And, now, for something completely different…

People tell me all the time, “Jules, you’ve gotta think outside the box.”

These are people who: A. Don’t know me, at all, or (much worse), B: Don’t or can’t accept what comes out of my mouth (and pen) when, as I tend to, do think outside the box. I noticed, a long time ago, that I just can’t stay in the damned thing. The box, that is. But, I’m a weirdo, for it. This same group, who tell me not to think what I think, or say what I say, are one in the same….the whole, “outside the box” crowd. Personally, I find it amusing. However, I digress. The time has come, to make my point.

I am the very first to admit that I’m no physicist. Math has always been an issue for me. It doesn’t keep me from speculating upon certain theoretical issues, however. In short, I’m all theory and no practice, so please, bear with me and my sprinkles of (mostly) conjecture.  I happen to be a believer in several different scenarios of quantum theory, out of the eight major, basic themes, concerning reality. First of all, I discount the theory that there is no “deep reality”, due to its integral flaws. How can there be no deep reality, if we exist? When Bohr said that, to go further( than to scratch the surface) was madness, he merely meant that it would drive him (as an old-school scientist) mad. He just couldn’t get with the times. I also contest that observation, as a passive entity, cannot possibly create reality. Besides, it’s utterly and (dangerously) subjective. Only one person, or mind, is needed to observe what s/he observes (which inevitably varies, based upon bias, experience, etc.), and that is wholly insane, or, at the very least, has the potential to be. I feel the most likely scenario to be that, consciousness creates reality (with a cross section of multiple realities based upon choice and circumstance; much like a game of chess, but I’ll get to that, in just a moment).

Well, you may say to me, how is ‘consciousness creating reality’ any less subjective, than ‘observation creates reality’? Because my theory stipulates, Sir, or, Madam, that the consciousness creating the reality, is a collective. Just as, one atom bends, to another, so do our minds. Things meld, become hazy, interpret each other, and mold to become (some) mostly defined form of what we all perceive.

I’ll return, now, to the idea that  chess is a cross section of multiple realities, based upon choice and circumstance. You’ll have a five-move Mate, going on, inside of your brain, and the opponent goes and fucks you up. He moves the Queen you were just about to trade, before sacking your Bishop, to Mate him with a Knight and a Rook (it happens, I swear…). Now, bottom line, the whole reality of those sixty-four squares, has changed. It’s altered, in a way to which you must adjust, or die. This is your new reality; the possibility of defeat, in the wake of certain victory. After all, how did your opponent see your move? I could blame collective consciousness and your projection of your mind, to his, but, I won’t. What I will say is that we, like all animals (and it’s best not to forget that we are, for all intents and purposes, animals) tend to follow a distinct and predictable pattern of attack. If you’re still with me, stick around…it’s about to get fun (for dorks, like me, anyway).

My theory, based solely upon the particular ramifications of my previously mentioned theories, is that I (in particular) project my consciousness strongly, into the overall collective, to which I attribute most of our reality. I do feel that there is a final word; a sort of mix, of God (“or whatever it is, if it actually exists”-The Life Aquatic, With Steve Zissou), and mere Man. If I piss off any feminists, I apologize, now. I do own a vagina, myself, I just don’t keep quite the exclusive rights on it, which you folks seem to.

Bukowski once said, “Some people never go crazy. What truly horrible lives they must lead.” He was right, to a fault. The supposely ‘sane’ people are the two-legged cattle who go about with smiles on their (whacko) faces, blubbering about Jesus, and ‘American Idol’, at the same time, if you catch my drift.

If ‘God’ were the purest form of absolute energy, and we were a continuation of that energy, emanating from the center of the Universe, to continue on, throughout death and the infinite reaches of said Universe; couldn’t science and religion coexist, as equal parts of the whole, without one trying to dominate the other? And, couldn’t humanity (or, whatever this slideshow of the inexplicable gauntlet of life and reality, as we know it) embrace and welcome death, as a graduation to the next stage of existence…a, sort of, evolution, beyond the consciousness we all think we know, but within the regulations of the infinitely more powerful ‘sub’-conscious, as it were? Just some food, for thought….or, thought, for food…