What if (a brief theory on time, space, and E.T.’s)…

October 30, 2006 at 04:43 | Posted in Anti-doomsday, Musings | Leave a comment

So, let us depart from the notion that both time and space are infinite. Because they are infinite the ways in which we understand them do not necessarily convene with the extent of their functions; time and space operate in ways that we cannot conceptualize. One way of looking at this is to think of every event as being simultaneous: your birth and death are occuring at the same time, along with everything in between them. Now, within this quasi-continuum of time what happens if we are the aliens that we’re looking for? What if humans of the ‘future’ were to return to an Earth of the ‘past’ (our present)? If this is true then the question, “Are there other intelligent life forms,” is unimportant, especially since it seems that we haven’t found any other forms of life yet; we don’t need to find them, because we are them.

Imagine us being able to interact with the earliest known human beings–we would certainly seem as ‘aliens’ do to us.

Wouldn’t we?

On the Earth’s assumption of Humans through motion and modernism…

September 4, 2006 at 16:50 | Posted in Anti-doomsday, Things related to critical theory | Leave a comment

Firstly, everything that humans do is a product of the structure of Earth, and cannot so easily be grounded as humans’ control of their own subjectivity.

So, in my recent readings–some of Merleau-Ponty’s phenomenology, and Exhausting Dance…by Andre Lepecki–I have been doing a bit of thiniking. In keeping with the first statement I have considered the affect of the actoins of human within modernism, and have concluded that modernism is a drive that consumes human beings, so that they are constantly in a state of motion with no intention of ending; the entire grasp of modernism is to embody motion on Earth with no intention of stopping, and to cover as broad an area as possible. It is not that modernism is a manifestation of human beings’ desires to subjugate, rather it is the embodiment of the absolute assumption of motion on Earth with no regard for anything other than that motion that subsequently leads to subjection as motion requires a non-moving object–that object inevitably becomes the subjugated, that which cannot move. Modernism is a motion with deadly capacity, for it subsumes any perpetuation other than motion as peripheral to motion–even the self; modernism is not only absolute motion, but absolute motion at any cost. Modernism is a mode that is consumed by motion, it is not that modernism decides to emobdy motion, rather it is that which cannot be reduced, for its engagement cannot be anything other than motion, but as we experience motion it happens to create modernism regardless of the subjects involved.

Post-modernism then is the engagement of the same tools and skill-sets as modernism that engages the notion of the structure of motion that it is assumed by. The difference between modernims and post-modernism is that modernism posits to know why it moves, while post-modernism does not know where it goes. Post-modernism embodies all of the values that modernism embodies–and still subjugates–but acknowledges that any attempts of the subjective human within motion to structure that motion are futile.

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.
Entries and comments feeds.