The paradox of absolute denial

I'm gonna make this one really quick, given myself a maximum of 10 minutes to write. It's a good, interesting topic, but I reckon I can get the basic gist down in a short amount of time. It concerns an interesting logical paradox that I awoke with yesterday morning (yes, in that same semi-lucid state that I've come to write a lot about over the course of the (almost) year I've been writing here).

Over at LessWrong, Yudkowsky wrote a very interesting post. You'll recall a long time I ago I wrote about the phenomenon of anosognosics. These are people who suffer from brain damage such that a limb is completely paralysed. However, what is interesting is that these people display complete denial of their condition, so much so that they take really strong evidence and construe and rationalise it to fit into their delusion. So instead of admitting my left arm is paralysed when you make me look at it lying limply by my side, I insist that the arm in fact isn't mine and is my mother's, who is lying underneath me in bed. Or something along those lines.

In that post, Yudkowsky postulates the existence of "absolute denial", a condition like anosognosia that is universal to all humans, all denying one aspect. That is to say there is one very obvious truth about the world that we cannot come to know because we rationalise any evidence contrary to what we've already come to believe. So for instance, it could be that all humans actually have tails, but this absolute denial has compelled us to either look at the tail and call it something completely different, or that it's so strong that our visual cognition filters that element out and our somatosensory systems ignore sensations from the tail. But to all non-humans it is perfectly plain. This is the tangent Yudkowsky goes on ... but I want to focus on something a lil' more fundamental about the problem.

This is another one of my steps on my crusade against logic, so please stay with me.

Is it at all possible for us to even consider the existence of absolute denial? Is such a suggestion logical sound?

Suppose it does exist, can we ever actually acknowledge its existence? It seems like we can't as that would be a logical contradiction. Absolute denial is absolute, to acknowledge it presupposes that it isn't absolute. Therefore anytime we state that absolute denial does exist, we've immediately proved it cannot exist because otherwise we would not have stated it in the first palce!

On the other hand, suppose it doesn't exist, can we ever actually come to know that? By its very nature, all the laws and truisms that we've come to accept as veridical become subject to scrutiny as potential rationalisations. And here's the really interesting thing I've come to realise (which I do not think is too far of a leap or a fallacy) the very fact that we have no proof nor any inclination to believe absolute denial exists proves it does exist! I don't think this to be a flaw in reasoning because from a definitional standpoint, this seems to be a rational entailment, and because we humans are stuck looking at the issue from within the system. Obviously looking from outside the system makes it an easy case of either absolute denial is true or false - but it's a different matter when you're within the system.

And here's the kicker.

Following from both my points, this seems to be the conclusion:

1. The fact that there is no proof for absolute denial confirms our belief in its existence.
2. We cannot believe in its existence because that is a logical contradiction, suggesting it to be false.
3. Therefore, we believe it cannot exist.
4. This leaves us with no proof for absolute denial, leading to point 1 again.

What it seems to me is that we're left in a logical loop. A chain of postulates that never actually leads anywhere. It's neither a vicious nor strengthening circular argument ... it's just circular. If I've done this right, this seems to be a huge problem with logical reasoning and using it in situations like this.

Any solutions?

Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince

SPOILERS BELOW

Went and saw the 10:30am screening of HBP in Goulburn yesterday - first one in this country town.. Had I been in Canberra I totally would've tried to get tickets for a midnight screening, since that would've made me one of the first public audiences for the movie. HBP and Deathly Hallows totally sit at the top of my favourite Harry Potter books - I'm not exactly sure which is top.. but they constitute the top two. I like any of the books that give a focus to Voldemort (surprise surprise, the villain-phillic Shanan makes a return).

So I'd been rather anxious to get my hands onto the film. I'd checked out wikipedia and it seemed that it was almost universall critically acclaimed, which I believe to be a first for a Potter film, which usually don't do well critically and yet I  still really enjoy them on an artistic and intellectual level, meaning HBP could only be infinitely superior. And boy it was.

I think what most people are gonna get angry with the film is that it's not exactly very faithful to the source material. Not that they've totally ignored it and just got the themes right. Rather they translate what needed to be translated. And this largely works with this movie because the book lends itself to translation. HBP isn't a plot-driven novel. Unlike all the other books, which set up the premise of the novel quite quickly, the mystery of the Philosopher's Stone, Chamber of Secrets, the Goblet and the Triwizard Tournament and Voldemort's dreams in OotP, unlike all those, HBP lacks any salient throughline.

