View Video By Clicking Here -> Nassim Nicholas Taleb talks about The Black Swan

Black Swan, Nassim Nicholas Taleb, Unpredictability, 9/11

I recently came by a group blogging project called “How I Want To Be Seen” started by a friend of a friend (so I guess he’s my friend too), a Mr Abu Aremu. My friend’s name is Shafie, although he’s not become as (in)famous as me online yet, he’s been helping me with my Ultimate Secrets of Success business.

Anyway, the project requires bloggers, especially those into personal development stuff or anything at all to do with Life and its betterment, to explain how they want to be seen by people, how they want to be known, what they want to be remembered for. I think that’s the gist of it. After I write my share, I’ll then “tag” someone, a fellow blogger, a friend, to do the same and pass it on. If they fail to pass it on, the blog-police will come and arrest them for negligence of duties (just a lame joke - ignore me). I think I already have someone in mind - so watch out whoever is reading this!

Do I Even Want To Be Seen?

Hmm… Let me think.

I don’t think I want to be seen if by being ’seen’ means only to be perceived, labelled, ‘tagged’ or described by people to be someone who’s done this or achieved that, said this or uttered that, was responsible for influencing the course of entire populations’ lives, done some good and done some harm, etc.

Some people believe that we are what we do - like in Batman Begins, one of my favourite lines is, “It’s not who I am underneath, but what I do, that defines me” - to an extent I find that true.

I also believe that we are who or what we think we are, as a person, as a character, as a soul. There has to be both sides to the equation.

If we define a person only by her deeds, we know nothing of her inner life, her inner world, her thoughts, philosophies, world views, the intangible things that drive her in life.

If we define someone by what he thinks he is as a person, then practically nobody will know what he is like, what his ‘true character’ is (according to his views), unless he expresses himself either through his words or his deeds.

Therefore both are needed.

How I Don’t Want To Be Seen.

I don’t quite care how I don’t want to be seen. People have their own perceptions. For example, to me, the Prophet of Islam, Muhammad, upon whom and whose family be peace, is indisputably the greatest, noblest, most successful human being to have ever lived on Earth (and beyond), and my view is shared by billions of other people - even those who don’t follow him - but there are some who either don’t concern themselves with a person who lived about 1,400 years ago or those who hate him outright as a violent warmonger, etc. That is their view. It is the job of objective scholars of history to shed truthful light on him.

How I Really Want To Be Seen (Finally!).

Okay, let’s say what I’m doing and what I achieve from what I’m doing just can’t help but attract people’s attention to the point that they see me as being responsible for this or that. So let them see what they want to see. I won’t concern myself with what people want to see of me. If what I’m doing is good and they see me in a bad light, then it’s their loss. If what I’m doing is bad and they see me in a bad light, then it’s their gain, because they’d then have to avoid me at all costs. But if what I’m doing is bad and they see me in a good light, I’ll have to be very worried.

I shall concern myself - not with what others see of me - but with what I want to see in other people and what I want to see in the world.

I shall see to it that my ideas, my beliefs, my thoughts, my actions, my enterprises and my brainchildren have the most significant and maximum impact upon humanity and its destiny, for the better.

I seek to be as wealthy as possible - not just in financial terms, but in the dimensions of knowledge, creativity, relationships, love, wisdom, courage, all the good intangible values, as well. But if being financially wealthy does not serve me and my self-defined life mission, then I shall just make do with a modest but stable life.

Anyway, I am the one who seeks to eradicate the monetary economy and replace it with a technologically advanced, holistic, ecological and egalitarian knowledge and resource based economy that makes poverty, deprivation and suffering irrational and impossible.

I want to see a world in which every child, woman and man are freed in the truest sense of the word ‘free’ from every unnecessary or undesirable chain, prison or shackle imaginable. No person shall ever have to work on something they hate just to put food on the table, but are free to pursue whatever gives them the healthiest, fullest pleasure and passion.

