No seriously, I am dumbass, I realize that the more I know, the more knowledge I gained and reasoned about, the more I know, I don't know anything.
So, in that sense, i wouldn't pretend to be anything different. Next to that I am/was pretty busy in the Real world so I can not pretend being really
educated by throwing a lot of sources that can be googled
, I've got my master degree in science though.
I am no skeptic I am no believer, I love a good discussion though but preferably with a few people. I hate creating problems to solve them. In a
discussion a prefer sparring partners that use the definition in words as the topic starter initiated, for the sake of progress. Progress in a
discussion is in my opinion a must, otherwise it is chitchat, disturbing, comparison of opions or whatever you would like to call it.
I have come to reallize that to truely understand a subject it is clarifying to jump from position sometimes. Defend the part that you attacked,
attack the part you defend. Try it, it is an eyeopener, if you do it seriously. Somehow I'm on a creative/destructive path in this lifetime, I say
this lifetime because I can not be sure what exactly is going on in existance, I sure have ideas and preferences, but I realize that I don't have the
capabilities to comprehence it yet, ok for me and humanity in general, we don't have that capabilities not yet, actually I think we don't have a
clue. Even if all info of the youtube movies, internetconspiracies, hehehe, library books, profets, etc was true and we would all understand just our
own info, we wouldn't have a clue. so we shouldnt pretend we know it.
In my life I've allways been surrounded by different religions, beliefs, cultures so it was lots of fun always. Intresting. That is also how my
intrest of analysing group behaviour has developed. And allthough the outcome of groupbehaviour can be completely different there is an structure in
it that has similarities. And so you can work with groups with similar patterns. Being creative/destructive I recognized a same pattern in the process
of development of art, art in architecture, music, subcultures etc.
I have analysed the development of of the early russian "constructivists". In short, in that time the tsaristic power was over overthrown and from
then started what we now know is communism. In that proces of change there was a gap for a few years. In that gap the existing power and government,
to describe it this way, was to busy fighting itself over its own power that art institutions weren't controlled anymore, like they were before and
after the gap. (For the info; the artist were working with artists from around the globe, that formed the basis for early modernism, like de stijl and
bauhaus.) They had some intresting ideas for forming a new society with art. One can argue that, while their art did not change society, it comes with
the birth of modernism, that helped developing the world of the middleclass.
The craziest thing that I found was to create an "own"-less society,
where everything was from everyone. To enforce the vision they presented the idea to have buildings for man, women and children apart, without family
you would only have society. hahaha intersting though. makes you think. If you would have been born there you wouldn't know any different. And how
would that be??? .....
I say all this because there is one quote I totally support, correct me if I'm wrong but it is dated in 1922 in the (translated from russian)
'Realistic Manifasto' by Naom Gabo:
"Perfection is not a goal it is a process and being in that process is the only way to reach perfection"
Now what has this to do with groupbehaviour? The thing is that Gabo was working with Tatlin at that moment. Tatlin was an influancal guy in the art
scene so to call and both were working on a art institution. So lots of artist picked up the concept to explore the direction of the development of
art. For me the problem lies in this. As soon as groups of people picked the themes up and discussed about it, there came agenda's. LOL it wasn't
about the perfection or the process anymore as usual it changed into fighting, debating art and political preferences (art for the art or art for the
people) (Nowadays we also have art for the companies like commercials and music, not all of them i agree). And this is what todays world society still
is. It is more a squirrel of getting the most people with you then about what is right. It is no perfection and we aren't getting there lol. Great
concepts, developments are put down by both companies that have other benefits and people that like to put them down. It is your own choise I know.
And you have the people that totally believe in them without seeing something actually work. It is your own choise I know. I'm more like this, Great
concept; make it work please. see you in a few months. Nice to see you being part of a process.
I really like one-liners, if they heve a underlying meaning. It is just too bad for me that ATS have the 2nd line rule,
Recently one of my
one-liners was deleted as an off-topic post. Ok I can understand rules in a group etc. But when is something really off-topic? Do we really have to be
in the box presented by OP, or can we make the box a litlle bigger. With so many joining discussionmembers we need boundaries in a topic so we don't
drift. The thread is about aliens hijacking voyager two and sending scrambled messages to earth. My post was: " we have decoded it, it is a
question..... what is cheap viagra
. Ok first of all I understand that a mod deleted it. But the meaning of my post was; don't worry about no
aliens, we have send so much crap in the universe that i can't understand why they would analyze humans as equals. Most of our info is BS. We should
just hope a spectator can filter that out. In short there are 3 possible outcomes; 1 aliens are just as dumb as us, 2 aliens come to obliterate us
because we inhabit a place the can make usefull to them, 3 aliens don't give a damn and are just playing like we would with pets. Ok and a lot of
I mentioned before the creative destructive path. I has been a couple of years philosophying on creation before Itruely realized that creation is
destruction, and destruction is creation. Makes me wonder what the Creator has destructed in order to create, but for anything else I haven't found
done by man that does not follow that rule.