Obviously there are some, that of Dumbledore's lessons and the unfolding Voldemort history, Draco's mission and the Half Blood Prince. But they hold little weight. Instead, HBP is a character driven book, and hence a character driven movie. The focus is on the relationships between characters and the consequences of those interactions, something which the movie focuses quite heavily on. And rightly so, when one considers the function of the book in the series.

The book serves as a transition between the lives of the everyman moving into a time of war and darkness. We therefore must observe the students in their prime, doing what they do best, almost acting in a denial of what is actually happening in the outside world. Before they can really accept reality, they distance themselves from it, trying to form an enclave of safety, which ultimately is so thoroughly penetrated by Voldemort's forces. Plus, it's the last time we're at Hogarts for school and seeing a lot of these characters, it's only natural they take the fore.

Things that were perfect:
Dumbledore drinking the potion
This scene made the film for me. Not the super kick-ass fire effects when the inferi attack, but when Harry is there forcing the potion down Albus' throat. Gambon truly out did himself here, it's such a powerful scene in the book and it could've gone so wrong here. Having read DH I know precisely what was going on in his mind, but I think that only gave more credit to the direction here - they didn't overstate the Ariana part of it at all. Towards the end, when Dumbledore is there so pathetic, I teared up, it was a great moment, having the all-mighty seemingly fall so far.

The camera pan from Harry + Hermione crying to Ron + Lavender in the spiral staircase to Draco in the Astronomy Tower
I dunno what it was about it, but that was such a beautiful move on Yates' part. It just seemed to capture the entire story up to that point in a 10 second pan. Brilliant.

The Unbreakable Vow
The scene was perfect. I love any long portion of Snape screentime. Narcissa was portrayed very well, but a bit overshadowed by Bellatrix (probably rightly so too). The look on Snape's face when Bella suggests the vow ... heart-wrenching considering I knew what it was regarding.

The added scenes
The attack on Diagon Alley, the bridge and on the Burrow ... What amazing additions. Small reminders during the perfect student life that reality is still out there, ready to kick us in the gonads. Makes me wonder how they're gonna handle Bill and Fleur's wedding in the next films, but maybe that'll be cut or moved elsewhere.

Draco
I expansion of his story served as a great character builder for Draco. Felton's grown so much. It's a nice juxtaposition, where Harry is the Chosen One and Draco considers himself chosen by Voldemort and how the two chosen ones go about their path.

Ron at the end
Harry + Hermione talking at the balcony. Hermione says she'll always be with Harry and there's Ron, sitting in the background. Perfect symbolism for the next movie when Ron leaves the 'quest'.

The death
It didn't feel milked at all. I really loved how the Avada Kedavra was sudden and unexpected. It was pretty much "Please Severus" and straight cut into it. We didn't have time to brace ourselves, Yates didn't opt to show Snape's face contorting with angst, just snap and it happened. And Dumbledore arc over the balcony. And then after that, the raising of the wands as the Dark Mark approached. <3

Things that irked me
How they played Snape's ambiguity
Maybe it's just me reading into it, but it felt pretty clear in the movie that we were supposed to feel Snape was a goodbye by the end. Like Snape shushing Harry at the end, Snape's face during the Unbreakable Vow (while I said it was powerful before and I stand by that, in the book it's a flat face, unreadable, adding to his ambiguity), the argument 'tween Snape and Dumbledore. I dunno, that's just the overall impression. I mean most people probably know he's a good guy since the book's been out so long so maybe they weren't gonna try too hard to make us think otherwise.

"I am not a coward"
One of the best Snape lines. Maybe next to his "look at me" right before his death in DH. Missing. WTF. I guess if they played that then they'd detract more from the ambiguity which I was just complaining about. But if they had already forgone with grey, as I insinuated, then they might as well've gone all black.

Merope
I understand they had to cut out all the irrelevant stuff, but I still felt it to be important to Voldemort's character to develop his background. Also explain a bit about the origins of the ring, which will come to be a vital part in the next movie. Maybe they'll have Harry inherit a memory or two from Dumbie and do it that way? Fingers crossed ;)

***

Anyway, it's late and I've rambled far too long. HBP sits at the top of my favourite Harry Potter movies and so far the top of my movies of 2009. I'm seriously hoping it gains proper critical attention through Oscars and the like. It's about fucking time ;)

PWNT

Open letter to Freedomf:

DO YOU NOT READ ANYTHING I POST IN RESPONSE TO THE NUMBERS YOU MAKE UP?

We are NOT $1,000,000,000,000 in debt. We are $11,539,240,768,664.48 in debt. You seem to be confusing the current national deficit with the national debt. Perhaps if you took the time to read anything I post, or any real news source, you'd know the difference between a deficit and a debt.

