Thank you George, for your presence. And for posting the possible implications of net neutrality repeal.
I will look into the Bredesen Protocol diet/lifestyle program you recommend, in reply to your other email re senility. Yesterday I encountered another program, Intensive Lifestyle Change, from Harvard Medical School. You made similar recommendations in prior mails – for which I am very grateful for your caring.
In the recent past you have sent me very personal and important emails, which I failed to respond to. This follows a destructive pattern in my whole life, some of which I am only now discovering (that I have some strong autistic aspects – which accounts, in part, to my poor personal relationship skills)). Knowledge of failing doesn’t always lead to changes. I skim or read many of your essays, when I encounter them, and if know I have responded to a few. How many, I don’t know, as I don’t even remember the essays I write. I am always astounded when I do a back search.
My exemplar is my seeming impossibility to “exercise”. Half and hour in movements is THE MOST IMPORTANT activity form body and mental health. I KNOW THIS. For well over a decade I weekly do an hour or more yoga-stretch practice, online over ZOOM, with a longtime friend, Jamie Lantz, in San Francisco. For the past few years I have recorded each session, with the intention to relay and move on the other days of the week. I have done this but ONCE! On my daily TODO list in my ECCO PIM (Personal Informtion Manager), is an enlarged and colorful item: PRACTICE
Jamie and I talk (and laugh) bout it. The only time I regularly do practice is in waiting rooms, usually to see doctors, and in the examination room waiting to be seen. To practice seems to “come-to-mind”, and there is nothing else to do. Also, IF I REMEMBER, I may do 5 to 15 minutes movement while watching TV, at night. I could well practice hours, nightly, during this wasteful habit (wanting to stop TV viewing, for decades). I daily look at the TODO item and never move to act on it. It is never the right time when I see the item, and I see it many times, daily.
George, my strange life has been filled with such paradoxical behavior. I also am very gullible in going along with others, doing what I’m really not interested in. Rationally, I need to be dependent on someone else to lead me in exercise practice. I can’t expect Jamie to do it daily. Going out to an exercise group doesn’t work. Maybe having a trainer come daily, but that would be expensive. The solution is to program my PIM daily schedule to have PRACTICE aat a fixed time daily. For over a decade explored different ways of more effective use of my PIM. I KNOW what to do. Schedule the next day (during a scheduled half hour on the preceding day) for MUST DO ITEMS AT FIXED TIME. Permit only minor or emergency deviations. I still have full freedom to select from my 1000+ item TODO list. I set doing this on my schedule, but like PRACTICE, it is always ignored. Were I living with a group that exercised, together daily, I would be healthier.
George, I won’t go one here talking about myself, which – I recognize – is a practice. I do like books where the author weaves personal development issues about their development of the ideas they explicate. Why my ideas are so weird and yet may be useful, requires knowing something about myself.
George Por, I think of you frequently, as I encounter your name on my screen, almost daily. As with everything in encounter on my screen, I usually can’t act on that stimulus, at the time. But, I seldom (now, sith senility, never) have any TODOs pop up when away from the computer, or working on the computer. The “mental screens” for this are lacking, in me, due to my lack of mental imagery in all sensory modes. I literally have no sensory remembrances (or reminders) and no sensory mental work-space. These days, when away from the keyboard, mouse, and two monitors, I am a strict stimulus/response machine. Almost all mental activity relates to what I am doing or arguing with myself about my life and how to change it. Actually, my thought are quite mundane when away from this interface. Nowadays, this routine is frequently interrupted by LYPOS (typos in daily living), now 30-50 daily.
There I went on again, about myself.
George, on contemplation I recognize you as in my top ten persons whose direct engagement withme was significant for my emergence. I really noted your absence when you moved to Europe. I have also found it impossible to maintain online dialog of an extent to be meaningful to me, with persons – such as yourself. The exchange of messages never is adequate, and they all have died eventually, with every correspondent. Commenting in others’ blogs doesn’t satisfy, and few comment in my blog – and when they do, I often forget to reply. We have, as yet, no proper apt for dialog about a long document. Academia.com is a start, but – to work – the dialog must be edited, managed, and monitored. An old pp, QuickTopic (with their pro QuickDoc) has potentials. In QD, a long WORD doc can be set so different comment threads are attached to each paragaph. It needs a way of turning a comment thread into a linked QuickDoc, nd a way of managing/monitoring long discussions. I started to use QD, and a few started to comment – but it was I who forgot to keep it up.
