The Captain's Cove

Robobasket – why you need it

2011-08-27T22:01:00.001+01:00

Robobasket is a neat Windows 7 64bit application that will sort your files – any files – whatever way you want.

This one is even better than running Amok. This will do all that Amok does and more – and better. The 64bit version is lightning fast. The Cap has been hunting for this thing for ages – and now has found it. Amma jumpin for joy!!!

10 reasons to use RoboBasket (according to their website)

Set-it-and-Forget-it solution for sorting files.
Create rules easily by drag and drop.
Filter files based on name, extension, date created, date last modified, size, kind and more other file attributes.
Filter mp3s or images using mp3 tags and EXIF information.
Perform actions like move, copy, rename, recycle, open, notify and more other actions.
Create individual rules set for different folders.
Quickly access RoboBasket from system tray menu.
Find files quickly by searching detailed actions log.
Save a lot of time and effort keeping files organized. RoboBasket can totally Pay for itself
Free support by email.

I’ve not seen another tool as good as this for sorting files. If you find better do shout about it.

This could change your life

2011-08-27T13:58:00.001+01:00

In just a few minutes these videos from a great man could change the way you live your life. Yes – there is a dog to feed somewhere, a bill to pay, a leaking tap to fix, or that link on Amazon to click. It’s up to you of course, whether you look and listen now – or you say you’ll see it ‘later’ – and we all know that’s most unlikely. So – if you’re 100% satisfied with your life look away now!

“It’s not about how to achieve your dreams; it’s about how to lead your life!”

What wisdom would we impart to the world if it was our last chance?

Check out this great MSN video: Exclusive: Nicole Scherzinger - Wet

2011-08-03T18:40:00.000+01:00

Check out this great MSN video: Exclusive: Nicole Scherzinger - Wet

You’re a stubborn man

2011-07-22T09:33:00.000+01:00

Yes – these are the words or similar I’ve had hurled at me at various points in my life. I’ve had words such as ‘rigid’, ‘insensitive’, ‘obnoxious’ and far worse abusive language thrown at me.

When I look back upon myself, searching for how I became ‘this’ way – as perceived by others, I’ve come up with a few things that are meaningful to me. I’m not saying they are pure or justified explanations of my modus operandi, but they explain a few things.

From an early age probably around the age of 10 I took a very keen interest in Star Trek (just hold off, I’m not a Trekkie). I became fascinated with Mr Spock and how he reasoned on difficult or simple things and came to decisions. The battle between logic and emotions (or the passions if you like), is one that interested me and would repeatedly be played out in my life - to this day. Of course it has been explored by numerous a philosopher – and I don’t really want to go into academia here.

The stubborn man! :)

I too found a home for myself.. in a new world.

At one stage my siblings used to mock me, as did some of my classmates – that I behaved like Mr Spock. Well yes, I often referred to the lack of logic in their arguments. You could tell that when they were losing an argument, the last ‘best’ strategy to ‘win’ as they saw it, was to disparage me or the way I was arguing a point. Yeah – many a debate did I have during lunch times up to the time I left high school (aka College back on a godforsaken Rock). I learned early on that when people want to win a point they would discredit the person presenting their point – not the logic behind it. Or they would stop listening entirely, and walk off ‘waving hands’ in disgust. I coped but not well or to this day. The stupidity of emotional expression in ‘humans’ confounds logical debate. And yes – you will see me fighting fire with fire out here at times.

It’s easy to see how cut and dried Mr Spock is on certain issues – at times lacking empathy, sympathy or feeling for the views of others. What can raw logic have to do with that? 1 + 1 is not a thing to get emotional about – and yes – raw logic is very mathematical at it’s core; it doesn’t care what you think or feel. That kind of response is bound to get up most people’s noses – people want to feel respected etc.. not have their thoughts and opinions demolished or diced up.

However my analysis of this tension between what is logical and what is broadly of ‘emotion’ has deepened in recent years. There is something of an enhanced realisation – though not a new one. I’ll share:

Accepting evolution as an explanation of the present existence of humanity, I have come to understand that evolution had very limited time for selecting species for survival on the basis of their ability to think logically. Cognitive processes are a very new phenomenon – I mean like only about 100,000 years and being sharpened only in the last 200 years or so. It is only ‘now’ that survival advantage is being decided by the integrity of cognitive processes. In other words evolution is now taking a different course based on a dramatically new survival factor.
But what does that mean? It means that the hardware of our minds (the brain), is all hardwired to function on instinct, emotion, gut feeling etc etc. Those were the things that came with our evolutionary baggage. I don’t know to what extent they had survival value – that’s another debate.
However, I’m thinking that when we were animals – I mean real animals – the business of mating and reproducing couldn’t be held up logical weighing up of which mate had carried the best survival features. Nature found other ways to deal with that. Strength, persistence, aggression, might, beauty, resilience were far more important and immediate means of deciding the business.
Now – us ‘animals’ have been ‘given’ cognitive processes – the greater ability to be self-aware, to plan and to think. We can weigh up – and think – about who’s a good mate etc. But hold on – there is still the problem that the ‘animal’ in us takes over, when it comes to the business of procreation. And keep in mind that ‘nature’ – that mechanical thing – that orchestrates this world, doesn’t know the word ‘procreation’.
And the animal – now trapped in a 21st century world has to cope with very serious demands. There are important decisions to make, I mean really important – not things that determine ‘survival of the species’ as such – but a whole new set of values and considerations that never could be dreamed of 100 centuries ago. Like? What career to seek, what phone or computer to buy, what perfume is good, what car is best value for money, when and how to get pregnant, how not to get pregnant, when and who to marry, how many children is best, what university to study at, which country to live in, what to drink, what to eat…. Blimey - Caveman never had to cope with that kind of complexity!! He basically had to work out how to find food, shelter and stay safe – and he would have been supplied with strategies handed to him by his tribe, which he might modify to suit – but it wasn’t as complicated or demanding on cognitive processes. Children would happen by a combination of a lack of planning, accident and instinct. Caveman’s existence couldn’t possibly have involved the complex analysis of a range of factors that could be involved in accepting a job offer i.e. moving house, pleasing wife and kids, earnings, pensions, contractual matters etc. Caveman had largely a day to day existence or one determined by the seasons. Our present-day existence is determined by global influences, our age, our sex, our race, culture, which country we live in or choose to go to live etc etc. I hope you get my drift i.e. a range of factors we can control or cannot control, but for which we may try to find strategies to adapt. All this demands much ‘processing power’ to bring a favourable outcome.
But in practice, what happens? The majority of people do not really weigh up pros and cons squarely, do not weigh opportunities and losses, do not calculate well into the future. For the minority that do, when the crunch comes, what do they do? They go with the ‘feeling’. So ultimately – what tends to rule is something that may be informed by logical analysis but which can easily overrule that kind of analysis.
A potentially dangerous hand-me-down from our evolution is the ability to suppress logical analysis. So we can ignore that which taxes the brain or which is likely to add to our discomfort. If thinking and analysis causes us stress we can easily do away with it. We can opt to pick the path of least discomfort, even if ultimately doing so will bring the least good/advantage to the greatest number or to ourselves.
And yet another serious danger lurks. This is one where we take what’s in our heads as fact, because we believe a thing to be real. That computer in front of you is a real object, but always remember that the perception of it is a constructive representation of the world in your head. The latter is not bound to match that which is outside, or to match closely. So belief about what’s in the head ought to be very carefully approached – always. Why? Because reasoning on beliefs that may have been improperly constructed by psychological or biological forces can lead to serious errors of judgement. The irreversible mistake is the worst kind to make.

This last point – is – I think the most dangerous part of our current existence. Look, I’m not suggesting that I’m better than thou. I too make silly mistakes. However, I think that being aware of the danger above is better than not being aware of it. At least I can try or struggle to do what is right by applying processes that are more adapted to my current world than one of 100 centuries ago.

If you got this far, thanks for taking the time. Even if you disagree with the above the value is in thinking about it. I’m delighted to think about it because it helps me to build on my thoughts of today.

I am a stubborn man relative to the expectations of others. I’ll more quickly and flexibly change my opinions and modus operandi where I see a sound logical basis to do so. However, I’m as cold and hard as granite in response to emotional attempts to sway my mind. Notice the words ‘more quickly and flexibly’ – I cannot root out the ‘evolutionary animal’ embedded in me by nature.

Best wishes to all.

What do they know

2011-07-07T13:32:00.000+01:00

The Cap enjoys the seaside very much, as you can imagine. This pic immediately below was taken at the Aberdeen shoreline, where I visited on 13-14th June 2011. It held a certain strange fascination for me. I looked down on these barnacles, waiting for the water to wash up on them.

They would live, reproduce and die, oblivious to the world around them, or the complexity of the heavens above, or that someone was looking down on them.

Their lives are so simple compared to mine. “Would I trade places with them if given the chance?” I wondered.

My thoughts were interrupted by a splash of water against my feet.

I retreated. I walked and looked around. What a view.

And I thought of my life in the same way I looked upon the lowly barnacle. And then I thought, “There is so much up there that I don’t know about, so much I will never know about.”

I was motivated to publish this by Leonard Susskind, a renowned physicist who probes the deeper nature of reality. He’s been called the bad boy of physics. In essence he was recently said that reality may forever be beyond the reach of our understanding. See Scientific American 2011-06-22. In a sense there’s nothing new in that. But somehow that sobering thought resonated with my experience of the barnacles. They too were limited in ‘understanding’ the reality around them.

What do they know – is also to ask ‘what do we know’.

A few more

2011-06-26T00:15:00.001+01:00

…to the one I love.

Suicide sticks

2011-06-11T11:11:00.002+01:00

The following has been deep in my ‘substrata’ for months. It went deep because a colleague with an IQ of 147, opts to smoke cigarettes. Besides the IQ the person is exceptional in other ways. Quite unexpectedly this morning as I got the computer I launched spontaneously on this that I write now. I know that is the best way to let my thoughts connect with my finger tips. You know this is coming from the heart. President Obama is given my attention later. And there’s a surprise.

If you’re a smoker and you’re sure that it is your choice to smoke cigarettes or use tobacco products, and you know all the ‘yarn’ about the dangers of smoking, kindly move on – you’re just one of the millions of the most ignorant, stupid and delusional people on this earth. If you got this far, you’re expecting this to be another lecture on the hazards of smoking. Move on now – the quicker the ignorant, stupid and delusional kill themselves the better for the human race! I think we all can agree on that one – even if you know you don’t fit my categorisation of you.

Someone reading this just thought “But lots of very intelligent people – doctors, judges, world leaders – who smoke tobacco products, surely they’re not stupid”. To which I would reply, “Stupidity and intelligence are quite often good bed fellows”. In fact my definition of stupidity includes being intelligent enough to know and assess risks (in general or specific) and in the face of high risk either rationalise persistent actions, ignore or ‘cover’ the risky behaviour. Well – yes, that covers ‘ignorance’ as an ‘attitude’ as well. Yes – President Obama falls into my definition. Doctors don’t really need to tell President Obama to stop smoking – get real – he knows the risks!

Here’s the surprise!! No lecture on the risk of tobacco products! That’s it! It would be a waste of my time and yours. It’ll become more obvious as to why soon.

I now simply give you my conclusions that there are two main kinds of stupid people on this earth

The first type is the one who doesn’t know of the risks, doesn’t have the wherewithal to assess the risk and merely follows the ‘herd’ blindly – over the proverbial cliff. But mind you this group is often exposed to some information on the risks, so they rather present as not knowing. In other words they lie to themselves.
The second type as I’ve mentioned above is the seemingly intelligent who knows of, or has the mental wherewithal to assess the risk but opts not to assess the risk, or having identified the thing precipitating the risk, does nothing to reduce of avoid it and is simply not bothered.

One way or the other I think anyone in the above groups eventually comes to a knowledge that they are killing themselves slowly.

But what if you’re a smoker and you genuinely do not fall into the above two groups of stupid people. Then there is some small hope for you. You’re not stupid – but you indulge in an act of stupidity. Yes – you know your actions (or inactions) do not fit. You worry – even silently to yourself – that you need to stop. That’s good but there is a risk that you move into and out of group 2 above.

I have no friends or close acquaintances who are smokers. Those smokers who would be inclined to closely associate with me would have a very hard time. Why? Because nearly every time I meet them I’d nag them to stop smoking. And the other thing of course is that the Cap has a slow tolerance of stupid people. Eventually those who smoke and attempt to seek my companionship will find that they avoid me. You see I’m easier to avoid than a cigarette!! In the toss up between me and a cigarette – I lose. I don’t believe that one of a pair of true friends would sit silently and allow the other to kill themselves, in such a stupid way.

So it’s a funny old world – innit? A fag is a smoker’s best friend. Fags provide comfort and death – I don’t.

Skype hotline

2011-06-07T00:34:00.000+01:00

Q: What exactly is Skype?

A: It’s a piece of software that functions as a telephone, on a computer.

Q: What is software?

A: Software is a computer programme or more commonly known these days as an ‘application’.

Q: What’s a computer?

A: It’s usually an electronic device that processes information and carries out instructions determined by the software and the way you use the software.

Q: So – why would I want Skype?

A: I don’t know. It depends on your needs. Why do some people prefer automobiles to horse-drawn carriages?

Q: So what does skype do that my phone can’t do?

A: It’s not that skype is so fundamentally different from a phone. It does the phone thing in a more flexible way with a few important differences.

You don’t need to remember a number to call a friend, if your friend has a skype ID. You click on your friends name (no numbers involved) and skype connects you to your friend. Or if you like the numbers thing, Skype will easily let you phone by pressing on a dial-pad (on your computer screen, using a mouse).
If you want three or more people to discuss a matter – you select three names and click to pull them all into the same ‘room’ i.e. conference. It’s literally that easy. No operators involved.
You want to see your friends when you’re talking to them. No problem - ‘right-click’ on a friends ID and then select video call.

Q: Suppose I want to send a text message?

A: Easy – skype can do that. Right-click your friend and select ‘send SMS’.

Q: Will skype do the washing and ironing?

A: I think you’re trying to be daft. Surely you don’t expect your telephone to do those things, so it’s ridiculous to expect Skype to do them.

Q: How much does it cost again?

A: Skype is free. Calls between skype devices using Skype ID’s are free.

Q: But some people say they charge to call phones.

A: Yes. Calls from a Skype device to most phone numbers attract various charges. However, calls to UK and USA toll-free numbers are free of charge.

Q: So what if I call from my computer to someone with a mobile phone running Skype?

A: You’d connect to them on their mobile, free of cost to you, so long as you have called them on their Skype ID.

Q: So you mean I can speak to someone on their mobile using Skype free of charge?!

A: Yes. It is true of Skype calls in the UK. However, this may not apply to all countries.

Q: So what if I don’t have a computer, can I still use skype?

A: Yes. As mentioned above many mobile phones can run skype.

Q: But is there are charge for calls using skype form mobiles?

A: It depends on whether your mobile phone service allows you to use skype free of charge. Most do.

Q: Can I be hacked by using Skype?

A: Not for using Skype. But if your computer does not have a good firewall anyone can hack your computer. The risk of you being hacked has little or nothing to do with skype.

Q: But can anyone peep at me through my camera using skype to see what I’m up to – I like to walk around naked in my house.

A: They can peep at you naked in your house only if you switch on skype and invite the world to look in on you. I’ve not even found that function on Skype as yet. You may wish to consider seeking psychiatric attention.

Q: Are you trying to be rude?

A: No – are you trying to be paranoid or are you truly paranoid? What have you got to hide?

Q: What if I don’t have a microphone?

A: It’s the same as if your mouthpiece for your telephone isn’t working – the other person won’t hear you.

Q: Do I need a camera?

A: Only if you plan to do some video conferencing.

Q: Is that pretty technical?

A: No. It’s as easy as right-clicking on a contact and then mouse-clicking ‘video-call’.

Q: I’m shy of cameras, can I leave it out?

A: Sure.

Q: Is ‘big brother’ in on all that I do on Skype.

A: Sure thing. Unknown to most people, ‘big brother’ monitors or has the capacity to monitor every word you utter down your telephone line. You can’t escape.

Q: Am I gonna get strange folk calling me up at all hours of the day and night?