To help you better understand, here's an excerpt from TreasuryDirect.gov

What is the difference between the debt and the deficit?

The deficit is the fiscal year difference between what the United States Government (Government) takes in from taxes and other revenues, called receipts, and the amount of money the Government spends, called outlays. The items included in the deficit are considered either on-budget or off-budget.

You can think of the total debt as accumulated deficits plus accumulated off-budget surpluses. The on-budget deficits require the U.S. Treasury to borrow money to raise cash needed to keep the Government operating. We borrow the money by selling securities like Treasury bills, notes, bonds and savings bonds to the public.

Now, Freedomf, since the majority of people can't even begin to comprehend the scope of these numbers, I'm providing you with this fun chart to help you and others understand how big these numbers are:

Now that you have an idea the size of numbers we're working with, please understand that the national debt is HUGE. $300k for a plane flyover that Mr. Obama himself didn't issue the order for? Small. $3,000 for a purse? Minuscule. The debt? MASSIVE.

Your share of this massive debt as a United States citizen? $37,642.63. That's what every man, woman, and child would owe if we equally distributed this debt amongst our population.

How big is the debt growing? On average, since September 28, 2007 (this was before I even heard of Barack Obama) $3.87 billion PER day.

What is 3.87 billion? Half the world's population. 50 cents per person in the world. That's 0.035% of the current national debt on a daily basis.

So please, Freedomf, have some perspective with these numbers. Look at them. We first broke a $1 trillion debt in the 1980s. By the time Clinton took over in the early 1990s it was $4 trillion. When bush took over it was $5 trillion. When Obama took over it was $10 trillion. So we all know where the doubling of the national debt occured by just looking at the numbers.

So before you go spouting off your poorly researched misinformation, look at the numbers. Read about them. Understand them. Comprehend them. Learn the terminology.

Also I strongly urge you to perhaps take a writing course at the local community college and learn to form coherent postings and thoughts. Once you can do such, I'll be able to truly decipher your opinions on what you're trying to say and respect those opinions. I have several friends whose politics I do not agree with. I do however hold great respect for them, because they can coherently tell me WHY they disagree with my own ideas. This goes for both my "Liberal" and "Conservative" friends (I'm NEITHER).

There's reasons why people, who generally agree with your overall view points, are coming onto his thread and joking that a Barack Obama stream should be played 24/7 in AWGate. That's because by association, you make them look bad. People will associate everyone of similar ideas with a certain person if that person seems exceptionally crazy and incoherent.

Sincerely,

Byte

Source: Active Worlds forums (yes, shameless copy and paste, but I wanted to keep it for the memories)

*** *** ***

Byte,

You are my hero.

Love,

AbMo

Something I dreamt

Every so often, when I'm lucky, I teeter on the edge between being asleep and being awake. For some bizarre reason, this is potentially when I am at my most creative, many of my ideas being generated in this state. This morning it happened, and when I woke I had a pretty much fully written .... paragraph maybe. Dunno if it's meant to go on or be a short story, but it was there in my mind. I forgot about it when I eventually got up, but remembered it moments ago and here I report it verbatim:

Two men are walking down the street deep in conversation. One man turns to the other and simply states, "fuck." No pretext or context, a statement uttered just to meet their quota,. To make the average. Now they can claim that their conversation had some semblance of modernity. That they were relevant and weren't antiquated fogeys. That they were still cool, a word here that conferred something he could never be.

No matter how much he lied, no matter how much he imitated, no matter how much he ever used the word cool (for kids who are with it never use it), it was not a word for him. Not a word that he could twist into his whore, his mistress, his wife, his lover, like any other world in his language. Not something he could be so deeply embroiled with that it would be incestuous, a word and a concept he would forever be estranged with.

Despite knowing this he still dilligently met his quota with every conversation. With a "fuck" to his friend, who replied with a sombre and knowing nod, the two went on their way.

Shanan Kan's Qualifications and Experience

Bored one afternoon, I was taking a look at Chris' Facebook profile and I came across an application that hosted his resume. Being the naturally curious and nosey person that I am, I opened it. I was suitably impressed. I know the guy well enough to know what half of what the contents of his resume actually involved, particularly anything related to his AW work. I'm not going to go into some long-winded rant about how I never knew you could bullshit like that on a resume, because quite frankly, I've known that as long as I've known about resumes. No, this opening paragraph acts as a non-self-obsessed segue into me thinking about what I could put on my resume.

