The Tyranny of Niceness

This post is inspired by reading this post from the The Advice Goddess Blog. I stole some of Christina’s lines directly and the general trend of the piece but I’d like to think my elaboration is of interest.

Our latest generation can’t argue. They think that creating tension is bad and a sign of something wrong or that something has gone wrong. It is part of the Tyranny of Niceness in which rocking the boat is the greatest sin and tolerance is the greatest virtue.

If you can’t argue then you can’t think.

One of the best ways to refine your ideas is to fight. A good vigorous debate between friends is a blast as well as a passionate argument between rivals. As long as your goal is to enhance your own understanding and delve into the truth such arguments are one of the best ways to enhance the mind. Those who argue with no intention of changing their mind and who openly state that no evidence will ever possibly convert them to any other view are already lost to reason.

If no one challenges your thoughts and opinions then the ruts of conventional thinking just grow deeper and stronger until you’re unable to critically examine your own beliefs and knowledge. Thus, the extreme polarization in America today where those who have the most extreme views are unopposed by the sensible majority and exist in an echo room listening only to those thoughts that agree with them. Those who dare challenge your paradigm are the enemy and whatever the enemy says is suspect as you already know and believe that passionately that your ideas are superior and correct.

The tradition upholding the ideals of free thought, liberty, and speaking your mind are quintessentially american. The latest generation has been raised without this and don’t know it and don’t appreciate it. One of the largest polls ever conducted on high school students showed that the vast majority think that the government should censor the media and those with unpopular opinions should be prevented from sharing their thoughts rather than being argued for and against in the free market of ideas. The ideas should just be quietly shut down and censored by central authority so as to avoid upsetting anyone. Again the tyranny of niceness rears its ugly head. As mentioned in the link Ethics Professors can’t find a single topic or ethical conundrum that their students will find objectionable and will actively stand up against! They just want SOMEONE else to make the decisions and shut up unpopular or divergent thoughts so they don’t have to critically apply their reason or make anyone uncomfortable.

The education system is partly to blame for this. An anecdotal story from an article in Newsweek I read years ago tells how a boy stood up and yelled at his teacher to stop being mean to a girl in their classroom. The girl had asked a question and the teacher mocked her calling her stupid and saying the question was dumb. The boy continued saying that in the first day of class the teacher had said to ask any questions you have and don’t worry there are no dumb questions so she was being mean AND being an hypocrite…the school’s response was to expel the boy for being intolerant and showing a lack of respect for authority.

Reminds me of a great speech given by Al Pacino in a Scent of a Woman.

Q&A: Author Dan Bergner on What Women Want (Hint: Not Monogamy)

Lots of things to consider and myths to bust in dealing with desire and sexuality.

Health & Family

Even Freud felt unequipped to speculate about the true nature of women’s sexual longings, but journalist Dan Bergner was bold enough to investigate what science has since learned.  His new book, What Do Women Want?  Adventures in the Science of Female Desire, offers some surprising insights. TIME spoke with him about his discoveries about female sexual desire.

What made you want to write this book?

I had done an earlier book about desire.  One of the researchers I’d worked with for that book said, “You need to come to my wife’s lab. She’s doing some fascinating research.”  That was Meredith Chivers and she was comparing what women say turns them on versus what their bodies say using this little device called a plethysmograph [which, in this case, measures blood flow to the vagina]. That was the beginning of this journey for me.