A: It’s very much like a telephone. If you leave your computer on day and night, connected to the internet day and night, and leave your skype on day and night.

Jackie Evancho!!

2011-06-05T01:45:00.001+01:00

The Cap is totally blowed down!! Like totally! Amma speechless.. just listen and watch.

This one was last night – on Britain’s Got Talent.

Of Justice and hunger

2011-05-26T16:47:00.001+01:00

Research evidence has revealed that how lenient a judge might be is related to how close s/he is to a meal break! A hungry judge is an angry judge – you might think, and you’d be on the right track.

Recidivism amongst offenders also predicted outcomes. However, even after controlling for that factor, the effect of meal times remained strong.

As I’ve said before – and some have been blind to or missed entirely – it is what is below our level of conscious awareness that we need pay most attention to. I don’t think that any of the judges who were subject in the study would admit that because they were hungry and tired, they were more likely to rule in a certain direction.

The reason I can think that, is that they would be admitting to a bias of some kind, due to a very human reason. However, I think there is something else. I don’t think they were aware of how their cognitive skills were being eroded by imperceptible effects of tiredness and hunger. Read all about it (or not): The Economist: 2011-08-14

All - ok 'most' or 'some' (for pedants) - of us like to think quite proudly that we are immune to matters that spring from the demands of flesh and blood. I call that an arrogant position.

I occasionally work amongst some who take control and occasionally push us through the lunch time ‘barrier’. I’ve always compensated in my decision-making, in those times, by slowing everything down, and taking time to refresh myself. I’d nip to the toilet, to kitchen to munch on something, for a drink of water, or skip off for even 30 seconds of fresh air (well a bit more). I nearly always carry snacks of some kind.

I refuse to accept that I’m mad.

2011-04-29T13:30:00.002+01:00

This might bring a chuckle to a few, however there is a recurrent theme in my life that I wanted to document. The situation has come up a few times in the last week – where I’m made to feel ‘I mad’. This is how it goes:

Person A will say ‘X is the case’.
I will record very carefully - write down verbatim what they say - because I have audiographic memory for long enough to so (only takes a few seconds really)
I’ll show Person A that ‘X is not the case’ either because there is no tangible evidence, or because they reasoning is entirely wrong against any basic standard. When I say basic, I mean a thing cannot be the same and it’s opposite at the same time e.g. one cannot be dead and alive at the same time (in the normal course of everyday events).
Person A will then assert that:
1. They never said ‘X was the case’.
2. They didn’t mean it like ‘that’ i.e. the way I took it.
Person A will then introduce new conditions that weren’t present or declared in the original proposition – so as to bolster their own position that ‘X was the case’.
I would point out what they did – in excruciating detail.
Person A may take offence of some kind, and in least-case scenario will not show it or try to cover it. In worse case scenario they would use foul language so as to attempt to bully me out of what they actually said. It never works.

In another set of scenarios I’m dealing with in the background the following is happening:

They ask for “X”
I say the extent of “X” is unreasonable – and list why with evidence and reasoning – the main issue is potential loss of earnings.
They respond by indicating that it’s something to do with me not booking holidays.
Clearly it isn’t, because the issue is potential loss of earnings if I make myself available to them, over a certain period and therefore lose opportunity of work. How on earth holidays could have anything to do with the matter me escapes me – and of course this means I’m ‘mad’ – if I don’t understand stupid logic!?
So I respond with detailed questions and set the context very clear – so that an average 10 year old can understand.
They respond after several weeks delay with the same references to holiday – totally oblivious to my detailed questions – I mean as if I didn’t even ask, even though the questions are quite clearly visible in the email thread.

You might think that the above is the result of a bunch of fools down on a god-forsaken Rock. Actually the responses come from lawyers in very high powered organisation in this country – people who are paid shitloads of money to be of a certain exceptional calibre (one might expect).

Some may be thinking, “Why does he persist?”. The answer is that I am not certain. Sometimes I think that I’m on a journey – one of discovery, perhaps. I don’t know exactly why I’m on it or where it leads, but there is something in my soul that will not allow me to rest. At times I tend to loathe being part of this race – the human race. They are so monumentally stupid – and I seem to bear physical and other resemblance to them. However, I’m so different. I’ve often said that I’m from another world – and at times I wishfully wonder if my journey is meant to get me back ‘home’. How did I become lost here – will probably unfold at some point in the future. When others try to insult me that "You’re from another planet!!” – I actually agree with them. Mad I am not!

Inefficient thinking

2011-02-07T17:20:00.003Z

People (in general – and yes there are numerous exceptions) know how to use household appliances, iron their clothes, make a sandwich etc – nothing surprising there. Some might know how to use a computer, fix a car, or a bicycle. Others may know how to build computers, programme computers, design circuit boards etc etc.. you get the drift – basically people have various levels of skill.

But here’s the thing – and I see it on and off this blog repeatedly and nauseatingly – people seem unable to use their brains to maximal capacity. First I must ask, “Do people know how to use their own brains (minds if you wish)?”. No – I'm not talking about lower level of skill in using the ‘head’ as in adding up some figures, remembering a few facts, or being merely creative. I’m talking about the integrity of processes behind all that. I’m talking about the core processes. For those in IT – I’m talking ‘kernel’ as against OS (by analogy of course).

At some point on this blog you may see Jumbie or I taking issue with a certain thing. It’s usually the conclusions formed that cause much debate or dissection. How do people come to conclusions? What reasoning processes exist ‘in the head’? How good are those processes? ‘Good’, of course, meaning how well the mind can sift through competing issues, separate non-issues and battle with unconscious biases that would sway the proper application of logical rules.

Each person holds himself to be ‘good’. You hardly hear anyone saying genuinely “I’m so stupid, that it’s not worth listening to what I say”. But the reality is that each of those people, holding themselves to be good at thinking, actually isn’t as good as they may think. And who am I to stand in judgement you may wonder cynically. It’s not about me – it’s about each person looking at the way the other person’s mind comes to ‘their truth’ and how those ‘truths’ are pressed or passed to others.

What are the rules of logic? What is poor logical reasoning? How many people know about these things. Does Captain Walker know more than others about it? Sure – thing. And I say so not because I wish to boast about it – but because it is a matter of fact that when I refer people to the fallacies of logic – there are usually two kinds of responses:

Self-defence – or rather psychological defence i.e. a response that protects the perceived integrity of ‘self’.
Silence.

By now, if you got this far – you’d be expected to think “What the F* is he on about?” Yep – at least one thing is clear to me – I know myself. And knowing myself – I know that I don’t just teach. I think and I stimulate others to think.

And what about inefficient thinking? Is the above inefficient? I knew you’d get there. It isn’t. The above was only to ensure that some exceptional person would appreciate that on occasion I deal with obstacles first. And the biggest obstacles to efficient thinking are the mind itself and it’s emotions. The mind driven by emotions often does two main things:

Bends the rules of logic (whether known or not).
At the speed of light, turn inferences formed as a result of bent logic into fact.

And what about logic? The mathematical aspects of logical representation are not easy for most people. The easier route to learning about logic is to learn about logical fallacies. No you don’t have to do this. But for those who really want to extract some real truth out of the world and who wish to make their thinking more efficient the following resources may be of some assistance:

Logical Fallacies – an encyclopaedia of errors of reasoning
The Nizkor Project – 42 logical fallacies dissected – very readable and with good examples

Too often in my work (which is always ‘classified’), I see people accepting premises based on fragile evidence and reasoning. A group of premises may stack up to form conclusions. Now, if we accept premises that are not well based in evidence or reasoning, then the conclusions we form are like a ‘house of cards’ – it may look good but would fall if only slightly shaken. [Note the ‘if’ word]. In fact it takes only one bad premise to be shaken and the whole thing could come crashing down. So my policy is sound reasoning, sound logic and sound evidence. It might sound ‘simple’ but really when you get to decision-making, there are so many competing factors that come into the fold. It’s amazing how people start introducing criteria that are of no relevance. They then usually say things like ‘I’m just saying…”. And I often respond seemingly rudely to them – but very politely: “If it isn’t of relevance to the decision-making criteria then it ought not to be said” – and that’s a fact. But it’s amazing to see how people feel slighted by facts.

For those wondering why I’ve written the above – I’ve written it for me primarily, with a small degree of hope (because I don’t live on hope) that it may help at least one other person out there. Why primarily for me? Because I need to ensure that I can easily find these thoughts and references in the future.

What it is to be ‘alone’?

2011-01-21T23:44:00.001Z

This is not about being lonely. I’ve been reflecting on certain life-situations, where I’ve felt ‘alone’. You can be ‘alone’ in a whole crowd of people. And you can certainly feel ‘lonely’ in a crowd. However the two concepts do not equate in my mind (regardless of any dictionary definitions).

The following are the characteristics that I’ve sifted out that constitute feeling ‘alone’:

Where I alone knew the intricate details, the multitude of interconnecting issues, and the various ramifications.
No one else would give the time of day or a candle by night to take the slightest interest in the details. It’s simply not their business.
Because of the course and intricacy of the situations, few would understand them in their entirety or sufficiently, to really grasp their significance.
A feeling that if another was to share in some of the detail they would certainly lose interest or feel they ‘shouldn’t go there’, on grounds of some political or moral correctness – conjured purely for avoidance.
Interest if shown would be short-lived and superficial, leading to under- or mis-appreciation of the salience of the issues.
Knowing a thing in detail and being so close to it, runs the risk of being accused of being pedantic – and seeing more into situations than exist.
Attempts to share the unique set of experiences leads to others taking a safe and middle road – after all they, not being able to grasp the depths of the issues are overly cautious, lest they be accused by some ‘watchful eye’ of misleading or misdirecting.

There is at times a pressure to share thoughts, with a hope that at least a single other person will appreciate, and provide rescue from a sense of potential insanity. But at the same there is an inhibitory risk that any sharing could lead to accusations of insanity. The tension between the two – hope of rescue from ;and risk of accusation of insanity – is an uncomfortable place.

Captain Walker's Seven Pillars of Apology:

2010-10-02T09:46:00.002+01:00

The apology must be objectively perceived (i.e. to the majority of observers or the intended recipient) as genuine and sincere, taking into account all verbal and non-verbal cues of the person offering the apology

There must be unqualified admission of wrongdoing.

Clarity and specificity about what the wrongdoing was.

Unqualified acceptance of personal responsibility for the wrongdoing or acceptance of wrongdoing on behalf of an entity which the individual represents.

Declaration and acknowledgement of the 'principles' that were offended.

Specific acknowledgement of any individuals or entities who are known to be offended, or likely to be offended.

An indelible committment not to err in the same way in the future.

The above foundations I suggest are acceptable to most 'right-thinking' people. Anything less than the sum total of the above is mere lip-service.

An apology obviously has to be appropriate to the precise wrongdoing. In other words if one apologises on a matter that was not centrally at issue, then the apology is worthless.

The Pope escapes arrest in the UK

2010-09-13T07:41:00.002+01:00

I wrote about this matter in November 2009 (see: Child Sex Abuse Scandal Rocks Ireland) but some will be wondering what this is about. Prof Richard Dawkins had made calls for The Pope to be arrested and charged with ‘crimes against humanity’ in April 2010 (Times 2010-04-11). However, as the months rolled on the eminent Geoffrey Robertson QC was reported to concede that the Pope would not be arrested in the upcoming UK visit. Arrested for what? Under The Rome Statute individuals can be charged with ‘crimes against humanity’ (in specific circumstances if they are one of the State Parties.)

Huge protests are expected here in the UK. Geoffrey Robertson QC is one of five select jurists in the UN’s internal justice system responsible for holding UN officials accountable for corruption and mismanagement (C-FAM 2010-04-08). Robertson is an Oxford Rhodes Scholar. He is no fool!

In his book published last Friday - The Case of the Pope: Vatican accountability for human rights abuse – Robertson QC is reported to refer to the Vatican as a “rogue State”. The Captain has purchased this book and will be studying it intensely. “Mr Robertson has laid out a powerful and cogently explained case in which he urges the international community to press the Catholic Church into abandoning canon law, the ancient set of ecclesiastical rules that also define disciplinary provisions for offences ranging from sex crimes to ordaining women” says The Age – 2010-09-08.

The Guardian 2010-09-11 reports that under Canon Law, “…"penalties" for raping children include such draconian measures as warnings, rebukes, extra prayers, counselling and a few months on retreat. It is even possible to interpret canon law as claiming that a valid defence for paedophile offences is paedophilia. Since child abusers are supposedly incapable of controlling their sexual urges, this can be used in their defence.” Just read that again – so, a defence to GBH or robbery could be the fact that the perpetrator is afflicted by criminality!!!

All this is the spatter from The Murphy Report 2004 (in Ireland) on Child Sex Abuse (CSA) spanning some 60 years. Hundreds of Catholic Priests were to be implicated (Interfaith 2009-05-19). In 2003 the Irish Government offered compensation to victims of the sex-abuse to the sum of £725 Million, based on a lower estimate of 10,000 victims! However, if all 150,000 suspected victims were to successfully claim, the sum could rise to £10.8 Billion (Telegraph 2009-05-20).

The Papal visit is expected to cost at least cool £12 Million – but that cost may go up depending on the scale of any unrest. The Pope is to honour and beatify the Victorian churchman and writer Cardinal John Henry Newman – making him a saint. A congregation of some 70,000 is expected at a park close to Birmingham. (FT 2010-09-10).

The Financial Times 2010-09-10 states that the Pope is likely to meet with protests when he visits the UK on 16th September 2010. They say that he “…stands naked before the blast of secular charges that now assails him with mounting force… has used both his quasi-divine authority and the Vatican’s statehood to push his church into more active hostility towards homosexuality, and above all homosexual marriage and adoption by homosexual couples; abortion, under any circumstances whatsoever; in vitro fertilisation; divorce; condoms, even where these are shown to reduce Aids; the ordination of women and the marriage of priests.”

The Examiner 2010-04-10 has been more scathing: “There is no doubt the behavior of the Pope has been criminal. Indeed most of the Catholic hierarchy participated on some level in the cover-up of the sexual abuse of children. For decades they denied, obfuscated, and covered-up the sexual abuse of countless children throughout the world.”

Dawkins’ welcome to the Pope was “Mr Ratzinger, as head of the world’s second most evil religion you are not welcome. True, your church recently “pardoned” Galileo (four centuries late), and eventually revoked its historic anti-Semitism. But the equally long-established misogyny remains. On almost all issues concerned with sex, contraception, population and reproduction your stance is illiberal, inhumane and immoral, and your propaganda claim that condoms don’t protect against AIDS is scientifically inaccurate and murderously cynical. In criminally shielding child-raping priests from justice you have placed the welfare of your church ahead of your victims. Go home to your tinpot Mussolini-concocted principality, and don’t come back.” See Dawkins – Audience with the Pope.

More sex abuse

It gets worse. An inquiry in Belgium heard 475 complaints of sex-abuse committed in the 1950s through to the late 1980s by Catholic clergy. “Because all sex is banned to priests, abuse of minors is lumped in with – and is apparently seen as less serious than – “living in concubinage”. The stress on salvation means that “punishment” is a matter of prayers, fasting, a retreat or community service: typically, offending priests are moved to other parishes – but rarely to posts where contact with children is unlikely. The result, very often, is more molesting.” (FT 2010-09-10).

The Vatican was allegedly angered when the Belgium police raided and broke up a meeting of Catholic bishops engaged in discussing paedophile priests. (BBC News 2010-06-28).

History

“The first child sex scandal in the Catholic church took place in AD153, long before there was a "gay culture" or Jewish journalists for bishops to blame it on. By the 1960s, the problem had become so dire that a cleric responsible for the care of "erring" priests wrote to the Vatican suggesting that it acquire a Caribbean island to put them on. (The Guardian 2010-09-11)

The Pope has been tangled up in legal proceedings about sex-abuse in the USA before. But the US authorities have always found a way to bail him out on technicalities. Robertson and others will have been sharpening their axes from all that. (This is a good read: Fox News 2005-05-09).

…. to be continued (This is a long one and the story does not just stop there. I will need to update this page so stay tuned).

What is real stubbornness?

