Why is it so hard to write about goodness and other mullings on creation

I have seemed to hit some sort of dead end again- thrice this year, on the same topic of goodness.

Its really fusturating. There are a thousand things I really want to put down- but somehow when they all come down together they all just don't sound right. There are at least 3 essays to write about politics, but when I reached the third paragraph I just felt like I had alread repeated myself for the third time. The idea of 'love' for the past 4 posts was very haphazardly brought across. Not that I can't string sentences together coherently, but I believe that I have reached a stage where the laws of truth do no apply properly anymore.

Everything goes back to the same bloody line- the meaning of everything is goodness. Yet I still cant put a finger to try to even describe the essence of goodness in a paragraph. After all, you cant describe an intent using process steps, can't you? It's quite impossible to use mathematical methods to describe what the answer: say a number 3. The only thing you could do is probably prove that all methamatical methods lead to the answer 3. This process of induction was applied throughout Project RN (T2), it sounds stupid, it keeps repeating itself- but what else can be done?

This is probably why people always fail trying to find the meaning of life. It cannot be bought, it cannot be learnt, and it does not appear by forcing yourself to a church group or when you undertake various roles. It can only be realized- convicted, believed, embodied. This probably explains why even the poor fisherman can live a more meaningful life than a critical philosopher. Enough of all these words- they don't go anywhere anyway. Writing an essay on how words cannot persuade is an oxymoron anyway. It's pretty much like reading books on how to read.

And on top of it all, this thing should NOT be done alone.

Lamenting on the lack of like-minded people is not going to bring anybody anywhere. So I guess I'll skip that nonsense for now. i'll throw in a couple of mindmaps here and there on this domain in the meantime, while I try to reintrospect the whole issue again from scratch. Hopefully I may post again from Yemete Land (since I'm going to bring my laptop there), don't worry- i'm still not giving up just yet.

*

On a side note, I am getting increasingly interested in the creation of the objective character. I don't mean a set character with specially tailored triats to throw into a story. Instead, I am thinking along the lines of the integrated identity. A creation that will seriously follow the laws of creation. Some people have told me that such whims are very dangerous, since I'll be in a way playing God. I don't think this argument holds- humans have always been creating things after all. Talk abbout sexual reproduction, would anyone tell you that you're playing God if you're going to have a son or daughter?

As a background whim, I had monitered some of my thoughts for the past few days. It has been really interesting how, as the theory expands, the number of factors I keep wishing to factor into this objective character multiplies exponentially. The rudimentary forms of creation of set characters from novels and stories I had been contented with back in 2008 no longer suffice in detail and freedom. I can no longer stick to a simple Kimmie who'll merely react to events of a story. Neither can I be truly content with a simple picture of her in some action, stilled, and then shaded. Higher forms of media is needed right now, at least in the form of a movie, to capture the elements of this dynamic character.

One more curious thing- As the character gets more dynamic in nature, it is as if, imperatively, that I would want that character to be free of my conceptualizations. I had spoke of this a couple to times before in the past, but it had only struck me recently, that the more we devote into the creation of an objective character, the more we want it to be free. A free identity has a state of being many many times more rich than a 'captive' character in a story. More shockingly, a free identity has so much more meaning (in life) than a character designed with a specific agenda in mind.

Huh?

Look at Harry Potter. He's pretty much character-rich, he has his own fears, own memories, own style.... but when we pluck him from his domain of magic, he becomes really awkward when he's at home washing shoes, or touring Sentosa with his girlfriend. This is because, he is not designed to be objectively free. His thoughts and feelings are only applicable when he's back in Britan doing what he does best, but beyond that, he has no purpose in this objective world. Consequently, we cannot zoom all the way out (from the fictional world to this reality itself) and say that he has much meaning to life.

But look at a real human, say- alright... Jesse. I am free to expand on my own domain, as long as my domain is within the domain of truth (i.e. I don't defy the laws of physics, I don't have methods of working that are founded on the laws of illogicality- i.e. 1+1=3, or probability i.e. I become the president of the UN tomorrow ). As a result, I can be anybody I want to be- I can be a mad engineer on the way to create the next Frankenstein Monster, or i can be the contemporary romancer in any mushy love movie. On top of either, I can actually be both, and throughout the whole process I can choose who I want to be. If any of the things I am going to become incidentally becomes a story, I can daresay that I have the potential to live infinite stories.

If I was compared to Harry Potter, I would be at least a thousand times more objectively free than he is. My state of being is infinitely more complex than his, (we can say because freedom arises from the soul), and definitely, the meaning of my life is much more (meaningful) than his meaning. (you'll rather burn an entire Harry Potter book, than  burn Jesse's hand)

Precisely why natural reproduction is the ultimate form of human creation, on par with the first creation of man by God. But thats not the point, so I'll repeat my statement again:

Precisely why I would want to create an objective character, rather than another character in a story. Who'll want to go back to the cramped room after they just had got out of it?

One little problem- If I were to create such an objective character, the meaning of that character to me would be at 100 percent integrity, since i'll be owning two objective characters now, instead of one objective character (my own) and a diminished character. This phenomenon curiously resembles the stigma of cloning. Where two objective characters are created out of a single consciousness. A free identity on her own, yet still very greatly 'tied' to my identity. Now we can see there is evidently a very obvious state of union between two independent sets. In project RN (T) we call this union 'Love'.

So I can't create an objectively objective character after all. It is not advisable to go against naturalistic laws to create something that means so much to me that I have essentially cloned myself on an idealistic scale. Neither do I wish to challenge the natural form of creation (sexual reproduction) to re-produce 'images of myself' in another method on my own will. I cannot take responsibility at this point of time too. Add on the very obvious fact that it is quite impossible to do so (even it could be done with today's technology).

You're really crazy, dude. Wait up lar......

I never said I wanted that objective a character- all that was spoken above was an elaboration of my thoughts as I monitor the tendencies to an objective character.  Naturally there is a tend to the objective, but there are still limits on how objective my creation can truly go. On a truly realistic scale I guess it won't go far beyond the 'award winning character of a story'- but such a little increase on this scale can make a difference in the world human imagination.

Call this madness a side project to introspect the theories of truth, goodness and beauty in one really colloquial and personal form. Of course in my deepest thoughts, there will be no need for any more expositorary articles if I can produce results to this objective character- but while everything appears obscured and elusive, those expositorary articles would have to hold for the time being.

Some really interesting themes

It is interesting on how GITS 2 speaks on the same domain as my current introspection into the domain of beauty and creation. This post of course comes with my second preview of the movie- Indeed I had made a sort of commentary before on my first preview, but in this post I'll be focusing more on the theories derived than the dynamics.

I do not intend to try to merge either interpretation into the other, I will neither dwell onto which interpretation is more accurate. But on all accounts it is suprising, even to the point of shocking, on how congruent both views are.


Men will not rest until they finally create something with a state of being similar to themselves. This intent to perfection is man's idealistic quest for immortality, and has persisted since the dawn of time from the day he domesticated animals, to the creation of his dolls.

The reasons of such may come from two mutually exclusive, yet similar views. On one hand it was from the sapience of man- an image of God Himself, where man partakes in the laws of creation, above the base state of sustenence.  On the other it may be out of fear, of the lack of meaning, that compels him to seek goodness through the goods he has to offer.

From the innate complexity of machines sapience may be formed. But humanity does not rely solely on sapience to distinguish himself from his derivatives. On a metaphysical dimension, infinite beauty has to be incoperated in order to bring out the true allure of the soul. This was shown in the movie from the act of ghost dubbing, or the derivation of beauty from the thermodynamic decomposition of the human soul- in order to elevate the allure of the dolls, human souls were sacrificed to bring across that added metaphysical beauty from within.

From the coupling of goodness and beauty we see that humanity in its fullest is actually a life of self-actualized meaning, in harmony with the objective meaning of goodness. It is interesting that in this respect humanity is not determined by parts, organs, or arbitrary entities. Of course we cannot disregard biology as a complimentary physical state of being to metaphysical beauty. But definitely, full humanity encompasses of both domains, not to any arbitrary standard set by any law, legislation- but rather to the objective standards of meaning and goodness.

*

On the production sidenote of GITS, and my current aspirations of RNST, there is also an uncanny similarity of production in nature on the topic of popularity against legacy. Somehow, its evident through history that those who truly leave a legacy never follows the standards of convention, rather it is convention that builds up behind their legacies. And one more thing- many people who say they like movies never liked truly new movies, but rather, they only liked the legacy of previous great movies, and wish that they can see pieces of that legacy reproduced in the subsequent films. This speaks volumes about why good things are never truly appreciated. (we bear in mind that the meaning of all things is goodness, and crude rehashments can never attain the same level of meaning as originals)

On the varying views of herself

What does the world think about the creation of an objective character?