And she found things like women apparently becoming…

View original post 1,021 more words

More Quotes

What’s frustrating about being disliked is that it’s invariably for the wrong reason.  ~Robert Brault

I don’t see how an article of clothing can be indecent.  A person, yes.  -Robert A. Heinlein

Aside from a cold appreciation of my own genius I felt that I was a modest man. -Robert A. Heinlein

Geniuses and supergeniuses always make their own rules on sex as on everything else; they do not accept the monkey customs of their lessers. -Robert A. Heinlein

The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false-face for the urge to rule it.  -H.L. Mencken

There’s no such thing as bragging.  You’re either lying or telling the truth.  ~Al Oliver

Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid. – Albert Einstein

Nature of Reality

(A paper I wrote a very long time ago as an insufferable freshman philosopher)


“Your thought is your reality” Adu’l-bah’a Abbas Effendi

We exist in a dynamic, variegated, probabilistic, interconnected, and interrelated Universe that is composed of energy shaped by ideas into patterns of information that is then affected by consciousness. The external world that we perceive is a model to represent reality that our consciousness creates and these models (and possibly reality itself) are subjective in nature and differ from each other depending on many factors such as beliefs, knowledge, history in space-time, and how the consciousness filters data.

In this paper I will be using the term “processes” for patterns of information existing in space-time. The reason why is because all “things” are in a constant state of change. But when you use a word like “things” you encourage a viewpoint that the “object” stated is frozen. What exists in the universe are processes in various rates of transformation. What gives the illusion of fixity is the rate of change compared to other rates of change.

Some or possibly all processes have a degree of consciousness influenced by their history, relationships, and the complexity that holds together their pattern or “self”. This consciousness effects the “local” environment through the act of observation. The observer causes a disturbance in the observed in proportion to the scope of consciousness exhibited by their pattern and in this way the observer intensifies their relationship with the object of their attention. This act links together the observer and the observed causing an effect in the observer as well. Every process affects every other process and is in some way connected to every other process in space-time. “Space-time” is an accurate description of reality if the definition of space-time is the history of a universe comprising all of its events and their relationships. Space is than a representation of the relationships between processes and time is the representation of change within the network of relationships that describe space. Neither space nor time has any meaning outside the system of evolving relationships that comprise the universe.

From my own experience I find that every new idea or stimulus I perceive or develop has led me to look at the world in a different way and thus react to my environment in a different fashion. I think that I’m constantly changing physically, mentally, and emotionally. I’m definitely not the same person I was a year ago, though I share up to that point in time the same history. History is different from memory for the mind can be tricked or it can be faulty in recalling experiences. How I react and deal with reality is transformed with each passing moment as I grow more complex and aware. As my history develops I evolve as a consciousness and the model I create hopefully becomes a more accurate description of my personal reality. In this way I feel that I’m drawing closer to my potential and living a richer more meaningful life.

As far as I know no one has connected all the ideas I have used in this paper together and pondered the cosmological consequences of their truth. By considering these ideas I have developed several new concepts that I hope you will enjoy reading as you consider their ramifications. The influences and sources that helped me to develop my position include elements or key concepts from the Theory of Relativity, Idealism, the Transactional quantum theory, the Participatory universe theory, Bell’s Inequality and the Aspect experiment that proved it, the coherence theory of truth, the pragmatic theory of truth, the Monadalogy by Leibniz, the Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum theory, Bekenstein’s Law and Bound, the weak holographic principle, Plato’s philosophy, Three Roads to Quantum Gravity by Lee Smolin, The Inflationary Universe by A. Guth, Relational quantum theory, and I’d like to thank David (Leshiye) Carnahan and Joshua J. Wiggins for providing valuable editorial input.

Halfway through the process of writing this I read Kant’s theory in my Philosophy textbook that comes to a similar conclusion about the external world being created by the mind to represent reality. My work is not derivative of Kant’s for we have taken very different paths to reach this idea.

An idea that helps me comprehend the universe or space-time is that of a web. A web when hit by a raindrop sends vibrations down every strand just like the universe does. The limit to the speed of communication of information in the universe is that of light in a vacuum. This doesn’t limit action or effects taking place instantly which Einstein called “spooky action at a distance”. The web exists and we exist within it in relation to other processes.

Another important topic to mention is how much of a necessity variety is. Without variation there wouldn’t be a universe for variety is what keeps the components of reality separate and unique. In order for space to be an accurate representation of reality you must have two processes contained within it and since time is the subjective rate of change occurring in the relationship between processes without at least two processes you have nothing to compare the rate of change of one process too. So the web is constantly transforming and creating new novelties and varieties as it evolves.

