Tuesday, May 11, 2021
Home Blog

I’m the great inquisitor AstonishingGardenDoorWithPelican

I’m the great inquisitor AstonishingGardenDoorWithPelican. I will hold anyone who speaks against me responsible with their lives and my red hordes will burn down the homes, string up the rebels and their secret backscratchers, henchmen, tools and backers and offer those who wants to love me an icy, judgmental look, while my pen jumps over the paper in quick, resilient accusations that overtake each other and hit your inner soul edifice so you become as weak as I and my underpaid employees. In me, in my language actions, the struggle of vulnerability against cynicism degenerates into inquisition. Where are your preambles when you speak? Where are your papers? May I see your papers? Sometimes I jump out of my red robe and run after you. I force you to the ground and shout: Cynic! Cynicism is barking at other people. Cynicism is offering oneself to bark. Cynicism is degrading oneself. Phenomena like the internet have pushed the nervous wrecks back and made sensitive people sicker than we deserve, but we get up with glowing eyes. [Thx to Ricky Gervais for being the inspiration for this. :-)]

On Correcting

The Philosopher-Language Massage Argument

1. Introduction

All clichés are messy language, whereas the opposite is obviously false. So we philosophers never say stuff like:

“We’re too different. We can’t be friends.”

“I feel I don’t know you when you act like that!”

Why? Because of our philosophical vigilance. This is something valuable. On the other hand it can seem arrogant that we’re simply not able to engage in dicussions where the person we talk to uses messy language.

As every human knows our language is crammed with clichés and messy language. Please notice here that we can’t simply jump up on the meta-level when faced with accusations like the one above. We can’t simply say:

“That’s not even your own words saying we’re different and saying you don’t know me. That’s messy language!”

We can’t simply say:

“What do you mean?”

That would certainly be very rude and arrogant.

Philosophers have a tendency to ask:

“How did you arrive at this conclusion?”

Which roughly means:

“What is your argument for saying this?”

But this is bad thinking. Why?

Obviously because the words “argument”, “premise”, “conclusion”, “induction” and “deduction” etc. all belong to language games.

2. Mini-solutions

We know from the latest developments in neuropsychology that we humans are experts in mini-solutions. Every time we encounter something new, or, for that matter, something old, i.e. something we are already familiar with, we come up with mini-solutions which we can express with ordinary language to explain what’s going on to ourselves and others.

In Bruno Shulz’ book “The Cinnamon Shops” we are presented with a sweet father-figure. The basic assumption of this surrealistic book is that our mini-solutions-based incoherence is something sweet. I personally like this book more than I like Hamlet (tragedy) and Erasmus Montanus (comedy). In Shakespeares most widely known tragedy we see a mad prince who is an expert in what we could call mini-solutions. We see the same thing in my countryman Ludvig Holbergs comedy Erasmus Montanus. These playwrights warn of us mini-solutions, despite the fact that they are very common to all of us.

Our brain is not logical but it’s good at mini-solutions.

I’m tired of the words “I’ve evolved very much as a person” and self-help books. Therefore I challenge my reader to try to understand how we correct ourselves and others.

3. Corrections

Look at this li’l’ table:

Correction: “You have no sense of humour.”

Said by ourself to ourself results in this language: Bad feelings.

Said by someone else to us results in this language: Almost unforgiveable.

Correction: “You have not suffered the way Allan did in his life.”

Said by ourself to ourself activates this language in our brains: Thoughtful silence + painful doubt + Weltschmerz.

Said by someone else to us activates this language in our brains: “Meaningless.”

Correction: “You are so dumb in saying or doing what you just said or did.”

Said by ourself to ourself activates this language in our brains: “Bad.”

Said by someone else to us activates this language in our brains: “Bad.”

Correction: “You are so naive saying or doing that.”

Said by ourself to ourself activates this language in our brains: “Bad.”

Said by someone else to us activates this language in our brains: “Bad.”

Correction: “You sound wimpish/bizarre.”

Said by ourself to ourself activates this language in our brains: “Laughter.”

