rattus rattus’ blog

The following conversation took place at Calvin and Hobbes’ family (see today’s cartoon at gocomics). Calvin to his mother:

I want the last piece of pie. Don’t divide it up. I want it all to me.

Calvin’s mother:

Don’t be selfish, Calvin.

Calvin:

So the real message here is “be dishonest”?

Of course it is. That’s why we are :)

Arlo Guthrie performed a concert from WXPN and World Cafe Live in Philadelphia on November 10, 2006. At some point during the show, host Dan Reed quoted Arlo Guthrie’s website quote of the day:

The me I used to think of as being myself
has slowly been replaced by the self I seem to be today.
— Arlo Guthrie

Then, Dan asked Arlo: I think it deserves an explanation, perhaps!? And, Arlo explained:

Well, that’s nice of you. You know, if these things need an explanation there’s no point in doing them. I would have just put the explanation in and forgot the quote.

Dan: End of quote.

All our secrets they are tailored trouble
Draped loose now around your hips

The band Taking Back Sunday recently released their song “Liar (It Takes One To Know One)”.

I’m an addict for dramatics
I confuse the two for love

Tony Petrossian directed a wonderful video for the song which is available through the band’s website, and on YouTube – Liar (It Takes One To Know One).

It’s still a question of
How long will this hold?

[*]

I have just attended a mini-conference on truth and knowledge, organized by Manfred Füllsack. Well, you know, it doesn’t take a bunch of acknowledged experts to make you know what you do not know, but then it certainly helps in some way or other.

You don’t need a weatherman
To know which way the wind blows
— Bob Dylan

In fact, I am still pondering over what I have actually been listening to. When someone articulates the need to distinguish tacit and articulated knowledge is this distinction nevertheless articulated, or is it meant to provoke the question which particular tacit knowledge it takes to draw the distinction?

Or, have I simply missed the speakers blink their Epimenidic eyes?

When Herbert Hrachovec compared the truth of knowledge with the expiry date of food might it be that the truth of his comparison had already expired at the time it has reached the audience? Thomas Auinger said this is not an issue of relativism. Quoting him: “Hier gibt es kein Relativierungsproblem.” Besides me wondering about what he was relating to, he might have been right about it if we consider the fact that the word “Relativierungsproblem” pretty much only came into existence when he used it. Or, was Herbert Hrachovec right when Thomas Auinger’s truth expired?

Of course, it’s all a question of definitions, isn’t it? (I love it!)
We have covered disfinism earlier here: The pure disfinism (of no definitions) and the eclectic disfinism (of a great many definitions). I should further extend the concept of disfinism by implicit disfinism.

Implicit disfinism is the science (or art — if you want — unless you define it) of discussing theories which try to explain the nature and scope of specific notions by use of the notions themselves without ever defining them. The little conference serves as a particularly nice example where several theories of epistemology (that’s theories of theories of knowledge) have been debated including plenty of references to truth and knowledge, shamelessly avoiding their definitions.

Thanks, guys!

[Ratta suggests not to move at all since Bertrand Russell said that all movements go too far, and this is certainly true. Those isolated better be independent, of course.]

Stop Making Sense, one of my favorite self-contradictory principles, is also the title of a wonderful video of Talking Heads‘ Stop Making Sense tour in 1983.

Since Ratta reminded us of who we are to do what we do as long as we do (make sense) I’d like to remind myself of the fact that I intended to confront my blog with some more posts about facts (as if this were possible). So, introductory, here is a list of facts about facts taken from lyrics of the video Stop Making Sense:

• Facts are never what they seem to be.
• Facts cut a hole in us.
• Facts are useless in emergencies.

• Facts are simple and facts are straight.
• Facts are lazy and facts are late.
• Facts all come with points of view.
• Facts don’t do what I want them to.
• Facts just twist the truth around.
• Facts are living turned inside out.
• Facts are getting the best of it.

• Facts are nothing on the face of things.
• Facts continue to change their shape.
• Facts don’t stain the furniture.
• Facts go out and slam the door.
• Facts are written all over your face.

If you have ever doubted the usability of a liar’s typical statement “everything you know is wrong” apparently suits well as catchline for a book about disinformation. And You are being lied to is of course the truth of another book, isn’t it?

Even when the title becomes more specific like in Everything you know about sex is wrong it’s no less of a truth as any self-contradictory statement.

Don’t forget:
Everything you know about blogging and me is wrong. This in particular.

How comes that justification is so hard to justify? I doubt self-reference to be the only source of mind boggles. And, who is a barber anyway?

Imagine justification to be some way to separate right from wrong. We might just slip through and fall into nothing, the space of no justifications.

I was wondering if anybody felt the urge to dig us out of such a whole, or do we call that whole ‘home’? — michael, 2006-02-13

The whole hole of nothing is a welcome space to be filled with home. Just don’t try to justify unless you need more room.

Yours truly, liar with an ever growing beard.