What is consciousness? I think it is awareness of the self and the self’s relational environment. This awareness forges a link between other consciousnesses and allows consensual agreements with other consciousnesses which form the relational web of existence. The impact a process has on its environment and upon its consensual agreements via its consciousness depends upon various factors such as complexity.

A moderately complex process like a table may have just enough consciousness to be aware of itself; that it is a table and can maintain a record of its history within the pattern of information it contains. A very simplistic process on the other hand like a proton may have just enough consciousness to be dimly aware of its own existence. The quantum entity is unable to have the informational storage capacity to record and maintain its history or even its present.

Bell’s Inequality is one of the most important concepts in quantum physics with important ramifications. The most important fact is that we must accept two choices about reality. First we can choose to believe that reality is non-local and exists when we are not observing it or that reality is local but nothing is real except when we are observing it. Luckily both choices support my argument. Of course if the second is true what constitutes an observer? This question led me to think that all processes could be observers no matter how “small” or simplistic.

Relativity gave me a possible clue to this riddle. According to the theory of relativity all processes have a subjective rate of change that is effected by gravity and momentum and that movement is always relational to other processes. It doesn’t matter if you think of the bulge at the equator of the earth as an effect of the universe spinning around the earth or of the earth spinning in relation to the universe. Another example that illustrates my point is that of twins. One stays on the earth and the other leaves on a spaceship traveling at a speed close to the speed of light (momentum). Both would experience a similar rate of time but the twin would return after 10 years in space to find that the other twin died of old age a century earlier. So we all have a slightly out of sync space-time history according to the theory of relativity that very accurately predicts the macro world.

Now to take this to the micro world we come to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. It states that it is impossible to measure both the position and momentum of a particle or the state or rate of change in any system accurately. The best we are theoretically capable of is 50% of the total information. This can be in any combination such as if we had full knowledge of a quantum entity’s position (100%) than we would know nothing (0%) about where the entity was going. This is not because of the lack of instruments precise enough or because of disturbances caused by the instruments performing the investigation. It is because entities in the micro world don’t have a precise position and momentum. They normally exist in a superposition of states when not being directly observed. That is why light is called a wavicle, it is both a wave and a particle and can even interfere with itself as shown by the double-slit experiment where a photon goes through 2 slits at the same time, except when observed which causes the photon to collapse to a particle and only go through one slit. The reason why the photon collapses when observed I think is because the photon now has the benefits of a link with a more complex process with a greater consciousness that is able to basically pick up the informational storage burden and our impact is greater upon the consensual reality normally at play on the quantum level because large complex processes rarely observe that deeply the micro world.

If less complex processes have less of an effect on what they observe than more complex observers such as ourselves then this would explain why the macro world is more precise than the quantum world. It also illuminates why the quantum world is so fuzzy. If all the macro observers are slightly out of sync with each other and are observing themselves creating a relational framework they cannot completely agree with each other! This disagreement is usually very small but then so is the micro world.

So basically the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle is explained in my theory by two factors; the lack of complexity found in processes on the quantum level leading to not enough informational storage capacity to provide accurate relational position for the quantum entity and accurate change of that position, and the disagreements between the observations of processes that form the relationships between processes.

No region can contain more than a finite amount of information and this informational limit is 10 to the 66th power of bits per square centimeter or 1 bit per 4 Planck areas and is known as Bekenstein’s bound. The Planck scales include the Planck length and Planck time and they are the smallest units of time and space. Any unit of time or space smaller has no meaning at all. Thus space is discrete and time cannot be divided infinitely nor can the agreements between observers ever be perfect in forming a consensual reality.

This connects well with the weak holographic principle that states we are mistaken to think that the world consists of things that occupy regions of space. Instead all that exists in the world are screens on which the world is represented. Nothing exists except processes by which information is conveyed from part of the world to another. The area of a screen is really just the capacity of that surface as a channel of information. So, space is nothing but a way of talking about all the different channels of communication that allows information to pass from observer to observer.