Said by someone else to us activates this language in our brains: “Offended.”

Correction: “You sound full of yourself.”

Said by ourself to ourself activates this language in our brains: “Ooops. (Laughter.)”

Said by someone else to us activates this language in our brains: “Bad. Offended.”

Correction: “What you just said is surrealistic.”

Said by ourself to ourself activates this language in our brains: “Laughter.”

Said by someone else to us activates this language in our brains: “Misplaced? Silly?”

Correction: “What you just said is boring.”

Said by ourself to ourself activates this language in our brains: “Laughter.”

Said by someone else to us activates this language in our brains: “Bad. Rude.”

What does that li’l’ table learn us? Obviously that we, as humans, welcome certain types of corrections whole-heartedly and unconditionally.

Whether or not we aim at being better persons or delve deeply into philosophical thoughts about Martin Heideggers concept (German: Existentiale) of thrownness (German: Geworfenheit) the landscape of mini-solutions will remain. Whether or not we speak of belief systems and consciousness the mini-solutions will be there as a challenge.

Neuropsychology is here to stay. We know more about the brain than ever before.

4. Discussion

This means that we have to massage the public with these language types: boring, wimpish/bizarre, full of himself and surrealistic. We philosophers are qualified in doing so. In so doing we’re obliged to do something about the BIG world problems: 1. Political correctness (Wikipedia: “Political correctness (adjectivally: politically correct; commonly abbreviated PC) is a term used to describe language, policies, or measures that are intended to avoid offense or disadvantage to members of particular groups in society. In public discourse and the media, the term is generally used as a pejorative with an implication that these policies are excessive or unwarranted.”) and 2. echo chambers (Wikipedia:” In news media, an echo chamber is a metaphorical description of a situation in which beliefs are amplified or reinforced by communication and repetition inside a closed system and insulates them from rebuttal. By visiting an “echo chamber”, people are able to seek out information that reinforces their existing views, potentially as an unconscious exercise of confirmation bias. This may increase social and political polarization and extremism.”)

5. Conclusion

We have to keep to these four language types if we want to speak with non-philosophers. Boring language. Wimpish bizarre language. Full of himself language. Surrealistic language. In this way we can do our philosopher-language massage without hurting the patient.

Four types of language

My philosophical area of interest is limited. I’m sure many of you are familiar with the expression “a clear and loving gaze”.

I am interested in these four types of language:

1. Boring language
(2. Super-language)
3. Wimpish/bizarre language
4. Full of myself language
5. Surreal language

Therefore I have designed an Android app and put up a website.

Luckily I don’t need to deal with defining super-language and I’m certainly not asking you to. Super-language would be “the correct thing to say in a specific real-life situation”. Sometimes we do and sometimes we don’t. 🙂

I’m interested in these four types of language because they seem to be connected with important stuff such as ethics and other subjects. My question is: What is the moral worth of these types of language in given real-life situations?

Anyway. I’m asking you guys to help me feed our new Android-app with text examples of these language types. In a month or so. Let’s say September.

Let me give you an example:

Real-life situation: An author wants to write the first sentence of his next novel…

1. Albert walked down the street.
2. Albert walked down the street. The sun was shining, but in an unpleasant way.
3. [Doesn’t exist.]
4. Albert walked down the street. The sun was screaming
5. Albert walked down the street and was hit by an unbearable stench of chlorine at the Pheasants Corner.

I’m not expecting you to submit lists of these types of language straight away. I’m asking you to compete.

I’ve designed an Android app, free and free of advertisements, and set up a website for the same purpose.




Mapping inequality/exporting the danish welfare model to the rest of the world

In this project for august 2020 our aim is to strengthen countries all over the world so that they will adopt the same welfare model as we have in Denmark.

We’re not going to worry about traditional neoliberalistic concerns like what if shopowner gets money from the state for being a human being he will close his shop. Instead we’re going to focus on other things. Practical things. A website.

Personally I’m not interested in power and I will hand over whatever power I have, i.e. the power over this project and the web hotel credentials, to the first person who applies and who’s willing to sign an agreement to use the web hotel for our common purpose.