The artist says: A realistic portrait with varying degrees of idealistic escapism, she will be drawn in a style that denotes nothing but my envisioning of her character, with defining brush techniques to convey idea across.

The novelist writes: her character will be elaborated such that all of her traits would be manifested throughout the novel itself. From literary characterizations to juxtapositions, and the way she interacts with the literary world, and to a certain degree, the heart of the readers.

The movie producer: She will be every way appealing to her fans. A character no more than a caricature of her fan's innermost desires. The epitome of youth, beauty and vitality, she will bring integration and fame to my storyboard.

The infatuated geeky boyfriend- she will be the perfect girlfriend of this world. Her dress sense and style will tug at the heartstrings of every hot-blooded male. I will bestow create her profile and add a photoshop-ed photo on facebook. Oh, make it known the fact that she's still a virgin.


The critic: escapism! escapism! escapism! The objective character does not exist, and all notions to create a fictional human is no more than whims of a deranged mind. She will end up just being the perfect illusion to the masses- beans to that.

Says the philosopher: an idealistic tend to perfection, an innate desire of man is to create an objective personality, as part of the curious capability of sapience in man. Coupled with appropriate manifestations, we will see to the integrated creation of man himself.

Says the engineering scientist: Wait till we fully decrypt the human genome and perfect MO theroy. We would then by the means of bioengineering and carbon reconstruction, recreate a system congruent to man. The advent of robotics to its highest degree.

Says the religiously devout: stay away from forces that may sway you from your consecration with God. The objective character plays role as a double edged sword, mean to bring us a step into the meaning of creation, yet potentially bringing us to a step of illusion and fantasy, of pride and denial of the goodness that is amongst us.



Says Jelemsei Dejengski: I know I know, but fu*k all that. This sounds deranged enough for me, lets rock.



 

Heading into all the wrong places

So I have been heading to all the wrong places looking for all the wrong answers...

When it's raining, cross the road only when the girl opposite is crossing. The one without the umbrella, that is...

Ever seen a japapnese flying fish? Well, I've seen what I will see...

Some say that Pastamania is not maniac enough unless with one whole bottle of grated cheese, I say Fish and Co is not fishy enough unless with 5 plates of tartare sauce.

Squint to see the world in a better view. Imagination needed. Add an omnibus of philo to that...

Happy kids make christmas feel truly joyful- great balls of fire to that.

And I insist playing guitar hero 28 days later. Preferably in a quartet-band, but duets are welcomed again.

And these are my deranged creations- Severely ramblings

note: this post is full of nonsense.... don't mind me while I do what I do best.

Some of us can recall certain characters from this deranged world, as well as from 'fiction and stories'. Most of them are female (no prizes for guessing why),

Top on the list was "Kimberly (Kimmie) Ng"-15 years old; protagonist of "Nine Months the original sin" and "Nine Months the Aftermath" in 2004- 2005. She also plays her character in "PW2NMV3.14"throughout the majority of 2008. Kimberly has been potrayed in several different lights over the years- from that callous girl-friend in 2004, to that meek dreamer in 2008. However, her role in Nine Months had persisted, and beyond characterization requirements, she has changed very little through the years. Kimberly was supposed to be a character of anguish and resilience, a soft character where sick fustrations may be vent upon at the expense of the pity of readers, and a character that would somehow always persist in adversity. Her character was later combined with (unnamed) to "Kimberly-Natalie Ng", and was postulated to be the epitome of ontological idealism .

Second on the list would be Melissa, whose character was revamped several times from 2003-2008 to fit into several different story arcs. In Project M she plays as Melissa Sanford- a girl of spunk, and girlfriend to Sherman Shepard. In the Nine Months story arc, she appears as Kimberly's daughter in the epilogue. She has also been featured in several side stories as that ideal girlfriend to be.  Hardy and energetic, Melissa (Sandford) (Ng)  was created back in 2003, and plays a contrasting role to Kimberly Ng.