2010-09-11T11:24:00.003+01:00

I guess some will immediately start asking why I am so interested in that. I’m thinking that I often meet people who refuse to move, change their mindsets, or take appropriate action when circumstances or evidence would expectedly dictate ‘change’.

There are reasons why people don’t change or move. These can be numerous e.g. fear of change, fear of the unexpected, difficulty in changing habits, effect of tradition or culture, inability to see benefits of change, inflexible attitudes, forgetfulness.

But I’m not talking about that kind of stuff so much. I’m talking ‘real stubbornness’. That is something I’ve been observing over the last 3 years. I’ve come to some ideas about what real-stubbornness is:

Foremost, it is a sense of pride in being all things that constitute being stubborn. People who are real-stubborn never try to hide the fact. They joke about it, laugh and boast about it. They boast that they are boasting about their stubbornness.
There are no inhibitory factors related to fear, anxiety, culture, tradition, failure of memory, cognition or habit.
Logic, reason, evidence, adverse personal life consequences, adverse consequences for others – nothing moves them in attitude or in action.
Even pain or repeated severe pain does not cause them to shift in mind or body.
Promise or realistic prospect of the utmost pleasure or wealth does not motivate them to move.
Even their awareness of others who are equally stubborn does not bring insight or change. They simply malign others who are ‘real-stubborn’ as if the condition couldn’t possibly affect them.
The few who gain partial insight refuse to change. Instead they wear the badge of being ‘real-stubborn’ with some sense of achievement.

I’ve come to a sad and possibly misanthropic conclusion that the condition is not as uncommon as we might think. My personal observation is that it is quite common.

Trying to help these people is like wasting your time and effort to say the least. Do I feel sorry for them? Like no!! They deserve all that life gives to them. They enjoy spinning top in ~~mud~~ flood! As they say on a Rock close to your heart - ‘Eeef dee cyap fit, wear it!’ [which upon code-switching becomes ‘If the cap fits wear it’].

A reflective time… tiny chemicals

2009-12-31T23:49:00.002Z

I’ve been quite busy since September 2009, with new work and new experiences. There have been so many experiences to blog about but not in this space. I therefore spent much more time blogging at Jumbie’s Watch, My proper English on this blog has me rather restrained, which is no bad thing. At Jumbie I tend to free my thoughts in a different way. This blog is therefore more reflective, more measured – in a strange sort of way.

I’ve recently been looking back at 2009 and looking forward into 2010. My mind is flooded. So much has happened and the future brings so much to me. I wish I could conquer the need for sleep. It has been a very challenging year – two ‘assignments’ took me a lot away from home. Nov 2008 – early April 2009, I was travelling up and down the country with work. I discovered Cornwall and the Cornish way of life. It’s a beautiful part of the world. I thoroughly enjoyed it.

In December 2008 some idiot crashed into the side of my car. That led to headaches that went on into the first part of 2009, and it was only resolved about a month ago. The crash brought me closer to valuing life. It happened so fast. Luckily I was not injured physically; just shaken a bit psychologically.

I was delighted to be back at home in April 2009. [I’m afraid to use the word ‘home’ lest some idiots assume that I mean some godforsaken Rock in the sun.] Time to think, write, do other kinds of work. Time.. time.. an amazing thing.. how it flows. How I flow through time. And I’ve been thinking about when I cease to flow in time. As one gets older these kinds of thoughts come to mind. It’s difficult to avoid when you see more and more people around you who you knew suffering illnesses or dying. You are confronted by the mortality that limits your own existence. It presses upon the mind to achieve and to be free!

Then from Sept to Nov 2009 I was also also into a 9 to 5 situation again – among workers – nation-builders; whatever you call um. It’s a sad situation generally ‘at work’. People there do what they do. They somehow or the other became caught on a treadmill, acquired possessions and status and then fight hard to remain on the treadmill. Their collective reality is that they’d be much more contented doing what they want to do – but they never admit it openly, or they hypnotise themselves into believing that they ‘lurve the job’. Many of them don’t think they’re sad – but I know they are.

And I look out at the world. I discover the complexity of the ‘worlds’ we create. I like studying law for example, but there is a time when its complexity becomes painful. Painful as I read past a few words separated by commas, then a few more words, then more commas. Then new paragraphs and sub-paragraphs leading me down into a tangle of Boolean operators – all this designed to limit something in certain circumstances. And I wonder what are all these limits? Why must they exist? And the answer is pretty simple: limited resources endangered by human greed, selfishness and solipsistic attitudes.

Yet among English politicians we saw greed and human callousness protected by a system of rules that allowed MPs to claim from sexy DVDs to moat cleaning.

The wars in Afghanistan continued. More crap came out about atrocities committed in the wars by British and American forces.

Diego Garcia remained off the radar, while Guantanamo Bay took the spotlight. Can you hear a silent scream?

I spent most of my time in the last 6 months, thinking about a land where I grew up for the first 30 years. Well ‘grew up’ physically, I mean. The reality is that I grew mentally twice what I did in 20 years of life in England, compared to the 30 in that place. Yeah.. ‘that place’. That’s a place I am deeply ashamed to be associated with. Why? Because I think if people know I’m from ‘there’ they would secretly be thinking “..he must be like them.. but he’s putting on a good act.” Well the reality is that people are like that.. I am like that. When I meet somebody from ‘that place’, I naturally have a presumption that their attitudes and thinking processes are likely to be ‘like them’. Come on – let’s not kid around.. people to get judged by their ‘cultures’. So when I meet people from ‘there’ I’m naturally sensitised to thought patterns, values and quirks that are part of that culture.

The other night (27/12/2009) we had some ‘visitors’ over for dinner. An interesting discussion happened. I became quite animated. They were shocked by my hopelessness for a people that live in the Nation of Trinidad & Tobago (i.e. that place). At Jumbie’s Watch I frequently refer to ‘that place’ as Donkey Rock. The visitors some of Trinidadian origins - lived in some degree of hope for that Nation. I held much less hope. They hooked into how much I read the online newspapers about that place – and suggested that I do that because I have a slight hope that things there will become better. Well slight, like very slight, and approaching zero rapidly – I would admit to. But that is not the reason I read those newspapers. I said so – that my reading those newspapers were simply and truly about my fascination with the human capacity for stupidity. The reality is that I am not at all interested in returning to that Nation. I think that people who are separated from their homelands - especially where life in those homelands has deteriorated seriously - often long for the opportunity to return. In opposition to such longing is the reality of what life might be like in those homelands at the present time. In the case of Trinidad and Tobago, the extreme rise in violent crime presents a serious and difficult to ignore risk. The trajectory of the rise of those risks, over the last 10 years - with little indication that law enforcement agencies have been effective - suggests that there is unlikely to be rapid change in the trajectory in the foreseeable future. It is therefore baseless wishful thinking to say that there is hope of improvement. But life is a strange game – if you make your case to powerfully you risk being marginalised, labelled, seen as different.. not one of the herd.

So always there are these games I have to play – for example: I ought to say that there is very slight hope, when in reality I truly believe there is no hope. That is only to appear not ‘absolutist’. Funny thing though, few people hold any absolutist views about the chances of recovery from end stage dementia or any other terminal illness. But hey – when in comes to a country – a Nation – you can’t appear to be devoid of hope for recovery. Why? Because we all ought to be all soooh patriotic to our respective Nations. And to say that you have lost hope in your Nation, means you’re and ungrateful unpatriotic bastard, or somik. No one really cares to say that a Nation is convulsing to death.. and there’s nothing you can do to save it. So – many times I hear people re-affirming their faith in an ability in human beings to change. Like oh puhleese – don’t I know that they can change? But I’m not talking about small groups of people. I’m talking very large groups. Well ‘that nation’ had 50 years to change and mature.. and what do we see today? Gross immaturity and myopia – and it’s getting worsening.

2010 brings more of the same. The number of the year changes – obviously – but people in their numbers hardly ever change. And if they do change it is because they have been subject to some extreme force that causes major discomfort or major emotional enlightenment.

Some may think that I’m unhappy from reading the above snapshot. I was never one for happiness OR unhappiness. My modus operandi does not depend on happiness OR unhappiness – I’ll do what I do regardless. My adopted philosophy is built on eudaimonia – difficult for most people to grasp – simply because most people are driven by states of pleasure or pain attached to states of happiness or unhappiness. In contrast I’ll take the seemingly difficult and tough road if it brings me contentment and greater benefits for others.

I harden my outlook on the future of that Nation. I also harden my perceptions of human nature. I feel we are a dying species and we’re bent on self-destruction. Have a Prozac or two, or more – I face reality cold as it is. Those who cannot face reality – well, they can play with their happiness chemicals whilst the universe and its forces continue to orchestrate their mere purpose; to increase entropy. The universe is happy..and they are happy on their tiny chemicals.

Who is Captain Walker?

2009-08-02T11:34:00.002+01:00

This is no ‘reveal’. I’m going to explain why the screen name ‘Captain Walker’. The ‘avatar’ or screen icon in my profile and comments, gives something away – its a small photo of Mel Gibson from a scene in Mad Max – Beyond Thunderdome.

Well my nickname used to be ‘Mad Max’ back in Uni many years ago. Why? You must wonder. It was recognised and said by one of my esteemed tutors, that I marched to the beat of a different drum (and still do). Others picked up on his comments. At first I was a bit embarrassed but soon I was to learn it was my nature, and I should go with it. I go my own way.

Mel Gibson played the role of Mad Max in Mad Max – Beyond Thunderdome. The scene is set in the aftermath of nuclear war on earth. Law and order had broken down and Bartertown was about the worst place to find yourself, situated near a desert. Well into the film, Max finds himself exiled from Bartertown among some children (some are teenagers), living in and around an oasis. They are the survivors of a plane crash, which was meant to bring them escape from a city that was to be bombed and the nuclear winter that was to follow. Captain Walker was at the helm. Walker apparently took some of the adults surviving the crash with him to find help. He promised to return. Max bears some resemblance to the Captain Walker in their legend.

They take Mad Max to be Captain Walker and in the end of the scene above, one says, “We is ready now..take us home”.

‘Walker’ then has a very hard time explaining to them the reality of their situation. He struggles to cope with their misguided expectations. He cannot deliver that which is based on a distorted myth which became a ‘faith’. At one point in the film he resorts to using force, but that does not bring them to reality.

I feel like ‘Walker’ sometimes. No – I ain’t no hero – and I ain’t here to save any bunch of people. But the feeling that many are living a false existence gets to me. In the film, the children’s Walker – by their expectations – is meant to take them ‘home’. But though Max knows who he is – he is still another identity to the children which he cannot escape – and he as ‘Captain Walker’ is unable to help them in their quest for the promised land.

Possible ‘links’:

Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome	Caribbean situation
Nuclear holocaust	Slave trade
Oasis and/or Bartertown	Monkey/Donkey Region
Survivors in the Oasis	Survivors of slave trade
Captain Walker	Me

Well yes surely nobody dong on dee rock looking to me to take dem home. I know dat fuh sure. My ID is not just about events on the Rock. It’s about other areas of work and life – the Rock just happens to be a small part of the whole thing.

Paying to be 'me' – affording our discomforts

2009-06-30T23:17:00.001+01:00

It has been rather interesting thinking about this. What is it to be 'me'? How do I pay for that?

What I mean is that each one of us (extrapolating from myself) has a fairly good idea about our likes and dislikes. So we gravitate to certain things, and we avoid certain other things. We like certain things and activities, and we detest other ‘things’ and ‘activities’. The stuff we like to do, we do them quickly, we prioritise so that they are taken care off with greater efficiency. The things we do not like we avoid, and leave to one side as much as possible.

However, the way we make our life’s preferences carry certain costs. Those costs may be tangible in terms of material things e.g. money, or the things money can buy - or intangible in terms of what cannot be quantified e.g. stress, disappointment, loss of opportunity.

For example, someone may dislike intensely the stress of moving home. So, either consciously or unconsciously that dislike is factored into decisions about a new job offer. Because ‘stress’ is the thing to be protected from - the dread of adjusting to a new town, influences decisions - the person might say “Well for £10,000/yr more, it doesn’t make a big difference to me.”

Perhaps a more down-to-earth example is dieting – which is difficult for many. It is easier not to diet. “What’s a few pounds or kilogramme more..you only live once” – some say.

Which of us truly wouldn’t want an extra million (in any of the big 5 currencies)? People in general crave for money – that’s the truth. Few admit it. But strangely there is an amazing contradiction i.e. those who need money the most, do not work the hardest or the smartest in order to achieve greater financial security.

What, for example, is the cost of disorganisation? Everybody needs to be more organised. Yet we have people who live in utter chaos and mis-prioritisation. They convince themselves that the chaos surrounding them is organised, and they know where everything is. Not true! I’m not talking about the average disorganisation, I’m talking serious disorganisation.

Or take examinations. An important examination (or similar decisive event) is approaching, but the priority becomes larking around with friends.

Which of us have never been in any of those kinds of situations? Few. So my observation is that many of us make choices and decisions that do not match a hierarchy of priorities in our lives. This costs us in tangible and non-tangible ways – yet we are content to pay. So basically we afford our discomforts!

Confused and primitive to the core.

2009-06-28T13:00:00.001+01:00

I was motivated to write this having reflected on my interactions with the human species recently.

They pride themselves as being several notches above other animals. They have built very large and complicated structures. Their intelligence has allowed them the privilege of creating weapons that could destroy the whole planet they live on. They have sent men to the moon and spacecraft to very distant worlds. They control large amounts of energy. They can produce lots of food. They can fight off very serious illnesses.

Yet they are ruled largely by emotions and primitive instincts that lurk deep in the substrata of all that intelligence. Ruled? Sure. When they do something that happens to be in conflict with their intellectual prowess, what do they do? They tend to become emotionally upset. That may or may not show itself. But whichever way, it frequently takes hold of their cognitive processes and steers them in a pathway aimed at defending the ‘integrity’ of the emotional being living deep inside. The endpoint of that is that they then feel justified in their actions both at cognitive and emotional levels.

The cognitive aspect is seen in the processes related to rationalisation. The emotional aspect of justification is observed by a sense of satisfaction – a feel good factor. Therein lies the seeds of what is commonly referred to as evil. The conscious mind can be directed by this unconscious stratum, to rationally seek vengeance in its various forms. The latter provides the emotional justification. But extending that further they can easily arrive at terrorism.

The emotional being gets in the way of progress and can produce chaos:

It slows down two way communication pathways destined for the cognitive being.
Communicators have to exert greater energy not to upset each other in order to maintain a clear conduit of communication – seen so often in political, legal, crime, and business negotiations.
Envy is part of the emotional being. It drives people to madness.
Avarice – drives individuals to exploit others.

The cognitive being is capable of great feats of logic and understanding, too many to mention here. If only this being could be unshackled.

I feel sad for me and this human race. We are so slow and so primitive. So intelligent and so stupid. I feel powerless. I wish I did not feel.

Looking away

2009-06-19T23:35:00.001+01:00

Recently I was on the way into a supermarket. Nothing special about that you might think. But as I was about to enter I spotted a former work colleague – one of my own batch of professionals, who I trained with. I hadn’t seen her for about a year.

It was a Sunday – about 14:00. This colleague walked past me, about 5 feet to my right. Her gaze was focussed at some point in the distance. So at first I thought she did not see me. As you normally do – I look in her direction. And all this is happening in microseconds - I’m thinking she will catch some bloke (me) looking her way and look my way, and I’ll say ‘Hi good to see you again’.

But no – she keeps the gaze straight ahead. “Hmmm…” and you might be thinking, “Nothing strange about that. It happens all the time people don’t see each other because they are so busy and wrapped up in their own thoughts.” Well as I’m writing this I’m seeing her passing by in my minds eye. I could replay that video clip a thousand times. And when I do, I see her eyes focussed in the distance and not moving from left to right even in the slightest. Its a look straight ahead.

I have no reliable way of verifying what is in anybody’s consciousness. So I cannot know with absolute certainty what she was looking at and why she did not see me looking straight over to her in passing. But what did that gaze in the distance mean? It clicked – and here it is. I’ve done similar. When I’ve seen some person I do not want to take notice of, I’ve deliberately looked in the distance – just like that. And when did that I would not have been focussing on anything in particular. I’d just look ahead just to avoid eye contact.