Your Blog of Collective Intelligence is a masterful creation; yet I have not even attempted to be a regular contributor. Your blog could be the core curriculum for a new beyond-higher-education program. There are hundreds (possibly thousands) of such blogs or apps. Michel Bauwens P2P Foundation is another “knowledge continent” I would like to explore and engage. Has anyone collected all such sites and studied their degree of interactivity. 24/7/365 per person is a limit we need to work to manage. I can become interested in everything and am overwhelmed by so many attractive essays and topic to engage dialog. Given that these may be approaching millions (possibly well past), it is impossible to “keep up” or even become “ignorant” (knowing OF what you don’t yet know or comprehend or can’t yet do or appreciate) of humankind’s creative production. It is beyond awesome, yet so lacking.
I have never been successful in introducing one of my component insight/concepts in one of these sites as a topic for dialog. I really haven’t tried as much as I might. I find that when I do get comments to an item I post, they usually are about a small feature that relates to an interest of the commentator. I admit, I often do the same. Usually the comment thread to my posts quickly becomes dialogs among commenters on their own comments and the topic of my post is lost – if it ever was comprehended or responded to. George, in our early days we were focused on process, often more than topic. In spite of my inability for sensory remembrances, I have conceptual pointers to many exciting adventures with you. Climbing Mt. Tam, my being stoned made me cold and paranoid bout surviving. Was Kevin Kelly on that adventure? Our joint presentations at conferences. Our long discussions. I “miss” you. [Missing someone usually means having intrusive visual or auditory mental images of that person.]
There are no present media/apps systems for introducing and sharing large, complex SYSTEMS-of-Paradigms&Perspectives. Even a large treatise is but a small cross-section of the whole. Sharing such cannot be done quickly or by passive means (reading publications). They require carefully designed/tested/constructed educational scaffolding (OLLO). “Physics” or “Ecology” can only be truly learned by an educational process (not necessarily schooling).
George, my many decades of emergence has had minimal relevant engagement with live persons, such was our relationship. I have only one friend in Tucson who is willing to try comprehending me. Those who live with me, or relate as extended “family” aren’t interested in my ideas and never read any of my writings. Often they tell me I am foolish. There are some 30-50 persons who know me in cyberspace. Either my own dysfunction & the extremes of my writing AND their own being overwhelmed has reduces my exchange with them to a trickle.
It has been decades since I have had useful dialog/feedback on NEW insights, and then only on small insights easily related to contemporary ideas. This is not the fault of others, but the inadquacy of myself, with limited media, to engage their interest sufficient for them to query me and want more.
This has had both positive and negative consequences.
POSITIVE: I have been free from the entrapments of success and the pressures of renown. I haven’t formed a “discipline” (in Foucault’s sense) around me, with others asking for my time and attention. My social needs would have glued me to them, and I would not have advanced. Each of my associations with institutions (student or professional) resulted in a narrowing of my interests. But, none of these institutional associations had anything to do with any of my insights. Had I an institution related to my insights, I would quickly have been trapped working within a small set of minor ideas selected by those attracted to those insights. Thus, I have been free to build and build and build – without constraints from others. Coupled with compensations from my imagery lack and autism, I believe Larry has hosted the emergence of a wrld, he calls “nuet” – that is both quite outside all categories of wrlds, both in limitations and assets. “nuet” is a conceptual system that I believe would be very useful for others to explore. I can’t claim “truth” fir it; but it will contain useful ideas to explore that are relevant to our survival/thival as we face of Crisis-of-Crises. Problem: I’m almost 83 and declining. I don’t know how much more time I have to share nuet.
NEGATIVE: “nuet” is woven from many hundreds of novel insights that critique many accepted assumptions. These insights are distributed trans-disciplinary, including most relevant domains of human cognition. The insights often occur in cascades, weaving with each other, each changing to fit with the emerging whole. Most new knowledge is reported as one new idea linked to a set of already accepted ideas. In “nuet”, most nu ideas are linked to other, also nu ideas. The newness of the whole of “nuet” cannot be developed one part at a time, working with the established episteme. This blocks sharing “nuet” via conventional means.
From George Por Re:WELL BEYOND SCARY 11/29/2017