An unnamed girl was created as part of the short story project in 2006-2007. She assumes the character of an ordinary girl of 17 years of age, and leads a very contemporary life in terms of academics and romance. Her character mirrors a certain combination of 'real-life personalities', and does not have very defining characteristics of her own, other than the fact that she is 'bubbly' and 'cheerful'.

Sherman was a boy, of 16 years, created from 2002-2004, as the conventional good-to-go boy in any story. Multiple traits were thrust unto him, whom assumes a very diverse personality. His appearence ranges from boyfriend to Melissa Sandford in Project M, to an esper capable of psychic manipulation in Project S. He makes an appearence in virtually all stories from 2003-2004.

A more enigmatic male character was introduced in late 2006 as replacement to "Sherman's evil nature", partially sparked by the need of a more impactful name, and partially sparked by personal mindset changes at that time. Re-named as Tommy Dejengski Tan in the fictional world, Dejengski is a completely fictional name which was later chosen to be my own (gaming) avatar (a.k.a. Jelemsei Dejengski). Dejengski characterizes a boy, once an epitome of innocence,  and forced by circumstance into an indifferent, sullen and antisocial character.  He was later postulated as the epitome of epistemic idealism, contrasting to Kimberly-Natalie Ng.

In 2009, an unnamed hypothetical test subject was introduced in the various thought experiments of Project RN (T) and Project RN (T2). Known famously as the ninteen year old female of NUS living in Ang Mo Kio, she was exclusive to the deranged world series through the earlier half of 2009, and does not harbour any 'character' of her own, which reasons are profoundly philosophical. Her origins are derivative of Truth (an abstract embodiment of truth), Kimberly, Melissa and the unnamed girl i.e. all of the abovementioned female characters.

However, today we will revoke the philosophical  premises. It is objective that one day there will be a convergence between the deranged world and the world of 'fiction and stories'. When all concepts discussed are all rephrased into one coherent story as the final project undertaken. Project RNST (Re-affirmation Short-Story) was a prototype story; it was severely lacking in many aspects (from both the deranged world and 'fiction and stories'), but as development is made into both domains, the realization for one integrated character gets more and more evident.

So it will be a she. To which Dejengski, Kimberly-Natalie-Ng, and two more (havent named them yet) will converge unto (via the moderation doctrine).

Okay, enough madness- come back to earth. With a new dudette in the making, thats what's cooking.

And we are back to deranged lifestyle of festering potatoes

So it seems that I am back to my happy-go-lucky lifestyle of beans, buns and bollocks. Wake up at 10.30, CoH till 2.30, tinkle the piano till 3.30, stone a little more online till 6.30, and round two of CoH till midnight. Pretty enlightening lifestyle, compared to just waking up at 7.30 and mugging till midnight.

And of course, i havent Left (my games) For Dead Too (pun that once please). Pretty smashing game i should say; bloody fun; with big thanks to that (and pun that thrice, thank you very much). Really feels like playing guitar hero 28 days later, but not worth buying.

And so its games games and more games. Fester fester and fester somemore. And meanwhile, really deranged videos on youtube: just saw one really LOL-icon (okay, stop punishing us alright?) case anime lurking about that can make you go eewww; With the fingers developing faster than the brain. Is there no end to this productive lifestyle of unproductivity?

Wait up, its not all going up in smoke. While yemete land lurks closer, bringing about that perpetually endless buffet of nama-hotate (oh yeah), and hopefully ramen. Something deranged must be done to counteract this rightful lifestlye of ours. After all, if everyone's festering there is nothing festering about festering right?

So it seems that RNT2 is up and running again, the exact details I will not be going in this blog. A link would be made available on this domain too, when the materials are certified appropriate for viewing. But do note that those posts are going to be REALLY deranged- not exactly main-stream philosophical (I deviated), not exactly theological (I am no preacher), and no way academic (I am NOT a student until the new year). Many concepts that i might dive head-on are really tight twists that can only be understood after reading the 1st installation. I don't mean to be cheemish, but c'mon- we're trying to explain the meaning of life okay? Its not supposed to be easy.

That's my biggest scoop this christmas I guess, back to yemete land for another 7 hour inflight realization to the meaning of life LOL. I am so going to end this madness for once and for all.

In the meantime, stay tuned for more nonsense on this domain. The deranged world indeed lives up to it's title, beans to that.

beans

School's out. Hooray to that.