

This date, December 3<sup>rd</sup> marks the transitional date to completeness. December 4<sup>th</sup> is a kind of purity date of completeness. If this turns out to be false due to an unexpected small regression, then that will be logged and recorded.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="affidavit-of-the-authenticity-of-the-book-and-journal-of-mattanaw-at-mattanaworg-as-a-testament-of-mattanaw-for-the-living-will">Affidavit of the Authenticity of The Book and Journal of Mattanaw at Mattanaw.org, as a Testament of Mattanaw for the Living Will</a>

*Prepared: Saturday, December 2<sup>nd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>21:13pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

*To Add*

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="affidavit-concerning-vegetarianvegan-and-water-lifestyle">Affidavit Concerning Vegetarian/Vegan and Water Lifestyle</a>

*Prepared: Saturday, December 2<sup>nd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>21:13pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

*To Add*

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="affidavit-concerning-mattanaws-abstinence-from-drugs-sex-and-alcohol">Affidavit Concerning Mattanaw's Abstinence From Drugs, Sex and Alcohol</a>

*Prepared: Saturday, December 2<sup>nd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>11:39am, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

Being first duly sworn, under oath states:

1. I am totally teetotal regarding alcohol. I use do not drink or utilize alcohol of any kind. I never have alcohol on my possession, and I never buy it from any person or establishment.

2. I am totally teetotal regarding drugs. I do not use any over the counter medication, drugs prescribed by doctors, drugs from any illicit source, or any drug whatsoever. I never have drugs in my possession, never exchange items with others, never carry items from others, and never ask for, buy, or solicit for purchase, any drug from anyone whatsoever. I have never, and will never, be involved in any sale of drugs, possion of drugs, &c... anything involving drugs.

3. I only consume water and plants, and infrequently dairy products. I have an entirely vegan and vegetarian lifestyle and only consume plants and water, and occasionally dairy products.

4. I only ingest non-drug substances. By one through three it should be understood that I only consume the set of ingredients that are water, are plant-based foods, or are dairy foods. All else is excluded from this list. This means nothing else is ingested. This means no alcohol, drugs of any kind, including any not mentioned, are not consumed. 

5. I do not put anything that is not food or water into my mouth at any time.

6. I do not "inhale" anything other than air/oxygen, and would refuse to inhale anything else. If anything is in my environment is perceived to be chemical, I exit that environment.

7. I do not consume anything that has a chemical formula sold as a single ingredient. I do not consume sugar. I do not consume any additive, except for preservative additives.

8. I do not engage in sexual activity of any kind.

9. I do not seek out any dating, or sexual friendships from the opposite sex, or anything that could be construed as leading to a sexual relationship from anyone of the opposite sex.

10. I am heterosexual only, but do not do not engage in any sexual behaviors at all. I do not seek, converse, or "look for" anything leading to a sexual relationship. I generally refrain from touching others, except for fist taps. I do not masturbate, and I do not view pornography. 

11. I am not a homosexual. I am not attracted towards males at all, have never been attracted to a male, and never have any sexual contact with males. I do not watch any pornography. On social media I avoid contact with images of males. I prefer images of females, and am attracted to females. But I do nothing that is ever a movement towards any sexual behavior whatsoever.

12. I am fully functioning sexually, am healthy, and have a very good anatomy, but do not engage in any sexual behavior whatsoever.


Dated at Miami Beach, Florida, this day _      _, day of _        _, _           _.



Notarization

Subscribed and sworn to me by Mattanaw, this _     _, day of _     _, _          _.



Notary Public in and for the State of Maryland

My Comission Expires _          _.


-

The following affidavit was used as a guide, from when the author was trial attorney and witness in his land case in Anchorage.

[cert-signed-and-notarized-affidavit-of-mattanaw.pdf](cert-signed-and-notarized-affidavit-of-mattanaw.pdf)

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="be-concise-but-you-missed-this">Be Concise But You Missed This</a>

*Friday, December 1<sup>st</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>11:39am, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

Be concise, but you missed this...

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="Authoritativeness and Uses of Single Forms of Identification">authoritativeness-and-uses-of-single-forms-of-identification</a>

*Friday, December 1<sup>st</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>11:39am, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

Identification over the years has changed quite a bit in a way greatly unfortunate to the user of the IDs.

Before proceeding let's consider some important pieces of information:

- It was oft-repeated that the Social Security Number is not an identifier, but should not be given to anyone.
  - This was especially repeated by older people who would now be elderly.
- The Passport is the authoritative international travel identifer.
- The Driver's License is the authoritative inter-state driving identifier.
  - Those who do not drive are asked for their driver's license.

A purpose of an authoritative single ID is to provide instant evidence that one is who one claims to be, and has the priveleges attached. Above we've seen that passports are the single piece of evidence required to show that one is who one says one is, and that one has the priveleges attached, relating to travel restrictions, and also to nationalization. It is a picture ID. It also provides signature confirmation. Above we've also seen that the driver's license is a singular identifier for immediately showing that one is who one says one is, particularly required in the context of driving. It also provides verification that one has the priveleges relating to driving and interstate travel. It also establishes that one has some connection to a state resembling residency.

An authority figure, or member of the public, can look at one or either of these documents and confirm that the person is as depicted, has or had that name, and is the person who the person claims to be, and has the priveleges attached mentioned earlier.

Obviously there is more regarding potential uses and priveleges attached, but for this conversation being complete and comprehensive is not possible and would create excessively lengthy discussion.

This use of single identifiers by authorities for international travel and for interstate driving is considered adequate to them. If you present a passport you can travel, you can use it to show your nationality in a foreign country, and you can use it to show your nationality in your home country. But obviously there are *many* risks associated with this. Likewise, you can use your driver's license with an authority figure and show your nationality, your state connection, and your priveleges for driving, and it is accepted as sufficient by itself to do this by authority figures such as policemen. There are still many risks with accepting this as a single form of ID.

The conveniences of only needing to provide a single ID however are obvious. What is the point of having multiple IDs carried along with you to establish who you are? It is possible that you might have one or none. You also are not obligated, it is said, to carry an ID with you in many if not most circumstances. But if you need to have an ID you don't want to have many. You want to only have one, or else there is a burden of maintaining a personal process of having and protecting multiple IDs, greatly increasing the risk of losing one or multiple IDs. That could lead to a lengthy process of having to obtain not only one replacement ID, but a number of them. This would come at a considerable time loss, loss of resources, and would create personal risks, depending on circumstances. Having one ID that is adequate protects alternative IDs that are also adequate, and diminishes the risk of a huge impact of losing multiple IDs.

While these authorities mentioned above can accept a single ID, we have somehow allowed a situation in which institutions can demand multiple IDs, despite the fact that there are fewer risks associated. They will claim there are more risks associated but there could not be more risks than with international travel. They use this perception, often falsely created, to gather more information about you than is necessary.

An example is in banking, where many conveniences have been lost.

I was issued a large check recently, in the amount of $393,000, and I went to the bank to either cash it, or obtain some smaller amount of cash along with a cashier's check. The check was issued by Well's Fargo as part of a Real Estate transaction. The bank visited to get the cash was Well's Fargo. The funds were in a verified escrow account in which funds could be instantly confirmed. The customer of the escrow account is a title company in which they do many large transactions. The name on the check was the same name as what was on my passport. I went to the bank with the passport and the check, expecting service to receive the funds: and it was important that the funds were released. However, the Bank sent me on a long pathway, without any indication the result would be favorable to actually releasing the funds, of confirming in myriad ways my identity.

There was a time in which a bank would make payment simply if the name on the check matched an authoritative ID.

What are some other places that require many forms of ID and papers, to get authorizations?

Keep in mind you can terrorize another nation with your passport. What is the need to have many IDs with such a low amount of risk to make simple transactions, and to accomplish very simplistic forms of business? Where is the convenience? Why is it so convenient to use the Driver's License, and the Passport, in situations that may present large risks, whereas, it is so difficult to use a singular form of ID to get any simple tasks done that elders would have demanded to be simple?

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="affidavit-concerning-name-change-of-christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-to-mattanaw">Affidavit Concerning Name Change of Christopher Matthew Cavanaugh to Mattanaw</a>

*Prepared: Friday, December 1<sup>st</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>10:20am, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

*Did you change your name?*



*What name did you choose and why?*



*Are you in the process of changing your names in various systems?*



*Have you used this name actively?*



*Do you use your old name?*



*Are there any organizations unsupportive of your name change?*



*What actions or ordeals existed regarding your name change?*



*Have there been any negative impacts regarding your name change?*



<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="affidavits-attesting-to-living-autobiography">Affidavits Attesting to Living Autobiography</a>

*Thursday, November 30<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>5:23pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

One learns, in the court system, that witnesses are trusted regarding the affidavits they submit, sworn under oath on text, and notarized. This is the case even if what they submit or record on the affidavits happen to include predominantly lies and fabrications.

When one writes an autobiography, one is testifying as to one's own life. One needs artifacts to substantiate one's personal history, working as a personal anthropologist and archaeologist and historian. Legal documents are part of the total history of artifacts that one might have, and it includes ID cards, medical records, bank documents, birth and marriage certificates, and actual legal materials used in the court system, if there were any procedures. For example, one may want to talk about the significance a traffic accident or a divorce had in your life.

If one used an affidavit to explain an event, or circumstance, and that document is trusted in the legal system, implies that others including the legal system would trust it within an autobiography.

Why not then simply create many affidavits in advance on any topic of interest that figures well into the living autobiography?

Why not make the living autobiography and books attestations to the court system?

Affidavits are officiated documents, sworn under oath. They get notarized by a public notary. One could make an entire autobiography an affidavit, if it is well enough written; although affidavits need not be well written.

I'm in the process of accumulating affidavits that constitute usable legal materials in legal proceedings, that will figure into my living will and living autobiography, and will also constitute the entire living autobiography and will too. 

All will be wrapped in affidavit, and include affidavit.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="my-commitment-to-chastity">My Commitment to Chastity</a>

*Thursday, November 30<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>12:43pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

Some who have been exposed to my writings and various postings would recognize that I'm a single male. But many would not know or recall that I was married for quite a long time, nearly 20 years, to my very first girlfriend. My ex-wife and I went to the same school system and are from the same town. We went to different elementary schools, but went to the same middle school and high school. While we went to different elementary schools, many of our friends from those different schools were blended together subsequently in our middle and high schools. So to a very large degree our experiences were blended together backwards in time, from the time we were first put together in middle school, to when we were born. We were even born in the same hospital, in Olney, Maryland.

We first became committed to a monogamous relationship November 29<sup>th</sup>, 1998. I have original correspondence between the two of us, from this time in High School, in our senior year, in my Book and Journal, at Mattanaw.org.
From that time we celebrated anniversaries on that date, and considered ourselves having a relationship equivalent to marriage. When I say we were married for 19 years, I am using that agreed upon anniversary date. We didn't really believe in getting formally married, until a time arose in which it seemed to make sense to combine finances. There were other reasons why I proposed at the time I did, but we finally got married, October 4<sup>th</sup>. I have my marriage certificate posted on my open health and identity page chapter here:

http://mattanaw.com/open-health-mattanaw.html#marriage-certificate

We did not celebrate the date of actual marriage as our anniversary, but continued to celebrate that on November 29<sup>th</sup>. We were evntually divorced, in January of 2018. The entire duration of my relationship I was entirely committed to monogamy. I never cheated and took passes from women as a kind of threat, although I did not openly express that or show any indication that that was how I felt. I kept my distance from other women and was mostly averse to any kind of touch contact.

While married I had a healthy sex life and could not of course consider myself chaste during that period. But my inclinations were still to monogamy and having a sex life that did not resemble in any way one of promiscuity, or even of interest in sexual relations with others. Mentally, even within my thinking, I did not think about sex with others. However, I did indulge in pornography. I don't consider that to be an exception. It does not involve other real people from one's environment. Rather it is a way to more completely satisfy sexual desires, since a monogamous relationship does not result in complete satisfaction in sexual relations. Particularly if it lasts a long period of time. Nevertheless, my sex life was complete, and I had enough that I really am not too interested in having any more, after divorce. It is a part of my life I really want to close off.

For the last several years, I have totally abstained from all pornography too. While I think self-satisfaction with or without pornography is a commendable way to live life as a single person, because few risks are presented to self and others by living that way, I am personally even trying to avoid that behavior. I've gone long periods without masturbation and currently I do not masturbate at all. Although, again, I find no issue whatsoever with that behavior and even find it commendable if it fits into a lifestyle that removes risks to other people and oneself. If one only masturbated then one would be no risk to others at all with cheating behavior, promiscuity, risk of STDs, and so on. It is an expected behavior among single people, and to urge single people to do more than this by engaging in promiscuity or formation of other relationships, is a kind of immoral pressure placed on them. Our culture really does immorally peer-pressure others into behaviors that creates risks to their well being and the well being of others. There are no good plans for ensuring unwanted children are prevented, STD/Is are prevented, and that cheating behavior is eliminated. Tinder and other applications of that kind, including dating applications, can expose good people to others who are already in relationships for sex. Tinder an other applications can also expose oneself to the risks of being a kind of promiscuous paid or unpaid prostitute. Lastly, there is even social pressure to prostitution. I have not been exposed to this but understand it does exist.

Being suddenly divorced in 2018 from my girlfriend from the 1990s, whom I met in High School, suddenly made me single in a very different world. I never had a date in my life, as I told many colleagues. I didn't know how to date, and didn't know anything about dating on social media.

Realizing that I was not really wanting to date, or do any online dating, I decided to completely refrain from any pressure to utilizing online dating applications. There have been many over the years that came and went, but I used none of them. I refrained from using even regular social applications for that purpose. Effectively, I'm entirely chaste in my online communication regarding sexuality, or anything verging on sexuality, unless one went further back into my history of earlier teenage years, in which I used AOL humorously to chat sometimes sexually within that community. That was during the period of low understanding of sexting and cyber-sex. All was text based and utilized no audio-visual, and was oddly uncontrolled and ignorant. Anyone who used AOL in the nineties would have humorous stories about the nature of online chat-groups and discussions with others to whom one discovered there.

After being divorced, I did go to bars and restaurants and suddenly had solo-interractions with others in a happenstance way. This was a lifestyle I was also previously unfamiliar with. This did lead to some very few friendships and dating opportunties. These were brief, but I did have a handful of dates, or singles date-like encounters. Is a first meeting with another person of interest a first date? Perhaps it is. In that case I have to say I did have some dating adventures. But these were very few. Less than ten total, between 2018 and the present. A few could be characterized as unwanted dates, since my inclinations were only friendly. I have only had two sexual encounters after being divorced in 2018 and I can say they were unnecessarily stressful. They made it obvious to me that our culture has provided very poor sexual planning, and mitigation of sexually transmitted disease and other risks.

For over one year now, I have elected to be one hundred percent chaste. This is a permanent election. I will never be in another sexual relationship of any kind nor do I want one. I will not date, be in a relationship, or get married again.

Soon I will write up an affidavit about this and get it notarized. So legally, I will have testified as to my chastity.

Why would one want to do this? Well, it creates a way to show to others that one is not a risk in any way, which is another thing I desire. I want a legal way to make it clear to others that in no way can I risk the relationships of others, in no way can I be a sexual "threat" to others, and in no way even be thought of as having sexual motivations of any kind. Males would understand this. They can be accused of anything. If at some point in the future, I attain a greater level of fame, I need a way to eliminate any risk of false accusations. But apart from this, just being a male, one feels a risk of false accusations.

Having already had a satisfying marriage, I can continue to think that that marriage completed my sex life. Furthermore, it really did.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="id-and-bank-activities-and-plans">ID and bank activities and plans</a>

*Thursday, November 30<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>12:01pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

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

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

<a name="current-thoughtstream"></a>

## <a name="gold-wiring">Gold Wiring</a>

*Monday, November 27<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>12:01pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

When one procures gold from a bullion dealer, there are a few options provided. Firstly, one could procure a small amount of bullion, under $10,000 and not sign any documents at all, using cash. One can procure more than that too, but if more is wanted, more documents are required as one scales to huge amounts of gold. From conversations with one gold dealer, my understanding is that 24 ounces of gold can be procured at the current price without signing more than what is required for a transaction over $10,000. If more than that is wanted, additional documents must be signed. In order to avoid all of this, one is simply slowed in the process of obtaining bullion with cash. Everyday one can get 24 ounces of gold and fill out the 10K paperwork, or everyday one can get less than 10K in gold and fill out no paperwork at all. I've followed the process of daily visits for less than 10K in gold, platinum, and palladium, in order to get a larger amount without worrying about any documentation.

If one does not want to make purchases with cash, one is able to make purchases with wire transfers. I'm exploring this for the first time now. After having made a large real-estate transaction, I'm wanting more bullion. My objective is consistent with that in development in my [Human Banking](human-banking.html) chapter of this work. It is also consistent with the developments and explorations of the world of wealthy homelessness. I have a field research study underway called "On the Overlaps of Homelessness and Wealthy Camping". Wire transfers are subject to the same rules. For this particular transaction, should I move forward with it, I'm required to fill out the documentation for tax purposes for transactions exceeding the 24 ounces I mentioned earlier. I think that's a 50k limit but don't recall for the moment.

What is interesting about this is that I'm doing this transaction via a third-party wiring. The title company issued the funds, and provided an initial check in the amount of 393,000 dollars. But the bank refused to cash it, or provide any funds in a smaller quantity in cash, and has asked for smaller checks. I have asked the title company to provide smaller checks, and they exhibited reluctance to do so. My current bank Discover Bank, an online bank, has set limits that are lower than what banks with branches set for accepting deposits. So they cannot accept wires over 250,000 dollars or take checks over a small amount under 100,000. So I cannot wire to the bank. But I may soon discover I can wire to a bullion dealer for bullion. In that case it seems banks can be totally bypassed in favor of wire transfers to other parties. That may open the potential scenarios for obtain funds without banks. Well without a specific party to transactions functioning without banks. One could then wire to other people to handle funds on your behalf, for an exchange.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="checklist-for-attacking-the-bank-to-provide-my-funds-owed-to-me">Checklist for attacking the bank to provide my funds owed to me.</a>

*Sunday, November 26<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>11:01pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

- Create articles for publication on social media, for re-use as Op-Eds in the newspaper.
- Create videos for sharing on TikTok and other social media.
- Create a video to send to the local news.
- Write letters to Wells Fargo Executives.
- Write letters to local politicians. 
- Communicate with the other banks, urge them to release the funds.
- Record all communication.
- Start a documentary.
- Prepare legal case.
- Begin log of damages.
- Below were added Sun Nov 26 12:10:42 EST 2023
  - Talk to Bank Managers at multiple banks.
  - Talk to other banks about their policies. You can use this to identify fake rules.
  - Write an affidavit.
  - Collect research.
  - Go through their website, and collect evidence.
  - Ask for signatures of support.
  - Gofundme.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="withdrawing-large-cash-amounts-from-banks-issuing-their-own-checks-refusals-and-pathways-for-obtaining-cash">Withdrawing Large Cash Amounts from Banks Issuing Their Own Checks, Refusals, and Pathways for Obtaining Cash</a>

*Sunday, November 26<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>10:19pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

I "learned online" that banks issuing checks, like cashier's checks, can cash the entire amount for you if you only go to the issuing bank, request the funds, and wait for the transfer to be arranged. The idea here is you sell you house, say for $200,000 dollars, you receive a check, and you can obtain all cash for that transaction by merely bringing that check to the issuing bank. You may need to wait two weeks or so but they are supposed to arrange for the cash to be delivered, and you can then receive all your money at once. They are supposed to do this for you even if you have a checking or savings account elsewhere, and simply can't or won't deposit the funds there, or even if you have no bank account at all. We are told there is no obligation at all to have a banking account, and for those opting to be partly or mostly free of banks, this is the way to receive funds when one sells one's home or otherwise receives a large check.

Recently I received a check for $393,000. I am wanting to use no bank whatsoever to obtain my funds. I am following this pathway of the person who has no banking account at all, wants none, and simply wants to obtain the funds owed.

In order to do this, I followed the above advice. The check was issued by Wells Fargo, by a title company. It is held in an escrow account. I took the check to a Wells Fargo branch, expecting to perhaps wait for two weeks to receive my funds, all in cash. But I found at the bank they will simply refuse to give any cash whatsoever, and complain of giving any cash more than $10,000 dollars.

After some debate with the tellers, and a conversation with the bank manager, I was told I could take $40,000 in cash that day, and get a cashier's check for the remaining amount, of $353,000 dollars. I thought this a good solution, perhaps better than receiving all the cash at once, at least for my needs, and agreed to wait for the transaction to be processed while in the same branch. I waited for one hour, until closing time. Seeing closing time approach, I anticipated that the branch manager would decline to provide the cash and cashier's check, perhaps doing nothing at all, only using the time to tick-away the day.

The branch manager emerged after a long wait and informed me that he could not provide any cash for the check. He could not fulfill on the solution he offered after finally being able to talk to him, after first receiving misinformation from tellers. It appears the entire visit was misinformation and wasted more than one hour of my time, and my time is valuable. I have logged one hour of personal work time lost to this effort. I am retired but I invest my hours into my own company doing scientific research and planning for my publication company.

He said that he called a higher office for approval for my request and that it was flatly denied. He said he thought in the future it would be denied again. The implication is that they refused to provide my money, even though their bank issued the check, and provided no means to obtain the money. They told me they could "open an account", but that is simply a mechanism for them to retain their own money, slow depositing, and obtain more information from me than I would like to provide. The bank manager told me he could not split checks, either, but that they could cash checks split. What is humorous is *they split the checks for themselves*, since they are the issueing bank. So for me to obtain all the cash, they want to write more checks that I will bring back to them, with the same or similar result.

I would like to pursue this further but escalate the issue. However, I have no experience with bank escalation. Does anyone here have a strategy I could use, to ensure I can receive all the cash, from this bank that is refusing to honor it's own checking?

A second resort is that I can ask the title company to work, again with Wells Fargo, to issue smaller checks. However, this is a fun process. Maybe I want all cash for my checks later too. Maybe I'd like to send people checks with money that they can use for cash. Is there a way that I can ensure that I can get my cash?

Thinking back in time, I thought the name had to match the check, and they simply were obligated to disburse. It is understood large quantities of cash may require some delays and planning, but not flat refusals.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="my-introduction-to-mensa-sweden">My Introduction to Mensa Sweden</a>

*Thursday, November 23<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>12:18pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

My name is "Mattanaw", formerly "Christopher Matthew Cavanaugh", a retired management consultant and Chief Architect of various global corporations. Many here have probably been exposed to my numerous writings in our shared groups Mensa groups in the social communities and journals, and my Book and Journal at Mattanaw.org. I first joined Mensa in 2014, but I was identified as gifted as a small child in my school system in Maryland, where I was born and raised. While I was born in the United States I see myself strongly as a global citizen, and while that's hard to make a reality, I spend much time abroad in locations like New Zealand, Australia, Brazil, and Canada, and expect soon to have residence in Sweden and Europe for a long period. I am an executive presenter, and may be presenting at the upcoming Mensa Sweden AG, on two topics in which I am expert. The first concerns management of creativity, and the second concerns my scientific field efforts at eradicating homelessness. That talk is called "On the Overlaps of Homelessness and Wealthy Camping."

Despite my history being a software architect and management consultant, my primary are of expertise is Moral Philosophy. This relates to our interesting theme of gaming, as I will explain momentarily. I have a nearly completed B.S. in Philosophy, a B.S. in Psychology, and I'm working on a degree in Management, with a focus on Economics and Finance, at Harvard University. I first began my more definite project on Moral Philosophy in my early twenties, although thoughts and materials from the 90s and earlier in my life figure into my work often, and are archived on my website at Mattanaw.org, where I present my life work.

Although I was a software architect the technology of focus was not gaming systems, even though I come from the generation that was greatly influenced by the onset of video gaming technology. It is a somewhat good demarcation to separate generations because my parents and those who were born only several years before me either had no gaming exposure, or developed very little interest in video games. It is interesting now to think of how my writings and research, and my software expertise, relate to the planning, execution, and limits of gaming systems. Also, moral philosophy has a gaming aspect, as it relates to  managing one's personal attention and one's behavior in this life which might be thought of as an RPG like game. RPG games, in a way, model and simulate real life behavior, and when one plays these games one is exposed to another world and environment in which one does familiar things. One makes decisions that bear on the outcome and one does well or not depending on how one chooses. I have a chapter in my book on the planning of attention, using process diagrams that are suitable for the planning of software systems, video games, and our use of our attention in life, and within organizations. For those who are interested, one can read my growing work "The Architecture of Ethics" here:

http://mattanaw.com/architecture.html

I will also be discussing this as it relates in my talk on creativity management at the Mensa Sweden AG, should the proposal for my talks be approved.

Video gaming for enjoyment has been a very large part of my early life, up until I was about 23 years old, when interest began to wane. My parents utilized video game systems to keep my siblings and I entertained, and out of the way, doing something known to be somewhat positive. I don't know what the impact to my mental development was, but I think it was largely positive, although it did detract greatly from my school interests while young. My first game system was an Atari-like self-contained unit that I began playing sometime between 1983 and 1985. I was born December 18<sup>th</sup>, 1980, so I was a small child excelling already on simple Atari video games. Later I spent many hours in arcades, playing a combination of pinball games and video games, while that was extremely popular, exciting and competitive. I had a large number of gaming systems, since my parents were very generous buying them, and around Christmas time especially, I recall having memorable experiences opening boxes of gaming systems, like Sega Genesis, Nintendo 64, Playstation, and some lesser known systems like Panasonic 3DO. Having many gaming systems and an expertise in the range of gaming platforms led me to form friendships in my neighborhood and have a draw to my home where friends would return again and again for fun times. As I write this now I am recalling some memories that were forgotten but highly formative.

I also had quite a bit of talent with Chess, and spend a very large amount of time playing board games with family, like Monopoly, and games more suitable for family fun with youths who are developing. We had a large collection of board games and had much fun playing these together as a cohesive family. Gaming had a good role in keeping us doing things together in a positive way for long periods of time, most memorably during the holidays when we were off from school.

Nowadays my interest in gaming is contained within my interest in planning and guiding organizations and developing my system of ethics, as I stated earlier. I think software planning was somehow left out of moral planning, and the evaluation of various ethical systems. I think they are incomplete because they do not include them. If they include them they become more detailed and useful. 

If one is interested, one can watch for the upcoming Mensa Sweden AG in May, and check for my planned presentations and talks. In that case there will be opportunity to discuss this topic, particularly as it relates to my presentations on creativity management, and "The Overlaps of Homelessness and Wealthy Camping". The latter topic touches on gaming as it relates to the experiences of making choices as a homeless person, in the system of law that makes for a survival game like experience.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="accurate-and-easy-descriptive-skin-complexion">Accurate and Easy Descriptive Skin Complexion</a>

*Monday, November 21<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>2:44am, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

*To Add*

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="facebook-and-using-sentiments-in-marketing">Facebook and Using Sentiments in Marketing</a>

*Monday, November 21<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>2:39am, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

Most users are aware that Facebook has provided ways to give emotional reactions to postings, but not all may be familiar with marketing methods that relate to this tool and potential misuse.

Being from the technology industry in an elevated status, working with businesses on marketing strategy and software related to marketing approaches, I can share with you some issues I see that relate to issues with Facebook's system for controlling, with a very short list of emotions, reactions you can provide to their system. I can also share reasons why their approach likely exists, and side effects for regular users.

This is an important topic because for some it greatly affects how they interact with businesses online, and with friends and family, and in any conversation had with anyone on Facebook.

Since the start of Facebook as a public company it was very interested in how to gain revenue via advertising. There was a period when the media portrayed Facebook as being "at risk" for being apparently unable to gain sizeable marketing revenue required to keep it a strong business. Not too long after this Facebook became a success in its approach that it needed in order to stay alive.

Businesses do not want negative feedback. Any business that can receive reviews online knows well, that if they get a single bad review, it can look very bad for their business. They will want to control perceptions regarding that review, potentially have it removed, and will offer responses to make it appear they are willing to resolve problems, or else deny them outright. Businesses oftentimes create false reviews of their own businesses to counter negative reviews to ensure their ratings don't drop excessively.

Notice that on Facebook, the way you interact with each other includes the ability to write comments or interact with likes and emoticons. This supplies data to Facebook on what they think you and other users think about a product, or other people's postings. You don't have many options. You can simply write comments that provide information about how you think or feel, and you can provide likes or emoticons. You have few options for the likes and emoticons. You have seven ways to tell a business or another person roughly what you feel, and most have noticed that these do no provide the full range of your natural reactions.

The easiest reaction is the like or emoticon. The next level of interaction is to write a short comment. Beyond that you can write lengthy or numerous comments to share how you think and feel. Most will share only simple short interactions. Emoticons and likes therefore will be the most common ways people quickly and easily interact with a business or with other people online.

Notice that a business is not a person. How you interact with businesses, you would think should be different than how you interact with people. However, Facebook blends these by providing the same means of interaction. This is important for the remainder of this posting, because I claim here that their way of gaining advertising revenue has constrained and distorted all your interactions with other people outside of business.

Since businesses do not want negative feedback, and want to communicate to other people and other businesses "good news" about their products and marketing offers, they are extremely motivated to have feedback that is positive only. It is not an understatement to say they *never ever want negative feedback*. We are all aware of businesses in the past that have even asked for "five star" or "ten star reviews" from customers, to nudge them towards not providing anything less than a perfectly positive response to them. That information is presented back to potential buyers. That information is used by businesses to communicate to others, that what they have is really excellent. They don't want to have anything that brings down anyone's perceptions about the quality of what they are offering.

As I mentioned, Facebook offers exactly seven like or emoticon options that people can use for their most frequent interactions. Now it is important to discuss what those are. There is a "like", a "love", a "care" that greatly resembles "love", a "wow", a "sadness" that has a positive aspect, and "anger". The first five options are roughly equivalent to "like" if one thinks carefully about it. In social sciences, these would all be grouped together as a "like" too. The "sadness" emoticon can be variously used for gentle disagreement when the user doesn't want to say anything in comments, doesn't want to indicate they feel anger, or does not have a better option to show they do not like the advertisement or posting. However, this emotion is also related to caring. Oftentimes, and more clearly, people will use the "sadness" option to show they are caring, actually feeling a sadness for someone or something, or that they agree with the sentiment of the post that is expected to provoke sadness in others. Use of this emoticon in these scenarios is akin to "liking" yet again. Importantly this is clear, whereas, using it to disagree is unclear. This means when analytic data is gathered from marketing it can be used to indicate that there is a positive engagement for whatever interaction happened, regardless of the way it was used. So going through our list of 7 options, six of six so far really are likes. They would be used that way. Businesses, again, don't want to share data on dislikes.

Let's now consider the seventh option, which really is the last. You have to look through six options that are all akin to "like" before that one is seen. Sometimes its position in the list is forgotten. If one really disagrees with a post, or dislikes a post, even if not very strongly, it appears this is the only option available to use, to make it clear what one feels. But it is too strong. This means most will be disinclined to use "anger" except in very few circumstances. This means that if we analyze the use of the emoticons we would find that very few are expressing their natural disagreements or dislikes at all, and are rarely choosing "anger" as their way of expressing it. This means it gets chosen unoften. There would be a good balance between the uses of "like" and "dislike", meaning that the seventh option would be selected very often, and nearly as often as "like", if not more often. In order for the public to express their true feelings of dislike, they only have one option. They have six for "like" and one for "intense dislike". It should be obvious to the reader at this point that Facebook is simply controlling interactions to report "likes" for businesses.

While one can choose to provide information in comment boxes, this information is likely ignored largely for reporting purposes; or, if not ignored, reports concerning comments can simply be omitted from being used. This means both Facebook and Businesses can choose to share reporting information with others, including investors, that simply excludes comment data. Instead they share the larger amount of data including public selections of sentiment. It is important that when someone selects their option in the list of like and emoticons, they are directly choosing the sentiment themselves. This could be used to show that people who clicked really did feel the way they did when they clicked it.

This is very different than comment information. Comment information can be analyzed by sentiment analysis tools and AI. When I was working at Adobe Systems, responsible for selling their software and architecting solutions for partners and customers, there was a sentiment analysis tool that we offered. This tool, Adobe Social, would examine text from users and report the emotional summary of what was entered. It was intended to reach into all social media, but Facebook created a policy eventually that blocked it's ability to connect to their specific data. Facebook decided it did not want external software to scan it's comments. There may be many reasons for making this decision, but one reason of interest might be that they don't want to use that data anyways, because it could be used again, to report negative sentiments more accurately. Additionally, since users directly chose their sentiments themselves, this data is more valuable because there is less risk of a faulty tool falsely reporting sentiments. But more importantly it give Facebook more *control over the user* to ensure they can only select one of seven options in reporting sentiment. This means very likely that even though Facebook users can say anything they want in the comment fields, the preference would be to simply use what appears most positive in reporting. That would be the likes and emoticon entries selected by the users themselves, constrained to have only 7 options, 6 of which are likes only. This is attractive to businesses because their reporting would then only reflect positive interest. Comment data can be then ignored, and negative comments could be excluded, or considered uncertain because there is not an automated tool checking for sentiment in that way, by an external provider, that might not do it correctly, or in any case, would provide more negative information than would be wanted by businesses.

Imagine if negative comments were automatically scanned by AI to lower ratings of businesses on Yelp, Google, or other systems providing ratings. Businesses certainly would not want that. Instead they want more control over removing negative feedback, to keep a pristine image, even if that pristine image is a false one. Again, that's like wanting five star reviews, even if the buyers of the product or viewers of marketing have negative thoughts about it, and may have provided comments or data in writing that suggests they had negative experiences or dislike the offerings.

It is unfortunate that this type of marketing control carries over in Facebook to conversations. Because there are few ways to choose sentiment for control over data for businesses, there are few options for choosing genuine sentiments in relating to other people. People are unable to dislike as much as they do, and if they do choose to dislike, are prone to over exaggerate by selecting the "anger" sentiment.

There could be one additional very harmful side effect to this arrangement in the software. It could be that Facebook not only does not want reporting of negative sentiment, they may not want people on their platform who express negative feelings.

Another purpose of Adobe Social and other sentiment analysis tools is to scan for text that indicates problem people. This is not only used potentially in social media, but at work. It also uses social media to gain information about employees. An example I remember at work is that Human Resources at a company may want to know, or to validate, that an employee suddenly has a very negative mindset, or is harmful in various ways. They may use it as a kind of health check on employees. If an employee is identified using software to be erratic on social media, expressing too much anger or even hatred, the business may plan to contact the employee to do a "check up" of sorts. They may even choose to fire on the basis of poor information. This is part of brand protection. If an employee is suddenly expressing hate, or seems to be acting poorly online, even if not at work, they may seek to self-protect the business by firing the employee. It is unfortunate but this is really how companies are seeking to use sentiment analysis software. They've been doing this for a long time now too. It was about ten years ago that I was exposed to Adobe Social and it is anticipated that this technology has been greatly expanded by major software providers.

But companies working on marketing businesses want to show a polished and nearly perfect image of them, in order to ensure they want to continue doing business. They would not want to mine user interactions in writings of users to see if there is negative feelings. They wouldn't want to use that to impact their ratings. Again, they want to control their ratings to have a perfect image. In order to do that they would want to use Facebook reporting on *controlled sentiments*. This makes Facebook very desirable even though it controls the user in what they can input. Unfortunately there are huge social side effects to this since it is also desirable that the user has consistent interactions between businesses and other people on Facebook-- there would even be a desire to confuse users into using only positive interactions everywhere to ensure they continue to do so when they are also confused that they are commenting on an advertisement. Some have complained that Facebook has created a system in which postings from businesses excessively resemble postings from friends. I've often commented or clicked "like" to things that looked like they were shared by friends or acquaintances, only to notice afterwards that they were really postings shared by Facebook advertising for social influencers I don't know, and businesses and groups I did not ask to see. Oftentimes these are personalized so it looks like things I would sign up for, but instead Facebook Advertising is simply smart enough to show me things it knows I might be interested in from interactions elsewhere.

Returning to the point about not wanting folks on social media who are negative, consider if a Facebook user very often chooses the angry emoticon. They actually would be a negative impact on their business and reporting. Very likely Facebook would scan for users who use that emoticon and treat them differently, and potentially more frequently lock their accounts. Many have told me about "Facebook Jail", which is simply a temporarily disabled Facebook account due to bad behavior. I have not ever been in Facebook Jail, or had my Facebook account locked, due to bad interactions. Overwhelmingly my reactions and communications on Facebook are positive, and that may be a reason I've never experienced this personally. I post extremely often and have had many disagreements, yet I have not ever been targeted as someone to have their account temporarily locked. It could be that those who have been locked out of their accounts exhibited unwanted behavior enough times with angry reactions that they are desirable for purging.

Consider if businesses could choose to have anyone who would rate their companies low removed from social media platforms, such that their ratings remained high?

Since Facebook already eliminated what is needed to balance liking with disliking, which is as frequent a sentiment if not more frequent, it isn't absurd to think they would take actions to lock or eliminate unwanted users damaging their advertising revenue.

Before concluding, let's consider the importance of the minimal selection of sentiment related options provided for disliking, versus liking postings. If Facebook wanted to provide you with an opportunity to share yourself truthfully, they would provide a means for you to share your sentiments accurately, whatever they are. If six of seven sentiments provided are equivalent to liking, correcting that issue would require at least five more sentiments equivalent to disliking. Wouldn't that seem like a dramatic change on Facebook? It would greatly change the experience. But it would also greatly increase the truth of the sentiments everyone can provide in their postings that they hope reflect their minds. Users really do want to be able to provide negative-ish feedback and ratings. What is the use of a rating system for businesses if one cannot state what one's less satisfactory experiences were, in a way that the businesses would have to deal with?Since this action has not been taken, to provide a way to give true sentiments, one's feelings are skewed. This has impacted millions of users of Facebook-- all users in fact.

All users of Facebook have been skewed in all that they've done!

To conclude, it appears that Facebook has been able to increase its profits by providing businesses protection from negative feedback. This protection utilizes a sentiment gathering tool, that is the same tool used for regular communication. This communication crosses into normal discourse and private conversations with family, friends, and acquaintances on their messenger application. This application is touted as a kind of replacement for telephone and text messaging functionality on cell phones. Many rely on it. Many have private conversations on it. Their conversations and special messages were skewed towards the positive artificially, simply to train the users to use the same methods as they talk with businesses. Their communication then is on a business-driven pathway, not a personal pathway.

It has made all communication on Facebook falser and more dishonest. It has created a situation in which all the history of communication on Facebook between regular people is less true. Minds on Facebook were steered to falsity and fake sentiments.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>


## <a name="changing-and-partly-disusing-the-phrase-i-am">Changing and Partly Disusing the Phrase "I am"</a>

*Monday, November 20<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>2:56pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

*To Add*

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="brain-dividedness-as-an-outcome-of-non-synonymous-multilingualism">Brain Dividedness as an Outcome of Non-Synonymous Multilingualism</a>

*Monday, November 20<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>2:31pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

*To Add*

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="the-need-to-finally-understand-whale-and-dolphin-brains">The Need to Finally Understand Whale and Dolphin Brains</a>

*Monday, November 20<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>2:31pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

*To Add*

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="updates-to-the-solution-regarding-wetness-in-the-field-study-on-homelessness-and-wealthy-camping">Updates to the Solution Regarding Wetness in the Field Study on Homelessness and Wealthy Camping</a>

*Monday, November 20<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>2:31pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

Following the prior notes regarding solutioning for camp wetness, the following was completed:

- A new white sheet set was purchased for some cents over $10.
  - The white sheet provides fabric to keep things in the interior space of the bag dry by drawing some of the excess moisture.
  - The white sheet makes for a very luxurious drop cloth for the beach. The secondary fitted sheet covers the sleeping bag well, making the beach experience appear more plainly normal. Both are white and again, creates an appearance of luxury approaching what is used by the resorts for their lawn chairs. It is more luxuriousu than what is normally used by beach goers, so the appearance not only is regular, making it appear not a camping experience, it creates an appearance of status and familiarity with beach-going.
  - The white sheet was noticed to be something useful to escaping periodic quick downpours. All loose possessions on the beach can be scooped up into the sheet if there is not enough time to repack everything in the waterproof bag.
  - It was noticed the white sheet can be used in conjunction with tent poles to create a sun shade that would be attractive and within the expected range of designs that would fit into the beaches theme.
  - The sheets can also double as a cover to one's clothing when one is in the rain, wearing a poncho. This would protect clothing and undergarments from saturation.
  - Being thin, the sheets are expected to dry fairly rapidly in the sun and should not require frequent cleaning.
  - Since the author lived in Miami Beach and used the sheet method earlier for laying on the beach, instead of using towels, it is known that there is little or no need for cleaning even after repetitive usage and easy access to laundry in one's home.
- The sleeping bag was recovered along with the wet clothes from stash, and dried in a dryer, in preference for the pathway to dry sooner.
  - Cost to dry was only one dollar and fifty cents, and not eight dollars. It was decided to test only drying the wet, sandy, and somewhat stinky laundry, to see if the outcome was good enough. The funds allowed for 30 minutes of drying in the industrial dryer. All was nearly completely clean, excepting some down in the sleeping bag above the head. The laundry did not smell after drying, and retained some scent resembling chocolate or cocoa butter from someone's laundry earlier. All sand was immediately collected by the dryer, except some in the interior of the sleeping bag. The sleeping bag was then pulled inside out, and the remaining san again immediately was collected by the dryer. It appears from this that the value of washing the wet clothes is greatly diminished. The clothing is nearly as clean as if it were washed. Savings off the estimated amount to spend was $6.50. This implies that drying alone may be enough to reduce additional costs for keeping clothing clean. It appears good dry cleaning exists running clothes in the dryer only.
  - Performance of the sleeping bag was extremely good on a two night usage. Sleeping in it felt luxurious on the beach, and was warm and dry, despite having some lingering wetness to some small amount of down in the head area.  

From the experience of using these solutions for two days it appears the strategy for remaining completely dry is nearly complete. It was noticed that the poncho material, however, is still inadequate for rain protection, since it does not provide enough material. It is adequate for the upper body but could not be used as a cover for the sleeping bag. It was considered that an additional poncho costing roughly two dollars may completely cover remaining needs, but if not, additional plastic material will be obtained to cover any remaining unprotected areas needing it. The feet are to be covered with simple bags tied above the ankle as was done when the author was a child. This is expected to provide adequate dryness to shoes and feet, and there are additional socks in case any wetness penetrates the bags. Additionally, it was considered that the shoes and socks can simply be removed for a period of intense downpour to briefly escape any risk of getting shoes and socks wet. Shoe wetness is especially important to avoid, so this requires additional consideration and testing for feasibility.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="you-are-an-organism-and-you-have-organelles">You are an organism, and you have organelles</a>

*Saturday, November 18<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>13:05pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

*To add*

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="religion-as-the-slowest-education-pathway-with-the-least-iterations">Religion as the slowest education pathway with the least iterations</a>

*Saturday, November 18<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>13:05pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

*To add*


<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>


## <a name="plans-for-resolving-some-specific-aforementioned-homelessness-and-wealthy-camping-issues">Plans for resolving some specific aforementioned homelessness and wealthy camping issues</a>

*Saturday, November 18<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>13:05pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

The primary areas of immediate interest for resolution relate to clothing and controlling for wetness and cleanliness in a shortage. Currently I have two pairs of shorts, two t-shirts, one hoodie, a sleeping bag, 7 pairs of socks, and a sleeping bag. One t-shirt, one pair of shorts, the sleeping bag, and 5 pairs of socks are saturated and dirty, and are accumulating stench, at the early stages, being bag kept.

Objectives:

- Reduce laundromat needs. While using washers and dryers is inexpensive and effective, the repeat use of these will quickly dwindle funds for a homeless person.
  - Reduction of laundromat needs is consistent with a strategy that:
    - reduces wetness, primarily.
    - utilizes other dry methods of cleaning, and methods of controling for odors.
    - utilizes alternative methods for drying, like sun drying.
  - Issues:
     - sun drying in a popular area, may signal homelessness and appear unusual. 
     - sun drying requires considerable time to remain with the clothes being dried.
     - sun drying for the author/researcher has an unknown duration, having limited experience doing that in the Miami Beach area, where plenty of sunshine exists, but humidity also diminishes the rate of evaportation.

- Make wetness an impossibility in all conditions, with free plastics and fabrics already in possession.
  - wetness appears to occur even if waterproofing and water resistance exists, so condensation and seeping through permeable walls needs controls perhaps with an absorbant textile.

- Guaranteed warmth even without a sleeping bag.
  - Currently the author/researcher has a sleeping bag of wealthy quality, from REI, made of goose down with a semi weather-resistant shell.
    - It was demonstrated that the sleeping bag will become totally saturated if exposed to shower.
    - The sleeping bag is currently at risk of being stolen or lost, because it is stashed. It was stashed after saturation, when a focus existed to get out of the rain.
    - The sleeping bag can be damaged, lost, stolen, or otherwise made unavailable. The sleeping bag is identified as too important for managing warmth. An alternative path with free materials is desirable to manage the warmth instead.
    - Miami has a warm climate, even in rainy conditions, although risks to temperature management is known to exist when rain continues, and wetness may occur. So there is a diminished need to maintain warmth, which may create potential solutions for using less insulating free materials as a substitute for the more reliable sleeping bag.

Priorities

Of the above, plainly, making wetness an impossibility appears to solve all the issues of concern. Until there was an adverse event of wetness, there was no perceived issue maintaining homelessness at all, in the Miami Beach environment. Dirtiness of clothing and the sleeping bag was due only to the wetness. The inability of the clothes to be dried immediately is what resulted in storage in bags, without air transfer, resulting in their becoming increasingly smellier. Before that, clothes could be worn for seemingly indefinite periods without any need for cleaning. This implies laundromats only come to mind in this context once wetness has ocurred.

The wetness then is primary. Now that clothing availability was halved, specifically due to the saturation, there is increased risk to well-being, because any additional wetness would create a funding requirement to buy more clothes quickly. Particularly since no method for immediately finding suitable replacement clothing for free, with good appearance, has been identified.

Since the clothing *has been saturated* there is an immediate need to clean and dry them and the sleeping bag. However, skies are cloudy. Weather indicates low chance of extended showers for approximately one week. Reports are changing increasing the probability of showers, showing earlier entirely clear skies, and recently changing, to show partly cloudy skies, with a ten percent chance of rain every day for the week. At the end of the week, showers are expected.

Right now, it is unwanted to use funds for laundry. So I must examine options.

Don't utilize a laundromat.

- There is a small risk of wetness to clothing currently worn without any backup at all.
- Prior exposure to wetness was unexpected and unplanned for. But for the period in which it was unplanned for prior to the rain experienced, there was no cares or concerns about wetness. There was no concern about inadequacy of clothing, although periodically it is remembered, that risks of getting dirty from foodor unknown source of staining, would require switching clothes.
- The period of time needed to wait for clothes to dry may be long, because the skies are not sunny, and the humidity is higher, and waiting alongside possessions in the open to dry may take far too long.
- It appears there is no immediate need, but the lingering issue of having increasingly dirty wet clothes and possessions is cause for worry and annoyance. The task remains incomplete and is totally necessary.
- Not using the laundromat would save approximately 8 dollars, estimating without knowing the actual cost of specific machines at local laundry facilities.
- zero dollar expenditure if this path is used.

Utilize a laundromat.

- Immediately and totally dry clothing and sleeping bag.
- Cost is 8 dollars, unrecoverable.
- Expected outcome, however, is that it will never happen again.
- Leaning towards this as the solution for the current condition, because it may be permanently solved, resolving any need for laundry in the future, because now there is also sufficient planning and training.

What is the larger cost of an 8 dollar deduction?

That is a question for later consideration.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="backup-tasks">Backup Tasks</a>

*Friday, November 17<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>17:19pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

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

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="problem-solving-issues-of-interested-related-to-the-study-of-homelessness-and-wealthy-camping">Problem solving issues of interested related to the study of homelessness and wealthy calmping</a>

*Friday, November 17<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>12:43pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

In the ongoing study on the relationships between homelessness and wealthy camping, I've identified some areas of interest for further examination. Without a resolution to some of these issues, total comfort even for the wealthy homeless, those studying homelessness with experiential field work, those taking camping extremely seriously in order to attain maximal mastery, and the homeless themselves, would not be entirely possible. The level of comfort I'm working towards is normal comfort. The same level of comfort that would exist in a normal mode of living, which is simply that style of living that includes a normal home dwelling, normal financial status, and a normal level of access to assets and various public services. Also is the normal level of access to electronics, electronic charge, batteries, and so on. Also is the normal level of appearance and health, which requires clothing and shoes that have a good appearance.

The following issues must be solved:

- Elimination of wetness, and finding easy and fast methods of drying.
- Methods of obtaining new clothing quickly, that has a good appearance.
- Identification of plants that are forageable, when there is an absence of foods available, and for increasing the diversity of diet for periods in which only the least expensive foods are consumed, like oats and flour.
- Increasing of the comfort of doing nothing at all for extended periods of time, in all climate conditions.
- Temperature management for all weather conditions, particularly for those climates that are already more suitable for homeless living: those that are already warmer and drier.
- Perpetuation of drinking water access.
- Perpetuation of basic food access even without any funds.
- Living without any shelter, utilizing bushes, overhangs, sleeping bags, bags that keep dryness, plastic materials for shielding rain, etc...
- Strategy for ensuring wifi access exists.
- Strategy for ensuring computing devices are available.
- Strategy for obtaining fast employment. If too slow, starvation or excess risk to being criminalized would exist.

