Monday, April 9, 2007


Philosophy came up with Logical Positivism, Linguistic Analysis, and the Philosophy of Science, including Probability. I am not to explain all this here, if I could, but will say I think the concepts are ingrained in my thought patterns. The guy who did explain it was one who so thoroughly spoke in paragraphs. I merely drop the terms here to excuse that I will write fleetingly of what I heard at an exciting political lecture. Maybe I can keep to the spirit of silence on the matter, and this will obviously not be a wide open essay on the matter.
It is so serious, that the subject is to be kept under the radar, in my manner of speaking, though I spilled beans in a counseling session as a result of being harassed. I had mentioned it on a pay phone, before I realized that this really is that big, and should have been secret – perhaps. Is it as secret as how to build ships in bottles? I don’t know. Is it secret society secret and serious? Perhaps I still don’t connect dots.

So I took a break and wondered what I wanted to say and why. Maybe also this is bad writing because I have to explain that I asked the lecturer if I could write on my personal blog that never had a comment, about what I heard this night. He said probably not. One, it didn’t feel right to call this personal, and two, according to probability which is so important to science, I can write about it. However I don’t yet feel comfortable. Thus the fleeting silence.
I decide the writing is of a style, perhaps (…) ? I don’t care, maybe cryptic is in order. Let me ask this, if a former president writes a bad book, can one get in trouble with the Secret Service for criticizing the book? I surmise so.

No comments: