Scrubs vs The office

My opinion:

Scrubs: Colorful, Creative, Imaginative, Drama based, Surreal, Dreamy, open kind of humor
Scrubs is like a kaleidoscope:

The Office: Dry, creative, imaginative(domain specific), More real life based and inhibited humor
The Office is like a defined algorithm that manipulates the picture:

I enjoy both these TV serials. But my vote would go to scrubs since I can identify more with the characters. Also, according to me there is a world of a difference in the relationship between Jim-Pam vs JD-Elliot. The former is a bit bland and shows limited situations while the latter is like a rich tapestry covering so many subliminal aspects and complex dynamics of a relationship. Also, scrubs uses its imaginative, childlike, uninhibited style to explore humor.

Pending topics I wanted to write about

  • Dimensions of sex/physical + psychological
  • Fear of the dark/unknown
  • Dimensions of humans and relationship with nature
  • Overcoming fear technique – adrenaline response – spider technique
  • Talking to a tree
  • Endo-reality and Exo-reality are intrinsically perceived the same
  • We get social energy only from identification
  • Shifting into 5th dimension awareness of possibilities. How habits, preoccupations, fears greatly limit the 5th dimension.
  • Focusing on the larger picture of the jigsaw – knowing a map that extends far beyond entities in immediate perception eg: egs: participating in school, helping ppl, engg project stuff, job related
  • Attracting people towards you technique: mimicking their body language, any kinds of identification with them
  • My Lucid dream WILD’ing adventure
  • Desires get stronger the more you chase and satisfy them: sexual, romantic, situations, academic, job related etc.
  • Symbolic meaning of a light shown at the end of a tunnel or in the center of the screen in many of the dreamy song videos, psychedelic state inducing videos etc, they all seem to converge on a bright light at the center.

Intrinsic value of music

These thoughts came to me from an interesting discussion about meditation/awareness/alcohol.
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread547291/pg2

I guess broadly there are 2 parts to the mind:
1. The judgment part, thinking/conceptual mind
2. Non conceptual, non judgmental awareness

  • It sometimes strikes me that, if I just hear music without association i.e. with a blank mind, I just feel plain bliss, no pleasure, no pain. Maybe this is like the 2nd part of the mind.
  • So its like, my thinking mind/conceptual mind and judgment has to switched ON for me to really get a kick out of the music(turning on the conceptual mind).

– That is why maybe after consuming alcohol, I enjoy music far more as it strengthens the activity in the thinking/judgment part of the mind and dulls the 2nd part.

– So what is the intrinsic value of music then?Is it only through associations/concepts/judgments that we feel the real pleasure/kick out of music?

Understanding higher dimensions

Higher dimensions can be imagined by looking at how you view lower dimensions. For e.g.: If you want to imagine something 4D, you need to understood how we interact with 2D objects. How would we appear to an entity who is 2D. They can only see edges (actually this edge too had 0 thickness, but for practical purposes lets assume they can see very thin edges like the thickness of a paper). Such 2D entities can never see us in our 3D entirety.

For e.g. say a circular 2D entity and we pass our finger through a paper, they would just see a circle forming with increasing diameter till its circumference is equal to that of our finger and then when we take our hand off, this circle would reduce in size and then vanish.

You(a 3D entity) can touch the center of the circle(2D entity) without breaking its edges. In a similar way, maybe a 4D entity could touch our inner organs without cutting us open.

The movie “Flatland” portrays this concept really well of 2D entities interacting with a 3D entity.
This can be supplemented with further reading about the allegory of “Plato’s cave”.

Self armor

I am really attracted to people who do not have a ‘self armor’ on. Its a kind of openness, vulnerability (not the same as naive at all). People who face their feelings squarely and who can clearly express it without feeling threatened. Also people who have understood what anger really is and have learn’t to control it. Since they have controlled anger they tend to be more polite and diplomatic. Its kind of like a rose, its totally open, helpless yet so pure and beautiful.

The reason for liking these attributes traces back to my childhood. I had some abusive(verbal) relationships of the extreme kind. It was powerful enough to really shatter me. So I had to generate this really powerful self armor, examine each weakness and patch it up with some defense of offense. Later I realized how terrible this self armor and how much better life would be without it. Then once the environment got less threatening, I started loosening it up and I can imagine how good it would feel to almost give it up.

It may not be practical in life to totally let down armor since you might meet many people who would influence you in undesirable ways. But I think its possible in a 1-1 relationship where both the people have experiential knowledge on this fact and agree to let down their armors at-least in front of each other. It takes a lot of deep intra-personal understanding of a philosophical kind, knowledge on varied perspectives and lastly free thinker abilities from both the parties. That would make an incredible difference in the ease of opening up.

The Golden ratio

This is one of the most fascinating concepts I have come across after Plato’s cave. I am aware that we can find patterns for almost anything but the number of coincidences in this case is just too large to dismiss. This ratio seems to be resonating everywhere. 1.618 is the number, it is derived from the fibonacci series. I think it could provide us powerful answers for defining beauty.

Why look into philosophy

Its really funny to see people moving about like mindless creatures and they really don’t know what they really want. They do not even bother to investigate. Its like, they might say, you know what I really want is a girlfriend or car etc. How exactly will that satisfy them? Hmm, I don’t think they care, they are more interested in the dream or pursuit and so confident in the reward. How can an intelligent person miss this? and trust society’s beliefs so much and barely question them? Its Baffling. It doesn’t even take some extremely complex questioning, just look at all the billionaires around. Are they the most fulfilled with ultimate happiness and no more needs. Its obvious they are not. Its not to discount their accomplishment but to look at it from a higher perspective. And people retort with “Ohh…we have more important things to worry about”. LOL, what can be more important. They are living in a sort of dream and they don’t care and have this false sense that they are after “more important” things. I feel like screaming “IGNORANCE”. Its unbelievable. Hope some circumstance/future event wakes them up before death comes.

Ayn Rand has written an excellent article on the same question: http://www.tracyfineart.com/usmc/philosophy_who_needs_it.htm

Here is another great one: http://30sleeps.com/blog/2009/01/04/why-you-should-study-philosophy/
http://www.uri.edu/personal/szunjic/philos/whystudy.htm

I think philosophy needs a lot of rare skills like:
1. A good level of detachment from your beliefs, thinking and reasoning so that you can look at it objectively
2. Ability to handle ambiguity, paradoxes, hold unanswered questions. Leonardo Da Vinci mentions these as qualities possessed by gifted individuals
3. Abilities possessed by free thinkers
4. A desire to know what is REALLY true, a desire for integration
5. A great deal of courage to venture into the unknown to the depths of the mind
6. Higher value in seeking understanding vs practical knowledge