Solving of the above issues would result in
- Perpetual basic food access with diversity of nutrition.
- Perpetuation of basic water access.
- Elimination of the need of any kind of shelter whatsoever.
- Ability to work.
- A calculation of earning capacity through requests for donations.

Some items above may be less essential than others. For example, it might not be necessary to find employment. For some employment is impossible, so the plan must include a strategy for living well without employment.

It appears requests for donations is potentially totally required, if one is to avoid engaging in theft. However, it may be that free food sources that exist utilizing scavenging may still be sufficient to cover most needs that are funding related.

For the present conditions in the study, defense against weather seems most important. The study is now taking place at Miami Beach, Florida, a former place of residence of the author. Conditions in Miami Beach are very optimal for homelessness. Comfort is often easily achievable. However, if it rains for an extended period, quickly temperatures are decreased and ability to remain dry is made difficult. Waiting through long rainy periods while businesses are closed creates long periods of waiting, with diminished access to resources. Recently the author had an unplanned experience having many possessions flooded. This was due to lack of planning and unexpected change of weather during sleep. Risks to the homeless do include decision making mistakes and mistakes due to lack of training. This means solutions for the homeless would need to include training for strong proficiency of self-management during the entire range of potential conditions faced, and this training would be not unlike the training gained by those who join the military forces, who become field practitioners.

It is very likely that the most adept homeless people would include those who were in the military and received training already.

Homeless simulating wealthy campers would be at more risk of disaster in unexpected circumstances. These travelers may have satellite devices that are popular nowadays that include an option for SOS, or signaling for help if there is an emergency. The homeless do not typically have this and would need to begin to ask for assistance if there are issues. It is already known that issues and complications in the outback areas, forests, remote territories, and so on, would create situations in which emergency response would be supportive or necessary. Pilots are aware of this and so are seamen. It doesn't appear that anyone who has received training in any of the areas in which emergency conditions are sought to be avoided with planning expect to have so much planning that emergency could not occur. So it appears there is another fundamental need of the homeless, to have very clear emergency assistance pathways that do not create additional risks.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="warfare-census-and-demographics">Warfare Census and Demographics</a>

*Prepared: Tuesday, November 14<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>~1:40pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

To Add

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>



## <a name="falsifications-and-infeasibilities-of-historical-methodology-and-practice">Falsifications and Infeasibilities of Histocial Methodology and Practice</a>

*Prepared: Tuesday, November 14<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>1:40pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

To Add

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="wealthy-and-luxuriant-beach-camping">Wealthy and Luxuriant Beach Camping</a>

*Prepared: Tuesday, November 14<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>1:40pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

To Add

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>


## <a name="aimless-behavior-and-work-labor">Aimless Behavior and Work-Labor</a>

*Prepared: Tuesday, November 14<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>1:37pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

To Add

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="broadening-synonyms-of-anti-prejudice">Broadening Synonyms of Anti-Prejudice</a>

*Prepared: Monday, November 13<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>8:14pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

To Add

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="common-retirement-struggles-part-i">Common Retirement Struggles, Part I</a>

*Prepared: Monday, November 13<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>7:36pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

To Add

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="reinterpreting-the-role-of-normalcy-in-morality-and-the-relationship-to-determinism">Reinterpreting the Role of Normalcy in Morality, and the Relationship to Determinism</a>

*Prepared: Monday, November 13<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>7:45pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

To Add

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>


## <a name="stock-in-nations-and-single-combined-retirement-and-basic-income-accounts">Stock in Nations and Single Combined Retirement and Basic Income Accounts</a>

*Prepared: Monday, November 13<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>7:19pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

To Add

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="the-full-extent-of-marketing-practices-and-making-it-identical-with-education">The Full Extent of Marketing Practices and Making It Identical with Education</a>

*Prepared: Monday, November 13<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>7:19pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

To Add

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="pulic-blood-storage-and-replacement-stations">Public Blood Storage and Replacement Stations</a>

*Prepared: Monday, November 13<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>7:15pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

To Add

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="oblivion-in-the-afterlife-as-contrary-to-equality-and-being-aligned-with-hate">Oblivion in the Afterlife as Contrary to Equality, and Being Aligned with Hate</a>

*Saturday, November 11<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>12:47pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

The duration of our lives is well understood. We know well we will live anytime from conception to approximately 130 years as a maximum. Most will die between the ages of 60 and 90 years old. But that is *not* what we are told is the true duration of our lives, if we are religious. If we are religious, we are told additionally we have forever.

Taking the duration of our lives that we know we have, to be a fraction over forever, the current life is really nearly nothing. As time goes on, it becomes negligible, nearly nothing. Consider after one million years, our life over the afterlife might be:

75/1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000... years

Equality hasn't been established in our current life. But if the afterlife is taken from other groups, we are saying they are more unequal than people may have considered. Those with the afterlife have everything, people without have nothing.

Saying other cultures and groups are not going to make it to "heaven", are not going to have an afterlife, are not going to have a *continued life* of that length, really means all they get is that fractional amount, that is nearly nothing. Everyone else has a continuing durable life that goes on forever.

By claiming that a group is a "chosen people", or a "select few", who will make it to the afterlife, while everyone does not, is a real genocide, if the afterlife is real. Everyone dies, but the few keep living. It is worse than merely shortening life from 75 years to 40 years and younger for a large group, or exterminating a group. They then only lost some few number of years. But by saying that all but a select few will have an oblivion at about 75 years old, they lost:

999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,965... years. Plus forever.

The afterlife might then be considered a form of hatred. It is *exclusive* in each religion. Everyone who is not in the select few are purged. They have oblivion. Nobody else dies!

Our current systems of religion are immoral. They do not really support equality, if they really believe in the afterlife the way they say they do. Cultures and peoples and religions simply cannot have the same rewards, if some are said to have oblivion approaching as something deserved.

It is strange that people could have believed in cultural and religious equality *without discrimination*(!), if they believe that some live forever, while everyone else does not.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>


## <a name="introduction-to-mensa-sweden-under-the-gaming-theme">Introduction to Mensa Sweden Under the Gaming Theme</a>

*Prpared: Friday, November 10<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>12:21pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

To add

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="color-palettes-for-social-justice-comfort">Color Palettes for Social Justice-Comfort</a>

*Prpared: Friday, November 10<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>12:10pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

*to add*

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="every-animal-is-deformed-already">Every animal is deformed already</a>

*Prpared: Friday, November 10<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>11:50am, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

*to add*

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="cloud-surfaced-earth-hypothesis">Cloud Surfaced Earth Hypothesis</a>

*Prpared: Friday, November 10<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>11:50am, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

*to add*

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="on-partial-self-marketing-removing-propaganda">On Partial Self-Marketing Removing Propaganda</a>

*Tuesday, November 6<sup>rd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>11:57pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

To what extent does anyone posting on social media have to become like a marketer to be heard.

On Instagram, TikTok and so on, it seems influencers and posters gravitate to becoming a sort of "false excitement" type to gain influence.

I don't want to excessively fault this behavior. Instead, I'm curious here what is necessary to have attention. 

How does this support folks here? Well, those who are very intelligent might have a distaste for advertising and marketing, since there is a convergence of false enthusiasm and false messaging. People here might want intellectual conversation and may want to present messages that are of good quality and length, well delivered, without a propagandist methodology.

This relates somewhat to my earlier video post here. If one becomes a marketer of sorts with one's personal messaging, one may begin to decline one's communications. Quality goes down, becomes less reflective of intelligence. It becomes more reflective of working towards popularity. Popularity including with those who might not understand the full messages from one's mind.

I've decided in my Book and Journal, and postings to various locations, not to follow this path in self-marketing. I'm a supporter of the idea that one can self-market, and should, in order to find a good career pathway. I've been successful at that.

Beyond normal career pathways, if one is wanting attention, on the media and in social technologies, one works differently. One becomes more interested in doing something that will catch attention with excitement. Perhaps with tricks, teasers, and underdelivery. Pretending to be bigger than one really is. Pretending to have a quality of life and intellect that is less than it is. Pretending to have something more to teach than one really has.

Instead of this, I want to have conversations. Occasionally, I'll exhibit my lifestyle and current thoughts, like a normal logger. But what I don't want to do is start to share my life in a way that is becoming increasingly more like a false media personality. Or an advertiser wanting attention and other related things in return, like money, without providing anything of durable interest.

Instead I'd like to just keep working steadily on providing value. I want it to be consistent with my mindset and manner of thinking.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="software-tasks">Software Tasks</a>

*Monday, November 6<sup>rd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>12:43pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

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

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="study-of-ones-symptoms-as-knowledgeable-symptomology">Study of One's Symptoms as Knowledgeable Symptomology</a>

- *Monday, November 6<sup>rd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>4:41pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>
- *Post Prepared: Monday, November 6<sup>rd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>12:25pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

Even the very smallest sensations can be classified as symptoms. What is your digestive tract doing, as a result of the foods you were recently eating, over the last few days? If your digestion is uncomfortable, that is a sensation that might be considered a symptom of what was eaten in conjunction with the state of your digestive system and related organs. If your digestion is more comfortable than usual, you may have more pleasant feelings in your digestive tract. Maybe you feel emptier and lighter than usual, and perhaps you feel as though an upcoming movement will be easy. You may know what you ate and perhaps you deliberately chose your foods to have a better digestive experience. In this case, again, you experience sensations that reflect the state of your system, that could be considered symptoms relating to the combination of your digestive processes and your eating.

Even your thought may be considered part of the symptomology of sensations. We need not call thinking sensations, but we can see the interrelationship easily. If one ate well, had good feelings in the digestive tract, and then experienced some happiness at one's choice, one's positive mood and temporary elatedness or comfort, then those feelings, thoughts and experience too fit into the symptomology.

In Psychology symptoms are mental. In Physiology, they are more generally biological. Physiological symptoms, or all symptoms of any kind, are sensations that relate to a combination of situation and bodily state, and choices about how one conducts one's life. This includes decisions about how one conducts oneself in feeding behavior. What is eaten and when, and how that fits with one's knowledge of one's own physiological system.

Even digestion is a part of moral planning. If one eats and lives well, has positive digestive sensations often, or very frequently, one knows this improves happiness, confidence, well-being, and long term health. These influence how one performs in athletics, work, and longevity. Longevity is connected some think with excellences in how one has lived, although it is known that that is not necessarily all it's about. However, if one is planning for good health with reasonable longevity, one can take better care of family, friends, and has opportunity to provide mentorship later in life to others as a teacher and elder.

If one's digestive system deteriorates, then one will surface new sensations. These sensations may include some that are interesting and mildly desirable. Some sensations may be negative, and more connected with what one would expect from a medical condition or ailment. Both positive and negative or wanted and unwanted sensations come along with various conditions and diseases. It would be a mistake to think conditions do not offer opportunities for self-examination sometimes, and learning creates the chance for expanded self-knowledge and potentially better health in the future. One sometimes learns to have a better diet after learning that a health pathway resulted in a real diagnosable condition came to exist. It certainly had some negative and positive sensations associated. The full combination of results that one notices from one's experience would figure into a comprehensive symptomology of human experience.

I wanted this posting to not only be about encapsulating experience in symptoms, understood as sensations, but to communicate an additional message about the usefulness of this perspective in medical history.

Currently doctors collect and record information in such a way that they may be expecting and anticipating language about sensations that are closer to diagnostics. They may not be using the word sensation. Instead they may be asking about your experience with a readiness to classify them already as negative symptoms. If you talk to a Psychologist, they may already be lead by their industry to hear for dysfunction. Perhaps you are having experiences and sensations related to sleep experience. While you tell them your experiences, you might both be ready to conclude something like "It appears you are depressed." Instead, I think it is possible to let a doctor know that whatever is discussed is mixed between positive and negative. It includes positive sensations and negative ones. If one is accurate, one merely relays one's experience without concluding anything as to even symptoms. This article states that a total symptomology could be considered more detailed if it focuses more specifically on sensations. However, the medical profession has not adopted this point of view. Within this view there are positive and negative symptoms. Within the medical profession, this is not what is expected. So here what I'm saying is that until that time, it may be better for people to let doctors know that they are not talking about symptoms but positive and negative sensations, with less immediate interpretation in relation to conditions and diseases.

Doctors are the creators of medical records usually. You arrive at the doctor's office, they interview you and look you over. You talk. The doctor quickly writes things down. These things written are in the language expected by the medical profession and that language may not support your long term interests. Sometimes, they may fail to translate your speaking accurately. They may even record your experiences as symptoms. They may build a case that something is wrong with you when there is not anything wrong at all. So doctors, being the recorders of your medical history, do so in a way that doesn't necessarily include your written input, may include expectations built into the medical industry, and may go into permanent medical and personal history with erroneous information or assumptions.

It seems thinking about this that one might want more control on what gets recorded. I have not experimented with this yet personally, but it may be possible to bring in writing that would go into the medical history on arrival. Write the experiences down, and ensure that those writings are gathered along and filed with anything that is written down. Medical data input into systems is also out of your control. You may want your medical records after a visit, so you can confirm that their entered data includes your writings that you brought along. Also, you may have opportunity to review the doctor's notes. They are yours and you paid for them. You have the chance to explain miscommunications and make corrections. If they don't accept your reading of their documents with a readiness to alter and correct them, they almost certainly are not operating in your interests. In that case they merely want to control your medical history without receiving your input, even if there are errors. The preservation and enforcement of retaining errors in medical records is not consistent with oaths and vows of medical professionals to never do you harm.

It is your living history in your medical records. Here it is suggested that perhaps it is more in your control than might be anticipated. Here it is also suggested that what you share can be both positive and negative intermixed, concerning your sensations. With a sophisticated view about human symptomology, you may be able to dodge the false or erroneous recording of information and symptoms you don't have, that could lead to independent diagnosis that is incorrect.

The cause of my thinking and recording this information was a recent conversation with myself about sensations. I noticed that sensations are symptoms, and that they cover all experience one might have that is wanted or unwanted. Seeing that symptomology has a diagnostic focus, from my learnings in college, in the field of Psychology and Biology, and some medicine, I noticed how it might be helpful for everyday doctor visits that everyone has. I hope this has been helpful to expand potentially the idea of symptoms to sensations and thinking, to perhaps broaden our ideas about symptomology that may allow us to have more accurate, rewarding, and self-protected experiences with doctors. It may help us better self-examine and understand ourselves too.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="the-replacement-of-pascals-wager-is-easy">The Replacement of Pascal's False Wager is Easy</a>

*Sunday, November 5<sup>rd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>2:01pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

People remember "Pascal's Wager" and use it again and again, thinking it authoritative. However, it is foolish, old, and meant to confuse and manipulate. People simply remember it, and keep pretending they can use it as an authority of sorts. There is no such authoritativeness. That it can be recollected so easily is really a kind of halt on civilization.

The replacement is basic. Firstly, people simply decide yes/no regarding the afterlife. They use no probabilities at all. However, probabilities could be used, to demonstrate they are unavailable for a reason. First I will share the main decision tree without probabilistic thinking. Then I will share the decision tree with probabilistic thinking. You have to add in the probabilities, doing work. Probabilities don't require no work at all. You must actually find the probability, or estimate it using evidence, and then use it. But really, the way people actually do this is they've chosen 'yes/no' already.

What you do or not after selecting one path or the other revels few action options. If the afterlife is true, you choose it, and do whatever it takes. Otherwise you are a fool. If the afterlife is false, and you choose it, you are a fool, doing whatever it takes to secure nothing. If you choose against it, you wisely have a true life.

The truth is not optional.

*Yes/No Decision Tree, and Outcomes*

- There is an afterlife.
  - Choose true: do whatever it takes to have the afterlife.
  - Choose false: don't do enough and fail to have an afterlife.
- There is not an afterlife. 
  - Choose true: live life as if it's all you have wisely.
  - Choose false: do whatever it takes for an afterlife that doesn't exist, live falsely. 

That's really done.

*Probabilistic Decision Tree*

- There is an afterlife = 100
  - Choose true: do whatever it takes to have the afterlife.
  - Choose false: don't do enough and fail to have an afterlife.
- There is not an afterlife = 0 
  - Choose true: live life as if it's all you have wisely.
  - Choose false: do whatever it takes for an afterlife that doesn't exist, live falsely. 

Now some think there might be a probability of the afterlife, so let's do one more:

*Probabilistic Decision Tree*

- There is an afterlife = 50%
  - Choose true: take it totally seriously and do whatever is required to secure it?
  - Choose false: fill in with another probability, then decide.
- There is not an afterlife = 50% 
  - Choose true: live life as if there is not an afterlife, trying to be true to that?
  - Choose false: fill in with another probability, then decide.

The tricky part is what to do if you think there are probabilities to fill in. Afterlives in the religion are said to be hard to have. This means you may need to allocate a lot of time/effort to securing the afterlife, doing all that is necessary to have it, only on a 50% probability, if that's what you think it is. This may explain why people pretend there is an afterlife for sure and do very little, while thinking they should life life "to the fullest" without becoming preists, monks, nuns and so on.

I would be interesting in how people can say exactly how they know already how to behave with different percentiles filled in.

Hypothesis: they don't know.

Hypothesis: true human behavior is really more like the first decision tree, they just suffer uncertainty.

It appears to me the correct pathway is number one. I assign a zero probability to the afterlife, understanding the fictionality of it. I assign a 100% probability to having no afterlife. Thus it becomes a simple decision with a true/false pathway. The best options are the first pathways in that decision tree.

Other variants of this could be created but I'm confident results are the same.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="the-idea-of-lobbing-in-business-and-intelligence">The Idea of Lobbing in Business and Intelligence</a>

*Sunday, November 5<sup>rd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>12:46pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

In business, there is a concept called "lobbing". "Lobbing" happens when a person, or group in a business, identifies a task that can easily be performed and simply passes it to another person or group, instead of doing it. When this happens, one might think "Who can do this task I or we don't want to do myself or ourselves? Who else can have responsibility for it? Who can be accountable for this instead of me or us?" The recipient often sees this clearly, but sometimes, the work is simply performed and completed. It was someone else's work.

It's like someone "lobbed" a hand grenade to someone else or another group. If not a hand-grenade, a ball or some object. It is metaphorical of course. Minimal effort is carried out and it is simply "chucked" to the other group or person.

I'd like to extend or play with this concept a bit further and use it for things it isn't strictly normally used for. Let's use this term in social media. It doesn't really fit the original usage, but has the laziness of "lobbing" I like. It also has the "take-creditness of it". It also has the pretense of having done the work by delegating, using someone else, and doing minimal effort to get some special perceived reward.

In business what gets lobbed might be something like an idea that one will take credit for later. You can pretend you delegated it if you lob it over. So now an idea or task was carried out, that you can even pretend you or your group "thought of first".

There are some in the high intelligence social communities who do little more than lob. They don't share there thoughts that are really their own. They don't use their own words. They don't do their own research. But again and again, they'll lob memes, they'll lob the research of others, and they'll lob questions to groups. They'll mine answers. They'll use people in the group and pretend they are "members" somehow. The person who made the lob takes credits for the thoughts of high quality thinkers. Often it is unclear if they are good thinkers themselves. They use the writings and thoughts of others and present them as their own.

This is so common, one might really get confused and think that these "lobbists" really are as intelligent as they portray themselves to be. They'll pretend the thoughts and findings of others, and memes, are like the thoughts that go through their own minds. But being poor at expressing their unique thoughts, rarely doing so, they haven't communicated their own thoughts. They lobbed over, or "chucked" into the group, something from someone else, or some other group. They do it again and again. Sometimes if one wants to see the thoughts of the person or people doing this, you cannot find them.

I wrote about the need to demonstrate one's own work and actual thought with productions. I did a long interview concerning the detection of giftedness in communication. If one has intelligent thinking, independent communication in one's own mind is happening, at high velocity of creativity and significance. If that thinking is real, communication pathways people have, will express the same kind of thinking. If instead, the people lob thoughts of others, they really are potentially scam artists. The writing below is an interview about this topic in which it is discussed the detection of high intelligence scam artists. One red-flag to be used in the detection, is impoverished unique communication, evidenced extensively in lobbing. Uniform lobbing is a sign of fraud.

[http://www.mattanaw.org/velocity-of-significance-and-ideation.html](http://www.mattanaw.org/velocity-of-significance-and-ideation.html)

One might think that this might not be true, but then only one forgets one's work life. If one at work is really only stealing, only lobbing, and never exhibiting talents and thoughts that supposedly are of a quality that they claim exists in their heads, they are doing fraud at work. If you haven't experienced this, that is a point of confusion to me. It would also indicate, you aren't aware that this happens.

In these communities, I will continue to use the word "lob". You're a "lobb artist" might be something that I'll state, from time to time. Trolls are not the only issues in groups. These frauds that just keep lobbing are pretending to be intelligent very likely. The frequency of lobs is under consideration. Sometimes people will of course share memes and thoughts of others. When a pattern of behavior is evident, it appears fraud is possible. They plagiarize and seldom do anything that's their own.

Obviously I could be targeted for the same, and expect it. But an important issue is that I've shared enough that it is obvious that I'm immune to this. I hope others immunify themselves as well, with honest and genuine, original thinking.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="naturalistic-description-of-attention">Naturalistic Description of Attention</a>
  
- *Monday, October 23<sup>rd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>3:24pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>
- *Entry prepared, writing not yet started: Friday, October 20<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>2:03pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>


An area of Moral Philosophy that I've spent quite a lot of time over the years developing is the management of attention. I've written much on this topic, and have worked hard on developing my own attention, with considerable success. However, I noticed I have not spent much time writing a naturalistic description of normal attention in human beings.

It is clear to me, particularly observing differences between myself and others, having undergone already considerable development, that such a treatment does not exist and has not been made available to people, so that they can see what normal attention consists of, and how they might want to control it in various ways in order to improve their own behavior. Improvement of behavior relates to truly embodying moral and religious characteristics, and not only speaking about them. Education relates to self-training, and people certainly can and do improve themselves often, but that improvement does not have the scope or specificity of the kind of self alteration at the psychological level that I'm speaking about.

This is not a long posting like some others I've been sharing. Instead of going into various areas of needs for a description of natural attention, I'll list some areas in which we are certainly impoverished for not having this work, and the work I've been preparing for several decades.

One: What is natural sexual attention and its relationships to relationships and their maintenance and need for dissolving?

Think of how relationships can live and die due to attention? And that there is little guidance.

Two: Attention as it relates to "tells" or "social cues" about how one thinks and behaves for real, and privacy.

Three: Attention as it relates to self-organization, and efforts to more globally improve one's life.

Here, I can point the reader to a special work of mine, of data collections on my own attention and behavior over the years. Follow the link below to my binder of personal data, and look particularly at how it expanded until the end. It was very well developed at the end.

http://www.mattanaw.com/complete-16102019-personal-forms-all-christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-mattanaw.pdf

This is a large document and takes some time to download, but is worth it. Let me know if you have trouble with it and I can find an alternative way to send it. Image scans can also be seen in the last section of this page:

http://www.mattanaw.com/mattanaws-personal-form.html

A primary finding was that hard work is required to track the categories of living. This relates to how we manage and organize our attention. Much is omitted from these data forms because of the time to fill them out. But beyond this, there is limited amount of thinking time in the day. An implication is that we have not trained our attention fully to scan our lives in the various categories to really develop them all in parallel. If you think I'm incorrect, consider if people are able to maintain their athletics over the years, jointly with family management, relationship management, work, financial management, health, nutrition, skills for cooking, resting, meditating, etc... You'll see that they are universally not uniformly well-developed in combination. Instead people seem to be able to focus on a few categories and not them all. Believe it or not, that is due to limitations on attention, and inability to develop attention and time management further, in a way that results in efficiencies and motivations that ensures parallel development of all life categories. 

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="thinking-of-me-as-a-very-old-person-is-appropriate">Thinking of me as a very old person is appropriate</a>
  
- *Thursday, October 26<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>~4:00pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>
- *Tuesday, October 24<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>2:24pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>
- *Entry prepared, not yet started: Monday, October 23<sup>rd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>2:20pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

In the High Intelligence Community, and in psychometrics, some still discuss the origins of IQ and it's original meaning that is the cause for the abbreviation, relating to "Inteligence Quotient". That quotient is no longer used, but still, we have the lingering history of meaning built into the acronym IQ, that really does still stand for that same phrase.

In the phrase "Intelligence Quotient" is the word "Quotient", which one would recognize from school years as implying division, and fractions. The original quotient related to one's mental age, versus one's actual age. The actual nomenclature was "Mental age over Chronological Age". The idea was that, if measing children in particular for giftedness, one would consider where there mind seems to fit in relation to their peers at different ages. Precocious children seem much more like older children in various ways relating to their mental abilities, although any parent or educator will tell you, they still are children of their own age in many important ways. But the idea is still useful and interesting for detecting which children might be especially gifted, as certain mental abilities are unlocked earlier, likening them more to older peers than children their own age. Various causes for separation from other children come to exist. They are too unlike children their age and very similar to children older than them. They are somewhat at risk of children their own age, and somewhat at risk *to* children their age.

When I was a child, I too was identified as being gifted, and was briefly raised a grade level. Behaviorally, though, in many ways, I liked to play and sport with peers very close in age. Sporting does not call for being elevated in grade level. Instead, for youths, one wants to play sports with those who are physically more equivalent, or physically unfairnesses come to exist. While I excelled at sports, in retrospect I wonder how much my comparative abilities related to actual physical talents. I had them, but I think perhaps mental abilities came to the fore there too, making it possible to excel with less perhaps. I state this without diminishing too much my physical gifts, because they are extensive. But I was never especially tall, large, or effortlessly dominantly strong. Strengths related to mental energy and mental exertions and endurance, that created good growth potential.

Mentally however, I was very unusual. I got along with peers, but remained intermixed with the regular student population, despite being placed in gifted and talented, partly because of parental decision making. I enjoyed my peers to a great extent anyways, too. But there was always a strange separateness.

In friendships I would do most of the talking. Later, it became obvious listening was limited in friends and close connections. I was typically the driving force in conversation and activities with peers.

I had an odd interest in pleasing adults. This lead to being strangely formal, careful, and patient. My skills in adulthood with various social formalities were not really learned as an adult but were already instilled probably as an elementary aged child. I would work very hard to please adults, and over time recognized a great futility in that effort. I was challenging of the views of instructors and that seldom was received positively. I had a scientific mindset as a young person and discussed sensitive topics dispassionately and scientifically. As an adult I still cannot understand extremely the causes for wanting to avoid topics that simply can be discussed like a doctor would. Discussions with peers on topics of sensitivity like sex life and so on were very easy for this reason, and I was a source of knowledge and positive mentorship, very early in life. Friends felt they could talk over these topics with me without receiving any shame or embarassment. As children I think it is easier to "turn off" sensitivities if the method of presentation feels scientific and matter of fact, and non-sensitive, but caring. This may be true in adulthood too, but probably a certain portion of the population shuts down due to increased sensitivity. My openness in face-to-face conversation is still appreciated by others. It doesn't appear to be well appreciated in a text based context, where sophistication in social cues and interpersonal emotion management is missing. I had very strong emotion management skills as a kid and could easily guide others to positive, honest, and humorous experiences, that were gentle, kind, and professional almost. This aided me in my career and in any job I ever performed.

Since I was intermixed with the standard population of children, it would not be easy for an outsider to immediately distinguish my mental traits from those of my peers. Simply looking, I looked like a kid like anyone else, and so, there was nothing incredibly special to witness unless one cared enough to observe closely. My giftedness in schools came up sometimes for GT meetings, but largely waned as school years passed on. I had much more attention in elementary school than later, where awareness of my GT status must have been much more known. Less kids, and better information sharing about fewer children.

This posting isn't really about my life as a kid though. Only to mention that at that age, there were mental traits that certainly were more like adults than a kid. These were separable from physical traits that were normal for my age, and since that is more connected to visual "sizing up" of people, physical traits overtook mental traits in comparisons.

As an teenager and adult, I was still oddly more interested in people older than myself. I still retained long term friendships with friends my age, but still, there was a much greater comfort with older people than younger people. I was always very able to get along with people who were far older in a way that seemed to open conversation that was meant for *their peers* and not only for me. I would have conversations that were more in their age range, I could feel, and I think I left impressions that they were talking to someone who was older than my appearance would serve to indicate.

More natural friends of mine, and more natural colleague relationships, trended later to be skewed towards people older than me. Physical sporting relationships, still seem to be skills and ability based, so I really still like to work out in gyms and work on fitness amidst people my age, and somewhat younger, because I have been able to maintain good fitness health. But for conversation, which is my main interest in friendship, I greatly prefer time with people who are older than I am, and sometimes much older.

After becoming divorced recently, I discovered that conversation isn't really as rewarding unless with women who are much older than I am too. I had some few dating and bar-room encounters with much older women. While I'm now celibate, and largely was since divorce, I still enjoy these moments with older women.

Since I'm retired at 42, and have had a career now that's been elevated early, my recent colleagues, friends, and acquaintances are all older. My life has also gone very far along in experience to be so comprehensive to resemble people in their elderly years. I've also had some elderly friends in the High Intelligence Community, because our mode of conversation, interests, and backgrounds align. My very best friends in the High Intelligence Community have all been much older. Some who I have the best conversations with are in their sixties and seventies, and conversation is never out of parity.
 
Mental Age over Chronological age is certainly a concept that is not distributable across all areas of development. Some traits I had as a teen were like fifty year old men. Particularly regarding manners, when I was showing them fully. Some thinking in Philosophy for example, was perhaps older. In reading I gravitated to older thinkers, like Bertrand Russell, who wrote quite a lot in advanced age. Most of my reading from a particular author was from him. Conversation included a large and developed vocabulary and words and experiences discovered in older writings of older people. This too indicated a sort of mental age that was not commensurate with my own. Physically my athletic age would not correspond to chronological age, but would be younger. Musically, and culturally, I enjoy things that are from the regular population that are sometimes from what youths enjoy. This means I would be conversant in youthful things that would cause one to perhaps say makes me similar to younger people. But this is true of many older people too, and musically I have had intersts in classical since a child too. While friends were listening to rap I was often listening to organ, harpsichord, oboe, or other instrumental music. 

Conversation, it appears to me, may really be the best way to understand mental age versus chronological age, and is a cause for wanting to divide children in youth. I've written a posting on this, regarding identifying intelligence via the [velocity of significance and ideation] and person demonstrates. As one gets older, or gains more experience more rapidly, being highly intelligent, one increasingly shares messages of greater density and significance. Topics touch on more experience than others would recognize. It becomes harder for people to relate, if there is not a similarity of mental age relating to quantity of experience accumulated. Children who appear to be similar to older kids are those who are gathering experience faster. Later in life these children will become adults who will resemble much older people even while younger.

These days, if I'm looking for excitement, I'm still young enough in appearance to put myself amongst people my age or younger. But if I'm looking for conversation, it's much more appropriate that I'd be talking to people who are older, and sometimes much older. While they may wonder about having friendship or acqaintanceship with someone who is considerably younger, I don't feel that same concern. Instead, I just enjoy it and want more of it.

Being someone who has provably immeasurable intelligence, there is even the idea that I would relate well to people who would be even older than is possible for humans to live. People die typically between the ages of 74 and 100 years old. But if someone is very intelligent, then they will gather experience faster, and may resemble *would be* 110 year olds, 150 year olds and so on. I've even likened myself to a vampire in some ways, being serious, taking out the negative aspects of vampiry, like eating people and enjoying blood. Instead, vampires may be very old and look young, and have vastly more experience than their peers-in-apparent age. It's not a terrible analogy, thinking of highly intelligent people as being peers only in apparent age with those who look like them. Their brains are different and really they have gathered experience that eventually is like the experience of more than one century for others. What is lacking is direct experience, but even these people, like myself, are curious in older things, older books and so on, and will really read them, causing more to be in common with those closer to living in those times. If one focused on reading works from the 1700s, one would have much more in common than would be expected with people who lived, thought, and spoke the same way as those books evidence for us. If someone was alive from the 1700s they would likely enjoy conversing with people who are younger but quite smart who absorbed minds of others from the 1700s through writings.

What is missing from this post is why I think it is quite appropriate to think of me as someone who is significantly older. To think of me as an old person, despite appearances. Some of what relates to that is written above, but more information needs to be provided that is more directly related to that particular point.

*More Soon.*

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="proving-determinism-with-an-approach-of-self-neural-inspection-in-conjuction-with-introspection">Proving determinism with an approach of self-neural inspection in conjuction with introspection</a>
  
*Sunday, October 22<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>4:11pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

Some who are thinking of the topic of free-will versus Determinism have taken the path of physics to at a very small and wide scale demonstrate that the universe is entirely causally explicable, and that this applies to human behavior. While this is interesting, I think oftentimes people on the free-willist side will be enabled to keep seeking refuge in whatever unknowns exist, claiming that somehow freedom is contained there, and that their brains rely on that closely. This delays conversation and proof substantially. This has been done again and again, and in the current day, some will bring up "quantum entanglement" as the are in which the unknowns that exist are pretended to create questions around the non-existence of free-will. The free-will that exists suddenly is somehow explicable in quantum entanglement.

I'm a Determinist that has assumed there is no free-will most of my life. I've integrated this view into my behavior, moral perspective, and expectations of others. I'm definitely of the view the Determinism is true, and also that it is easy to demonstrate, and not that hard. While most of my views about that are to be written in a book planned for that, I will share one additional methodology that has an experimental trajectory that is viable, and expected to allow people to gradually see for themselves, observing themselves, that they do not have free-will, and that nonexistence doesn't hurt them in any way. Rather, it helps them.

The experimental pathway is this. Eventually brain scanning technology is made available to people either via their smartphones or via headset technology like the Oculus 3, or other VR system. The person wears it or has it near. The person also receives some basic training on introspection. While people all have the ability to navigate their own minds, by thinking about how they think and feel, there are certainly big differences between people in their ability to do so.

The brain scanning technology will allow individuals to in real-time see their brain states as they think. This means not only will they be able to think about how they think, and just think, they will be able to see what brain activity is happening for all thoughts. This will enable them to connect their thoughts to their brain states as they happen, and see what changes as their thinking changes.

What is really interesting about this is they will be able in time to see what they appear to be able to change for themselves. They will see how their learning changes their brain, how their reflections result in structural changes. They will see how forgetting might relate to brain structure they remember. Some brain structure went missing or became different! They'll notice the changes that are happening from sleep. For those with especially good memories, they will be very adept at tracking brain changes as they relate to the thoughts they've had.

Here's where the simplified proof against free-willism comes in. Once noticed, I think intuitively the reader will recognize it illustrates Determinism is true, and that there is nothing that exists that is free-will. One will know what the constraints of change are gradually, and see what slowly changes, and what apparently never changes. They will have emotions, and changes of feeling, and changes of certain thoughts that appear to relate to brain structures that also do not change much in structure or behavior. They'll see that they can't change them with thinking any way in particular. They can try, and yet when they observe the brain states, they do not change, and correspondingly, when active, the feelings, sensations, and certain underlying thoughts do not change. This will serve to demonstrate that the degree of constraint of those systems, and a stability of unchange that reveals that they simply don't have any freedom to alter those systems, or have a greatly diminished ability to control those systems. This experience will also be recognized as something obvious on reflection. Change deltas of people are very small.

Additionally, they will recognize more clearly they cannot just think anything. Their brain will navigate what they know, how they imagine, and they will have feedback showing which brain areas do that again and again. Later, they will recognize what *learning* does for their brains, and see that *those areas were forever unavailable* unless they learned them. Thus they will become better at seeing that options for choice are unavailable if there is no brain tissue or states that exist for it. They will get a clearer idea that what is not in the brain is not available for choice. They will get a better idea of what is available for choice and why it is there to begin with. This will reveal the importance of constraint over misconceptions of overly broad freedoms.

The scope of thinking and change in the nervous system will become more apparent. This will allow to define the extent of constraints. The constraints will be seen to be very great. Freedoms one enjoys in regular behavior are unaltered, so constraint begins to appear less an enemy, and just something that is expected and natural, and universal.

Actual causality of thinking will be more related to brain tissue and state. Causality of thinking will be illuminated by being able to introspectively think and see the brain state, and switch to another seeing that brain state. One can then deliberately return to another brain state and see that the brain state really is realted to the causality of those thoughts. One will see how deliberation and selection of thoughts *also* relates to brain tissue and state.

Not much more needs to be said about this presently in my estimation. The combination of being able to introspectively think and observe one's brain activity that corresponds will be enough to prove finally that free-will is not real. Instead all is causally determined in animal organisms.

It can also be seen that the discussion of "quantum entanglement" is not necessary and is probably an irrelevance to hold onto a freedom the people think they will lose, that is really illusory. Medical understanding is primarily what is needed to understand that determinism is real. It will be found, unfortunately, that these experiments will seem unnecessary for proof. Everyday self-examination will be shown to always have had sufficient information to convince that causal determinism was true. We are animals that are medically and biologically determined.

*[Finished at 4:34 in 23 minutes, semi-blind typed, without edits as part of a study in Editing.]*

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="it-is-possible-to-share-everything">It is possible to share everything</a>
  
*Sunday, October 22<sup>nd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>2:58pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

The meaning of "everything" has to be clarified here. My point relates to the context of this writing, the ThoughtStream, that is a place to share anything I happen to be thinking about. It is a blog page within an Book and Journal, and as a "blog", it is a web log, but one can think of it simply as a public but personal journal. I have another similar blog page, called SocialNuggets, that is the primary location of all social content that is suitable for social media pages, where informality and media is expected, and not only text. Between the two of those locations and the entire Book and Journal I've been striving to share all I can about myself and my thoughts. Many writings, like those that go into a personal journal or diary, are shared in these locations. Diaries include thoughts to selves that are private but not only those that are so private that they could not be shared to others, but simple thoughts of importance to record and hold onto.

But what cannot be shared in these types of writings that are private-like but are also public?

If nobody reads them they feel safer, and of course, personal websites are often unread, or have a low readership. But they are consumed by search engines, tools like AI, and do provide the public a record of something that can be legally used whenever there is a legal contest. I have had legal contests and in one, my public profiles were used against me by my opposition.

It seems as though one cannot share whereabouts of exact current locations. However, in my case I travel, so my location changes often. Sharing something about my whereabouts does not typically provide so much information that one can search and find me with ease. I am not trying to remain elusive necessarily, but this observation is relevant to what can and cannot be shared. If one shares on social media platforms images, oftentimes those images have GPS encoded information that can be used to determine recent locations. Also, my postings tend to have timestamps, or hand written but accurate times logged. This provides information about recent whereabouts. If you post your vacation images someone could potentially travel to go and see you. But few worry about that, and either way, it does not imply that by the time someone seeks you out, you are still there. Posting at your home location may actually provide a way for someone to quickly find you, and legal process servers can and do use that information to find you to serve papers. There may be times in which it is unwise to be that current on social media. However, if I lookat my Book and Journal, and various pages, I see that it includes materials going back to the 1990s. Certainly over 99.9% of the information on the website then, is historical information. This means for those considerations one simply wants to have some minor controls, perhaps, on current details.

Anything on the website can be used for legal purposes, but if one reflects that one already has public social media pages, and a long hisotry of it, one knows that quite a lot of personal information is already out there that vultures can use to try to harm you in various ways. Expanding on that information is successful self-marketing, so self-marketing appears to be at odds with the desire for secrecy. My finding thought is that the infrequency of use of the pages, and my want for having an accurate living autobiography and personal record, greatly outweighs other considerations. Some seem to be hesitant about what they would share in great detail, but consider authors too. They might write many books and share their autobiographies with the effect that they are well known but could be attacked. However, these objectives are goals most would like to achieve if they can. It appears still one can easily share very large amounts of personal information with limited risk, that already exists for almost everyone to an extent.

If much is shared, as it is in my case, it is harder to scan and read and understand. In my legal cases, attorneys chose to use easier locations like LinkedIn and Facebook. Reading through my entire Book and Journal with many hundreds of thousands of words, and many tens of thousands of images, is difficult, costly, and one finds too much that is relevant. Not knowing what is relevant, it is hard to find anything of interest. They did not utilize my website in court.

I have an open identity. I have a chapter in my book called "Open Health and Identity" sharing my medical records, identity files, and many other items of interest for establishing authenticity and identity. There are some claims that public health data cannot be shared, and identity information cannot be shared either. Having a long history sharing this information, I'm confident it has *helped* rather than hindered, because real risks of utilizing that data results in criminality to others, and hasn't happened; whereas there have been many situations in which building trust has been needed, and for that purpose I simply shared my records. Again and again you have to share your identity and establish credibility in new relationships, and for that purpose my openness has been useful and successful.

I have a history in computer and data security so I'm aware also of security risks. This is not a posting for that, but in passing I would mention that openness still seems to greatly improve security conditions rather than diminish them.

So what is new regarding this posting about being able to share "everything"?

What has been missing is a way to share personal or business IP information, involving my plans, designs, and information relating to customers I've had in the past. Also the sharing of personal notes, that seem to be something worth discarding and keeping. I don't want to rely on tools from others and strive to use my own. Sometimes I kept simple notes in text files and other places that I did not want to place on my log. However, those tools consume the information sometimes, and instead of simply using the tools of others and letting them consume my information without providing me a great storage model, I could simply store that information in my thoughtstream. I began doing that recently.

More recently, I realized that even more sensitive data can simply be shared. I have a message encryptor tool on my website that can simply encrypt information I've written into ciphertext. For data that seems more important to retain but not share totally open, one can simply use this tool and post the cipherdata into the log. Posted and timestamped, later it can be openly decrypted, such that it has still been shared with a good data retention model, still be synchronous and sequential, and still be create openness. It is simply temporarily locked although it is open and public.

One can see such a posting here, where I recorded my plans for the continuing maintenance and improvement of my software system which constitutes personal and business intellectual property of great value:

http://www.mattanaw.com/thoughtstream.html#planned-completion-of-key-workflow-related-functionality

Using the strategy of temporarily encrypting open postings makes it so that some of the prior considerations are not as important. One can really share anything textual or image based in the same personal log and keep it open.

One can say that I have not "shared it" if it is public and locked. But that would only be partly true and is a matter of degree. It has been shared, is timestamped, is public, is consumed by web crawlers, and can be decrypted. Later it will. The only matter of importance is it is not decrypted and cannot yet be read. So one can temporarily share with self something usable that others cannot understand, in a public way, *briefly controlling* the potential negative usage. I was saying above that *current risks* relate to travel for example. Risks have a start and expiration. With intellectual property and in business, there is a time of value and utility, and confidentiality is impermanent. Oftentimes between businesses I've had NDA documents, or non-disclosure documents, and those only last about 2 years or less. Which means even public sharing of data that would fall under NdA can be performed, keeping an accurate record, even an accurate personal legal record, of the same data, that can be unlocked at a time of expiry.

Much can be shared that one would forget about.

One can play and use my message encryptor tool for free. It is fun and can be used for sending mail messages that are encrypted, and can be used for sending any textual content whatsoever in a way that it can be decrypted by passwords for free. It is safe and easy to use, and no data is sent to my server. It is kept on the client. One can steal the page and use it for one's own purposes too if one wants. It is an Open Source Tool that I created, using the existing cryptojs library.

http://www.mattanaw.com/message-encryptor.html

I hope this was interesting to those wondering about what can and cannot be shared, and the exploration of sharing increasingly private information for one's personal benefit, to become more transparent and organized. As I move further along in this exploration, my finding is trending towards the view that total openness is possible, as long as some very minute and timely safety details are kept sane. One does not need to be so open as to risk one's life to achieve a very extreme openness. If one considers that one only needs to temporarily expand on security, doing things like what I've done above, then one can feel incredibly open and honest, share more, and still remain secure.

*[Finished at 3:30pm, in 32 minutes, without editing, semi-blindly typed, without re-reading. Unedited as part of a study in editing.]*

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>


## <a name="planned-completion-of-key-workflow-related-functionality">Planned completion of key workflow related functionality</a>
  
*Sunday, October 21<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>12:36am, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

[encoded data, 5120 characters]

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="planned-update-to-publishing-method-of-underlying-software">Planned update to publishing method of underlying software</a>
  
*Saturday, October 21<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>10:58pm, Miami Beach, Florida</time>

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

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="regret-and-you-cant-even-want-the-right-things">Regret, and You Can't Even Want the Right Things</a>
  
*Saturday, September 14<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>4:32pm, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil</time>
  
For some I think, who are approaching death, there may be a realization that their plans and pursuits had too many defects, and that there is not enough time to change course.

It may happen very late in life.
  
Some choose silly objectives. Large families of strangers (discovered later), car and property collections (nobody cared about what you had), and excess social concerns (caring about what people care about). Later in life it is discovered that much was illusory in the plans and activities one was involved in. This can result in regret-- "If I had another life, I would do this and that differently."
  
I have another perspective to share.
  
You are unable to identify what morality consists of. Otherwise you'd already be able to identify a good and worthwhile plan, and already know what is not regretful about it. But if you are regretful, or might be, you couldn't even see morality correctly.
  
For those who regret. I would have you consider that maybe you don't want the right things. Late in life if regret creeps in, you might want to think:
  
"I couldn't and can't know what to want anyways. If I lived to 10,000 I would discover over and over I couldn't ever plan anything I wouldn't regret to substitute with another."
  
"Partly because I'd like to BE SOMETHING ELSE."

However that is not true of everyone and is not true of myself for example.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="repetition-of-example-uses-of-the-my-moral-attentional-processes">Repetition of Example Uses of the My Moral-Attentional Processes</a>

*Sunday, October 8<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>8:00pm, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil</time>

Earlier I wrote an example real-life recalled usage of my attentional processes listed in my chapter discussing [attentional architecture](architecture.html#attentional-architecture). At the moment I don't know what I titled that piece but it was posted via this ThoughtStream. It was a recollective stream of consciousness of the earlier process as it was performed, and I could remember the usage very clearly. Here an in the future I will provide additional samples in which the utility is demonstrated clearly, which will provide additional substantiation of the routine dissertative thinking interconnected with the process that results in books like [The Velocity of Significance and Ideation], a book whose contents explains methods for identifying giftedness of thought. Posting this way will enable me to demonstrate repetitively and conclusively that the moral-attentional process combined with dissertative thinking improves quality of thought and provides opportunity for its real life demonstration, in an intellectual way. The takeaway of this will be that the process itself has clear benefits of utility, and also that the thesis of "The Velocity of Significance and Ideation" regarding the use of productive intelligence to estimate degree of intelligence is true, and self-applicable to my own thinking and writing. 

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="#when-what-you-are-is-not-what-you-want">When what you are is not what you want</a>

*Tuesday, October 3<sup>rd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>4:31pm, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil</time>

Suppose you could ask an old dog if they wanted to be in heaven with you. The dog is sick and elderly, and uncomfortable all the time. They lived from 17 to 21 in a deterioration.

They might just answer with 

"Not if I'm in it"

Because at that age what you are is what you don't want.

...

Now thinking about probability, very likely old age will have discomforts that last.

Now thinking about birth and probability, very likely many will not be who or what they want.

And yet morality has left out a death plan.

...

"I'm the animal that doesn't like what it is" is what people think at times.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>


## <a name="interview-from-scott-douglas-jacobsen-of-insight-journal">Interview from Scott Douglas Jacobsen of Insight Journal</a>

*Monday, October 2<sup>nd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>6:23pm, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil</time>

This is the source interview on intelligence from Mr. Scott Douglas Jacobsen that culminated in my related book shared earlier "The Velocity of Significance and Ideation". He noted in the introduction that this was the longest interview he received to date, with the second longest being that from  Hindemburg Melão Jr., creator of Sigma Society, and self-proclaimed candidate for the smartest individual in Brazil. The population of Brazil is 200 million.

This Journal has also posted some interview responses from my favorite Moral Philosopher who I acknowledge in my works, Peter Singer, of Princeton University, and links to his answers are of interest to see a person who has influenced me deeply. He is world renowned and has many publications worth reading. His responses concern animal ethics and the utilization of AI in relation to moral issues relating to animals. I mention this to provide some understanding that this interviewer is one who has serious intent and does have some very good quality responses from significant figures. This places me in some good company, and for that I'm fortunate for having had the chance to be interviewed by Mr. Jacobsen.