In the same way that we now breathe freely of the abundant air around us, so shall we see that every basic need of human life - healthy food and water, clean air, decent shelter, protection from preventable (and what seems to now be unpreventable) diseases, holistic education, etc - are available in abundance without monetary or other barter forms of obligations.

The worth of a person, although human beings are intrinsically beyond valuation, shall no longer be defined by material wealth, monetary value, possessions or other physical-based factors, but by one’s intangible, intellectual or aesthetic achievements, one’s use of the freely and abundantly available resources to fashion something better, one’s discoveries of new conceptual or real vistas, one’s selfless service rendered to a fellow human or to life or to a good ideal, etc.

Of course, a transcendental revolution of such epoch-defining magnitude cannot possibly be the work of one person. In fact, I claim no exclusive credit for my ideas. There are other more brilliant minds who have seriously looked into these possibilities. I shall strive to be a significant contributor to the realisation of this grand vision.

That is all.

I now tag my friend, Ganesan, to perpetuate this “How I Want To Be Seen” project in his own unique way.

How I Want To Be Seen, Abu Aremu, Ultimate Secrets of Success, personal development, Batman Begins, Ganesan

Consumption of meat at night tends to make you not be able to sleep.

I shall therefore benefit this protein-induced temporary insomnia to elaborate on Latiffology.

Here is a list of the themes or issues that is to be covered by Latiffology. This list is not exhaustive:-

1. Business and its true functions.

2. Cosmology or attempts by finite sapience to swallow the totality of existence using blackboard theories.

3. Truth, media, propaganda and the subjective human experience.

4. Global warming, global cooling, global cataclysm and the problem-reaction-solution pattern.

5. The functions of systematic indoctrination of children’s minds to comprehend the world and the unravelling of humanity’s true potential.

6. Entertainment and thought-provoking information via a multi-sensory experience.

7. Conceptual, theoretical and practical models to address problems in reality.

8. Islam.

9. A Socratic Exploration of the Infinite Ignorance of Humankind.

10. The Human Race - its triumphs and its follies.

11. Self Actualisation as it should be.

12. For the Love of Wisdom.

13. The Relationship between Self, Society and World and attempts to Harmonise it.

14. Distribution of a Limited Portion of the Population’s Models and Ideas to the Masses.

15. Systems of Belief, Models of Understanding the World and Ways of Life.

16. The Triumph and Supremacy of Reason.

17. The Instrument of Manifesting Humanity’s Will over the Universe.

18. The Little Things Count Too.

19. The Quantification and Qualification of the Subjective and Objective Value of Individual and Collective Property.

If you’re savvy, you might notice that the 19 themes or issues match or describe the categories of my WordPress.

Friends of mine who have known me for more than 2 years (among others, Ganesan) are familiar with one of my recent coinages, Latiffology - a term with which I named the previous incarnation of my blog and also meant (generally and vaguely) to encompass everything I think about life, the universe and everything (not the Douglas Adams book).

Some time in March / April 2007, I took over 600 articles of the previous Latiffology blog (which I called Latiffology 103 - which means there had been 2 previous versions - 101 & 102) offline, but not before I backed it up to my local hard drive.

I had my reasons for doing so, among others to induce (ineffectively, I might add) a sense of scarcity and shock such that my writings and ideas carry more perceived value. This I shamelessly say to be a shameless bid for attention, but I have now, over a gradual course of time, transcended all notions of wanting attention (except in cases where it is absolutely necessary) for its own sake.

It might do the collective mind of humanity some good as the previous version of Latiffology had some posts which were nothing more than the vain rantings of an immensely wanting young man. Mixed in with the vain were also some semblances of (I dare say) genius and profoundly brilliant insights - therefore, a dig into its contents might resemble an archeological exploration - some dirt, sand, dust, mud and crumbles mixed with the beautiful artefacts and remnants of once-brilliant minds.