The correspondence theory of truth says what is real is what is observed as a fact or that the truth is an agreement between a proposition and a fact. This is true but is limited by the accuracy of the model we perceive and create. This works well for daily life when and if our model is fairly representative of reality; however, it is not good enough by itself to be the basis for truth since it is dependant upon observation.

The coherence theory of truth states that truth is found within the connections between other truths and is dynamic as new truths are added to the web. I think this is how the mind forms its model to interpret reality. The reason the mind doesn’t create an accurate as possible model is that when a false statement is incorporated all further connections and truths are flawed or biased until the false statement is corrected. This is why the external world we perceive doesn’t always correspond with reality. The good thing is that if we are aware enough and flexible enough we can alter our model to more accurately reflect reality.

Relational quantum theory is another important concept supporting my ideas. It states that the quantum state of a particle or subsystem of the universe is defined, not absolutely, but only in the context created by the presence of an observer, and a division of the universe into a part containing the observer and a part containing that part of the universe from which the observer can obtain information. There is not one quantum state of the universe but as many states as there are contexts. If this is true then we each live within a subjective “portrait” of nature that is subtly different for all observers.

This brought me to the idea of a consensual reality. Should this be applied beyond our representation of reality to reality itself it would have many ramifications. The goal would be not to “pierce the veil” to a deeper and truer reality that Kant calls the noumenal reality but to develop our own individual models to be as accurate as possible since there would not be an objective and absolute reality.

The question then is what are the standards of accuracy? Is it agreement with the majority or general will? Are there no standards at all? Or is the truth to be found upon the pragmatic path? In my opinion the best model for you is the model that works the best for you and allows you to live the richest and fullest life. The truth or value of your model only you can know and developing it is a great journey most all of us undertake. This journey pursuing “The love of wisdom,” I believe is what philosophy is all about. You must be willing to step outside the bounds of what others tell you is the truth and come to self awareness and self realization which will guide you and allow you to achieve self rule and freedom. Of course, while on this journey much of the work has been done for you by others; be it great philosophers, scientists, religious figures or even your family. Their works and ideas may provide keys to doors that will lead you beyond the thresholds of ordinary thought.

One of the big puzzles of relativity is that inertial mass equals gravitational mass. Or in other words acceleration causes gravitational force in proportion to the acceleration. I think I may have the answer to this riddle. Gravity is one of the bonds that connect processes and has an infinite range so it connects all processes to each other. When a process travels in a vacuum according to Unruh’s law it produces a gas of virtual particles surrounding it. This could be a reaction from the bonds connecting the processes together. Momentum places stress on these gravitational bonds causing the bonds to resist by mimicking the effect of gravity like rubber bands increase their resistance to being stretched further apart. The reason why the bonds resist may be because of the difficulty such a massive change in relational position causes between the observational agreements between processes. Gravity is the influence that the distribution of “matter” has on the causal effect of space-time for our model while in reality it is the one of the influences created by the bonds between processes in the web.

Ideas are the language of the universe that forms the structure of how information is composed. Energy always has a pattern and this pattern contains information built from this language. Plato has helped me quite a bit even when I disagree with him such as Plato’s concept of “Forms”. He said that there was a perfect universe where perfect ideas existed and that what was real here was shadows or imperfect replicas of the “Forms” of heaven where they exist eternally and absolutely. My thought is that the ideas or “Forms” are constantly changing and that they are the totality of their history, form, and relationships which is dynamic and relative. For example Plato said that all tables were copies of the perfect table while I say that all the tables that exist and have existed in our space-time form the idea of what a table is. Ideas come in many varieties from small building blocks like neutrons, or complex patterns like computers, or even the structure of the periodic table. Ideas are an integral part of this universe and do not exist separately from this universe and are intimately shaped by consciousness just like processes are affected by observation so as a consequence ideas are dynamic not static.