Posted from Ipanema, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

https://in-sightpublishing.com/2023/10/01/mattanaw/

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="arecentexaminationofothecalendaryear">arecentexaminationofothecalendaryear</a>

*Sunday, October 1<sup>st</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>3:13pm, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil</time>

arecentexaminationofothecalendaryearforthepurposeoffurtherunderstandingthe[completedsolutionofthecalendar](the-calendar-solved.html)revealedsomeadditionalseriousissuestothestudiesofcalendaringthatarebothhistoricalandcurrentherewewillenumerateseveralseriousflawstothecalendaringsystemandcalculationsofthesolaryearandrelatethemtothethesisalreadywrittenwithinthatsametexttheequationsforthecalculationofthetropicalsolaryearhasbeenlocatedandwaswrittenby[kazimierzmborkowski](the-tropical-year-and-the-solar-calendar-kazimierz-m-borkowski.pdf)thefollowingweretheissuesidentified

- namingconventionsaboutthenonpropernameofthecalendarhavenotbeenmadeconsistent
  - thereareusesofthetermsastronomicalyearsolaryeartropicalyearandyearandtheremaybeotherexamplesofalternativesynonyousnames
- researchregardingthelengthofthecalendaryearexcessivelypointsthereasercheratantiquatedhistoricalcalculationsthatarenearingtheprecisionofcurrentprecisionratherthanprovidingquickaccesstothecurrentcalculationmethodsthathaveconfusinglynotarrivedatmuchgreaterprecision
- precisionhasnotimprovedmuchbutitmustbeagreedthatthecurrentprecisionevengeneratedbyformulassuchasthoseintheaformentionedacademicarticalarenotaspreciseastheyshouldbegiventheprecisionofastronomicalequationsutilizingmanydecimalpointsandthisappearsanerrorofdisinterestwithintheastronomycommunity
- [thecalendarsolved](the-calendar-solved.html)providesthesolutiontothecalendaringsystemreplacingthoseimplementedbytheemperorcaesarandpopegregoryanddoesnotrequireanylimitsontheprecisionthatcanbeascertainedandvariationsofmeasuresincalendaryearsbecausetheendoftheyeariscelebratedandoverlayedonthenaturalandunarbitrarylistofdaysatroughlythesametimeeveryyearandeverytimethereisanadvancementonprecisiontherecansimplybeaminuteshiftofsecondseveryyearathetimethattheyeariscommunicatedtoalltohavebeenelapsed   - theimplicationofthismethodofcalendaringisthatitbothadoptsthemorehistoricalprecisionsoverlookedbutalsocanadapttoanylevelofprecisionarrivedatbyastronomersastimegoesonandinstrumentationandstudiescanconfirmevergreatercalculationsitisalsocertainthatthissolutionisthepermanentsolutionbecausenoadditionalchangeswilleverberequired
- thesystemofutilizingleapyearstoaddadditionaltimetoyearsperiodicallyaccordingtotheoldercaesarianandgregoriancalendarswasfoundtobeentirelyantiquatedyetithasnotbeenrecognizedthataneasysolutionsolvesitpermanentlyandmakesallyearsconsistentwithnoneedforleapyearsoradjustmentsintothedistantandnotonlytheforseeablefuture

additionalobservationswillbeaddedinthefuturebutinthemeantimeitisagainstatedthatthewanattomiancalendaristhecalendarsolvedverilyandthatanylaterimprovementtothecalendarwouldmerelyapproachthesolutionalreadyknownandinsteaditisrecommendedtodisuseleapyearsentirelyandsimplyadoptthewanattomiancalendarthatmakescalendaringeffortsentirelyunnecessarynotonlygroundsofinstrumentalnessandutilitybutonthegroundsthatintellectuallytooitissolvedandthesolutionissimplerinusagethanallcalendarsthathavehithertoexisted.

finishedat359pmin46minuteswithouteditingsemiblindtypedwithoutspellcheckinalllowercaseaccordingtotheabandonedancientwritingmethodoftheromansoftypingwithoutspacingorpunctuation

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="my-introduction-to-mensa-sweden">My Introduction to Mensa Sweden!</a>

*Thursday, September 28<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>7:42pm, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil</time>

I am a long-time member of Mensa America and Mensa International, having joined in 2014. I was first identified as having Mensa level giftedness as an elementary school student, where I was tested by a visiting psychometrician, when other students in the school were also tested. I was separated for the special giftedness program in the State of Maryland and offered opportunities to join the well-known programs at Johns Hopkins University in the same state, a program that was joined by some well-known notable figures. Although admitted and separated, my parents did not encourage my work in separate programs, and for a long period I was mostly disinterested in giftedness. After becoming a Software Architect, and engineer supporting the President of the United States, then Barack Obama, I decided to get tested again, using the Stanford-Binet 5 and Wescheler (WAIS-IV) tests, and again confirmed my childhood scores. After confirmation in 2014 I entered Mensa, and shortly after became a Mensa Lifetime Member.

I am the author of [The Book and Journal of Mattanaw](http://www.mattanaw.org) at [Mattanaw.org](http://www.mattanaw.org). This is a privately produced Book and Journal that has objectives of promoting a better moral and ethical understanding, using my history of professional moral philosophy and science, and career background. I am a trained Psychologist, am trained in Philosophy, and have another degree in Computer and Information Science all in the University of Maryland System. I'm not a student of Harvard, although I already culminated my career and am now retired, working previously as Chief Architect at Adobe Systems, and Advisor/Architect at a number of very large enterprises known worldwide. I am currently President of Social Architects and Economists International, and consult periodically when interest is sufficient, or there are retirement related funding needs. I am also CEO of Plaintext, a new publishing company related to the publication of my book and journal.

In my career I became a very experienced presenter to leadership of global corporations, and am now focusing, in addition to my writing efforts, on sharing my experience and knowledge on diverse topics, in support of moral efforts internationally, and also for resolving issues like homelessness. I travel extensively, and think of myself as a non-nationalistic global citizen, even if that is a hard mission to make a total reality. I've lived across the United States in many locations and own an 80-acre parcel of land in the State of Alaska. I've lived in Canada, Mexico, Australia and New Zealand, partly for retirement and for business interests. Next year I intend to live in Sweden and Northern Europe for a period. Typically I try to stay in the warm summer seasons in places that are not too cold, and alternate from hemisphere to hemisphere. I'm currently residing in South America, in Rio de Janeiro in Brazil.

Some notable facts about myself include my history of flying planes, and flight training. I'm an endorsed solo pilot with 103.5 hours in the Cessna 172. I enjoy athletics greatly and am a skilled basketball and soccer player, and I enjoy many other ways of staying fit, like weightlifting, running, walking and hiking. I'm intensely interested in ethics, logic, mathematics, philosophy and science, and use my Book and Journal as my main outlet for my writing and creative interests. Oftentimes these writings appear in the various Mensa Groups in which some of us share good conversation, including the Mensa International, and other Mensa Facebook Groups. I am a member of Mensa New Zealand and am pending inclusion into Mensa Brazil. I anticipate that some here would have enjoyed some of my writings already, since they've been published for many years, and I look forward to forming some new friendships in Mensa Sweden as we become more mutually acquainted. I may be presenting at Mensa Sweden's AGA in May, 2024, and that is yet to be decided, but I would be very happy for invitation and inclusion to share my talks that I've planned and prepared.


<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="radioactive-data-storage-radio-communication-and-increased-capacity">Radioactive Data Storage, Radio Communication, and Increased Capacity</a>

*Thursday, September 28<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>3:49pm, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil</time>

A long while ago I recall seeing an interesting posting about the prospect of having a new storage device that utilized cubical crystals, with information stored and retrieved within the crystal using lasers, that would write to it using three dimensions. I read that this device, using this very small crystal, that was perhaps a 1cm x 1cm x 1cm cube, or a cube of s similar size, would hold terabytes of data. This was during a period in which gigabytes of storage was still somewhat expensive, and the idea that such a small device could retain terabytes was very attractive.

Now utilizing microSD cards in the one half gigabyte size, it is clear that it is very easy to store huge amounts of data on very small devices. It is already somewhat strange that I can use such a small device to hold so much data, at a cost that has been under $100 dollars USD for several years now. Before relying on that media, I used the Samsung USB Bars which are USB devices that are also small, that could hold 128GBs and 256gbs. Now it has stopped its growth at 256GBs and this was my cause for moving to microSD.

The cheapness of the cost of the microSD for 512GBs has caused me to wonder at the costs of computer hard drives purchased from manufacturers including nearly the same amount of storage. The microSD is the size of a small SIM card, and is actually somewhat smaller. I've complained that it seemed a computer system could include more than one computer system functioning independently with more than one microSD card built in, and perhaps an array of microSD cards that could store huge amounts of information at low cost and size. Phones could hold easily in volume no less than twenty of these microSD cards without an apparent weight increase. Since now MicroSDs can be purchased at 1TB for $100 USD, it seems manufacturers could procure them very inexpensively, and provide phones and laptops with seperate internal systems so one can have more than one computer in one device, and also provide much more storage capacity than they currently provide, at very high costs. My most recent cellular phone purchase was for an iPhone12 Max Pro, which has 256GBs of data. It was about $1,000 USD. For my laptops, typically I choose those with smaller hard drives, using the hard drives for minimum application storage, and offloading data storage to my microSD cards. What is funny about that is I am using computers that still cost about $1,000 or more, being Apple products, but the application storage is only 128GBS while I have very large amounts of storage, much more than the computer provides, on tiny wafers of microSD cards. I have about 12 micro SD cards that costed a little over $100 each, I believe, when there was a brief cost increase, and two smaller hard drives. Together the micro SDs offer about 5TBs of data storage, and I have additional TBs of storage on the hard drives. Combining the 10 microSDs it is humorous to see how much data can be stored on devices that can be easily lost. But these are preferred because as I travel the world, I have a large amount of storage with devices that weigh nearly nothing at all, and I can redundantly store those devices so one or more could be lost but I would still retain my data. Furthermore, I can geographically redundantly place them so that I have all the storage safely backed up.

The above indicates some of my solutioning for my technology that I have developed but not the entire system. I mention this to make it clear I am very familiar with, utilize, and depend on, very small storage devices with very great capacity, so I can safely store large amounts of mental information and life-assets. I also have a scaling plan for the software and storage as market costs change, so I can safely update my storage to include differing devices with greater amounts of storage, as I scale and as the market changes. I've done that in several iterations already over the last decade. And of course all have experienced growth of storage from simpler computer devices since floppy disks and before that time. The earliest storage device I used for external data management was the large floppy disk that we like to remember "really was floppy" and later the 3.5 inch hard floppy disks. After that I used hard drives and zip drives. Zip drives were basically larger and thicker floppy drive-like devices that were input like floppy disks but had characteristics of cartridges. They had quite a lot of storage, but the shift to flash and usb greatly improved portability and easy of use. The zip drives still required a slot on a peripheral device that allowed for inputting the cartridge, and were somewhat like small disk drives or VHS/Beta video drives. Or like musical casettes, except again, they were read like floppy disks and had the small metal sheet that slid to reveal the drive within. I also used like others tapes for other readable media, which we forget really were storage devices, read-write audio tapes and cassetes, vinyl records, film for storing photographs, paper photographs, books and print paper of course, card files for reading (scantrons in education), and cds, DVDs, and larger capacity read/write disks for computers. I never used BlueRay or other more advanced DVDs thinking them antiquated by the time they came out. Recently I was forced to use cds once again because of interactions with the legal system as an attorney self-represented in a land-related prescriptive easement case. One can see from the above I'm very familiar with the range of storage devices, have used quite a lot, and it traces back to the 1980s which was very close to the beginnings of computing. I was Chief Architect at Adobe Systems nearly a decade ago, and was trained in Computer and Information Science in the University of Maryland System. In my education I was exposed to some other forms of storage, but these forms of storage were not too different than I was utilized and was exposed to already, having fortunately been born near the earliest consumer electronic computing device stages.I was young enough to have been exposed to some of the very earliest personal computers, word processors, video gaming systems, and used devices that appeared earlier than these in school, since they were still being used due to existing technology investments.

What is common to most technologies used before I saw this crystal devices is storage in two dimensions. Read-write storage on musical recordings like records were simply etchings onto a plastic-like vinyl material. I remember as a kid playing records that were made of hard plastic. Cassetes utilize a still available medium of tape storage that records audio and data. Microfiche is a film based information and document storage that is fading, but still exists in Anchorage, where certain older legal documents can only be researched using it. But to the present day, looking at all the other devices, they still were 2 dimensional. This includes compact disks that are basically small records, hard drive disks, floppy disks, and flash media like USBs and MicroUSBs. The implementations of the newer small devices and SSDs are not something I've inspected, but quick observation still reveals to me that these are not utilizing three dimensions the way one would want to, to have an extremely large set of storage on a single small device, using layers of sufaces that are microscopic. To give an example, consider if a compact disks surface were represented three dimensionally such that there were thousands of compact disks in three dimensions, for a small thickness. It could be that some current Hard Drives with very high capacity do some of this three dimensional storage, but as far as I know, this is limited. And probably by how it is written.

The crystalline three dimensional storage was expected to finally store on three dimensions using movements of more than one read write laser, that would pinpoint positions in the crystal to store and retrieve information. Writing was stated to degrade the storage, so read-write was not something that could be done too many times without degrading the crystal. But oftentimes we do not write entire disks often, and maybe this storage method could still successfully write to the entire cube thousands of times. I was excited about this technology because it seemed to create potential for scaling of personal productions. Nowadays my interest has transitioned from simply intuitively recognizing that vast storage was interesting, relating it to potentially storing also quantities of information similar to what is in a human brain, to actually needing such a storage to support the scaling of my productions, which exceed that of many enterprise corporations.

Seeing that the market trajectory does not include an easy pathway to store all of one's information in a cost-effective way, while one scales one's own media productions, is something disconcerting. It seems by this time that one should be more able to utilize a single device, or an array of small devices, to store huge amounts of data. But it appears the market only provides ways to do it minimally greater than what is mostly average at a reasonable cost. This issue relates also to the number of ports on a computer, bandwidth of radio communications, and so on, making it more difficult to scale to large amounts of productions, particularly when moving about, than one might realize. I will say more about this in the future.

Thinking about the crystal device that appeared about 10 years ago in print, and how it did not come onto the market, recently I had an idea about an alternative that might be of interest to those who are interested in computer storage, and the possible future for improving computer storage. I think I've thought of a possible device that may exceed even the storage of this crystalline storage that would be written upon with lasers.

The idea is that since radioactive material and elements exist that can transmit radio waves, there may be a way to combine communictions with storage on three dimensions. Like the crystal structure, there could be a storage devices utilizing elemental radioactive elements that are not harmful to people, or are shielded, or are used in quantities that are so low that they couldn't harm anyone. With x-rays we already know we can shield with lead. We also know that low exposure isn't serious, and that there are differing radioactive materials that are less risky than others. Radioactive materials provide a radioactive signal we know for many years into the future, with a predictable degradation. We know this because radioactive waste for example stays radio active for a much longer period than humans want, staying radioactive for thousands of years, making it hard to eliminate and treat as separate waste. In the production of nuclear energy we have refuse that we don't know well what to do with, where to put it, and how to store it, such that future people are not impacted. While this is something we do not like or want, we did get communicated to concerning half-lifes and degredation mathematics indicating that radioactive materials do remain radioactive in a way that may be extremely useful in other contexts. It may be that it would be useul in combining storage technology and communications.

The storage device may work as follows, although feasibility is not assured without sufficient research and development. I don't know for certain that this would work but still communicate it as a possible area for advancement. In three dimensions radioactive material is stored in a particular configuration that represents an empty state, ready for writing. This is the initial format. The radioactive configuration at the elemental level provides the image of the device, and the radioactivity and configuration can communicate the image to a sensing device, that can ready immediately its state. So initially it communicates via its radioactivity, something sensible, relating to the initial empty state.

Akin to the lasers that combine to write to the 3D crystal is an approach that reconfigures the elemental radioactive material to differing positions or configurations that represent the data to be stored. Perhaps a single text file is written to a location, or a single image. The radioactivity of the substance then communicates via its radioactivty to the sensor(s) that read the differences, or the actual structure of the medium. With this then is a read-write method using radioactive substances, and a possible approach to direct communication to the medium. It may be that peripherally available computers can read from teh same device using sensors that pick up the radioactivity. Perhaps it is not necessary to have direct sensing at a very close distance, like in a normal hard drive. Already there are devices like geiger counters that detect radation, and the level of radioactivity, and these devices are old, and don't need to function at immediate touching proximity. They are operated by hand at a distance. Signals increase as one gets close, and if radioactivity is high, but signals are still received at a distance. If information encoded is captured at a distance in a consistent manner from material it may be possible to indirectly read from storage without radio communications that are now standard, like wifi, bluetooth, infrared, or through routers and radio devices. Instead the configuration of the elemental radioactive material in conjunction with the radioactivity of the medium could work with sensors that are external for more quickly and more directly communicating information. Currently data has to be processed through many systems and protocol layers for transport. In computer and information science one learns of the OSI Networking layers, that relate to networking and digital security, and the total architecture of a computing system. Much of the existing layers could be bypassed potentially if a receiving system can simply pick up the configuration of a three-dimensional radioactive medium. 

Since the configurations could be elemental and potentially manipulatable using lasers, magnetism or other, we would have a more atomic method of storing information, meaning we are already at elemental levels of information storage. As storage and computer technology increased in storage capacity, we knew that the smallness of the electronics would dictate how much could be stored. Intel for example had to produce processors that were smaller and smaller to process more data. Likewise in the history of storage, the movement was from small to smaller. If more is written to the same disk, it means that smaller writing is required. The limit of the smallness is on the atomic or elemental scale. If one can write to a medium with a configuration of atoms, one has gotten very close to what is possible for potential storage. So a device like this may be useful for finally having maximally dense information storage, so we can have devices that would probably exceed in capacity what brains can store. Additionally however, would be the possibility of using natural radioactivity to communicate the storage, without processing in between, and with less networking protocols. Here we may have one potential idea providing a pathway to combining storage and communication.

If we had brains that functioned like this device, we would remember more, but also would have methods of reading other brains at a distance.

*[Completed at 4:41 pm, in 52 minutes, without editing, semi-blind typed, without spell check.]*

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

*Tuesday, September 26<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>6:41pm, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil</time>

## <a name="the-end-of-randomness-randoness-in-uncertainty-and-cryptography">The End of Randomness, Randomness in Uncertainty, and Cryptography</a>

*Tuesday, September 26<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>6:41pm, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil</time>

Approximately one-half decade ago I devised a strategy for utilizing true randomness of user input in a computer system. One might wonder what one would want to use such a method for, but there are a wide range of applications, including making random passwords that are closer to what is naturally considered too complex to predict. In physics and the sciences there is not an agreement as to whether randomness exists at all, and it appears it might not on the regularities experienced in nature. In Philosophy arguments about physical determinism and free-willism have related to uncertainties and apparent randomnesses that seem to exist in the movements of electrons, in quantum slit-experiments often referenced, and in brownian motion, a topic of interest to scientists such as Einstein and others. While there is disagreement concerning whether or not such randomness exist, probabilistic natural laws and natural laws expressing regularities in mathematics, conjoint with everyday life regularities of planning and historical reconstruction, cause one to want to accept complete Determinism. I have accepted complete Determinism on grounds of regularity for my Moral Philosophy on inductive grounds, but I have not completely discarded the idea that there could be some randomness in nature that is or is not regular that feeds into processes that are regular. On this topic we often find the religious refuge of those wanting to preserve their traditional viewpoints, but those viewpoints fail whatever refuge is attempted.

The device I envisioned is a simple one and not theoretical regarding feasibility. It is a truly simple system to create. One only needs a peripheral device with an object and sensors taking in information from a physical thing presenting sensory data too complex to understand due to the understanding of brownian motion, complexity, and apparent irregularies in natural behavior of objects. I've used the example of the "snow globe" to devise and build such a simple system, with optics similar to those collected from an optical mouse. If one requires a good cryptographic encoding of a document or text file, one may use software to do the work, but that software will sometimes require mouse input that is created by the user, that is seemingly random. One simply moves one's mouse around a while as data about the mouse's position is collected and encoded in text, that is subsequently used in the encryption in a variety of ways. Movements of the users hand really do show characteristics of randomness and unpredictability although the behavior of the person moving the mouse does show regularity. To control for that regularity, to avoid detecting any pattern of mouse usage, it is recommended to simply move the mouse around longer. But in this system, no user input is required. Instead the optical instrument is pointed into the "snow globe" detecting random minute movements and positions of floating, rising, and descending particles, or particulate that is the "snow" in the globe. For those who may not know what a snow globe is, it is simply a glass dome or sphere containing a Christmas or Winter themed scene, with material inside, upon being shook, results in an appearance of falling snow. The movements of the currents, and small movements of *things in the fluid* exhibits a good randomness that can be detected by the optical tool like the mouse on a surface. This is then used to rapidly build data that is random, or seems to be random, with great complexity. It is not repeatable. Patterns would be hard to utilize. The result of the movements is due to physical causes that are not well understood and are thought to be random from true randomness in nature. While I disagree with the hypothesis that this is random, I can't prove that it's not random. It appears it is not for a variety of reasons I'll share, but in any case, it's complex enough to cause us to think that this device really would provide random input at a fundamental level of randomness supposedly existing in nature, based on what the physicists would tell us about the state of their understanding.

Some inputs of randomness like the future digits of pi that have not been ascertained, and the pattern of static exhibited in radio or television static could be used, but I have thought that these show sufficient recollectivity to indicate there is still a knowable pattern. For example, once PI is calculated, it is recognized it is one number or ratio calculation. If PI is known then it is not random any longer. One could still collect intervals of hard computations of PI and it would appear random. Static is recognized as such. If static were truly random, it is not clear it could be recognized as static. It appears to me this indicates again, that once one "understands static" as a thing, one would eventually understand the pattern. Complexity determines for us what appears random. Static information gathering would result in an unrepeatable gathering, which would allow us again, to devise a similar system to the snow globe approach, because the input involves data and pattern complexity that one cannot predict using a recognizable pattern. If one knew all the digits of PI then one could break any PI related input, but that depends on computing power. If one has sufficient computing power one can select unknown intervals of PI and use it in a similar way, although someone with the same computing power would be able to break a setup using PI calculation as an input.

From the above, it can be seen that, since PI is weaker than the others, that complexity of input seems more important than actual randomness for cryptography. As long as the input is complex enough and not repeatable it does not matter if it is truly random. Thus it appears randomness is not required.

Apparent randomness and complexity together do provide a system in which one can arrive at very good cryptographic strength, and so such a system like I devised would be one that would be especially strong for protecting documents and messages using also some mathematics and software doing the actual encoding and decoding.

In any computer system not actually utilizing a device like that I've mentioned relying on an *external physical method* of grabbing information that is complex and random from a physical level, instead using only the computing system and software, is fully deterministic. Cryptographic algorithms taking the input using the math and software use math and software that is fixed. This component of the cryptography is entirely deterministic. Furthermore, input from the system like the generation of random digits is also software and hardware based and is fully deterministic. Some systems allow for highly difficult to remember passwords to be generated from the software, and that can also be fed into the crypographic algorithms for encryption, but in that case all is fully deterministic, and would be fundamentally weaker than the system setup I devised that relies on what even the best physicists would consider to be random information.

Recognition that the entire computer system is deterministic is important, and I will share more in future writings on this point. The idea that seemingly random things like PI's digit expansion is really deterministic is also important. The physical idea that there is randomness in Brownian motion and in quantum experiments of particles and electrons is something I will challenge. It appears on future work it may be possible to put an end to the idea that there is randomness in nature, and the work of physicists is in that direction. The idea of randomness relates to "I can't tell if there is anything law-like governing this yet". The goal of science is to finally eradicate uncertainties and replace uncertainties with knowledge.

It may be possible that certain underlying controls of nature are not accessible for our observation. We rely on complex machinery and tools like CERN to study partical collisions to unearth tidbits of information on subatomic particls, and that is very hard and costly to do for some small results. Results may be large for technology, but they seem small regarding determining finally what the patterns are that would allow us to conclude that there is no randomness. Randomness is not something that is assumed, but is rather something that tells us there is more to know, and that knowing it may be difficult unless there are other arguments and techniques that can be devised that sidestep observational difficulties, to show us we are in better than a probabilistic system, but one in which we can always make predictions in principle. That would prove finally that Determinism is actual "all of the way down" to a fully reductive physico-mathematical level that opens up methods of fully determining natural systems. If the smallest natural systems having some characteristics of apparent randomness are shown under the surface to really follow regularities we expect, then we will know for certain that they collect such that all nature can be shown to be totally predictable in principle and fully regular, even if complexity gives us the expectation that we will not have enough computing and predictive power to utilize it at all scales. Mattanaw's Law already states that it would not be possible to represent information fully enough in any computing or natural storage system to have the power to predict the future, even for somewhat small scales.

*[Finished at 7:16pm, in 35 minutes, with no editing, spell check, semi-blind typing, without reading. [Editing](http://www.mattanaw.org/editing.html)]*

The timing above relates to my book [The Velocity of Significance and Ideation](http://www.mattanaw.org/velocity-of-significance-and-ideation.html). For those in the profoundly gifted range it may be required to illustrate dissertative thinking conversationally to show there is no lopsidedness between mental internal communication and thinking and outward expression.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="purely-intellectual-morality-and-resistance-to-application-and-learning">Purely Intellectual Morality and Resistance to Application, and Learning</a>

*Monday, September 25<sup>rd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>4:38pm, Rio de Janiero, Brazil</time>

Yesterday, while walking along Copacabana in Rio de Janiero, I began reflecting on the gulf that exists between intellectualized or mental morality, and moral behavior. While thinking about this topic I recalled my earlier studies on morality, about twenty years ago, which included the observation that there is a difference between what one thinks is correct intellectually, while there is a gulf between that idea and behavior. Self-training and education is required in order to, personally, make the transition from having an idea about what a more excellent set of behaviors would be, connecting to a moral view, and actually having those behaviors and acting a certain desired way automatically. While most can tell when they learn something about a self-improvement goal that they have not reached that goal, it appears additionally that many have an idea of morality that they would utilize for judgement of others, even while it should be known to the thinker that that morality is intellectual and is not actually related to a commitment in behavior the thinker has, or a commitment to the behavior that exists in others. Sometimes people will have an idea about what is best concerning behaviors, and expect others to engage in those behaviors too, even before a commitment to personal change has been made, and that person himself/herself simply hasn't habitualized it to automaticity yet. We see this again and again where there is a contrast between expectations of others, particularly those in media and entertainment, and public officials, while the person with the expectation cannot or does not really behaviorally exhibit what would have been expected. If we dwell on this topic and combine it with other observations from this Book and Journal we would arrive at a more clear and comprehensive idea about what hypocrisy is and was, and the extent to which people are truly hypocritical.

Just before I began thinking of this I was thinking of another topic in which there is a serious flaw, and that is the issue that nobody really understands the laws. While one might think one knows the law, it can be easily demonstrated that one cannot recite usually even a single written law, which as a rule has more detail than one expect. Lawyers also do not memorize the laws but only get a better sense of them and how they fit into the legal system, that they are educated more about. But lawyers are typically specialists and would recognize that they too, don't know and cannot recite most laws that exist. 

This issue extends into morality, but is far worse. In religion people have been judged for their ability to recall scriptural verses. If one is good at recalling and repeating what was written, one is thought, if one is not only relying on memory and is of good intelligence, to likely have a good idea, compared with others, about their religion. However, these could be compared with lawyers who only have some recollection, and like everyone else, memory is really very poor about verse and nobody can well recall all that is written within the religious texts. But morality for the everyday person goes beyond what is written even in religious texts and this is obvious when one looks at what one recalls as far as hearsay rules of society are recalled in short phrases. This means that what would need to be recalled is much greater than just what's in a religion, and really would include laws additionally because following the laws is thought to be within the required moral conduct of a nation. The phrases from culture have not been recorded like the laws in a way that provides easy reference in libraries, so much is unwritten. The result is not only that people cannot recall what is written, they would disagree about what has not been written that they think should be. The complete normal ethical system that one thinks one belongs to then, is unknown in a worse degree than what was stated above about knowledge of law.

Relating the first paragraph with the next two, we find that much of what we think is morality is a list of intellectual ideas recalled, that poorly represent what it would actually be. People quickly recall and generate more moral ideas themseles, that are thought to be what people should act on. These can be thought of as poor-quality intellectualizations of how one should act and behave. These may or may not correspond with actual behavior, as we'll see shortly in more detail, and if there is a discrepancy we have the issue that this is a mental morality that is not within behavior sufficiently. This means there are rules in mind that are not followed and would not be followed. Because moral rules are often unwritten, and laws are not recalled, people disagree even about the purely mental rules, and debate if they should ever act on them. It follows from this that much moral thinking and debate is simply a mental exercise that is largely unrelated to behavior, and we can anticipate disagreement rather than agreement about what it means for behavior. It also means people will be chronically calling each other hypocrites because they both cannot agree as to the rules, and clearly see that the rules are not well used and exhibited in real behavior.

When we connect this to education the issue becomes more clear and obvious and in different ways. Teachers often teach mathematics, grammar, and a range of topics that are never applied. I have discovered that mathematicians often do not apply math to their own behavior or their own field, but more than this, the math they teach is often never applied in the world by themselves or their students, even on the topics that relate. People complain because they do not obtain jobs that relate, and so can never use it. Likewise the instructors have been criticized for having jobs that teach, but do not do, what is taught about. The range of what education provides is large, and contains much that is useful, but it goes unused oftentimes, and people admit this and complain about it often. People learn skills they cannot apply, and they learn teachings they cannot get jobs for. They also learn so much, they have few chances to really utilize each thing they learn, which means they will not behave in any way utilizing what has been learned. They may recall sometime what they have learned but they will need to agree that they do not utilize it often. If one considers the full range of all learned in education one will need to agree that due to the size of all that is learned, there will rarely be matching situations in life in which that same knowledge is behaved upon. It follows from this that most of what is learned involves rules that become mental recollections.

Additionally and somehwat unrelatedly, is something I want to share about learning and change. Recently I shared an article *[The Calendar Solved](the-calendar-solved.html)* that offers a solution to the calendar that is permanent. The calendar has gone through a number of changes over many centuries to correct for differences in years, since it is known that the year is not exactly 365 days but has an extra fractional day. We corrected for this using the leap year. But more corrections are needed to finally get it right, and that is what the solution in the article is about. Once one learns this, one has to consider how one behaves. Since it is solved it really implies that all would need to adopt it, since correct. Since the current calendar is functional and there are many investments in this calendar it will take a long time to change, but the change is required, if one wants to be honest about progression of science and learning and education. If I were a teacher of astronomy and geology, or history, I would teach this in my class. But I would be unable to change my behavior about the calendar much regarding existing calendar use, although I have decided to use my own instead. I'm an example of someone changing behavior on the basis of what is learned. Students in the class would likely hear it, understand it, and perhaps remember it, but would be unlikely to be able to behave regarding it. Likewise, even if it became widespread knowledge that this new calendar is the solution, it would take a very long time for others to adopt it and make personal changes, and things like the annual celebration of the New Year would also need to change in simple ways.

Learning something new makes demands on how one should behave. Firstly, once someone has learned it, they have already changed their mind. They may not agree that any behavioral change needs to be made immediately. But they would agree that some changes are needed eventually. This leads to a disparity of knowledge and behavior. But that makes sense because how to behave on it is slightly different at times from learning new facts, which do not seem to call for any specific changes. One person commenting on my new calendar solution said it seemed to her that there was no need to change the existing calendar because it, paraphrasing, "would do the work into the forseeable future", and I agree with that. However, it was learned by her that it was incorrect. What she was wanting was to simply resume using what existed, because it worked, but not to utilize the learning. Mentally we both agree what is the right calendar (I think she understood), which means we both would agree on what the correct astronomy, geology, and history is to teach about it. By not taking steps to use it in practice, we teach students who cannot use it, but need truth. Also, if we decide to not take steps on our own to revise the calendar and holidays related to the New Year, we are deciding to learn something that we will not use. The result is that there is a resistance to change on the behavior, but a willingness to learn that is somewhat stifled, within one's mind.

Here we have an example of an inability and resistance to matching up what is our mental rules, even in education which would touch on all learning and knowledge. We have new rules about the calendar that we agree with and cannot follow. We may use it for moral judgement of software companies who continue to use the old calendar, but they cannot yet adopt or change for it. We see the world unchanged as we learned something new that relates to the behavior of everyone.

Education is largely that-- knowledge that seems to relate to required changes in behavior of ourselves and others. This means there is a disparity as I said above between what is known and what is expected potentially of others, and oftenties teachers have not utilized what they are teaching. This informs us about the nature of hypocrisy and disparities between learning and action from learning. It also informs us about morality. Learning happens fast, but there is resistance to using it, even though there are expectations generated that make us want others to follow the rules even if they are not utilized broadly.

Connecting this with the observation that people don't really know the laws or moral rules, and would disagree on moral rules if they were written, and not know most later in attempts to recall, we can see there is a huge disparity on what would be true and what could be carried out in action. What people carry along with them in education and their knowledge of laws and morality is often mostly mental, and disagrees with what others think. And since there is a limitation on application of anything learned that calls for new behavior, it appears that not only are the moral rules and laws are often unknown, or purely mental, they *cannot* be applied as well as we might think. Moral rules are those we sometimes think *must* be applied.

*[Finished at 5:24 pm, without spell checks or edits, semi-blind typed, unread]*

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="generalized-human-hierarchy-for-ranking-and-titling">Generalized Human Hierarchy for Ranking and Titling</a>

*Sunday, June 26<sup>rd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>4:36pm, Phoenix, Arizona, USA</time>

Hierarchies used for ranking people in order of importance recur in many human contexts without any apparent awareness of the reword done in each context, what was already done in another. The result is that we have a fimilarity between organizations wherever there is a desire and need to rank and title, but differences in how the ranking and titling is done, and a perception that changes to the way of ranking and titling would require independent effort, and not the use of a ranking and titling standard, competitive with other standards. Not yet understood and unstandardized, organizations unfold in ways that are self-determined, with resulting rank and title systems that have some familiarity to those existing at other organizations but with idiosyncratic differences, resulted from unguided growth by vague emulation.

Recently, I was reflecting on the large number of synonyms that exist for "high leader" roles. This large number of synonyms might lead us to think that our extra vocabulary around names for leaders is inefficient, and also that it is somewhat strange, that one organization would choose one word for a leader role, and not another. Desire for importance seems a motive for avoiding the use of just a single or small number of titles for role, because by having a new title, or one slightly different than the one expected, creates a chance to have special importance.

In choosing how businesses are organized, if one is a founder, one sees that the entire structure of the organization is open for their determination. They can choose what the leadership structure will be, and what to call each of the roles within the leadership. Owners can be given titles or names that are somewhat lofty to create an impression to others that those who are members have some special greatness about them. There is some consistency within business leading to mutual comparison and relative "fitting in" regarding how one chooses these titles. Creating a business is somewhat like creating a government in which an organization will be lead, with knowledge that the organization that's not in the ownership or immediate leadership will be beneath, and may never be owners or members themselves. These workers or employees are also placed into a hierarchichal strucutre, in which titles for jobs will be created, along with gradations in the jobs relating to room for people to have "advancements" and "promotions", increasing their relative power and compensation in the organization. There are few organizations in which there is not a feeling of a mostly traditional hieararchy in which people are given titles which function to show their relative importance, compensation, and some summary descriptiveness about the role that they perform. However, businesses do differ significantly in their resulting hierarchy specifically, and this appears to be caused primarily by their being a business functioniing without definite standards.

Militaries, hospitals, businesses, religious organizations, and nations all have systems of ranking that really are quite similar in their function, yet there are still no standards the cross these domains. It appears however that the method of creating and organizing human hierarchies is roughly similar whatever the organization is that has a hierarchy. That they all use hierarchical schemes is also telling regarding the simililarities betweent he organizations. They can know that they need and want hierarchies, but they cannot know how to do it well, and rely on copying what has been seen in other existing hierarchies already observed.

Below are some words used for the title of the highest leader. These words really mean roughly the same thing despite utilization in differing domains.

Pope, President, Leader, General, CEO, Chief, Cardinal, Director, Manager, Sultan, King, Queen, Monarch, Resident, Executive, Judge, Professor, Doctor, Master...

The list is really quite large, and on only a small amount of reflection, it does appear humans have chosen to simply rename the word "leader" over and over. They've had different motivations for this, but regardless, a cause is not having a *system* of taxonomy and structure for organizations. A pope is simply a leader of the church. A cardinal is a leader of a subset of the church. A  President, or CEO, or owner, is a leader of a business. A director or manager, is a leader of a subset of the business. An organization with more development may have a CFO, who is a leader of the financial portion of the business. In that domain, there may be an Account Manager, who is a leader of a subset of the business. What is common in this scheme is the hierarchy, and hierarchies within hierarchies. Leaders are simply roles in which some subset of the organization falls underneath them, in certain ways.

What varies greatly also are the sizes of organizations and their level of development of their heirarchical structure. The mililtary would be an example of a very large hierarchy with many titles and gradations between titles. Organizations of one person, when companies are created, have self-designated Presidents and CEOs. This would be an example of a great error, or a symptom of not having a system of forming hierarchies. A President that has no hierarchy underneath may simply be someone pretending to be like a president of another organization that may have a hundred thousand employees, or someone pretending to not be a simple worker. They may be pretending they could ever have a useful or successful business or any structure in their organization. It is just them and they are instantly president! When I created my business, I was instantly President of my own company.

It appears that as people are creating various organizations, or managing organizations that exist that are separate, they continue to be motivated to play with their particular hierarchy, to do new things that would differentiate their organization or people in various ways, and create a different perception in those who are inside and outside the organization. Motivations for making modifications seem to relate to competition. Simply not having a hierarchy that is the same as another may create a differentiation that has many ramifications for the success of the business, including its ability to attract and keep employees, and for marketing to others that their organization has different traits, and has a different offering. Companies will try to argue that their organizations are simply "better to work with", and that might be relating to reasons including "how the company treats its employees," or "the quality of its work environment", or the power of their leadership in their industry. Organizations will strive to make their leaders appear more and not less important than the leadership of competing orgs, even if those competing organizations are larger, offer a better product or service, is more experienced, or is more generally powerful. 

Names for members of hierarchies can be used to trick others regarding who is in charge of what and when. An owner of a company can put considerable blame suddenly on a director, when there is business or legal crisis, even though the fault is entirely on the owner. Employees can be given titles like "President" or "CEO" even if they are not owners or have little total control over the business. This gives the impression that certain people who have such titles at large companies are really responsible for whole organizations or are the causes of certain decisions. People may come to believe that they receive the bulk of the pay, and are earning more directly from the margins of earnings atop wages of staff; whereas, in reality, the owner may be unknown and receive these funds more directly, without any contributions at all, or with very periodic decision making only. The President or CEO can be someone who simply redirects attention away from real owners to keep them protected, and also to have a way to direct all blame. It is possible to have an organization blame a President, after an event causes public unrest, with the objective of protecting the real ownership. As owner of my company, I could easily hire a President, who would then be paid fairly well, and would be the apparent leader to others. However, mostly this person would be an employee who is puppeted somewhat in their leadership role. If there was any situation with accusations of mismanagement, I could fire this person and people would believe the issue was taken care of. Meanwhile, I'm unknown, and am still earning a larger amount of money for doing less.

I myself have fallen for the idea that a presented leader must actually be the leader. It is a common illusion. It is hard to know what exactly the title means when it is used. If one is totally ignorant about the financial and founding organization of a large business, and its history, one will not know really if the leader of that organization is the leader of that organization. With research one becomes less ignorant, which may cause some to think "well, people can just research specific organizations to know more" but the work associated with such research is not great enough to overcome the issue that for all organizations unresearched there will be an illusion as to the leadership.

My primary interest for sharing this post relates to the fact that a single word really could be used to designate all leaders, with the addition of a standard for describing, in a more detailed way, what that leader does, and how that leader relates to real hierarchies.

It appears to me, that the actual structures of organizations are complex and not cleanly hierarchical, meaning we pretend there is a hierarchy akin to that which the business may "draw up" given its way of assigning titles and relationships among employees.

A hierarchical model may represent a single view into the organization model of the whole which would include much more detail and may not be cleanly hierarchical. But more likely, a published organization chart would have inaccuracies.

A hierarchical model may be one in which to *force* an organization, and it also may be one to misrepresent one. A complete description of an organization would indicate some striving for a clean hierarchical model, but the actual description may not benefit from hieararchical visualizations of it. Visualizations of the complete description would require probably more sophisticated graphs, that would show what the role of the "envisioned hierarchy" is within the organization apart from an attempt at description.

This relates to my view that people are organizing things in a "straight and rectilinear" way, when oftentimes the more optimal organization would be one that is less tidy and orderly and more akin to structures seen in nature.

Problems that organizations face when leaders are trying to structure them are natural problems. They seem to try to solve these problems with a desire for tidiness that is akin to house cleaning and organization. Tidiness is not a mark of problem solving necessarily, meaning that a tidy organization does not mean it has been optimally organized or that its problems were solved therby. Instead, one is quickly confused into thinking something has been improved or that problems were solved, by tidinesses. A tidy hierarchy is a way to make it appear the organization is tidy, and functioning optimally, but the  result may really be an angry staff, but a nice looking diagram. 

It does not appear to the author that there would be an inexhaustible number of potential organizational models due to the constraint that humans have for advancement. If not for some basic constraints around organization which are the cause for their becoming hierarchical, there may really be a massive number of possible organization types in which the constraints would move to being human or animal constraints, or successful prolonged grouping and work.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="changing-processes-of-morality">Changing Processes of Morality</a>

*Thursday, June 22<sup>nd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>7:40pm, Phoenix, Arizona, USA</time>

Edits required on process improvements and degradations relating to system behaviors including idividuals and groups, implies that one's moral system is one that cannot be entirely unchanging. This is and has been an assumption of the author, and is implicit in the edits of his gradually improving system of ethics on the process components. But it also implies that ethics cannot be static and unchanging, and "planned in advance", and debunks religion, and it's commitment to ancient and unchanging dogma, wherever that dogma is not taken to be literary history, and is considered to influence behaviors of individuals and groups. It's age would be akin to if I created my moral system in my youth, then followed it without any addition or alternation the remainder of my life; civilization being young, created a sketch process and demanded it to remain largely unchanging. Yet civilization is wanting of changes. The processes of a young person or young civilization on moral behavior is not inclusive enough of learning either; indeed, the goals of the author here are to expend and improve the process to be increasingly inclusive of new relevant knowledge and information, and it doesn't appear there would be final terminus of the process. If the author was to create a final process, and make it into dogma and scripture, subsequent moral practitioners would be required to do the same; however, this is not at all in keeping with the goals of the author. Improvements to the process are part of moral learning and creativity, and moral self-modification and improvement. I am a changing persona and my moral learnings would conform to a changing process of behavior, even if merely descriptive and not one that guides future behavior. The implication is a more scientific view of my life is included in this, for allowing for changing descriptions of my life related to actual behavior, while also recognizing processes and rational behavioral plans and real target habits exist that are also changing as I learn. This includes all planning behavior, which also falls within the total description of me. This book includes my living-autobiography.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>


## <a name="a-strategy-for-creating-a-taste-for-your-bag">A strategy for creating a taste for your bag</a>

*Thursday, June 22<sup>nd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>6:02pm, Phoenix, Arizona, USA</time>

An issue with improving habits around nutrition is periodic triggers to eating, that associate with unwanted foods and drink. For example, a gas station that one frequents may be a trigger for sweets and drinks, or alcohol. A bar that one has enjoyed frequently, becomes a trigger once it is nearby, resulting in desire to sit down for drinks. Shopping at a grocery store, has aisles that may attract if one has been down them, having candies, snacks, already-prepared food of poor quality, etc... The list of possible triggers to eating in a way that is recognized to be contrary to one's nutritional goals is huge, and in my history has been an obstacle to progress. Historically, I used a strategy that is not the focus of the present post, but I'll mention it in passing. That strategy is to recognize all triggers, and find alternate paths away from the triggers even if it means going to new locations that one ordinarily doesn't go, and additionally, to focus on visual plannin in advance, about what paths will be taken and what will be eaten that's better, that's substituting positively for what is wanted to be avoided. The reason for this is that it appears to be easier to make alternative plans that are better and attractive and follow through on them than to simply combat the various triggers in one's environment. My earlier thought was that driving home from work was a cause for desire for satisfying certain food and drink cravings, since I was in a weakened cognitive state from working all day, and that the triggers caused decision events in which I was less equipped to think rationally to choose options that were not as desirable, the nutritious options, or no options to control spending. Also, choosing a positive alternative route home that had none of the triggers only involved one commitment, of redirecting my path when I left work, in a context without the triggers nearby. It was then easier, to drive the alternative path that had no triggers, and sometimes, one will find, the alternative path results in having no decisions arise at all concerning cravings, and one simply makes it home without issue. It is a simpler way to alleviate the burden of repeated decisions required when triggers to cravings would be numerous, creating numerous decisions, following one's normal pathways.

This writing concerns, however, a new option that only recently came to mind, approximately 17-20 years after having started the above method. It appears they could be used together to improved results. This new idea is to transfer interest in things in the environment as providers of food and drinks, to one's own bag. This is simple enough, and some have done this, simply by being prepared with already prepared foods, snacks, and drinks. I've done the same. What is different about this idea, however, is the addition of an attempt, using the psychological methods of reinforcement and conditioning, to make the bag itself, which can be a purse, backpack, or other bag always had nearby, an object of desire or trigger of desire for food and drink. Additionally, combined in this same process, is the creation of a search habit, for food when it is wanted on recognition of a sensation, to immediately go into the bag for the item. The result is that the bag itself causes a desire for food, but if the desire also comes from a sensation of feeling famished or thirsty, the bag is still the object of the food search. Either way the bag becomes the source of the food. Repeated satisfaction in the food and drinks contained then reinforces positively the process, making it more desirable to repeat again and again, making it a habit. Once a durable habit, one can stop thinking about how it was originally formed and simply enjoy its repetition, until a time in which *another habit competes with it for behavior*—at that time a return to retraining the habit with the same process is required.

There is a cyclical need to retrain habits once they begin to be subsituted by other candidate habits that may be less desirable. If more desirable, one simply learns the new habit and replaces the old one permanently.

The assumption in the above method is that foods and drinks placed in the bag will be those that are known to be of good nutritional quality. It may be desirable to choose options, that are satisfactory even with some degree of overeating and drinking, because, if the bag becomes a source of desire, one may repeatedly want food or drink at a greater frequency. This may be a limitation since having no food at all or no drink, for some, may encourage eating nothing or waiting a prolonged period, but this would not be the same type of person as that mentioned above, who is succumbing to triggers for buying poor quality food and drink at various businesses. But if all in the bag is not too calorific, this may not be an issue. My typical strategy additionally is to eat only late at night. The time in which I would be wanting food nowadays would be when I'm famished and haven't eaten for a very long time. At these times I would prefer to have my bag available as the object of my eating desire, or my area to search once I notice I'm hungry on other sensations.

My preferred drink for my bag is water. I've noticed that water is also, of course, a substitute for food, and will be practicing utilizing it in advance of using the bag for any food contained. Foods that will go into the bag are to be decided, but may include, somewhat eccentrically, my more recent preferences: oats, really inexpensive nuts, like peanuts or sunflower seeds, and fruit. I have not decided proportions, but since I tend to overeat peanuts or sunflowers seeds, I would carry less of those particular foods. I may make simple additions and modifications to make it sufficiently attractive to make the bag really potentially a possible object of desire itself. However, these foods are certainly somewhat low calorie, of good quality, vegan, and their choice is consistent with my moral goals and objectives.

The method to be developed further, which will be here written, is precisely how the bags attractiveness is to be increased using principles of psychology. Already having done similarly in the past, as indicated in my [personal form](mattanaws-personal-form.html), I am confident it will be simple to succeed in conditioning my interest in the bag. There are a number of ways it can be achieved, and in practice I will see what works, and record that process here. Here are initial ideas on how I may begin:

- *Associate my bag with dinner.*
  - I eat once a day, when I eat, it will come from the bag. This assures that everyday already, I'm using the bag to obtain my food. This will create feedback loops on the dinner, relating to the bag, with positive association of the result of the meal, of feeling satisfied and comfortable. Since a person can store food anyplace for dinner, or stage it anyplace temporarily, food that is had for dinner, can come from the bag everytime. This may not be as easy for others having differing diets, of foods that are perishable or odd to carry, like meats and eggs, but is easy for most of what is in the grocery store, including produce. The food I'm eating is also simple, which is consistent with other goals I have around minimizing costs and making the food more basic, for training in camping (notice the listed foods above are suitable for camping). It is easy to make, then, the bag a place to store the food for when you will eat it, forcing one to have repeated positive results, at the time of eating from the bag.
- *Carry the bag everywhere.*
  - This is the easier portion for me, since I already cary bag everywhere. This process is tailored to my needs, but a similar process could be used, to utilize a purse or other bag that is expected to always be nearby. I have three bags that I use. My primary bag is a small backpack that is intended to carry water for fitness, but it has a large compartment that can easily also store food. Since it already contains water it is a good candidate for this method. I also carry a larger backpack, when I'm travelling around or hiking. This would become the new bag serving the same purpose when the smaller bag cannot be carried. I also have a handbag (coach purse used as a briefcase), that could also be used to carry a good quantity of high quality foods and a water bottle (the cause of my knowing the purse is an option is that I carry one!).
- *Make a positive event of its use, and planning.*
  - When the bag is utilized, or when I think about the bag, I will try to think of the enjoyment I will have with it, satisfying my goals around nutrition, and enjoying the taste of the food and water whenever I have it. Visualization of the positiveity of its use is done when it is not used but recollected. If food comes to mind from a sensation, I will try to relate it to positive interests in the bag. The foods in the bag, I will remind myself, are delicious and satisfying. Having them will consistently result in good satisfaction, and feeling of accomplishment. When I'm actually eating, I enjoy what I'm eating, and enjoy that it came from the bag. When I think about plans to eat, I will imagine them positively. Thus I am reinforcing the use and planned use of the bag, simply by thinking positively about what it does for me. 
- *Pretend the bag has the tast and satisfaction of the food.*
  - Here is a mind trick in which I will attempt to make the bag taste like cool ater, creating thirst-quenching satisfaction, and to make it taste like my foods, at the time that I'm wanting more, after having already been satisfied by some of it.