Anyway, I don’t care if only my friend Ganesan is the only sentient, sapient being on Earth (other than yours truly) who reads this, or if an extraterrestrial visionary were somehow able to procure my brainchildren via the photonic aether of the universe and use my ideas as an impetus and manifesto of sorts to revolutionise his / her / its civilisation, or if I were to be condemned (but first I have to be misrepresented) for my ideas, stands and beliefs.

Articulating the violent (neuronal) firing activity in my head is one of my greatest pleasures in life - my birthright - an activity which is almost spiritual to me in its nature - and this alone is its greatest gift, its ultimate reward and essential motivator.

I dislike labels. Ironically, although I prize expression and I am particularly inclined to do so via the instrument of words, I have a love-hate relationship with it, specifically its limits (and its abuse).

At times, I find that a stand, idea, philosophy or paradigm (way of looking at things) of mine concerning any one thing closely resembles that of another person or a pre-existing ideology or philosophy or dominant mode of thought, but in some unique aspects, radically differs from what has already been existing.

I find myself at a loss to efficaciously convey how or what I think - labels such as ‘Left’, ‘Right’, ‘Liberal’, ‘Conservative’, ‘Moderate’, ‘Fundamentalist’, ‘Extreme’, ‘Radical’, ‘Socialist’, ‘Libertarian’, etc - do not satisfy me.

Therefore, should any historian attempt to study my works posthumously, I demand that they do so with complete respect to their collective, overall (and holistic, in a sense) context. All my thoughts should come under the domain which I define to be ‘Latiffology’. I condemn in advance those who misconstrue or misrepresent what I say, write or express and twist them (or even keep them intact but cut them out of context) to suit their own selfish ends - or use what I express even in its purest, untouched form to advance some malevolent cause.

“Opinions (other versions: excuses) are like armpits. (Almost) Everyone has them and they stink” - some source which I am too lazy to credit.

Well, some armpits do not stink (that much), and it would be insane to call for a blanket extermination of all armpits (an armpiticide!) because of their foul stench.

Another example why arguments or justifications based on analogies cannot be taken seriously.

Anyway, unlike the Maddox’s and Dawkins’ of the world, except for a limited number of things, I do not subscribe to the false notion that once I feel that I am right about one thing, I am always right and I should assert that I am right about it and point out how others’ views of things are wrong and should be ‘converted’ to my line of thinking. Of course, there are always exceptions in any case.

What I am is beyond ego or egolessness. I am neither so bloated as to verge upon the Nietzschean nor do I pretend to be so egoless as to approach nihilistic tendencies. Here, I break my own rule (see? An exception) and apply the label Utilitarian or Utilitarian Humanist upon myself. I am a Utilitarian Humanist who is also a Shi’ah Muslim in faith. And no, do not accept that at face level, or go to Wikipedia or consult the textbook definitions of Utilitarian and Humanist, for they do not suffice to do justice to my concept of it. I am somewhat a humanist because I am human and I put the interests of all humanity above everything (theists might ask what about the interests of God? Well, I ask you, since when does God ever have interests? The so-called ‘interests of God’ as defined by religion has always been essentially the interests of humanity). I am also a utilitarian because I believe that in everything we do, our means must justify and be justified by our ends, even in seemingly ‘pointless’ leisurely, recreational or entertaining activities (humans need such things - to a limit).

Ganesan, Latiffology

I realise I have been guilty of the NATO disease (how can you be guilty of a disease?). The ratio of my ideation, planning and discussion to actual implementation of said ideas, plans and discussions is disproportionate, leaning heavily to the theoretical rather than the practical side.

No worries. Like any good utilitarian, I shall remedy this with more plans that heavily favour actions rather than more complicated theorising. Of course, testing, tracking and evaluating are crucial elements of this experiment as well.