The participatory universe theory reveals a most interesting concept. It states that there is no absolute truth of reality. Instead when we are investigating the universe we are actually creating the answers with our questions. These answers must be self-consistent with previous answers but the answers did not exist prior to our questions. So, we are creating new ideas with the universe and helping to make reality and our model of reality more comprehensive and detailed or at least make our model more so.

According to the pragmatic theory of truth what is real and true must work, be useful, have value, and be dynamic and changing. This works well with the participatory universe theory and is the basis of the majority of technology built with quantum theory. Often a discovery is not understood but is applied in our daily lives. We use compact disc players, computers, and other high tech devices that are built upon quantum theories like Quantum Electrodynamics or QED.

Unfortunately these theories or formulas are just plugged in without thinking about the ramifications of the theory. Such as Schrödinger’s equations that have been used for over 70 years and other primary equations or quantum physics without scientists realizing that built into the equations are waves going into the past not just the future or in scientific terminology advanced and retarded waves. This is the basis of the transactional theory of quantum physics. This theory says that the present is in communication with the past and the future and may explain why electrons in super conductive material somehow manage to “dance” and avoid each other which allows little or no impedance.

Finally, probability is one of the cornerstones of the standard model or Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum physics. Rather than rigid cause and effect the micro world has many strange anomalies. Radioactive decay is a prime example of probability in action. We can very accurately predict the rate of decay of various atoms and molecules but we cannot say which one of the atoms will decay in the mass. How this happens is still a major question but it illustrates that Einstein was wrong when he said, “God doesn’t play dice with the universe!”

Materialism’s primary tenets are that we exist in a deterministic universe devoid of consciousness and composed entirely of matter from which we can find answers through an objective and empirical methodology that applies reductionism to gain knowledge. Other beliefs include the concept of an absolute space and time that is objective and can be measured perfectly.

According to materialism a thing is simply an object that takes up space, has length, width, taste and other descriptors. The mind is non-existent and is simply an idea born from a flawed understanding of the brain and the states a brain experiences. God, the supernatural, psychic phenomena, the idea of the soul, and magic are superstitions that are born of ignorance and appeal to sources besides reason. If you break something down into its parts you will understand the whole with every event having a direct cause. For example, the reason billiard balls scatter after a break is because of kinetic force that is applied using a pool cue to the cue ball to direct it in the direction of the balls. Materialism is committed to the methods of sense observation, analysis, and tentative conclusions and that what can’t be proven this way cannot be known.

Determinism in materialism is applied to everything in existence so there is no such thing as free will and as a consequence it is not the fault of criminals for committing crimes because they were simply puppets reacting from prior stimulus such as a bad or abusive childhood. Everything happens for an exact reason that can be predicted if all the data is provided.

Famous followers of materialism include Democritus, Thomas Hobbes, and Pierre Laplace. Democritus believed that reality could be explained in terms of matter he called atoms and that the universe consists of atoms and empty space. In this atomic universe “all things happen by virtue of necessity, the vortex being the cause of the creation of all things.”

Thomas Hobbes wrote about his philosophy saying. “Every object is either a part of the whole world, or an aggregate of parts. The greatest of all bodies, or sensible objects, is the world itself; which we behold when we look around about us from this point of the same which we call the earth. Concerning the world, as it is one aggregate of many parts, the things that fall under inquiry are but few; and those we can determine, none. Of the whole world we may inquire what is its magnitude, what its duration, and how many there be, but nothing else.”

Pierre Laplace proposed that the universe is self-regulating which current data has shown to be true. Laplace developed the idea of the “Divine Calculator” which knew the velocities and positions of all the particles in the world at a particular instant and could calculate all that had happened and all that would happen. There was no need of a God for “God did not matter” but simply a naturally occurring supercomputer.