So, here was I on the ‘receiving end’ I now think. I could never know what was in the mind of the other, but the closest approximation, is to look at myself first i.e. when I did that sort of thing – and make some kind of extrapolation.

Now some might be thinking that that was the only such incident. No – it wasn’t. The same happened about a year ago. A male professional colleague who knew that I thought he was a plonker passed within 3 feet of me. I always look plonkers in the eye, because I have nothing to fear. So I looked over to him. Guess what. It was that same kind of robotic gaze – at some amazingly interesting ‘non-object’.

What I realised is that when you wilfully avoid the gaze of another person you really do not focus on something of interest. You simply look ahead, like a robot. If you’re truly distracted by something interesting in the distance and miss sight of a familiar face, then your eye movements would not be blank and straight ahead. You’d be looking at the ‘thing’ that has grasped attention but also vary your gaze to surrounding objects. I’ve also checked that I can pick up very easily if someone within a cone of 5 feet from my eyes looks at me.

Well – in the case of the plonker avoiding my gaze, that’s understandable. But when it’s someone who has nothing I know of ‘with me’ – it now puts me to wonder again about human nature.

Identifying with the patzer

2009-05-16T23:59:00.001+01:00

The dictionary will tell you that ‘patzer’ means ‘amateur chess player’. However in this piece of reflection, I’ll extend it to mean all idiots and the not so intelligent - outside of the game of chess.

I’ve been observing a phenomenon, where in general, the amateur finds some degree of camaraderie with a group of people. That situation will normally arise where the expert bludgeons the apparent idiot with facts and evidence, to the point where the patzer will need to cower.

What would then happen is that others will ignore the expert and enquire of the patzer if s/he is okay, support her and get her back on her feet. She’ll be treated as a victim, instead of as a felon deserving of punishment.

Why I know about this? I’m used to suffering idiots with their own idiotic logic. It’s simple really. The technique is to use the evidence of what they say to put in opposition two things that cannot co-exist. So you can’t move left and right, forward and backward at the same time – one has to prevail. What would then happen is that the patzer will realise that left nor right are options. Cornered – now waiting to be bludgeoned. Now the patzer sees zugswang in sight, cannot move – a thing cannot be the one and it’s opposite at the same time. That is the simplest form of logic in most situations.

And that is when rescue tends to come. Instead of the crowd descending on the idiot and finishing her off – what to they do? They provide comfort and support. And that is the world I see. But in an futuristic world – my fantasy world - such beings with such logic would be eliminated. I yearn for another time, another space.

The definitive idiot’s guide to causing yourself stress and failure.

2009-05-15T23:15:00.001+01:00

Yes after years of careful research into the human condition I've now come up with the 'Definitive Idiot's Guide' to causing yourself stress!

Well, they say every little helps. I've been motivated to write this because I see so many people trying so hard to cause themselves stress, that I decided I needed to provide a practical guide.

The way I see it, if you're gonna do it do it; do it well - and have a reference manual as well.

Waste your time. I mean seek out ways to convince yourself that you're working productively - but in reality spread out the work so that it consumes any time available. Don't just confine this to work. Apply it in every aspect of your life.
Never plan anything. Just go with the flow. Do it - whatever - any old time. Unleash your creativity on life!
Watch loads of TV and listen to the radio all the time.
Drink yourself drunk on a Sunday night, so you're properly hung over on a Monday morning.
Believe that God or some other mystical being will guide you to the promised land.
Reject any helpful suggestion to improve your life or performance. After all everybody is against you.
Be stubborn – not just average ‘stubborn’ – I mean reject anything that causes you any discomfort.
Hang out with idiots – I mean seek them out and gain support from them.
Blame everybody else for your life’s problems:
1. you’re overweight – it’s your parents’ genes that caused it.
2. you don’t have enough money – well you don’t spend anything really, and you earn too much money – so ‘what the heck’s the matter with the world?’ you must ask yourself.
Forget what happened yesterday or months ago. What do you care? All that matters is tomorrow.

Well it’s a work in progress – and there is no deadline. So this idiot’s guide has to live up to it’s principles. I’ll finish it any old time. How’s that?

Perceptions of perceptions.

2009-05-03T14:51:00.002+01:00

Like huh? Well, one can never be 100% sure what others think of you (i.e. me). People basically don’t tell (by words) all of what they think – for umpteen reasons.

So I’ve been asking myself what do others really think of me. I cannot be 100% correct either because I can never truly know what is in the mind of the other. Which then leads to another question, why should it matter what others think of me.

How does one come to know what the other thinks? It’s easy enough if they say something. But because they won’t actually say what’s on their minds I’m left to make inferences based on conduct and non-verbals.

Perhaps I should deal with that question first. I imagine the following reasons are relevant:

We live in a very complex social world. It is extremely difficult to swim alone against the ‘tide’. We are by nature animals that live in herds and isolation from the herd means less survival advantage. Isolation can come not simply by physical distance from the herd. Psychological distance matters very much more than physical distance. What others think of you is a marker of psychological proximity or distance.
Psychological proximity – how truly close others are to you – provides a sense of readiness to offer support.
That readiness of support from others brings a sense of security – largely against all life’s unpredictables and threats.

I’ve avoided reasons that have to do with any form of narcissism; reducing the ‘what others think of me’ to how it might affect ‘me’ in most basic of ways.

Non-verbals

Actions and non-verbals speak louder than words. Really – the research proves it. In fact communication experts have known it for years that 70% or so of meaning is transmitted by non-verbal means (body language) as it is commonly called. As the years roll by experience has thought me that my assessment of non-verbals has grown more accurate. How do I know? I’ve reflected carefully on voice patterns, breathing patterns whilst people speak, eye contact, body movements etc.

I also work amongst people who are aware of non-verbals and who may even try to mask what they ‘give away’ – so in a sense I’ve been ‘trained’ to look under the ‘psychological armour’ of those who have a better chance of concealing their innermost thoughts and feelings.

Knowing

I pay a high degree of attention to detail. My perspective of people in general is that they don’t like paying too much attention to detail. In some circles I hang, people who pay attention to detail are simply labelled as ‘obsessive’ – even though extreme attention to detail is required! In that attention to detail, inconsistencies between what is said, how it is said, and other corroborative details, often leads to a picture that I’m not getting the full picture – or the truth. In one other circle of work my skill in detecting those inconsistencies are used to full potential and I am valued.

Disrobed

Ever had a dream that you went to work naked? It is a very common dream. For those who have had such a dream, recall how awkward it felt. Conversing with me is like being naked psychologically. I will pick up more than you care to allow others to see – and the worse part is that I won’t let on that I’ve seen something of you that you cared to conceal.

For those who do not know of my professional status, they are happily ignorant. It’s like standing next to a guy and you didn’t actually know he had on ‘X-ray specs’ and was actually seeing under your clothes. But what when you discover that he does have on X-ray specs? Ooooh..that’s uncomfortable. And interestingly people in general believe that their minds cannot be read. Well that’s true in the literal sense of those words, however, peoples values, motives, perceptions, honesty/dishonesty, economy with the truth etc can be read. It happens every day – read what’s in the political news some time. Well - I'm cool with close 'others' knowing that I'm delusional and that I have no special powers to see 'under their clothes' - the better the 'view' for me!

Summary

So in essence to be near to someone who has on X-ray specs 24/7 is not easy. Everyday life from my perception depends heavily (too) on people not being as honest as they make out.

We don’t expect others to ask questions about each inconsistency or flaw in the logical sequence of our thoughts. But to be next to someone who might spot such flaws is to be ‘naked’ – even if they say nothing of the ‘nakedness’ they see.

But I’m sure my perception of inconsistency and lack of logical sequence is communicated to the other by non-verbal means, that I may not be aware of. The other will not relish that. Trust me, few like or can endure staying for prolonged periods under and X-ray machine or a microscope.

The price of proximity to reality is probably isolation. However, I have no regrets. I value the former far more, than the camaraderie that comes from association with fools.

Still bewildered

2009-04-26T12:47:00.001+01:00

I recently wrote about Disrespect for my Right to Privacy. So a couple days ago I received yet another email. But this one did not disrespect my privacy. Instead it contained the emails of 122 other individuals.

[I deviate to explain to the technologically challenged that I did not count each email address. I simply cut and pasted into Word processor, and did a CTRL + H, then did a ‘Replace’ on each @ symbol, after which a count comes up. Then I subtracted 2 from the count].

So I could not help but think, “Well, if each of those email addresses were the telephone numbers of those individuals what would I think?” Well I would think it is quite a despicable thing to do. I live on another planet where people in general don’t like their phone numbers being distributed to others en masse.

Like I’m in a perpetual state of shock why it seems ‘ok’ for others to distribute email addresses around, like it is nobody’s business. I mean how would you feel if you (person A) knew that in calling me on the phone, I was likely to take your phone number and whimsically, in another conversation with some other person (person B), take your phone number distribute it and our recorded telephone conversation to B and 121 other people? I don’t think that would go down well.

As I tell all who are close to me ‘Do not distribute my email address without my consent’, I think it is reasonable to request that they do not send me emails with loads of other people’s email addresses. It is the principle of the matter that is important. The principle is privacy. If I accept emails with loads of breaches (or what appears to be breaches) of privacy then I defeat my upholding the same principle.

It would seem ridiculous to say, “Okay, don’t do it to me but you can do it to others and I’ll say nothing.” The principle had no sense of direction – it simply applies.

A slice of heaven

2009-04-24T22:34:00.005+01:00

Kurumba pavillion

Disregard of my right to privacy…and my time...by my so-called friends

2009-04-18T00:28:00.003+01:00

I’ve been fighting a battle with people I know, some who would feel slighted if I did not consider them friends – for the past 7 years.

This is what it is about:

I inform all who know me not to send my email (or other contact details) out to ‘third parties’ without my express consent.
Invariably they respond something like, “Goes without saying, I would never do a thing like that!" - in a tone of disapproval at my apparent lack of trust in them.
Then invariably they do send out my contact details – especially my email address – to third parties without my consent. They do this by idiotically:
1. lumping my email address with several others in the ‘To’ or ‘CC’ fields of emails – a sure way to distribute my email address to umpteen people who do not know me.
2. Clicking the FWD (forward) button on emails forwarded to others, and leaving my email address exposed, like it's everybody's business (and it ain't)!
3. submitting my email address to websites to send me links or messages – like how much intelligence does it take to realise that that is in fact giving my email address to a ‘third party’ without my consent.
And then they go something like, "Sorry, I eh very good with IT and computers." - as if to say that is a great explanation

But is this phenomenon about a lack of intelligence or is it more about a lack of memory or consideration for me? I have to wonder. No – many of them put it down to, “I thought it was okay….” or “Sorry I made a mistake.” – as if to say all human mistakes are excusable.

The following conversation occurred recently between me and another – small print is commentary or my thoughts at the time.

Me: Please do not submit my email address to any websites as it appeared with that [named] website.

[This had happened and I happened to be in ‘chat’ with the person. I’m being very clear in what I’m saying.]

Other: ok, why not?

[Bloody hell, do I really have to spend time explaining that I have right to privacy and confidentiality of my contact details and I expect my ‘friends’ to honour all that? Like – no! I don’t have the time. My bloody time in concentrated and I decide how I want to spend it, like now. And the reason I’m writing all this is because I’m fascinated by the stupidity of the most ‘civilised’ species on earth – or so they like to think of themselves. So I give the short answer below.]

Me: No questions....just don't

Other: what? So how else can I send articles?

[Oh golly gee! I’m supposed to explain it. Like I don’t want frigging articles from anywhere where my email address has to be submitted – and oh, you’re meant to send copy and paste and send it in an email to me. Bollocks.]

Me: How'd you like if I send your private telephone numbers to some website...it's the same thing. Look, I don't like my contact email going to other sites and that's that.

[Like do I have time in a chatroom to go into this? No. Just do as I say, for God’s sakes]

Other: ok, well as you wish. But you should keep several e-mail accounts then if you're worried about privacy.

[Oh right – so I’m supposed to do as you say in order to receive crap and waste my time. No – ‘why don’t you spend your time respecting my privacy’ – I’m thinking. Sorry, I don’t see why I should spend my time checking email addresses for junk. Respect for my privacy is my so-called friends business too. Why should I compensate for such a lack of consideration? I shouldn’t.]

Other: Oh well, I think I'm gonna take in the news. There is a live feed of the summit on.

[Well, if I sense some displeasure there then I’m paranoid. Eh?]

Me: No. I decide how many email accounts I want to check. I have a right to privacy.

[In other words I shall not be compensating for your lack of attention and respect for my privacy]

Okay – so you might be thinking that I’m going on too much about this. Read on, then.

I go back to 02:35AM 17th August 2008.

I heard my cell phone ringing. I struggled to answer it. It is dark. I'd been jolted out of my deep slumber. I was clueless at the time to what time it was. I answered the phone:

Other: "Aye, how yuh going".

Me: "Ah sleepin”

Other: "Oh gord...ah sorry.. ah only see yuh online so ah press dee button....ah eh watch dee time...sorry ah gorn".

[I've got Skype and it's on my cellphone - so I appear online all the time. It doesn't do the auto 'away' feature like in the usual PC version.]

Me: "Alright”

I get back to sleep in a few minutes, luckily. But in those few minutes - I'm thinking "Yet another blasted Trinidadian...demonstrating the same mindlessness typical of its people". No I wasn’t particularly angry whilst thinking that - more in a state of...well it's a difficult one to find words for...I guess a mixture of expectation, confusion, disappointment, puzzlement, disgust for the human condition.

Actually the caller was the same person in the conversation at the start of this blog, and the person is used to changes of time zones and international travel. So one could expect that if making a call to anyone in another country that the time zone is checked. The time zone is actually displayed after my screenname on Skype.

‘White Lies’ – just amazing

2009-04-17T01:09:00.002+01:00

Recently I discovered ‘White Lies’ – the group. Well when I heard ‘To lose my life’ a few days ago, I thought to myself “Hey, Bowie is back!”. So it wasn’t David Bowie, but so what? These guys are just brilliant.

I mean I can’t get their songs outta my head! Like I’m having a pretty prolonged enjoyable hallucination.

So I thought I’d spread the joy.

	The lyrics on both these music-vids are thought provoking
		Lyrics

		Lyrics – see discussion here

What’s a psychiatrist?

2009-04-10T12:23:00.001+01:00

Recently I was in the company of a colleague who is a psychiatrist (aka shrink).

We were walking into a large supermarket. He’s saying hello to the chap who’s greeting customers. The conversation goes as follows:

Chappy: So what if you don’t mind I ask do you do?

Shrink: I’m a forensic psychiatrist – which is different from a psychologist. Basically I lock up the criminally insane and provide treatment for them.

Chappy: You know…[hesitating a bit]..you know what I thought you were?

Shrink: No, tell me.

Chappy: I thought you were a doctor. You just have that look about you.

Shrink: Well a psychiatrist is a medical doctor.

Chappy: Oh so you mean you’ve studied for your doctorate and all that.

Shrink: I’m a doctor like any other medical doctor.

Chappy: Orh..r..i….g…...h…..t [the sort of spread out ‘right’ that you get from the English when they don’t know WTF is going on].

Well actually: the non-verbal context of this was that although my shrink colleague took the effort to differentiate himself from being a psychologist, he could not have expected to be differentiated from being a doctor. It still didn’t sink when he told the chappy that he was a medical doctor.

This is the way England is. People appear to have lots of intelligence but what they really have is a lot of ‘lip’. Ooooh…now I’m extrapolating too much from one incident. No – it was an extrapolation from lots of incidents; this is just one of them. Come on – I think I can expect any person of average intellect to know that a psychiatrist is a medical doctor.

If you don’t get the point – leave it alone and move on.

Judge jailed for telling a lie.

2009-03-28T23:38:00.001Z

This is an amazing story! STOP EVERYTHING: Don't go to the toilet..don't walk that dog...don't go to the grocery...don't phone that friend!

This is a tragic tale of how a judge of international repute ends up in jail - for attempting to tell a little fib.

"Marcus Einfeld, the judge in question, was certainly of high enough degree - none higher. Queens Counsel since 1977, Australian Living Treasure 1997, United Nations Peace Award 2002, the list goes on. He retired a few years ago but has continually been brought back to judge important cases about refugees because the Australian legal system can't do without his experience and prestige."

