rattus rattus’ blog

The portal of the St. Marx cemetery (Friedhof St. Marx) shows a hexagram, well known as Star of David. Yet, I was told that this hexagram was (and still is) not meant as a Jewish symbol.

Interestingly, a number of gravestones there show six-pointed stars which some consider variations of hexagrams. Though, I found one engraving showing a six-pointed star within a hexagram.

What is part of a symbol?

One of Heinz von Foerster’s favorite symbols was the Ouroboros. (Von Foerster often used a variation where 2 snakes devour each other’s tail.)

At the St. Marx cemetery some gravestones carry Ouroboros, many with an arrow pointing from left to right.

Are symbols just symbols?

I vividly feel as if I was an Ouroboros on fire.

For one more application and a beautiful variation on the liar’s paradox see motzes’ posting “on the unknowables” and (about the same quote) Richard Zach’s “Logic Joke“,
because only an idiot would believe this.

Juliet Ernst suggests to have a ‘before you call’ list at hand that could help us to systematically rule out all the less significant possible causes before [we] panic or descend into real depressive funks.

This is a wonderful idea. So, I put on my list to make a list. Making lists sure is included in many people’s lists. Lists of people who like lists. That’s probably why there are recipes. Because life is complicated (which is a lie), and lists are simple (which is another one).

Like with good recipes we need more lists: Good lists, suitable lists, easy lists, short ones and long ones, comprehensive lists, serious, scientific lists, approved lists, experts’ lists, classifying and diminishing lists, and, of course, lists of lists, such as this one.

Eventually, do not forget to check your list of lists, and your schedules, your categories, registers, criteria, systems of divisions, rules for distinction; your catalogs and inventories; your principles, and
yourself.

When I met Erwin Chargaff in his flat in New York, I felt like entering a new world, yet familiar. In his book “Kritik der Zukunft” he suggests that, for the time being, we declare our resignation from humankind.

Besides the fact that he says he did, I am to follow.
So here I am, outside.

Who am I? — Of course, trivially I am I. But who says so? Who is I and who is I not? Can I trust this I?

Who am I? Who is me?
Am I the sum of my history, or am I more than the sum of it? Or less? I keep forgetting. Nature or nurture? Are my hopes and wishes part of me?

What about the collection of aches and pains that consume my body? How old am I? Old enough to kick my father’s butt? Am I ready to accept my rheumatic disorders? Or more? Where do I draw the line? On my birthday? When I die? Does death end my life, and me?

What have we forgotten about ourselves? There is this and that which I am proud of, what I believe in, and those I love. And there is everything else. I am the one to decide. So, it depends. I depend on me?

People keep asking: Who are you? — I’d like to answer honestly: I do not know. And I do, because there again is this I. I says about I that I does not know.

Maybe this is why trivial is not derived from a broad way but from three ways crossing at one point: The I that is me, the I that says I, and all that is not I.
Who said that?

Das oft Wunderbare an Dichterinnen und Dichtern ist die Buntheit der Worte, die sie finden, wenn ihnen ein paar Worte fehlen.

The most important aspect of trying to save earth is not to do so.