Monday, March 14, 2005
pi-day silliness
(uses ie5.5+ transition; mouse-over -out for effect)
trials: 0
interior: 0
pi: 0
(completed) runs: 0
mu: 0
sigma: 0
there are many, many pi sites on the web.
here's a related twist. why are so many fundamental constants (π, φ,
e,
i, ...) related ? must be some sort of (weak) anthropic principal at work; they are “fundamental” because
we say they are, and of course, the internal consistency has that same basis in “we”. just a thought.
also note that the numeric value of “π” (and thus pi-day, etc.) depends on choice of metric, spatial curvature, and dimension, none of which are necessarily restricted to niceties such as integers, squares and so on. so this is “euclid's pi-day”, and perhaps that is the mathematician to be memorialized.
yet the
definition of π remains the same, independent of such considerations. and there's nothing particularly magical about
that, now is there ?
ethical wills - pros, cons, realities
oh, great: ethical wills. saw this is an ap news story. if you want to formalize such a conservative (in the sense of continuity and past-preserving) process in a family's traditions, then you better also formalize more progressive instincts for adaptibility and innovation as well. i guess it depends on where the balance is between these (and other) micro-cultural forces. there has been a sense of loss of community that has very real consequences in terms of personal and social instabilities that is directly connected to modern phenomena such as mobility and communications technology. and although the structures being disturbed have no objective claim to superiority, they are the ones with which we have evolved, with too-quick changes having the results noted.
hmm - ok, maybe if people got more of a sense of security in their personal lives through mechnisms such as these, they might be more willing and comfortable with social tolerances and innovations. an anti-backlash effect, maybe. conservatism that breeds courage and liberalism ? why not ?
still, i would feel more comfortable with these “ethical will” things if those writing them also had the forethought to include a list of freedoms and imperatives to be oneself and go beyond the deceased's existential gestalt. as if the people on the receiving end really care anyway. which is another perspective, that these exercises in moral / behavioral legacy will have little or no practical effect anyway (as in, healthy stays healthy and vice versa).
how about this for an ethical legacy: go to the f'ing library ! use your f'ing brains !
of course, the above discussion takes place in the context of the first order reality that we live our daily lives in. at the root level, things like ethics and choice are simply mechanistic derivatives and merely illusory. it's kind of like being in the matrix and discovering the underlying truth. except that the illusions are more pervasive, and the reality far more base. in fact, flip them around - weren't events in the matrix's illusory world seen as largely controlled, and the outside reality had free will ? well, in our reality it's the reverse.
not that i like invoking analogies to the matrix (yuk), but perhaps such a popular vehicle will help people understand.