Now he's doing time (2 years) in the slammer!

Click this now: The little white lie that grew

For those who wish to listen the podcast is here.

But he is defiant - stating that he wasn't dishonest that he just made a mistake.

See: Australian Telegraph 2009-03-23 And see: The Sydney Morning Herald 2009-03-28 where he asks for cell door to be left open, a psychologist and a masseuse!

What happens when it's better than free

2009-02-26T22:36:00.004Z

Well tonight I had an interesting experience. I go into the local supermarket around 20:45. There's a worker in uniform at the entrance offering me free bread. It comes with a coupon that I use at the cashier to get it for FREE.

So I say thank you very much and with some glee take the bread and coupon. I get to the cashier (or check-out, or whatever you call it - goddamit). So like I check my bill after paying, as I always do. I discover that I actually got the bread at better than FREE!!

How's that you're thinking? Right - well the computer scanned it in at 10p - and I get 25p credit with the coupon. So - that means they paid me 15p for taking the bread!!

A few seconds later I'm walking out of the supermarket and I spot the same worker flogging two other pieces of bread to two youths, who are looking indecisive. So I show them my bill and say "They paid me 15p to take the bread...it's a good deal you can't lose". To which they respond by looking at me as if I'm a nutter. Well, I couldn't care a monkey's as they in England - I like being paid to take away good stuff.

Yup - It's a good loaf of granary bread! No tricks. No catches. Tastes good.

Now you want to know what supermarket is this. Well - no other than a Wal-mart store. Yup - that'll be ASDA - my favourite supermarket.

Really - I love the place. All the workers there are sooooh polite - I mean like sometimes I'm pinching myself and thinking 'Is this England...is this England?'. I go to ASDA regularly for meals, shopping, or just for a jaunt - and really I couldn't care less about who thinks that I haven't got better things to do with my time. I like good service and I've always got it from ASDA. I leave their shop, nearly always thinking to myself 'I've got a good deal'.

Well today I got a small but much better deal than I expected!

Macaroni and cheese

2009-02-02T12:23:00.001Z

No - this ain't a recipe for it. This is about the service surrounding it. It’s a long one. I’ve taken several weeks drafting this (working on average a few minutes each week). It is such a difficult story that I could not put it down all at once. I really had to do it a bit at a time.

The story

I go to a local supermarket fairly regularly with my daughter for a meal. Their cafeteria is not the best but we both like the macaroni and cheese they serve there. BTW I'm qualified in business and my teenage daughter is studying business. Hold on. The story will come. Just relax.

So on this occasion (Saturday 2008-11-15), we go to the counter and work out rather quickly that she'll have the macaroni and cheese and I'll have the fish and chips. Normally M&C would go with other things like vegetables and chips, as full meal. But we don't want full M&C so I ask a tall female attendant behind the counter "How much is the M&C?". Why would I ask this? Because there is no sign above the food counter where the prices are normally displayed. The female person responds in English in what sounds like a German accent, "You'll have to look at the board for that" - pointing me to a large board of prices to my left at about an 8 o'clock position, roughly 5 metres away, at about 40 degrees elevation.

So I read the board diligently. I cannot see M&C priced on it. I look back at the female attendant and say "I'm sorry I don't see the price on it, can you help". She's looking away at the board and rocking with arms folding. Rocking? Yeah - like when you partially flex your knee and push on it intermittently. You know – its like she’s tapping to Katy Perry’s

Hot n’ Cold or some crap.

She repeats that the price is “there” – with this strange downward flick of the wrist while keeping index finger extended. I look again over ‘there’. By now probably 60 seconds has elapsed, which you could imagine felt like an eternity. So I look back to her and say, "I'm sorry it isn't there...in any case I only want to know what it would cost if you could serve us the M&C on it's own." She then tells me that the M&C comes with chips and peas etc. So I repeat myself, "I want to know the price of the M&C on its own". She looks at me blankly and repeats something about peas and chips. By now probably 2 min have gone.

So I politely and firmly say to her, "You're clearly not understanding my English, I'd be grateful if you could find someone else to assist." She looks displeased and goes off to find the cashier who is about 5 metres to her left. The female cashier (i.e. AttNo2) arrives within seconds.

Me: "I hope you speak English because I was unable to communicate well enough with the person to your left, who was not understanding my English".

AttNo2 says "Yes I do, how can I help?"

Me, "I'm trying to find out the price of the M&C on its own"

AttNo2: "Normally it is served as a meal and that costs £4.49, but I can do it for you for £2.00 on its own."

Me: "Thanks, that is a what I was trying to find out"

AttNo1: Now appears visibly disturbed...utters something and storms off.

Me: [To AttNo2] “That was rude of her, I'd like to speak to a manager of this facility.”

I give him the above story, and explain to him that AttNo1 was rude and lacked basic linguistic competence in English, to inform me of the price of M&C on its own.

Manager: “To be fair she only recently started and probably felt upset by the way you pointed out her lack of English.”

Me: “It matters not. She was clearly in difficulty and did not seek help. I had to tell her to seek help and when she returned her response was rude.” [And BTW how does he know anything about the ‘way’ I might have pointed our her lack of linguistic competence. Was he there? No. Was he within earshot? No. Could it be an assumption of some kind, based on the fact that I was confronting his bullshit…oooh and confrontation is not allowed in England?]

Manager: “Well all I can say is that she was new...”

Me: “Are you trying to defend your staff”

Manager: “Yes! I have to defend my staff!”

Me: “I'm not happy with you and I'll speak to your superior...you're defending staff in poor customer service.”

He goes off. You might think that that was the end of it. No.

I remain there determined to get my M&C at the £2.00. So a third attendant - a male - AttNo3.

So I go through the same thing again with him as with German sounding female. This male sounds Italian and he's go the same problem understanding "..on its own". So, I gesticulate and use simple words to communicate that I want M&C on its own. [Well as I’m writing this I’m now in a state of doubt – which is silly really – as to whether ‘on it’s own’ is too complicated English]

AttNo3: “I'll ask my boss” (i.e. the same Manager who's defending his staff).

Me: “Thank you.”

AttNo3: “I can't serve it to you like that.”

Me: “Why?”

AttNo3: “Because my boss says I can't.”

Me: “I'm confused. The cashier (me pointing in her direction i.e. AttNo2) just said we could have it for £2.00.

AttNo3: “Well I can't serve it to you because the boss said so.”

So what happened next? You’d think I might give up. Not me. I then complain outside and ask speak to a floor manager, to be third by AttNo4 that, “They’re all in a meeting” – and of course not sure when they’ll be out. Amazing isn’t it – this is England for you – meetings don’t generally have a start and end time. And…and..this is a Saturday so the meeting could go on forever – eh?

AttnNo4 explained to me that the canteen is not really run by them, but by a contractor. Like now I’m jumping for joy – that really helps me – huh? This is how she explains it “I’m not trying to be funny or to say that what you experienced wasn’t bad…..” Ok, you guess the next word……. Yup that famous “but” – this is the way the English talk utter crap. Ooooh now I’m racist for referring to ‘the English’. Gimme a break. That’s my perception of them and that is them culturally. I don’t want to hear about bloody ‘but’. Crap service is crap services. I’ve experienced it and that’s that. I don’t expend so much time and effort in your bloody shop for the fun of it. I happen to have better things to do. So why did I spend so much time on it? Two reasons: 1) My daughter is a business student – so it was for her to experience what poor customer service is about. 2) I happen to like the cafe I have an interest in getting rid of wanking staff.

You’d think I would give up. I give them half an hour while I do some shopping. After that the meeting is not over. Surprise surprise. So I give a description of my complaint to the AttNo4. She taps in the stuff on screen and promises me a copy, after taking my address and phone number etc. Do I get a phone call? Your guess.

What happened next? I get a dumb letter in the post apologising for what happened and a card bearing £5 credit.

So what have I learned. Well first of all this was not in a Wal-Mart store (such as ASDA here in the UK). Nope Wal-Mart has much more respect for customers. They really believe and understand that the only reason they are in business is for the customer. No – I’m not one of those ‘the-customer-is-always-right’ sort of people, nor is Wal-Mart. Well what I learned more about is the big rip-off Britain. Basically the British and particularly the English don’t like to complain – relative to American folk (from what I’ve picked up). So English business enterprises get away with ‘murder’ – and they like it so. I am so thankful that Wal-Mart is here in the UK. I’ve never been treated with such contempt as above.

Bending the rules

2009-02-02T00:19:00.001Z

This is an exploration of how people interact with rules and regulations. It is largely based on personal observations. Therefore it is subject to all the biases and weaknesses that go with personal observations of the world.

What kinds of rules are there?

Law (Primary, secondary, delegated legislation, legal regulations).
Quasi-legal regulations (i.e. codes of conduct and practice that do not have statutory force but have the backing of statute).
Policy (i.e. written policy agreed and imposed by employers for example).
Other – a diffused set of rules that are written.

I do not go into moral rules, because these are hardly ever written or directly enforceable.

What motivates me to write about this?

I find in my worldly interactions that people often know what the rules are or they can find them – yet they choose to bend the rules to suit their own needs. This causes differences of opinion between me and others on a fairly regular basis.

What do I mean by bending of the rules?

I mean holding a personal interpretation of the rules that ends up (from my perspective) at much distance from what the rules were meant to achieve. Bending sometimes goes so far that it actually breaks the rules.

How (or why) do people effect the bending of the rules?

None of the categories below have sharp boundaries.

Appeal to the generality of conduct i.e. everybody else does it ‘so what’s the problem’.
Herd effects – everybody gets away with it, so I just do as others do.
Tradition – i.e. ‘we now what the policy says but this is how we’ve always done it – and no one has ever raised a concern – and by implication ‘who are you to raise a concern now?’
Personal justification – i.e. ‘It’s rubbish the way the system is set up. The rules are stupid. I don’t agree with it. It is morally wrong and totally ridiculous so I’ll do as I think best’.
Minimisation – the rule or regulation is reduced in importance i.e. ‘Nothing much will come of it if you do it outside of the rules.
Disparagement of authority - ‘These people at the top are clueless paper pushers; what could they know of things as they really are.’
Lack of enforcement – if there is not enforcement of a rule, it is as good as no rule.
Pressure to act – from others or cumulative pressure from systems can cause others to bend the rules.
Failure of systems of justice – this is not necessarily about legal matters. Justice is a concept that permeates everyday life.
Not knowing the rules – but thinking that some one else who mentioned them knew the rules (when they didn’t).

….to be continued….I’m thinking more about this.

IF

2009-01-26T18:44:00.001Z

If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you
But make allowance for their doubting too,
If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
Or being lied about, don't deal in lies,
Or being hated, don't give way to hating,
And yet don't look too good, nor talk too wise:

If you can dream--and not make dreams your master,
If you can think--and not make thoughts your aim;
If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster
And treat those two impostors just the same;
If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken,
And stoop and build 'em up with worn-out tools:

If you can make one heap of all your winnings
And risk it all on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
And lose, and start again at your beginnings
And never breath a word about your loss;
If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are gone,
And so hold on when there is nothing in you
Except the Will which says to them: "Hold on!"

If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,
Or walk with kings--nor lose the common touch,
If neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you;
If all men count with you, but none too much,
If you can fill the unforgiving minute
With sixty seconds' worth of distance run,
Yours is the Earth and everything that's in it,
And--which is more--you'll be a Man, my son!

--Rudyard Kipling

The weather in England

2009-01-10T01:12:00.001Z

It has been a bit of a mystery to me, up until a few days ago. I used to wonder why talking about the weather was such an easy icebreaker in England.

It suddenly dawned on me - and the answer was pretty simple. Here goes.

In England we all share the weather. It's the one great thing that all the English share the same joys and miseries. I mean this is so obvious that it isn't appealing. But it is true. The weather is there for all of us.
We suffer or enjoy the weather together. So that common union with the weather makes it easy to talk about.
It's a force that we have no control over. So it is like common friend or foe.

Into the race

2009-01-02T00:56:00.003Z

Peace is where you find it..

2008-12-21T13:26:00.001Z

Peace at 23,000 feet:

And at ground zero:

Am I still the same person?

2008-12-21T13:21:00.001Z

This question came up in discussion with someone who believed they knew me 28 years ago, for a period of about two years - and now claims to know me still. The other asserted that in our recent discussions over the last few months in live chat, that 'Your personality is the same' as back then.

There was an assertion by the other that "Personalities are formed as early as 3 ...you aint changed that much." Amazingly this is being said to me, who happens to be recognised in my field as having expert knowledge of personality - and who assesses personality almost daily, in a professional capacity. Anyways, the discussion continued with the insistence that because this person knew me from 28 years ago, I was the same personality today (as I was back then).

Some thoughts came to mind:

How closely did the other really know me back then?
How do you know if you 'know' someone?
What does it mean to 'know' someone or their personality?
How close do you have to be to know someone - what kind of talk or situations should be shared.
28 years later what does the other know of me, except what s/he learns of via a live chatroom transmitting text?
Could s/he gain enough access to my functioning in the present to 'know reliably' and with reasonable confidence that my personality is the same as 28 years ago.
What is personality?
Is it formed as early as 3 - as is popularly thrown around - by idiots reading popular science mags?

Personality

It isn't what lay people think it is. But lay people don't know any different because they share the same concept common to them, which is a lay concept. So it's like a lay person saying 'blood is a red liquid'. Well yes, no one will doubt that, but when you know the extreme complexity of the structure, physiology, and biochemistry of blood - it being a red liquid becomes so simplistic it is useless. But will the average man in the street investigate of his own volition what this red liquid is. I doubt very much. The average man has far more important and mundane things to do.

And similarly with personality, is it simply just people's behaviour and thinking styles? Oh it isn't? Well on the surface it is - like the redness of blood. The real psychological concept of personality is so complex that it still boggles the minds of many trained psychiatrists. Personality is about a collection of fairly stable styles of thinking, reacting, managing emotions, interacting socially - that have endured over many years. Those who knew of me as friends would have seen only a certain set of interactions and styles. So perhaps 28 years later they see similar to what they knew back then. Seeing the same 'face' of an 'object' does not mean that the other 'faces' of the object have not changed with time. In reality the whole object could have changed its form quite fundamentally. So flipping the 'object' on a familiar surface might reveal that if you roll it along, it rolls quite differently - and that's when the 'other' would see changes i.e. the whole thing would not roll as it once did.

And personalities are not formed as early as three. Temperaments can be seen at age of three, but that is not personality. So in reality our personalities are not truly formed until late adolescence. And adolescence is not strictly defined by chronological age. Doctors and lawyers for example tend to have delays in their adolescence. So, using a concept loosely is bound to lead to misunderstanding? Misunderstanding - a misunderstanding that is shared by the masses, who not knowing better feel comfortable with it.

Can personality change? Sure it can. What can change personality? Very important events, traumatic events, education, religion, adopting a new culture, influential persons, adopting a new philosophy, brain disorders and mental disorders (the list is not complete). So while the other was saying my personality is the same as 28 years ago, I'm thinking how could s/he know off all that I've experienced. How could s/he know about how my thinking and interacting has changed? I myself have seen me change from 28 years ago. I'm not saying that all of my personality has changed. Yes, I expect some traits to remain the same and some to change.

Any changes

Stubbornness

I had come from a science background so I was always inclined from back then to link things up to evidence. I would try very hard to gather evidence to support what I believe or say. That bit has remained. That would lead others to think I'm 'stubborn'. Why? Because I wouldn't accept opinions simply on authority. I would demand that authoritative opinion be based on evidence that I could ‘touch’ and ‘examine’ for myself. Well I've come to gather that most people do not operate like that. They give in on the word of some figure in authority. So by contrast I was 'stubborn'. But there have been some changes. I've become much more stubborn!! I'm now brutally stubborn. But in all that there is a very soft spot i.e. show me the evidence..and show me the reasoning, then I'm soft as clay.

Bullshit threshold

I've always had a problem with stomaching bullshit. My threshold for tolerating rubbish has become lower. So, these days I'm more likely to say 'That's utter rubbish'. I used to be afraid to offend friend, family, or employer by speaking my mind. Now my philosophy is that those who cannot withstand my speaking my mind should get out of my way. It's my world too and I deserve to express my opinion (albeit lawfully).

