The usual caveats and cautions, this is a dangerous site for an open mind, as the author’s goal is infesting every brain in the world with his ideas, you must distrust ideas everywhere, ideas are dangerous. Seriously, there is an OK version in ‘about’. Intellectual hygiene is important.
A problem I have always had in writing is that my mind connects everything and forming a properly linear narrative with no dangling ends is normally not possible. The world is an amorphous mass of stuff, and we chalk ‘things’ on the surface that we see or create by cleaving on crystal planes. That description imposes my mental model on reality as filtered through your mind’s interpretation of my words, you see how this communication channel has some inherent bit-rate and noise problems?
So things trigger thoughts and I accumulate interesting thoughts and my browser has so many tabs on posts-in-progress that I can’t find anything. So a need for a blog organization that doesn’t require a nice story, is just unrelated things. And maybe I can even find a meta-connection when it is all done, amuse us all.
My brother pokes around and finds neat stuff, sent me this.
I haven’t watched much TV since high school, so have seen all these people and laughed at their skits, but never sat down and watched an episode.
But the thing I find interesting about that is the medium and the effect it must have had on people’s frame of the world, their general point of view. That interaction of audience and actors no doubt happened at rehearsals throughout history, but only after tape could it be shared, and become one of the shared experiences of the whole nation. Many of those shows became a shared experience of audience and actors.
Look at the humor from meta-levels, this piece is wonderful and at 6:50 they go self-referential.
Minds got much more sophisticated in those years, I believe. We went from Bob Hope’s standup humor :
to Robin Williams :
in 40 years, I think that represents a rather large change in people’s fundamental understandings. All people, or only the baby boomer cohort and below? Surely many people didn’t think Williams was funny?
There are many sociology, etc. theses in analyzing such changes in tech, knowledge and attitudes. No certainty, it will all be correlation, but interest.
Just the ability to replay a skit means we can analyze what and how. I find this an amazing bit of stagecraft, everything is perfect in guiding the audience moment to moment through the sequence of emotions that Penn and Teller designed. Think about that, they designed a sequence of emotions for your mind to execute.
I bet they could affect your thinking, if they wanted to do that.
Another random stimulation of thought.
That is another measure of national something. I recall reading that the level of psychotropic pharmaceuticals in river water was high enough to affect fish, but suspected that was standard green exaggeration, didn’t evaluate further, you can’t do everything. Wonder if I was wrong, and what is the relative sensitivity of drugs for humans, tailored to human brains, relative to the average fish-in-a-pharmaceutical test? Average sensitivity vs outliers? Many humans are quite sensitive to every drug, differences are often associated with other mental differences. Some of the psychoactive drugs are associated with suicide and violence.
So drugs in the water affecting fish is important if true, but the main truth is “quickly do tests on mammals of that mix of chemicals in various concentrations”. Also, what do we know about ranges of sensitivity to psychoactive drugs? I should know that, it seems to me, never thought of the question before.
Playing the Pan-Galactic Buggery Game in so many dimensions