There are a couple of areas in my life that I seek to better -

1. My Livelihood.

My internet businesses are my livelihood. Presently, I am working on a ‘make money online via internet marketing‘ type of project called MoneyMakingTactics.com. Feel free to take a sneak peek at the work in development. I have been learning, testing, launching, failing, relearning and generally ‘doing’ internet marketing since 2002 and I’ve surprised myself by not launching an internet marketing site of my own to impart my 5 years’ worth of knowledge, information and wisdom to others - until now.

In the internet marketing world, the word ‘guru’ has been bandied about quite frequently. If by ‘guru’ you mean someone who knows something and can teach it, then by all means I am a guru. In fact, that is what the word ‘guru’ originally means, right, in Malay and (if I’m not mistaken) Tamil? But the internet marketing arena has warped the word ‘guru’ to mean someone who is very successful with a huge list of newsletter subscribers to which they promote their products for massive profits every time.

Literally, you can make thousands of dollars overnight on the internet. Such things are true and not pipe dreams. I’ve had a taste of it myself - a couple of hundred US dollars overnight from selling a 5-page report on how to get traffic from Wikipedia.

My currently running (and nearly 100% automated) project, which you might already know, is Ultimate Secrets of Success. I started it in early 2005. It’s in the success and personal development field. In 2003, perhaps some of my friends will know, I launched my first personal development online business project, Effective Questions dot com. I wrote my first goal setting ebook, earned my first US$1,000 from sales of it, but got distracted by other internet marketing opportunities, school projects and worries about my looming national service.

Now it’s been over a year since I’ve completed my 26 months (24 actually, I ’stole’ 2 months’ worth of leave near the end) of service to the country, and sometime early this year I breathed new life into UltimateSecretsofSuccess.com - the domain name is unconventional (too long, uncatchy, etc), it breaks countless laws in the marketing textbook, yet it makes some money and I have my own cult following of about 300+ subscribers - not to mention I’ve gotten the attention of several fellow (some of them bestselling) personal development authors and experts.

I’m a bit go with the flow and having a clear plan and agenda. I make up new plans or evolve old ones as I go along and see how things develop.

An offshoot, spin-off or ’sister project’ of UltimateSecretsofSuccess.com would be my up and coming FreeYourGenius.com. Think the US$20 Million a year DoubleYourDating.com business model but applied to the accelerated learning, memory improvement and general mental and intellectual literacy enhancement market. An African American teenager named Jermaine Griggs started his niche play-piano-by-ear training online business a couple of years ago and it’s now a multi-million dollar business. The “playing gospel music on the piano” market is not even a modest one (there are less than 50 searches for such things every day according to Wordtracker) - it’s tiny but somehow he’s successfully turned it into a multi-million dollar business.

At this point, it has become clear to me that I might have chosen this path - either consciously or subconsciously - for deliberate reasons. I’m not a perfect and infallible person, but I’ve always felt at ease and most ‘in tune’ when the projects I am doing are about enhancing other people’s lives in whatever ways feasible - be it through my personal development content or my internet marketing software or services.

This is what I believe in - businesses that not only generate profits but improve lives. I believe the 2 should come together, hand in hand. One should never overtake the other. The next philosophy or concept I wish to integrate into my plans is that of helping people help themselves - the “give a man a fish VS teaching him how to fish” idea (which I actually first came across as a mural in my primary school; initially I thought it didn’t make sense, why would a school talk about a man fishing? but now it is clear to me). This is in line with my revolutionary life mission and leads to my next point…

2. My Mission.

Some months ago, I think it was my birth month, August, I started volunteering every Monday to listen to the grievances of local residents (their financial problems, fines, family disputes, etc) and help direct them to the relevant bodies that can help them by writing up correspondence to said bodies for them. It isn’t exactly groundbreaking but it’s my small part to play to help humanity. The past few weeks I had been occupied with other work commitments so I’d been missing my Monday sessions. I do intend to resume in the very near future when circumstances permit.