This may not be a complete strategy, however, in my experience it appears this will work effectively. The association of my bag with a single dinner, means that every meal I have will include the bag without any exceptions. If I eat, the bag is involved. This is facilitated by my normally only having one meal, but enables eating on other occasions, for having the food in the bag. Also, since I predictably eat dinner, and dinner recurs, involving my bag ensures training. It means the bag will be involved and will be part of the goal of conditioning it to become attractive on its own. The usage at dinner creates sufficient repeated use.

Carrying the bag everywhere ensures the presence of the bag at other times I may be wanting to eat or drink, on sudden sensation, or to combat possible purchases at locations involving triggers (this happens despite the usual of eating one meal a day). This creats not only sufficient repeat use, it makes sure it is always present. Being always present, it is available as the primary source for satisfying thirst and hunger. If the bag itself does become tasty, then it is more likely that it will be a first searching point for food/drink. This point then ensures, sufficient repeated use for training, and sufficient usage to ensure the success of the objective to be able to use it anytime food or drink is wanted, and not only at dinner.

The first two points pertain to frequency of use and spatial presence of the bag, and routine usage at dinner creating good conditioning opportunities. Additional conditioning is performed by the last two points, which involve emphasizing repeated positive thinking about the bag in relation to the food/drink, search, and finally to make the bag itself a target of hunger. If a psychological study were performed, it would not include conditions so desirable as these, for frequency and opportunity of conditioning, and availability of subjects. What is missing somewhat is isolation of certain relevant conditions, which is needed for confirming causality, but it does appear that one will see clearly that the process has caused the results once it is successful. It could be that one could suddenly have the successful outcome for other reasons, but those would be noticed along the way also, and it is not thought that there would not be additional learning along the way. However, what is interesting, is that despite having no isolation, and a single subject, the causality will appear to be well known on post analysis. Being able to identify the causality is not only about the experimental design, but the mind analysing. Some, unable to identify for themselves good steps to arrive at an objective, may do things along the way to cloud what has occurred. Meaning some, for not having as good quality of minds, or as good quality in planning, may become confused as to how the success has finally resulted. I can admit, to an extent, this appears pervasive regarding weight loss, and there have been instances of my own weight loss in which the central causes resulting in success involved in my behavior may have been unknown. Nowadays this would not be the case for me, but historically it was, and for many wanting to lose weight, it is possible to have success and be unclear as to why it finally worked, and cannot be perpetuated or repeated easily later.

The final result of this effort to make the bag tasty and an immediately thought of place to search for food, is to make the bag related to the only two starting ways in which one seeks food or drink: 1) one thinks of a food of interest and targets it directly, or 2) one becomes aware of a want for food and finds a place to obtain it or search for an option. The result of this process is that the bag is tasty itself and contains tasty options, immediately thought of and present to mind from habit of eating it. Additionally, all searching and shopping is eliminated. One simply has a search habit of going directly into the bag if there is any strong want of food immediately, and of course, at mealtime, when it regularly happens anyway.

What is missing from this process is that the bag cannot contain all food that one will need. One can imagine that if all shopping has been eliminated, the bag is filled with all the food one needs all of one's life. Which is a humorous way of looking at what is wanted to be achieved, to have a tasty bag in which all food wanted and needed is already in it, and additionally, it never runs out.

Of course it runs out, however, so one has to shop or procure food. Water procurement is easy in that one really emphasizes always having it and does not tolerate waiting to refill. Refilling with water is a priority and it is filled often.

Regarding food, the objective is to refill it daily at a minimum, from a source that is *detached* from periods of high appetite or craving. Appetite and craving is managed entirely by the bag, which means there need to be times of shopping without a feeling of need to reload the bag. This connects with other advice I've used for myself around shopping when not hungry. Shopping when not hungry allows one to purchase more rationally, and to get foods that one does not simply want immediately. Food shopping happens when there is no strong food desire, and fills the bag, and creates a surplus (if needed) that itsef can be used to refill the bag. This is equivalent to filling a kitchen with suitable foods which then are transferred to the bag.

*[Written in one hour and 14 minutes, without edits or spell check, finished at 7:16pm]* 

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="demographics-you-dont-have-that-are-you">Demographics You Don't Have that are You]</a>

*Wednesday, June 21<sup>st</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>7:50pm, Phoenix, Arizona, USA</time>

There are numerous social issues that are pretended to be solved, or are somehow perpetually out of attention, and awareness, that have serious pervasive consequences.

Here is a list of the things you do that you did not supply demographic data regarding:

- You drank while you were pregnant.
- You smoked while you were pregnant.
- Your baby has unknown developmental deficiencies since you didn't really follow any health plan, and drank and smoked, and substanced.
- STD checks aren't between all sex encounters.
  - *Maybe you did one STD check, probably none, and yet you had sex how many times? Your spouse cheated.*
- The condom slipped off and your privates rubbed together outside of the condom.
  - *You have no sex plan*.
- Right after drinking you drive, and you *don't* know your blood alcohol percentage.
- Your spouse cheated, you don't know, and you didn't have them use protection or STD testing, between all sex encounters.

What are the causes of tiny heads?

But you solved the afterlife.

Which other demographics matter? What is your religion and did you drink when you got pregnant?

You can't know if your spouse has STDS but you pretend you can know for dating?

There are areas in which as a group there is a pretense that there is a solution, but there is apparently none.

Do you even care about STDs?

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="you-should-have-thousands-of-std-test-results">You Should Have Thousands of STD Test Results</a>

To what extent have you aggregated your STD test results, monogamous or not?

You should have thousands of test results by now.

Sexually transmitted disease testing and prevention seems to dumb our population. It is pretended that anything reasonable is done at all by anyone really.

In response to saying something like this, I would anticipate "societal protection" responses, that support rationalization:

"I use condoms each and every time I'm with my partner" as though genetalia don't rub together, and as if that were actually honest.

"My cheating husband has no STD tests at all, and never used a condom."

This problem is not solved. Not only is it not solved, it is as if nothing has started for finding a solution.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="adding-philosophical-discourse-to-the-high-intelligence-community">Adding Philosophical Discourse to the High Intelligence Community</a>

*Sunday, June 18<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>4:54pm, Phoenix, Arizona, USA</time>

*[Written without edits, and spell checks, in a single sitting, as part of an ongoing study on editing, and the value of certain forms of edits, and editing processes]*

Since the departing of William M. Fightmaster, there appears to be a dearth or scarcity of truly philosophical conversation of good quality in certain High Intelligence groups in which he formerly participated. After he died, there was, over a period of time, a noticeable decrease in postings of the same quality and character, which seem to have been primarily created or contributed by him. His many postings were more academic in nature, and where characteristic of philosophers who were academics, and his were sharings that seemed more directed to creating awareness of philosophical topics, shared in a way consistent with what perhaps may be shared by other Professors of Philosophy, coming from philosophy departments in university institutions.

He was sharing openly with our groups topics to discuss with material references from good sources, and also background information and summaries of readings from earlier philosophers, so readers were aware of some background and direction for future explorations and investigations. As a student of Pychology and Philosophy, like him, I am able, and have been able, to verify the authenticity of his shares. He was sharing good quality philosophy that was real and consistent with what is presented by other philosophers who are current, and still professors at various institutions. His citations were accurate, and his descriptions of the thoughts of others seemed accurate to existing trusted readings, providing corroborating primary or secondary source materials, which would justify his postings.

He wasn't incredibly opinionated regarding his materials and invited open conversation and lively discussion. Threads in which he was included, and those he created, were a source of good intellectual conversation which seemed to enrich the high intelligence community. Now that he is not around, after some number of years, his contribution to the quality of discussion is more obvious, and now there appears to be a clear difference in the quality of conversation and contributions. I think people in our groups are ready for high quality discussion, but the starting points for their development seem to have been reduced without his frequent contributions.

I first joined the High Intelligence Community after years of studying philosophy and psychology independently, mostly keeping all conversations and thoughts about philosophy to myself. Even while at the University of Maryland in the Philosophy Department, I was more often wanting to think alone than with others, because the controversial nature of philosophy lead to a style of conversation that did not seem to promote growth or mutual development. Instead, conversations flagged after focusing on specific topics presented by instructors, and seemed more about quandries and puzzles that did not appear to have good direction for self-improvement. Many who are exposed to philosophy and some parts of psychology and the sciences that are more theoretical, or less obviously connected with everyday self-improvement, probably felt the same way as I did. Having perhaps less interest for independent study, Philosophy and certain theoretical topics may have seemed 'pointless' will less real-life reasons to think the topic worth considering further. However, Prof. Fightmaster invited conversation in a way that was unusually consistent with the objectives of real philosophers who really are able to make connections between the subject matter and real life. He had many admirers and friends and it appears it was because he offered significantly improved mutually collaborative conversations that show the real value of philosophy and topics he was interested in. He provided real academic avenues for people who may not see the value of philosophy and theoretical topics, in a context in which people really were wanting to have that kind of conversation, and he appears to have won much admiration and friendships as a result.

He and I quickly gravitated to discuss with mutual interest and recognition of understanding of the importance of Philosophy and mutual understanding of what it requires concerning logic and skepticism. Finding him to be reputable, I spent much time communicating nearly exclusively on threads that included contributions of his as well. Seeing each other as being akin in various ways we developed a personal relationship and friendship which extended into in-person visits and conversations outside of the social groups like Mensa. I was a guest in his home a number of times, and once attended a party including others who were caring about his friendship and involvement in the comunities, at a time when his health conditions were deteriorating and it was becoming clear that probably he would eventually succumb to terminal illness. He passed away not long after, and is now noticeably absent from discussions all over the intelligence community's discussion forums.

I think there is a need in the High IQ community to introduce topic matter and a familiar style of collaborative discourse that he was providing, and that I found stimulating and congenial to my own intersts. He provided somethign to the community that I was intensely wanting, and appreciative of upon finding it. I don't think he is the only person to be able to stimulate with new and intersting conversations on topics of theoretical interest that are foundational, and supportive to minds that are wanting better complexity and solution. But to contribute in the way he did would require substantial efforts and time; being a retiree, he was able to spend more time than others in posting to the group and sharing comments. Others however, I think could provide excellent contributions, perahps if certain suggestions are observed which would relate to his contributions, and would relate also to what is simply done in academia. It's the sharing of topics of real interest, and invitation of a quality of communication that exists in academic publications. He would provide numerous background sources to back up sharings he made, which would create seriousness and reality to the discussion, and provide material that readers who are unfamiliar need, to be brought into the conversations. Here in our groups we have scientists and philosophers, and business people, who ceratinly could delve more deeply into interests they have that are foundational or "cutting edge" with sufficient personal background and research to supply information with some basic preparations and citations, creating collaborative high quality discussion. Folks may not be able to spend as much time developing the conversations but periodically, I think it would be a great contribution, if some could sometimes contribute in a similar capacity.

In my many sharings over recent years, I have taken an alternative course of sharing edgy philosophical topics embedded in my own reflections or remarks, in a way that assumes that others could recognize the significance or philosophical directions, thinking it could perhaps stimulate interesting conversation, and sometimes it did, but I think not with the same results as what Mr. Fightmaster would produce, by sepaking to tohers as a teacher would. Here I believe I will transition my own writings to be more in keeping with useful conversations I've had with Fightmaster in a more academic and invitational format, that may help benefit in the ways that I was mentioning others could do similarly, in their own areas of interest. In other words, as I write this I'm forming plans for how I contribute to the high intelligence community, in ways that are more similar to what I've done somewhat, with Mr. Fightmaster, somewhat following his lead, in earlier conversations. For me this is a return to a more academic style of communication, with recognition and appreciation for what Mr. Fightmaster has done for our community, and I'm also inviting others perhaps to be more ready to share in a more academic style, to have longer more worthy conversations, than some that are created that detract perhaps from the value of the community.

Of course people want to socialize, so I'm not thinking that socialization should end in favor of more difficult sharings and conversations that require some background reading, research or career development. Instead I'm thinking it would be great for an increased quality of contribution of the other type so that there isn't an unbalance felt, and that there might be a real feeling of interest and cultivation of mind in the various communities.

It would be noted, probably, by other folks who have been in the communities many decades, that there are times in which there would be really good quality contributions, and other times, in which there appears to be less. I'm feeling from what I've seen over the past few years that perhaps quality has diminished from the period of a few years earlier. Then again, it depends on where one goes for conversation, and who it is with. Mr. Fightaster leaving may have simply left a noticable decrease of a certain kind of conversation I myself enjoy, but I have to also say, that with his departing it does make it appear that the groups have diminished somewhat in the availability in what I'm wanting for myself and found gladly on first arrival.

I was focusing this on philosophy because typically philosophy involves conversation on topics of intense interest for being on the edge of intellectual exploration. It touches and includes various fields, as long as they are foundational or are on the edge of mental and learning adventures. Others, doing similar things, in technology and the sciences, and engineering, are working on "cutting-edge" ideas, and foundational or novel areas of cultural development. I am including these others in the above remarks and am wanting to hear more from them what they can share about what is of interest in their own minds, for mutual conversational development and enrichment of the community.

In other words it would be nice to hear the more advanced academic developments of folks who have much to share even if they don't have much time, in a way that is "teacher like", providing some background information and ways to learn, in a way exhibited us already by folks like Prof. Fightmaster, Ph.D, Psy.D. The way he was sharing is what is of interest and not that he was an advanced acedemician. He was inviting others into conversation in ways that was collaborative without expectation of PhDs or advancement in a university setting, making it possible for others to interat in a similar way without having had that background. It was a feeling of having a familiar university level conversation with wider participation made possible. It's not to be forgotten that people are able to contribute in the same ways without having the same backgrouns, and of course we are in a group with a very diverse participation. Furthermore, it is not clear who will have important and unexpected contributions.

A characteristic of these conversations was respectful and interested communication, and expectation of collaboration, and much less that is rude, reactionary, or quickly written with an objective of thwarting the conversation, or its value. Conversations have still been inviting of diversity of opinion and debate, but the debate was of a type more characteristic of kind and civil conversation, which is celebrated within Philosophy, where it is possible to be skeptical of all sorts of thoughts, and supportive of ideas that are unconventional, or often rejected.

*[Completed, blind-typing, without reading or editing, or spell check, as part of my ongoing study on editing]*

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>


## <a name="status-on-the-current-project-regarding-homelessness-and-wealthy-camping">Status on the Current Project Regarding Homelessness and Wealthy Camping</a>

*Saturday, June 17<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>4:39pm, Phoenix, Arizona, USA</time>

In earlier writings I've discussed an ongoing project I'm working on connecting the topics of homelessness and wealthy camping, with the goal of resolving related issues. Efforts to dates have resulted in some insights of significance, requiring some additional testing and validation, including:

- *Compliants.* Complaints, including anonymous complaints, even for issues unrelated to the behavior of a camper or homeless person, may be a primary cause for being unable to enact solutions. "We simply don't want someone here that often, or sleeping, or camping, or looking like a traveler, or looking like a possible homeless person. I don't want to see that here, knowing I have to pay for where I live, and cannot travel around myself, or because I simply want to control real estate around me and not merely what I myself own."
- *Finding a place to sleep*. Homelessness and rapid travel of wealthy individuals includes a related problem of finding, spatially, a place to sleep near to the location where sleep is desired. If one does not feel an urge to rest or get sleep, or if businesses near are open and there are inexpensive things to do out, there isn't a very strong need for being anywhere near a bed one is allowed to use. However, if one really does want to sleep, and one is *not* near a location where sleeping is acceptable, suddenly one needs to potentially have travel arrangements, energy, and reservations, or a suitable place to camp, that is a good distance from one's current position. Wealthy travelers, campers, and homeless people would all face these issues over and over without good resolution.
- *Inability to define the problems due to complexity*. People have been unable to articulate what the problems of homelessness really are, and what is to be solved, versus retained, about homeless life and wealthy camping. If people want to be tourists or backpackers exploring the world, clearly there is an urge to retain parts of the experience of homelessness, since travelers spending little are going to be livingin a way that is somewhat closer to the homeless people, and they will be facing problem solving situations that resemble those problems already faced by homeless people. Also, homeless people themselves may want to live frugally and cheaply, and without making payments often in the market to ensure they live easily within what is possible to them given their resources. Homeless people want to live without annoyance from others, just like anyone else, and want to live cheaply and freely, on less resources. An implication is that they don't want homes. Instead, they want to be left alone and want to live well without as much expenditure, particularly in the form of rents. If one can remove rent payments one can live well as long as there aren't complaints and special security risks. However, it appears law enforcement creates some of those risks rather than working to resolve them. They are working for someone else to put the homeless in jail potentially or to purge them, and are not working to protect them and ensure they are comfortable. These and other issues indicate that homeless people may want to be homeless, which means that the problems they want solved are not problems that end homelessness but problems that relate to living like a camper. "I want to be homeless and the issues around homelessness are not those that others coming up with solutions would say they are. People who are not homeless or are not travelers are unable to articulate what the problems are but are somehow the people offering solutions, and of course, their solutions have not been able to survive given other social arrangements and pressures which may be for making homeless living difficult."

It's been important to me to arrive at key occlusions that exist that have prevented others from being more successful than they have been in any projects for solving homelessness. It is interesting that in all the time in which solutions have been attempted or proposed, for various homelessness related issues, there has not been a need to introduce causes to keep homelessness. In other words, it appears it has been solved to keep homelessness, and that solution already exists and is living in the world. Complaints and controls around the market for sleeping, including requirements to have a suitable bed at a hotel or in a residence, appear to be key incredients in this issue. Also the role of law enforcement is extremely important, because they are the ones responding to complaints, and are effectively the existing solution for preventing wealthy camping and homeless living. Where one is allowed to sleep, is also related to the controls that exist with law enforcement, particularly if one thinks that it is dangerous at night, and one must be on property that one pays for or owns already, meaning there are transit, market and property requirement that all connect to ways to involke police. Those who are more adept at complaining and getting police favor would be those most able to ensure that issues around homelessness still exist. A person who is having difficulties related to homelessness are experiencing those difficulties partly because of who would complain to police. In locations where there is more money and power, homeless people and travelers can be complained about much more quickly even if their behavior is not related to anything causing complaint. One can simply dislike wealthy campers and homeless people, and use one's power with law enforcement to ensure that they have irritating police encounters that could lead to arrest, and inability to continue their pursuit of healthy wealthy camping and homeless living.

Currently I'm focused on what the life of people consists of when they decide they do not want to be in the rent market. Rent makes up a significant portion of one's living budget, but few really consider that they could remove renting and owning homes from their expenditures. There are claims in the United States and elsewhere about rights to choose lifestyle and certainly that includes ability to choose how one spends money on sleep arrangements. If sleep is the primary need one has identified for being a consumer of homes and apartments, and hotels, then one may want to continue to rent and purchase accommodations. However, if one has decided that what the market offers is not good enough, is too expensive, or is otherwise only something to have occasionally, and not all the time, then one has the freedom, some might think, to spend money otherwise. With funds made available due to a decision to no longer rent, one has had a substantial income increase, even if one is living on savings. Suddenly, one may have another $15,000 a year to spend on other things, which may enable being able to survive well on existing resources. One may not spend much on other things apart from rent, if one is living frugally. Living frugally is arguablly, extremely limited, given this huge cost increase in expenditure if one chooses to live in a residence. Keeping those funds to use otherwise is an intelligent choice, and so one may want to not have a home and live more as a traveler or camper, than spend those funds. Even if one is wealthy, one is supposed to have the option of where to spend extra funds, since as a consumer, one can have any position one likes regarding making purchases in the market. On may refrain from renting simply to choose how one will retain, manage, and spend wealth. Even if that wealth is very great. We have some exmaples of wealthy people, like Warren Buffet, who pride themselves for living in regular homes. I once read a book, "The Millionaire Next Door" which explains that the demographics of wealth reveal that wealthy people are not really ostentatious on average, and instead choose to spend their money on more basic homes than one would expect. This means the wealthiest, most well planned families regarding finances, are choosing to spend a certain way that supports keeping that wealth and ensuring habits are good for preserving and increasing wealth. One does not need to have several million dollars, or billions of dollars, to follow their leads. Actually, these people are often advising others on how to attain the same situations for themselves. Their recommendations are often to do the same, or spend even *less* for not having enough yet, to have even a modest home. Some have stories, of before they were wealthy, explaining that they did what they needed to, to live in a car, live with other roomates, or live in homelessness temporarily, in order to make sacrifices to gain wealth later. They tell their humble starts to their success stories. This implies, that for many people who did become wealthy, they would advocate very frugal living, making big drops in their budgets for paying rents, or any rent at all, and further, they live in success still living in modest conditions. This means they advocate to *never* be wasteful regarding resources and instead to live as cheaply as one can, even making what they call, again, sacrifices in rent, to eventually get to the point of having substantial resources, still in an inexpensive home. 

It is important I think to think more about why they would advise sacrifices, and why they could even be sacrifices. Living inexpensively, in a vehicle, or in a camping scenario, or at someone else's home temporarily, or with family, or in an RV or tiny home, etc... clearly may include some discomforts. But why advise that type of living? Also, why advise that type of living, to celebrate a living hardly better later, once wealth has been gotten?

Here is where I can offer some expertise as a wealthy traveler and camper, and someone exploring what it means to live closer to homelessness in a huge variety of living conditions. This includes years living in hotel rooms. That sounds irrelevant, but it is not: it involves choosing how and where one wants to live, and there are sacrifices, including strangenesses around relationships requiring "permanent physical addresses" and "mailing addresses". Even if one is wealthy, and traveling hotel to hotel, suddenly there is pressure to stay in one place, to have a mailing address and physical address. But as a consumer of the rental market, I can choose *anything* I want to spend my money on, including totally homeless life in hotels. I've lived this way for years. 

I've also lived trying to camp, stay in hostels, stay in AirBnBs and more short termarranged housing. I own a large plot of land in Alaska where I've lived for long periods in an RV, totally off grid, with no water and no septic. This type of living also requires making what some would call *sacrifices* relating to entertainment, transit around havin wifi/cellular, and strangenesses around rules with addresses, since my property is a vacant parcel, and they don't allow mailing boxes near the home, if there isn't a permanent dwelling. This creates a good amount of complexity for managing life, particularly if one is maintaining a business and is actively working.

But there are rich people who were advocating worse living conditions. Living temporarily in vehicles like cars, or living more like a homeless person, simply finding places to sleep. Many stories from famous people tell about doing this for long periods to create habits and savings to make steps towards wealth and work success. Some tell stories of risking everything including all funds and taking on credit card debt on risky business ventures, with the result of sleepinging in cars, or sleeping in offices for long periods. Anyone living in the United States knows probably there are *too many* stories like this, not a shortage of examples.

> *People will use stories of their temporary homeless life, or frugality in residence, to create credibility on their success story. Meaning some will lie.*

There really are too many stories like this in American Popular culture. Wealthy people want and need to prove they *did it all on their own* and in order to explain it, will tell their stories about how they had nothing in the beginning, and how having nothing was really important for teaching lessons required for finally becoming rich.

But why are we advocating these sacrifices, what are these sacrifices, who are they for, and what risks do they create? Firstly, it seems that to preserve merit in having a good success that one has made for oneself, *everyone* needs some story about having nothing. So everyone is told that *to do it on their own* they need to have started basically with nothing at all. To prove it, one needs *street credibility*, which includes stories like living with danger in one's life, or living without a place to go and maybe nothing to eat. For everyone else, who hasn't started totally from nothing, one is still getting advice from rich people like Warren Buffet, or those who lived in cars, who say that making big frugal changes to lifestyle results in sucess. So now one is told to live in vehicles, camp temporarily, live in offices (like living at your employers place?), sleeping where one can, taking uncomfortable offers from friends an family to have cheap temporary places to stay. All of these things create social risks (now your friend later reminds you of how poor you were and how you didn't get success on your own), security risks, and risks of looking like one is doing something wrong. So now you're living in your car, or on the street, and you are a problem and you are not someone to be cared for. How can this type of life be *suggested* by people who are successful later, if the risks are this great?

People don't really consider living this way, and really do not consider themselves free about their rent arrangements, beecause they understand it is risky to try to live one one's own according to suggestions like these. 

But the risks are not really well understood such that they could be listed by people. People don't really know what the risks are well, and cannot explain them, if they have not perhaps attempted living that way, or have not been exposed to information from those who know. When I was young, I just vaguely knew I would not want to not have a home or a place for mysel. I didn't seriously consider that choosing not to spend money that way was really an option. That one does not think to budget out rent is an interesting tell, because it shows that people are really not as free as they might imagine, given that option can never come into their thought at all. Instead they automatically know they need to spend on rent, and do not take it out of their budgeting.

But the rich people still advocate starting out in a way that is extremely frugal, with risks maybe not totally remembered or recollected. One reason why, may be, that they noticed that they really did have that option. They really did budget in a way to take out rents. They did something *unusual* and they know it. Later in life, they forget the risks and discomforts. Also, they somehow survived without serious outcomes, while others, certainly, end up uncomfortable, or really do have consequences realted to law enforcement that make it seem much more impossible an option.

> "I tried to live as a homeless person to improve my life but instead was criminalized and accused of miscellanous unsolved petty crimes, or worse, something serious."

Homelessness is a tell that one does not have a lawyer. This means one will not succeed very likely, if one is suddenly targeted by police.

. "I was just sleeping in my car in a parking lot, but suddenly I was arrested for criminal trespass, and accused of theft. Now I think it unwise to try to live without rent."

A famous person may have gotten through possible predicaments without serious risk. I've slept in cars, travel vans, RVs, and have been approached by police on many occasions. All were unwanted and unnecessary. I've gotten through it without issue, but I'm also white, intelligent, I have good self-presentation, and am less likely to be targeted more thoroughly or in a more severe way, by police. If I was black, or hispanic, there may be someone with my likeness out there, already accused of a serious crime. Now, there is risk of a visual match. Since trespassed, why not accuse them of other serious crimes that happened at night? 

Famous people may have forgotten risks is the point here. But they tell the stories because they *did*:

- Actually save tons of money by living this way,
- Recognize that doing so created the savings possibility,
- Not get seriously jeopardized, but do still recognize that it was something hard to do,
- That it seems necessary, if one is to learn to be totally frugal.
  - There is a message "You will not be able to save with that rental cost existing, at all, in your budget, if you don't have resources." Particularly, if you have little and you are going to need *extra* to make business purchases and investments.

Who has ever started a business and wanted to pay their rent, and rent for an office? I temporarily did this and it felt like an incredible, and somewhat depressing, waste of funds. What is advised is to have *no rent* at all! What one feels when one has an office is "Why am I not at home in my home office," and if one can do much of the work without an office, and one already dislikes rent, then one doesn't want any of it, particularly given the costs. Real estate for a new lawyer's basic office might be more than their own rent at home. So a starting lawyer could make a foolish move of having 1,500 in rent and 2,000 in office payments. Interestingly, those people who made business success stories, living without rent, would  have had other real-estate concerns and issues related to their business, and would advise to minimize those costs too. For example, when you start a business, it needs an address, you ned bank accounts with addresses associated. So one may not be following the rules either when starting the businesses. One may be breaking a good number of rules to make the sacrifices possible to begin with.

> "What was you mailing address on your driver's license, when you were living in your car?"

If you advised concerning the American success story from having nothing to being rich then you would be aware, that this may include having an incorrect driver's license, and mismatching information on all records requiring ID and address.

Then, the postal service handling mail has rules around post office boxes, correct addressing, and so on, meaning that one may need to break rules to get mail, while one does not have a home, temporarily living in a vehicle, or in someone else's home, or in a hotel, or in a tent.

It is really strange, that advocates would think it both necessary, for learning and saving, and also a sacrifice, despite being part of a global American dream. How can all these examples of success stories from nothing exist, and continue to be advocated, while maintaining beliefs that there is good opportunity in America?

> "It is required to suffer and have risks for any life improvement if one is starting with few resources, and it's good."

Not only is it "good" it's been a "dream", a "real possibility", drawing people from other countries to follow similar advice, with good expecations, and not expectations of dangrous risks including criminalization and permanent poverty.


*[More to come]* 

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>


## <a name="if-the-news-isnt-interesting-others-likely-became-less-interesting">If the news isn't interesting, others likely became less interesting</a>

*Friday, June 16<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>4:30pm, ASU, Phoenix, Arizona, USA</time>

*Or, using the news to, in advance of socialization, know if socialization is worthwhile.*

In the earlier posting below, it was discussed that people tend to think they are conveying their personal value when they discuss current issues on the news, which may relate to politics or religion. If some major event or movement exists and is in the news, people will think they can convey their own value by talking about their position and thoughts on what the news has shared. Notice they do not discuss, or seldom focus attention on, issued considered closed or settled, or old, or out of memorty. People really do focus on what has been presented to them recently on the news and media.

Now, suppose nothing of interest is going on in the news. Suppose there are no major events, and no major movements. What is presented on the news may appear more mundane, less interesting or catastrophic, and perhaps less related to personal worth, that is expressed in shared thoughts in conversation. Now, having less of interest to talk about, and less that is perceived valable, there will be less that appears to connect what they wish to talk about with the larger world around them. They may become more interesting on communicating about what is nearer to them, or what is more of personal social interest.

In order to have something to think about, to convey self worth, it appears there is a complete reliance on news and media sources to have something current, that appears larger than their own social context. Otherwise what people will discuss and talk about would be spatially local, and appear basic, and more like small town talk.

It may be possible to use the news and media as a way to recognize what people *could* talk about, to keep themselves interesting to others. Maybe people are not conveying their own value as much as they are keeping themselves interesting, they think, to have attention.If one can observe the news, and media, and roughly guess at the probable thoughts probable minds will be having, one can then avoid having any conversations with people who would only say what is expected.

People who would oppose such a view, would not have a reasonable argument, since having expected conversations with others is not anything anyone really advocates. If too known, too repetitive, and too expected, a person will look for other sources of stimulation and interest. They do not owe interest from poor sources of information that's too predictable or repetitive. But interestingly, it does appear to be a common thing in etiquette, for people to think they are deserving of being heard, regardless of who it is they want to take attention from. However, behavior and other recommendations clash with this perception of rudeness, in trying to manage attention.

It appears possible to simply periodically observe the news and media in order to estimate the relative unvalue of the thoughts of others. However, if the news becomes of better quality, it is not clear that the thoughts of others outside the news would become any more valuable, given the news is more sophisticated than they are.

> "If the news were more sophisticated than most of the audience, and more informative, they audience would not be able to copy it into their conversations, or have reasonable positions."

This seems to provide additional information, regarding why regular people seem so perpetually unuseful as sources of information and quality of conversation. Even if the information sources get better, until it exceeds their sophistication, they won't be elevated. It would make it obvious that instead of listening to others, the news is adequate on its own.

But if the news is of poor quality, then thoughts and reflections on what is conveyed may appear to exceed what the news has provided, making it seem as though regular people are more valuable, but that is only an illusion created by having simpleton-news.

The relationship between the news and demands of others to be heard suddenly, about what was on the news, by listeners, is a strange topic. It clashes with what is taught in education: one should direct one's thought and attention to learning from valuable and trusted sources of information, not everyone. People in academics would likely greatly enjoy people in their environment in which they can have conversations about what may be more valuable, versus regular people from the public who decide to rely, contrary to what is taught in education, on the news and what is given in the media. And each other! The respect wanted to the process of listening to people reacting from the news, because it is democratic, is simply contrary to what all have been taught. 

More basic pieces of information supporting the view that higher moral behavior, and better ethics, requires a method for managing attention, in a way that is more consistent with what is taught in higher education, and what is more consistent with rational selection and habit building.

> "Choose your friends wisely"

indicates a non-democratic viewpoint that most accept. Expanded upon it's:

> "Direct your attention to what is worthy, excluding all else."

Of course, any attention to something, completely excludes all else that could be attended to.

One ought not choose plain friends, who react to low news and stimulation, with a probable mind, that is probably low quality. Going further to attention to all, and not just people, one wants to have a smart family, and not a randomly generated family! One wants to reach intelligent books, and not nonsensical misinformation. One wants to have a nice environment, maybe one more heavenly, to use an analogy that the low people use. 

Nice things to have, hear, and see, and smell, etc... Not people reiterating the news, in a canned fixed-patternlike way.

You interacted and shared the news according to a fixed pattern, known-inferior?

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="inability-of-others-to-contribute-useful-thoughts">Inability of Others to Contribute Useful Thoughts</a>

*Friday, June 16<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>3:45pm, ASU, Phoenix, Arizona, USA</time>

Just moments ago I was reflecting more on what it is other people can really contribute that is valuable to me conversationally, or informatively. 

Earlier I mentioned that most people have highly probable thinking, as opposed to those who are more intelligent, and are not too into common sources of stimulation (socialized probable thoughts), who have less probable thoughts, more likely to be separable from common social thinking. These people are less worthwhile as targets of conversation, or as worth attending to when they try to force their presence or messages on your attention.

Oftentimes when someone thinks they have something valuable to offer, or complain concerning, it has these two aspects:

1. It does not include private information.
  - Their value would not exist in their privacy, and perhaps their privacy counters their value.
1. It often includes what has been on the news.
  - The information did not come from their mind. Rather, they watched TV, took in some highly probable thinking, and reacted to it.

People do have a tendency to relate important thoughts to religion and politics, or current events in the news. They obtain their sense of their own importance by their support or non-support of various religious or current event issues, which are put in front of them. These are probable pieces of information they did not create. But more importantly, they are unable to create topics of interest. They depend on these topics to have a reaction to them that somehow creates value, they think, relating somehow to themselves.

In democratic nations, by reacting and supporting or opposing a view, or happening, one thinks one has automatically become valuable, because there is a supposed inclusiveness in the democratic system, which is thought necessary to keep it going. However, this is a very unreflective way of arriving at self importance, and anyone can do it! Even those with probable thoughts, or copies of thinking from the news and media.

This also relates to the view that young people really do not have valuable thoughts to hear. Around end of high school, and early college years, young people begin to think the way to show their value is to participate in common disagreements that are current to their time period. Their thoughts are considered something worthwhile in that it shows they are getting involved, and are doing something adult-like, consistent with the ways that government and entertainment function, according to some unspoken words about timeliness. This is why they talk about LGBTQ+ism and gay rights so often.

However, adults also instantly discard their thoughts oftentimes, seeing their activism as naive and well, practice at becoming an adult. There is something bizarre and foolish appearing about young people zealously supporting something they learned recently on the news.

What could these activist kids have to offer to politics, if they did not find something from the news to react to? Would they be creating things anew, afresh, to share with us, including new improbable thoughts, and improbable solutions? Or, is it more likely that these kids, like the adults that think their activism is cute, really just repetitively choose topics from the news, and pick some side that seems to exist, to team regarding it, and talk over it or gesticulate openly, with zeal sometimes at rallies, using probable thoughts, conversation and sentences, that can be known in advance?

Let us imagine an approach to understanding whether or not any regular people will have something of value to offer, or not. One can first think, well, what has been on the news? Also, what are the repetitive supposedly important common religious views, and their possible relationships to news events? Ok, now what are the ways that people team and oppose each other? Knowing these things, one can fairly predict, without extreme accuracy, but good accuracy, the kinds of things people will say. "I think gays should be allowed to be married," and "I think women should be able to have equal pay," and that "student loans should go down, and debts forgiven." What of this is of value really, to me? What can they say or do that would convey from them to me, something of a useful exchange, particularly given that, someone like myself would have something interesting and new to contribute, and not something merely a routine "unsolved problem"?

I was walking by a guy at Arizona State University today, and he tried to get my attention for something not worthwhile, and not well communicated, and I thought to myself:

> "What could he really do for me, LGBTQ+ me?"

Now I'm required to disclaim that I'm not against something one might cherish concerning current events in LGBTQ+ welfare. But instead, I'm going to say "One cannot infer what I think from this...""

But back to this thought "What are you going to do, NEWS me?"

This really does appear a reasonable approach to handling information from others particularly when the person who approaches, or is wanting of information spreading, is someone who does not appear to have anything obviously valuable to offer, from a fair sizing up of their face and body, an clothing. What does anyone share that is new, interesting, improbable, or valuable in relation to educating others. If one just reflects: "This person is a private person who really cannot share without believing they risk their own life, and when they do share, is in a common news-fed way, relating to instant antagonisms between teams... Going on probability, their minds will be probable. I can safely ignore."

Going on probability the minds will be probable, really does allow one to unlisten to all that people might say, knowing in advance that really, people are disenfranchised and have nothing to offer. 

They actually go further than having probable thoughts and probable minds, but join in a system of voting and politics that is channeled and controlled. They "joined in" on a news system and information sharing social process that makes their minds more probable, thoughts less interesting, more in control.

If I decided, as a media organization owner (I'm not that), I could simply raise a new topic of supposed political importance, and watch people become self-important. I could predict and watch how they would team. Their superficial thoughts, and wild anger act activist rallies that might result.

If I created an issue around marriage, I could predict in advance most that could be said about the topic, that would be unvaluable, that would be common too. Their preferences can be seemingly known in advance, because what they would probably think, with probable thoughts, that's political and religious, would be what they think raises their own value. Raising their own value with their words and actions, they are communicating, they may not realize, their supposed preferences.

I don't believe their behaviors would indicate they have the same preferences, particularly considering what they keep private, but I would be expected to *believe* them, when they are talking in a context that is supposed to be showing their value.

There is an attentional process that is reasonable here, that could be added to the relationshp management part of life, fitting into the attentional management process I've written concerning. It is that you can expect that people will try, when they want to convey their value, something that seemes canned and related to the news. For that no listening is required.

Just now I noticed a thought of interest. If people are canned, they need to know the ways in which they appear object-like and not humanlike in their behaviors. If they are more object-like, they may dislike their own self-objectification. They may come to recognize that their behavior is a simpleton-pattern, self-objectifying and predictable. It is much better for me to oppose that politically and one method of opposing is by not listening to them. 

Recalling additionally, that one only hears what is near, or what has temporary access, there is no rudeness in not listening to what has merely presented itself, while all else, that has not been presented, has gone unheard. One can simply not hear along with all else that exists that is not heard. This had to be written because there are people that think that anyone who is present needs to be heard. This does not work well when the thinker considering listening has value, but those around have little to offer. That one person, and important listener, who many want to listen to him/her, has many more situations in which they really need to decide not to listen. Whereas the people who want to speak, who people don't want to tell anything to, can believe that all need to hear, for having no instances of people who want them to hear something.

More on this topic later, but a tentative supporting confirmation exists above in refraining from listening to people who are effects of news.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="inability-to-intuit-that-significance-precedes-persuasive-language">Inability to Intuit that Significance Precedes Persuasive Language</a>

*Thursday, June 8<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>12:49am, Santa Ana, California, USA</time>

Today, just now as I was reflecting on the posting below, [The Life Categories, Language, and Brain](#the-life-categories-language-and-brain), I came I think to a solution to the issue of communicating new significant thoughts, or ideas, to people who are unable, apparently for reasons of having a differently organized mind with respect to language, including words and relations, and knowledge. There is an excessive expectation in thinkers, including myself, who have many significant ideas, to speak and write in a way that is accessible and persuasive to others. The ideas had, which are significant, already involve language immediately available to thinker. If a person is strong at communication and verbal thinking, then already that thinker, will use language alone, independtly, to self-explain, summarize, and develop upon the same thought. Communicating alone, there is no special need, to go any further on persuasion; believeing the thoughts already important, the thinker is persuaded by the idea's meaning and interrelationships with other knowledge, and relationship to life and the environment, so there is no audience requiring any pressure to accept some learning. Persuasion is a kind of pressure applied, to get others to want or succumb to a messageor learning. Oftentimes, people do not want to hear new ideas, or accept them, or understand them. Oftentimes they cannot understand the messages. This is due, partially for having different brains with verbal mappings, (Ref further into [The Life Categories, Language, and Brain](#the-life-categories-language-and-brain)) and relationships. So when a thinker, who already understands and can communicate an idea already understood, and already understood to be significant, tries to speak with others, they either don't understand, or resist somehow, and we think that plain or simple language and persuasiveness will overcome this, and make them able to think what the thinker does. There really is a want, for the thinker to have an audience who can reiterate with understanding a confirmation of what was communicated. They want to hear that others are understanding and *see the significance*.

This a solution to stay aware of this, for someone like myself, because there isn't a great reason to expect myself to change how I speak, for others who either won't understand or won't be persuaded. The idea that simple language is required, is missing that that an audience will really not resist what is heard once understood, or that they can understand. Furthermore, the thinkers like myself, believe already that the thoughts *do include plain language*, which explains the irritation had, when others expect other words and other ways to express. Sometimes they want examples crafted for them, or special illustrations. If the knowledge is missing in someone to quickly recognize the significance, then what is needed is more knowledge, and not plain language or illustrations. How they get the knowledge is something of interest. Certainly if they can arrive at a similar enough language organization of brain, they will have a better chance at understanding, like anyone who ends up actually understanding already. But how do they arrive at that? By learning new vocabulary, and getting prepared with new teachings and relationships, etc... This resembles trying to teach someone something new, to get them to a greater sophistication, to finally arrive at the more significant thoughts. This takes time. That it takes time, already debunks the idea that the significant thoughts should have another kind of simple land persuasive expression, for *immediate* understanding. The duration of time required to arrive at thoughts was ignored and is actually necessary. Instead what was substituted was "you need to think more simple and do certain steps, before I can understand or accept", but this was only a false path set by the audience.

> The requirement that a thinker have simple or plain language, and be more persuasive, is a false-path misdirection, of those who may not be able to understand, and may not have a short pathway to understanding something important.

These people will also say, "it isn't important" without understanding. They'll say "if you can't it simply, you don't know it." This last example, is plainly a way out for some audience members who know they are not smart. A thinker who arrives at a mathematical treatment of a topic, that in mathematics is said to be "elegant", has arrived at a great level of simplicity in complexity, that an audience will never understand. This means they have not lacked simplicity at all. They have not had a way to persuade, or provide knowledge, to people who could not have had enough time to learn the information, or people who never could learn the information. The requirement set up for these thinkers, is a requirement of instant communication. But for significant thoughts, this is not possible.

This creates an issue for people, like myself, who have highly important significant thoughts often, using language already felt to be simple, in communicating with others. I think now, reflecting on this, that the reality, a reality resisted, is that people cannot understand and cannot be communicated with, regarding highly important thoughts. There is a want to share share, and give to others but they cannot receive it. Not only that, they don't want it. The proof that they don't want it, is the false expectation of instant persuasion simple words without new knowledge, is for making the thinker have more work to do, for no achievable goal. It is often also a way, to make the thinker believe, that their thoughts are not actually understood by the thinker.

Again, a thinker who has really already had a significant idea or thought:

1. Knows what they thought, and identified it as important.
1. Has the words required to have to begin with, to arrive at it.
1. Can speak about it using the words they have.
1. Words had already, include all of the simple words.
1. If the thinker continues thinking about the same idea already understood, they will re-use their own vocabulary.
1. To have the idea, new words are not required, because that would imply new words are required for learning thoughts, already learned. Since learned, and known, the vocabulary was sufficient already. Nothing additional is needed.
1. A significant idea, is one with many associations.
1. An idea with many associations, has many words related, including simple words.
1. A thinker who is good at communicating alone, and is highly verbal, will be able to use those words, already known to be associated, to contiue thinking about, summarizing, and expressing the idea, independently. 

A thinker has all of this already. Simplicity and many ways to say the same, including ways to say what is important about it. Why they like the idea. Why they think it important. Why their minds led to that point, of having the idea with the words they learned already.

The have all this

AND they want to give it to others.

For free oftentimes!

People in the audience are not "loving" if they are not understanding the causes of not being ablel to receive it, and are ready to call it nothing, by saying that the thinker doesn't even understand their own thoughts. "If it's not simple, then the thinker doesn't understand it" is really disgusting and repulsive. It's ungrateful and anti a willingness to share. Consider the best things are:

*Significant.*

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="the-life-categories-language-and-brain">The Life Categories, Language, and Brain.</a> 

*Tuesday, June 6<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>5:34am, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA</time>

At the time that I first created the life-categories that were intended to provide a mechanism for staying aware of the various parts of life requiring attention, it became clear that there were many different categories that could be chosen alternatively. The primary focus of selecting those categories, were related to my specific purposes and my interests, and what I thought to be important areas of my life to manage and collect information regarding. I spent time over a period of two years using and revising these categories. 

After a long period of discontinuing active development of my personal form, I returned recently to work on the life categories in the development of this Book and Journal. I have altered the priority of each of the categories to suit my recent needs. However, I did not much alter the actual categories used. This was due to my recognizing that they really were adequate as they were, provided complete coverage of my life, and could be modified at any time depending on my later needs or goals.

Another early observation relating to the categories of life is that people with different interests and backgrounds, and people wanting to choose categories using differing languages, would choose other words, and not the words I was using. Part of the plan of these categories was to allow for modification, and anyone who wanted use the system, modify it, or create systems of their own, would want to use their own words, as long as additionally they had adequate coverage to encompass all that was important to them in their own lives.

The key criteria of the life categories is maximum coverage with an easy to manage sized list of categories in which to focus attention on parts without forgetting any for too long a period of time. Additional information on this approach can be found on the section about the personal form itself. Our purpose here differs somewhat from a development on the life-categories themselves, and is more about the importance of resisting excess structuring and restructuring of them. They are modifiable, of course, as I said, but one need not dwell excessively on organization, once it is known that comprehensiveness is attained, and the requisite attention is achieved, by usage of each of the categories. Some may experience a desire to represent life in a way that is extremely accurate by revising and re-revising this list of life categories, which is a kind of taxonomy of a person's life, as it relates to categories of interest and behavior. It may not be immediately recognized, by systems of taxonomy, like the taxonomy of the earth's animal kingdom, can be organized and reorganized many times, and is incomplete and not complete. The current nomenclature for annimals surely does not adequately represent the structure of the history of animal life and the ancestry and relatedness of the different organizms whose names appear in the lists of extant animals. In different languages outside English and Greek/Latin, there are other languages, like Chinesse, which could be used to name the animals differently, and alternatively represent their ancestry and relations, according to different assumptions about how life on Earth evolved. Within the taxonomy of primates, including humans and their ancestors, there would be differing opinions about the lineage, and the meaning of various fossils that have been proposed to have latin names, with partly guessed positions and ages in the history of the human lineage. Even the human portion of the taxonomy, Chinese and other language speakers would likely greatly disagree with the current usage in English/Latin/Greek, and probably the name "Homo Sapiens Sapiens", which redundantly includes the word "wise" twice, for our subspecies, would not be accepted. 

Working on my life categories, and thinking about larger issues about how to choose names and arrange them according to life-structure, I have recognized that the objective to perfectly describe using relationships of words seems an incorrect approach. If we look far into the distant future, it can probably be seen that even if we diversly created taxonomical systems to represent the history of earth's animals, we would not find a final taxonomy that represents it in the way we want, in all the ways we want. Here we might say the representation of the animal kingdom as we have it is somewhat like representation of the earth's globe in different map forms. Without an exacting knowledge of Earth's history, we do not have a globe; by that I mean, we have to rely on maps that are not precise like an image of the Earth from outside, including all the spatial information desired. Being able to image the earth well, we have good globes that provide the full information we are wanting. When we can't use a globe, however, like map making in history, when maps were made with incomplete views, different types of maps that had differing levels of descriptive truth were created to fit needs. But these were greatly inferior to a spherical globe based on space-imagery. As an analogy, we can see that we do not have detailed history of the Earth. It is really lost and appears to be something we can only reconstruct somewhat poorly. Since that is the case, we cannot have a taxonomy that will be a final one, and instead have to rely on a  "partial map" to continue the analogy, of the structure of animal life. Since all maps of this life would be partial maps, Chinese Maps, English Maps, and maps from any other group creating it, would be unable to come to a desired exactness that is final. Moreover, being maps and not globes, different versions would be needed to depict different things desired, for not being able to show all that is desired at one time, in the right way. Maps look different in how they appear as partial maps because they cannot be spherical. Being not spherical, they have to make concessions in what they show and how. There are many ways to depict a sphere as a rectangle, or other geometric figure. Using other geometric figures, one loses sphericity. Cartographers, the map makers, have known that to create correct distances, representations of areas, and correct directions, require different partial maps with different geometric properties. We've seen the defects in maps, when we view a globe and see that Antarctica is smaller in appearance, than on the Merkator projection map, which shows Antarctica as the largest of all the continents. This map is one used in flattened form on Google Maps (if not a very similar projection), and that used as an instructional poster in classrooms. If one were to use language alone, entirely, to describe the world, without a globe, one would be even more limited in how to describe it. In times before we had a globe, if we tried to write in words what was in the partial maps, we would have something in language alone that is of perhaps less quality still than what is in the already limited maps. Notice that our system of taxonomy for representing animal life does not include a globe with a video of how life evolved from the beginning. So what we are doing with our taxonomy of animal life is using language to describe what we have only very incompletely known in visual and historical data.

