Factoids and Censorship

Often taking the time to absorbed the full perspective of the writer is just as much an effort as it is to understand the nature and understanding of research and information development about a topic. Where that writer leaves off.

Bradbury on FAHRENHEIT 451 See also at Home with Ray

What space has this writer given us, as we look forward to the future? What valuations do we then assign the places in television as we have become numb to the experience of discovering who we are?

So I do understand the wider perspective here about what people can do to each other as we select and transcribe the future prospects of where we want this society to go. I had learnt about this aspect of numbing as I realized that it was just as great an effort to awake our own selves to the subtle perceptions of existence, as it was to respond most appropriately in our views on the things that we had taken into our beings for assessment.

It was “as if” we could find that “space in time” where we could “stop time and look in between the clips of our everyday experiencing” and realized then, that in every moment of time as an arrow, human experiences follows? There was that place to awaken our ingenuity of mind to the discoveries of the world around us.

“Television gives you the dates of Napoleon, but not who he was,” Bradbury says, summarizing TV’s content with a single word that he spits out as an epithet: “factoids.” He says this while sitting in a room dominated by a gigantic flat-panel television broadcasting the Fox News Channel, muted, factoids crawling across the bottom of the screen.

His book still stands as a classic. But one of L.A.’s best-known residents wants it understood that when he wrote it he was far more concerned with the dulling effects of TV on people than he was on the silencing effect of a heavy-handed government. While television has in fact superseded reading for some, at least we can be grateful that firemen still put out fires instead of start them.

Ray Bradbury: Fahrenheit 451 Misinterpreted L.A.’s august Pulitzer honoree says it was never about censorship
By AMY E. BOYLE JOHNSTON Wednesday, May 30, 2007 – 7 pm


How subtle this point about this identification of this question on creativity,”What does “creativity” mean in our lives? that it could be thrown in the mix? There was a greater story here waiting for us in the wind? How unpredictable the weather to see that in the third valley of Amy Tan’s exploratory journey, that while she in writing sees the object of stones as a part of the story line, then finds reality has been kind to her, that such serendipity is the realization that all things will come home to roost.

So too in this aspect and understanding, do I find, that the word “creativity” is a funny thing that such “determinisms are factored with it.” That such ideals and relations become the “correlations of cognition” that I had found opening in my own life. It was by discovery of such a method in a literary device I could, look at what other authors were doing as they began their stories.

How was I to know that the very search I had put myself on would lead me here or there, and to understand, that I was seeing into the future, and the future was coming home to see me?

The discovery of Plato and his Dialogues were a lesson in mind that I had come to look at, as if, the Dialogues themself were a method by which such perspectives could have pointed toward a future. An outcome, determined by the very process of bringing forth the “point of view”, whether by a “truer character of being,” or some form of left right brain dialogue of coming to a consensus on that oscillatory moment.

School of Athens by Raphael

That two such positions could have been adopted in the painting of Raphael in the Signatore’s room at the Vatican, was a deeper recognition to me of the creativity we can assign such outcomes by placing Plato and Aristotle under such such an “Arche.”

The “centre of the painting” is itself to draw attention to all the events that were happening in the school(A Royal Road to Geometry?), but to bring us back to this centralized position within ourselves. To brings us back to the very questions about the relationship of this teacher and student. This was a foundational perspective that was a sign of the times to me.

While we look at the inductive/deductive relation of what such an Arche represents, it was a method that by such induction/deductions of such things were to become “self evident.” This dialogue could be wide sweeping, as we take Aristotle gestures and a sweep of the hand, while Plato, points to a higher purpose, and the revelation of where ideas come from. This is a source of inspiration to me that such deductions while delineating a pathway to historical context, has a relevance to what was always known. Was alway there to be discovered, We just did not realize it yet.

The Teacher and the Student

“The Teacher and the student” could exist in each of us. What choice would you have while on such a search to know that while there was never the possibility to assign ourselves to this group or that, that you were to wear the stripe and pattern of, and then loose that part of yourself that was till on the journey?

The probability of new language development was the realization that from insightful development each of us holds the ability to warm up to the idea of what creativity means in our lives. While we gesture ourselves to that future and PLATO’S HAND, and how IDEAS could descend into every thinking mind that opens itself to such a pathway?

He wanted to give a speech, but no remarks are allowed. “Not even a paragraph,” he says with disdain. Ray Bradbury: Fahrenheit 451 Misinterpreted

Why would he just settle with shaking a president’s hand while he was being misinterpreted and was left without a voice?

Ray Bradbury rejected part of the mould “of who and what limits such a participation of self to the truth” was the message that betrays the deeper recognition of what we may assign to our fellow creatures on earth. Shall we learn the truth of who we are now being limited by using the distinctions and factoids, now becomes the way of hiding the deeper relevances the messages have about that truth? Were we acquiescence to such numbing? Then, Wake-UP!:)

Should we assign such a deduction to what the avenues of new technologies appeal to the nature of “numbing the senses” or, point to the realization, that such devices will allow “fine openings and apertures” which revealed the truth of that ever searching mind?

Letting Go of the Mould

Amy Tan reveals a thinking of mind that allow me to write on the “Character of our Heroes,” to imply that we had to let go of our prejudgements in order to fully experience the methods and thinking of those historical figures.Sensing who they were in their totality.

Amy Tan revealed that writing on a particular place in China, the village that she was to write about suffered a terrible loss(sixty homes burnt) and the individual who caused that incident, was to bear the brunt of the village justice. In order for Amy to live and breathe that village, she had to pull back her own opinions about what justice was in order for her to write of the discipline and justice applied to that man. Removing her opinions, and “moving into that space” was to try and expeirence the story fully. Let the story to be written.

This entry was posted in Aristotelean Arche, deduction, Induction, Ingenuity, Intuition, Plato, Self Evident, Signatore and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s