January 6th, 2003

beartato phd

(no subject)

Watched "Kate & Leopold", since it was rented. Wotta weird movie. Not too bad though. "He is so method!"

My book-multiplexing is only getting worse. Read a few dozen pages of vojagxoj. Cue all those who want to say "I told you" so to say they told me so.

This nasty painful mysterious cut/infected thingy on my chin that arrived a week and a half ago is finally going away, I think.

I forgot that Sprecher's root beer is available here. Got some today. Mmmm.

I keep having these conversations with my mom that end like

me: Some people claim that X.
mom: [in a completely agreeing tone] Yeah, like Y.
me: Well, actually, that's completely contradictory to X.
mom: But don't you think that Y?
me: Well, Y is certainly a valid point of view, but there's this
long-standing argument between X and Y. It's not as if they're
mom: Right, exactly, that's why I think Y.
me: Okay, whatever.

Or occasionally the notion of 'diametrically opposed' is replaced by 'barely connected at all' but the structure of the conversation remains. I think the root cause, though, is we rarely both care about the same questions in an argument. Everything turns into a sociological question with her --- not that turning everything into a particular ological question is particularly viceful thing to do, I'm sure I do that also not infrequently. But, well, I just don't care that much for, say, reading Magritte's not-a-pipe paintings as merely a comment that we all watch too much tv, even apart from the anachronism of it. It seems like there's something more at stake: there's something more than just cautioning against immersing yourself in "inner realities" (books, tv, paintings, etc.) too frequently, something that questions what status the "inner reality" really has, and whether recursive application of that idea already presupposes too much credibility of the constructed illusion.