so yoooou wanna make a barb a cue soss...???

01101111 01101110 01100101

From the time we are tiny teething toddlers we are inundated with ideas from above. The bellowing voices of creatures much larger than ourselves seem to know their way around. After all, they can walk, they can talk and some of them can even fly a kite.

One of the their principle ideas, a macro-idea which seems to set the stage a multitude of micro-ideas is that of evolution. We are encouraged to believe that with time everything is getting better. As toddlers very few of us have been made aware of logical fallacies, namely, argumentum ad novitiatem or “appeal to novelty”. In fact, very few adults have been made aware of these fallacies. The toddler, however, seems to have an intuitive sense (pardon the pun) when it comes to making “sense” of the adult world. We are all well aware of the “Why? Game” played by most toddlers which young parents are subject to.

Why is the “Why? Game” so difficult for adults to play with the toddler? Why is it a game that the parent will ultimately lose? Asking “Why?” flips the tables of power and puts the it all in the hands of the inquisitor. The toddler understands this intuitively. He has stumbled into a psychological pot of gold. Never before has he been able to outwit the adult.

It is because of this transference of power that the toddler’s liberties of inquisition must be muted.

Alright, so before this starts sounding like some sort of boring academic essay, allow me to loosen up the language a bit and start rambling the way one normally would amongst peers. Well, upon reading that last sentence, it has become quite apparent that I am not capable of colloquial prattle. Perhaps, this is a good thing. I shall allow myself to interpret it as positive. After all, I am the author of this book and I appoint myself that freedom. I am not physically harming anyone with my droll choice of words? Or am I?

Is it possible that upon reading my choice of words, one becomes so consumed by self-hatred that he decides to take his own life? Or the life of another? Could I be held responsible for having influenced this person to commit such heinous acts of violence? Many blame the writings of Nietzsche and Blavatsky for the atrocities of WWII and Karl Marx for the Soviet Union. I can only hope that someday my writing will have such an impact. Of course, I would also hope that it would be in the opposite direction of Communism and National Socialism.

Alas, we are getting ahead of ourselves, or rather, I am getting ahead of myself. Perhaps I am getting ahead of you? -BJ

No matter.

Let us continue…

I had wanted to make a point about the hypocrisy of adults ramming the macro-idea of evolution down the throats of children, figuratively speaking, of course. It would be hard for me to picture an adult literally ramming an idea down the throat of a child, seeing how an idea exists outside the physical realm and the child within.

Although, now that I think about it, everything that has ever been created was at its inception nothing but an intangible idea floating around in the aether, in the mind of the one whom it inspired. In a sense, you could say that the idea of light bulb could be rammed down the throat of said child by its physical representative in the physical realm, namely the physical light bulb that we can hold in our hands.

One might even be inclined to say that the child himself was once nothing but an idea in the minds of his parents, or an eternal soul or limb of the godhead. Then perhaps the architect wouldn't have to ram the physical blueprints of this building down his physical child's throat, but rather use his mind’s eye to ram the ethereal idea of his new building down the throat of his unborn child.

Where this really gets exciting is when it comes to a musical composer? For music is something that never really exists in the physical realm, rather only in the aether. A composer can use his vocal chords to “ram” a new melody into his child’s ear, yet his voice is not the melody itself. Even the “physical” sound waves produced by a human voice or manmade instrument cannot be said to be the melody itself. Oddly enough, man has learned how to capitalize off of this ethereal experience.

Words themselves are also a sort of music. The words you are reading right now are merely physical representations of words. These are only blots of ink on a page. Light waves are vibrating toward your eyes, to be “interpreted” by your brain, etc. Also, these “physical” light waves and electrical impulses are not my words. Let us not even mention the implications embedded in the fact that many of you may be reading these words via some sort of digital gizmo.

The line between the material world and non-material world or “physical” and “metaphysical” gets blurred very quickly when we start to think in these terms. This is another one of the adults’ “macro-ideas” that gets drilled into us as children.

So where was I? Ah, yes. Evolution…no wait, not yet. I still have to finish up my thoughts on argumentum ad novitiatem. Then I will tie that back into the evolution thing. There, are you happy. I used the word “thing” in my book. Does it feel less academic and stiff to you now?

Stop distracting me with your criticism. I am trying to make a point. How can I ever make my point if you keep interrupting me?

My point was simply this…

Adults are trying to convince us that “new” is always better, that everything was worse during all eras prior to the one we are now “living in”. That’s a pretty bold claim considering nobody alive today (as far as I know) has been around since prehistoric times. No one has even been around since the “Dark Ages”. We call them “dark” because we know so little about them, yet we assume it was all plagues, monarchs and illiteracy.

Now that’s just a simple observation that any child could use to easily dismiss the absurd claims of the adults, but there is something much more significant I wanted to address.

If you haven’t noticed by now, adults DESPISE anything new or different. They say we are evolving and that evolution stems from mutation, from deviation from the norm. Yet if any child or adult questions the zeitgeist of today, they are instantly shut down by ridicule. Labels like “crazy”, “stupid”, “delusional”, “paranoid” and the like are thrown around.

Revolutionary thought is not allowed, however, the adults will hypocritically idolize the “freethinkers” of the past and call them revolutionaries. For them, revolutionaries, visionaries and the like only exist in the past, long ago and far away. If one is to bring revolutionary thought into the present times, then he shall be done away with. If he cannot be ridiculed into submission then his voice of dissent will surely be silenced by some other force.

It is my hope that by documenting my musings the reader will be inspired to “gang his own gait” in life. That is to say, to accumulate the bravery within himself to deny any and all traditional thought.

The realm in which we find ourselves suffers not from a paucity of groups, cults or movements. That which seems to elude us is original thought. How many thoughts can the modern man honestly claim as his own?

Some may argue that there is “nothing new under the sun” and go on to deduce that original thought is therefore not possible. No hypocrisy there, seeing how they will readily admit that their concept of “nothing new under the sun” was not an original thought. However, these men utter such platitudes with such conviction as though they are attempting to convince the listener that they have carried out some kind of exhaustive research themselves. They would like to give you the impression that they have held the entirety of existence in the palm of their hand and scrutinized every last detail themselves. The effort they exert in trying to convince you that they “know better” implies that the “truth” has been divinely revealed them. If this is the case, then it would clearly argue against their claim that “there is nothing new under the sun”.

These wretched prisoners of the mind say what they say because they have heard or read the words somewhere else before. Most likely, they did not hear these platitudes from the drunkard down the pub (although this is not to be ruled out), rather from someone whom they deem to hold some sort of expert status. Television personalities, professors and men in white coats spring to mind.

When I was a child, I was always slightly embarrassed whenever I would here my parents partake in such trivialities. Some topical subject would come up in a conversation among friends or colleagues (who am I kidding, my parents didn’t have colleagues, they had coworkers) and I would have to listen to a group of adults “arguing” tritely back and forth.

01110100 01101111 01101111 LET US ARGUE..