Photo Journal 12/15/2019

 Click here to get more!

Shot with Canon 80D

Canon 100mm f2.8 Macro Lens &

Canon 24mm f2.8

Marine Drive

Click to Enlarge

Book Review: Dune by Frank Herbert

Click here to get more!

"There would be tricks within tricks within tricks."

My friend recommended this book to me several times and I am very glad that I decided to take the suggestion. This book was a non-stop rollercoaster of intrigue, action, and suspense. From the very first chapter, the reader is thrown into a mysterious world where pieces to a massive puzzle are introduced through context while eluding simultaneously to a known future and an unknown present. The author introduces such puzzle pieces in a myriad of forms such as excerpts from unknown tomes that refer to unknown events, words that can only be contextualized to determine, and the names of people, cultures, and religions that will only make sense once the reader has delved deeper.

It is impossible to overstate the intricacy that exists in the text of Dune and it is difficult to explain the story without giving away what makes it so entertaining. Above and below the surface layer of the story there are layers of macro and micro examination and the interplay between layers as well. Everything in the universe of Dune is connected through thousands of years of interconnected human endeavors. Just like in real life the humans of Dune are in a constant race to manipulate the environments they occupy including both the ecology of planets and social dynamics of competing sects. Frank Herbert navigates these intricacies with a rigorous methodology that at no point takes away from the fun that the reader experiences in discovering the world through its players. 

We learn about Dune from its newest royal inhabitants and overlords led by Duke Leto Atreides. He is joined by his precocious teenage son Paul and his enchanting concubine Jessica. While these names may appear mundane I assure you Paul and Jessica are not to be trifled with. Paul's quick reflexes and Jessica's intelligence and cunning prove to be powerful assets. With political turmoil all around them and betrayal lurking around the next corner, Duke Leto is charged by his Emporer to take over the planet Dune and extract all the spice he can and the spice is nice. Mmmm spice!

Dune is an exercise in keen observation. As the book continues the reader sees into the mind of the highly trained Mentat assassins, seductively selective sorceresses and more. You notice every vocal tonal change indicating to you that someone is afraid or hiding something or straight-up lying. Words become codes and a couple of hand gestures can communicate an entire conversation. These are just some of the mysteries that exist in the cut-throat world of Dune.

I highly recommend this book to anyone interested in an epic adventure that explores both the internal world of the characters' thoughts as well as an in-depth external sci-fi world with a healthy dose of fantasy to round out the excitement. The only negative thing I could come up with is that while the vast majority of the story is unpredictable the ending was mostly expected, which doesn't take away from the enjoyment in the least. If anything it allows for a satisfying resolution that entices the reader to continue the saga with the next book which could be Dune Messiah although there are so many Dune stories one can get wrapped up the world forever. I will certainly be reading more of these novels and I hope that any movies or shows based on the Dune world do the story justice. 

Security and Fence: A Retail Perspective

Click here to get more!

At a high-risk retail location such as the one I have been working at these past three years there comes a time when you are asked to be both a security guard for the products you sell and fence for the thieves that steal them.

All-day long you are on the lookout for those that might be trying to shoplift. It's usually pretty obvious and the company expects us to thwart these no-goodnicks by simply offering them amazing customer service which is actually just direct, unwavering observation, assistance, and silent harassment. While you are attempting to thwart injustice you get called away to help a real customer and without constant observation, the thief strikes and soon, you watch them walk out and half the time they set off the buzzers at the front of the store. It's too late and they've struck again and everyone looks at each other as if we've lost another one. We have failed in our half-assed attempts to thwart the criminal from stealing the master's property. 

Secretly, but not that secretly, the masters don't really expect you stop most of the attempts. They expect the store to reach a certain amount of predictable loss (shrink) and it's more important to sell something and make money than to worry about petty theft. Even not-so-petty theft is acceptable as long as it isn't perpetrated by the employees. 