Language is an important cause as to this limitation on our ability to represent, and accurately describe, parts of the world and our own lives. Focusing more on the topic of our lives, recalling our lives are still natural phenomena in the world, with more or less complete potential data, that we simply are unable to capture, we can see that again, we can use language to represent ourselves only incompletely. We have a similar issue of trying to use simple words to "correctly" represent the structure of our behavior and interests, and parts of life requiring our attention. One person would not choose the same words as I have when I started my own life-categories. Someone from another language, would think that some words are more central than others for classifying nearly the same things, but this too would have effects on how to organize things further, or more fully describe life, when details are sought, and interrelationships are considered. The categories of life are not distinct. For example, while I'm focused on the category of fitness, I'm often aware of other categories like nutrition, which includes cooking, and health. One could combine them all into a single category creatively if one wanted to. However, I kept them separate because of how I choose to organize my own behavior and attention. Similarly, one could use more than 15 categories or less. It is optional how many categories one might use for organizing and desribing one's own life or the lives of others.

However, there are other interesting things worth considering here aside from this admission about some arbitrariness of choice of category arrangement, and of admitting that options appear to be necessary for others to find the categories useful for their own ethical interests. This relates to the observations above that there seems to be no way to choose, in any case, if numerous options are created, to decide what "finally" represents life most accurately, or most usefully. Usefulness is a primary consideration too, like in map making for navigation. This system is intended to be a tool for aiding in life's planning, information collection, and behavior management. It appears that there is something fundamental about the need to resist trying to organize and reorganize this, and I've actually gone through the process of doing such reorganization a number of times. Early choices do not seem much worse than later choices, and in some ways they were better. I've made improvements which are instrumental and allow for more precision, but I could be more precise still. However, it is extremely useful as is. If I were to spend much more time organizing and reorganizing, it would be much like the organizational problem many people feel when they are wanting to find perhaps some "perfect" system of organization, that feels "finished" and not merely extremely comfortable and useful. Many people have the urge to organize and reorganize to the point in which they may feel a sense that they cannot solve some perplexing problem about their specific situation requirng organizing. It may have not come to their attention that there is no final solution, and that instead, there is a level of good utility and usefulness, that relates to certain comforts the person has. This same tendency to organize perhaps too often without a great gain in usefulness, to get to a mental comfort level, exists in wanting to represent life on earth totally accurately, and for organizing one's entire life categories in a way that is best for one's goals and improvement objectives.

Now it may be seen how large this interest is in organizing and reorganizing things in life, and this is particularly true of the organization of one's mind. Consider that most aretrying to problem solve in their mind variousissues that they face, which requires words and language, and decisions about their importance and arrangments. People will find new words to describe more accurately situations, and make distinctions and new words, in order to arrive, again, at something that feels comfortable and "more final" regarding answers. If situations are complex, then again there is this feeling that perhaps more time organizing and finding new information and vocabulary, will allow for describing it entirely accurately, with all problems comfortably solved. Culturally, as knowledge progresses, we have new words and new information which leads us to think we are doing better and better at describing situations, and solving problems thereby. A great example of this is in our development of medicine, with creations of new words for illnesses and new words for underlying things which are important for finally understanding what was and is important for treating and curing illnesses. Still, it can be noticed that medicine is far from any final taxonomy or description of science as it relates to animal life, including human life. The taxonomy of the animal and plant kingdoms are still related to an understanding of medicine, as one needs to know a bit about relationships between animals that are test subjects, and humans who are administered drugs. The drugs are coming from chemicals and plant organisms which also need to be well understood to research further, what might better resolve medical ailments. So while in medicine alone this issue exists regarding wanting to find a taxonomy that is final, it relates still to the taxonomy of the entire earth and the scientific descripiton of all that exists. It does also touch on physics and chemistry and the origin of life, and sources of matter. Medicine also relies on technologies that make use of x-rays, which implies similarly, that information about electromagnetic spectrum is also required for advancement. It is not clear which, if any information about the universe would be unuseful for the further development of medicine and its description and taxonomy, and larger taxonomies.

Here we can transition to considering the importance of the brains organization and representation of language. Earlier I mentioned that different people in different cultures using different languages would use different words and relationships to describe the same world and lives within it. This implies that their brain structures have different organizations than the brain structures of those with different vocabularies in different languages. Between individuals, too, there are different selections about what words to use, and anyone who chooses to independently create life categories would have different words and relationships in mind between the words. All would be doing something related to trying to describe life and the world, and in this case, a person's own life. But it is important to recognize, that this really does imply that people have different brain organizations relating to the words stored in their minds and their relationships. Also, the readiness of the brain to utilize some words over others. If everyone on earth was asked individually to describe their life using a set of categories first that they could choose, and the relationships later, using sentences and paragraphs, they would all do it differently and their way of doing it surely relates to the organization of tissues in their brains.

While driving around New Zealand this year, I was reflecting on some significant observations around this and the requirements of learning both for humans and for computing systems, that utilize machine learning for standalone use or with early artificial intelligence. The brain, and computing systems, rely on training in order to develop further. Networked computing systems in machine learning rely on huge amounts of information and training in order to finally "learn" what was presented to it. One machine learning system would not have the same resulting memory or physical representation of what was learned, depending on how it was exposed to the information and training, and the order of exposure. Also, different machine larning systems, learning for example, different plants on earth and their relationships, would see images of plants, and videos, and words, from data/information sets that are different from each other. If one software company created one machine learning system, and another another, they would not have the same result, and would not have the same sophistication. Different AI systems resulting from work at software companies would result in consumers having preferences for one over another. Sometimes consumers would want only one superior option, and other times, some consumers would want one that does some things well, and another if it does other things better. The point is that these systems would have partial views of the earth's information, would have learned differently, and would have different internal representations of what is thought known. Additionally, the behavior of the system would vary. The above can be very quickly understood as an analogy for human life, since many people and many learners are exposed to information differently, with similar effects upon the brains representation of that information, with the effect that their behaviors differ. One person if they seek to describe their life using life-categories and sentences/paragraphs related to those categories, would do so differently. Some would do it in a nearly globally superior way. Some would do it well in some ways, while others better in others. Some finally, would not do it so well. This depends obviously, like with computer systems, on the level of advancement of the brain, or the quality of the system. It simply varies from one system to another, if human or if not.

As I was relfecting on the organization I chose, I noticed that some categories have larger interest than others, and some words are called to mind more easily, and during the time doing the personal-form collecting data on my behavior, some categories were much more useful than others and received more attention. This would relate well to my actual life as it would describe what I was doing versus what I was not doing at all. My life has depended on learning in a way that has been different than for others. I was exposed to different languages, culture, and regions than other people. I learned in a school system that emphasized certain books and courses and goals that were not emphasized in others, particularly if one considers this internationally. The sequence of my learnings differed from others. There are things others learned early that I learned late. There are easy things I have never learned. The implication is that my brain structure is different from others, and this includes, of course, words and relationships between words, and different strengths of associations, and readinesses to bring some words to mind versus others. My creation of my life categories relates to the vocabulary I prefer and my history of learning as it relates to describing my life.

The way that life is presented is not planned entirely. Different people are exposed to information and situations and stimulation that is mostly organic, or asystematic. What this means is that it is not systematically prepared information, quite often, that supplies the learning experiences. In my case, I've done lots of reading and have had an extensive education, using materials that were systematically prepared. However, there is some lack of overall planning even in these materials which leads to an organic or asystematic aspect to the overall learnings even when they were well prepared by experts. Most of my life information, of course, came from experiences with nature, and with people, which was unplanned an organic. A cause for my system of ethics is that I, like others, were not prepared with a systematic and correct overview of all learning, particularly learning relevant for the rational planning of one's life and one's behavior, and training in relation to that information. This Book and Journal filled this void, and I had to create it myself. The life categories are an important ingredient in this overall effort. 

Since my life-categories related to learning that was organic and asystematic, any systematization created is from a brain whose organization is different and somewhat arbitrary compared to brains of others. Again, others would do it differently. And again, others would however, arrive at similar results. Even if myself and others did much to develop this system, there would be no final result that had all the strengths one wanted all at once, with no limitations. Each system would also, I noticed, be very comprehensive, and likely one could utilize one or the other, without too much loss. Similarly, like the brain itself learning, the system can be changed and switched as needed.

Focusing now on the organice way that stimulation is learned from the environment for humans, animals, and for computing systems, it can be seen that it is a necessary requirement that minds would all differ. No two humans have the same mind. No two machine learning systems would have the same result. The way to make two minds or two systems the same, would require similar hardware and biology and precisely theh same perspective, and learning of the same systematically presented materials. This is of interest to my article Abandoning Equality, which is a writing about the expectation of inequality between people, and not equality. Likewise, we here can see, that people would differ greatly just because they learn things in an organic way, in different places, and in different languages after languages are acquired, and in different times, and in different orders. Historically, people were extremely different from people now, in how they organically intook information that was available in their environments.

A system of taxonomy and life-categories which describe extremely well would be approaching what we might call an optimal system, that is approaching what we find desirable in utility and accuracy and detail in descriptiveness. However, we have already said that each would have strengths and weaknesses, and without extremely large minds, and without complete information, there could be no optimal finished system. Instead, what we would be looking for are roughly optimized systems. Humans, it should be noticed, do understand their own lives and can self-describe in ways that are much better than certain animals and machine learning systems, presently existing. Also, some people, who are considered less advanced or deficient, are thought to have ways that are less optimal for self-understanding or describing with words. Having a system such as that here described indicates it is possible to have still a better system of self-description and self-organization than which commonly exists. It appears also, of course, that this system is a novel system, and represents a state of high advancement in taxonomy of life and ability to self-describe. Others, not having such systems, however, are on considering the advancement of life on earth, and culture, pretty good methods for self-understanding. What may be said, then, is that there are some who have more optimized ways of self-understanding, and additionally, people in general, are a trend of earth neuroscience towards brains that are more optimal than what existed earlier, in the development of animal life. So there is a range of optimization on this topic. Also, I stated that people learn in different orders and in different ways. If we take people who are already somewhat optimized, taking optimization to be a relative thing and leaving plenty of room for growth for millenia to come, it can be noticed that this system can also be learned by others. Also, I stated that others would choose different words, but can have quickly the same comprehensiveness. This means with some time, alternative usages of a similar system such as this would result in others being able to have differnt systems of categories and descriptions that have properties related to optimality.

This is a promising development as it relates to potential learned of another approach to ethics and management of one's interests, training, and behaviors. That was not my initial thought causing this direction in the conversation, however. What I wanted to indicate, is that with different exposure to information, we have different brains with different words and relations that are somewhat trending towards optimization, and that being useful already, as parts of living minds, adapted to life and living life somewhat effectively and well, that there are similarites of interest between brains even though they differ. The structure of lexicons and relationships of words, and models of life-categories, and life, vary and are partly optimal, and are useful. This offers great support of the view that trying to find a final arrangement and taxonomy is an incorrect objective, although improvements and progress is had and can continue; and it also supports the view that allowing for change in the system via learning, and change of needs is valuable; and also supports the idea that there is some interchangeableness in the system, in that different people can be effective with different sets of categories, and that one person can use this system, and develop or change it to their benefit, and that people use it differently over time. Overall this supports the idea that human brains and machine learning systems find optimizations on a spectrum related to organic learning from the world's stimulus.

If one were to graph the life-categories and relationshps, and caluculate relative importance of words in their behavioral usage, frequency of thought, perceived priority in life management, what would be found is something that appears unplanned as a model. It would look like a set of nodes, and connections, with different weights and values. This would relate, in various ways, to underlying brain, that itself has the characteristics of having strong and weak associations, and different networked nodes, with differing thresholds related to readiness to think one thing or another. These look somewhat unplanned and tangled in appearance. The structure appears somewhat like what is thought to relate to models created by artifical intelligence software for optimizing problems in the sciences. These systems also have networked nodes, relationships that are stronger and weaker between nodes, with different information stored in different ways based on the exposure to information. All of these indicate that what results in the optimization that has resulted, from learning on organically presented stimulus, has an appearance of non-humanlike organization. In other words, what your brain looks like, what your eventual system of life-categories and relationships in the categories, and description looks like, and what the machine learning system/AI system looks like, is something that is not systematic, like what a human would plan, wanting to be really orderly and exacting in drawing it out. Humans want a kind of orderliness and structure which appears to not approach what this tendency is towards optimization. That is not to say that optimization does not occur from deliberate human planning; but it does appear that human planning results of rigidness in results. Square buildings, rectangular hierarchical diagrams, straight ways of lining things up, and not other ways of organizing which are closer to those resulting from organic natural growth. It is also noticed, that trying to arrive at an optimal way of organizing over and over, results in something dissatisfying in the rigid, straight lined results, that don't solve all problems and don't have properties of final optimization. 

The interesting webbed and irregular networked organization resultin in nature, and in the brain, and in the linguistic representation not excessively planned or controlled in a system like this, and the similar structuring in machine learning systems, which were created by observing natural minds and how they learn, appears to approach optimization, whereas, the rigid and sometimes obsessive organization into linear structures trends towards optimization somewhat less. Also, the organic way of learning, which is asystematic, we would think, would already have such characteristics potentially, and we see also in the growth of animals and plants in nature, similar odd webbing and patterns of growth that have curves, nodules, and less exacting geometry related to our way of learning mathematics. Our way of wanting straightness, and precise geometrical figures relate to our way of learning those things. Similarly, however, the beauty of nature is compelling, but we are unable currently to use what we see in nature that appears irregular to guide our way of organizing much of what we do. Instead, we rely on the rigid and simpler structures that were made available to us in education. What nature has optimized is much more complex and much less well understood. This includes the nature of the brain itself, and it's tangled way of organizing information that it was exposed to.

There are many systems in nature which grow in response to stimulus in the environment that results in what we consider optimized solutions, that are really somewhat optimized solutions, including examples like the arrangement of bone tissue, muscles, plants relying on sunlight, &c... bones have an odd appearance relating to the handling of stress and strain, and has a webbed like appearance, also with lines that are not perfectly straight, and nodes and grooves. These are optimized with relationships to nutrition in the environment and ability to handle gravity and forces relating to specific behaviors. Plants grow in unusual ways, not straight ways, in order to have adequate sunlight, and the result is something also somewhat of a networked organism, with webbed vascularization, and networked branches and connections between branchs, with differing sizes of branches. Much in nature follows this type of pattern, and the organization relates to stimuli coming from other sources.

At this juncture, it may be noticed that this can be taken quite a bit further if one includes all of earth's history, recognizing that ancestry includes strong and weak associations, more growth in some areas and less in others, and an irregular total graph. The ways that ancestry happened related also to stimuli in the environment, and social forces, and disasters &c... which relate to ability to reproduce or not, for individuals and entire groups of people. This here would be where the topic would relate to a natural and somewhat optimized description and representation of the history of life on earth, and its growth, improvement and evolution. Here there would be a good point of departure, to in detail consider Darwin's theory of evolution and advancements in evolutionary theory. Notice already, there were views as to the supposed "perfection" in nature, from the religious, which exists also in evolutionary scientists, who admire greatly the seemingly extremely well adapted traits of plants and animals, ability to live well under various conditions in their environments.

This system of nomenclature is simple, yet is comprehensive. It allows for change and adaptation. It can be expanded on to include additional detail as far as is necessary or is instrumental for describing a life and for aiding in the planning of ethical and moral behavior, and general training for goals and objectives. Limitations on ability to represent, relate to optiimizations that exist from not trying to be too rigid with organization. Any system or taxonomy aiming to describe life appears to have a limitation that exists already in describine and naming the animal kingdom. The description of the animal kingdom, welldone, would have those characteristics of organic development, and partial optimizations, similar to what we saw as necessary in brains and computers systems. Language itself, being formed on the basis of organic infomration exposure is also a system that has optimization properties that when graphed would show patterns of non-straightness and webbing like what is seen in nature. It is expected that a system of life categorization and description, is one that will have properties like this system, and would probably require a starting point like this system anyways in order to advance to later stages.

*[Finished at 7:41 pm in 2 hours and 7 minutes, without edits, partly blined typed, without a reading, without spell or grammar check. Typed on a flight from Honolulu to Portland, Oregon]*

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>


## <a name="the-intelligent-who-cannot-find-real-games-to-enjoy">The Intelligent Who Cannot Find Real Games to Enjoy</a> 

*Tuesday, June 6<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>7:48am, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA</time>

*Or: The choice of child's puzzles to mathematics and reading.*

Since young I wondered why people seem to have been unable to notice that the puzzles offered by mathematics, are sufficient to supply the same or similar interests thought to be had in doing popular puzzles. I think it is arguable whether people truly find published puzzles that fun, even though they do them, but assuming they provide some amusement, or some somewhat pleasant way to use time, when nothing else seems better to do, in order to focus on what can be done instead that is at least as enjoyable or more enjoyable, but more importantly, useful. Math, reading and learning area all available activities at the time that puzzles are chosen, except that people don't imagine them to be options, perhaps for not recognizing, yet, that there are similarities.

Also, when young, I was exposed like others to a range of popular puzzles and puzzle games, that existed in our culture, in print in newspapers and periodicals, and in other types of physical games. I remember playing parlor games, card/strategy games, chess, crossword puzzles, puzzle-piece image recreation puzzles, word finders, and so on... The list of puzzles experienced by anyone from my generation or older, in a print or tactile format must be very large. Sudoku also existed, but not until I was older, in my later teens perhaps. 

Here I will focus on chess, Sudoku, and crossword puzzles. These are all puzzles thought by the intelligent to be worth their time, perhaps for all of their lives. People in the high intelligence community, like Mensa, may have extra interest in puzzles, and Mensa has been a publisher and releaser of various print and tactile puzzles that are or were new, and wouldn't otherwise exist.

These types of puzzles, chess, Sudoku, and crossword puzzles, have some things of interest in common. For example, none of them model life, the way that it is claimed, mathematics or the sciences do. Each option, limits people's minds as to which games to play. When the time comes to choose a game, one recalls these, if one plays them, and then plays them again. If the game is chess, this can be a serious problem, as the repetitiveness of the game may not even be noticed by those enthusiastic about it, and they may choose that game, a bit too often.

These games, are also not great learning opportunities. Not only are they not great learning opportunities, people have difficulty explaining why they are worth doing. Sudoku somehow "ensures one's mind stays agile and, well, works". Some will try to borrow the utility of math and claim it exists in Sudoku. Chess, others will argue, is a kind of intelligence test, and of course, it is not, but certain people will think that showing some skill is a way to show that some smarts exists in the player. Chess, likes sports, also has an unadvanced analogy to life, people think, forgetting that such an analogy, could be quickly written down by, *someone*, and once known, doesn't require playing chess. Chess includes a skill of using certain mental powers, somewhat different than those for Sudoku and crossword puzzles, but these powers, particularly visual-pattern recognition and planning powers, exist doing almost anything complex outside. Crossword puzzles, supposedly advance one's vocabulary, by playing similar games over and over, with exposure to new hints at words, and new word problems and solutions. However, I think it irrefutable, the puzzles are often poorly created. The word problems are ill conceived, and answers are, well, often not answers. They words that fit into blocks that are solutions to hints, or word problems, that just sometimes slightly or partly relate. "I can guess the word that fits into the box, but the puzzle part, is well, not that well authored." The crossword enthusiast, like the chess person, and the Sudoku person, thinks they have some special vocab by doing it. But clearly, the Stanford-Binet test, can let them know what their relative standing as to vocab is, and in one sitting. I.e. Crossword puzzles, chess, and Sudoku, and many other games, allow one to pretend one is smarter than one is.
Doing these things over and over really does indicate some dysfunction in choice of activities.

Sudoku is another game, of a single type, that can be done repetitively, with a pose that one is doing math somehow, and one is good at math. However, math does not do one thing over and over again. Math has a problem set that could be done forever, with new and different real problems, and solutions that can be applied to life. Sudoku doesn't appear to have many analogies to life. Also, Sudoku really would be something that a mathematician would be interested in, as a single problem only. A mathematician would be strange, to keep doing the same problem over and over after understanding it. It is a math problem that scales in complexity. In this way it is like the size of a chess board, which could be much bigger and include more pieces. Sudoku has easy puzzles, and harder ones, but the format is recognizably identical. A math problem exists in, perhaps, saying what is identical. The test author would know what that is very likely, but the audience would not. Meaning they may have not recognized what it is yet. However, that didn't stop them, from playing over and over the same problem-set.

Sudoku specifically prompted me to again and again, become somewhat annoyed, at the inability of people to see how pointless and wasteful the activity is. Mathematics textbooks include sometimes thousands of new problems, each different, that would create skills that can be used for real creative productions and learning applications. Somehow, the way in which people were exposed to math, and learning, has caused them to not realize, that all of that learning really could be fun. Particularly, if the posturing about the puzzles is true: "I like visual problems and like to relate them to real life learning" (chess), "I like vocabulary, which learned would allow expression, and perhaps new ways of thinking and communicating about life" (crossword puzzles), and "I like digits, which can be used for real world scientific applications, and for personal hobbies and projects" (Sudoku), then why not use what is more useful instead, related to learning that you would claim is vital. Is that a hard puzzle to really solve, that math and reading, and learning, with books and math, and logic, and science, really are better.

One might think that "doing math" and "reading" and "writing" or doing other productions may not include enough to do, somehow. But the comparison of things to do, in the entire available things to do in math, in reading, in writing, and in personal projects, is more than three puzzles. Instead of three, you can substitute in the number of puzzles you yourself can imagine as options, that you would really choose at the time that you decide, you need something boring to work on. That number is very small and finite. People are not powerful at considering options, when the time comes, to do something other than, sitting and staring, and contemplating good actions. Reading really includes all books and things written. All writing, really includes, all you can develop with your mind into print. All learning, really does include discovering something interesting, if looking in the right places, with good questions, and does not require pretend analogies to life, like chess. You are actually learning things in life, that can apply to life. In math, there really is every textbook ever written, that has millions of problems contained. The objective of this math, is usually real life problem solving. Problems are created for the puzzle mathematicians, so one does not have to become a real mathematician to enjoy it. In other words, you can just buy textbooks and have plenty of real world puzzles, created by someone else, just like Chess and Sudoku. Sudoku, has this special thing in which not only is it one type of problem, authored by someone else who maybe was a mathematician, but the users believe they are doing math, without any mathematical expressions of any kind. The test-user, is not a mathematician or puzzle-mather. They aren't doing math at all but believe they are because digits are present. Here as I write this, I can feel the Sudoku puzzler's presence, wanting me to at least notice, that they do mental arithmetic from elementary school, while they do Sudoku. But they'd want me to say it in a way that makes it sound better, by leaving the elementary nature, of addition, and whatever small skills and tricks are employed.

I have noticed, since young, that some few observations about these games, are enough to make them unworth my time and attention. Let's consider some examples. Each greatly diminish interest, but together they make the games seem foolish.

- *Some puzzles are conveniently scaled easy puzzles, made to be just hard enough, for you to think they are unmasterable, but easy enough for you to learn how to play them.* 
  - Chess is an example. Chess is simply a scaled mini-puzzle, like tic-tac-toe. It really is fully-deterministic. Some claim ineffable freedom exists in chess, but that's because they don't really honestly have a mathematical approach to thinking about chess. It is a game that is set on an 8x8 board, and not a 64x64 board.
- *Relatedly, if made smaller, they become children's games. What does this say of the slightly larger version? Sudoku could have less rows and columns. Crossword puzzles could have shorter more common words. Chess could be on a 4x4 board. Making them smaller makes them easier games, too easy to want to play. Well, what does that say about the *slightly larger games* that normal average adults enjoy? Some people even call the games of other adults "Child's games", noticing perhaps that there really is a similarity to the games children were playing. They just got slightly more complex. 

*[More to come]*

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>


## <a name="cannibalism-and-wartime-disrespect">Cannibalism and Wartime Disrespect</a> 

*Friday, June 2<sup>nd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>9:04pm, South Pacific, Australasia</time>

If I'm not mistaken, there were instances of cannibalism during Vietnam. Likely in all or most of the wars that have existed, in which dead remains would lie a long period, and hungry soldiers were around?

> How do you not taste the enemy?

Also, during the reactions and response to 9/11, some of those angry, and in favor of military action, were calling the middle easterners "Sand Niggers". Once again, I think most wars, had phrases to disrespect the race and heritage of the enemy peoples. Formerly "equal people, and culturally equal national friends".

It seems, does it not, that warfare includes, obviously, disrespect? It also includes dehumanization, and instances of cannibalism.

I can't imagine myself at any time in the future really respecting thoroughly and soldiers or veterans.

Respect the anti-sandniggering cannibal?

This sort of respect is not really required, even if people think it is required during

celebrations.

Remember the disrespect.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="i-didnt-invent-your-privacy">I didn't invent your privacy</a> 

*Friday, June 2<sup>nd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>8:45pm, Sydney, Australia</time>

Zoology on a personal level can continue, including speaking about explorations and findings, and learnings, without a concern about your views on privacy—your views on sensitivities and offense. 

I didn't invent your privacy.

Are you sensitive about your inventions?

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="people-didnt-solve-conversation">People Didn't Solve Conversation</a> 

*Friday, June 2<sup>nd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>Sydney, Australia</time>

In everyday experience, we hear and become involved in conversations that are undesigned and unplanned in how they are conducted. A conversation is thought to be a simple thing, when it is not a meeting, with an agenda or a purpose in which a number of individuals are present. Still, in that context, it appears there is no plan or design, and no variety of methods, in which those meetings can be carried out effectively. One method I am aware of, which appears very antiquated, for handling meetings in certain formal settings, like in politics, is Robert's rules of order. However, this method appears extremely suboptimal and unfit for continued use in our more modern context, and what was created has the appearance as an early attempt at meeting structure and process, and not a well developed process.

The purpose of this specific note-taking is more about the simplest form of conversation, between two people. A simpler form of conversation exists within one person, but this is the simplest in which there is more than one participant and two different minds. Conversations between individuals do not seem to have a planned structure, or a method with much variety; instead, they are done in a way that is not well understood in the sense that participants cannot easily describe the method they are using. Oftentimes, conversations between two people have a back-and-forth like nature in which one person begins speaking, speaks for a period, and then stops, or pauses. The pause or the stopping is a time in which the next speaker thinks either the prior speaker has finished or the prior speaker has provided enough silence for opportunity to jump in and start a turn. There is turn-taking in the conversations. In this turn taking, people seem to desire to have some parity in time taken to speak. This is part of the reason for equal time allocations in Robert's rules of order. There is a desire for fairness in the conversation, for equal hearing and speaking time. This seems to be wanted in most conversations although in some there is a clear power disparity in which one speaker is given more importance or more time, and that may happen when a younger person is speaking with an elder, if someone is speaking with a paid expert on a subject, or if there is something else special about one of the two participants thought justifying temporary unfairness; i.e., if a speaker is having a birthday, or if a speaker is intended to be the focus of attention for having some special need.

These differences in situations create a difference in the expected parity in the turn taking of conversations, but what is interesting is that still there is a desire, particularly if one is moderately talkative, that there is some turn-taking that trends towards parity.

There are other situations which indicate that value in conversations might be developed further if one speaker gets much more time or all of the time in a conversation. It may seem odd to hear that a speaker may get all of the time in a two person conversation. However, if one considers that one signs up for lectures, and pays for time with an instructor, not to speak but only to listen, take notes and learn, without asking an questions potentially, then it seems less odd. One could have had arranged time with a lecturer to perform the same lecture to them as a single audience member. Notice, however, that when there is no audience, and there are only two participants, it does seem odd that the lecturer would not suddenly become a plain conversationalist, interacting in a normal way with a student. When not in lecture, students may believe they can get personal time from their instructors in which they can have a conversation that seems to trend towards parity in exchange, or taking turns, in what is said. There is an idea that respect would result in some consideration for the students thoughts, and that suddenly there may be equal time between the two participants.

The format of speaking and pausing and accepting a transition to a new speaker is a bit strange in my estimation. It appears to be something lacking in sophistication, and the lack of planning and method seems to result in conversations that are lower in value. A student sitting in lecture listening to a high quality professor may be involved in a conversation that is of superior value, and this shouldn't be too shcoking if the listener is paying large quantities of money for the experience. Likewise, the instructor or lecturer may be very well compensated for only speaking and providing very little interaction with listeners. If there were a transition to another format in which the same lecturer were interacting alone with a student it is not clear if the lecturer should not still mosty speak while the student remains silent. Personally, not thinking my lectuers typically of this quality, I don't think this type of scenario would often occur; however, there have been courses I have had in which the lecturer really was doing a great job of informing me, and members of the audience, with very little need for questions or discussion of any time. Paying for high value thinking, I appreciated when lecturers could share their knowledge for the entirey of class time without hearing from any inferiors in the audience.

Another area of interest, aprart from time management in conversations, and the back-and-forth turntaking of discussions, is personalities and vaying values in the participants. There is not equality in conversations (ref [Abandoning Equality](abandonging-equality.html), which is clear when one considers parents speaking with their children. In almost every conversation there will be different values between participants, that will relate to diverse traits and skills and knowledge. Some converse poorly, and some rudely, even if they are not contributing value. In these scenarios I see again, a lack of method for handling the conversations. Still there appears to be an expectation of parity in time, although some talk too little and some steal too much time. Some do not listen well. Some of little more than what they'll say next. There is a tremendous variety in the ways conversations can unfold between people with differing traits, but there appears to be very little variation in the key methods employed for managing conversations. The mothods wouldn't be defined for us in any designs or plans, but there would be exemplars of excellent conversationalists who know how to manage many kinds of conversational situatinos so as to extract value. But these socially skilled conversationalists probbly still adhere to some expectation of partiy in time, and in some unstated rules about provind equivalent back-and-forth.

Historically I've been quite skilled at conversation management, but I confess I greatly err on the side of ensuring the other party feels they've had some degree of parity in the conversation, or perhaps more time than they should. I wonder now if there is an alternative method or approach that can used that could yield more value, that would greatly decrease the speaking time of others, and their opportunities to speak, including at times when I'm waiting to think of what next to say, or to find the right way to express a complete thought. I'm also not especially desirous of managing the emotions of the participation; it may be that, more valuable interactions will include ones that less satisfying to the other participant. Occasionally provoking frustration in the other may nevertheless result in a better conversation exprerience. I am thinking about my own benefits as they relate to the conversation; however, it is not clear to me that this wouldn't also result in a more valuable conversation *despite* any lessening of positive feelings, or creation of negative emotions. 

A more mature perspective in work is one that understands that interactions have a sort of cycle to them, or, that work goes on and the results of the interaction can change greatly in time. I've had negative conversations with colleagues that lead to long term friendships or connections. Put another way, in general, it appears a leader in an organization is a better one if they know the likely outcomes in long periods of time of all sorts of events, including ones that are negative that turn positive. This knowledge can allow one to perceive and know that future effects of seemingly negative events may better than worse.

There is also a science to changing ways of interacting with others so as to gain information about the relationship quality. This is another example in which less positive conversation experiences can lead to longer term gains in certain kinds of knowledge.

This is an exploratory posting in this subject. Prior interests in conversation have been about using them to appraise values of relationships, and for utilizing written formats instead of spoken formats to better track what was said, and to watch developments. In my history I've been greatly annoyed by the inability of others to recall conversations, making it difficult to have good interpersonal growth. I've also been interested in the quality of conversations as it relates to intelligence and creativity. Here I'm more interested in the strangeness of the expectation that there would be parity in conversations in a give-and-take format, where participants are not equally valued. It appears that this may be something very difficult to change due to possible potential social side effects. One example, is that in conversations with certain parties, they think any disagreement and potentially other modes of discussion as threatening authority, and may be willing to take actions simply for having a different way of transacting, even if there is no legal cause for it. I was thinking about this today as I was considering that certain authorities or people in businesses may want to take action as if they had legal power, simply because they percieve there is disagreement, or a challenge to their authority. Nevertheless, I intend to do some testing in my own conversations to shift away from the typical method of give and take to:

- periodically speak at the same time as others to keep my side going during unwanted interruptions.
- to keep speaking without giving time to the other for extended periods of time such that they may wonder if they would have an opportunity to speak.
- to end conversations as soon as I'm done speaking, or after providing myself a considerably longer time to talk.
- to never respond, or seldom say anything, and to stop listening, to people speaking to me, to tune them out or otherwise unsure their speaking is diminished, to increase the value of the conversation. (value to who is a topic of interest).
- to have longer delays in speaking but to repetitively inform the other that I have more to say and to be patient with my pauses.
- to speak more slowly sometimes but without saying any less.
- to speak in a way that is more approaching my value even if it goes beyond certain age-related obstacles (I.e. unconcern about the age of the person I'm talking to, and/or speaking as I often do as someone older, which is normal given my history in business and well developed backround, and status as retiree).
- To interrupt much more often with certain people. 

I may follow up with some results of these experiments in the near future.

Initially I think I will start simply, by either taking all of the time, or by giving none of my time. Doing all I can to simply control pace without stopping speech, with interrupting, and demands for continuation during pauses when unfinished, and by failing to listen while not saying anything to someone speaking to me. It appears silence is usually an option even in cases where there may be some demands for interaction.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>


## <a name="rudimentary-advice-and-adults-ready-to-do-little">Rudimentary Advice, and Adults Ready to Do Little</a>

*Friday, May 26<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia</time>

<br /><img  class="ui huge center image transition visible" data-src="childish-advice-mattanaw-1-web.jpg" src="childish-advice-mattanaw-1-web.jpg"><br />

Often we see advice in social media that is rudimentary and childish, about how to "never give up" or how to accumulate small changes by consistent self-improvement. Here is an example of childish advice given by adults. The receptiveness of the audience, indicates that the advice provided still has not been learned, despite how basic it is. If learned, it would not be reshared often, or shared by those who are elders. But it appears elders are quite receptive to messages such as these. 
 
Consider the advice in the image above, which was shared by an executive who appeared to be approximately sixty years old. People receiving the message were receptive an willing to reshare it, and comment on it as though it were exceptionally useful, applicable to their own lives. However, it appears to me that this is a very defective meme that should be recognized as excessively rudimentary and repetitive to anyone who is not deficient. It is like learning about compound interest yet again, as an elderly person, but with a formula that isn't a formula at all, but merely an example of exponential growth arbitrarily selected in a juvenile way.

Consider:

- The view that such a message is still useful to an adult is an indicator that many perceive themselves to be very close to immobility regarding self-improvement. If this is the case, why suddenly would such a message encourage a change. Instead, it is a sign that such changes cannot be made despite decades of rethought.
- The equation of compound interest is well known and taught in high school. If it cannot be remembered or has not been self-trained, then by 60 years old, if the advice is still shared, it is evidence that the person has not learned it, thinking it still valuable. Reminders should not be necessary any longer either.
- People who are highly intelligent who still find messages like this useful appear to not have utilized their intelligence on their own behavior or development on the sophistication of their advice giving or receiving.
- The equation is falsely to suport the point, like a bar graph skewed to be persuasive and misinformative. 1.01^365 isn't any representative model of growth on consistent behavior, but is instead used to say "Look, .01 will increase fast over time like compound interest." Unlike compound interest, it uses a useless equation without any variables. "You'll become a 37" which seems a reasonable increase from being just a one. But notice that if instead of 1.01, 1.9 was chosen, then you would equal 5.559866e+101, a number so large it can't be written out by a calculator. "You'd be that big a number." Alternatively, if 1.000000000001, then you'd be approximately 1 later too.

The time it takes to explain what is wrong with such memes is enough for readers to TLDR response anything that debunks the message. The result is that such messages go undebunked and people continue to use them, share them, consider them as worthwhile unreflectively. However, they've not realized that this message includes childish content that shows their advice is primitive, and exhibits their inability to improve, or use models that use real math, but instead uses childish ways of demonstration.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>


## <a name="some-comments-in-mensa-to-someone-claiming-special-knowledge-on-real-creativity">Some comments in Mensa to someone claiming special knowledge on "real creativity"</a>

*Monday, May 15<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>Tasmania, Australia</time>

[HighIQ Community Member], appreciate your history in there. You can see my history here too if you're interested: LinkedIn.com/in/mattanaw. Very large creative demands on my mind that had to result in decisions and tangible products of various types. I would disagree with you on this statement, selecting it out as being, still, the key area of contention in your earlier comment: 

"But I was talking about what I personally consider a deeper kind of creativity -- what I consider real creativity."

Here is where I would say, there isn't any "real creativity." Coming from a background in Psychology, if you are making the claim that real creativity cannot be measured, I would say you've missed operationalization of the concept, which requires validity tests, which would come to a point of "how do we measure this?" Taking your statements as relating to a hypothesis about deeper creativity, you would need to construct a scientific experimental design, that would allow you to collect data to show that it isn't measurable. Furthermore you would need to define the word clearly, and have parameters relating to other things that are measurable, allowing for the planning of data collections, that relate to statistical significance, which is a huge miss in scientific studies, BTW. If you think this through, I think you will find it is a way to separate out something to make it have a special place, that is not measurable, and maybe not physiological. Using measurements of what exactly would allow you to show this? If you developed such an experimentation, I think it would result in a reductio ad absurdum to your hypothesis assumed true, which would show that it is really measurable, and not something different fundamentally from creativity. But doing such a thing you would create greater clarity on creativity.

But I really do think, on grounds of introspection, and knowledge of Psychology/neuroscience, that the growth of productions and mind is related to active creativity and neurodevelopment that is physiological and measurable. If there is something underlying what is in our awareness about our creativity, which is certainly the case, then it is physiologically explained, and not introspectively explained. The physiological explanation would include why you have creative growths you are aware of, but also those you are unaware of. On this point, again, I think there isn't a good reason to have a special thing separated called "real creativity" that is somehow more ineffable. 

This error I think is similar to the one found in the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance in which the author writes, extensively, about how quality cannot be defined and never could be. He creates a special somewhat mystical place (you didn't say "mystical" I know), for "quality", pushing it into ineffability. When I read it, I thought "But I can explain quality..." but what I could not convince this person probably, is that it doesn't have the special place he wants for it, for other reasons he has that he did not share. Probing further into your statement, I would wonder, what this view achieves for you personally, over and above your reasons for thinking it truthful. Why do you find this idea attractive? Does it help you have an improved self-concept in some way? If so it may not actually be as defensible as you think, and I feel very confident I could explain the experience in detail. 

If you were to share with me what your experience of real creativity is, in detail, I think I could explain why it is measurable and better explain what it is, and relate it to my experience. But, on a hunch, on experienced judgement, I would guess if you think you can't measure it, you may not be able to explain how you experience it. But then that makes it a physiological subprocess under your awareness, and neuroscience would explain it better.

Going further, pretending the statements came from someone else, someone I don't know well, like you, I would say maybe this view also relates to religion. And in that case I would also relate it to other things, like a belief in a soul, or a belief in an afterlife, in that creativity somehow connects to something supposedly "deeper, more real, more meaningful that simply cannot be expressed." But spending time with me would really reveal, I think, that it can be expressed, but expressing it shows that it is not that, and not connected with those things; and that more detail would be surfaced, than the detail which is shared. Indicating that it hasn't been thought through completely.

You have other comments earlier in the group that indicate to me you have some interest in the creative process and what creativity means for you. I write about this actively. I would be interested to see what you have written about it, and can also share with you what I think might relate from my own writing. Or else share more thoughts like these that also, sort of feed my other writings in various creative/productive ways.

[Note: Written in 14 minutes.]

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="can-you-unpriest-a-monk-or-is-a-monk-alone-a-priest">Can you unpriest a monk, or is a monk alone a priest?</a>

*Friday, April 19<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>Queenstown, New Zealand Time</time>

Can you unpriest a monk, or is a monk alone a priest?

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="a-pathway-to-recovering-brain-material-related-to-memories">A Pathway to Recovering Brain Material Related to Memories</a>

*Or: Using Content And/Or AI to Support and Recreate Brain*

*Thursday, April 13<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>Queenstown, New Zealand Time</time>



<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>


## <a name="when-can-you-sell-a-photograph">When can you sell a photograph?</a>

*Thursday, April 13<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>Queenstown, New Zealand Time</time>

A common question of interest is whether or not photography is an artform, or whether or not soon it will become too easy to be artistic.

Related to this question is what of the experience is artistic, or produces art, that is supposedly in the photograph. 

Finally, there is the question of what photos can be sold, and what the justifications are for selling and procuring certain photographs.

Before I being to say more: pointing a phone at something of interest, that is itself artistic is an artful find. It can be used to preserve something artful. It can be used to archive artwork, and to collect meaningful visual experiences. Sometimes the experiences themselves contain something which precedes whatever medium is used to do any more. Some won't take photographs, or as many of them, because they think that the photography diminishes rather than enhances this experience, which may lead to artful productions later, of the same kind or other kinds.

When I was in my teenage years I used disposable film cameras, and would refuse to take pictures of myself, or to hand my camera to others, to take pictures of me when they volunteered kindly to do so. To me, at that time, a photo was going to be a memorial of what I saw that I enjoyed, from inside my head, through my own eyes. Even seeing myself on a photo from my camera indicated there was an experience someone else was having that I did not have myself. I wanted my camera to be like my eyes in a way. Since then I've decided that recording my life is valuable, and took many photos of myself and my companions in a selfie style. 

Like this complaint I had, regarding photography and the art, and what it means in relation to experience is not something that others have not thought about, sometimes in other ways. Recently I had a conversation in which my companion was saying there was something he disliked about the order in which photos were taken in relation to experiences had that would prompt photographs. He also did not like that a photograph cut out or selected only a portion of the experience. To him the experience was more than the photographs produced and somehow the photographs falsified themselves, and diminished the experience itself; so instead he would not take photographs during certain better moments. Related to these complaints were various ideas about photography as a less artful form. I will not say more about these but he had numerous ideas about why he had some distaste for photography.

To some of the above I was able to provide what appeared to be persuasive points. He seemed to agree with some counterpoints, although I would admit still, there is something about photography that certainly *can* take away from natural experiences, which were the focus of our talk. I will share these persuasive points momentarily.

In another conversation just earlier, I heard from a photographer who was telling me that he did not like to take photos of other artworks, thinking that it was something approaching theft; or if not theft, trying to recall correctly, something not his, and instead he preferred to photograph natural settings, landscapes in particular. There was something of an issue with the relationship to another art producer, versus a relationship to nature.



<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="revisiting-the-parenting-plan-as-providing-reason-to-live">Revising the Parenting Plan as Providing Reason to Live</a>

*Thursday, April 13<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>Queenstown, New Zealand Time</time>

*[Note: Unedited as part of a study in editing]*

I'm not fond of the phrase "Reason to live" thinking that there are many reasons that can be provided when a persons birth has a high probability of resulting in a fulfilling life. I prefer instead to think that a person may have a very large set of expectations which individually and collectively contribute to a likelihood of a satisfying animal existence.

Many have complained that they need such a reason to live. Instead of already receiving something from their parents and environment as children which show, clearly, that forethought existed in a certain kind of plan, also answering "what is my plan?", they are produced on sexual desires alone nearly.

I have said before that people ought to have a much better strategy regarding if/when to have sex, not faulting individuals who have a deterministic history resulting in sexual acts; but that more generally people can get into population planning, STD management, relationship risk management and life plans for selves and future others, and by doing so create some distance from history in its prior lack of strategy. Before desire alone, like animals, ensured that new animals would be produced. Reflecting on how humans procreate, they really do act similarly. Where there would be claims to plans, and strategy, of parents who pretend having made sound decisions, instead are lack of writings that support, and lack of anything that can be given over to the child to demonstrate that such planning existed before they were born. Even among married couples who have ideas about what a family may consist of, is lack of clear vision of what their kids would look like, what there characteristics would be, and a probabilistic idea about what their advantages in life would be, that would create a high quality life as a person.

Instead, later, oftentimes, parents claim they need "salvation" and a "life savings", financial and spiritual, to make the next "better life" available. It is told also that this next life is not one that is assured. "Reasons" are taken from sources claiming to have a way to survive life well and be "granted" an afterlife, but these do not come from parents but from ancient peoples instead. A modern and thoughtful plan would not come from such a source, and would be satisfied if it came from parents who were concerned about the freedoms of their future children, to live and learn in a way they choose for themselves, but with the traits and advantages which make a good future likely.

Suppose a parent or parents were to create such a plan for their children. In this plan would be somethihng relating to expected appearance and traits of the animals which would relate to traits the parents themselves enjoy. For example, a parent who thinks themselves unattractive, might produce a child also unattractive, and potentially unhappy. A parent who is unhealthy, may produce an unhealthy child. A wife who does not thoroughly enjoy the traits of her huysband may not like her child's traits; and if so, the child would not enjoy perhaps their relationships with women, who think similarly, or a mother, who might deride their traits which are the same as those deridden in her husband. The same is true the other direction, considering the traits of women and their desirability.

This plan relates to all traits which can be known that are of interest for determining if a life is a beneficial one. Intelligence is to be considered. Region where one lives needs to be considered, which means situational information is vital. Level of income and money, and availability of resources is required. If not, parents can simply create poor starving children, and claim there is a plan from another source, rather than realize that they animalistically, as animals too, created children out of sexual desire.

To me, having done perhaps a large amount of work which would prepare me to formulate such a strategy, I think I could arm my children, if I were to think it likely they would have genetic traits worth having, with a plan that would make it clear that the vision was appropriate to the decision for having them. "My father really did have a high expectation that if a baby was born, it would live well later, and I'm that child. He could not envision my traits in advance, but had a probabilistic expectation that I'd have an excellent life. This also gave me some direction as to what to do in life to continue to have such an expectation: by using my beauty, talents, living situation, region, and many other factors to my benefits, to have a happy and fulfilling experience."

Such a plan would be truthful and honest, and this would create a parental bond of trust. A plan coming from parents that is honest in its vision and expectations, and predictions, would be enough to make questions such as "What is my life for, and what is my plan, and what are my reasons for existing" unreligious, and more scientific, and immediately relevant.

*[Note: Unedited as part of a study in editing]*

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="modeling-skepticism">Modeling Skepticism</a>

*Thursday, April 13<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>Queenstown, New Zealand Time</time>

When you are theorizing, how do you model the level of skepticism appropriate to your thoughts?

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="updating-theorizing">Updating Theorizing</a>

*Thursday, April 13<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>Queenstown, New Zealand Time</time>

*[Note: no edits in accordance with the earlier mentioned project in studying editing.]*

An issue that exists in the scientific community, that is general to its work to be performed, and its manner of explaining its results, is the wording around what is a "hypothesis", what is a "thesis", and what is a "theory". All have had some confusion or concern about precision concerning what a theory is apart from a hypothesis, and all in science are concerned with research and papers, in which a thesis is to be had and demonstrated.

There are several problems. Firstly, there is the problem of lack of complexity, since a hypothesis may be composed of several subhypotheses, revealing that a model would exist for each and every hypothesis which would relate to what has been thoroughly demonstrated, and what has not been demonstrated and is really "theoretic". The word "theoretic" has been used to discuss what is not demonstrated but appears to have truth. This confounds theory and hypothesis.Underlying a hypothesis containing nested hypotheses, and within it, are premises of certain sorts which are themselves complex, which come together, which are to form a rigorous scientific demonstration or proof, which has mathematical aspects. These premises are to have a logical structure. All together a work, or set of researched works, or works, is to combine hypothesis and logical structure to fully demonstrate, or prove out, what is required for the thesis. The result of this is supposed to resemble scientific method, in that the outcome of the work is really one that has the sufficient number of components and connections between components explaining thoroughly what is to be demonstrated. This includes statistical data related components, observations, experiences in other researched papers, and logical arguments which bring together all to really convince readers that the primary hypothesis is a true one.

Above more than one other problem exists in how these hypotheses are linked together, and what to call each independent already existing hypothesis, regarding its state of maturity in its own development towards becomine a theory. A theory is supposed to be something that has already some weight in evidence and prior work, and is trending towards truth accepted. However, since there are different kinds and levels of assurance as to quality of prior work, each theory and hypothesis really would benefit from having different names, and a different nomenclature, capturing what is uncertain about each.

A theory is a longer statement of sorts, and a hypothesis is a shorter statement that is supposed to be testable. Both resemble each other, but differ regarding the levels and kinds of existing work has been done to support both. 

A 'theory' is confused with 'theorizing' because a theory, we are told by some in the scientific community, is a statement of sorts in which theorizing has been complete. This confuses the language.

This brief writing is intended to reveal that a new nomenclature would support clarity around what a hypothesis is more particularly, and what its level of related skepticism should be. Arguably, theories which are secure in existing work are still hypotheses under this way of looking. Theories are still questioned later. What are the questions and concerns regarding theories which are accepted? Which are the questions and concerns about theories which are less accepted. Classify these concerns and you have the solidity of the theory, and hypothesis, and ways to talk about the solidity, apart from the usage of two words which have confusions.

More to be added later regarding what such a nomenclature may look like if developed, providing some pathways for the work of others, if I do not continue further to work on the issue myself, working around the words theory and hypothesis to simply provide more detail and clarity regarding what we might be skeptical about, and what might go past skepticism to natural understanding of the world.