The sessions had been eye-opening and a great learning experience. I can safely say 100% of all the cases I attended to, the problems had been caused by money - the lack of it, or the lack of knowledge of properly managing it, or just the lack of opportunities (due to various reasons) to earn a good sum of it.

The more cases I attend to, the more first-hand knowledge or ‘grokking’ I can get. I don’t intend to keep a ‘distance’ in such a way that my experience becomes mechanical (i.e. entering their grievances into the system) nor do I want to immerse myself too much into their problems until I am psychologically affected.

I’ve started to see these problems systematically - where it had gone wrong, what exactly was the cause, what was missing or lacking, what shouldn’t have been there, etc. It all boils down to know-how, mettle, maybe a little luck (but luck can be self-manufactured), nothing that relevant and specific education can’t help. Not only are we enemies to what we don’t know, we are also slaves suffering under the tyranny of our ignorance. Most of the time our problems in life are caused by a lack of information or knowledge in certain areas or contexts. That is the key.

Some people swear by the System - it is everything. Civilisation is either made or broken by it. I say it is true only if people or the human element is included as a crucial (if not the most critical) factor in the System. Milton Friedman’s theories unleashed a genocide when implemented in Argentina. Should the economist be blamed or the dictator Pinochet? Some religious fundamentalists accused Darwin of creating the theory (evolution) that was the intellectual ancestor to Nazism and Fascism (’Survival of the Fittest’). The problems of the 19th and 20th centuries which are now creeping into the early 21st are caused by this ‘objective’, ‘rigorous’ and ’scientific’ (if you will) disregard for all subjective, emotional or human elements and tragically, when theory becomes practice, the ‘objective, rigorous and scientific’ disregard for the human element is also reflected and hence, human beings are seen as no more than ‘objects’ that can be moved about, manipulated or entirely removed to ‘perfect the System’. Ironically, however, greed is also a human trait. So where should the lines that separate objective and human-subjective be drawn? And once the lines are drawn, should they be set in stone, or constantly evolving?

There are several practical paths that my mission can take - how I can translate this vision of eradicating money and establishing a resource-based economy built upon the foundation of justice as opposed to profit and the paradigm of abundance as opposed to scarcity. The current monetary system is to be seen as backward and impeding to humanity’s progress; as idolatry was in pre-Islamic Arabia.

Money is a temporary quick fix that somehow, because of mismanagement of civilisation and resources (such that the few dominates the resources of the many), became a permanent, long-term thing to stay, and if this system of representing real value with fake symbols continues, civilisation will either continue upon a path that will lead to doom or be eternally trapped in a nightmarish loop of booms, busts, short-lived prosperity periods and great depressions.

A new world built on this transcendental economic model must be prepared for the mindset changes, paradigm replacements and even philosophical re-evaluations that it demands. For ages, money perpetrated this illusion upon humanity and we were all addicted to it.

One of the paths that can effectively lead to this revolution is to invest in minds, to invest in the development of human potential as an end in itself, not as a means to use said human potential to generate greater profits. Ironically, this mission of destroying money requires the flowing of money - at first - at least, until we have come to the point where human potential and technology is developed such that we have optimal mastery of resources such that they flow abundantly without end through perpetual renewal.

The micro-finance and micro-credit movement has been instrumental in the third world. Free universal education at all levels is also a fast track towards the realisation of this vision. By free education, I mean all levels, from the basics of literacy all the way to the highest levels of practical or philosophical knowledge - from A,B,C’s and 1,2,3’s, through arithmetic and geometry, all the way to the principles of Friedman’s economics, the finer points of the universal declaration of human rights or the management precepts of Jim Collins. And this education must be relevantly focused upon each individual’s passions, interests and needs; its purpose is to liberate and draw out the best, not to manufacture obedient citizens of the state who do not question authority (especially when it is fit to be questioned).

Since when has knowledge diminished the more we give it away that we have to ration knowledge by charging exorbitant fees and placing premiums upon it, shackling students to bonds (bondage?)?