Respect for authority

I've become more 'disrespectful of authority'. And I can see why that has happened. Too often I've seen very senior people talking utter crap! I mean 'cuhraap'! I mean people in high places with all the letters and positions behind their names, lacking the very basics of thinking skills. England in the last few years has seen many experts taken down. Thank god for courts - the real testing ground for logical thought. No I’m not suggesting the courts are perfect, so calm down.

Thinking and expression

Mainly in the domains of thinking and expression. I think more widely about things before coming to conclusions. I never used to do that way back then. And what about my thinking skills? Do I think I'm superior? No that's not it. Can a person evaluate himself relative to others and say 'Well actually I do have better skills in this or that area', without attracting labels of being arrogant or narcissistic? And take IT skills - I certainly have much better skills than most average people around me. This is fact that can be tested - nothing to do with boasting or being arrogant. So that's another thing, I'm no longer afraid to be called names. And there is a way to call names without calling names that is very interesting. Like when you don't like what somebody says, you go "That's sad". In reality this is not about calling the situation sad. It is hurling some kind of abuse. Or saying to someone that 'You need help', because you resent and confront what rubbish they're talking about.

Friends and acquaintances

I've become more willing to lose friends and acquaintances by knowing that if I speak my mind I might lose them. As you become older, you see life in a different way. When younger, numbers of 'friends' meant a whole lot. Now it doesn't bother me. Those who would have been considered friends are now largely annoying. Why? I'm no longer in need of the approval of a large group of people - that I used to call 'friends'. In general I don't see many people around who can evaluate things along similar lines - as I do. So is my way of evaluation right? Yes it is, actually. It is based on foundations of truth, evidence, justice, fairness, and cutting through the bush to core issues. Well..ooooh all that stuff makes me not likeable to the majority - and do I care a rats buttocks? Like heck no.

Iconoclast

I've also become disrespectful of systems that profess to care. Why? Because these systems invariably care only for their own arses. They like individuals have a fundamental block - they can't seem to put themselves in the shoes of 'the individual' and imagine what it might be like. So in the health care system for example, people are treated as objects. Whoohoo...hang on. I'm not saying that all health systems are like that 100% of the time. But there is a sub-group of people who are treated with contempt i.e. the elderly, the learning disabled and the mentally ill. Around 1992 I wrote to an eminent academic body that ought to have had an interest in elderly people being treated with contempt. There response was to send me back to my employers. Like hello...giving the perpetrator of the crime to mend its ways? Hellooooh...this is real world. And 15 years later a fancy report from some think tank organisation comes out telling all of England what I new way back. Needless to say, how many people must have been waxed off in those years.

Contempt for cogs in wheels. Yes there are people who become parts of organisations and merely go along like cogs in wheels. Organisations - especially in a social democracy like England - promote this kind of thing. And these cogs in wheels are truly willing to secure food and shelter at any cost for themselves and their families. So when they see Cuhraap (aka crap) going on they turn a blind eye and have visions of family starving, house being re-possessed and losing all their precious valuables. Oh yeah...how many out there are really willing to lose it all for a cause that is to stop evil? You might put up your hand now, but when the time comes to act, it would be like what happened when it was crunch time with UN Resolution 1441. You don't know about that!? Too bad for you - live a blinkered and happy existence.

Pursuit of happiness

That leads me to happiness. It is like a bloody addiction. Everybody wants an easy happy life - except me of course. Oooh waw...now I'm a misfit...name calling again. No. This is what I've become. I am contemptuous of happiness. I now embrace self-fulfilment. What's that? It means happiness and unhappiness are there to be had on the path to something that is even bigger. Ooooooh...now I'm grandiose. Adjectives...adjectives. To what end. Be gone.. The future of our fragile human race is at stake..and people are bent on their individual happiness, when the most intelligent and sentient beings in the last 5 billion years (if you're not Christian), could self-destruct rather soon.

Well I have to admit that I was 'seriously' affected by Bertrand Russell's work 'The Conquest of Happiness' some 35 years ago. That did shape my attitudes to life and happiness and it still does.

Religion

Religion? I used to be religious at one stage, but not overly. By my late teens, I had begun to move away from religion having been influenced heavily by several philosophical works. It was also amazing how much overlaps there was between philosophy and psychology.

Currently, I feel sorry for those who are religious and they reciprocate similar feelings. It is a very grand delusion and that will come more to light in 50 years time. It was a useful scaffold for the human race. Now it is largely an obstacle. You can't say that to any particular religion though, because you could be arrested, prosecuted and locked up for inciting religious hatred or some 'cuhraap'. There is nothing in religious belief that is fundamentally different from ‘delusion’. And no, I haven’t been reading much of Richard Dawkins. Psychiatry for example has been very cautious to remain outside of debates on religion or calling religious beliefs ‘delusion’. In reality there is no demarcation for a patient who is psychotically religiously deluded from a sane patient with similar crazy beliefs. Oh I always recall my then 'friend' back in College who predicted that Jesus Christ would descend from the heavens in a spacecraft to collect 100,000 of the most faithful. Well, if it happened we never heard about it. A top secret operation by the Almighty for the chosen few.

Conclusions

The main facets of my being that rolled on the road of life have changed in degree but not significantly in form. So yes there is change.

So whilst I set out to with a personal bias to disprove that my personality has not changed, this analysis has led me to an important awareness - that the main facets are still the same, but may have become more defined. Perhaps my temperament has grown more visibly into personality traits. My personality has changed. The same strands exist but they've grown bigger and toughened. But this is not to say I'm the same person or same personality. I happen to know me too.

Beautiful....Alizee

2008-11-30T00:05:00.002Z

Money isn't everything...but I sure as hell love it. Don't you?

2008-11-01T12:54:00.001Z

Yeah..we know this very well don't we, that 'money isn't every thing'? The phrase sickens me. Why pray tell, you must be thinking.

Let me try a few substitutions for the word 'money' in there:

'Air' isn't everything
'Sex' isn't everything
'Banana' isn't everything
'Food' isn't everything
'A house' isn't everything.

Well yes, I hope you get the point? You don't? Let me spell it out. 'No one thing' or 'Class of things' is every thing!! Got it? Sorry I can't help any more. Leave it here if you can't grasp it. Don't read on if you can't get the point.

For those who can see where I'm coming from, I am absolutely amazed by the stupidity of the statement 'Money isn't everything'. Logically it is a nonsensical statement.

Ooooh but now we're meant to interpret things in figurative way at times. So let me have a go at it. In broad brush the statement could mean that money isn't meant to be the highest priority in life. First of all I could agree with that for people who do not live in social democracies and capitalist based systems. And certainly at the centre of the Sahara or Arctic Tundra, money is unlikely to be the highest priority.

But what if you live in a capitalist system. I observe how people operate. In large part they go to work to get paid. Paid what? Money - I suppose. Their lives revolve around money - earning it, saving it, investing it, buying food, houses and cars with it etc etc. And yet ...yet..these are the same people who go 'Money isn't everything' - when in reality money is such a high priority. In fact it probably is the highest priority, because without enough of it, they can't enjoy those lovely holidays and quality family times they brag on about as being of higher priority (than money).

Oh no...but we can't appear to be driven by money! Nooooh...money is a bad thing isn't it. And we can't be seen to be materialistic. We're better people than that. We can't love money....we must instead...love nature...wild-life, planet earth, the environment and the poor suffering people of this earth. Now we're in the right crowd. But money? Ooooh noooooooh...loving that means you're a selfish, self-obsessed git. Yuh know - one of those Scrooge types.

Well, I'll tell you what I think. People - including those who may think they are my buddies - are guilty of hypocrisy for going "Urrhhhh...murhney isn't everything". We love to delude ourselves and to live up to false images. False images? Yes. The one where you really love the money, it is almost everything, but you declare that you're really not like the money grabbing riff-raff - because you want to improve your public image or even fool yourself about your own image.

Money is a very powerful marker of success and it allows us to enjoy life with a greater degree of freedom. People who go 'Money isn't everything' are usually the ones who most need it - and they will continue invariably to be enslaved by it (consciously or unconsciously). And yes money can lead to destruction. How we use the 'knife' is up to us - to carve a beautiful object, prepare a meal, carry out surgery, or to inflict harm to self or others.

I love money. "Money!" Say it. Say it. Next time you go to take photos of someone or a crowd, instead of telling them to say 'CHEESE', ask them to shout "MONEY! MONEY! MONEY". It's guaranteed to bring out bigger brighter smiles or even laughter! Try it!

Wrongly accused

2008-10-30T00:36:00.001Z

Amazingly (about 20:00 2008-09-07), I'm contacted by email, by a colleague I had not seen or heard from for 28 years. In the first two emails. I'm told that I've abused some child in some forum, by cussing the child. Naturally when you get this kind of thing you think to yourself "What the heck!"

Eventually I track down the link to a forum. I read it carefully looking for where I've abused anyone by cussing them. No I can't see it - or else I'm blind.

The forum is about me confronting some idiot on a nonsensical attempt to pin blame on me for something. I put the idiot right in stern but factual language, backed up by evidence and reasoning. I'll remind any reader now that in my profile I've stated that I enjoy punishing idiots. I really do. It's just my thing - and I really don't care (me being ignorant perhaps) of who thinks anything bad about that. Look, I'm not talking about people who don't know something. I'm talking about utter idiots. People who are on the brink of wilful stupidity. No I'm not taking about the dyslexic or the mentally retarded. And I'm not talking about people who are children!

When you punish idiots, especially in a pubic space, you run the risk of at least two things:

Someone else coming along, doing a quick read and forming a conclusion that you've been harsh or abusive.
1. The result could be that you muddy your own name.
2. you do not attract many friends/ acquaintances.
That people will be scared shitless about what they say to you, for fear of being considered an idiot and being so punished.
1. People avoid you - is the effect.

You know I'm cool with all of this. I'm in no popularity or unpopularity contest. I just want to be me. Being me gives me great satisfaction. Punishing fools is not an illegal act. The most I might 'suffer' is a greater degree of social isolation - which is hardly any suffering. I'm at peace with myself which is of far greater importance than the avoidance of social isolation.

Idiocy

2008-10-26T08:37:00.001Z

There are times of course when I cannot punish idiots. On occasion an idiot may punish himself - and not even know it. It's not as good as actually dishing out the punishment, but sometimes you settle for second best.

Case in question? Sure. Person calls a mobile phone from overseas weekly for about 5 min and runs up their bill, disregarding the alternative of calling a landline number at the same timeslot. The cost to call the mobile is about 5 times that of calling the landline.

Now someone must be thinking, why not give them the landline number. Oh yes - they have both numbers but opt for the mobile for no obvious reason. Now you might be thinking there is some advantage for them to calling the mobile that I'm not seeing. No. No such advantage.

Now you might be thinking that the person doesn't know that calling a mobile in that country is far more expensive than to a landline. No. That one has been ruled out as well.

Conclusion supported: Human stupidity is based on - just that - the absence of a logic, or the absence of an intelligence acting on a logic.

Answering off the point..

2008-10-07T22:30:00.001+01:00

It is an amazing phenomenon that makes me wonder how the human race has survived this long - yeah 'answering off the point'. WTF does that mean?

It means like when you ask somebody a simple question you get an answer that does not address your enquiry. Or you ask a question of someone and you get all manner of information that was not relevant to the question - as if the other is trying to second guess where you might be heading, and head you off.

So here is an example:

Me: So, when was it you came to realise that that was the case?

Other: My mother died. Then we had to go up north. It was complicated because she was suffering with cancer. The whole family was distraught.

Me thinking: What the bloody hell did I ask you? It's a flipping easy question 'when' like in bloody when. Why the heck do I want to know about your mother? Do I know when she died FFS!?

Me [being stiltedly polite]: I'm sorry if I interrupt you, I didn't quite get when it was you came to realise that that was the case?

Other: Oh it was after the explosion in Ealing Station.

Me thinking: FFS - How am I know to when there was an explosion in Ealing station? Am I supposed to ask, 'Give me the date and time when you came to realise that that was the case!"

Look, I'm sorry if anyone disagree's with me but the simple and rather clear answer to the question could have been something like, "It's difficult to recall exactly...it was summer of 1997...probably around June...yes it was most likely to be because the days were very long..that's when I came to realise it was the case."

Now that is a more on target answer, because it gives me a reasonable timeframe in response to the question. For God's sakes, this is English..we are human beings...we're supposed to be sentient..this is the 21st Century - else I'm an entity from another timeline!

Of Rivers and Wild stallions

2008-09-28T10:43:00.001+01:00

The unconscious has been explored by Freud and many other psychoanalysts. What this 'thing' is, is largely unknown - simply because we cannot hold down the unconscious and look at it. After all it is that which is beyond conscious scrutiny. Yes there are loads of theories on the goings on in the unconscious but there are no hard facts. This is simply because the unconscious is not readily open to empirical scrutiny. (I'm not talking about 'the subconscious' - and I'll not explain that further.)

But the unconscious is observable by others when it is not at all visible to the individual's own scrutiny. This is a fact stemming from the reality that we often are unable to see ourselves as others do.

I often see people reacting or not reacting to something said or done. It is the consistency of the reaction or lack of it that says something. So the unconscious can be touched - likened to putting a long stick into a pond - the bottom of the river cannot be seen but it can be felt. Just as the stick transmits the resistance from the floor of the river to the one holding the stick, that is how the unconscious can be touched.

So too with the mind, it is the resistance to new ideas, new thinking, changes in general that tells of the unconscious. Of course, this is not to say that people do not consciously resist certain things. However, when resistance to change is seen for no logical reason or no discernable reason, that is your base of the river. The floor of the river determines to some degree the flow of water at the top.

What people say they will do often does not match what they actually do - we all know that. But I often ask myself "Why say you'd do something - commit to it - and then not do what is required?" Laziness? Sure - but that's too easy an explanation. What is more important is what produces the so-called 'laziness' - and the contour of the river's floor might determine the resistance to flow on the surface.

The unconscious is also like a wild stallion - difficult to tame. The stallion is easily spooked by events, instinctual drives, raw emotions - it knows little about logic and is not good at reasoning. Our conscious existence - meaning our self-aware worldly existence - is the product of a 6 mm skin of brain - which is far more highly developed than in so-called lower animals. Keep in mind that before we became conscious, our remote ancestors got by on 'the unconscious'. So the unconscious has become skilled at survival, and the things that challenge survival over thousands and thousands of years.

But hold on, it is a new world - a very fast world, with much larger and complex issues to manage. The unconscious often fails us in this new world. It's not geared up to crunching numbers, balancing complex values and other abstract ideas. The wild stallion was good for getting us from A to B, but in today's world it struggles to cope with the demands we might place on it. It is burdened to get to Z via umpteen other subroutes or combinations of routes.

And now we are caught in a world where logic and reason is meant to prevail, but we're all left riding wild stallions that are lost, scared and hard to control. How will humanity survive this amazing and mounting tension? I'm thinking about it - but I sense danger ahead for the human race.

I am Superman

2008-09-21T20:34:00.001+01:00

Not often am I inspired by goodness in the human condition. Saturday 20th September 2008 was different. I bought the book "The Book of Lies" by Brad Meltzer and came across the site: Book of Lies Soundtrack.

Then I came across http://www.ordinarypeoplechangetheworld.com/ which then took be to songs by 'Five for Fighting'. And then I got the song 'Superman' - and lyrics here:http://www.lyrics007.com/Five%20For%20Fighting%20Lyrics/Superman%20Lyrics.html

Today:

I'm only a man in a silly red sheet
Digging for kryptonite on this one way street
Only a man in a funny red sheet
Looking for special things inside of me
Inside of me
Inside me
Yeah, inside me
Inside of me
I'm only a man
In a funny red sheet
I'm only a man
Looking for a dream

I'm inspired by the human condition or a small portion of it - my misanthropy put on hold.

Today and hopefully for the foreseeable future I am delighted to be counted as one of the nerds who say 'I am Superman'!!

Grief

2008-09-18T09:31:00.001+01:00

Friend o' mine called up yesterday and asked me something about 'how you manage or deal with grief'. Yeah grief.