Thu Apr 13 15:11:14 NZST 2023

*[Note: no edits in accordance with the earlier mentioned project in studying editing.]*

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="a-comment-in-the-high-iq-community-regarding-claims-that-certain-rarities-are-really-not-so-rare">A comment in the HighIQ community regarding claims that certain rarities are really not so rare</a>

*Sunday, April 6<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>Invercargill, New Zealand Time</time>

*A comment in the HighIQ community regarding claims that certain rarities are really not so rare*

Productions of folks don't seem to support this at all in my view. If we were to aggregate productions of each of those who are supposedly 1 in  24,500, we would not see quality or significance which is approaching what should be had on criticism relating to subtests of intelligence [Edit: for those who are IQ 176 vicinity]. For example, we would see productions which are thought to be of better quality, with better significance, and less defects (a subtest), less pattern mistakes (a subtest), less vocabulary sophistication or word combination (a subtest), less memory length of written statements and compactness of meaning (subtests), etc... through all the subtests. Less indications of visual/written match of ability, which indicates lopsidedness in productions. Why would there be lopsidedness of productions? Individuals who have claims such as this, are to be measured on productions to determine in what ways there is a match or mismatch with intelligence measures that are test based, because the skills used for the test are to be self employed in productions. If not there is lopsidedness that debunks.

In our experiences reading high quality materials of various sources, and artistic works, we can see how rare these are. Not that they need to be developed to this extent with practice for signs to be evident regarding non lopsidedness of productions and testing. A child can show productions that are showing that there is not a lopsidedness with less development and resources. 

Aware that Mark posts all that may be of interest including what is easy to agree with or not, I don't think this is a share indicating agreement, and so I don't anticipate any interpretation that I'm somehow trying to be contradictory with the purpose of the post, which is informative and for keeping folks perhaps current.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>


## <a name="if-we-dont-ever-do-it-we-are-patterned-away-from-it">If we don't ever do it we're patterned away from it</a>

*Sunday, April 6<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>Invercargill, New Zealand Time</time>

If we don't ever do it we're patterned away from it

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="explorations-in-greater-freedom">Explorations in Greater Freedom</a>

What hand symbols or gestures are you disallowed from using, in your freedom of speech, and how does that relate to artful symbology, and your artful expressions, which are symbolic and analogical, and meaningful, and communicative? What say you, Communications Doctorates?

*Wednesay, April 5<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>Invercargill, New Zealand Time</time>

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>


## <a name="my-history-of-writings-in-the-high-intelligence-community">My History of Writings in the High Intelligence Community</a>

and my book, [*Book and Journal of Mattanaw*](http://mattanaw.org#introduction)

[*Important Note: Unedited as a result of my ongoing study on editing, for some reasons provided below.*]

Thu Mar 30 14:14:21 NZDT 2023

Some may have noticed that my long history of writings in the intelligence community had characteristics that did not necessarily resemble writings of a book or academic articles. This was deliberate.

In order to carry out a personal project of building a website or blog, or a book, or any writing whatsoever that is expected to be sold, there must be content. There must be sufficient writings the justify the effort of collecting them together, and for anyone who has blogged, they know that there must be enough writing and material to justify paying for a server, a domain name, applications such as a webserver, and anything else that might be a costly investment. A complete book requires a design, and a complete site requires one also, but if there is no material to include, one designs a site or book before there is anything to put in it of value.

Recently I have thought of putting together a living will in order to make clear to people certain things I really do not wish to occur after my death even though that control does not exist in great measure. There are finaincial things of interest, and assets come to mind, when thinking of waht happens when one dies. But what also about one's wishes? Wishes is an expansive topic including how one is remembered, and how one's thoughts and productions might be used later, if one is an artist or creator. One would not want one's artworks to be defiled or used for other purposes. Similarly, people make provisions for their own bodies, so that their bodies are used in a way that seems compatible with one's wishes, if one takes the time to think carefully about what those are and is not satisfied with simply being buried in a cemetery only, according to custom's of others and normal practices where one lives.

I'm not here going to discuss fully what my complete set of wishes would be in life and at and after death. Instead I want to focus on what is relevant to content that might be created for a book, or website. How could these relate? Firstly, I have stated before that I am much averse to quotations. I would not want to be an author that is known for small excerpts of works unread, taken out of context, repurposed for intents that are customary or highly different from my own intentions. Like being burried in a cemetary according to the customs of others, I don't want my ideas to simply exist in someone else's context. Much better than this is to be understood. For someone like myself, I have already discovered it is not possible to be understood because the bulk of materials I have produced are too large, and will be much larger on development, for anyone to read in detail. But, if my wants were recognized, and they do not appear to be recognizable, people would think as they quote, that they have not fully understood; but part of my wishes would be that people simple recognize that fact, if any quotation is made. Being not famous enough for quotation perhaps, I wouold think the same of any excerpting, or selection of sentences, which results in a few words or phrases, or a sentence, or small number of sentences. Knowing that it is not interpreted correctly without a thorough reading is already respectful of the situation of the author, and of people's thinking more generally when it cannot be easily encapsulated, or cannot be encapsulated. That people are aware they need to read all or most of a work in order to fully understand a meaning, even of a component part of the work, is already enough, perhaps, for people to see that they could read what else exists to achieve that, and perhaps some might. Even if no one did, the recollection of my view on quotation, and short sentences, would be known enough to create the right way of looking at excerpts or fragments of what gets used, and what is remembered. Not everything can be remembered. People will select small fragments and excerpts.

As a retired, former expert software architect, trusted to guide international corporations and governments, I know well what an appropriate content and writing strategy is. I would be the person entrusted to guide all on this topic!

Creating my own Book and Journal has been a long process. It's not finished and is a work in progress that will go through all my life. Knowning *in advance* that such a process requires content to justify the design, I perused materials from brief articles with social intent rather than those which would be of academic intent. Earlier articles seemed very much what like short blog posts that one finds on the internet. Later, I became interested in sharing my mind, closer to its operation in real time, on topics that are often socially critical, in a format that allowed for errors, blemishes of various kinds, justified on grounds that such writings would be draft if found in handwritten journals, and would be forever in draft if in conversation, where many errors happen, but people listen; furthermore, unedited *streams of consciousness* writings, which we learned about in our educations as youths, have the strenghts of sharing something untained by editing. If I edit a work, I have not shared precisely what I was thinking and how I was thinking it. As a typist, I can really type as I think, and leave those thoughts in place without alterations. Doing this fulfill other objectives related to creating artifacts of self, but that writing is for another time in the same book and journal.

Being able to write in such a way that is somewhat similar to what is done between friends and amongst others in social media, where formality is not expected, and where much is allowed and permitted regarding sharing *authentic things* as people might say, I have been able to amass much content which could and was used for justifying the existence of a site, domain, server, design, and book. Since my book is also my living autobiography, and the reader is also experienced in social media, it can be seen that blending such social materials does allow for a timelined living autobiography. Suppose you were to collect all your writings together from social media, all your videos and photos, and retain them for yourself as a photoalbum and journal. Would this not enable you to create your own living autobiography, from what you've already done? The author knows and knew this has not existed, and it is a difficult thing to have and retain, and organize what has been put on software products not independently owned. These things are lost forever, and remain disorganized, with no way to download and organize those materials, to have them in the same way that photo albums and journals are had.

So much of my earlier writings are about my life and thoughts, but were very limited in that they did not provide my thinking as it related to earlier book plans which were more of an academic or intellectual quality. This also relates to somewhat undesirable expression in the form of sentences and short phrases, full of blemishes, which are nice too remembering life, that result in a misundersanding of sorts about what one is doing, and what one really wants to say, and how one would like to be remembered, or read in the future. I have stated above that I'm not in favor of quotations. Yet I made plenty of quotations myself, simply posting on social media sites that require a certain small amount of text and no more.

A reader who has seen much of these writings may be surprised that my intention earlier was to use my own writings as a source to show limitations about using these short writings, over longer ones. Knowing how some people think, I was aware that some could even claim there is a hypocrisy in someone claiming that quotes are unwanted or have fundamental issues, who also quotes, and uses short excerpts of text, instead of longer ones. 

As I said above, I don't expect that people would necessarily be able, or have time, to read enough to refrain from relaying my thoughts in a way that is not short. My practice also explains why quotation exists, and why people deal in short sentences and phrases, and why so many authors, unfortunately, have been disfigured in time, being shared only in pieces that could be had or recalled. It also explains somewhat, the interpretation of fragments from writings which do not exist entirely, that are still used and interpreted, despite a permanent lack of material which would provide an ability to interpret. Some fragments have been used to create false views about authors, simply because it could not be admitted that their works were lost. The works of many authors like Epicurus, Epictetus, Aristotle, and others are permanently gone. This implies they really cannot be known. Yet charitable interpretation to their fragmentary sources has not been applied in a way that is uncommon: to protect them from mythologization and fictionalization. Once cannot know an author if their works have been lost!

My writings to date have allowed me to build a considerable work of living autobiography, justifying investments, and now I can transition to writing more in an academic and intellectual way, that will help to explain my desire that people are rightly interpreted; myself included. If one cannot be righly interpreted, one can receive a charitable omission from making any further fictionalizing commentary! Or biography!

This writing is primarily to explain the earlier postings over the last few years. What they mean in context somewhat. They have enabled me to justify continuing writing and maintaining my publishing technology. Others will face the same issue as this when they plan any type of website, blog, or journal. Large organizations face this. What content do we have to share? How fast can we get content? What will fast content look like compared with slow, torturously edited and updated content? In my case I used content and materials suitable to my long term objective, that was faster. The fast content really did serve my purposes and is interesting in my estimation. It provides artifacts and data about my life, and a primary source commentary of the type of life I'm living, which is similar to the lives of others, who are contemporaries, like the reader of this posting. It enabled my objective of having a finished book, with the structure required to incorporate all my other productions, written or artistic.

What is difficult in this process is that one knows that the earlier writings are not the ones one would want to be interpreted using! One wants it to be finished! In my case I chose for structure and direction, knowing that later works would clarify earlier ones, and that I would not *finish* really, but would have a good product at death. But if I died earlier, all interpretations of my mind would have been done with fragments, and it would have to be admitted I would be unknown.

[*Written in 41 minutes with no proofreading and no edits*]
 
Finished Thu Mar 30 14:55:42 NZDT 2023

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

*Sunday, March 12<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>7:21 PM Wellington, New Zealand Time</time>

*You like the younger version of your spouse compared to the older*

## <a name="a-mathematical-proof-like-demonstration-of-preference-of-youth-to-age-in-aesthetics-from-sexual-preferences-and-cultural-example">A Mathematical Proof-like Demonstration of Preference of Youth to Age in Aesthetics from Sexual Preference and Cultural Example</a>

Recently I made a statement that someone I had some relationship interests with was hot to me, although she was older. I used the example of her daughter to confirm why she was attractive. This indicates that there would be a preference I would have for her younger self to her older self, which is true. I utilized the younger self to make it more clear why the later version was attractive. Just like how someone would argue that their wife is attractive to them, for being a progression of the younger that is pleasing.

An ethical maxim that existed in recent history was to check the appearance of your potential spouse's parent to confirm that they will still seem attractive to in their expected aging. If the parent of the potential spouse did not seem attractive, there could be reasons for not going forward with a desired relationship. Since marriage is a long term commitment with unexpected changes in time, information regarding expected change matters, where it exists. There is a family resemblance in aging, that is medically utilized. It would be medically utilized for predicting age related conditions which relate to visible appearance.

Reasoning steps:

1. At the beginning of your relationship, you find your spouse attractive.
1. Considering the incremental changes of your spouse in time, you use the historical maxim (a heuristic axiom or theorem), to know the future appearance, and a series of appearances from youth to old age.
1. The series of change of appearance is decremental with respect to preference, also using the historical maxim as a justification for continuing a relationship, versus preferring it more.
1. You find the mother attractive, but less so.
1. You will find the daughter more attractive to the mother.
1. Now relating this to my actual scenario: I find the mother attractive.
1. The daughter is an example of the earlier appearance of the mother in the series.
1. I find the daughter more attractive than the mother (but ignore it).
1. I find the mother attractive.

This isn't done obviously and requires more steps than simple mathematical steps alone (needs statistical steps). But the mathematical component of the proof with the series does seem to have a usable generalization.

It might be fun to find other ways to express this proof formally, so that you can explain why you like younger people and older ones too. You may realize or help others see that, there is a series in aging as it relates to attractiveness, with this assumption already existing in culture, and an expectation that it would not relate to specific numbers of years of age. (One can make this same argument in favor of Indian arranged marriages). I leave it to the reader to decide independently what it might imply regarding various parts of relationship ethics.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

*Saturday, March 11<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>3:38 PM Lower Hutt, New Zealand Time</time>

## <a name="making-good-encyclopedias-available-offline">Making good encyclopedias available offline</a>

In my effort to solve issues of homelessness and wealthy camping (they relate), I have discovered the issue of needing to be stimulated with information if in the back country, offline, for extended periods of time. If satellite technology is available and energy too, then this is not an issue. But at present, even with Starlink, it's not very movable or feasible, or simplistic to resolve. If one is in another nation, in a sedentary remote position, Starlink may solve it. Either way, offline resources for backups in these conditions are needed.

I came to the conclusion that scanning the Columbia Encyclopedia would be wortwhile and would provide endless reading material. Wikipedia would be excellent, too, but it is largely not usable. Some notes on this topic were exchanged in the high giftedness community between myself and another very intelligent person. He suggested that The Tormont Webster's Illustrated Encyclopedic Dictionary is another good option.

Below are some notes of mine, to his share, which was in response to my comment regarding the Columbia Encyclopedia, which I own but have not yet scanned.

Response 1:

After looking at Kiwix, wondering how they could earn after noticing the difficulties of handling a 92 GB complete English wikipedia, I saw they are doing their work for enabling people all around the world, with offline computing only. I looked for other offline ways of using wikipedia, and there are none, unless one writes what Kiwix does, and I think that's not worth it, due to unmaintained data APIs. So my little project of working to have off-grid reading, went to the discovery that this need is the same as for gifted kids worldwide. Gifted kids without resources. I think it is an amazing idea. Intentions may not be amazing from what I'm seeing since there is an odd board group or advisory panel for it. But, it seems cool. Much better would be unlocked wikipedia with easy html download. For this group and any folks enabling the gifted here, and I know there are some, I think this may be another thing of interest. So now there are three somewhat compact large-scale encyclopedias that are potentially usable for offline use (the one in OP for scan, and the Columbia Encyclopedia for scan. They seem about the same length and are reasonable for scan and storage).

Response 2:

<Kind commenter>, btw, I'll have the Columbia encyclopedia in my possession not too long from now again, when back temporarily in AK. I was thinking to scan it for offline use. KiwiX is the offline wikipedia. It seems glitchy and a little problematic, but an alternative. Since the Columbia Encyclopedia it is out of print, I may be able to share it, once scanned. In that case we can all have it. I was wanting it for off grid camping and vacation, for ample reading with minimal connectivity and load. I'm carrying just one book now and already it feels too heavy, and it isn't enough reading material. This encyclopedia looks very nice. A lacking of the Columbia Encyclopedia is that its illustrations are not in color. Makes a little more classy though, but nevertheless, color is wanting here and there.

This information should be valuable to anyone who wants a condensed form of high quality encyclopedic reading material.

These comments were from within 2 hours ago, posted in a private High IQ community within Mensa.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>


*Tuesday, February 28<sup>rd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>8:17 PM Wellington, New Zealand Time</time>

## <a name="mattanaw-says-you-need-not-join-moments-of-somebody-elses-silence">Mattanaw says you need not join moments of somebody else's silence</a>

Rock Lizard.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>


*Saturday, February 25<sup>rd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>5:46 PM Wellington, New Zealand Time</time>

## <a name="plans-for-the-evening">Plans for the Evening</a>

Today's plans for the evening, on returning home, after enjoying some time at the gym in Wellington, and perhaps a jog doing some exploration, is the following:

- Work on incorporating creative productions process workflows into the mind and habits.
  - Process and push new media album to cloud.
  - Server checkup.
- (Mental Development) Productions: Save new diagram on sensory-attentional process.
- Environment: Add music to playlists while being entertained:
  - Listen to male opera singing, and vocal training, and scales.
  - Listen to instrumental scales, and whistle along.
  - Put Etudes from Chopin on playlist, and if there is time read along from sheet music.
- Evening Routine: Get things ready and plan for tomorrow (including camera). 


<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>


*Thursday, February 23<sup>rd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>2:36 PM Wellington, New Zealand Time</time>

## <a name="suffixed-and-prefixes-and-interfixes-that-didnt-dictionary">Suffixes and Prefixes, and Interfixes that didn't Dictionary</a>

The potential dictionary size is vast if you simply build on your already attained mastery of wrapping and interstitialing fixes.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>


*Thursday, February 23<sup>rd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>2:36 PM Wellington, New Zealand Time</time>

## <a name="mocking-shit-faux-jargon-like-boomer">Mocking Shit Faux-Jargon like "Boomer"</a>

Boomer is a word that has been used by the media with full commitment but is truly shit jargon.

Shit jargon is something that needs to be recognized within the process of evolving the shared scientific vocabulary.

If it comes from the media, is a generational concept, as a rule it should be rejected as shit jargon.

Recently I updated my glossary page with words I coined. One coinage is the word "Cageism" which is interesting itself. Suffixing to expand vocabularies in a false way, while disabling people from using their mastery of the approach to coin new words is also worth making fun of. For this purpose we will join generational concepts with ways ofusing the word ["Cageism"](glossary.html#cageism):

*Related coinages: Cageism, cageist, cageophiliac, encageophiliac, cageophobic, cageomaniac, encageomancer, cageonometray, cegeonometrician, encagenobstectrics, millenialwokeuncageists,genzrevertocageophilistinism, boomercageist, unsuffixingcageist*

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>


*Thursday, February 23<sup>rd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>2:02 PM Wellington, New Zealand Time</time>

## <a name="redoing-strange-grammatical-constructions-like-variations-on-lay">Redoing strange grammatical constuctions, like variations on 'lay'</a>

In the near future I will begin changing some english usages to use my own versions of poorly done grammatical variations in English. Obviously I will not attempt to cover the language exhaustively. However, any parts of English that seem a "reference nuissance" or nuissance offensive to natural mastery" that I am wanting to change will be changed. 

The variations of the word 'lay' may be one such starting point, except for places where i've already done it, as with [superpluralification](glossary.html#superpluralification).

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

*Thursday, February 23<sup>rd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>1:55 PM Wellington, New Zealand Time</time>

## <a name="first-of-the-author-and-firsting-behavior">First of the Author and "Firsting" Behavior</a>

In my [lists](lists.html) page that includes my lists of obvious errors, falsities, and likely areas of untruth, I wrote about what I think of as "firsting". Firsting is "He was the first" type statements about famous figures, false leaders, messiahs, prophets, [cult](cults.html) leaders, and others who want to claim more for themselves than is honest or is documented for posterity.

L. Ron Hubbard in Scientology had a booklet with false firstings. It is unclear if it was of his preparation or the preparation of a mythologizer (Ref. [bibliography](bibliography-citing-and-referring.html) the work Two Lives of Charlemagne). Either way there are numerous obvious firstings, that have the following characteristics:

- They are testably false
- Some are untestable, but are obviously false
- Some lack primary source documentation (corroborating materials from Hubbard or other sources).
- No access to history in which to independently want to make the claims (versus simply hearing lies from a motivated person who wants something).

The implication is that they are obviously false statements, that for others may appear possibly true, but for those people, they would have no way to verify, and would have nothing but claims to think it true. 

However, that does not mean that nobody really "firsts" anything, and I argue in many locations for many purposes that each person is entirely unique, and is a first of sorts by default, which ensures they are [unequal] to others (Ref: [Abandoning Equality](abandoning-equality.html)). So firsting is something easy to do really. When you do things you are firsting becaue you are connected with the complete description of the situation in which you do it, and already you are unique, so what you do is unique. This I have used to argue that history never repeats itself (which is really just a recalled phrase anyhow).

What I am using as a heuristic device is using utterances of claims to firsts and similar statements as invokers of skeptcisim and cause to think cautiously. The utterances I have in mind are "monumentalisms" trying to make what one has done or what another has done as some monumental achievement worth durable respect or maybe separation from others as especially unequal or high in worth. Obviously there are reasons to think some as great, but firsting is a red flag as to false motivations and bad salesmanlike intentions.

This work does have the property of creating firsts in the world, and later I will list many meaningful ways in which my work really does do something either monumental, or does something leading to something that is monumental in an important way. There are huge differences between this and firsting. Namely this work has these properties:

- A primary objective is honest recording of history to create artifacts.
- Artifacts then can be used to test history and provide primary source materials to people who want to see if any big firsts really are true.
- I am making the claims and not someone for me. This is important because if Charlemagne wrote his autobiography, it would agree in many ways with the version of Einhard, but not of Notker the Stammerer, who was a mythologizer. This means that it is important that peole who do something important tell their own story so they are not falsified by either a mythologizer or someone who pretends to be a follower with bad intentions, or anyone else with an interest in tampering, slandering, or making something excessively great.
- The document form itself will be unusual to history. This means as an artifact those things which are listed as firsts will be clearly firsts, although it is understood that failure to preserve other parts of history could result in an inability to compare. If this exists, then ther may be a difficulty in inability to compare with what has not been preserved.
- The author expects the reader to be skeptical.
- The author expects truth-testing processes to be utilized. 
- The author will be obviously unmotivated about making things great by keeping things proportional to what they achieve.

## Tentative Conclusion

In my work from the early 2000s I mentioned that this total work is partly an attempt to arrive at trustworthy conclusions which seem to be durable (Ref: [Rational Times](rational-times.html). Much is tentative in what we conclude from our analyses of things, but oftentimes we do arrive at hard and definite conclusions which are durable or permanent. A permanent conclusion is that whatever you make as a fiction is a fiction, and is therefore permanently false. We can easily recognize permanent falsities and these constitute more trustworthy truths. Much harder is representing nature in a way that is complete. In this we are often close, and close enough to have something duruable, but not far along enough to not already intuit that our representation witll not be supplanted later by something more clear, detailed, and integrated with other truths, which themselves will likely have more clarity and details. Certain truths later will have more power (akin to unlocking nuclear weaponry with physics).

A tentative conclusion to move forward with, directed simply at myself too, might be:

You certainly are creating many novel and important firsts with this work you are doing. These firsts are of a type which have little relationship to "firsting" which is a really abhorrent behavior, but does involve red flags, which should invoke skepticism in others, concerning how to validate or confirm that those firsts are really firsts, and if those firsts really have any special importance. The list provided will provide a reader with a definite set of testable claims as to achievements. This list combined with an honest approach at self-verification, and corroborating artifacts, and evidents of positive intentions and motivations of the author, along with other truth validation techniques, will provide readers and the author himself with ways to recognnize that caution resulted in verification, and that caution resulted in showing an example of where others are obviously firsting.

When I say this is tentative I also think it tentative in keeping with the objectives of the thoughtstream during more rational moments. I do not think subsequent thoughts will not elaborate on this tentative conclusion to create a writing that is of better quality on the same topic. Also I don't think this written tentative conclusion is a total representation of my way of thinking which includes other durable conclusions that are unstated and need to be written out or connected with this. This paragraph above and earlier statements however trend towards a better statement and are more trustworthy than others which might be less rational. This writing is part of a more [Rational Time](rational-times.html) in life, which is worth recollecting. The conclusion has not been written in logical form to allow for logical analysis assuring soundness, but that is a formalization requirement that is not always possible due to life-complexity. Aspects of parts of this argument can certainly be shown reasonably efficiently and will be recorded later (time and life permitting), providing adequate expectation that the author's thinking results in soundness more generally. The writing provides the datum required for inductively and statistically arriving at that expectation. In this way perhaps later with adeequate time a finite number of well chosen arguments, in conjunction with all artifacts provided, will allow for a validation that the author's mind will result in sound arguments of high complexity. I already intuitively knows this to be the case but has much more work to ensure the reader is able to have what is needed to confirm this in my mind. In this way also there is agreement between the objective here, the tentative conclusion above, and the goal to ensure the reader can tell that I am not doing any firsting behavior, which is done by others who are and were unable to do the same. This message should be a note indicating that such an effort really would result in significant firsts by the author, if the reader simply compares this with what they have been exposed to (particlularly by comparing with old dictatorial politician's claims to greatness, of the 1900s, and not those who were perhaps honest and dictatorial in history).

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

*Wednesday, February 20<sup>nd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>4:55 PM Wellington, New Zealand Time</time>

## <a name="new-reading-of-schopenhauer">New reading of Schopenhauer</a>

Today, after having it long in my possession, I began reading "The World as Will and Idea" also known as "The World as Will and Representation". 

At this point in the development of my work I don't think I require this reading in moral philosophy. Already I've read enough and my project underway has a completeness in its trajectory, indicated in my earlier remarks on coherence of work and editing. I hae much to say regarding reading versus preserving creativity. 

Now and in the future I intend to read additional works of philosophy, but with efforts made to ensure my work trajectory remains distinct. This does not mean I do not wish to be influenced by new ideas. The tree of work I've had growing for the last twenty years will remain mostly the same tree even if I am influenced in various minor ways. 

I need to say much more on my creative process which has included readings in the past which were very influential but never so influential as my own thoughts had in reaction to these materials. 

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

*Wednesday, February 22<sup>nd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>2:45 PM Palmerston North, New Zealand Time</time>

## <a name="what-internal-implementation-disputes-exist-in-the-brain-and-how-does-the-brain-resolve-those-for-us-with-or-without-our-participation">What internal implementation disputes exist in the brain, and how does the brain resolve those for us, with or without our participation?</a>

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

*Wednesday, February 20<sup>nd</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>1:29 PM Palmerston North, New Zealand Time</time>

## <a name="knowing-if-and-when-processing-is-parallel">Knowing if and when processing is parallel</a>

A moment ago as I was thinking over how to include my sensory process in my attention management process, I realized there is more than one way to achieve the same or a similar implementation, with a similar functional result, in that the sensory process could be one that is called at the outset of the process and just before exit, and operate in parallel for the same duration, or could be included within the process and be thought of as a way that the process itself is carried out. This appears to have implications outside of this interest which is more general and interdisciplinary.

For example, as we think, we are not certain of the implementation in our brain of our learned skills and way of thought. It is not clear precisely how two parts of a process or two processes which relate but are not controlled together are structured physiologically or biologically, or how they operate for a specific duration. More unrelated parallel processes are assumed to be parallel but may not be parallel depending on the interpretation. Because the brain is a network unlike a plain activity diagram process or coded program, it's definition and modes of function may not permit of a siple distinction of parallel or non-parallel processing and instead would probably be better modeled using a more detailed way of thinking allowing for complex interactions and blended storage (networked shared and unshared nodes, connections, and loose transactions.

For programming there is a question as to what differences exist choosing to implement code one way or another. With regard to architectural decisions around parallel processing, or parallel definition, there appear intuitively to me to also be many possible ways of considering, but even if still complex it is much less complex than decisions in the networked system, if they are planned for in advance especially. The software arhcitect's job is mostly to plan well in advance and potentially face social judgement and various real-world problems if things are not planned well initially. A brain, however, is not pre-planned in its implementation but is a learning system that gets defined and redifined, stored and restored, structured and restructured as time goes on. This is considering the program as separate to an extent from hardware, or physiological instructions and precursors.

Even more complex would be to think similarly concerning interaction of physical rulesof nature, and potential implementations of those rules (i.e. how the rules really work and what their structures are). What the structures of the rules of the implementation of nature is omitted from the idea mathematics represents nature. Without knowledge of the implementation of mathematics, it is not known from mathematics what may vary in the rules, or how they really model nature and how rules interact. Instead we have something that is more representative of behaviors rather implementation.

There appears to be an arbitrariness in my decisions as to whether to make this process parallel or to include it within the single process, although my behavior will depend on which I choose to some degree. Both processes which might be parallel or combined are also arbitrary. Resulting behavior is more optimal than before even with the arbitrariness. For now I can't measure the difference between one or the other or see what might be preferable. It seems there is an arbitrariness that is insoluble, which explains why programmers never can agree regarding what is optimal regarding architecture and programming language choices. Maturity in software architecture seems consistent with this perspective but not in a perspective that thinks too quickly that one is certainly any better than the other, where such uncertainties exist.

*[Written in 21 minutes semi-blind typed, some confirmation reading along the way on the spots being typed, no spell check or proofreading. Has not been read yet.]*

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

<p><em>Thursday, February 23<sup>rd</sup>, 2023</em>, <time>2:36 PM
Wellington, New Zealand Time</time></p>
<h2
id="suffixes-and-prefixes-and-interfixes-that-didnt-dictionary"><a name="suffixed-and-prefixes-and-interfixes-that-didnt-dictionary">Suffixes
and Prefixes, and Interfixes that didn’t Dictionary</a></h2>
<p>The potential dictionary size is vast if you simply build on your
already attained mastery of wrapping and interstitialing fixes.</p>
<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>
<p><em>Thursday, February 23<sup>rd</sup>, 2023</em>, <time>2:36 PM
Wellington, New Zealand Time</time></p>
<h2
id="mocking-shit-faux-jargon-like-boomer"><a name="mocking-shit-faux-jargon-like-boomer">Mocking
Shit Faux-Jargon like “Boomer”</a></h2>
<p>Boomer is a word that has been used by the media with full commitment
but is truly shit jargon.</p>
<p>Shit jargon is something that needs to be recognized within the
process of evolving the shared scientific vocabulary.</p>
<p>If it comes from the media, is a generational concept, as a rule it
should be rejected as shit jargon.</p>
<p>Recently I updated my glossary page with words I coined. One coinage
is the word “Cageism” which is interesting itself. Suffixing to expand
vocabularies in a false way, while disabling people from using their
mastery of the approach to coin new words is also worth making fun of.
For this purpose we will join generational concepts with ways ofusing
the word <a href="glossary.html#cageism">“Cageism”</a>:</p>
<p><em>Related coinages: Cageism, cageist, cageophiliac, encageophiliac,
cageophobic, cageomaniac, encageomancer, cageonometray,
cegeonometrician, encagenobstectrics,
millenialwokeuncageists,genzrevertocageophilistinism, boomercageist,
unsuffixingcageist</em></p>
<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>
<p><em>Thursday, February 23<sup>rd</sup>, 2023</em>, <time>2:02 PM
Wellington, New Zealand Time</time></p>
<h2
id="redoing-strange-grammatical-constuctions-like-variations-on-lay"><a name="redoing-strange-grammatical-constructions-like-variations-on-lay">Redoing
strange grammatical constuctions, like variations on ‘lay’</a></h2>
<p>In the near future I will begin changing some english usages to use
my own versions of poorly done grammatical variations in English.
Obviously I will not attempt to cover the language exhaustively.
However, any parts of English that seem a “reference nuissance” or
nuissance offensive to natural mastery” that I am wanting to change will
be changed.</p>
<p>The variations of the word ‘lay’ may be one such starting point,
except for places where i’ve already done it, as with <a
href="glossary.html#superpluralification">superpluralification</a>.</p>
<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>
<p><em>Thursday, February 23<sup>rd</sup>, 2023</em>, <time>1:55 PM
Wellington, New Zealand Time</time></p>
<h2
id="first-of-the-author-and-firsting-behavior"><a name="first-of-the-author-and-firsting-behavior">First
of the Author and “Firsting” Behavior</a></h2>
<p>In my <a href="lists.html">lists</a> page that includes my lists of
obvious errors, falsities, and likely areas of untruth, I wrote about
what I think of as “firsting”. Firsting is “He was the first” type
statements about famous figures, false leaders, messiahs, prophets, <a
href="cults.html">cult</a> leaders, and others who want to claim more
for themselves than is honest or is documented for posterity.</p>
<p>L. Ron Hubbard in Scientology had a booklet with false firstings. It
is unclear if it was of his preparation or the preparation of a
mythologizer (Ref. <a href="bibliography.html">bibliography</a> the work
Two Lives of Charlemagne). Either way there are numerous obvious
firstings, that have the following characteristics:</p>
<ul>
<li>They are testably false</li>
<li>Some are untestable, but are obviously false</li>
<li>Some lack primary source documentation (corroborating materials from
Hubbard or other sources).</li>
<li>No access to history in which to independently want to make the
claims (versus simply hearing lies from a motivated person who wants
something).</li>
</ul>
<p>The implication is that they are obviously false statements, that for
others may appear possibly true, but for those people, they would have
no way to verify, and would have nothing but claims to think it
true.</p>
<p>However, that does not mean that nobody really “firsts” anything, and
I argue in many locations for many purposes that each person is entirely
unique, and is a first of sorts by default, which ensures they are
[unequal] to others (Ref: <a href="abandoning-equality.html">Abandoning
Equality</a>). So firsting is something easy to do really. When you do
things you are firsting becaue you are connected with the complete
description of the situation in which you do it, and already you are
unique, so what you do is unique. This I have used to argue that history
never repeats itself (which is really just a recalled phrase
anyhow).</p>
<p>What I am using as a heuristic device is using utterances of claims
to firsts and similar statements as invokers of skeptcisim and cause to
think cautiously. The utterances I have in mind are “monumentalisms”
trying to make what one has done or what another has done as some
monumental achievement worth durable respect or maybe separation from
others as especially unequal or high in worth. Obviously there are
reasons to think some as great, but firsting is a red flag as to false
motivations and bad salesmanlike intentions.</p>
<p>This work does have the property of creating firsts in the world, and
later I will list many meaningful ways in which my work really does do
something either monumental, or does something leading to something that
is monumental in an important way. There are huge differences between
this and firsting. Namely this work has these properties:</p>
<ul>
<li>A primary objective is honest recording of history to create
artifacts.</li>
<li>Artifacts then can be used to test history and provide primary
source materials to people who want to see if any big firsts really are
true.</li>
<li>I am making the claims and not someone for me. This is important
because if Charlemagne wrote his autobiography, it would agree in many
ways with the version of Einhard, but not of Notker the Stammerer, who
was a mythologizer. This means that it is important that peole who do
something important tell their own story so they are not falsified by
either a mythologizer or someone who pretends to be a follower with bad
intentions, or anyone else with an interest in tampering, slandering, or
making something excessively great.</li>
<li>The document form itself will be unusual to history. This means as
an artifact those things which are listed as firsts will be clearly
firsts, although it is understood that failure to preserve other parts
of history could result in an inability to compare. If this exists, then
ther may be a difficulty in inability to compare with what has not been
preserved.</li>
<li>The author expects the reader to be skeptical.</li>
<li>The author expects truth-testing processes to be utilized.</li>
<li>The author will be obviously unmotivated about making things great
by keeping things proportional to what they achieve.</li>
</ul>
<h3 id="tentative-conclusion">Tentative Conclusion</h3>
<p>In my work from the early 2000s I mentioned that this total work is
partly an attempt to arrive at trustworthy conclusions which seem to be
durable (Ref: <a href="rational-times.html">Rational Times</a>. Much is
tentative in what we conclude from our analyses of things, but
oftentimes we do arrive at hard and definite conclusions which are
durable or permanent. A permanent conclusion is that whatever you make
as a fiction is a fiction, and is therefore permanently false. We can
easily recognize permanent falsities and these constitute more
trustworthy truths. Much harder is representing nature in a way that is
complete. In this we are often close, and close enough to have something
duruable, but not far along enough to not already intuit that our
representation witll not be supplanted later by something more clear,
detailed, and integrated with other truths, which themselves will likely
have more clarity and details. Certain truths later will have more power
(akin to unlocking nuclear weaponry with physics).</p>
<p>A tentative conclusion to move forward with, directed simply at
myself too, might be:</p>
<p>You certainly are creating many novel and important firsts with this
work you are doing. These firsts are of a type which have little
relationship to “firsting” which is a really abhorrent behavior, but
does involve red flags, which should invoke skepticism in others,
concerning how to validate or confirm that those firsts are really
firsts, and if those firsts really have any special importance. The list
provided will provide a reader with a definite set of testable claims as
to achievements. This list combined with an honest approach at
self-verification, and corroborating artifacts, and evidents of positive
intentions and motivations of the author, along with other truth
validation techniques, will provide readers and the author himself with
ways to recognnize that caution resulted in verification, and that
caution resulted in showing an example of where others are obviously
firsting.</p>
<p>When I say this is tentative I also think it tentative in keeping
with the objectives of the thoughtstream during more rational moments. I
do not think subsequent thoughts will not elaborate on this tentative
conclusion to create a writing that is of better quality on the same
topic. Also I don’t think this written tentative conclusion is a total
representation of my way of thinking which includes other durable
conclusions that are unstated and need to be written out or connected
with this. This paragraph above and earlier statements however trend
towards a better statement and are more trustworthy than others which
might be less rational. This writing is part of a more <a
href="rational-times.html">Rational Time</a> in life, which is worth
recollecting. The conclusion has not been written in logical form to
allow for logical analysis assuring soundness, but that is a
formalization requirement that is not always possible due to
life-complexity. Aspects of parts of this argument can certainly be
shown reasonably efficiently and will be recorded later (time and life
permitting), providing adequate expectation that the author’s thinking
results in soundness more generally. The writing provides the datum
required for inductively and statistically arriving at that expectation.
In this way perhaps later with adeequate time a finite number of well
chosen arguments, in conjunction with all artifacts provided, will allow
for a validation that the author’s mind will result in sound arguments
of high complexity. I already intuitively knows this to be the case but
has much more work to ensure the reader is able to have what is needed
to confirm this in my mind. In this way also there is agreement between
the objective here, the tentative conclusion above, and the goal to
ensure the reader can tell that I am not doing any firsting behavior,
which is done by others who are and were unable to do the same. This
message should be a note indicating that such an effort really would
result in significant firsts by the author, if the reader simply
compares this with what they have been exposed to (particlularly by
comparing with old dictatorial politician’s claims to greatness, of the
1900s, and not those who were perhaps honest and dictatorial in
history).</p>
<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>
<p><em>Wednesday, February 20<sup>nd</sup>, 2023</em>, <time>4:55 PM
Wellington, New Zealand Time</time></p>
<h2
id="new-reading-of-schopenhauer"><a name="new-reading-of-schopenhauer">New
reading of Schopenhauer</a></h2>
<p>Today, after having it long in my possession, I began reading “The
World as Will and Idea” also known as “The World as Will and
Representation”.</p>
<p>At this point in the development of my work I don’t think I require
this reading in moral philosophy. Already I’ve read enough and my
project underway has a completeness in its trajectory, indicated in my
earlier remarks on coherence of work and editing. I hae much to say
regarding reading versus preserving creativity.</p>
<p>Now and in the future I intend to read additional works of
philosophy, but with efforts made to ensure my work trajectory remains
distinct. This does not mean I do not wish to be influenced by new
ideas. The tree of work I’ve had growing for the last twenty years will
remain mostly the same tree even if I am influenced in various minor
ways.</p>
<p>I need to say much more on my creative process which has included
readings in the past which were very influential but never so
influential as my own thoughts had in reaction to these materials.</p>
<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>
<p><em>Wednesday, February 22<sup>nd</sup>, 2023</em>, <time>2:45 PM
Palmerston North, New Zealand Time</time></p>
<h2
id="what-internal-implementation-disputes-exist-in-the-brain-and-how-does-the-brain-resolve-those-for-us-with-or-without-our-participation"><a name="what-internal-implementation-disputes-exist-in-the-brain-and-how-does-the-brain-resolve-those-for-us-with-or-without-our-participation">What
internal implementation disputes exist in the brain, and how does the
brain resolve those for us, with or without our participation?</a></h2>
<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>
<p><em>Wednesday, February 20<sup>nd</sup>, 2023</em>, <time>1:29 PM
Palmerston North, New Zealand Time</time></p>
<h2
id="knowing-if-and-when-processing-is-parallel"><a name="knowing-if-and-when-processing-is-parallel">Knowing
if and when processing is parallel</a></h2>
<p>A moment ago as I was thinking over how to include my sensory process
in my attention management process, I realized there is more than one
way to achieve the same or a similar implementation, with a similar
functional result, in that the sensory process could be one that is
called at the outset of the process and just before exit, and operate in
parallel for the same duration, or could be included within the process
and be thought of as a way that the process itself is carried out. This
appears to have implications outside of this interest which is more
general and interdisciplinary.</p>
<p>For example, as we think, we are not certain of the implementation in
our brain of our learned skills and way of thought. It is not clear
precisely how two parts of a process or two processes which relate but
are not controlled together are structured physiologically or
biologically, or how they operate for a specific duration. More
unrelated parallel processes are assumed to be parallel but may not be
parallel depending on the interpretation. Because the brain is a network
unlike a plain activity diagram process or coded program, it’s
definition and modes of function may not permit of a siple distinction
of parallel or non-parallel processing and instead would probably be
better modeled using a more detailed way of thinking allowing for
complex interactions and blended storage (networked shared and unshared
nodes, connections, and loose transactions.</p>
<p>For programming there is a question as to what differences exist
choosing to implement code one way or another. With regard to
architectural decisions around parallel processing, or parallel
definition, there appear intuitively to me to also be many possible ways
of considering, but even if still complex it is much less complex than
decisions in the networked system, if they are planned for in advance
especially. The software arhcitect’s job is mostly to plan well in
advance and potentially face social judgement and various real-world
problems if things are not planned well initially. A brain, however, is
not pre-planned in its implementation but is a learning system that gets
defined and redifined, stored and restored, structured and restructured
as time goes on. This is considering the program as separate to an
extent from hardware, or physiological instructions and precursors.</p>
<p>Even more complex would be to think similarly concerning interaction
of physical rulesof nature, and potential implementations of those rules
(i.e. how the rules really work and what their structures are). What the
structures of the rules of the implementation of nature is omitted from
the idea mathematics represents nature. Without knowledge of the
implementation of mathematics, it is not known from mathematics what may
vary in the rules, or how they really model nature and how rules
interact. Instead we have something that is more representative of
behaviors rather implementation.</p>
<p>There appears to be an arbitrariness in my decisions as to whether to
make this process parallel or to include it within the single process,
although my behavior will depend on which I choose to some degree. Both
processes which might be parallel or combined are also arbitrary.
Resulting behavior is more optimal than before even with the
arbitrariness. For now I can’t measure the difference between one or the
other or see what might be preferable. It seems there is an
arbitrariness that is insoluble, which explains why programmers never
can agree regarding what is optimal regarding architecture and
programming language choices. Maturity in software architecture seems
consistent with this perspective but not in a perspective that thinks
too quickly that one is certainly any better than the other, where such
uncertainties exist.</p>
<p><em>[Written in 21 minutes semi-blind typed, some confirmation
reading along the way on the spots being typed, no spell check or
proofreading. Has not been read yet.]</em></p>
<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="upcoming-thoughtstreams-self-created-textiles">Upcoming Thoughtstreams: Self-Created Textiles on an Animal-Creativity Spectrum...</a>

- Self-Created Textiles on an Animal-Creativity Spectrum.
- Seeking information and imposition of information, and killing the old "nature nurture" convo stagnation.
- Equivalent Classification Schemes, Life-Taxa, Bio-Neural Representations, Weathering, and Flexibilty of Life Categories.
  - Ref: [Pattern History of Your Tissues](#pattern-history-of-your-tissues).
- Training AI to Know Your Real Face with Static Data, and "Close Enough You?"

*[In the list above, I left some title-like capitalization, and some without, but all was written in the same sitting. I.e., could not be used as an artifact indicating alternative authorship or times of authorship. May indicate a problem in historico-philologico-archaeological methods.]* 

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

*Wednesday, February 15<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>2:38 PM New Plymouth, New Zealand Time</time>

## <a name="pretending-one-is-not-procrastinating-and-unchangeable-occlusions">Pretending one is not Procrastinating, and Unchangeable Occlusions</a>

*Wednesday, February 15<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>2:38 PM New Plymouth, New Zealand Time</time>

There are two ways to appear to oneself that one is progressing or is active, and that is by moving around or thinking with greater rapidity. A person who is not particularly creative, will not be creating new movements or new thoughts while doing these rapid things. This means nothing new could be done in the thinking or the moving, but what is thought is using recollections of what was thought before, and what is done, is mostly using movements of what were done before. Speeding up thinking with caffeine or drugs or some other stimulation, and movement after frustration, or from a desire to escape stagnation, will increase rapidity, but will not increase it much in the way that may be really desired. It is likely that there is an illusory gain, in those who are really immobile in relation to creativity, in simply increasing rapidity of thought and behavior, which includes all that one does in life. It explains somewhat the use of drugs and preoccupation with bodily movement in those who are more active, but not creatively active. One can use fast communication and "fast thinking" with high productivity, and one can use something like moving around often at work as an indicator that good work is being accomplished. Even gains may indicate slowness, concealed in the form of focused fastness. Bodybuilding may be the result sometimes of a perceived inability to progress. One can go to the gym and simply feel like something is happening, and still have good progress on something in which consistency guarantees the results. One can also do drugs to increase the feeling that one is making mental progress that would otherwise feel like is not ocurring.

I am greatly interest in increasing one's ability to not procrastinate. Speaking for myself, someone who procrastinates very little but occasionally on certain areas where gains are desired, I want to clearly distinguish between two things:

1. Ability to remove obstacles to progressions that can happen, and
1. Knowing what cannot happen, or knowing what limitations on progress exist.

I think people appear to be quite a bit slower than they think they are regarding their ability to progress various parts of their lives, and substitute frivolous behaviors, or use of drugs, to create an appearance for themselves and others that they are more productive than they are. This is even *if* they are overcoming certain kinds of procrastination.

One could think of procrastination in another way. What are my ongoing unchangeable versus changeable occlusions that exist inside me and outside me that slow my thinking and actions? What would reduce these occlusions, and how much reduction of occlusion is possible?

If I move around fast and think fast frivolously, that occlusion still remains that I'm pretending does not?

Some may pretend to be mathematicians for example, and spend quite a lot of time moving around, buying books, and reading about math, and quite a lot of time talking to people about math, and yet not do math, because of a permanent occlusion which is:

"I don't really have a good aptitude for this."

This must occur for many who come to believe at an early age they would like to do math, but discover they aren't that interested, or work around it actively, but not *on it actively*.

One may not really be procrastinating if one cannot do something, and people really need to identify what they are capable of in order to determine the distinction. Likely they already know. Sometimes some small bits of additional information are required to confirm. Knowing that one cannot do something well, or that low interest exists, seems easier than trying to overcome procrastination all of life.

## References:

- [Procrastination](procrastination.html)
- [Strategies for Managing Procrastination, One](strategy-one-tips-and-tools-managing-procrastination.html)

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="practentice">Practentice</a>

*Sunday, February 12<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>4:47 PM Waitara, New Zealand Time</time>

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>


## <a name="automatic-weight-loss-and-general-life-excellences">Automatic Weight Loss and General Life Excellences</a>

*Sunday, February 12<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>2:48 PM Waitara, New Zealand Time</time>

Recently, I've been able to get myself back into a state where I'm losing weight habitually without any effort. Today, while walking, thinking about certain improvements I'd like to make, including getting off coffee and only drinking water or citrus or foraged herb infused waters, I noticed I have not been recognizing my fitness accomplishments. Originally my [Personal Form](personal-form.html) was intended for tracking fitness and weight loss, with the goal of habituation and automaticity. I did not want to need to think about realizing goals for weight loss especially. Just before starting the form I was at nearly 270 pounds. Gradually that form shows my weight diminishing. Later I was able to maintain a much better weight around 190 pounds, mostly without thinking much about it. Now, however, being older, and having some different health goals, I want to be thinner. Returning my attention to weight loss I've made some changes, which took conscious effort. I had to focus on this periodically for a prolonged period of time. Now, I'm losing weight rapidly, and am forgetful even of my fitness *gains*. This caused me to think again about how nice it is to attain automaticity in goal realization, by habituating a plan. Not long before today I noticed that my plan was really trending towards automaticity. It appears, this current plan, may be one that has more perpetually the benefits I'd like to have which may be over and above what I accomplished earlier with weight loss, and constancy of somewhat unattentive monitoring.

There are parts to the plan which are not deliberately only for weight loss. Firstly, I mainly eat a single meal a day, mostly at night. This has been largely habitual for a very long period of time now, so is not the main focus of new accomplishments. I made budgetary changes relating to the category of [livelihood](livelihood.html), which relate to my goal of alleviating homelessness by walking and camping, and using public transportation more often, which relate respectively to [property-and-organization](property-and-organization.html), and [fitness](fitness.html). The budetary consideration involves eating cheaper basic protein rich foods and fruits, and keeping transit costs low not having a car. Not having a car implies walking more often (and running the way I do things now). Eating protein rich foods and fruits once a day implies reduction of calories. In combination both bring down weight. My current focus on wanting to decrease coffee intake relates also to increase of water, which is what I call "water worship". "Water worship" is sarcastically mocking religion in that worship is largely staring and thinking about something a while (some idol). Making water a sort of idol, (for fun), I will eventually consume just that. Currently I drink no alcohol, which means I have no alcohol calories, which relates to [nutrition](nutrition.html) and [health](health.html). In my plans I relate each of the [life categories](life-categories.html), which can also be seen as early as 2006 in the [Personal Form](personal-form.html), which had the purpose of gathering minimal health information along key categories especially, with some practice gathering more informaiton as well. The outcome here is that I have been able to cdreate a situation in which my expenditure is lower and I'm automatically losing weight, and am becoming more healthful. As a vegan who excercises I'm already healthy. However, I wanted to lose weight and make various improvements and have been able to achieve that. Automaticity is what is most wanted, and it's funny to make bigger gains with thoughtlessness than attentiveness! Abdominal muscles are being revealed without my thoughts as to how to get better abdominals. A humorous thing for men, is accomplishing this with greater ease not thinking about it. Having it perpetually requires that one is already habituated to behave in a way that retains it. Some are obviously able to do this already. The objective of the Personal Form and the Life Categories, and my moral philosophy and ethics which is more than this is to automatically be excellent in various domains in which one can be excellent without excess or otherwise detracting effort.

