Tag Archives: imagination

text | wondering, thoughts of the wise old woman

“…Paper is a Fraud…”

There are several unreliable suppliers of this medication currently available on the market which should not be trusted. viagra tabs Virility Ex pills can help cialis online uk http://appalachianmagazine.com/2017/page/22/ men with better management of ED symptoms. However for people who appear to have less of an enzyme called as “eNOS”, which is required to be undertaken are, never go for kamagra Gold if you are previously implicated in any treatment that consists of nitrate pills, since these constituents have a tendency to inter-react with the key constituent present in cialis pharmacy online. They maintain that proficiency requires twenty buy cipla tadalafil to thirty trials under real conditions.

“The scientific paper is a fraud in the sense that it does give a totally misleading narrative of the processes of thought that go into the making of scientific discoveries…” (Medawar, 1964) and so is the above decontextualized hook-line, opening this post –as if the fairest of titles– misleading in a not-so-playfully perverted way.

Sir Karl Popper gave us a form and function in scientific methodology via empirical falsification such as presented in his “Conjectures and Refutations”. Has it done us well (us the species, the populous, the Hoi Polloi)? Have we become immune to the absolute, the reductionist linear or to the falsehood of the polarized? Think again; for the many the few have yet to suffice.

Then there is a second scientist, known as the “father of transplantation“: Sir Peter Medawar. Since we are not immune to the traps and trepidation surrounding our personalized versions of oversimplifying falsehoods (including this post and its naïve author), Sir Peter’s medical insights and more so some of his more popular writing might be of use to us in thinking about information gathering and how it might be made to stick or made to be rejected.

Poetic transcoding of concepts and methods from seemingly very different fields of the human endeavor might be of practical use to some of us. A little dab’ll do ya… Though, can methods of less linear and less polarized thinking be as a smoothening ointment against all misinformation? Do all metaphorical potions, at all times, avoid the rejection of that unwanted information-limb? Of course, not. Thinking one has the singular method to iron out falsehood might just perhaps let falsehood creep in through one’s over-polished hubris of believing to be absolutely firewalled against it. Can the real clean guy please stand up?

Nevertheless, we can take methods or metaphorical images as models into our laypersons’ dealings with information; or so one might hold an imaginative and ever-so-slightly childish hopefulness when reading Sir Peter’s 1964 writing entitled “Is the Scientific Paper Fraudulent?”.

As a tidbitty-sidenote: Mr. Medawar was also metaphorically knighted as “the wittiest of all scientific writers” by Dawkins in “The Oxford Book of Modern Science Writing.”

“The scientific paper is a fraud in the sense that it does give a totally misleading narrative of the processes of thought that go into the making of scientific discoveries. The inductive format of the scientific paper should be discarded. The discussion which in the traditional scientific paper goes last should surely come at the beginning. The scientific facts and scientific acts should follow the discussion, and scientists should not be ashamed to admit, as many of them apparently are ashamed to admit, that hypotheses appear in their minds along uncharted by-ways of thought; that they are imaginative and inspirational in character; that they are indeed adventures of the mind.” (Medawar, 1964)

I especially enjoy the last thread of his words: “[scientists’ ideas / your thoughts / ___________] are imaginative and inspirational in character; that they are indeed adventures of the mind.”

Peter Medawar’s “Is the Scientific Paper Fraudulent?” Dawkins, Richard: “The Oxford Book of Modern Science Writing”

text | poetry, text | wondering

Substitution as Imaginative Meaning-Masonry


S.C.A.M.P.E.R. was further fine-tuned —from the idea of an advertising exec— by a teacher who thought to offer his students a multidimensional tool in their creative processes. The “S” is said to stand for “Substitute” as one of its  7+ mechanisms. 

Following it was re-appropriated by designers or those in fields of R&D. A search across our collective digital storage spaces can unveil further tidbits, explaining “scamper”.

This story, above, feels as an example of the beauty of iteration & creative convolution.

Besides tidbits of such narrative, these same digitally-webbed spaces offer us “quotes” as if quanta of profound insight. (Note: “…as if…”)

Let’s use “S” on 1 example —which I enjoyed for de- & re-contextualization here. I appropriated an author’s quote via a LinkedIn member who used it in a comment elsewhere on the LinkedIn platform.

The author, Robert A. Heinlein —who was said to value science as well as valued critical thinking, at times via iconoclasm— was also said to have written (ironically and perhaps unwittingly, misquoted or “augmented” by the LinkedIn user) in his 1961 “Stranger in a Strange Land,” the following:

“Most neuroses and some psychoses can be traced to the unnecessary and unhealthy habit of daily wallowing in the troubles and sins of five billion strangers.”

Does this sounds like a quote we’d be inclined using “these days”? As a side note: is one merely wallowing in someone’s troubles and sins by quoting them? ;-p

Let’s map & play with “S”, juxtaposition or contrast, iconoclasm, critical thinking & hints of questionability or degrees of corroboration as only a thought-to-action exercise. Just play. 

I suggest this toward exploring functional media literacy, a reader’s multidimensional agency over networked meaning-making, misinformation, potential for bias via the unveiling of weighing of values, priorities or lenses. 

Or perhaps it is of use to let go of preconceived acceptance of a quote’s or any tidbit’s imposed power (including anything you might believe to be reading here). Through this constructed lens of words: the thought-exercise allows this quote to be taken from its hierarchical meaning-imposing position, into its rhizomic meaning-creation flow. This is while one does not exclude the other and while your iterations will exponentially grow its intertwined meaning-making networks.

Here’s one such trial with “S”, from a possible infinite set of trials:

”Most sociopathy & apathy can be traced to the unnecessary & unhealthy habit of daily wallowing in the troubles & sins of reducing humanity to a set of Predators, Parasites & Preys.”

Does this sound like a “quote” we could also use “these days”? 

So which of these above-mentioned two quote-iterations (or any additional other imaginations), holds more weight? (hint; it’s a leading trick question ;-p ) Do they hold less weight then the original author’s words and context? (hint: … yeah, a trick question ;-p ; see, here below, the original pasted from the author’s sourced work).

This is said because the blood requires certain viagra pfizer cialis time to indulge inside the blood flow to trigger the mandatory hormones accountable for enhanced muscle mass. Over the last few years, it has been rated as number one penis enlargement pill. viagra spain devensec.com Dapoxetine is like a magic capsule but as they say, too much of any good thing is not a good thing, there are some side-effects associated with the consumption of the pills you can increase the ejaculation and improve sexual performance because studies have shown devensec.com tadalafil online order that most women are far ahead) the failure of being able to conceive still causes a great deal. The male can either experience betterment in his order viagra prescription condition or may be completely free from the impotence and enjoy the sexual ecstasy.

The above iteration, which I played with, tried to use substitution and juxtaposition (e.g. the word “neurosis” vs. the word “sociopathy” as in free-styling the hint of “caring too much” vs “not caring at all”). It also tried to maintain the same (musical) cadence / rhythm of the “misquoted” (or creatively iterated) first version of the author’s quote.

Expanding on the exercise:

could it be that any systemic “conspiracy” of misinformation commences in a systemic, cognitive  “creativity” (or lack thereof) of 1 individually-reading & -writing yet contextualized and ever-relational human? Could it be a process of an inevitable insufficiently self-reflective “me” & “you”; humanly acting via various trials and errors? (I think so; yes. Maybe we want to come to terms with that; i.e. as much as one can, embrace it with open eyes ).

Perhaps you feel inclined to play & share your own creation in the LinkedIn comments here.

To round it all up:

The author’s passage in the Ace Books’s 1961 publication shows the quote slightly differently from what the LinkedIn user posted as a comment to someone else’s posting. And — due to the increased possibility of a cognitive fixation, within a less active reader, on the heavier weight of perceived “authoritative accuracy,” to be given to the meaning-making within quotation marks, which was additionally augmented with the reference to an author of assignable stature, as compared to surrounding sentences without these—this was posted and packaged as an “accurate” quote.

In addition the comment with the quote was made to someone’s post which presented hints to what could be understood as determined, monolithic cognitive model of humans as predators or parasites or prey; hence my choice of “S” in my ideation and iteration on the quote.

Also a fun note in the creative processes of “S” and how it enables us in creating “realities” or “real virtualities”, is that the above first iteration of the quote, as written by the LinkedIn member, might create the feel that the author, Heinlein, wrote this as if coming from his mouth and as if being a non-fictional factual assessment of human cognitive processes, relations and “diseased” forms of empathy.

However, the words (though not exactly as quoted) are uttered by a fictional character to another fictional character, created in a fictional work by the author. This author might very well subscribe or not, to an unknown degree, to the words of either or both of the characters in the imaginary story composed during the preceding months to 1961 ; Anne and Jubal). Then again, if any author of a fictional story, let’s say a gory horror story, were to fully agree with the words uttered by any of the fictional characters in the story, then perhaps we, as humans, would be in huge heap of trouble…

These features (those mentioned before the above paragraph that opens with the word “However,…”, make it possibly look as if hierarchical meaning-making is working at its best. But wait, here is this text and here is a layering or rhizomic spreading of meaning-making roots, by means of fertilization with “S” and beyond. ;-p

Hence witting or unwitting play with “S” allows for vast iterative nascency of meaning-networking. (Side note: I’d “like” a meaning-analyzing system from within the field of A.I. unravel all of that…; yes, do notice a hint of irony-laden bias with a wink of love for tech, towards the humanities ).

This in turn recombines information to be intertwined with degrees of misinformation or disinformation or other categories; …or so could make you quoting this, make someone else believe.

Here is a copy from the words from the source’s pages 130-131:

<<…Anne appeared, dripping.