It gets so that when a man walks out with $400 worth of electronics or an entire $1000 laptop it's just the cost of doing business. The police may or may not be notified. I just hope they never pull a gun and go for the cash. Sometimes there is a ton of cash. But they know that it's a major crime to rob someone and they also know that shoplifting is such a minor offense that most folks won't try to stop them. And if you try to stop them with force you can get fired so you just have to watch them walk out with someone else's property. You think that it's your job to stop them and to protect your own job security and to protect the companies interest and if you care about the store you work in, the other people that you work with and adhere to general community ethics then you feel like it is the same as stealing from you. It could easily be you anyway.

Then, just after watching one leave another one enters. This one you haven't seen before but they certainly look the part. They look shady as fuck and walk straight to the return line and hand the cashier a bunch of random shit that was obviously stolen. Sometimes they come up with some excuse like their grandma bought the products a few weeks ago and now she just doesn't need $250 worth of Epson ink that just happens to be sitting on the shelf nearby unprotected. Your grandma spent over $200 dollars on ink she didn't need? Or the one with ten random day-planners that no one has ever purchased in those numbers before and happens to be the most expensive options when they don't look like they've spent more than $10 on their clothing, backpack, oversized coat, and two huge handbags. 

There is a rule that managers can refuse a return but managers aren't the ones at the registers most of the time. The ones at the register are typically younger, less experienced and barely trained. They don't understand the policy and since they are intimidated by both customers and managers they can't make complicated decisions about which policies to hold more strictly and which ones to break completely. They don't know how to professionally refuse the obviously douchey person trying to get money from nothing and some management teams might say to just do the return and some might say to use their best judgment.

The return policy also requires a receipt for a return except that telling someone that legitimately bought $100 purse just a day earlier that you won't give them a refund because they don't have a receipt is near suicide as they will either tell a higher-up that you were rude or they will just continue to argue with you until you just give up or they will say your racist or sexist or some other crazy shit. Dealing with an angry customer is no fun and to be avoided at all costs, for the most part. Having enough experience to understand when a customer crosses the line and demanding that they leave or you'll call the cops takes time to develop and the brand new cashier will just take the abuse most of the time until a manager steps in. 

Ultimately the policies should be straightforward. They should be easy for the customer and for the cashier. It shouldn't be a guessing game or a complicated algorithm of whether or not the customer deserves a break this time either because they are super nice or obnoxiously demanding. Managers should be able to make decisions about who is not a real customer and security should either be a priority or not. It feels like a priority but it really isn't. 

The contradiction occurs when someone thinks that the company wants to enforce laws. Companies, especially the largest companies, would rather the government never gets involved. Only when the problem becomes too costly do they resort to the police. This is due to two factors, as I see it. One is that companies and governments don't always mix well. Government's tax companies and inflict regulations that can make it difficult to do what the company wants and challenge what might make them more money. 

The second reason is that people know that the government and especially the street cops are not going to stop petty crime. They probably won't even show up. They don't have time and the cost is not worth it. It is technically a crime but so is loitering, littering and public indecency. The "man" doesn't have the men to enforce all the laws. Companies have security systems but those are not usually reactive and some companies have a security guard and if it is really important they will have more guards and real guns but balancing the cost a human guard and the liability involved is complicated. It isn't usually worth the fight when it comes to petty theft. 

When you work in an area that has extreme poverty and crime is rampant, especially petty crimes you see the stark difference between those vagrants and the majority of folks that are decent enough not to steal from you or show up too drunk and don't do hard drugs in the bathroom. These are the people to give great customer service and should be the real focus of the team but it is very distracting to have to judge all that come into the store in an effort to work as a deterrent to the baddies.  

It is demoralizing and confusing to be expected to be both the security guard and the fence. To watch people walk out with product just to have them or someone that looks like them bring it back and put it on the counter and lie to you makes you feel the opposite of empowered. They say that they bought the product but you know they didn't and you were always taught that lying and stealing are bad and that heroes stop criminals and the right thing to do is to expose liars. Well, too bad. Just ask them for their ID and don't cause a ruckus and the corporate masters will deal with it in their way. Just go back to selling and signing people up for harassment emails and giving people undeserved discounts because they say the word "coupon" in some configuration that passes as a sentence and trying to explain how shit works to people who don't give a shit about how it works, they just want it to work.