Education or human potential development is one of the few things that need not consume resources (except for time, energy and some soft resources like memory instruments such as paper or even computers) such that we desperately need to charge money for it or else “education will run out and all our thinking will be depleted”. Think about it. If that were so, our parents would have charged us money for teaching us how to talk, walk and take care of ourselves.

utilitarian, make money online, internet marketing, guru, Jermaine Griggs, resource-based economy

My mission in life, to put it bluntly, is to destroy money.  Specifically, fake money. Paper money. Electronic money. Those pesky little things that are intrinsically worthless but to humans symbolise some form of value hence their changing of hands represents exchange of one value for another. That is a very flawed model from the beginning but due to practical limitations in the first place it was accepted at its most primitive stages as a norm, and it continued to evolve without addressing the fundamental quality and essential principle it was supposed to serve in the first place - the development of human life and civilisation.

Money is the lifeblood of human civilisation, makes the world go round (or so they say) and bestows status upon people who have more of it (or more concentrated quantities of it) and defines the structure of social hierarchy.

But money is still fake.

This is its biggest problem. This problem has plagued humanity for millennia. But things are changing. Money was invented from a paradigm of lack. But the true nature of the universe is not that of lack but of abundance. What is lacking is simply the knowledge (specifically human knowledge) to mine the vast resources of the universe that will serve to improve the quality of human life and hence civilisation as a whole.

And even in the arena of knowledge - both theoretical and (technological) practical - revolutions and evolutions are the constant norm - whether or not we choose to pay attention to them while we’re distracted by fake money.

I am going to make many enemies, confuse entire populations and perhaps some might misinterpret what I truly intend to convey and create fanatical death cults. I might even be branded Marx 2.0 but I assure you I am the anti-thesis of Marx - no, correction, anti-thesis is not enough of a descriptive word - I am way beyond that. If my ideas take root, it will be way beyond whatever economic, philosophical or political systems humankind has conceived. In that manner, my world-view, my vision is transcendent.

I am excited by the technological developments of the so-called transhumanist movement but I am against meddling with our human nature too much to the point that we lose our humanity (and philosophers will want to debate with me what is meant by humanity).

I am optimistic that the developments of nano- / pico- / femto- technology will open new vistas of human capabilities and elevate us to new levels of our quest for the ultimate mastery over matter and energy. But I am against the repetition of tragic portions of history where only the elite few whose interests wantonly override those of the many have totalitarian control of its power and wield it to enslave rather than empower and liberate.

In some aspects, I am an anarchist. In others, I am a totalitarian. This seemingly confused amalgamation of qualities emergently manifests its coherence when you elevate your perception of what I am trying to do and see that ultimately what I am interested in is what most humanists, activists, freedom fighters, democratists, (some) religionists and other intentionally benign groups want to see as well - the elevation and liberation of all humankind from all shackles (either self- or externally-imposed).

Yet I temper this notion with the realisation that humans are intrinsically limited beings but our growth potential is virtually unlimited. I am not against our limited nature. I am against impediments, blocks and cages that limit our growth. Growth is good. Our natural limits are good. But growth should be done in the most benign manner possible and not at the expense of others (and by others I mean both other humans and other forms of life - even non-life; i.e. the intricate ‘balances’ of nature so to speak).

The previous 2 paragraphs sum up the motivation behind my motivation - the why beneath the why - of my intention to dethrone money and replace it with a more just value-exchange system that intrinsically makes poverty, lack, limitation (and all that it causes - i.e. war, slavery, tyranny, greed, elitism, fascism, etc) rationally impossible.

My vision is this - ultimately, I want all that is needed - the basic necessities - for human beings to lead decent, dignified lives (healthy air, food and water, shelter, clothing, education, love and comfort, etc) to be as freely available as the very air we breathe. When the basics are taken care of, we can move on to the more advanced levels of development and exploration.

