We constantly play at pretending to make meaning. This play has become more and more important over the past half century. But what has happened to meaning itself?
I urge the council to consider the problems that have already arisen just from people taking search engines as infallible-- We've already started to lose words from the various services providing scores of conflicting definitions.
And the printed reference has been shown to be in decline since the 2020s, if this amendment should pass & the remaining books are consolidated under this "Bearer" group, these conflicted definitions will be all we have until the words are totally extinct.]
...
A member of the committee cuts Syt off- "Are you suggesting that consolidating our knowledge will somehow make it more likely that things will be lost?"
ReplyDelete"Sir, I am simply suggesting that ACCESS to it may be lost-- "
"Are you trying to accuse the Bearers of being biased? Because I will remind you mister Candella, that doing so would also imply that this very committee has been biased in choosing them."
At this moment Syt realized that Jimenez must have infiltrated the UN somehow. He would have to change tactics
“I feel that by having the information of so few runs counter to the nature of information. If we look at the way in which our brains store information we see that there is much redundancy. In other words, I feel that we need…”
ReplyDelete“I did not know you were an expert in neurology, if that is what you would like to speak on perhaps we should schedule you for a different committee meeting.” The same voice interrupted again. The placard in front of her read Julia Zepke. He was not familiar with her she must be a new member. But who could she represent? With the never ending geopolitical changes the boundaries of the world rarely remained the same from day to day.
Syt cleared his throat, having significant difficultly trying to do the same for his mind. Reaching down, he straightened his tie with a single pull as he resumed, "No Mir
ReplyDelete[AS:change "sirs" to future "mir" & maybe "samm" for dudes?]
, I am not an expert in neurology, I'm an expert in history.
I have seen what happens near the end of a society. I know that it is common for cultures to increase their investments in entertainments and to lose their focus on any of the more noble endeavors they've achieved. I know that towards the end, violence increases. I know that as a society extinguishes itself, what few example of the apex-of-culture that still exist are often consolidated into a few places. YET I do not find this to be evidence in favor of the Bearers, but rather the inverse.
I propose that in most cases, the increase in hedonism comes AFTER limitations have been placed on knowledge. I propose that the drive to seek out entertainments is a direct reaction by the people to the perception that they can’t be trusted with their own culture. I propose that if you enforce the idea that the public is too stupid or too violent, soon the public will agree with you and by the time they agree with you, it will be true.