Perspective…on perception

Reality comes to us courtesy of our five senses, and from the way our brains process the incoming stream of data. Our senses each receive observable data in a particular range of values according to the abilities and sensitivities of our human sense organs. We can see, hear, touch, smell, taste…we know what’s going on around us.

Let’s put that into perspective.

The key phrase in that opening: human sense organs. Turns out, because of our particular set of sensory organs, we humans have a unique reality. No animals on the planet are experiencing what we experience. Dogs, as we all know, can hear the high pitch of a certain whistle that is used to call them, and we can’t hear it. They also have a sense of smell that is hundreds of times better than ours. There is a hovering bird-of-prey that can take up a position over a field, hang motionless while looking down, and see only what moves…like for instance a mouse. When it looks at a fixed scene the stationary objects and background fade away to grey, and only movement is detected. Further examples abound…point being, there’s nothing superior or special about our senses; what we have are the ones that serve the survival of our species, just as it is with animals.

 

Another way to look at our perception can be seen here in the chart of the electromagnetic spectrum. Note that the color bar representing our visual range is a breakout of that little sliver between ultraviolet and infrared. Out of that  whole range of energies/wavelengths, we’re equipped to see only a tiny little bit. It makes our capabilities look so random-ish and insignificant, and by extension so do we find that our  perception of reality is nothing special. Maybe we don’t, so much, know what’s going on around us; there’s more to it than meets the eye!

And with all that, I think, larger points can be made:

   In the grand scheme of all the species on earth, and the millions of years we’ve all been here, we normally exaggerate how special and important we are.

   There are things happening around us all the time that are beyond the range of our senses.

From that perspective, that there’s always more than meets the eye, it is easier to think broadly and stay open to possibilities…to think outside the box.

Perspective…on driving fast

perspective:  the state of one's ideas, the facts known to one, etc., in having a meaningful interrelationship

If there is one concept to keep in mind to help make sense of the daily grind, it is perspective. It has a few meanings, most concerned with art and perception, but the useful one here is largely a synonym for point-of-view. Referring back to my initial posts, “we’re all in this together but we’re all on our own,” to get along together in the first part it helps to keep in mind the different perspectives we all have in the second part.

For instance…let’s talk about the issue of “driving too fast.” We should start by defining the term: not mental fast, or as fast as you can go, but 10-15 miles over the posted limit, which is a speed that statistically a great many people (though still a minority) are comfortable at, including me. I think it’s perfectly fine to go 75-80mph, that it’s not dangerous, and that speed limits are too low. Most people think otherwise. We have different perspectives.

In fact, the issue here is our perspectives. The meaning of “driving too fast” is the hidden problem, because both sides assume that their definition is the topic at hand.  It’s not, and it hit me like a ton of bricks when I suddenly realized… I borrowed a friend’s car a few years ago, a new luxury-type car from one of the Big Three (Ford,GM,Chrysler), and I thought, “OMG, I wouldn’t go over 65 in this thing, either.” It plowed in the turns, the brakes were mushy, the suspension too soft, etc., and I was shocked at how bad I thought it was. Meanwhile, being an “enthusiast,” a winning road-racer, an extremely focussed and attentive driver, I have always driven performance cars. For 25 years, every car I’ve had is further from its limits and more in control at 80mph than the average car at 65mph. You look at the two sides of the argument…(for the most part) we don’t drive the same cars! It makes the discussion of driving too fast an “apples-n-oranges” deal. If you say you would never drive 80mph, well, neither would I, if I was you. And I’ll bet if you drove my car for a day, you’d see the rationale in my (wait for it) perspective.

Perspective is everything

This is an awfully clean and tidy example, but still useful as a reference model for any discussion or argument. We might be using the same phrases when we talk, but they don’t necessarily mean the same thing. Depends a lot on our respective experiences, on how and where we learned something. It doesn’t hurt to ask a few questions up front to help ensure we’re all on the same page. I know now the few speed limit discussions I’ve had were just a waste of time. 



Enjoy the impressive dioramas of '50s and '60s America by Michael Paul Smith, seen here in one of his settings.  

What the fuck?

As I page forward from my blog to “Next Blog,” it appears that I’m in with a group of religion-oriented writers. What the fuck?

NOT WHERE I BELONG.

No offense…just not who I am. I suppose I have used tags that put me there; they’ve been changed, and I expect to be reclassified soon enough, in a periodic index sweep. I hope this posting helps to send me on my way.

I’m tempted to review George Carlin’s 7 words that can’t be said on television 8D

Remember those? Let’s see…gotcha.

Not necessary to offend anyone further right here.

You go on your way, and I’ll see you when we get to the 11-dimensional space.