It seems obvious that materialism is seriously flawed to the point of absurdity. It doesn’t take any scientific discoveries in the last two centuries into account. Discoveries like Lord Kelvin’s modern ideas of energy and his Thomson atom or Einstein’s famous equation of e=mc2 that states that energy equals mass times the square of the speed of light. The theory of relativity and its background independence disproves the Newtonian concept of absolute space and time. Bohr’s work on the structure of the atom showed that the actual matter in space was so small as to be negligible; the only reason our hand stops when it hits a table is because of the “energy field” created by the electromagnetic radiation connecting the atoms and molecules of the table. The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle invalidates the idea of a “divine calculator”. I’ve already talked about probability being fundamental to our understanding of the universe; examples include quantum tunneling and radioactive decay. How can you have an objective methodology when your very observations are affecting what you observe?

The moral implication of materialism’s embrace of determinism is frightening. If true there can be no justice or worthwhile punishment. If materialism is adopted into the model of a majority of the population it would breed nihilism for what is the point or purpose of life if we have no freedom? The fatalism absolute determinism could inspire would probably rip the fabric of society and led to a colorless and gray existence lacking any meaning. The destruction of all forms of spirituality would take away even that little bit of hope of escape from drudgery, tyranny, and apathy. So even if materialism is “true” it wouldn’t work for society to adopt because the pragmatic theory of truth would invalidate whatever truth to be found in materialism.

Materialism offers nothing to the future as a goal or a purpose for it says that there is nothing you can do anyways that you’re not going to do. My theory encourages the maturation of the self and shows a reality where everything is alive and in the act of transformation. Nature fills our minds with what the consciousness perceives and this is the fuel that can be used to evolve our consciousnesses to a higher degree and leave behind the baggage of old models of reality that no longer serve as accurate portraits of reality.

My theory allows for spirituality in most forms and encourages reason as a goal in itself to become a more complex process better able to handle reality. Freedom and the power of choice are integral and powerful as we participate in the making and shaping of ideas and the universe those ideas exist in. Consciousness or the ‘mind’ is a force that can change the world…literally!

Further proof of the potentially vast power and influence of consciousness is by the impact of the effects of observation on the way light is measured can actually change the past journey of that light. This has been studied with experiments dealing with a few seconds into the past. Scientists, hope to one day develop an experiment to prove, that depending on how we perceive and measure light, such as the possibility that we actually change the path and history of photons traveling for billions of years depending on how we choose to observe that light! Every aspect of materialism is flawed and it can’t be taken seriously by anyone that has been presented with modern scientific data or who has the capability of reason.

While materialism is bankrupt there are other options. If we can learn to approach life flexibly with a viewpoint on internal growth and appreciation for the beauty of our existence there may be no need for a fear of a future dystopian rule and the corresponding philosophy that must underlie any such attempt at our liberty.

As my friend Nick said “We are dreaming up reality, and that beneath the apparent solidity of matter there is only the energy of mind, weaving its wonders.” Maybe if more people took a similar path we can open that “infinite” door of perception to the magic and mystery that is life and reality.

“It seems certain that Einstein was doubly wrong when he said “God does not play dice.” Consideration of particle emission from black holes would seem to suggest that God not only plays dice but also sometimes throws them where they cannot be seen.” — Dr Stephen W. Hawking,

Excellent Quotes

“The most dangerous man, to any government, is the man who Is able to think things out for himself, without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost invariably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane and intolerable, and so, if he is romantic, he tries to change it. And if he is not romantic personally, he is apt to spread discontent among those who are.” – H.L Mencken

Perhaps men of genius are the only true men. In all the history of the race there have been only a few thousand real men. And the rest of us–what are we? Teachable animals. Without the help of the real man, we should have found out almost nothing at all. Almost all the ideas with which we are familiar could never have occurred to minds like ours. Plant the seeds there and they will grow; but our minds could never spontaneously have generated them. -Aldous Huxley

The barbarians aren’t at the gates…The retarded monkeys rule the castle! -Me

Just because an idea sounds inane or ridiculous doesn’t make it false. The veracity of a concept has nothing to do with how reasonable it seems. Once you remove such a roadblock from your thoughts you will be able to look at the universe with clear eyes and accept what nature is telling you. -Me

