InterOuts

Writing or the Sum of Everything

A serious article. Sounds a wee bit on the pretentious side, much like saying someone is very 'deep'. The problem is how do you write so as to ask questions, debate, answer coherently and reach justifiable conclusions that are not opinion only but are backed by hard quantifiable and independently verifiable facts. And keep it informatively entertaining. Quotes are fine, jokes another matter because you step in a minefield of differing interpretations of law, political correctness, social responsibility etc etc and the hot water you unintentionally land in can be very uncomfortable. And what is not understood by anyone who doesn't write is that writers on the whole tend to be loners and bookworms and sometimes socially inept (on whom did you think writer's based their characters?).They base their work purely on the facts, their worked out conclusions (to varying states of meticulousness) and their interpretations of all of this. However the monster really does live in the cupboard and will come out. What, oh the Ego. And the Id. The "ME" and the "REAL ME " which is kept out of sight of all including partners and close loved ones for fear of scaring, repulsing them or numerous other reasons including total manipulation and falseness. This rules all of us except in rare cases to varying degrees depending on our level of self control not to be confused with awareness as often the most controlled people are the unaware and perform in the way that they have been taught to without questioning or deviating from the path they were given to follow. The problem is very subtle as we automatically let the mammalian brain be overruled by the reptilian one which presents pure survival by any means.

So that the writing becomes tainted with the 'personal' rather than the observer who is fair, critical, often dispassionate and above all, the voice of reason. But we know full well that the very act of observation changes that which is observed. And what they do not bring to the fore, the observer changes as well. No longer is the information they have purely intellectual or mental, now it has experience added to it thereby shifting the margins of what is clear and concise to blurry and undefined. The redaction of written documents is a good example of this where you are aware of 80+% of what is said but have ill defined exactness. So the overall meaning is understood without the details defining and justifying each fact giving you an even more exact understanding of the totality of the subject. This is translated daily in so many aspects of our lives from politics, business, work and the rest because we interact no matter how superficially with other people and have to admit we do not really know them 100 or even 80%. And how that information is interpreted is down to the individual though we all have stereotypical views, attitudes and preconceptions about most subjects (well the majority do because they take so much as a given)which of course directly influence our thoughts as an observer or writer or any other 'professional' activity where reason and morality supposedly prevail. So can the writer really ever be just an observer or are they automatically interlinked with the observation itself as well as that which is being observed with or without their awareness of it occurring.

The interlinking of all this means only one thing. That the concept of separateness of actions and the subsequent reactions for, against or neutral to those actions is incorrect and that all of them are therefore interlinked. This occurs in thoughts and deeds because the so called 'spill over' effect happens as information received verbally,physically,visually or intellectually affects all thought and so all actions or deeds derived from thoughts. And since technically all actions from licking one's lips to complex maths or fixing a tap washer are the result of thoughts either conscious or subconscious, or aware of and unaware of. So are there any thoughts which really are our own? Yes in a sense in that all the input from everything we have gone through in our lives comes together to formulate a clear opinion (that is what an answer is) for us personally. And it will differ from subtle variations to wildly opposite between us as we each interpret the situation in our own inimitable way.

Yes we really do see each colour for example very infinitesimally differently to each other and virtually everything else we experience as well. Our understanding by use of language that has broadly based (in most instances) clearly understood common meanings has allowed us to proceed down the evolutionary path though mainly in the material realm. We have denied except by use of religions, cults and other co-ordinated dogmas the other so called intangible aspects of life like intuition, emotions and the dreaded word' spirituality' because of all the fuss and bother that attends its appearance. But all these influence our thoughts and are further layers of intricate linking. Linking that is denied constantly so we can deny responsibility for many actions like social unrest and dissatisfaction, deprivation and inhumane business practices where the poorest spend what little they have on inflated priced basic goods which are reputedly subsidised. If we truly cared, then the politicians would be out of work because the questions they cannot answer will flood them and we would have implemented changes long ago. We would stop to recognise the interlinking of all things and start to regard them more highly, not as useful and once used, able to be discarded and ignored.

This interlinking forms patterns and they become very intricate rather quickly as the amount of data increases. In mathematics, the term Fractal is applied to them so that they can be empirically quantified and therefore are available for use in research, manufacture and every single aspect of our lives. Yup! They really do quantify things you would rather not think about as well as ones which amuse you (we spend 6 years on average of our lives in the bathroom)in order to evaluate every possible thinkable aspect of everything. Actuaries work this out to a fine detail mainly for Insurance Companies but statisticians take this to extremes. And does this benefit us. Yes in a purely practical materialistic way mostly as it affects every part of our existence though this must be tempered with the knowledge that advertisers, manufacturers and producers of all goods and services employ this knowledge to a lesser or greater degree to sell their wares. So why don't we use it and understand it. Because it predicates the downfall of the current system as we come to grips with the reality of what we all have to accept as life. We then are in a position to challenge it not only from a point of understanding but with viable options to put on the table. We are not taught this but are made aware of clearly demarcated examples when necessary to validate a point leaving us believing it is rare and not the norm. So writing is not really that simple and easy as we said when trying to define the input that a writer employs in order to put down the words via keyboard or pen (some use voice recorders preferring to speak) and reach a reasonable and readable outcome to their ideas.

We have all seen the images of Fractals and pretended to understand the allegory that we are like onions, layer upon layer until we reach the core (from conception to birth and on). Life commences supposedly at birth (we know the unborn child reacts to and is aware of sounds, feelings and more) as we experience from moment to moment all the facets that make it up. But we refuse to acknowledge the fact that each experience is interlinked with others and so our lives are composed of interlinked moments in time each of which is further interlinked with other moments. What each moment represents is for each of us to know since it is personal even if it happens with others present. And even if we use the same terms of reference to describe it. So the title 'and the sum of everything' is not so pretentious after all but simply a good indication of all that is included in the makeup of the words used to convey ideas that most of us accept without being aware of the implied connections between us and these very same words. It is so easy to distinguish oneself from the mass by ignoring and denying these connections as we otherwise suppose (wrongly) that we would be snowed under with information and unable to proceed. Not so, in denying our interconnectedness we allow all manner of actions to occur and then complain about quality of life etc but without taking responsibility for allowing this state of affairs to have come to pass as we give the green light to the depersonalisation of so much of our lives. Not in My Backyard (NIMBY) syndrome afflicts us all when the tediousness of everyday life becomes overwhelming. There is a famous saying 'most people lead lives of quiet desperation'. Let put that to rest and start to enjoy and take pleasure out of living by being aware of how the very process of life itself works.