Working with the general public can be a frustrating mess and most people do not understand the hardships that the lowly floor staff deal with on a daily basis. The main goal of a business is to make a profit and in that pursuit, they need to maintain a positive reputation. This means erring on the side of the customer and not doing things that lead to negative press or legal action. This means that associates take on the complicated task of representing a companies interest even if the ones who make the rules never know who those associates are.  

Questions about Panpsychism

Click here to get more!

After listening to Sean Carol debate Philip Goff about panpsychism and materialism I had a few questions about panpsychism.

Are animals conscious? 

If so, how would we find out? 

Wouldn't we have to use external observation in the form of some material mechanism? 

Maybe one would think that animals could tell us what it is like to be them. Maybe we could interpret their languages and understand that they are experiencing what we are experiencing.

How would you explain to a foreign person that has never heard the word consciousness what consciousness is? How would a dolphin explain to us that it is conscious? How would we ask it? 

Saying that humans have consciousness is a fact and then postulating that that fact is an indicator that all things are conscious seems like a very big leap. If consciousness is at the root of all physical reality then many entities would experience the world in a similar way as humans and should at least experience some form of consciousness. 

How is consciousness defined? If the definition comes from the only thing we know is conscious then the definition must include the aspects that are linked to the human we experience of it. This means that it would include characteristics such as a self-concept or self-representation, a stream of present tense external and internal stimulus that includes some form of symbolic representation such as a language that interprets, analyses and integrates stimulus in a meaningful and expressible manner.

If the only way we know that something is conscious is to ask them and if we ask someone if they are conscious and they say yes why should we believe them? Why should we trust our own perception of consciousness? How, other than appealing to physical reality, would we ground our confidence that consciousness exists?

Philip also relies on the difference between quantity and quality but I didn't get a good definition of quality. Maybe it is just another term for subjective valuation and has no objective base. If that is true and "quality" can not be judged then there is no reason to study it as it can neither be wrong or right. So how does someone who thinks consciousness is only qualitative expect to study it?

Is there a way to evaluate quality in the form of quantity such as a degree of happiness, or a degree of redness? Also, I'm not sure if "redness" is a qualitative characteristic. Experiences can be quantified such as how many times one experiences something or the amount of hormones, neurotransmitters, and electrical activity that exist before, during and after an experience.

If you care about science then you must care about the means in which we verify intuitions. Also, Philip repeats the idea that neuroscientists can only get at a correlation between brain activity and conscious accounts but that correlation does not disprove causation as much as it proves causation. Also, neuroscience is not the only science that studies consciousness. 

Philip keeps asking Sean to explain what a particle is as opposed to what it does but he doesn't explain how if everything is conscious how would we ever prove it if materialism or scientific methods or empiricism is on a different level as consciousness. It is a kind of unmoved mover kind of argument. It's not that physical reality includes consciousness it is that consciousness is what physical reality actually is and therefore cannot be explained by physical reality. Saying that what we do when we do math or science is just describe the behavior of consciousness doesn't explain consciousness or prove its existence at all. It is the same argument that God is before time and space and therefore one can not prove its existence using science. 

Why should consciousness be on a different ground than any other concept? It should not be held up higher than any other hypothesis or theory. We should be skeptical of our assumptions regardless of how real they feel and we should be skeptical of our willingness to separate things because they seem mysterious and miraculous. We should ask questions about what we are talking about when we use the word consciousness and why it's important.

I suppose what I mean is I should ask these questions and look into the subject more. 

Links:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panpsychism

https://www.preposterousuniverse.com/podcast/2019/11/04/71-philip-goff-on-consciousness-everywhere/

Worthless Meat-Sac

Click here to get more!

I suppose most of my life I've been a little depressed. Not enough to warrant any one's attention. Just enough to dwindle away any remaining hope, pride or confidence from a once playful child. A once hopeful squirt.

Along the way and at no time, in particular, the lust for life and all it could offer subsided. Reality set in hard and with little push back from myself and for Reality, it was easy to interject a little taste of spiteful consequence into an already uncertain world. 