There’ll be a transition period until global equality is real.

In this period we must do surreal things like ignoring economical theories and economical laws. The world is not in order but in a state of emergency.

In Denmark we pay 50 percent in tax and take care of each other. Everyone should do this. This is not communism.

Please enter the country you wish to help and donate via PayPal. I will divide the donation amount by two and send half of the money to the government of the selected country and the other half I will share among the applicants based on fair principles.

Greed is not the problem. Greed is part of being a human being like so many other problems. Greed put into system is another thing. We must fight this unphilosphical idea.

Many governments and government leaders don’t know what they’re doing. We all know that.

So we have come to a natural ending of my speech. I hope for your collaboration.

Lovely Historical Account of District Court Judge Being Bitten on Right Knee

In this beautiful historical, there are many guesses in the afternoons in the world of scribes and cribbing, where a bee bothers by biting the scribe on his right knee.

Exercise Is Not The Right Thing for Asparagus-Dory

Why do you think exercise isn’t the right for you?
“I already get a lot of exercise.”
It’s so interesting you say that.

Gas Stations Exist in Perfect Health

“It’s just because the contact with the filling-station attendant is often a little superficially conventional and ceremonious that I made a bit of fun with my friend Youk and said that gas stations don’t exist. Heh heh.”
Yes, yes, I get the point.
“Existential nausea a la Sartre. Heh heh.”
Well I got it.
“But when I started to google different gas stations, I realized that several of the objects and paraphernalia at gas stations around the country actually have astonishingly high levels of existence. The dirty gauntlet which is used to put in and take out the baking sheet with prefabricated dough scores a remarkable 7 points of existence, even with a star, while the pump hoses themselves gets 14 points. However, this score is for all the hoses, taken together.”
That’s unfair.
Because then the level of existence of the individual hose decreases when new ones are added.
If the owner expands with more pumping stations, more hoses will come.
“Do not fumble with that thing!”
If they have a shared existence level, then the level of existence of each particular hose must be the total points divided by the number of hoses.
“You can’t say that.”
I just said so. Heh heh.
“But you can’t divide.”
I just said that I can and will divide if new hoses are added.
“How long will you wait?”
Three months.
“Why exactly three months?”
This is the time it takes to build a plastic toothpick in a pre-industrial society.
“You sound like Douglas Coupland.”

Reader Question: “How do I stop a zeus?”

Answer: Pour some petroleum into its bowl-shaped hat. Then it walks the other way.

Boomerang from “Really Old Days” Constitutes Thursday’s Most Interesting Find in Denmark

How can it have been thrown into space if you have it in your hand now?
We dont know.
You and me.
I basically don’t care.
Me and the guy behind me.

We Now Know 100 Times More About How “One” Should Behave And Live “One’s” Life Than Just 20 Years Ago

What does it mean that so many relatively foolish conventions take up so much room and confuse so much?
I have no idea.
But aren’t you the originator of the theory?
I am not the originator of any theory whatsoever and I want nothing.
But I think that’s a really good theory that you should hear about.
You know what. Now I have been working as a hammer and baker for 30 years. Even at the same time. And there’s only one thing I hate more than theories and it’s people who talk about them all the time without bringing them to life. That’s why I love entrepreneurs.
Er. You speak nonsense.
Do I?
Not all theories can be put into practice.
No no. Did you think so?
Gosh. How could I’ve been so dumb!
Well you’re still stupid.
Am I? Oh no! Hhaha.
Yes, because you didn’t understand why.
Why what?
Why it’s so. The theory, for example, that water consists of hydrogen and oxygen cannot be realized. You confuse theories with plans.
You’re right. I was so foolish.
Well, you’re still a moron.
Because you mess up the concepts.
Well, what if I just don’t?
I can just stop messing up the concepts.
Don’t do that.
Because the word is free. Because the word is alive. Because the word became flesh. Because the word became light.
OK. Those are good arguments. There’s just one thing I don’t understand.
Why are your shoes green?
I’ve cut grass in them.
They look more green than that.