I’m off.

Later, chief.

Apologies and all due respect to Marc Maron's WTF podcast (on iTunes), but I needed it here!

 

Who’s in Charge?

Sometimes in a relationship there’s an issue about who is in charge, about one person telling the other what to do, how to look, even how to act. It can be a struggle for control, if the personalities don’t mix right. It can also look to outsiders as if one person is strong and in charge and the other is weak.

In a related statement, which will make sense further down: I have always felt that I could love and marry almost any girl I’ve ever met…which is probably why I’m an inveterate flirt. I just love them all.

The common thread here is that people draw the line for themselves as far as what things to stand up for, and what things matter so little that they let their partner have the decision. If there’s something not right about what I’m wearing, I’ll change it; couldn’t care less one way or the other. Want to go to this restaurant, and never that one? OK. Doesn’t matter. I let anything peripheral like that just unfold any old way. What does matter is what kind of person you’re with, and the people I’ve known pretty much have it right. We don’t differ where it matters. I don’t tolerate lying, or selfishness, or being inconsiderate, or arrogance…it’s the core stuff, what’s inside that counts, and if that’s all good then the rest is just window dressing. If I want to spend a night out with the girl I love, and if I happen to be doing that, then it doesn’t matter where, how, what…The details can fall where they may, I figure if we’re together then the important part has been taken care of. Everything I care about has been taken care of.

I’m sure there have been bystanders through the years who thought I was being bossed around, but they didn’t know what they were seeing. They naturally interpret interaction based on their own experiences, and most people would be at a loss to interpret the way we played around. Upon overhearing a conversation, you can only imagine your own motives as the reasoning behind what you hear; you aren’t likely to guess the actual thoughts. 

So, in establishing the dynamics of the relationship it’s just a matter of choosing your battles, drawing the line where your comfortable, and applying your personal perspective on what’s important to you. It’s a very individual choice, and it's just between the two of you. Don’t waste time worrying about what anyone else thinks.

Merry Christmas

Merry Christmas

Peace

It’s not global warming… (and also) 100%

I don’t know who gets the credit (or the blame) for the term - global warming - but it sure hasn’t helped the discussion any, because it’s not accurate. There is global warming, on average; what it means in day-to-day life is record lows and record highs, stronger storms, and unusual events such as snow in places we’ve never seen it before.

Call it global climate change.

The weather is an oscillating sytem, as evidenced by the rhythmic changing of the seasons. With an increase in temperature there is more energy in the system, and the swings become more exaggerated. When it gets cold, it gets really cold. When it gets hot, it gets really hot. Big thunderstorms become “100 year storms,” meaning they should normally (statistically) occur just once every 100 years. They will, and do already, occur more frequently.

Don’t think that record cold is a contradiction of the coming weather catastrophe. It’s part of the global climate change, to a new pattern of more extreme weather.

Recommended:

Weather article in Discover magazine

____________________________________________________

You’re undoubtedly familiar with the obliteration of “100%” as a measure of effort or achievement…it’s never good enough to “give 100%” anymore, you have to “give 110%” to sound like you mean it. And no, there’s no such thing as greater than 100%, but whatever, that’s the way it is. Well, I recently heard someone get a little too excited and, in trying to reach for an impressive superlative, came up with “a hundred and ten…thousand…percent,” like he couldn’t stop himself.

Well, now what? What’s next? It’s out of control.

How about if we reel it in for a while? Let’s think about the implications of 100%, being all there is, and how you can’t have or do more than that.  If you “give 100%,” that’s impressive right there.

You can’t do more.

A new regime(n)(t)

The new regime required the elite regiment to adopt a regimen of long marches.

Regiment

It could happen.

And if it did, it would likely be reported incorrectly. These three near-homonyms are used interchangeably all too often, whether big-time media, learned treatise, or blog/comments entry. Make’a me crazy.

Regime: A ruling or prevailing system. A government in power.

Regimen: A regulated system, as of diet, therapy, or exercise. A course of intense physical training.

Regiment: Noun: A unit of ground forces, consisting of two or more battalions, a headquarters unit, and certain supporting units. A large number in regular or organized groups.

Verb: To manage or treat in a rigid, uniform manner; subject to strict discipline. To form into a regiment or into organized groups.

The basic concept for regime is that it is a controlling entity, directing its attention downwards. A change in government signals the start of a new regime.

The basic concept for regimen is that it refers to prescribed action. A regime may impose rules…which may be structured as a regimen to be followed; a course of action, or a set of rules. A diet is a regimen.

The basic concept for regiment is that it refers to an organized group.  

The new government took control of the military and put the elite unit on a program of long marches for fitness and readiness.

It could happen.