No one may master a path without casting it aside. -Me

The rampant destruction or perversion of the imagination was the greatest crime of the last century and shows no sign of abating. -Me

It’s not arrogance when it’s the truth. -Thomas Gray

To follow knowledge like a sinking star, Beyond the utmost bound of human thought. -Tennyson

The aim of life is self-development. To realize one’s nature perfectly – that is what each of us is here for. -Oscar Wilde

Loneliness is such a drag…-Jimi Hendrix

Understanding is a three edged sword. Your side, their side, and the truth. -Kosh

Shake off all the fears of servile prejudices, under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear. -Thomas Jefferson

“Love” is that condition in which the happiness of another person is essential to your own… Jealousy is a disease, love is a healthy condition. The immature mind often mistakes one for the other, or assumes that the greater the love, the greater the jealousy. -Robert Heinlein

In every country and every age, the priest had been hostile to Liberty. -Thomas Jefferson

But we can’t be free, till we learn to laugh at ourselves. Once you look in the mirror and see just how foolish we can be. Laughter is inevitable. And from laughter comes wisdom. -G’Kar: Meditations on the Abyss

A stupid man’s report of what a clever man says is never accurate because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand. -Bertrand Russell

The more complex the mind, the greater the need for the simplicity of play. -James Tiberius Kirk

Don’t believe rashly what the common man advance, but remember to always ask yourself for proof of what is maintained. -Epicharmus

It is our responsibility as scientists, knowing the great progress which comes from a satisfactory philosophy of ignorance, the great progress which is the fruit of freedom of thought, to proclaim the value of this freedom; to teach how doubt is not to be feared but welcomed and discussed; and to demand this freedom as our duty to all coming generations. -Richard Feynman

If you have knowledge, let others light their candles in it. -Margaret Fuller

To see the way that mankind loves, you could search the furthest reaches of the universe and never find anything more beautiful. -Stardust (Neil Gaiman)

It is not sufficient to see and to know the beauty of a work. We must feel and be affected by it.


Favorite Babylon 5 Quotes

“There is a greater darkness than the one we fight. It is the darkness of the soul that has lost its way. The war we fight is not against powers and principalities, it is against chaos and despair. Greater than the death of flesh is the death of hope, the death of dreams. Against this peril we can never surrender. The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.”

“The Universe speaks in many languages, but only one voice. It speaks in the language of hope; It speaks in the language of trust; It speaks in the language of strength, and the language of compassion. It is the language of the heart and the language of the soul. But always, it is the same voice. It is the voice of our ancestors, speaking through us, And the voice of our inheritors, waiting to be born. It is the small, still voice that says: We are one. No matter the blood; No matter the skin; No matter the world; No matter the star; We are one. No matter the pain; No matter the darkness; No matter the loss; No matter the fear; We are one. Here, gathered together in common cause. we agree to recognise this singular truth, and this singular rule: That we must be kind to one another, because each voice enriches us and ennobles us, and each voice lost diminishes us. We are the voice of the Universe, the soul of creation, the fire that will light the way to a better future. We are one.”

“If I take a lamp and shine toward the wall, a bright spot will appear on the wall. The lamp is our search for truth, for understanding. Too often we assume the light on the wall is God, but the light is not the goal of the search, it is the result of the search. The more intense the search, the brighter the light on the wall. The brighter the light on the wall, the greater the revelation upon seeing it. Similarly, someone who does not search, who does not bring a lantern with him, sees nothing. What we perceive as God is the by-product of our search for God. It may simply be an appreciation of the light, pure and unblemished, not understanding that it comes from us. Sometimes, we stand in front of the light and assume we are the center of the universe — God looks astonishingly like we do! — or we turn to look at our shadow and assume all is darkness. If we allow ourselves to get in the way, we defeat the purpose — which is use the light of our search to illuminate the wall in all its beauty and all it flaws, and in so doing, better understand the world around us.”