Earlier I wrote about [Related Accomplishments](related-accomplishments.html), which provide other examples across life which relate to the successes of this ethic, which are small things and large things, comprehensively covering all I do and am. Today this reflection on my not even recognizing the gains I'm making, is another confirmation, after many confirmations, that just regarding health/fitness/nutrition, I'm repeating again the expected excellences of this plan. But this plan covers all else and for each of the others I'm now reminding myself of the other accomplishments too.

One can be a scientist of sorts, replicating the results of the plans one had earlier that one looked away from to focus on other things. An early goal of the Personal Form I had was disuse. Once I was finished with habituating the effects I wanted, it meant I learned and integrated the plan, so I could stop training and simply live that way. Then I could focus on other things to improve. I did know, however, that people tend to unknowingly do things which can gradually steer habits away from where they were. For that reason I already knew and planned to use the form, when I thought I needed it again. Currently, I'm using the form in a more developed mnemonic state, described in [Attentional Architecture](architecture.html). Now the personal form and the attentional architecture are better fit within my larger system of ethics which is slowly being shared here in my Book and Journal. It is important for the reader and myself to recognize that this small sample experience is connected with the total ethical method which is true and corresponds with a true understanding of naturalism. Here it may feel unnatural to discuss these other topics relating to naturalism and philosophy to discipline relating to personal development on life data and processes. However, a more holistic understanding, being what people are supposedly searching for, would imply ease of integration. For me it is natural to quickly relate these, but as I write, see that for the reader, there could be some feeling of oddness in making such transitions. Ethics requires a person to develop excellences on the basis of observations of their behavior, and moving themselves, including their minds and bodies, to new minds and bodies. This implies a need for making observations, either collecting or remembering data, and making changes to alter the data. The results of changes of data connect with visible results. One can also focus on the visible results taking less data, but the two approaches harmonize. For example, as I lose weight I see it of course and know it relates to the plan. If I'm wanting to better understand the total ways in which such a methodology can be used or should be used realistically for improving my life, I need to be knowledgeable more about my psychology, and the world around me. Occupationally, I would not know what to do if I did not think this way. Any category relating to life at all is included in the plan or is adaptable to the plan. I have already had the accomplishments in occupation which relate and demonstrate. I have had accomplishments in each and all of the categories which demonstrate. Thinking this way allows someone to carry over successes in something like fitness to other aspects of life, which is a way of looking at fitness which already existed. However it is inadequate. This method in the Book and Journal of Mattanaw is and has been adequate for a more maximally general purpose which is close to what people want when they are looking for guidance in their lives as wholes.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>


## <a name="book-and-journal-of-mattanaw-as-uncharacteristic-of-the-views-of-others">Book and Journal of Mattanaw as Uncharacteristic of the Views of Others</a>


- *Title mistake corrected. Wednesday, February 22<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>12:26 PM Palmerston North, New Zealand Time</time>
- *Original Posting: Sunday, February 12<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>1:29 PM Waitara, New Zealand Time</time>

*[No edits as part of a study in editing]*

Thinking about how this work might be used within a work of history, relied on as a primary source artifact saying something about a time or place, this would not be usable to characterize the thought of large groups of people. Instead, this work is really uncharacteristic. Certainly elements of what are contained would say something of the current period, because the current period supplied the raw material for thinking and the outcome of this work cannot have an entirely new vocabulary. However, combinations of words, and sentence strings are more improbable than those produced by others. There would be less matching of thoughts in sentences here with thoughts that might be had or might be recorded by others. In life the author has been mostly differentiated from others regarding opinions and thoughts on all matters whatsoever. The author knows this but since youth thinks independently on his own plans and objectives, in order to remain closer to what appears to be truthful about the world and life and planned behavior. While stating that this work is uncharacteristic of others, the author thinks still there would be many people who would look at various paragraphs and agree even if they believe there are omissions or incompletenesses. There might be significant overlaps between what others would think as true and what they read here, *even though*, I think separate thoughts of others would reveal that the work here is uncharacteristic and not the usual. What I think this would lead to is that others would find what is here written often truthful, but not of their minds or of other minds they would know, and they would not be able to expect or anticipate what is here written. Being able to anticipate what is here written would imply the thoughts are more probable, and expectation is built from what one has experienced often, or has at least experienced personally. This is an argument also one might say that human animals occasionally emerge the reveal to others what is true more completely than what they would arrive at, and that no other around, or no collection of others, would be able to replace that thought. Meaning that thinker and those thoughts that are true (even with certain omissions and incompletenesses due to the nature of mind and communication), that individuals are sometimes the only way to get certain pieces of information from a truth-system that is more holistic and accurate, and improbable from nature. This author is not religious but nevertheless sees inside the idea of revelation what might be true about special teachers. Writing as I do I'm motivated by my own skill and results over time in my life and have been a special teacher to myself, having none that could produce what I've produced, because of its being uncharacteristic. Often I'm revelaing to myself what would not otherwise be had. Already there is thought to be a pantheon of sorts of academic professionals, including teachers who are hierarchically better than others, and who are sought for more information by many people. Firstly, they trust their own information, if they are really of the quality others think they are. Switching attention to myself I've found good information in the writings of others but I have not felt satisfied that these others would be able to teach what I need in a way that I could not better do myself. I would not substitute my head for theirs, and I would not want to substitute my knowledge for theirs, excepting to add detail in any special area where their attention really appears to be deep and accurate. In this way again, I've found myself uncharacteristic, even considering those who are special teachers to others. This way of thinking is self-confirming I think of the idea that there can be special teachers, and forms of revelation, and that this writing is uncharacteristic of the thoughts of others more generally. 

There was another point to make however regarding the meaningfulness of this work as an artifact of history. I think as a historical document one would have to first realize that this thinking is atypical, but would typically have points in which others would have some agreement as to truth. I think there would be many points of agreement with people who are prepared to disagree. In particular I think religious people would read this document already with intentions to contradict it, without necessarily having real logical contradictions. Observations about history I think would be useful even if atypically thought or expressed, and this would include observations that are general. Of great importance, obviously, is that I am writing something I think conveys many general truths, and this would include observations which are universal. Truths about people and the world. This is separate from who has arrived at these truths. That is what I said would be uncommon. Observations like those which are found in [Preliminaries](preliminaries.html) are ones that are often univeral to all people during the current time. For example, the [Human Shortcomings](human-shortcomings.html) listed, and the commonality of assumptions found in [Assumption Elimination](assumption-elimination.html). Observations like that people really think they are separate from animals is something that is really important for history. Currently and looking backwards in time, for a long period many or most thought they were not animals. Right now, today, many or most people do not think they blend in with animal nature, or if they think they do, only have that opinion in a fractured way, while mainting that we are not in other thoughts, particularly religious ones. For the historian of the future, a document like this would be supportive of trying to show that at this time and before, people were very confused about what they were, and how they fit into natural history. Regarding this, this time period will be seen, and should be seen, regarding this particular point, as a largely primitive time period. As a point of etiquette, this topic is mostly glossed over or covered up, creating an impression that maybe people are scientific in their opinions as to animal nature, and that they are no longer superstitious. But when this conversation is forced, it is found that it is against etiquette, and that people do not often hold naturalistic views, and that they are unable to do so in a uniform way, maybe for not being able to talk about it often, due to etiquette breach. In this way this work is uncharacteristic in its commitment to naturalism, and would be useulf for historians of the future as a social commentary, regarding certain unpopular thoughts, and the level of knowledge of the general public concerning areas which should involve true assumptions, if modern.

*[Written in 28 minutes without spell check, or edits, blind typing. Has not yet been read. 1:57 pm]*

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="ends-and-lifecycles">Ends and life-cycles</a>

*Sunday, February 12<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>12:55 PM Waitara, New Zealand Time</time>

Life-cycles like the birth and deaths of animals, and discrete organisms, can be thought of as having beginnings and ends on the object level, but also have many beginnings and ends, in between that are of importance. For example, for a human, death can be very uniteresting. One may be elderly and die very slowly as an organism, after already having many end moments, near death, involving the mind, and various activities like conversation.

The words "beginning" and "end" are each not as clear as one may think they are and again, in my view of things, description is much better at times to attain better understanding. "End" is something that is matched to many different kinds of phenomena, but has some emotional connections apart from any specific phenomena. Thinking about the end of life and the end of enjoyable activities, relationships, and so on, make some connect more sadness with the word "end" than should be transferred to other kinds of endings; and also to the same endings where they would be better understood if described without using the word. Some will try to achieve a "flip" on a sad interpretation to make it a happy one, by saying things like "ends are new beginnings" and the like, and while there is may support better descriptions it is a primitive way of doing so, and it excessively binaries the mind and world in its way of trying to deal with emotions.

I have not liked the insistence on a positive ending in literature and life for any particular thing which may have a story. People are lead to incorrectly infer that if some particular ending event seems negative or sad, then an entire life or entire story has been totally affected. A simple observation that comes to mind is that ends seem to be more related in time to the surrounding events of the end. By this I want to create attention to the fact that a death does not retroactively change anything preceding the death, including all the truthful story leading up to the death. In a way, periods long preceding a person's death are immune from alteration by the death, or various other end of that life.

If I were able to write my entire autobiography up to and including very last moments, as though I could drop my pen right as my brain stopped functioning, I would want it to be as accurate as nature, without any concern for any ending. In a way an ending is not a "special event". If you start to write differently for the ending to make it "big" or "extra meaningful" what is being done is falsification of a later part of life.It's similar to trying to make larger or more meaningful any particular earlier time in life taken randomly perhaps. The ending can come quickly and randomly... Meaning it may not have any association with any other kind of happening which would be considered to be of higher value. There are special events and happenings in life, but that does not mean an ending to life will align with that kind of event. Most likely it would not if it is simply a death event after long sickness, and likely that would be in a situation in which it seems little is going on.

Moving back to the earlier point, there are many kinds of life-cycles in the body, and in behavior which include onsets and offsets. As one moves through life many things life-cycles complete. I was thinking yesterday regarding life-activities that people will gradually diminish all activities until there are none but thinking, and biological processes. I was also thinking earlier in earlier postings on thinking aright about death without fearfulness, that our nervous systems also often permanently lose access to certain parts of the brain, and prune them until they are don't exist. Various tissues have life-cycles of their own. The life-cycles of tissues/cells and biological materials result in life cycles of brain activity. There are all different kinds of ends and deaths throughout life in a single organism.

Stopping now on this thought to do something different, I want to write that ends of an organism, again, do not cancel ends that occured earlier. Things are ending along the way often. We're familiar with ends, and most ends do not bother us and do not get story magnification. Old ends have true stories which can be told that would not change because of new stories. Considerations like these enable me to think that any particular later end for me isn't one that would have any special magnified sadness or happiness about it, or culmination that would change the story backwards in time. In psychology, to change one's ealier story for the later is a form of psychological fallacy, and others who do such a thing are considered oftentimes harmful or abusive. Traits for often doing such a thing are estimated as lower, and pathological. While I do see certain personalities as more harmful than others, I'm not sure I would agree with this way of approaching the topic, but outside of psychology it is still logically incorrect to infer that ends of stories imply changes to earlier portions of stories, and natures data going backwards in time is unchanging. The psychological idea of gaslighting is related to an already incorrect illogical way of thinking, and unscientific understanding of the way the world works. I think this creates an approach for doing literary criticism that would lessen the value of approaches to literature that put too much emphasis on the ending, either of the book or the story it tells.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="pattern-history-of-your-tissues">Pattern-history of Your Tissues</a>

*Friday, February 10<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>11:34 PM Waitara, New Zealand Time</time>

Although people at birth are unlearned and are composed of unloaded hardware in ignorance, and are similar to each other in being infants (ref [Abandoning Equality](abandoning-equality.html)), their DNA instructions which are not of their creation do seem prepared somewhat for the context in which they will encounter world-information, although the preparedness precedes greatly the exposure to information. The brain tissue and its instructions were due to arrangements which were earlier, and much earlier, and primordially earlier depending on which part of the system is analyzed. Your ability to utilize certain information from the world relates to some brain components which are certainly of animal preparation. Their sexual desires that assured their side-effect babies, preserved some traits that you still now have, including sexual desires that assure side-effect babies for the future.

In order to understand the interplays of you, which is information joined with old instructions for tissues, you would really have to read zoology, exposing yourself to yet more information, of a kind appropriate for claiming that kind of tissue. You hardly need to know much of your lineage in the modern time, which means you don't need to know your genealogical history much, or perhaps your family preceding your experience, to know your tissues and its way of sponging. More of interest is your life interactions during your living, and the pattern-history of your tissues.

When were each of the pieces of your nervous-system prepared earlier and when were the first rough equivalents already appearing as your pretend equals in prehistory? How prepared were those tissues for cultural information, including 20-year current fashions? What relationship between tissues and cultural information are a progression or not on ideas about what is jealousy provoking at a basic level? How do you fit into this time in a way that can't be unfit, and how do you compare with that which might seem more optimally combined?

*[Finished in 25 minutes with minor edits, at 11:59 AM]*

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>


## <a name="thinking-of-salt-as-a-drug-and-not-a-mineral-nutrient">Thinking of Salt as a Drug and Not a Mineral Nutrient</a>

*Thursday, February 9<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>3:56 PM New Plymouth, New Zealand Time</time>

*[Unedited as part of studies in edidting]*

Recently I was pondering over my planning for my salt intake either on dependency to what is sold in stores, and independency using what exists in nature. Thinking further on how I would utilize store-bought salt, like the very fine-grained iodized salt used in the United States, and similar salts here in Australia and New Zealand, I recalled my earlier removal of salt from my diet, and reflected on my current behavior, adding salt to my food and not only sometimes having it administered to me in prepared foods. When I do add salt, I experience, like others, after effects which include uncomfortable water retention and sluggishness. Salt, on researching it's effects, has something akin to a half-life, or elongated period of time of secretion from the body which takes several days or longer. Utilization of salt within the body is not somethign simple but goes to the electrical, and is involved in heart functioning, and is expelled in complex ways, not only through the kidneys but through the skin, as a result of maintenance of body heat. Trained doctors would not be able to tell you what the complete actions of salt is, and where and how it is stored at any particular time in the body, or what it's electrons end up doing. They could tell you some of the functions but not all of them. For the non-physiologist wanting to understand one's own salt intake, one does need to know a little about how it is retained and expelled over time. This is also complex and not easy because it depends on other factors like activity, level of hydration, and actions of other foods and drugs. If one wants to reduce salt in the body, one can do little more than wait, hydrate, and exercise. Exercising will expell water and salt. Not consuming more and waiting simply lets the body do it's normal process of expelling salt in a way that is also unique to the individual.

Not having any salt at all, one will eventually run low enough to die. Salt must be consumed. However, it is not clear that salt needs to be consumed with anything else if one already has access to it in nearly pure form. Salt is used to flavor food, but I have also recently noticed, that I can achieve flavors approximating saltiness with citrus fruits. I then considered that flavorful foods can be created without any salt at all, and that some foods, like soups, which are saline solutions, require an excess quantity of salt before salt is detected; whereas, other foods require very small quantities of dry salt in order for the salt to be noticeds. Application of a small amount of salt to something and eating it will enable tasting the salt, like if one exercises vigorously, let's the sweat dry, then tastes the perhaps invisible salt remaining. Salt in combination with food seems a risk, whereas controlling the application of salf seems less so, and creates a greatetr likelihood of noticing the taste.

I devised an experiment while walking about here in New Plymouth, New Zealand. I will take a small quantity of table salt and scatter it over a paper with a grid of centimeters. It will have a uniform layer of salt at a known volume and weight. This will enable visual recognition of quantities of salt. I will then check the quantity of elemental sodium in the salt by checking the type and getting the data online. This will enable my usage of salt outside of food as a controlled substance, or drug that I can administer on my own. This will be useful to ensure I do not have too much, but it will also enable me to make sure I don't lose too much fluid while I'm doing my back country hiking for my homelessness eradication project. While hiknig around water is important to conserve so I can use the salt to control my depletion of liquid.

After doing this, I will liquify the salt with water and dry onto the paper uniformly, so the paper becomes like skin with dried salt from exercise. I will then cut the grid, so I have little pieces of paper with somewhat precise amounts of salt that I can use, like a drug dealer would, for controlling quantities like pills. A square centimeter of paper will then relate to a precise amount of elemental sodium. I can then just eat the papers, or else leave them in my mouth until unsalty, to get my salt, like an anmial with a salt lick, or your drugging on acid when they were a teen.

I will then go back to my earlier behavior of not even having or thinking about salt, in my own cooking. Periodically I will have food already prepared and will then have uncontrolled amounts, but other times, I will not use salt, and I will only use it as a drug for complete control.

Salt usage in unknown quantities does present a real health risk, and many know about issues with salt. However, my interst for the present is knowing about how much one has and what it's effects are, immediately as it relates to taste and comfort, and also over time as it relates to a variety of physiological states. It really can be managed in a drug like way. Of course it also is a drug like all the other chemicals in foods, which we learned in chemistry and biology. If people and children were educated to use specific already measured quantities of salt with known amounts of elemental sodium, from childhood onwards they would know more than doctors likely about the effects of salt on their own bodies. Considering this, one has to wonder why it is sold only in unmeasured piles. Extra packaging is not desirable, but there were sugar cubes before. Salt cubes and sugar cubes both could enable learning in children and in adultsfor their own health benefits and for becoming more like scientists.

*[Written in 24 minutes with no editing, no reading, semi-blind typed (seeing somewhat the type as it flows from the mind inattentively), no proofreading, and no spell check. I did not read it yet. Finished at 4:20 pm]*

*Author: Mattanaw, Christopher Matthew Cavanaugh*

- Masters Business & Economics, Harvard University (In Progress)
- B.S. Psychology, University of Maryland, 4.0, Summa Cum Laude<sup>[1](notes.html#1)</sup>
- B.S. Computer & Information Science, University of Maryland, 3.91, Magna Cum Laude<sup>[2](notes.html#2)</sup>
- B.A. Philosophy, University of Maryland.<sup>[3](notes.html#3)</sup>
- G.E.D., State of Maryland, Montgomery County, 1999.

Former Chief Architect, Adobe Systems

Current President/Advisor, Social Architects and Economists International.

Contact:

- [cmcavanaugh@g.harvard.edu](mailto:cmcavanaugh@g.harvard.edu)
- [christopher.matthew.cavanaugh@member.mensa.org](mailto:christopher.matthew.cavanaugh@member.mensa.org)
- [mattanaw@mattanaw.org](mailto:mattanaw@mattanaw.org)

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>


## <a name="air-insulation-in-clothing">Nearly Free Air Insulation in Clothing</a>

*Thursday, February 9<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>5:04 PM New Plymouth, New Zealand Time</time>

In my learnings working in the fireplace industry while young I discovered that a layer of air is considered among the very best insulators, and this, along with reflection, is the reason why the thermos is so effective, and why some building insulation systems and ventilation systems work as well as they do. While thinking again on solving issues relating to homelessness and wealthy camping, and thinking to myself that I'm not quite as equipped as I should be for warmth in my current camping research project, I began thinking of makeshift ways of using air to create temporary insulation underneath clothing. The goal is to add warmth at the lowest possible cost for those who are only partially prepared or have insufficient resources: like wealthy campers who did not buy enough expensive gear, and the homeless who have insufficient funds and planning abilities. Recently having purchased inexpensive plastic freezer bags in large quantity I considered that I could fill bags, seal them, and distribute them under my garments to test the amount the would insulate. Likewise, while sleeping in my sleeping bag, I will arrange bags filled with air, first breathed at 98.6 degree Fahrenheit, to see again what is accomplished for insulation. Thinking myself an energy producer until death, I wonder how much I can achieve with simple heat-filled air gaps, with methods of air circulation to release moisture. From what I know it appears that it is feasible to have systems using air in clothing and in sleeping bags, and it seems unfortunate that designs for such systems have not entered the market. Initially my purpose on this project is simply to heat with free things. Organic matter is also something I may try to surround myself with to stay warmer, but air insulation seems promising for creating new clothing. If useful enough it may be worthwhile to encourage some growth along this direction, which would also help for potentially creating needs for recycled plastic materials. 

- Air is an extremely good insulator, particularly if you include air circulation, but also quite good simply with a seal (thermos).
- There can be more than one air layer, including one's that are sealed and others that ventilate.
- It can certainly be used somehow in clothing.
- A person is a producer of warmth, and warm air. It is fun to produce warm air and I can't stop.
- Sleep systems can make use of air insulation almost certainly, even with ventilation.
- Reflection in conjunction with heating should enable slower release of heat from pre-heated air, and retaining of heat produced by the body.

It appears a combination of reflection, air, and heated air production, and ventilation, can in various combinations fulfill a large range of needs related to inexpensive but effective clothing from cheap plastic sources, and also create solutions for wealthy campers, and for homeless people who may be willing to have less comfort even in the solutions they are supposedly receiving. This means it does not need to be the best solution, and maybe among the worst, to support the needs of the homeless, and it would still potentially be successful.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="quick-remark-on-what-some-call-lateral-thinking">Quick Remark on What Some Call Lateral Thinking</a>

*Wednesday, February 8<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>5:04 PM New Plymouth, New Zealand Time</time>

A comment to someone who was discussing their lateral thinking and interest in brainstorming:

I'm a bit of a lateral thinker too. Any particular thing I'm working on has many aspects which lead some to perhaps think there are tangents occurring. But really it's relevant lateral thinking happening. Without that kind of thinking holism is not possible, at all. Some will have to be thinking in a lateral way to see how situations are larger than they are at a really close view of one main interest. Brainstorming is doing that. I enjoy white boarding sessions in which related ideas come together to "become something". If they did not become something there would be an unreality to what is being done, and disconnectedness and fracturedness would reveal that people are simply thinking separate things without an ability to combine them. Lateral thinking without synthesis would be a kind of change of spotlight without any ability to put pictures together, and then I think people think it is not lateral thinking. Although it is just without synthesis perhaps. Someone with ADHD may have issues with such a thing.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="development-on-homelessness-solutioning-and-example-of-my-attentional-management-process">Development on Homelessness Solutioning and Example of My Attentional Management Process</a>

*Wednesday, February 8<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>3:14 PM New Plymouth, New Zealand Time</time>

*[Unedited per usual as part of a set of studies on editing]*

Today after waking from my AirBnB in Waitara, NZ, I decided to take a walk to the bus to take a rider into the larger town of New Plymouth, where I would sit for coffee and write. Taking the bus is consistent with my plan now to experiment in distriuted livelihood and to increase my walking and self-reliant transportation (without a vehicle). I've driven over 750,000 miles to it is an interesting change to be using public transportation, bicycles, and walking on foot (although I've also been a bicycle commuter). As I walk around and take various forms of transportation, I connect the activity to my [attention management process](imagination-and-filtration-dark-green-notebook.html#attention-management-process-and-application) that I've created, as part of the self-training progression of my personal ethic. Walking is an especially good time to be using this process, and most would agree that walking is when good reflection often occurs for people. I often use this process while walking especially, but I do also use it for other activities while I'm awake. Transitioning to the bus, I switched again to use this process mindfully thinking about what I was doing, sitting on the bus enjoying sunshine through the windows and sights I was seeing, that are still somewhat new to me. Actually utilizing the process, I stepped into consideration of the various life-categories in sequence, starting with [Cycles and Shifts](cycles-and-shifts.html), which relates to cyclical biological behavior, and cyclical life plans, which in our culture relates to the [calendar](cycles-and-shifts.html). Being on the bus I thought about how my transit plans relate cyclically to my scientific and experiential study of distributed livelihood intended to solve problems related to homelessness and related problems faced by wealthy campers and travlers. Monthly now I travel to a new location, which indicates I have a monthly travel cycle in which I have a new temporary residence. On arrival in recent cities, I'm doing related cyclical research on aspects of the new place, particularly map reviews of the cities and spaces nearby. Not having knowledge of transit infrastructure including bus and train maps, I review maps to see how I will move in and out of specific areas of interest. I do this when first arriving at a city, before quickly learning how their particular bus system operates, receiving payments. I then learn the extent of the system, and connections to other systems. I reflected as I was on the bus, that an upcoming campint trip had some planning vagueness as I did not choose yet the specific areas suitable nearish to ends of the bus lines. This was something I was going to need to decide. Wanting to improve upon this cycle, and on the travel method incorporating camping, and research method for rapid understanding of cities and transit and avenues to areas of interest connecting with my needs and objectives, I thought that I would do a map review while at the coffee house, to identify good camping spots. These would be spots outside the city or on its outskirts, reasonably near for foot travel to the bus lines near their ends. I recognize this is not the only approach that may be used for camping planning but it is one that relates to my expectations of comfort and relative isolation. I then determined that what was needed during my cyclical arrivals at new destinations which are more adventurous, or plans before arrival, which are more for creating more relaxed less exploratory initial experiences, was clearer knowledge of the locations of terminals of bus lines towards endpoints and the geographical/climate conditions of areas near those locations, and land-ownership conditions, which might impact rules for camping. Thinking that there would be many locations which would be suitable, I would think about how I would analyze maps to enable intuitive and quick identification of areas, resulting in nearly automatic decisiveness, which is similar to the decisiveness experienced by readers of maps who are trained on specific usages for long periods of time, like drivers wanting to easily get to destinations with specific driving needs and preferences. Having a large number of locations quickly identified, I would have something akin to "many potential dwelling locations" automatically known. Making it fun and short with a phrase I called this to myself having "Many homes." I then thought about how homeless people may not have self-training for comfortably deciding among many known safe options. This would imply that a problem faced by homeless people is one of imagination and one of indecisiveness in relation to viable options and alternatives for safe sleeping and camping. Instead homeless would likely choose something near and less safe and comfortable, for not having a better strategy and self training which would exist for a camper who is wanting to have a reasonable location on lands that allow it. A camper who would have many options for this. Wanting to resolve this difficulty for myself as an experimenter in this type of livelihood, I have trained over time to get to a point in which I could make a small advancement on my plans, relating to a number life-categories, while utilizing my attentional process, which is part of my moral-philosophical ethical project, and writings. If successful on this particular effort I would have training which could potentially be used to train others to live in ways that are appropriate for wealthy campers and homeless people alike. At time of this realization I thought it would be wortwhile to incorporate into my plans for writing during the day at the coffee house at Starbucks in New Plymouth. This is where I am now completing the writing which traces back this development beginning with the starting of my activity method beginning when I was leaving my AirBnB this morning.

A purpose of the above writing is to provide a narrative of the utilization of my attentional management process that I have written about and created a technical architecture for, [Attentional Architecture](architecture.html#attentional-architecture). The beginnings of this architecture were in writings from approximately 2006 in my [Personal Form](mattanaws-personal-form.html). An intial review of the personal form and attentional architecture would not reveal really clearly utilization. However the utilization is made more clear by a narrative sample usage of the form connecting clearly with process diagrams. The process diagrams are well tested and well used, with many hours of usage and usage of approximately 45 days in its present version. This provides also an example of how my thinking in my project relates to its management within this process.

*[Written in 31 minutes partly blind typed without edits, except for one typo briefly noticed. It has not yet been read, spell-checked, or proofread by the writer. Title now being added post-completion. Added two links afterwards as well. Finished at 3:45 pm]*

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="commant-and-response-to-cyclical-euphemization-process-and-anticipated-word-expiry">Comment and response to "Cyclical Euphemization Process and Anticipated Word Expiry"</a>

*Wednesday, February 8<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>3:03 PM New Plymouth, New Zealand Time</time>

Below is a comment I received regarding my article [Cyclical Euphemization Process and Anticipated Word Expiry](#cyclical-euphemization-process-and-anticipated-word-expiry). This comment was received in a social group to which we are both members. Context was not provided for interpretation, and my comment beneath creates context establishing relevance to this comment, and gives reaction to what is perceived as an attempt at being helpful.

In the works of Gibson, a predominant concept is the concept of postcultural
consciousness. Therefore, if semantic materialism holds, the works of Gibson
are not postmodern.
The primary theme of the works of Gibson is the role of the reader as
artist. Derrida uses the term ‘capitalist theory’ to denote not deconstruction,
but predeconstruction. However, semantic materialism suggests that the
establishment is part of the defining characteristic of language, given that
the premise of Foucaultist power relations is valid.
The subject is interpolated into a semantic materialism that includes truth
as a totality. Therefore, many discourses concerning postdialectic narrative
exist.
In Pattern Recognition, Gibson denies Foucaultist power relations; in
Mona Lisa Overdrive, although, he deconstructs surrealism. But
Foucaultist power relations implies that the goal of the poet is social
comment.
In the works of Gibson, a predominant concept is the distinction between
without and within. Lyotard uses the term ‘Foucaultist power relations’ to
denote a self-justifying paradox. It could be said that Debord promotes the use
of postcultural capitalist theory to attack sexism.
“Society is intrinsically used in the service of class divisions,” says
Foucault. Lyotard uses the term ‘surrealism’ to denote the role of the reader
as poet. In a sense, the subject is contextualised into a Foucaultist power
relations that includes consciousness as a whole.
In the works of Gibson, a predominant concept is the concept of
subdeconstructive sexuality. The economy, and therefore the futility, of
surrealism depicted in Gibson’s Neuromancer is also evident in
Pattern Recognition, although in a more capitalist sense. However, Marx
uses the term ‘semantic materialism’ to denote the absurdity of neotextual art.
The subject is interpolated into a cultural paradigm of narrative that
includes culture as a totality. In a sense, if Foucaultist power relations
holds, the works of Gibson are modernistic.
Sartre uses the term ‘poststructural deconceptualism’ to denote not
discourse, as Baudrillard would have it, but subdiscourse. Thus, a number of
desublimations concerning semantic materialism exist.
Marx suggests the use of surrealism to modify and analyse class. But
Finnis[2] holds that we have to choose between
Baudrillardist simulation and neotextual semiotic theory.
Lyotard promotes the use of surrealism to deconstruct hierarchy. Thus, many
theories concerning a mythopoetical paradox may be found.
Bataille suggests the use of semantic materialism to challenge sexual
identity. Therefore, a number of discourses concerning Lyotardist narrative
exist.

Below are my responses to this comment:

Thanks for sharing. I have a background in Philosophy so this is appealing. The readings referred above are more continental than my philosophical learnings, and are of interest perhaps, in addition to what you are trying to convey, as areas of possible exploration where I might need them in relation to my larger work (Book and Journal of Mattanaw). It appears you have shared this because the observations here on Gibson, relate, in a variety of ways, to the understanding of the lexicon within a cultural total, interpreted correctly, along Foucalitian, Deconstructionist, Materialist, Early Economist, Sociological and Artistic cultural perspectives. I have not read Gibson so this provides some interest for pursuing that potentially if it seems instrumental. The connections to surreal art are of interest and my own ethical studies include aesthetic considerations too, but without any specific focus on artistic school, as much as a focus on psychology (perception and sexuality).

Relating to the OP though, I think the relevant concern for that particular posting, is one pointed out already. The planning and evolution of terminology and changes as they relate not only to scientific development, but reactions of public to changing utilizations which can include those perceived as harmful. Your writing above applies to that in particular because those who are affected and impacted may not understand their own cultural influences.

When I share from my blog or copy-paste sometimes the formatting is thrown off, and line breaks don't work correctly with word wrapping. It appears for this reason that this is copy paste. Did you happen to copy paste this from any work that is your own or did it come from another? My assumption is that this is your writing which is nice, but I don't want to assume that, if copy pasted from an unavailable resource.

mattanaw.com/thoughtstream.html

<group member> it looks like this is a literature review to place Gibson in context for some additional writing. In that case knowing the source would be especially interesting. I'm interested in reading more concerning this. If it is an excerpt you like from elsewhere, thanks for saving and sharing. If it is your own writing, I'd like to see more of what you've prepared, or see later what is next.
This is good here: “Society is intrinsically used in the service of class divisions,”

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="cyclical-euphemization-process-and-anticipated-word-expiry">Cyclical Euphemization Process and Anticipated Word Expiry</a>
 
*Tuesday, February 7<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>11:17 AM New Plymouth, New Zealand Time</time>

*[Unedited without proofreading for an ongoing set of studies related to editing.]*

For a long-enough period of time people have been exposed to a process in which words that were originally well-intentioned or jargonized became insults or offensive terms after public alteration of the original usage. Some examples:

> *[It is known that the history of this needs to be revisited perhaps for a better tracing of pathways and for better exmaples]*

- Manic Depression, which became:
  - Bipolar Disorder (which is now offensive, and may pend changes).
- Retardation, which became:
  - Menally Handicapped (which is now offensive, and may pend changes).
- Autism, which grew to include
  - Aspergers, which was altered to become
    - Autistic Spectrum (development more on scientific advancement),
    - Or for some Neurodivergent (which may be less offensive).

Earlier these terms were yet earlier terms that were changed to be euphemized or professional terms instead, with specific meanings, which were then converted to insults by members of the public. After children and adults and other nonspecialists alter the terms to be derogatory, their offensiveness increases until there is a desire to change the words, even for those in a professional occupation making specialized usage.

It was perhaps noticed by some few who realized that this is simply a cyclical process that is inevitable, as words for diseases, conditions, and various states of being that are considered undesirable inevitably become words that are used to demean and disparage others. A new word is introduced that is intended to euphemize an older word, or supplant depending on interpretations, with the intention that a scientific interpretation is used that is objective or more descriptive, and not at all intended to offend or insult. Sometimes the objective is purely advancement on science, and sometimes it is to aid in improving public welfare for people who are mistreated. Either way new terms that relate to personal details which are considered undesirable will become words that will be used to offend or demean others who do not have those same characteristics, just as someone is likely to use the words "dumb" or "stupid" for people who are neither. The cycle is related to the fact that people do not want to be like those who are lesser in value along certain measures.

While words are updated and altered to attempt to satisfy people who may be damaged by the words, or those who think they are supportive of alleviating harmful affects, others are annoyed that the change should be required, for being more objective and understanding of the specific meanings of the concepts in their more scientific application. Professionals and others may think the words suitable, given their usage, and their ability perhaps to refrain from using those same terms to harm people. In the field of psychology, certain words are known to be harmful to patients and people in the public, and within the field they are more disciplined in their avoidance of these words. Educated people may not want to often revise words for purposes that are political or unrelated to scientific goals.

It is suggested here that since this cycle seems to have inevitability to it, because of the change of concepts from advancement in science, and the expected utility of the words to harm others, that a scientific treatment of the process itself be used for planning the professional lexcion. If it is understood that there is a natural process to the evolution of words which includes modifications to preserve feelings, and to decrease immoral or abusive behavior, then it appears professionals ought to incorporate it into their professional ethic, and utilize it in their planning of their own fields. With this understanding it would be more clear to everyone which words will likely require changes. Having all people aware of the types of words that would likely end up in this cycle would perhaps create better human awareness around the evolution of words, and of moral practices concerning their usage.

An alternative would be to train regarding this cycle, and instead of making the changes to words on the basis of expected usage by the public for injury, make the changes pre-emptively on the basis of improvements which would occur anyways, in the science. Redefinition and reclassification is required as knowledge grows. Instead of utilizing the same words for words that are targeted for being part of this cycle, these words are simply changed to be more descriptive and current. In this case most is achieved by the dvancement of science, and all those who understand the cycle, including both professionals and people in the public, will know to wait for words to change as they become increasingly misused for aformentioned reasons.

*[Written semi-blind typing, without edits or spell check, without planned composition, arrangement, or development of conversation, from thoughts on the topic which pre-existed partly, however. Incl. awareness of the cycle. One minor typo fixed after. Completed at 11:44 a.m. in 27 minute]*

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>


## <a name="familiarity-with-self-is-not-a-clarified-representation">Familiarity with Self is Not a Clarified Representation</a>

*Monday, February 6<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>9:38 PM Waitara, New Zealand Time</time>

Yes, you and others are self-familiar.

But what organized true representation did you make of that familiarity?

Did you write a true autobiography?

Did you depict your life true in visuals and sounds?  

Familiarity is done by having normal animal functioning.

How good is your self-familiarity is only shown with the quality of your clarified representation,

otherwise it is not clear how well you know yourself, 

to yourself,

or anyone else...

A clarified representation is something you have that is not in you that requires your own independent creation.

Familiarity with self is not a clarified representation.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="combining-widely-separate-situations-and-the-brains-reactions-to-that">Combining Widely Separate Situations and the Brain's Reactions to That</a>

*[Written without editing for studies in progress]*

*Monday, February 6<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>4:19 PM Waitara, New Zealand Time</time>

One of my interests in my writings is the proper understanding of truth as it relates to situations, and models of situations. In order to arrive at a good understanding of large situations, like for Earth as a whole, one must be able to consider patterns and analogies, and similarities, between situations that are contained. Before recently, one was mostly only able to do so by comparing and relating in one's mind what one has learned from experience during exposure to separate situations, and from using what has learned from other's explanations and recordings of situations, as poorer but useful substitutes from more direct experience. As we are increasingly able to store audio-visual materials showing diverse situations, and presenting these situations quickly for comparison, we are more able to see relationships using better copies than what humans could earlier relay only with verbal communication and artwork, we are increasingly more equipped to compare realistic or nearly realistic situations to understand larger situations, like for Earth more wholly.

More recently I began reflecting on how this relates to the experience one has psychologically in relation to mobile applications that can present short pieces of situational information in quick succession to a user. Social applications currently exist in wide usage that display short videos and images to users very briefly, before moving on to present new videos and images that often includes very different scenarios, sometimes widely separated in time and space. One might see an image of a display of talent from a young person wanting exposure in North America, then suddenly see something about animals in Asia. Video content and images appear to be shorter and smaller partly because of software and video scaling limitations in the architecture of the applications, but the resulting experience is also one that has desirable aspects, relating to experiences we've already had watching the news or other television shows that show one thing of high interest, but move quickly to another. Listening to musical mixes in some night clubs, DJs quickly move from one track to another in a very short period of time. These experiences indicate that people do enjoy oftentimes having more types of stimulus for shorter durations than longer types of stimulus for longer durations. Taking this further, it may be the cause of choices of song length, television show length, and movie length. Historically I have preferred very long movies, and longer songs, but there have been plenty of counterexamples to this preference even in my experience. Additionally, after certain extended periods of time, other limitations like limitations on comfort and need to use toilets and restrooms interrupt, and need to eat and get rest from stimulus exposure, cause a more definite need for moving on to other activities and behaviors.

Considering, from one's own experience, the range of experiences of various kinds of entertainment, their formats and durations, one can see that certain social media exposures really do include a somewhat new experience. Videos are much shorter, and one can scroll through several videos in seconds if one can immediately see they are not of interest. These applications have millions of users and millions of videos, from diverse situations all over the world, and in seconds many can see many videos from many places, watching only for short durations. The size of the total data of video content and user experiences of that content is very large, and again, is unique to the total human experience from pre-history to the present day. There are two very interesting considerations which relate to this unique and new phenomena. Firstly, there is now data about a larger number of situations which may be quickly compared, because of short formats, and because of the largeness of the datum, and range of spaces and times in which users can share content concerning. Again, these videos include vivid content which is much better in quality than descriptions that would have existed in human verbal communication earlier. Verbal communication about interesting events also, from our experiences, was longer in duration and one could not simply jump between verbal descriptions with the rapidity that one can switch between highly vivid audio-visual content. Secondly, this data, and our experiences with the data, can tell us something about our own brains and to what extent it appears that humans were equipped for such experiences, switching so rapidly between different kinds of situations, invoking different mental events, emotional and intellectual.

Observing my own mental experiences with these applications, especially TikTok, over several years, I have found that strange combinations of experience sometimes prompt unexpected mental connections and emotional associations that do not seem to be entirely normal, given the history of human experience. There have been times in which the emotional response of some materials appeared to be transferred to subsequent materials, which did not have situational relationships in nature, apart from what has been enabled by the application itself, in being able to show very unrelated things in a short time.This seems to indicate some things about the brain and ability to disable certain reactions, between exposures to different situations. For example, if one is exposed very quickly to a victim of an injury on TikTok, one may have an emotional response that is culturally or personally appropriate to that exposures. Perhaps one feels saddened for a victim, their appearance, and angry about their experience. TikTok sometimes shows burn victims who wish to share information about their lives. A user can watch the video and feel this for a period of perhaps 30 seconds; or, the user can simply feel a reaction to an extremely momentary exposure, and move four or five videos along, briefly seeing each video and quickly deciding that something else is wanted. They may then see another video of interest, perhaps seeing someone attractive doing a workout. Clearly this would be a very different kind of content; however, oftentimes, elements of the one situation resemble elements of the next, even if the content is quite different in terms of potential emotional reactions. One can see something and still have an emotional reaction to the prior video, and transfer it somewhat to the new video, even if the new video seems different from the one preceding it. The extremely diverse number of situations that can be experienced in succession should be evident considering that any user from any place on earth may post something with different intentions and interests. Quantifying situational diversity is not something that is immediately achievable and probably does not exist, but certainly there are more than trillions of combinations of aspects which constitute the total earthly situations. On the app, one gets sexualized content then immediately after, violent materials. Then lovable animals, then scenes of sports. The result of the strangely large pool of unrelated content presented to users in quick succession are mental events which are unusual.

In everyday experiences sometimes we are interrupted quickly in what we are doing with catastrophe or suddenly unexpected situations. Perhaps a person has a sudden health event that one never experienced, while working. Perhaps one is enjoying a drive, before suddenly being investigated by police in a very aggressive fashion. The emotions of the one experience often influence the reaction to the other experience that prompted very different emotions. Having relaxing driving experiences suddenly becomes something related to avoiding aggression. Work suddenly becomes a health risk. Typically, there is consistency in the experiences which does not involve quick changes, and so one can have many drives that are long and enjoyable, and one can have exhilarating days of work, if one is doing something one really enjoys, that unlocks potential. Or one can simply do days of work in comfort in a routine, without any feeling that there are risks. This seems to indicate firstly that one does not expect rapid successions of real events, and one's brain certainly would have been evolved in an environment that does not have great leaps between situations frequently. One often does not enjoy sudden changes of situations. There are examples in which sudden changes of situation create excitement too, but again in normal human experiences one does not change space and time quickly, but rather can only switch environments within one's area somewhat infrequently and at a pace not nearly like that which is provided now by TikTok and other social media apps. It appears then that the brain has not necessarily been equipped to move so rapidly between widely different kinds of situations, and that sometimes if it is done, it is unwanted, with side effects, and other times, it is stimulating and exciting. When I've used these applications, I have alternated between really enjoying the experience, and really disliking it. And I have experienced odd psychological side effects, transferring emotions and sensations from one situation in which I'm exposed, to the next which is largely unrelated.

It is unobvious whether this kind of experience falls under the total experience in which humans can have and get familiar with, without any especially negative near or longer term consequences, or if there are more serious consequences because of the newness of the phenomena. It is not clear if the brain is general enough to handle all kinds of learning situations, or if it is better to keep experience closer to what is closer to that in which it was originally evolved.

Either way, the data and the application, presents a set of useful scientific opportunities for understanding how the brain functions, what its preferred functions are, and for learning about the Earth and its interrelationships.

*More soon*

*[Written in 47 minutes with no spellcheck, no edits, mostly blind typing with reading or feedback of what is typed at the time it is typed. Finished at 5:06 pm]*

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>


## <a name="upcoming-initial-postings">Upcoming initial postings</a>

*Tuesday, January 25<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>9:09 PM Waitara, New Zealand Time</time>

Items to post concerning from recent thoughts:

- Topic shifts in discussion, interjections, rules of collaboration.
  - Involves thoughts I developed while in bed late last night.
- The life categories and structure of organization of one's life.
  - Will appear here or on the existing [life categories](life-categories.html) section.
- Writing off the recent [notes regarding objectivity relating to ritualization for more probable recollection](#notes-objectivity-in-symbolic-ritualization-for-more-probable-recollection).

This post is in keeping with permitting myself to include some planned tasks openly via thoughtstream. [Sharing of Tasks and Plans](#sharing-of-tasks-and-plans).

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="cohesive-visions-plans-and-post-editing">Cohesive Visions, Plans, and Post-Editing</a>

*Friday, January 20<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>8:24 PM Sydney, Australia Time</time>

When one writes concerning a topic of high complexity wanting to eventually bring it to a cohesive work, that reads well, has good transitions, and is well encapsulated, one needs to either have a vision as to what the work will need to become, or one will need to eventually come to a vision of what the work can be that is more simplistic. The present work will be demonstrably more of the former, although does include elements of the latter; the reason for its having elements of the later is creativity which occurs along the way which influences thoughts about what might be better concerning the vision. Obviously creativity along the way to a better result which realizes the vision is desirable. Sometimes it may give new pathways to better projects. In my case, however, I am mostly simply realizing an original plan and that is and will be demonstrable. This is important because it indicates early recognition of significance, ability to write things that might be incoherent to others, for their complexity, but later bring all together into something that is really obviously coherent and consistent with the initial vision and its significance. In fact, I could have written about how it could be combined, but doing that would in an unsatisfactory way speak of something that is better revealed at a time when it is spoken of better.

This is very different from another pathway which might be had. This may consist of more narrow visions had separately, written about without a vision as to synthesis. Some writers may enjoy writing this way thinking of each as a separate project. Some writers who do not have a corpus or body of work that obviously fits together as a singular piece of work of many pieces, are sharing with us that they did not have such a vision or work, but rather had separate visions or works. This is not necessarily something that diminishes the quality of what they are doing, depending on what their focus or goals happens to be. For example, a film maker, should not be expected to create movies with interesting widely separate situations, in a way that they fit with the each other as singular works. They may seem quite different, and that may be what indicates the quality of the creativity of their creations. They are able to "get out of" one way of doing something, to do it very differently to arrive at a better final piece of another kind. If one writes one biography, certainly it should not be the same work as another's biography. Because of personality there will certainly be aspects of method and style included which may allow one to identify the cdreators influence. But this is not really something deliberate, but more accidental. Novels, works of different kinds of art, and different genres, need not be part of a single work. The artist for these pieces may more deliberately want to separate them. Actors do this when they want to make sure they don't transfer something from one character to the other, falsifying the future characters, by giving them traits that they would not have, brought by a separate entity, the actor, having nothing to do with the character itself within their situation or creative universe.

Writings that are separate or visionary that have some complex aspects that are not part of a vision, will seem erratic or chaotic, and perhaps irritatingly disjoint, such that if they are encountered together, may seem to indicate purposelessness, or lack of goals. Many writers write this way. Collections of their writings may appear very incohesive. Arguably some may say they have not yet finished, and so, the vision that holds them together must wait. However, typically, signs and indicators as to vision and pathway would be easily spoken concerning without revealing everything. In these cases it is highly likely that if something of the vision cannot be said, and sufficient short indications as to directions are not provided, they do not exist, or are also fractured and not systhesized. Articulation of the significance of the work in some few statements that don't reveal and do not share something that is inadequately stating something that should be stated later should still exist. Apart from writings of complexity that have this characteristic of perpetual analysis paralysis as to holism, or even incremental separate synthetic part wholes, we have most other people who think more simply about things separately and narrowly, without writing. These thinkers are still mostly doing what this paragraph indicates they are doing. They think about something of interest temporarily, bring it to a point of personal satisfaction, and then jump to another topic, think about it, and bring it to a point of satisfaction. They jump around unable to bring them all together in a singular or somewhat holistic vision or thought plan. If they were to write, they would have a similar chaotic work of many writings about different things that don't come together coherently. As with an artist however, these works would come better into view looking at the life of the person, and seeing their personality. However, they would like as part of their lives and personalities something of a clear vision that brings these pieces together.

All who would be included in the prior paragraph would have to, afterwards in writing their autobiographies, or in writing what they think joins their mental content and their written content, do post editing. They would have to look at their lives, and their writings, and find hidden connections. They would have to admit, that if they found it, it was when they found it that they found it, and not earlier. They would not be able to say "This was my plan all along" but rather, in a retrospective, these writings and these thoughts, and these actions, come together in such a such a way. I think most would be unable to bring it together even in post editing, although reading repeatedly ones writings may provide new insights which would result culminating thoughts joinging things together creatively. If done later in life, this must consist of very pleasant moments of finally arriving at something from a sort of incohesive collection, to something that feels holistic, and maybe is. However, I think that would be really rare. When I speak of holism in any case, I'm still thinking of partial holism, as I've already written about the impossibility of any kind of perfect holism. Yet there is a desirable holism of life plan and "making sense of things", of "coming to an understanding" of life. This is not merely autobiographical. It is more because a successful autobiography truthfully tells life as it happened in a shorter format; whereas, coming to an understanding and telling one's life story includes that one came to an understanding and may actually include writing about that understanding which can communicate it to others. Better still is if the life itself also included the plans which include the understanding, and culminate in greater undersrtanding, were always cohesive, and required less of this post-editing. In that case attribution of the understanding to each earlier phase in one's autobiography is honest. For others who attain later and attribute it earlier are really falsifying their own life story.