Ahead, I only saw chaos and unpredictability. All I saw was my own failure, greed and no one to make proud, least of all myself. Who am I to demand such things of myself? Am I not just another human, doomed to a life on this earthly hell? With torments within and torments abroad.

The world, seeking to destroy you throws death and confusion at you. So you accept your fate. I told myself I was just another in a long line of worthless humans. No more important than the distant stars,  a speck of dust on the planet. With no God and no one to impress and no chance for greatness, why even try?

In the background of my mind negativity was always there, demanding more and expecting less. Never enough and never to anywhere. I thrived amidst the opportunities afforded. Blessed and cursed by the world's prescribed options. Adrift and ashamed. 

I am still ashamed of my lack of fortitude and passion. I am still ashamed when I find myself following someone undeserving of my loyalty. But it is not the case that I am just a cog and it is not the case that I have no choices. I have consequences to conjure and futures to inspire.

It is the case that I can accept my frailties and work toward improving the best aspects of myself. To take on tasks that improve my attitude, my mood and that create confidence. The ones that help me appreciate life and find joy. Activities and indulgences that I can take pride in even if I'm not always willing to divulge them to others.

There are positive and negative behavioral feedback loops that one engages in whether one is paying attention or not. If one is paying attention and wants the depression to lessen then it makes sense that one should engage in activities that promote positive psychological feedback.

A great book that I read that facilitated my acceptance of my current state and empowered my dedication to make my life better is called The Six Pillars of Self-Esteem by Nathaniel Brandon. Another book I read that helped me rethink my relationships with others is called Real-Time Relationships: The Logic of Love by Stephan Molyneux. After reading these books I came away with actionable steps to take control over my life in a way that I didn't know was possible beforehand. I started to look at my life as something to be taken seriously as a limited resource that was worth investing in. For more on this topic read my blog about losing 45 lbs and why as well as other blogs about personal development.

Even after about five years of a concerted effort to no longer treat myself as a worthless meat-sac I still get depressed and still, my depression takes the form of a subtle, yet persistent pessimism, nihilism, and doubt. A voice inside my head that looks at my accomplishments, skills, and humanity and judges it all as a pointless endeavor unworthy of continuance. I stop writing, stop learning, stop appreciating myself and I start to doubt that I am worthy of any effort at all. Fortunately, as time goes by and I work at improving my self-esteem these bouts of depression are fewer and far between and I hope that in time positivity and enthusiasm will take on a more dominant role in my psychology.



Links:
https://www.amazon.com/Six-Pillars-Self-Esteem-Definitive-Leading/dp/0553374397

https://www.amazon.com/Real-Time-Relationships-Logic-Stefan-Molyneux-ebook/dp/B004Z8S1TA

https://joesnotesblog.com/blog/2018/10/3/re-post-a-new-lifestyle-how-i-lost-45-lbs-and-kept-it-off

My Favorite Podcasts of 2019

Click here to get more!

Click on links to check out these great podcasts!

Let me know what your favorite podcasts are on facebook!

Sean Carol's Mindscape Podcast (Still one of my favorites!)

Superego (New Episodes Up)

Doug Loves Movies (Doug Benson)

Joe Rogan Experience Podcast (Pick and Choose)

Philosophize This with Stephen West

Favorite new podcast! (New to me)

Timesuck with Dan Cummings

An Educational Miss

Click here to get more!

If kids can vote at 18 and everyone thinks they should vote then why is there essentially no formal education related to political philosophy? They should also be practiced in evaluating candidates and understanding the process and its consequences.

There seems to be a gap between whose role it is to teach life skills and job skills. Formal education was originally a supplemental experience that would prepare one with a means to know how to do something valuable. Something that would ensure they get a skill-based job. I'm sure that it all originated with apprenticeships and other on the job training and then, in time, turned into more and more of an institutionally based endeavor. Education, it seems, has become bastardized by laziness, bureaucracy,  and politics. (Yet another example of how the government corrupts a good idea.)