Currently only a small percentage of the human population can afford (even then that affordability is questionable) to be the forerunners of progress and scientific (philosophical, aesthetic) exploration; and the efforts of these few, while appreciable, build the paradigms and drive the movements of the many who are less than privileged or are tied to the wage slavery system.

What I want is for the basic needs to be taken care of, then with a focused educational system that addresses the growth needs of a human being holistically, the vast majorities are given free rein (within clearly defined moral and ethical boundaries) to explore the various fields that are their individual passions (or muses) in life.

Knowledge sharing is the new currency of the future, but in a way that has lesser limitations than the monetary currency that runs our lives currently.

Yet despite all that is written here, I must assert that my idea not be a new dogma or doctrine; i.e. some rigid ideological system. It must not be. It needs to be fluid and receptive to realities. Perhaps the only thing that I want my idea to be dogmatic about is the concept that whatever we are doing is in the ultimate interests of the allowance for the fullness of human life.

mission in life, human civilisation, Marx 2.0, transhumanist, technology, Knowledge sharing, currency of the future

Georg Cantor, Ludwig Boltzmann, Kurt Gödel, Alan Turing. 4 people who, besides Einstein, influenced the understanding of philosophy, mathematics and science that we have today.

Beyond the historical, biographical and philosophical explorations of this documentary, I feel that the root of this ‘problem’ of uncertainty is more psychology than the nature of mathematics or reality itself. A finite mind with infinite evolution and growth potential wants to immediately grasp the ‘answers to all questions’ now or very soon, yet it is not designed (or evolved) to function that way.

The truth, to me, is that we can never find all the answers to everything. Absolute certainty cannot be possible. Infinite progression, unending (perhaps eternal) evolution of psychological and philosophical exploration is the ultimate order of existence.

But instead of being disappointed (to the point of being suicidal, like these tragic geniuses) about this notion (which I also feel might be wrong), we should feel elated, ecstatic, rapturous, even, that we are one of the few sentient beings who have the ability to explore deeper and higher levels of understanding in the first place. Why stop? It never ends. It is never supposed to end. Why be comfortable with only one phase of certainty?

Einstein, Georg Cantor, Ludwig Boltzmann, Kurt Gödel, Alan Turing, Infinity, Mathematics, God, Logic, Entropy, Chaos, Order, Incompleteness Theorem, Paradox, Continuum Hypothesis, Non-Computability, Absolute Certainty

Paul Laffoley is the modern day Leonardo Da Vinci.

He artfully blends architecture, metaphysics, esoterics, futurism, biology, ecology, etc, to design such potential inventions as a time machine, an actual habitable house that can be grown from a seed like a plant and the harnessing of new, yet-to-be-discovered forms of energy (beyond those we now conceptually know).

Explore Paul Laffoley.

Paul Laffoley, Leonardo Da Vinci, time machine

1. There is no such thing as a Renaissance or a Golden Age. Golden Ages are posthumous. Historians ascribe that quality to a certain age before or futurists to one that they hope would come because of certain perceived qualities in said age. We could be living in one Golden Age right now, for all we know. Would people who lived during the Italian Renaissance know they were living in one?

2. Humans are cursed with the eternally questioning imperative. There are no perfect answers for any question in existence. Any answer put out and/or accepted by anybody is simply a manifestation of the questioner’s satisfaction with what he / she has arrived upon at any given moment. What dictates one should stop seeking the answer beyond the answer, the truth behind the truth? Practicality.

3. Atheists, incessant Nietzschean philosophisers and nihilists would find that there is no given meaning to existence except for what one chooses to ascribe to it. I have found an antithesis to nihilism. I call it infinitism. Yet in infinitism I find a paradox, an oxymoron. The futile search for a meaning (usually quantitatively means only ONE meaning) to existence leads one to find that there ultimately is none (unless one subscribes to any belief system that has one ready-made for them). What if one were to begin by finding MORE than ONE meaning? What if the number of meanings to existence is infinite? All this pessimistic search for meaning, of finding the Ubermensch (Overman), of carving out an ideal, seems to negate or belittle the value, utility and “being qua being” of the non-idealistic, naturalistic and has-already-been-here reality. This is just another way of saying, what if the goal of everything is the journey itself? The road that leads to the never-reachable ultimate? How would this road look like? Circular?