Well, it's one of those things you have to laugh about - and we did - in retrospect. I had an initial thought, but did not say much as he explained.

This is the funny part. When he first asked me - and I told him this later - my first thought was, "I just give um grief back!"

I gotta laugh at myself really. Well of course I also understood that he meant 'loss of a loved one'. But you know in life you don't actually tell people what crossed your mind - it could be embarrassing.

For those who don't know, 'grief' in England is used to convey things like stress, aggravation, hostility or bother - alongside its more usual meaning. I didn't know that when I first came to England.

Praa...praa..praa....praaahh

2008-09-16T16:48:00.001+01:00

Man, I just got off the phone to some mega-idiot! Trust me there is such a thing. I really wonder why I go on the phone at all to utility companies.

Every bloody time I call one of these call-queuing things, my blood pressure goes up!

Yesterday I wasted bloody 52 minutes of my time. Today 22 mins.

Invariably this is what happens:

I'm in England but I get put through via crackly telephone line to somebody sounding like they're in India. How do I know that? Because I bloody well know what an Indian accent is, and it leads me to imagine I'm speaking to someone in India. Look I don't care if they're really in Tristan da Cunha - okay.
Next they speak in this bloody polite tone that is stilted and frankly annoying.
They usually don't understand anything I say - although they speak well articulated English. So then I have to repeat myself.
Then they speed up in rate of speech, because now they sense they don't know what the hell is going on.
And now comes the pain, this Indian or whatever accent, becomes more accentuated with the rapid speech and begins to cut me across in mid-sentence. Like wait to bloody hell until I finished what I'm trying to explain!! Christ man!
So then I tell them in stern words to STFU (well not like that) - basically I cut back across them and say, "Hang-on a second - I'm in mid-sentence here when you cut me up - that's very rude. You couldn't possibly know what I was going to say next."
Then they shut up for a bit. Listen up but continue to get nuance of meaning wrong.
Oh I forgot to say that all the above might happen up to three times while I'm passed from department to department, one not knowing what the heck the other is doing.

So - at the end of these calls I'm shattered. Why do I endure it? Well I'm seeking a better deal for myself. On one occasion I thought I might save myself £36 per year.

If you know what I'm going to say like why should I speak at all. Look this thing seems to happen mainly with people sounding like they're from India. I ain't got nothing against people from India, but heck man - just learn the language, learn to listen and have some manners, for God sakes. Oh I know what, I'm supposed to feel sorry for these people and blame their employers. Well I do blame their employers, but I'm sorry the 'messenger' or frontline staff will get shot when you cross me.

But now I'm thinking, "Heck - the real financial cost to my health is probably gonna exceed what I save in money on bills! Is it worth it?" And hold on a second, what about how I value my time on the phone. What's the cost of that? So between yesterday and today I've spent over an hour on the phone getting nowhere and probably damaging my health. So I'm no better of financially for the call, and my health is probably affected if I do this too often. Is that a good deal? I don't think so.

Conclusion - let them take the money! It's always about money - isn't it. Your money or your life! Who the heck cares.

What's the measure of friendship?

2008-09-15T21:23:00.001+01:00

It's an question that's been on my mind for quite some time. People go "I have many friends...or I only keep a few close friends". Of course, defining what a friend is, is central to the question. However, friendship is the core issue and someone who maintains a real friendship is by definition a true friend.

The discerning may ask, "Well is there such a thing as an 'unreal' friendship?" Sure. That's where someone claims to keep a friendship or simulates it very very well. There are some people who take a big interest in what you say and what you do. However, you come to a nagging awareness at a gut level that that interest is an investment for their future possible needs.

Well, yes friendship is different things to different people - and yes 'it depends', those famous words often uttered by idiots who like to live on the fence.

Oh and I should declare a bias, that I hope does not upset some who think they are my friends - I only ever had one very serious friendship. He died about 23 years ago. You will notice I refer to the word friendship. It is a qualitative thing, similar to 'friend'. However, friend is more a fixed kind of thing. It lends to the idea that either you're a friend or not - or that your 'in' or 'out'.

But friendship can have 'shades of grey'. In other words there can be degrees of friendship. And we all know about this at a gut level. In a circle of friendships, there are those people one keeps closer to than others. That may be based on different qualities and how you weigh those qualities up. If you value someone who listens attentively you might rate one who is a good listener highly. Another person may value 'trust' more than listening skills. So for that latter person s/he will keep different sets of people closer.

The meaning of friendship as I know it, and how I think others might value it, is as follows. None of the following ideas are meant to be well demarcated.

Genuine interest in what each other think and do. And I must distinguish this from the obvious 'patronising interest'. And genuine interest would cover things like 'caring', protecting, helping.
Total disregard for status, wealth, power or influence. Yes true friendship cannot be contaminated by these things.
Friendship is not about sexual relations. In general I think that friendship is not to be contaminated by primary 'survival' or biological needs. That's a different thing to my mind. I think that biological and social needs are about satisfying herd instincts. I see friendship as a purer psychological phenomenon i.e. it is not necessary to have 'biological' or 'social' glue to hold the friendship together.
Respect for what each other stands for. No person is perfect. Having respect (and I'll not be distracted by defining 'respect') for what each other does well is central.
A willingness to give. No I'm not talking money. I'm talking about the things money can never buy e.g. time, effort, help, genuine consideration, listening, genuine feedback. How would you know it's genuine. You feel it in your bones.
Boundaries. Yes - whilst friendship is a unifying space, each member of the friendship retains individuality. It is individuality and boundaries which, strangely to some, maintain a friendship.
Building. Friendship is something that builds and fortifies. Two or more minds working as a whole are stronger than the force of each added together. It's a different kind of mathematics.

The things that test the integrity of friendship, or the possibility of friendships are:

Money - or lack of it.
Fame or good fortune.
Power
An attractive potential mate.
Scarcity of essentials basic to life.
Time pressure.
Illness or disease.
Disagreement.

The list is by far incomplete.

What about love? No - to my mind that is state of mind driven by survival instincts. But that's a big and separate debate. And I'm not in the right spot to debate the number of different kinds of love people might conceptualise.

There is a kind of superficiality to friendships, where people go 'Oh let's move on...nothing is ever perfect'. Nope that's not my thing.

Who are the people who find closer friendships with me? (notice the word 'closer'). Easy - people who subscribe to my values and my modus operandi - people with very thick skins on their backs, who are willing to go 100 extra miles. If you're not in, I'm happy that you're out.

I don't know if I'm right. It wasn't my intention to be right about it. I just wanted to put these thoughts that have been in me for many many years. I may modify them as I learn more.

What changes minds?

2008-09-13T10:57:00.001+01:00

It was 00:30 2008-09-13 - when I decided to start writing this. Crazy? So what.

I've been thinking about what changes people's minds about things. For example what changes your mind about accepting something, believing something or doing something. Why the heck am I interested in that? Because of my statement that "The human mind can move mountains, yet there is no mountain as immovable as the human mind".

But somehow minds do change. And over the last few hours it's been at the back of my mind to list the things that I've seen or heard of that change minds.

Culture
Shared experience
Force of authority
Compelling logic
Pain and suffering
Feedback from multiple others
Direct experience
Traumatic events/experiences including pain or suffering
Kindness
Threats
Time
Leaders

I've decided to stop there with the list, because there is an important observation that 'reason' and 'evidence' are not on the list. And that's interesting in itself, because I have little faith in 'reason' and 'evidence' changing minds. When I say evidence I mean some kind of research; something that is very very reliable. Why do these two factors not change minds? Because minds are free to find alternative reasoning or to disregard evidence.

So that led me to think about the things can cause minds to resist change. I think this could be a big list.

Fear
Uncertainty
Anxiety
Tradition
Culture
Shared experience
Personal experience
Image of one's self
Habit
Lack of time to update knowledge, think or effect change
Inability to see the consequences of change
Lack of perceived benefit for self or loved ones
Narrow focus on basic human needs
Narrow focus on life
Personal characteristics - e.g. stubbornness, laziness

Okay - I'm gonna go away and think some more about this. If anyone out there has other ideas do post up some comments.

Will

2008-09-13T10:40:00.002+01:00

Will is the ability to direct and control one’s body and mind. Each of those underlined words is important. Will power is the strength with which one focuses the mind or controls the body. Normally we all have control and direction over some parts of our bodies and minds. This however, is not absolute. It is limited because we simply cannot control every part of our bodies or minds.

Take the functions of our bowels, normal adults have a good degree of control. Or take sleep – you can’t just will yourself to fall asleep instantly.

What about our thoughts and emotions? In everyday practice we can discipline ourselves sufficiently to organise our thoughts, for example if we had a certain amount of planning to do. Or we could direct our attention at task we must complete, ignoring distractions around us. We can delay laughing about certain things until after work. Of course, this is never perfect but we can exercise some control. Or if someone made us angry, we could control our expression of our emotions in response to that person.

What things affect the will? For starters, physical or mental illness can weaken our sense of control and direction. The more powerful the emotion the less control we might have. Fatigue and stress are in there too. The list is perhaps longer than I first imagined.

Our basic needs when heightened can sharpen or weaken the degree of control we might exert. Hunger, thirst, and sex-drive are examples of things that can alter the balance of control. Of course non-basic needs such as thirst for power, fame and fortune can cause similarly direct our will. It depends very much on the balance of these ‘forces’. However, basic needs have survival advantage and when heightened are especially powerful. The need for self-preservation or survival is also a powerful basic need, which when seriously threatened can either weaken or enhance our will.

The avoidance of pain, suffering or stress are also things that affect how we direct our will.

Some glossaries will say that will is a 'mental faculty'. This is true but not the whole truth. Will may be largely an ability that is produced by the mind. However, it is possible to direct one's actions unconsciously. When a badminton or table tennis player reacts to the shuttle or ball moving at high speed, and returns the shot that appeared impossible - how does that work? Is the player fully aware of all 'calculations' that effect the right force, angle and speed of return? I assert - no! This kind of wilful reaction is the result of a body and mind working as one. The whole thing directs itself. Thinking too much in tennis, badminton, cricket - almost any sport can actually impair performance.

I'm spitting out these words on this screen with minimal effort. Do I know how my fingers reach for the letters on the keyboard as I touch type at 80 wpm? No. I don't know where the keys are. If I think about it too much I slow down and lose accuracy. By some mysterious process my thoughts are connected to my finger tips. That I activate my fingers is undoubtedly the product of my will. But my point here is that will is not simply conscious intention.

Or take driving. I sometimes drive hundreds of miles in one day. Yes I'm conscious while I'm driving, but do consciously will every turn of the steering wheel or every shift of the gear lever? On one occasion my car picked up a skid on ice. Only after I came out of it, I realised that I reacted correctly. How did I do that? There is an autopilot sitting in the background some where - I suspect. Sometimes it takes over when my conscious mind or will is too slow or inefficient.

I do not set out above to make an exhaustive list of things that can affect 'will'. I only wanted to put this in a space that I can look upon it - reflect on it - refine it. I thought it was important to do this because increasingly over the years I've wondered how 'free' I am to direct myself.

Everybody slow down

2008-09-10T12:59:00.001+01:00

I'm amazed by how people rush around madly and actually create more work for themselves and more confusion for others.

Here's a quote from an email I received in response to an enquiry:

"XXXX will authorise both tests. I should have made this clear to you in my response. I am rushing to catch up with a mountain of work having just returned from annual leave!!"

What happened above?

I send an email setting out a request for coverage of costs on two tests - which I itemise and specify.
Person A sends it to Person B, who would authorise them (notice this is plural).
Person B emails me authorising one test (singular).
I have to email Person B repeating what I told Person A.

Then Person B gives me the response above.

What Person B has done is admitted that s/he has acted inefficiently by rushing with his/her mountain of work. But in so doing has actually added to his pile by having to respond to me.

Inefficiency on his/her side has resulted in me spending 5 min to draft an email. Do you see what I mean?

Oooooh..but hey this is England where bosses never see crap like that - or bosses couldn't care a monkeys (as they say over here). Oooh but bosses can't admit to that - can they?

Here's my pretend English response:

"When people get back from holidays they are in fact rushed of their feet and need time to get back into gear. The mistake is understandable. You can't expect perfection of people all the time - are you perfect?! Have you never made an error like that. You shouldn't be so hard on people!"

My pretend un-English response to that:

"I'm thankful you're you're not working in my company...I don't expect perfection. I simply expect work practices that deliver efficiency..rushing around and working inefficiently can create a bad image for my business amongst my customers. All our business is geared towards customer satisfaction. If people are over-worked on return from annual leave, they should speak with their line manager and get something done about it."

So a proportion of people reading this would also think 'I'd stay clear of his company!' - and I'd support that! Wankers - stay away!!

The important learning lesson in all of this - before people distract themselves too much with my 'personality' - is to 'slow down'. Slow down at work, especially after returning from annual leave. Rushing around madly could add to your pile and cause others to work inefficiently.

Is that ten?

2008-09-08T17:21:00.001+01:00

At about 2008-09-08 16:00 GMT, I was at a local supermarket delicatessen counter.

So as usual I ask (in well articulated clear English at a reasonable volume), "Could I have 10 medium cut slices of the Spanish Chorizo please?"

Idiot behind the counter reaches for the Spanish Chorizo, is about to put it on the machine, then asks me, "Is that ten, yeah?"

And I go, "Yes that would be ten medium slices please."

Him: "Ten, yeah?"

Me: "Yeah, ten medium slices."

So I'm thinking while he's slicing, "Why the heck did I take the effort to speak up and to speak each word clearly? I might as well have made a grunt; that would have saved me some effort." Reality bites. This is England.

Behind counters in England you have a bunch of flesh covered robots. They're only there for the money. Their minds are elsewhere. And some of them are racist robots, so anything said by a person looking coloured or sounding a little different gets ignored - and they do a double check, just in case the person cannot speak English properly. So maybe I'm victim of that, on this occasion - I don't know. You never really know do you.

Oh...now let me play some English mind games for you. I'll pretend I'm English right.

Pretend English me: "Actually, he could have been very hard working chap, who is highly trained to verify each order. So he's only doing his job as he was trained. You don't have to be so hard on people all the time."

Real me: "If it was my business my staff would be trained to be attentive to customers, and listen more carefully. He should have said 'Thank you, that's ten medium slices of Spanish Chorizo coming up!"

But what's missing from this story? I'll tell you. You weren't there! You weren't witness to the vacant disinterested look in his eyes. You didn't see that he was looking at a woman's bottom as she passed by, and couldn't give a shit about my order. Oh yes, males have greater selective attention for bottoms compared to their employer's business.

Not driven by logic

2008-09-07T10:02:00.004+01:00

You know many of us hold logical thought as something very prized. If something does not hang together logically we're likely to discredit it, have doubts about it and so on. We like to think that we are logical reasonable people. And in general we avoid people who are confused and illogical - simply because they're 'a pain to be with'.

We tend to believe that in our person we are logical. We believe we are driven by logic or commonsense in most of our actions. All our decisions have a 'method to its madness' - our way of justifying what we do.

Over the last few years I've wrestled with a reality that I don't operate on purely logical principles. I'm not Mr Spock, however much I admire the clarity of the fictional characters brutal clarity of thought.

The National Lottery plays on my mind in all of this. 'Why on earth such a deviation?' you might think. I've proven mathematically that the National Lottery is the thing that most people should take a regular chance in. Yet the majority of logical people I know do not - even when presented with my argument that is not disprovable so far. There is an interesting prelude to this - when I ask people what is 1 divided by zero, the majority say "zero". Do it on a calculator and see. The answer is infinity!! In fact any very small number like 0.00000001 divided by zero equals infinity!!

So here's the logic:

The chance of winning the UK national lottery jackpot is 1: 14,000,000 (or something of that order) = 0.0000000714285
The chance of winning the Euromillions lottery jackpot is 1:76,000,000 (or something of that order) 0.0000000131578
The chance of winning the either of the above without a ticket is 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 - you get the point.
But either of the above small numbers divided by zero equals infinity.
Therefore the chance of winning the Jackpot in any lottery anywhere in the world is infinitely greater with a ticket than without!!

Logic would dictate that if you wanted to infinitely increase your chances of becoming rich quickly that you should spend on at least one ticket in each lottery draw.