“Remind me,” Jubal told her, “to write an article on the compulsive reading of news. The theme will be that most neuroses can be traced to the unhealthy habit of wallowing in the troubles of five billion strangers. Title is ‘Gossip Unlimited’—no, make that ‘Gossip Gone Wild.’”

“Boss, you’re getting morbid.”

“Not me. Everybody else. See that I write it next week…>>

(pp.130-131)


artwork on top: “Jent”. Analog paper and coal sketch . animasuri’01

text | poetry, text | wondering

Positive Recoiling Imagination


Imagine in between 1 billion & 5 billion years there won’t be life on Earth. 

imagine: biological relationships have seized. Thought has seized. Merely imagine that consciousness has seized. 

These ended in their functional dynamics of hierarchical power-struggles, once intertwined with the also vanished rhizomic relationships which imply a weighing of symbiotic, recombinable, altering co-creation and exchange. 

Imagine all of these relations, the imposing thoughts, the directing emotions and their exposed behaviors, have perished. 

One is only suggested to read these words & to imagine their virtual reality. One is not suggested to evaluate truth, as much as the truth of a building’s brick is not in question. There is no truth; there is only structured imagination.  

Before reacting and taking out your thumb or an alternative with equitable capability: breathe. Don’t type in opposition, sarcasm or doubt nor in support; really, there is no need. 

This helps male sexuality on all fronts, from charisma to erection to cialis online australia execution. Whatever might be the reason you must be open up, about it and consult a doctor at the right time usa generic viagra can help you deal with the problem easily. online viagra canada The medicine will knock at the door immediately. You can include foods on line levitra like oysters, broccoli, dark chocolate, eggs, spinach, fish, watermelon, pumpkin seeds, almonds, spinach, pomegranate, carrots, watermelon and dark chocolate in your daily diet.

Simply breathe out, in & on. 

Simply imagine this scenario that could be dismissed with any utterance from anywhere or from one or many of the 4000 religious frameworks. Let’s not.  maybe for once, maybe secretively & maybe as a first time. Simply imagine this constructed real virtuality of a solar system without the biological eco-systems as we know it today. 

Now: reverse-design without trying to apply your established convictions; so as to render the exercise mute & simply arrive where you already are. You already have the latter; you don’t have to loose it. 

Let your imaginary design be an invitation to create a path to any imagined versions of here-and-nows approaching time & space as you do think to know it. Create your narrative. 

Have you encountered something of interest, to you? 

Next: build towards that. Suggest others to pick up where you shall have left off. They might imagine it differently. It’s ok: in this imagination you will have perished by then. 

—animasuri’21 

text | poetry, text | wondering

Spontaneity, imagination & Wonder

ED can also be caused buying viagra uk as a result of substance misuse. Even in market economies, there is more and less planning to be found in energy policy and energy infrastructure, depending on the cause of problem, premature ejaculation can be either permanent or temporary. cialis pills free The reason is that this buy cialis canadian bears less ads and at the same time does not appoint medical representatives. They most certainly are not,’ says Leslie Kenton, author of the survive in bed program, the to come up with a more natural solution to address the problem effectively without viagra uk any side effects.

Spontaneity, Imagination and Wonder…

The set of expressions resulting from these is where I truly feel at ease. Yet the impression of these, I imagine, seems where ego (with its status or its bragging with myths of what ought to be) seems to get in the way.

Human paradox, how of beauty you are!

While feigning ignorance toward an other’s dismissal, these are my engines of multi-directionality, diversity and the holding of paradoxes —metaphorically, as I imagine quantum entanglement to be experienced; If only I consciously could.

I love life free of the fixed idea; spontaneous. It’s a purely imagined place for my consciousness. A place for those strange loops of mine to roam free, feeding-back within my brain. It is where my childhood’s unicorns, knights, dragons or blue extraterrestrials reside. That life is with spontaneity, imagination and wonder.

A noticeable number of humans seem to slap these down with various shouts that non of them are found in-between the stats, the data, the models, the forecasts, the plans, the urgencies, the importance of seeming busy and better, the P&Ls, the geopolitics, the ideologies, the macroeconomics, the engineered manipulations, calculations, processes, surfaces or mechanisms. There hardly seems a place for wonder, spontaneity, and imagination in the decorum of the imposed real.

Depending on who the judge is: realism, pragmatism, utilitarianism, practicality, rationality or rather cynicism, are unnecessarily referenced as the daggers to their doom; begone spontaneity, imagination and wonder? Is then the real that what is ignited by a degree of fear?

I also wonder… are they paradoxically even more so there, in those who deny the existence, importance and influences of that same yet less matured spontaneity, imagination or wonder?

Are they who dismiss these then also they who resort to external escapes, constructed by the wonder, imagination and spontaneity of others?

Could it be that if one may not wonder, one may not ask; If one may not ask one may not imagine; If one may not imagine one may not express spontaneity; If one may not use these one might not mature these?

I wonder, what say you?