More and more people started sending their children to school. This allowed them to get a head start on reading, writing, and math, which was becoming more and more of a necessity in industrialized nations. As occupations went away from farming, parents spent less and less time at home and needed somewhere for their children to be during the day. Soon, and with the help of the efficiency born of the factory, schools started taking up more and more of the role that parents once held.

Life skills were traditionally taught by parents by both modeling and direct teaching. Parents would teach their children about household duties, sex, religion, politics, and all the things that are involved in navigating once's culture. It was the role of the parent to truly prepare their children for the outside world and it was the role of the school to prepare their mind for fundamental cognitive abilities that would become financially viable.

Throughout much of American history, mothers stayed home and took care of household maintenance and fathers went off to work somewhere for most of the day. As women started joining the workforce and the government decreased the value of money through inflation in an effort to increase tax revenue children became more and more neglected. Now we have a situation where the vast majority of citizens live in the working class, which means that they typically need a two household income in order to pay bills. This means that there is less time to teach their children life skills and with schools teaching nearly everything under the sun, parents don't know what their children are missing. Also, because they were never formally taught modern life skills they assume that their children will learn as they did, just by doing it.

I think that we would all be better off defining the roles of both parents and educational systems. I think that the government's "free" schools should either provide life skills or not. If they are going to take on the role of educating the youth to create effective, successful and productive adults then they should teach the things necessary to accomplish this. This includes teaching skills such as sex education, finances, political philosophy, cooking, health, computers, typing, etc. If this was the case then this would be on the top of the goals list of teaching children job skills as well, such as math, science, geography, English and the like. This is a lot of work for the government and it seems that they are already in charge of much of this and yet don't seem to have a clear goal in mind. If you are going to take on the task of educating the future entirely then you should do it well.

If the government is not the right choice for the job of educating children in life skills then it would fall to either the parents or a private agency such as a private school. The nuclear family seems to be falling apart and one thing that is helpful about the nuclear family is it relieves the parents of some of the burden and allows for a more stable, nurturing and ultimately healthy environment for the development of a child's capacities. As single-parent households rise parents are more stressed, less attentive and more absent in their children's lives, leaving less room to teach life skills. Also, because the parent is struggling it does not provide a hopeful example for the child either. Why would a child listen to the advice of someone who is barely making it? They won't. They will go somewhere else.

Where do children go to learn life skills? Now, it's the internet. If they want to learn about sex they look it up online. Not just porn but articles about how to be in relationships. Or they just watch porn. Only the more intelligent look deeply into their own potential and seek out experts. Many just do as others do and will end up just like their parents even though they despise them. They look to celebrities and emulate their personalities in a naive attempt to become someone important instead of becoming themselves.

The world is becoming more and more complicated and young people have more possibilities ahead of them than ever. Even if parents take the time to teach their children they are most likely unaware of the current considerations that young people should be made aware of. Every year there are new technologies, industries, laws, and cultural mores that parents can't keep up with and therefore cannot educate their children in a way that will be relevant for them in the future. The government takes so long to update their curriculum and continually changes their standards that they cannot educate the youth in a way that prepares them for our complex and rapidly changing world. It makes sense that so many young adults (and many not so young adults) find themselves scrambling to understand the world that they are thrust into when they turn 18.

Waiting for people to "figure it out" on their own is terribly inefficient and wastes so much potential. Well before someone graduates, they should be immersed in the real economic world. Diverse and extensive job experiences before the age of 18 would help transition the young into the world that they are already a part of but are separated from partly out of necessity and partly out of fear. People learn from doing and so if you want people to understand the world they must experience it. For children, this is facilitated by adults and for teens, mentors can help transition them into the world. If parents don't take the time to mentor and educate their children then there will exist a gap between the real world and the insulated world of children. On the other hand, some children are thrust into the real world too early and are forced to engage in adult activities before they understand them.

Maybe companies like Youtube, Kahn Academy, Udemy and others will bridge the gap that exists but children don't know what they don't know and if they don't actively engage in educating themselves then they will go through the growing pains that most of us deal with when we have to fend for ourselves. While people make due and some will be very successful and some will fail miserably with the majority somewhere in between the world could be improved by taking education more seriously, not for the sake of the state but for the sake of humanity and freedom.