Amazingly when the above argument is presented to people the response is something of a smile, with a look of puzzlement and suspicion. No one to date has ever said "Right - I see the light...that is perfectly logical and my actions will hereafter be driven by this robust logic...I will now take a chance in every lottery I can afford". Nor have I heard, "No - your logic is wrong for this..this..and this reason". The logic surrounding the lottery thing is mathematically sound and so far no one has shown that it is incorrect.

The point of this thread was to use an example to highlight that, as human beings we prize very highly actions driven by logic - but that in reality we are not at our core so driven. The lottery argument is just one example. However, in everyday life I see loads of people doing things that just make no sense - oh, and I'm not immune to this phenomenon. The cluttered desk at work is another example. Research has shown that 'the method to the madness' of a cluttered desk is flawed - and that people in general work less efficiently among excessive clutter. But many convince themselves that the clutter is necessary.

Now as I write this I'm thinking, "Is my time spent here actually determined by some logical process". Answer - No! Why then? It's because this stuff has been weighing on my mind for some time. Yesterday I had a discussion with a friend and it triggered my thinking about this again. This is important to me at this time, but I've not done a logical analysis of why I should spend my time writing this, right now. It's not driven by logic - though I can find vague reasons, none of which would compel my actions to write this.

So, I'm now driven to analyse why I've begun blogging at all. I'll come back with some thoughts another time.

The meaning and importance of privacy

2008-09-05T10:13:00.002+01:00

In the UK the law is not only made up of Acts but by Regulations, which then drills down to quasi-legislative codes of practice.

The DPA Acts deal with data and privacy relevant to individuals in two main ways. I'm not in a mood to give a lecture on this today. Those interested can Google the stuff.

Data Protection legislation is meant to provide protection of 'privacy' - and those protections were driven to the UK by European Directives back in 1995.

There is a tendency in the UK for people to bawl "DATA PROTECTION! ..DATA PROTECTION" for anything they want to withhold or at some subjective feeling that their activities are being 'discovered'. This reminds me about patients in health services, and prisoners, bawling "HUMAN RIGHTS...HUMAN RIGHTS..YOU BREACHING ME HUMAN RIGHTS". In reality these pieces of law are very carefully worded and apply in very specific ways. I normally ask people "What part of the Data Protection Act...or which of your Human Rights have been breached?" - a confrontational approach you might think, instead of the anglocised emollient approach. Well, you should see how people begin to stutter when they realise that they don't know WTF they're talking about.

Contrast this 'lurv and respect' for privacy, with the tendency in the UK and probably other countries, for people to take your private email address and lump it with hundreds of others in the 'To' or 'cc' field - and blast it around the place! Actually, that is equivalent to taking my personal telephone number and putting it on a messageboard somewhere for the entire world to see. It's fine if I want to do that, but it's not fine if a 'so-called' friend of mine somewhere was to take it and do that without my prior approval.

How hard a line do I take on that. Well here's a bit of email exchange that might interest you (between me and a trusted 'friend')

CW early on 27th Feb 2007 [In response to a 'friend' forwarding to me someone's email without their consent, I said]:

"Do keep in mind that none of my emails to you nor my email address should be copied to others accidentally or otherwise - without my express written approval. I treat my email address like my private telephone number."

[I don't think I could have been more specific]

CW on 5th July 2007:

"You said on 27 Feb 2007 10:36AM [quoting the person] 'And I will never share anyone phone numbers or any kind of address to anyone. Without the person knowledge. …….Please I will never give out your information, because I would NEVER like anyone to do that to me.(sic)'

If even one of the 11 people you have copied my email to decide to act ‘accidentally’ as you do then what happens to my email address? It is very easy to see what will happen. However your email actively tells others to forward on the email. Your letter sparks of a chain from which my email address could be all over the Internet within days.

Person responds
"Please accept my apology; you may not believe this but I DID SCREWED UP. It was a mistake and I do apologize.

I know you trusted me I just don’t know what I can do to change that but I am very sorry ok."

And the point is exactly as the person states - there is nothing that can be done to change the irreversible. And..and..sorry does not help - irreversible acts. Why? Because when something is so important to you, when the act causes such a breach of trust - how do you ever trust again that 'most trusted' person. It is like a crack in a pane of glass that can never be mended. So that's what happened. I avoided contact with the person ever since. Chance? No. I don't give chances - especially after I was so specific and the breach occurred within a matter of months. Yes friendship severed by a serious breach of trust. In the grand scheme of things a 'stupid' email means little. But it wasn't about an 'email'. It was about TRUST i.e. the ability to hold water!

No. Listen. There are some things in life you just do not do. You don't shag your best friend's wife. That's an irreverisble breach of trust.

And similarly on the matter of privacy, I'd have to be afflicted by a serious mental disorder, to take a friend's phone number and put it on a messageboard on the internet. The act of sending a friend's email around to hundreds of unknown others without consent is the equivalent act and equally disrespectful of privacy. Yes, and I know that shagging your friend's wife is not the same as spreading around an email address or telephone number.

Now to join the two issues, by way of contrast. On the one hand people in general are oooh so concerned and protective of their own privacy, but what they do to others shows a remarkable contempt of privacy - especially when it comes to personal contact details.

Some times I wonder

2008-09-04T09:47:00.003+01:00

It's happened so many times before in my life in England, that I provide clear and conspicuous information but people then ask me for clarification. I often wonder what the heck is going on.

Here's the situation. I send out letters to professional colleagues with my postal address, telephone contact details and email, clearly visible on a green and beige coloured box on the top right corner of my letter. I'm seeking responses on certain professional matters by a certain deadline, by postal mail only (due to the confidential nature of the matter). Letters went out last week. So this morning I receive and email from one asking me "I would be grateful if you could clarify where I should send my report."

Well I'll deviate to tell me what my initial psychological response to that was ( Imean my thoughts) i.e. "Did I not print the address on the top right corner?". You see this kind of question made me think 'Heck could I be at fault, have I cocked up again'. But no, I always check my paper correspondence about 5 times before sealing and posting them. Really! I consciously do a checklist of all parts of my letter like here at English Plus. Well, no! I have to stop doubting myself.

The next thing I'm thinking, "Can't he read..after all he's got the email address off the letter...and the postal address is just two lines above that." Or "Maybe he's too busy... Oh - right, so because he's busy I must spend my time duplicating information that is so conspicuous". No - it's not me. I've done nothing wrong.

And then I think "Hmm...is it something with my address? Is it too short? Does it look suspicious in any way?" It is factually a very brief address because it is a named postbox. What's that? In the old days you would have "PO Box 1234" or something like that. These days you can name your post box like 'BM Surgery'. Yes, the funny thing I've noticed about living in England is that people in general like to double, and triple check the obvious, with a sort of 'just in case' point of view. However, the strange flip side of that is that there have been monumental cock-ups with data security of names, addresses, credit card details etc in England. So you kinda have to wonder 'Well is it because of a culture of cocking-up that these people are so flipping suspicious and obsessional?'

So what did I do in the end? I replied to the email and politely give the same postal address. And then I decided to write this.

On a roll here - Skype is great.

2008-09-03T14:11:00.001+01:00

I like Skype. I dare say I was one of the first people in the world to try Skype (www.skype.com).

Now, you reading this might think 'everybody knows about skpe!'. Well no - not everybody knows about skype. Half of the people I know are clueless about it and aren't even inclined to try it.

Skype gives me the following benefits:

It lives on my cellphone (aka mobile phone) - that allows me to call and chat with anyone in any part of the world. What's so great about that? Well I do it for free (well I mean included in my cellphone subscription). Not everybody likes 'free' - so I'm cool with that.
Skype lives on my computer. And? Well - I have a skype in number that looks like any old number so select people can call that number and get through to me while I'm at my computer. And? Well they can then talk to me like if I'm on a phone. And? And I can be in any where on earth!!
Skype then affords me a skype to go number that I can use from any other real phone to make international calls (at cost, at skype competitive rates).
From my laptop computer I can use Skype to make unlimited calls directly to landline numbers anywhere in the UK for £2.24 (subject to a 3p connection charge). Well this is actually very good because I make less than 50 landline calls per month from my home phone. So I don't need to pay the likes of BT or Virgin Media something like £7/month for unlimited calls.
Really good sound quality.
Conference calls - that can hook up people on landlines and those on skype.
Video conferencing.

Well I know I'm sounding like I'm a walking talking advert. Thing is that I'm not selling anything, and I ain't making any money from sharing this information. So you're under no pressure at all to look at skype. If you're technophobic don't bother to try it - see a shrink.

Why a Google Calendar

2008-09-03T13:39:00.002+01:00

I like Google Calendar. The people who invented this really put a lot of thought behind it. It took me about a year to get using it regularly. I now wish I hadn't taken that long.

Here's how it benefits me:

I can store my agenda securely online.
I can have several agendas, some that I keep private and those that I want to show the public.
I can access it from my cellphone (mobile phone) which has Internet access.
I can set up to 5 reminders for each event.
The reminders can be days in advance or down to 10 minutes before events.
Reminders come as SMS, email and popup's (the later when I enter my Google Cal).
For important events I can stagger reminders over weeks down to minutes. That keeps me alert not to lose track of things.
I don't need to keep my agenda on a computer.
I can track UK holidays easily by importing a shared calendar from someone else, without any risk to my other agenda items.
I can share my calendar with others and they with mine.
If I want, I can sync my desktop calendars with my Google Cal. So changing either one reflects changes in the other.

I'm not recommending Google Cal to you. I'm just shouting about it because, I find it makes my life so much easier. If you happen to want to share an easier life, then try it.

Trapped

2008-09-03T11:56:00.001+01:00

Yesterday something small occupied my mind. But it was something that repeatedly came to mind over the years.

I got into my car and drove off as usual. About a minute down the road, I could see a tiny fly in the upper right corner of my windscreen. It was bumping its head on the screen trying to get out. It was quite a distraction. So I slowed down, wound the window down and tried to brush it through the window with my left hand. The fly would escape the waft of my hand and get back to bumping its head on the windscreen.

I then drove off and hoped that with the window partially down it would get sucked out. That did not happen. Eventually I had to whack it. And that was the end of that.

So why the devil is this important? Well my dad used to tell me (probably between ages of 10 - 17) about flies being caught behind windows, likening that to people being trapped behind invisible boundaries. That served as a way of looking at things over the next 30 years.

It is so true - I see many people being trapped behind unseen (or unrecognised boundaries). They know the boundary is there; they just don't have the means to understand it and know what to do about it. So they continue to do what they always did and what they've been programmed to do.

But the hand that waves them in one direction is important. Sometimes a helping hand is extended to these 'trapped' people. However, they are so driven by instinct that they continue on the programmed path. The outcome? Not good.

The moral of the story is to:

1. Find the boundaries

2. Identify what needs to be done.

3. Do it.

Feeling whole again

2008-09-02T00:25:00.001+01:00

It's been something I wanted to write about for some time - the feeling of wholeness. Like sometimes one of your prized objects doesn't work well and you simply feel 'not whole'. It could be something simple like a wrist watch. Or it could be your dishwasher.

Well in the last few weeks two things weren't right and I did not feel right.

First the dishwasher broke down - totally clogged. Next the Jag developed two problems. The right front door speaker went dead. Then she developed a strange hum and a mild vibration on the steering column about a week ago. At first I thought it's me just being hyper-observant of minor noises. But no, this got worse as the days rolled on.

To cut a long story short - and this is the good part - both 'objects' had extended warranties on them. So I simply called up and explained the problems. The dishwasher was fixed in a jiffy.

Then the jag was sorted out within a few hours today. It was a bad hub-bearing that caused the problem. Like whew! Because if I had to pay for that, it was gonna be major dosh. As it happened I did not see or hear of the bill. Jag service simple fixed and delivered the car back at home. The bill was dealt with imperceptibly with the warranty people. I don't even know what it is!

I took her for a test drive and she performed like day one.

So, hey - I'm whole again. I feel good. And I feel even better for having the foresight with these 'objects' to have purchased extended warranties.

What's with the banner

2008-08-31T10:37:00.001+01:00

The banner picture is of one of my favourite places. It was a peaceful time when I was on vacation in 2005, at an exotic location. I could sit back and look up at the heavens and think about nothing.

Yeah nothing. It's great to think about nothing. I was on a small atoll in the South Indian Ocean. There was such serenity. And after thinking about 'nothing' for quite some time, I began to think about something. I was lying on a beach on another atoll, looking up at the blue sky. Around me was a pale green clear water gently washing up to my ears. What came to me? The thought: "What is it about?" Yup. Just like that. You know like 'What is all this about?'. My existence? My existence in relation to the world.

In a few days I would return to my usual world - a maddening pace, surrounded by technology and smiley people trying to be helpful or unhelpful, all eking out an existence, doing somebody else's job to gain enough money to maintain ownership of their possessions. I'd join them in the monumental rat race created by my political masters. So, no I'm not free.

Oh well. It's good to be let out of the cage for a few moments. One day...one day ..I'll find freedom. Real freedom.

Oh well

2008-08-31T09:24:00.001+01:00

Life rolls on. I write a great deal everywhere else but here. I'm not entirely sure why. So I'm trying to change that. I'm thinking perhaps that no one really looks on here. But in reality that should not matter, because it's not meant to be show. It's supposed to be my record of my thoughts, and feelings I imagine.

I remain displeased with the world. The more I go on the more I see 'games' of all kinds around me. I'm thinking why on earth does life have to be so complicated. Whatever happened to raw honesty and consideration for the betterment of others. It has become such a selfish world. Well having said that I kinda have to think and qualify my statements because somebody might think 'Huh..you've got a strange world-view'. You know, people always have to find the exception to any statement. That's partly what I mean by complicated. Can anyone these days give the general perspective on life without worrying about what someone else will think about minor exceptions. Okay, right - its a selfish world the way I see it.

Much of the time I'm at work it all seems to be an act. It's like we interact, we smile, we laugh but it's not real. I mean I come home and think to myself, "Was that joke by so and so really that funny?" Not really..but we had to laugh to keep up appearances. Do I really want to compliment so and so. No not really but good management practice is that you compliment people around you for their efforts.

So I'm thinking, when Bloggs complimented me did s/he really mean that? Or could it be that s/he was playing the same game. I guess I'll never really know. English society is strange and you always have to be thinking "What's below the surface?". Really. Sometimes when you're saying something you see people nodding their heads. So you might think "Right..They agree with what I'm saying". Big mistake. People nod because they understand what you're saying -not that they agree with you. So now I have to interpret what nods mean. Krieky! You see what I mean about complicated.

The use of 'one'

2008-03-09T22:07:00.002Z

Sometimes I get confused using English, once I think too hard about it.

Like today 22:00 I began wondering whether the possessive form of 'one' had an apostrophe. So I'm thinking, " Is it ones'"? or "Is it one's"? In fact I began to wonder how on earth I knew that 'one' was pronounced 'won'. I couldn't remember who taught me the proununciation of 'one'. Anyways, the word looked so strange.

I searched around on Google and found this link: http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/GRAMMAR/one.htm which really gives a lot of information. Eventually I gathered that possessive form of one is in fact one's.

So...so...now I'm cool again.

Crime situation and more

2008-02-24T23:11:00.003Z

The crime situation in T&T grows worse. I watch on. The population collectively seems confined to whinging. Politicans seem insensitive.

Blimps etc fly around, but seem to be no deterrent to crime.

Recently 5 fire-hydrants were stolen by thieves. That one took the cake really. In my wildest dreams I couldn't believe that would be a thing to steal.

Guyana is in a state of chaose. Duncey police from Trinidad are concerned now about Guyana. One copper got some body-music and his gun stolen. Oh and police officers have been carrying home their guns for fear of...well...well...you guess.

Tony Blair is accused of much with the SFO: http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/industrials/article3367546.ece

Well here we go

2007-12-19T22:10:00.000Z

After many months of looking at Google Blogs, I decided to make the plunge.

Hmmm..not sure what to write about - so here goes.

Today? I'm at work and play. Read many doctors' forums at DNUK, wrote part of a report, interviewed a relative of a client I'm to see soon, updated timelines, sent of several emails and e-Xmas cards, did the school run, put petrol in the car etc etc.

Gosh the time just flies.