For me, resumes break down into two broad categories: Qualifications and Experience. The former is the more 'objective' one, in the sense that you either have the qualification or not, there's not subjective interpretation there. Aside from formal academic results (HSC, UAI, School Certification, Uni grades too, I guess) I'm pretty much not-qualified at all :D Obviously if what I was going for was like a scholarship or some other studential field, my qualifications are rather meaningless.

So that leaves Experience. What experience do I have, and what minor experience do I have that I can manipulate into sounding as rather impressive? Well, I have no work experience, so I can't list former employees, since I've never held a job in my life. This kind of experience is also sorta objective, in the sense that you can write "Hydrophillics Anonymous, Secretary, 2005-2007" or whatever. The stuff you'd write after about what you did there would be subjective, but there's that impersonal prelude. Seeing as I have none of these ... I'm pretty much left with...

School Captain of St Pat's
Since this was four years ago, I don't think people really care. I do still think there are skills I developed here that would go well on a resume.

Vice House Captain at Grammar
Less official than School Captain, but more recent. Probably far more interaction with the 'people' rather than the previous one which was a lot of hob-knobbing with officials and giving speeches. Note to self: include House Music victory here.

Assistant Director
Again, more recent. Another very people oriented one.

Tutoring
This would be my "job" I guess :\ I wouldn't personally call it that, given how informal it all is. Aside from the people skills, I'm wary of what other experience I can garner from this that would be applicable in other settings.

SWI
Probably one of the better ones I have. Let's see, for SWI have I learnt two (maybe even three, if I could Java) different programming languages, utilised an existing SDK, worked in an international team of programmers on an online game with over 1000 players, acted as both a programmer, story/scenario writer, content creator and lead developer on minigames. Ultimately where I think this one falls most short for me is that I wouldn't've been able to accomplish all this without the other SWI guys, which is great if they're looking for teamwork/organisation skills, but not so much if they're after, say, programming skills - not that I'd be looking for one of those anyway.

This blog
I noted that Chris also mentioned his blog as part of his list of experiences... Maintaining an online presence, building up a community (albeit incredibly small), debating and discussing contrasting viewpoints, moderating said discussion, dedication to writing posts almost daily and of substantial quantity (in both size and depth).

Anyway, what I wanted to get to was just looking at all these points. They're all a bit iffy and not exactly anything tangible, there'd be a lot of waffle going on with just a bit of bullshitting, I reckon, but people reading resumes are expecting that. But it does look woefully small. Most people my age writing these will have a whole bunch of more 'real' experiences, a list of casual employment they've had, sporting achievements. I'm missing these. I almost sort of wish I had some, though I'm wishing I had really interesting and odd ones.

Most people in this situation would probably read some sort of 'wake up' call into this. They'd go out and try to change that, to bulk up the resume. But as one of my favourite aphorisms go: I'm not most people. In fact, I represent just one person... although it is the one person (ho ho, solipsism). I'm merely wishing to point out the gaping whole in my resume without a single move to try and change it in a conscious and deliberate manner.

I probably will, over the course of the next few weeks (if I can be arsed), compose a proper PDF looking thing which would serve as my resume. Not that I need one for anything, but I figure it to be a good exercise to try out of fun. It'd be interesting to see how other friends of mine fair in the task. Personally, when I get the inspiration, I'd like to register a domain under my name, seeing as I still have those 6 NameCheap ones, and make an online resume, where I can be quite more verbose and comprehensive, as well as provide examples of, for example, my writing and maybe a few things from the projects I'm working on.

I've also been toying around with calling my current occupation a Professional Amateur. Failing that, an Amateur Professional. I'd like to think either one describes the kind of approach I'm taking to my projects. I just need to decide which makes me seem better. I'm thinking Amateur Professional, as that at least gives off the impression that I'm trying to display finesse, rather than the reverse, which makes me sound like someone who's just really good at being really bad and not looking to improve (or worse yet, trying to become worse).

I was going to include something here along the lines of why I don't care if people read some of the things I write, especially when those things could impair my future ambitions (such as my un-PC jokes, bizarre insanities, dead baby metaphors running rampant ...) but I'll save that for another time. Doesn't fit in with the mood of this post. But I am including this one paragraph so that when I do eventually look back here to compose my resume, I will remember this point.

What I'm waiting for, to bolster my resume, would be for a break. That's what I want. I don't want a steady trail of working up through the workforce, starting with a crappy job and moving onto a less crappy one and eventually hitting something either impressive or eccentric. I want to start out there. Something like head of a department in a Government office, or as a director of a successful line of porn films. I want to so fully and completely wow someone with my personality so much so that they surrender their entire business to me. Delusional? Yeah. Dreaming? Yeah. Impossible? I dare say not ;)