Post-editing of a collection of writings to achieve understanding is not something that is undesirable but rather something that might be the best that one can strive for given one's abilities.

Yourself as an animal can only achieve what is possible to it given it's nature. It's abilities and it's properties. One has to really consider in one's planning if one is going to realize one's goals what is possible given one's abilities. One's executive functioning in the brain is related to one's plans for oneself and also the realization of those plans. If one has good executive functioning concerning planning of what is realizable, one would already choose something that is attainable or not given one's nature. Not all should plan for a work such as this one, and many would do well not to. 

*Written in 27 minutes without edits or spell check, blind typing with only part screen reading, Friday, January 20<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>8:51 PM Sydney, Australia Time</time>

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>


## <a name="paper-and-energy">Paper and Energy</a>

*Friday, January 20<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>7:28 PM Sydney, Australia Time</time>

Recently, as I was thinking about my offgrid living plans, and travel plans, regarding my computers and my devices, I realized that I could accomplish most of what I want to accomplish, even for months at a time, with few batteries, as long as I shifted my attention back to paper. My writings can continue on paper. My artwork I've been wanting to do, is of course, something that can be done on paper. Sheet music can be written onto paper. Paper, unlike all my computers, and phones, and so on, is very lightweight. It would enable my backpacking to not have these devices and instead have paper and writing implements, and would make travel much simpler.

Thinking about this on the train in Sydney this early evening, I realized that there may be a benefit to thinking about paper books, and paper to write on, as having battery power. What are the energy needs of paper once you have it? What are the comparable energy needs of computers and phones, for doing similar tasks.

My primary tasks of interst involve what I've included above, but also archiving. Eventually, my writings will be in a digital format for archiving, and for later publication, returning what was digitized back to paper again. Writing is something I use to occupy my leisure time for fun, and also to continue my book and journal that's in progress. Artwork, and sheet music involve plans for additional productions which I intended to be digital primarily, but now am considering doing on paper, if energy considerations make it more worthwhile.

## Paper Energy Requirements Contra Electronic Devices

My iPhone battery life appears to have the following key energy limits:

- Duration in usage: 1 day.
- Duration of single charge when off: 30 days or more.

The iphone battery life in usage is really some number of hours less than 24 hours. But I have noticed, it holds a charge that satisfies me for roughly one day before it needs to be recharged. For this reason, I simply say my phone can last one day if I use it. If I do not use it, it can last more than thirty days turned off. In cold weather I believe it may last only a day or two turned off.

My computer battery life appears to have the following energy limits:

- Duration in usage: 2 days.
- Duration of a single charge when off: 10 days.
- Cold weather duration of a single charge when off: 1 day.

I know my computer will completely lose it's charge if left in a cold car overnight. For example, I lived in the state of Alaska. I did not always bring my computer inside, and sometimes did leave the computer in the car. Returning to computer not long after, I would find it's battery empty even if it was fully charged before.

Now let's consider energy requirements of paper.

- Duration in usage: depending on the paper, up to 700 years.
- Duration in storage: depending on the paper, and storage conditions, perhaps several thousand years. Perhaps more if stored in resin.

Paper appears to exceed digital devices in terms of energy requirements very greatly. What are some implications of this? Below are some implications that directly relate to my plans regarding the archiving of my book and journal:

- *Final archival format is not digital because it will be lost.*
  - We saw that a stored book may last more than 700 years in a library. This is excluding the fact that it can be copied and reprinted again and again, meaning it can be stored 700 years many times. There are risks that the books would be burned, lost to water damage, or some other hazard. For this reason they are usually copied and stored in more than one location. However, these risks only become probable over very extended periods of time. A book in a library will almost certainly last a very long period of time. 
  - Comparing this to digital books. With digital books, there are many parts of the technology with interfere with reading access, which eventually can come together to total and probabl loss of that book, even in the near future. Firstly, with a digital book, the screen goes off. Paper, the screen never goes off. With a digital book, you may need a password or security step to access for reading. It is mixed with other things you have, that make for undue protection of the book. Without the password or security step to gain access to the device, not only may you lose the book, everyone may lose it. It's archival potential has been eliminated. If any part of the device is damaged, it may make access for copy, retreival, or other impossible. Hardware failure is nearly certain to occur within 30 years, even if there is no accidental breakage. Software limitations placed on digital computers have planned obselescence. This means that the book will not be accessible on the computer, or readable using software on the computer, after some passage of time. Regarding this book, which is on a website, I have to apply a security patch to the server, or allow the cloud provider to make software changes, that can interrupt the server, and make the book inacceissible. This may happen in a timeframe of just a couple years. Browser technology may be unable to render books in my format in the near future. Storage media used apart from the computer systems that allow you to see your books, which are similar to storage of books that nobody can open, eventually degrade. How they are organized becomes confusing, and easy to lose, since all is on a chip, whereas, in a library, there are many books that are not likely to be lost all at one time. If you have a chip you may decide to just throw it away, forgetting what's on it. It may break, and I've had chips break (mini SIM cards). Whereas, my library was an annoying possession to have that could not simply be eliminated when I wanted to rid of it.
  - A website, printed as a book, has longevity that the website or file cannot have, because of these many parts of the technologies that can fail.
  - The point of this as it relates to batteries is that along this entire path of digital storage for archiving are all these problems AND related energy requirements, because the entire systems are electrical systems. Paper archiving requires no energy, is not utilizing any parts that depend on energy, can fail to supply energy, can fail to supply signals using energy, can fail to display a screen using energy and the like. Whereas, with paper, it's always on. It is accessible. It is harder to lose, and harder to get rid of. It requires no energy in the lifecycle regarding its own presentation, and self-storage of the content.
- *Paper and Pencil never turns off, is not unavailable if there is no energy supply, is lightweight for not requiring battery storage, always can show what it will show, even if energy is not supplied, and it would not be supplied.*
  - When I'm traveling on a hiking trip, to read and write I really would prefer to have my computer systems and phones working indefinitely, but that's far from the case. All devices if used will certainly have no power at all within 2 days. However, I considered, if I'm only using paper, for writing, artwork, and music creation, I can still scan and archive them digitally at a later time, and return them to paper again. However, I then can use it for my entire trips. I will not have to worry about losing battery as I do my work. I can live offgrid for months and have no worries concerning my abilities to continue my work and fun tasks recording my thoughts and reading them again. Taking a single hard copy book alone with me, printed on fine paper, I would have many pages to read and recall at low weight, without any chance that I would be unable to continue reading for extended periods of time. Total weight of some paper and some implements, and a lightweight book of many pages, is much less than for carrying devices, computers, solar generators, cables, etc... But again, all can be returned to digital format later if necessary. 
- *Creation format and archival format as paper has many benefits*

*[More soon]*

*Finished without edits in 40 minutes. Friday, January 20<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>8:08 PM Sydney, Australia Time</time>*

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

## <a name="notes-objectivity-in-symbolic-ritualization-for-more-probable-recollection">Notes on Objectivity in Symbolic Ritualization for More Probable Recollection</a>

*Wednesday, January 18<sup>th</sup>, 2023*,&nbsp;<time>6:51 PM Sydney, Australia Time</time>

Write about the universal applicability of a symbol like the fitness template. (It should seem somewhat ridiculous because of the arbitrariness of it). 2 minute analogy to a lecture in college or theological seminary which is expanded into a 90 minute paid course lecture. Ease of learning it. Secular understanding provides the feeling of practicality and willingness to use and find interest in one's own life. Arbitrariness seems ridiculous but also is creative, which indicates people can create similarly without support, and enjoy the ridiculous arbitrariness of it while having the usefulness, and having something shared with animals. Feels more obviously proven in development of examples in culture and seemingly interpsecies behavioral analogues. That it corresponds to a need in morality which explains its historical usage in parts of religions, with examples of religions that can be recalled. While the choice of symbolism and specific ritual may be creative, and arbitrary, and have a sense of ridiculousness associated with it, it is also unarbitrary, because of its history in nature it appears to have evolutionary utility. And it relates to cycles of attempts to rehearse what is not often recalled otherwise; thoughts and ideas are encouraged in the brain, to increase probability of recollection later when situations would make it useful. If related to emergency response, or related to having certain behaviors in important contexts which could relate in death, serious injury, illness, or psychological damage, which may be lifelong, training provides similar examples. Acronyms in emergency training are used so those trained more easily recall what is wanted to be done during emergency situations. If what is trained is not done during emergency situations, the person may be considered incompetent at their job, although it is understood that emergency response can be more high-pressure with less time for decisions than other contexts. Yet that is the reason for the ritualization, and training, to create higher probabilities that thoughts will occur when wanted, and behaviors will occur when wanted, which is the same thing which has caused the formation of symbolism and ritualism described. This would be an example of a really objective moral proto-design, which before was more natural in its manifestation, of people who were ritual in behavior but could not explain using objective grounds why. This non-objective natural origin is a cause of trust in one's group but distrust in another. Because it is not known why really but appears to be of great importance, and is arbitrary to the culture that created it, with a feeling of ridiculousness that results in cognitive dissonance when challenged, even if the challenge is for learning. 

<br /><img  class="ui huge center image transition visible" data-src="18012023075349-notes-objectivity-in-symbolic-ritualization-for-more-probable-recollection-1-mattanaw.png" src="18012023075349-notes-objectivity-in-symbolic-ritualization-for-more-probable-recollection-1-mattanaw.png"><br />

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

*Preface: Opening task lists and current work plans.*

*Started Writing: Thursday, December 1<sup>st</sup>, 2022*,&nbsp;<time>7:23 PM Cairns, Australia Time</time>

## <a name="sharing-of-tasks-and-plans">Sharing of Tasks and Plans</a>

Before I was using a log to keep track of my backlog of tasks, but I've decided not only to open up my life via wthis website with health and identity information, and various thoughts as experienced, but to open up to include some immediate plans relating to work projects I'm conducting.

There may be very little interest in some of these task lists that I'm producing. However, as a log, and part of my living autobiography, it provides more information about my activities as they are happening.

A few writing projects are incomplete on this site including the following which I hope to complete in the next few weeks:

- finish interview regarding charlatans of the high intelligence community.
- add more content regarding intelligence related to communication of significance and density of meaning in the fastest typing.
- completion of the list of favorable moods that I'd like to be able to experience on-demand. This relates to the writings on the life category of Mood and Mediation, and Higher Order Attention.

This is the very first post of this type including items from my personal task backlog. I have not yet determined exactly how much I should be sharing from my backlog. Historically that information was somewhat confidential to me, particularly as my tasks related to my business. Customers would certainly be protected and I could not provide backlog tasks related to work performed for them. However, for work items in my business that I create for myself in my business, I am contemplating sharing those. It does not appear that there is anyone who could take and do those tasks, and combine them into a meaningful plan that would be competitive against my plans. This would be another progression in my attempt to see what needs protections and what doesn't, finding that more and more can be open, reducing privacy but increasing various freedoms from having to protect.

*Started Writing: Thursday, December 1<sup>st</sup>, 2022*,&nbsp;<time>7:30 PM Cairns, Australia Time</time>

*[Finished in 7 minutes, without approximately 7 minor typo fixes, with spellcheck, no grammar check, and little self reading (semi-blind touch typing).]*

*Author: Mattanaw, Christopher Matthew Cavanaugh*

- Masters Business & Economics, Harvard University (In Progress)
- B.S. Psychology, University of Maryland,
- B.S. Computer & Information Science, University of Maryland,
- B.A. Philosophy (Nearly Completed, 2003), University of Maryland.

Former Chief Architect, Adobe Systems

Current President/Advisor, Social Architects and Economists International.

Contact:

- [cmcavanaugh@g.harvard.edu](mailto:cmcavanaugh@g.harvard.edu)
- [mattanaw@mattanaw.org](mailto:mattanaw@mattanaw.org)
- [christopher.matthew.cavanaugh@member.mensa.org](mailto:christopher.matthew.cavanaugh@member.mensa.org)

[http://www.mattanaw.org/christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#sharing-of-tasks-and-plans](http://www.mattanaw.org/christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#sharing-of-tasks-and-plans)

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>


*Started Writing: Tuesday, November 29<sup>th</sup>, 2022*,&nbsp;<time>1:53 PM Cairns, Australia Time</time>

## <a name="im-not-that-into-relationships">I'm not that into relationships.</a>

What were the obligations you were thinking I had?

What control do you feel thinking about that, regarding my relationships?

[http://www.mattanaw.org/christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#im-not-that-into-relationships](http://www.mattanaw.org/christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html#im-not-that-into-relationships)

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>


*Preface: Brothers who aren't.*

*Published: Sunday, August 25<sup>th</sup>, 2022*,&nbsp;<time>3:08 PM Cairns, Australia Time</time>

## <a name="solving-your-problems-by-calling-each-other-brother-or-sister">Solving *your* problems by calling each other Brother or Sister.</a>

You know how people at one time called each other "Brother"?

I was just thinking to myself. You say this because you are in a situation in which you think people will endanger each other, but you are similar enough to each other, that you think pretending you're family will support kindness.

Now imagining myself in this context, where people say "Brother" perhaps in the 70s and 80s, or whatever period this was most used:

"I appeared here and there were too many of you. You are a population problem. I'm not solving your problem by making you family even symbolically, such that I forget what metaphors are. Instead, you're not my brother, and well, I'm not sure I need to talk to you either."

Doing otherwise somewhat makes you responsible for others poor behaviour. Ok some of you can't control yourselves. If you think calling each other brother will help you, go ahead. But I prefer wide separation from problem people.

Strangers with problems.

Legally do you want to be brothers? How fake is your brotherhood here.

*Author: Mattanaw, Christopher Matthew Cavanaugh*

- Masters Business & Economics, Harvard University (In Progress)
- B.S. Psychology, University of Maryland,
- B.S. Computer & Information Science, University of Maryland,
- B.A. Philosophy (Nearly Completed, 2003), University of Maryland.

Former Chief Architect, Adobe Systems

Current President/Advisor, Social Architects and Economists International.

Contact:

- [cmcavanaugh@g.harvard.edu](mailto:cmcavanaugh@g.harvard.edu)
- [mattanaw@mattanaw.org](mailto:mattanaw@mattanaw.org)
- [christopher.matthew.cavanaugh@member.mensa.org](mailto:christopher.matthew.cavanaugh@member.mensa.org)

[http://www.mattanaw.org/thoughtstream.html#solving-your-problems-by-calling-each-other-brother-or-sister](http://www.mattanaw.org/thoughtstream.html#solving-your-problems-by-calling-each-other-brother-or-sister)

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>


*Preface: Building on earlier work on the morning and evening routines, using the life categories.*

*Started Writing: Tuesday, August 22<sup>nd</sup>, 2022*,&nbsp;<time>12:23 PM Cairns, Australia Time</time>

## <a name="making-the-morning-and-evening-routine-mnemonic-connect-with-the-memory-journey-methodology">Making the morning and evening routine mnemonic connect with the memory journey methodology</a>

The memory journy methodology in mnemonics has been used by memory games competitors to achieve very good quality results that showcase what is possible for our memory skills.

I've used the memory journey in my early twenties, when I first learned about it, from a source unknown but probably while I was in college studying Psychology, but later also in the book Mind Performance Hacks. Using this method I've also had good results, and used it for things like remembering shopping lists, and for remembering things to do in the course of my day.

The memory journey is simply walking through a familiar location mentally, while along the way storing and retrieving things you need to remember, in places which have also been called "memory pegs". I would walk through my childhood home, always in the same way, looking around from one room to the next, in the same order. Along this pathway would be locations of interest which are the memory pegs, or storage locations, where things could be placed. If I had a shopping list, I might put something at the doorway when walking in, perhaps "broccoli". I'd find the brocolli at the entrance when I walk through that path, and when I was shopping, I'd remember that I need to buy brocolli. Walking through the remainder of the home, a very large number of objects can be seen and recollected. While I used it for lists probably not exceeding 30 items, others have used it for recalling hundreds if not thousands of objects for memory competitions. There are many other methods that can be used, and I'm not a memory competitor and could not tell you them all. However, this method is reusable and certainly effective. It is re-usable and each time you can add new objects to the journey. Another tip regarding the memory journey is that it is easier if vividness of story is added to the journey. I would make nonsensical and absurd things happen at different locations in the journey for new list items, that would help me remember. Maybe I step on the brocolli walking through the entrance, and squash it, releasing a stinky odor. This makes it really easy to recall later when out shopping.

*The memory journey, however, does not have to be only an unreal journey.* In my morning routine, the goal was to go through a sequence of tasks that all relate to my various life categories. The objective was to complete all that's necessary in one's day in a very short period of time, perhaps less than two hours every morning. When I devised this, I was working long hours, and wanted to ensure before work, that I was already clean, exercised, practiced some mediation, and completed certain other tasks that would ensure I was mostly feeling finished with doing what I needed to do for entire days. Since the list included a sequence of steps, each relating to a life category, there is something to remember, if one is not referring directly to the personal form. I had these steps listed on my form so could simply read it. But not wanting to be permanently dependent on a list, written down, I recognized eventually it is better to simply rely on the habits that were formed, and memory. Automaticity is desired. I would often write about Habitualization/habituation after practice as a goal of using the lists. Now again wanting to use my morning and evening routines, I'm wanting to build on what I did earlier, and simply use my memory to recollect. I've created a new way to walk through the various categories that I'll record here soon, which is a mnemonic method.

The morning routine, being a set of tasks done in sequence upon waking, has a journey associated with it already. When you arise in the morning, you go through a sequence of steps in your environment where you arise. If you wake in your bedroom, you'll often use the restroom, after walking through a hallway, and then, if you recall your steps, you will walk to other parts of your home, going through different rooms, seeing different things and completing different tasks along the way. This is a retraceable journey. It is easy to forget, in the morning, if one has not done a morning routine or one has not done one in a while. I'm in a state of requiring retraining. The mnemonic approach to remembering the steps is good, but an additional real-world recollection aid will make the process better. I've used this as well. This method is to leave things you need to remember alone the paths you regularly take in your home. For example, I've put water at various locations around my home, to ensure I'm drinking enough water. At this moment, in my home, there are water glasses filled, all over in different rooms. Walking along my morning routine pathway, I will find water. Water and hydration is on my list in relation to the category of nutrition. The effect is it forces you to remember, but it also appears, makes it possible to aid the memory journey, since now there is an expectation of seeing water along the path visualized. It is not only added to a memory peg with the imagination, it really exists along the path. This is a new development and I'm working to ensure that other things I need to remember also exist along the path and that it is blended with my memory journey which is imagination based.

Along the path at home, messages can be left, as is often already done, and not only objects. Today I put my memory cards on my counter beside my couch to ensure that when I sit, I resume my photography productions. This is something I think most do. It is highly useful to train to do this often, even outside of the memory journey. 

When you leave someone a message who leaves with you, you'll put it someplace you know they'll see it. A place along their pathway, which might resemble your own. What is different here, is adding messages to *your own pathway* along a total journey through your home, that you will take over and over, so you are completely reminded about all the steps, and don't miss out on steps when you are really performing them.

I will add more later on these developments relating to these cyclical routines soon, and also on my new method of focusing attention in periods where there are many distractions, to things that are consistent with rational plans. This will help so one is not redirected away from their more rational goals and plans.

*Ended Writing: Tuesday, November<sup>nd</sup>, 2022*,&nbsp;<time>12:52 PM Alaska Time</time>

*[Finished in 29 minutes, without edits, spellcheck, grammar check, or reading. Semi-blind typing while partly attending to what is written on the screen.]*

*Author: Mattanaw, Christopher Matthew Cavanaugh*

- Masters Business & Economics, Harvard University (In Progress)
- B.S. Psychology, University of Maryland,
- B.S. Computer & Information Science, University of Maryland,
- B.A. Philosophy (Nearly Completed, 2003), University of Maryland.

Former Chief Architect, Adobe Systems

Current President/Advisor, Social Architects and Economists International.

Contact:

- [cmcavanaugh@g.harvard.edu](mailto:cmcavanaugh@g.harvard.edu)
- [mattanaw@mattanaw.org](mailto:mattanaw@mattanaw.org)
- [christopher.matthew.cavanaugh@member.mensa.org](mailto:christopher.matthew.cavanaugh@member.mensa.org)

[http://www.mattanaw.org/thoughtstream.html#making-the-morning-and-evening-routine-mnemonic-connect-with-the-memory-journey-methodology](http://www.mattanaw.org/thoughtstream.html#making-the-morning-and-evening-routine-mnemonic-connect-with-the-memory-journey-methodology)

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

*Preface: On finishing with others concerning voting.*

*Started Writing: Thursday, November 17<sup>th</sup>, 2022*,&nbsp;<time>12:14 PM Brisbane Time</time>

## <a name="foolishness-of-the-common-trust-in-voting">Foolishness of the Common Trust in Voting.</a>

<a name="abstract, Teaser, Contents"></a>

Abstract, Teaser, Contents:

Voting in democratic nations has a cermeoniousness which has resulted in creating voting events which are national holidays. The cermeoniousness of the voting process includes repetition year-by-year in a way that is familiar and similar from one voting even to the next, which resembles celebration of holidays like Christmas. People are brought into a similar mindset during each event and tend to recollect similar feelings and similar ways of thinking and speaking for each event. When voting comes around, we know how to think and feel, and speak, in ways that are supportive of the voting process, implying that between us, and for each event, there is much similarity. What is uncommont to these various events are new ways of handling ceremony, changes to rituals, changes to ways of thinking about voting, and recommendations for improvements. The process of voting is considered universally to be received, and is treated as complete, and not something ready for updates. Voting is something mostly discussed vigorously during voting, and lesser so outside of voting. In this way also it is similar to holidays. People think about it intensely at that time [Mattanaw, 2022], but less outside of that time, again like Christmas or New Years, or like birthdays.

Voting is at a stage of low growth, and is of low sophistication, and not high maturity. Sophisticated new thinking during times that people think about voting, has not been applied to the voting process itself. Instead ceremoniousness has resulted in a feeling of constancy about voting process between votes, and being understood and common, means all can or think they understand it. Sophisticated critiques of voting process, and sophisticated ideas about voting, have not been sought or shared during times when people think most about voting. I have found that I am largely a solitary thinker about voting when I want to consider how voting might be improved. More than this, however, I've determined, that my behavior is inexclusive regarding this; anyone who wants to improve voting and achieve a greater level of personal sophistication would need to do so alone. We have not been given a way to vote on an individual level either, and so one must work entirely independently arrive at a solid process for arriving at a vote that seems sophisticated, and satisfying.

Sophisticated objections to voting do not exist and would seem contrary to ceremony around voting. This would be a cause for reactions against well-intended objections to current voting practices that might result in improvements. Lack of knowledge of the sophisticated objections to voting imply that one has been unable to speak openly and utilize open political thinking and criticism about voting itself.

Some objections to voting inclued, among the contents:

- [Voting as ritual recollection](#voting-as-ritual-recollection)
- [Value of education is left out of voting](#value-of-education-is-left-out-of-voting)
- [Freethinking in politics applies to itself](#freethinking-in-politics-applies-to-itself)
- [The field of human resources is not used](#the-field-of-human-resources-is-not-used)
- [Voting appears primitive once one considers growth and improvements](#voting-appears-primitive-once-one-cosiders-growth-and-improvements)
- [Diversity is left out of voting](#diversity-is-left-out-of-voting)
- [Voting improvements have been disincentivized](#voting-improvements-have-been-disincentivized)
- [Abstract, Teaser, Contents, Back to Top](#abstract-teaser-contents)


<a name="voting-as-ritual-recollection"></a>	*Voting as ritual recollection.* Voting is a sort of holiday. As a holiday, it has a ceremoniousness, which includes ritualization and desire to repeat things as they are recollected precisely. It is governed and protected also by rules. The making voting a holiday means it is uniquely resistant to criticism, and critical thinking, and thinking generally as it is not recollection, but new thought. It has not been considered if voting should pertain to voting itself. It does not allow political consideration but ceremonial holiday repetition. This may explain why politics has been considered an activity that one should not be open about, alongwith religion. It also explains why people tend to have the same perspective: as with other holidays, the repetition of those holidays and ways of celebrating results in not only similar sentiments over time, but similar sentiments between people. We know that those who celebrate Christmas tend to think similarly about Christmas, celebrate it similarly, speak about it similarly, and celebrate it ways that are very similar over years. Christmas ceremonies within families resist change. Those who desire to stop celebrating are strongly pressured to continue celebrating. Voting is also a national holiday, blending religion with politics.

<a name="voting-as-ritual-recollection"></a>	*Voting appears primitive once one considers growth and improvements.* Using one's political mind for evaluating voting results in a perspective that is solitary. However, being supposedly a fundamental process, one would think it would have maximum attention, and maximum sophistication. However, it appears it is more simple, and more religious than other democratic processes. Thinking carefully about even voting has been a practice of mine for a long period and my finding was that I was totally alone doing it. Furthermore, I found that people have been unable to retain what I've stated to them in conversation concerning voting. However, they are trained on recollecting every year what has been ceremonial concerning it. Something as important as voting should be something that is maximally sophisticated, which implies it has and receives maximum attention, and has maximal acceptance within the democracy; however, the reality is it is a protected topic. People assume it is complete, but it is in the beginning stages of development and is at a state of very low maturity. Since people have not discussed this, none can state my position regarding why I would consider it to be of low development. I have never heard anyone say anything regarding the maturity of the voting process. If the voting process is on a stage of maximal maturity, at a point where it is space-like in difficulty of improvement, then growth inhibitions would be natural, and would relate to education, and finding of talent to improve it. However, even the talented have been indoctrinated into thinking it is a final and complete system. It has not been acknowledged that it can even be improved, or that voting is only a component of a system of politics, that can be worked on somewhat separately from other parts of the system. That it's not a component implies that other parts of the system are also in a state of low maturity, because to make changes in one part of the system, should be simple for not impacting other parts of the system, while curently, we can expect if one changes voting, one will have many interrelationships that must be fixed in other parts of the system. At present, dependencies between parts of the system are not known, discussed, or tracked. For the reader, this should indicate, that the voting process is not only low on its own, is very low in ways that will be revealed later, as the total system of politics is eventually developed and improved. It will be shown, that the process by which it grows is slow and stagnant, and it hasn't really developed on its way of developing. It doesn't quite know how to grow, and the rates of growth will later show that it largely preserves immature processes. Discussing voting is something that has been disallowed, in a system that is supposed to be encouraging free communication, and the result is that critiquing voting is a solitary activity. I would expect, potentially, I may be the only person thinking in this way regarding voting. "Someone, somewhere, surely is thinking about this?" But I have no reason to expect so, other than that I cannot be the only one on this topic, who would see the mathematical aspects of voting. But I don't think the sophistication would exist in anyone else very likely.

Sophistication of objections concerning voting, then would be rare and unknown, particularly if they are takenn in combination, when the number of objections is large, and independently rare. I would expect and anticipate that readers would find these objections to be largely unspoken from themselves and their peers, which means they can test in their own lives that voting appears to be a ceremonial repetition of recollections, that are mostly common, and unsophisticated. Each of the sophisticated objections regarding voting have an aspect which appears to require greater mathematical treatment. The mathematical treatments of each do not exist.One could research and find parts of mathematics that would apply; however, that they have not been applied, and are unknown to all who vote, indicates that there is uncommonality in it. That few would think to apply or use any mathematical understanding concerning this indicates it is at the lowest stages of understanding, and uncommonality.

Some key objections to the voting process as it exists calling for a better more mature voting system, includes:
 
**That it has not considered that people are fundamentally unequal and not equal (Abandoning Equality, Mattanaw, 2022)**. Instead, it entirely conceals diversities that are directly relevant to quality of selection. Details: All people in our system believe that as they are educated they are improved. This implies that all who have improved are more valuable than when they started. That this applies to all people is known. This has not been used to improve the voting system so votes are weighted according to education. People are not equal regarding ability to learn. Being unable to learn, the handicapped and mentally retarded have been included with the same strength as the smartest, most able, and most intelligent, in our voting system. Being more able to vote, they are more able to self improve. Self-improvement is believed to increase personal worth for all people. This has not been included in the voting system at all. 

**The Job Description is Unknown.**


**The discipline of HR has grown to become huge, and relatively mature, but does not exist for selecting political candiates. HR does not use a voting process for selecting candidates.** Human Resources is trusted for all large enterprise corporations, but they use a system closer to dictatorship and totalitarianism, in order to achieve their success. It isn't democratic at all; yet all voters support and have been selected using HR processes. This means they have trusted a totalitarian/dictatorial corporate whatever process, that is non-democratic, to select them, but they do not use a similar process for finding political candidates. If they are asked how to use it for selecting political candidates, in a way that would be trusted, they would not know how.In fact, they have never spoken concerning that.
	
**Voting with polling is nearly primitive.** All it does is take yes and no reactions from people. There is no influence with speaking.	


**Voting creates a fixed unchangeable voting power of influence, but working towards persuading others, and having a media presence, does not, and is much more powerful.** For explaining this I have included diagrams. Fundamentally, if you scale your sophistication in trying to influence politics during voting, you focus exclusively on persuasion and media messaging, to change the votes of others, because you cannot do anything to improve yourself to improve the power of your own singular vote, in a way that would compete. In order to increase your voting influence, you *must* shift to persuasion and speaking, and not in a format that is unlikely to succeed. Media influence and propaganda guide and sway, in a way that communicating with friends does not. Since we are told we are not to be political in conversation, it is known already, that it is an inflammatory topic, and people are often unwilling to be persuaded. However, they are willing to listen, change, and be educated by the media. In fact, voters only know what is going on, by the news, and political marketing. Here I am unwilling to dwell on the power disparity between an individual and the news, but instead only want to share, that an individual voter would need to scale only on this side, and become like a media organization eventually, to grow influence in voting. One's voting power is unchangeable by education, personal growth, having a better mind, and anything related to growth that really does imply inequalities. One cannot become an expert and get more votes. It is possible, that one may not grow, and only improve abilities to message, and greatly improve one's influence of other voters. One might want to think about which influencers seem to be basic in their intelligence, who still have influence, and still have an audience. You have no audience but someone who is an athlete does. The implication is they have greater power in voting than you do, regarding something unrelated to what is required to guide good politics.

**Tasks in Politics are Unknown.** There is no list of upcoming tasks and policy changes that are anticipated and needed within the work being done. Instead, the people who don't know the job, in their parties, advertise what they will do, which does not include tasks within the actual organizaiton. The organization doing the work would provide a list of clear work tasks that require completion, policies that need change, and jobs that are open, and so forth. They would also be able to list definite jobs and projects completed, who completed them, what they were. Technology organizations would go further to measure the rate of change if they can, and they track all tasks being worked on and what was completed, and report on that work, and prioritize that work. Voters have no knowledge of what work is really done, has been done.

**Policy Changes Supercede People's Roles.** In politics we are concerned with what changes, and what remains the same. We talk about policies when we discuss what changes or stays the same. Policies are central to changes of all types. A politician will be working for changes of various types that fall within the job description. Prior tasks are known regarding changes to make, if they are tracked. Work completed is tracked, and work to be performed is tracked. Knowing what work must be done, and what work is going to be done, voters can see what policies will change, and how, regardless of who will be doing the work. Work tasks can be added by new employees. However, these are tracked. In technology and business, employees can recommend changes are added and prioritized for the backlog. Employees in large coprorations already do and adopt this, and see it works. 

Voters are not given any method to know this information, which would be a vital part a job. If a voter has such information, they would be incline, as they do within corporations, to be fixated on what will happen next regarding the changes, and not who makes the changes. Within a corporation, employees who really care about change appear to be somewhat unconcerned about how the changes happen, knowing that jobs shift, and people come and go. When someone is included, who appears to be opposed to what they would like to happen, they will start to be resistant, because what they would like to happen will be thwarted. This means that in a business context, they are not especially concerned, necessarily, who is doing the job, as long as they are doing it well, and are making those changes that are needed, that relate to policies within the company. In politics this includes projects, programs, and large-scale changes, that are big enough for people to be wanting to look at, in the limited attention they have during voting.

**Voter Research is Infeasible.** I have argued while still young, that I felt unprepared in my education about how to actually vote as an individual. It does not appear this is very difficult to teach people, particularly if the system is sophistiated enough to include people on how they can arrive at good voting decisions. Instead, they are not given any method in which to arrive at a good vote. This would include how to become informed. Instead, they are reliant on media and news sources, and potentially advertising, rather than trusted sources of information. In academics, trusted sources of information, disinclude even wikipedia. While studying at Harvard University, I was informed that I could not cite wikipedia, because Harvard does not accepts wikipedia as a trusted source of information. However all voters rely nearly exclusively on media, news, entertainment, and advertising, which are all far more untrusted within academia. Having this information in academia is considered not researching, not a success story in research. This means what people are doing to be educated is considered what one does when one is not educated. If one is to use this type of information in academic papers, or nearly anyway in advanced education, one is showing how uneducated one is, not how prepared for voting one might be.


Another way to put this is that whatever change happens, would be in writing.

It appears that whoever is hired, would have similar work to do. This work would include a finite list of tasks which would already be known. Additional tasks could be added. However, the tasks to be done were added by who and how? Where are they? It appears voters alternatively should be voting on what it is that should be achieved, by whatever candidate is best qualified. In my history of criticism of government, I've argued to others, that one must be able to speak about specific changes that are anticipated, if one is to be successful not being ignorant concerning political happenings. If one knows much about a topic, one will discuss specific policies, programs, and changes to be made, and what has been done. Policy expertiseis what is desired to make policy changes. Whenever there is an important task to be completed, that is political, it involves a program, project, or policy, which will be changed. It is possible to have votes regarding the specifics of policy changes, with more unconcern about who is doing the work, like normal jobs. Having a written 

**Writing is Necessary to Track Changes.** Writing is needed to know what has changed regarding the job description, tasks to be done, tasks completed, and all that has been suggested in policy changes. Having this in writing would make it possible to create creater collaboration with voters, who might be interested enough, to read the specifics of anything related to voting. 

Part of the purpose of this article goes along with my personal moral goal of finding times in which to discontinue various efforts of work, where it is not particularly valuable, by getting to point of conclusiveness which is jusitifiable. The goal is to finish various topics which I can no longer make developments on when they are no longer valuable in relation to my own personal growth paths and interests. In this article I believe I have arrived at a completion point regarding voting, and can pass the work to someone else, who is more interested; or else to everyone else, who has not started. I can also share here, that I am capable of continuing, but am not sufficiently incentivized to think concerning it further, on my own, to the extent that I have. If paid, I would consider working further on it. In this way I am able to include this within my system of ethics which I have devised, which works towards arriving at points in which improvement are not really possible or valuable. It does not appear I need to think further regarding voting, or to participate in voting.

<a name="voting-as-ritual-recollection"></a>

#### Voting as Ritual Recollection

Voting as a Holiday

It is a ceremonial repetition of a process which ocurrs periodically, over some number of years. Those voting events that are for presidents and prime ministers are the major holidays, while the lesser holidays, might be those that are for many representatives, because in those elections, there are too many people for people to focus on simultaneously, or maintain an intense interest concerning; or those that are smaller exlections, with smaller voter bases, that are held for smaller regions/land-areas and towns/cities, which may have intense interest in certain locales, but not a large enough interest to promote the event, to a national holiday of sorts.

And of course, there really is an election day, at least in the united states<sup>2</sup>, for the presidential elections<sup>3</sup>.

Recently I've written that holidays control how one thinks about what the holiday includes, and also controls the frequency and character of your thoughts concerning it. Since celebrated as a holiday, it is given some automatic religious qualities. Since celebrated intensely, and on a schedule, one cannot maintain those thoughts over the remainder of the year. Remaining days may have other holidays which will steer and guide attention. So one forgets elections and redirects attention away from voting, once the holiday has ended, and begins to think about it again, when others cycle back first, to make preparations related to the ceremonies. 

There is a span in which it is appropriate or inappropriate to think intensely or communicate about voting as it pertains to election. If one keeps raising the topic of voting too early or too late, using thoughts similar to those that would arise near election time, they will be discouraged either by lack of interest of the other parties involved, or because social interest is not great enough for the speaker to want to resume naturaly. It is when others begin talking about something that one becomes increasingly interested and ready to maintain interst.

This is well known with Christmas, where probably the greatest span of time is allowed to others for celebration, planning, and communication about it. People are reminded about Christmas by the market, as it returns to its cyclical plans; and others once they begin to plan their ritual ceremonies. There is also a period afterwards where people are allowed to maintain interest, as they remove decorations, return gifts, and finish thinking about what has transpired. Like with Christmas, it appears interest is maintained for a longer period leading up to the holiday, but for a shorter period following the holiday; following the holiday, another holiday is known to be approaching, and people tend to shift attention to what will be coming next, rather than spending time allocating their minds to what has already happened, because of course, one must plan to live for what is next and not for what has already happened (even survival requires attention to shift to what is next, and one may already be thinking much about what is next even during the holdays). Much is not thought about that is recent during the holdiays, but that is also generally true, as the news is able to shift people's attention, such that earlier events of supposedly great significance are no longer considered.

For the remainder of this article I will focus my attention on the larger voting events, like that for a president or prime minister.

Voting is performed in a very similar way each time a vote is held. Attitudes and opinions regarding each recurring election, also appear to be mostly traditional recollections. People are encouraged to vote without thought as to the circumstances and views of individuals; it is recommended and urged universally. People celebrate their act of voting, by wearing pins, and in voting appear honestly to think themselves as having accomplished something of value. Those who did not vote, are silent about not having done so, which is indicated by the contrast between the ostensible universality of the celebration (few openly say anything negative about voting), and the actual numbers of votes which are reported as received and counted. Over a long period I have explained to others during elections reason for not thinking that voting is as valuable as people think it is. However, I've never heard others say the same as I do. During elections it appears I'm nearly a sole dissenter.

<a name="improving-voting-alone"></a>

#### Improving Voting Alone

Even saying that I'm a dissenter concerning the voting process, I would suspect that many readers would make false inferences concerning why. I would also anticipate a negative attitude in response, and more false inferences about what it might mean concerning my other views. Suddenly some will think, I'm against people being considered during planning that will affect them.

Even more irritatingly, some will assume, evening knowing who I am, that somehow my views would be unsophisticated on this topic. However, being a ceremonial thing that everyone is aware of, one can quickly tell that the standard views about voting are really basic and unreflective, and being ritual, mostly remembered and repeated. They are hardly considered anew. I would ask the reader to confirm, from their own experience with elections, how often they've heard something new about voting, and how often they've themselves considered what process alternatives to voting might exist, and how mathematically, voting might be improved. People do not even think in this way about voting, which indicates that minds, as they relate to voting, are themselves not complex. On other topics, when sophistication exists, there is questioning, probing, and creation of new ideas, often with a desire for greater detail and greater complexity. Those thinking about voting with a clear view abou the purpose of voting, would also be those that would notice where there are errors, problems, and potential pathways at solution, or actual solutions, which would do a better job at achieving those goals which voting are meant to achieve.

An illustration here might be the comparison of business versus ceremony. 

In politics we expect those who are employed to have a business-like attitude towards their work, in order to make quick improvements based on what custsomers, here citizens, really want and need, and pay for. Yet we elect them with a ceremonial attitude, and those involved in doing elections do it without much changes, implying that they make little changes in what they do, and how they conduct and carry out elections.


<a name="sophisticated-objections-contra-simpletons"></a>

#### Sophisticated Objections Contra Simpletons

What are some sophisticated objections to the voting process?

- *Voting is too simplistic*.
- *We should be seeing process developments improving elections*.
- *Policy centric politics is superior to electing representatives*.
- *Voting has social objectives that are forgotten during elections*.
- *It is unknown how to vote*.
  - This is one I've been saying since very young: we have not been educated on how exactly to prepare for an election, either in research, or in how to form a judgement concerning that research. We have no clear way to ascertain which facts we need, if those facts are available, and how to move from those facts to a judgment. We are not clear if security clearances are required to ascertain the requisite facts. We are not certain what the job consists of that we are thinking we are hiring for.
- *Voting is hiring but that appears unknown, and HR Process is not used.*
  - There is an entire discipline of Human Resources that is ignored in electing an employee. Hiring is not performed by a group of those who do not understand the work to be performed closely, and without a job description, and list of work items to be performed. Hiring at a corporation for important roles is done by a small group at most, if a group has any role at all. The final hiring would be done by a corporate executive in conjunction with human resources, or simply by the executive. One expert understanding somewhat what is needed would do the hiring. If a company is large enough, it is understood, that an employee requires a very good understanding of the work before they are hired, so that they understand what they will be doing. Not only that, so anyone who also might be hired knows precisely what they are doing. Given you can run for President when you turn 35 if you are in the United States, AND you are hiring agent as a voter, you should know, extremely well, what the job consists of. You are a candidate and you are hiring! However, you know very little about it, and must admit that as true, as the job of President is as unknown to you as any job in any large company is. You would not know what an executive of a large technology company would be doing, and yet you think your country has enabled you as a candidate and a hiring, voting member.
- *Elections are performed without a list of political tasks to be performed*. 
- *Not voting is a political position*.
  - If one chooses to not vote, it is a viable political position. People are told they have a voting right, which is anonymous. Having a voting right that is anonymous, they are allowed to vote however, they like, and this includes abstaining to mark that they have not considered voting for one candidate or another as representative of their minds or interests. Furthermore, strategy in politics can include *any* strategy considered valuable or workable, for political goals which might arise. I think it plausible that if everyone decided not to vote, if the elections were exessively rigged, as a way of showing that nobody is supporting any candidate, and that the election itself is failed, that it might succeeded in showing that. If it did, then it would be a viable political strategy. Even a necessary one depending on circumstances. Being a first voter to encourage such a process is reasonable, even if is "conscientous objection", which is an encouragement of activism at the individual level if one notices something is not correct, even alone. However, regarding voting, it appears really people would be punished for being a conscientious objector. Some even think there is an obligation to "do the right think" which implies that one sometimes must be a "conscientious objector" who would be socially punished.


<a name="voting-ensures-you-did-little"></a>

#### Voting Enusres You Did Little

Let us consider a more serious objection in more detail. It is this:

>> Voting reduces your voice to an singular momentary act, or checkmark.

Imagine you are working very hard for some job you might have, or have had, working for a company. Imagine you work there for five years. Every day, let's say, you drive to and from work for 30 minutes, sometimes in traffic, and at a cost. Every day, let's say, you work ten hours. For this company you do more, and you are paid fairly well, you are somewhat appreciated for your voice, and your thoughts, which you are required to use orally, and in writing via email. 

Now, let's consider voting day. Maybe you drive 10 minutes to your local voting location, and walk in, wait in a line, then you check a box, make a mark, or put a slip in a box. Maybe you punch a couple computer keys. It is done anonymously.

Do you really think you've done a job worth celebrating?

Now compare this with someone who has chosen a job relating to politics. They might work to steer people's views for years full-time. They might use their voice along with politicians who hear them for a period of 5 years, or decades. 

Strangely, but predictably, voters think they have achieved something worth celebrating in a ritual fashion, having been reduced to no words in actual political process. People can speak all they like in conversation.

To include 

- Size of impact if you steer votes versus voting (even if you don't vote). 
- A democratic method in which polls result in complete steering of people to options, while allowing for perceived freedom (via forced choice).

[Include information about your divorce, and your knowledge on psychology and customer service regarding this. Note that the article doesn't imply research. It implies sharing research, which is a recovery of what one has been exposed to in Psychology, and has used in life.]

Voting also ensures that you cannot grow or diminish your influence by learning more, or by having ill health. Voting ensures that mentally retarded have the same influence as the most educated, most trusted authorities, including those who might have some knowledge and quality of judgement for most topics that voting could relate to. General intelligence that is advanced then cannot utilize voting any more than a mentally handicapped, brain damaged, or generally cruel and deficient person. Quality of moral disposition, even if proven by revelation of all private moments, could not be usable to increasing vote strength. It is always one, and will always be cancelled by those who could not do the same.

<a name="voting-ensures-you-did-little"></a>

#### Voting ensures no matter your personal growth, you are equal to the lesser, and that you are always canceled by greater numbers of people who forgo the same growth. 

People who really are unconcerned with growth, or are unable to grow, and actively prefer not improving, will always have a group of people who will cancel your voting power, even if you have grown, become more educated, more moral, more public, and more immune to any personal criticism than others. Your former self would cancel the vote of your later self even if your later self is known to have critical information that was lacking in the former self. Given everyone was a child, this means that your older self would largely cancel the mind of your lower self, and you did do that, as you replaced later knowledge with earlier misguided information and you replaced ignorance with organized brain tissue. An implication also is that the younger cancel the older. It is known that the interests of the youth must be attended to; however, the interests of the youth includes all people who were younger than their grown selves, which would include votes that people might wish to cancel, once they are grown into their later selves. Many who reflect back to their first voting experiences would understand, that they may not have chosen as they did later, but more importantly, consider themselves better than they were when they had their first voting experience. Since most think they improve with maturity (they don't in all ways), they would recognize that their earlier selves probably shouldn't cancel their later selves in voting. Knowing this would apply to all people who have grown, it means we naturally want the youths to have less voting influence if we relfect on oursleves and extens what we learn regarding our own growth to all people.


<a name="completing-the-topic-of-voting"></a>

#### Completing the Topic of Voting

Can one read such objections as those above and still really think of voting the same way, with the same seriousness, and desire for unchanging ritual ceremony?

There are few incentives to work on improving voting, but sufficient sustained personal interest. My primary interest in voting appears to relate to my knowledge of the issues and the frequency of being reminded about the ignorance that exists, and urges in the media to vote, coming from those who appear to be recollecting only. People repeat the ignorant cycle without changing much thinking concerning it, and each time the topic arises, the incredible ignorance comes into view, and there is a desire to communicate the issues. However, having communicated the issues, I've found that even friends and family members fail to understand, remember and retain the information, and return for each voting election, with a mind wiped clean except for what is recollected from traditional indoctrination. The conversations repeat, in the same way, and with the same information, as is to be expected with the ritual.

If I were suddenly asked to work on this process, in an planning and architectural leadership capacity, like in my work for large corporations, I would do so, because under such circumstances I would be paid, and I might have a reasonable chance of succeeding, and would likely have a receptive audience. Until such a time, I'm not adequately interested in resuming thinking on this. In my personal life, it is much better to abstain from further consideration, because really the topic appears complete, in the sense that the objections sufficiently justify disinterest and inaction.

The next time elections come around, I will not be celebrating, joining, critiquing, or working to improve the process, any further than I've done, pointing out clear and obvious areas of concern, and potential pathways for improvement.

*Ended Writing: Sunday, August 7<sup>th</sup>, 2022*,&nbsp;<time>4:49 PM Alaska Time</time>

*[Finished in thout edits, spellcheck, grammar check, or reading. Finished at 4:30 pm]*

*Author: Mattanaw, Christopher Matthew Cavanaugh*

- Masters Business & Economics, Harvard University (In Progress)
- B.S. Psychology, University of Maryland,
- B.S. Computer & Information Science, University of Maryland,
- B.A. Philosophy (Nearly Completed, 2003), University of Maryland.

Former Chief Architect, Adobe Systems

Current President/Advisor, Social Architects and Economists International.

Contact:

- [cmcavanaugh@g.harvard.edu](mailto:cmcavanaugh@g.harvard.edu)
- [mattanaw@mattanaw.org](mailto:mattanaw@mattanaw.org)
- [christopher.matthew.cavanaugh@member.mensa.org](mailto:christopher.matthew.cavanaugh@member.mensa.org)

References:


Notes:

<sup>1</sup>. Proper nouns for job titles are not capticalized within Mattanaw's evolving system of writing. These result in an automatic respect which has not been justified.

<sup>2</sup>. Proper nouns for names of countries and holidays are not capticalized within Mattanaw's evolving system of writing. These result in an automatic respect which has not been justified.

Link:

[http://www.mattanaw.org/thoughtstream.html#foolishness-of-the-common-trust-in-voting](http://www.mattanaw.org/thoughtstream.html#foolishness-of-the-common-trust-in-voting)

Log:

- Started at 12:14 pm, November 17<sup>th</sup>, 2022 Brisbane Time.
- Stopped at 2:16 pm, November 17<sup>th</sup>, 2022 Brisbane Time.
  - 2895 words, calculated using Unix wordcount, wc program.
  - 9.65 pages, computed assuming 300 words per print page.
  - Few edits, very little reading of what's typed, partly blind-typed, spell check shows 16 uncorrected typos.
  - Slow pace. Unrushed.
- Started at approximately 2:00 pm, November 20<sup>th</sup>, 2022 Cairns Time.
  - Spent roughly 2 hours writing.
  - 6366 words, calculated using Unix wordcount, wc program.
  - 3471 new words, calculated using Unix wordcount, wc program.
  - 11.57 new pages, computed assuming 300 words per print page.
  - 21.22 total pages.
  - Few edits, very little reading of what's typed, partly blind-typed, spell check shows 16 uncorrected typos.
  - Slow pace. Unrushed.

<pre><a name="create-a-gap"></a><div class="ui section divider"></div></pre>

- [Next Section: SocialNuggets™ (Experience Shares)](mattanaws-social-nuggets.html)
- [Contents](#contents)
- [Main Contents](index.html#main-contents)
- [Prior ThoughtStream. August 15th 2018, through November, 17th, 2022](christopher-matthew-cavanaugh-thoughtstream.html)

