February 27, 2006

why we blog

Why we blog - because we can still demonstrate an understanding of knowledge. Whether the basis of understanding is fact or fiction, i'm afraid we will never know. So always assume fiction whenever in doubt and do due diligence, so that when we blog we at least seem to know what we're talking about.

Like why do we call it a unitary executive philosophy when Cheney calls all the foreign policy and Bush calls the domestic shots. I would call that the dual executive philosophy.

Or how to you concentrate power with a fair division of labor? Seems that multiplication increases while division separates. Why do we divide things into components and forget that they are all part of a whole. If each component functions optimally, then the whole vehicle rides smoother - so shouldn't effort be made to bring the broken parts up to speed, rather than weighing more of the load on the components that still work?

How do you create a cycle in a zero sum game? By the second round, the game is over? And how come the concept of fair always is two-sided? Shouldn't fair consider all the parties involved equally and not just those who found out that there is a table where they are represented at. But - if you don't spend the time wishing to be represented, does that mean you waive your rights to allow somebody who doesn't really represent you act as though they do? Why are credit signatures binding for only some people, while banks can unilaterally change the rules on the fly - or cut off access to the system?

This is why we blog. To find answers to unanswerable questions - sequentially or randomly. Context is in the frame of reference - the more data, the better the intelligence. But books and reading materials like blogs are only the gateway into the world of knowledge - you have to spend the time learning to put the pieces together in the way that makes the picture on the puzzle appear.

No comments: