I've had a lot of heavy/unusual thoughts lately. I've always questioned everything, but not this much. I recently quit drugs and spent a couple of months in rehab. I'm now on Ritalin (For ADHD.), so I'd say it's pretty safe for me to assume that has something to do with it.

Mostly I'm confused on the rules, law and nature of social interaction. Innate, commmon, instinctual responses to said situations. Why, what, where, when?

I recently read a journal which gave me some ideas, and I wish to share these ideas in hopes of achieving some form of unified understanding. This is the journal I read: [link]

I chose to write this as a new journal instead of a reply because the chances of feedback are greater. This is not some mindless attempt at attention (I'm sure the thought crossed your mind.), but hopefully some sharing of ideas.

Internet and information -- Forums, blogs, facebooks, wikipedias, massive amounts of information with the click of a couple of buttons. How does this effect individuality? Personal experience and information is being replaced with a stripped down, naked fact, but logic dictates it was decided by a panel of judges (I mean, how else did it end up at this point.). At the surface, this seems to be acceptable. Deeper down, in the intricate network of the flow of consciousness and reality, how does this effect us? Currently, I guess most of us are thinking it's nice to skip the useless untruths of whatever you are trying to look up, and go right to the fact. Again, at the surface, a very nice concept, but it will only get worse/better (However you look at it.), and the knowledge of "this" will eventually become more rooted in human reality as opposed to the natural process of seeking out the fact by reaching a conclusion of different facts (Or, in other words, a fact based on a more investigated search. This will of course be much more relative to your own personal logic.), would this not mean that soon everything and all can be summed up in a few words? And/or that a few humans (A panel of judges) will dictate what is fact and what is not to a greater extent.

To me, it seems as if (the world's leaders. Perhaps it doesn't work that way, but it makes this easier to understand in a way.) the world wants to transfer individuality to a collective consciousness. It wishes to debunk individual concepts, ideas, theories, and create a singular consciousness for every creature to derive their reality from (Ideas, thoughts, concepts, feelings, etc.)

This, again, happens to coincide with theories on 2012. Perhaps it's a bit far fetched in this case, but, again, to me it seems to fit perfectly. I don't think we'll transcend into another dimension overnight -- perhaps it is the cirka beginning of the collective mind. As the journal pointed out, perhaps it's already begun with the conception of the internet. Why do these 2, completely unrelated (In normal thought I suppose. This feels like a somewhat crazy idea.) theories fit together? A coincidence, perhaps? Or maybe I'm just way off base and need to clock back in?

I don't mean to exaggerate. Crazy ideas and radical thoughts seem to make people think I'm worried, when I'm simply just somewhat interested in learning more and sharing my ideas.

I don't know what to make of reality or truth anymore. What is truth? Who decides? Evidence? Evidence is relative to the crime and nature of reality after. (Crime is just an example. Any action, anything.) I suppose our mind deducts everything and all into a small corner of the conscious thought to make sense of it all, or perhaps it just considers past events that are somewhat related in logic to this new one to reach a conclusion, and denies everything else.

If a tree falls in the woods and no one was around to hear it, did it still make a sound? "The age old question". We're exploring the universe, but we've yet to understand or put any effort into understanding basic logic.

If everything is ever-changing, does this not mean that reality is different after a set event? Of course on an atomic level, but what is the extent of this micro-reality in our perceived reality? No one knows, it's just "safe-to-assume-guesswork-based-on-past-experience". Everything is.

Now, what is information? Why do we share it? To get attention in a way, basically. Sharing information to get more information, knowledge. Knowledge is power. Power is good, or atleast considered a "positive" thing in our society.

I do not believe in conspiracy theories. I do not, however, deny. If you are interested in something, every category of that interest contributes to the conclusion. The conclusion to anything we humans are interested in is some form of truth to make our lives/reality more enjoyable. Sort of like "Wishing for a better tomorrow."

It's safe to say that the "internet" seems like a joint operation by the worlds leaders to centralize information, and devalue individual thought. It's also safe to say that it could be a natural (Well, not done by humans. The universe, energy, whatever.) chain of events. Humans have always seeked out other humans, and the internet was a ticking attention bomb waiting to happen. Perhaps it's just humanity at work. Do we blame anyone? No, we cannot blame anyone for what is forged in our essence.

Instant-gratification is now the way of the world. Scoring some "gratification" as fast as possible with minimal effort. We cannot dismiss what seems to be primal urges/instincts though, so we can not blame, or praise, anyone but humanity itself. People are still different, and we all get our kicks / joy from something slightly or vastly different. Some people spend more time than others for their "kicks", while some spend less time and get more kicks - Different levels of joy, but the big picture/result remains the same -- Trying to be happy (Or maintaining happiness.). I hope you understand what I mean -- These are just examples.

I'm sure you've realised it by now, but English is not my first language. Perhaps I am just at a loss of words. When talking about basic instincts, feelings, at the trigger or cosmic event, I often find myself wishing for a better structure to describe it. I do apologize -- to me it seems like the languages I know are incredibly limited by design, and not my lack of understanding. Who wants to blame themselves, though? Heh.

School rewards memory, not intelligence. If you can regurgitate what "he", or "they" said, you will be rewarded. To paint a crude picture, it's more like a dog being rewarded a bone for rolling over. The teachings do of course follow basic logic, but everything and all can be manipulated to whatever you want it to be. Presentation, wording, structure, day of the year all factor in on whatever.

People get impressed by people who do well in school, and assume they are intelligent. People also think dogs that can lie down or bark at command are intelligent. I'd say learning and repeating behaviour is not intelligence, it is simply the ability to copy. I'm not sure how to define intelligence -- my personal opinion is that it's the ability to do more than others with bits of information in a set enviroment and set time (Everything being equal.). IE; a tiny circle on a blank canvas turned into a masterpiece instead of an 8. Just an example, not necessarily art.

It seems like the school system was simply created by "the "man" to brain wash people into working ants. A good hive is a productive, loyal hive. The system by design is supposed to prevent injustice at the surface, but what is injustice? Murder? Stealing? Common notions of injustice. Let's consider why. Murder because it takes away freedom, removes the ability to live, and the action says the person responsible might murder someone else, it causes a chain of fear, confusion, hatred and so on. Stealing because you took something you did not earn. If 2 factions fight each other, the civilians murdered in between are acceptable. It does not matter because of the circumstances, and the chaos around. Seems to me the smartest thing a serial killer could do is sign up for the army/fighting force of his or hers country. Are you still allowed to kill if you enjoy? Most countries prefer so, atleast it appears so by their training. The officials might completely deny it, but doing beats saying, right?

The flow of "the system" and its logic is extremely curved and almost endless. From the starting point to the end (Of a decision, a rule, a punishment, an action, whatever they do.), there are hundreds of ways to manipulate the rules a tiny bit at each set-point in the long process, but the result will appear "legit/acceptable/true" because of the seemingly natural chain with only a few errors.

Anyhow, back to basics and humanity as a species..

Humanity crawled into existance about 500.000 years ago (They say.). There are different theories on evolution, some are fantastic and some are boring. Most of us think about Charles Darwin on the subject, but the icon on the theory of evolution got his idea from a french guy (If I recall correctly.) and refined it. There are so many different theories, which is good, but to be honest we don't know what happened. Monkeys are quite similar to humans according to DNA research, about 99.8% or so, but I'd say they aren't very similar at all in consciousness. If you believe in evolution, it is safe to say that monkeys simply didn't evolve into humanity. What happened to our brethren? We made a massive leap in conscious thought, while no other creature even comes remotely close? Once in 14 billion years, 1 extremely special race appeared. A random event, a chance. If it hadn't happened, would it have happened? Could another race, superior in intelligence, suddenly spawn somewhere? Not likely in such a small period of time when you look at how long it took for the first species with this quality. .


There are 2 basic systems of belief -- Science and Religion. Science is supposed to be the absolute facts, the logic of reality and truths. This is not true. At the subatomic level, chaos rules and nothing can be predicted. There is evidence of an energy randomly popping in and out of existance (I do not remember what it is called.). We are still searching for what makes up over 90% of our supposed universe. It is simply the need to make sense of it all, so we search for truths in common logic to make us feel good, something to hang reality on. What is between galaxies? I will not deny that I get most of my information from wikipedias, websites and so on. And I will not deny that a certain amount is probably bunk, but who is to say. Where is it possible to get truth on obscure subjects? One site said a couple of hydrogen atoms per cubic cm (inter-galactic) or cm (galactic), most said supposedly "dark matter", which is the 90% we're searching for. I do not think anything that consists of so much space and hasn't been found, ever will be.

I'm not trying to blame anyone or anything, I simply wish to share my random opinions and thoughts. There are a cople of redundancies in here, so no need to point that out.