4. What would a moment of non-existence feel like? Does non-existence equal aconsciousness (not a misspelling, means non-consciousness) of existence? Would it be possible that just a second ago you were unconscious but in an instant your consciousness was regained and this occurred in such an infinitesimal span of time you did not notice it? Would it then be possible that only a moment ago, the universe was rendered non-existent somehow, then, again somehow, it returned to existence, in such an instantaneous span of time, no conscious being was able to perceive it? Is it then possible that this has been occurring at every infinitesimal instant of time since the beginning of time and existence as we know it? Why not? Why should a notion as Occam’s Razor negate such a possibility?

Golden Age, Golden Ages are posthumous, Renaissance, eternally questioning imperative, nihilists, Occam’s Razor

“You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.” - Richard Buckminster Fuller.

Bucky Fuller was the utilitarian extraordinaire.

I am optimistic and partly hopeful that the developments and de-developments, evolutions and de-evolutions that are simultaneously or sequentially occurring on our planet on myriad existential levels would continue on the obsolescence model of Bucky Fuller.

The question that begs us then is - how do we build a new model that makes the existing models of class divisions, religious supremacy conflict, extreme nationalism and other human-divisive-isms absolutely obsolete?

If we take the Fuller concept further and apply it to various ‘tired’ contexts, the implications could be revolutionary. Take, for example, the current destructive enterprises of various forces fighting for various special (political, religious, economic) interests.

Instead of fighting the ‘enemy’ (whoever that may be), why not build a model, an invention, a machine, a thing that renders the ‘enemy’ not only obsolete but irrelevant and perhaps even philologically non-existent?

Iran need neither submit to the arrogant demands of the ’superpowers’ nor continue its nuclear programme (which is for peaceful energy I am sure) escalating the suspicions of the ‘arrogant powers’ and causing them to want to invade as pre-emptive policy. Iran can spend what it spends now on its current nuclear programme on alternative energy sources that are more eco-friendly, and perhaps even beat the “Arrogant West” to creating the world’s first “perfect”, “clean” and “efficient” systematic source of energy. This is a triple win for Iran as - (1) the “Arrogant Tyrannical Powers” have no pretext to invade Iran and take over its oil supplies, (2) Iran proves once and for all to humanity and to history that even a theocratic country can beat the secular, ‘democratic’ West to creating something truly revolutionary for all humankind (clean, hopefully ‘free’ energy) and (3) Iran’s sovereignty, pride, dignity, etc, is preserved.

This is also a win for the ‘Western powers’ as - (1) Iran won’t nuke Israel or any of the ‘Western’ nations and (2) since Iran is eager to cooperate with America (but not Israel, that can be for a separate discussion), Iran’s discovery / innovation of the ‘perfect’ non-nuclear energy source can help other countries as well, and in fact, (3) help the world combat global warming (assuming the new energy source is really clean and eco-friendly).

Hey, in fact, instead of sanctions and escalating tensions, why don’t the West offer to help Iran, in a non-obtrusive manner that is in no way compromising Iran’s pride as a sovereign and independent nation, in its current energy development programmes, nuclear or otherwise? While assistance is being rendered, even closer monitoring can be done to ensure that Iran’s nuclear programme stays ‘peaceful’. But here’s a condition - the assistance and monitoring must absolutely not be done by any American or Israeli agents at all. They must be completely unbiased 3rd parties neutral to the Iran-America tensions.

How’s that for a plan to change save the world?

Buckminster Fuller, Iran, Arrogant West, America, Israel, plan to change save the world