Log in

No account? Create an account

illscience's Journal

ill science
Posting Access:
All Members , Moderated

The world needs an iller science.

See, science as we know it now- normal, or regular science- has shown itself to be faulty, integrally flawed. Concerning itself more with its own blustery proclamation that with enough measurements it can explain away the world, and less with any actual relationship to said world- being more interested in itself than the truth it proclaims to unearth- "regular" science has painted itself into a corner from which it may never emerge.

To wit: Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. By describing exactly how much it can itself describe, science has come full circle to a point where it must admit that it simply cannot describe eveyrthing- and that, therefore, its premise is self-contradictory and therefore deeply, fatally flawed. It's a liar whose eyes are ten times the size of its stomach.

Do you want to deal with a way of describing reality that is a liar? I don't.

Further, the goal of science is to use words to infinite specificity in the hope of making sense by way of unending demarcation and delineation- separation- when thinkers from doctrines as diverse as Buddhism, existentialism, dadaism- which actually are not particularly diverse, but in fact simply closer to reality than "old" science ever was- have shown that the key to sense and reality is not constant separation, which in and of itself may even be irrelevent to the experience of life. No, the more accurate way to go about our time here is a unified, unconcerned and simple science that's at once fun and realistic. And doesn't mid using really fucking long sentences with lots of clauses.

Plus, "wack" science trains us to think in terms of single causality- well, it's coming around, but that shit still hangs around like thick prehistoric stank, shit they haven't yet cast out- and binary oppositions, which of course accomplish nothing more than setting up boundaries that are easier to work with than infinitely complex reality, but which are also false. Ill science says, fuck that, man, that's not even wrong- it's also not entertaining. It's only funny because it's so dumb- which is one of the best kinds of funny, but still.

What is ill science, then? I don't fucking know. But its essence is in those stories you can see sometimes, online, where the author is clearly a total amateur and they don't really know how to write their story, and at some point your perspective shifts from a sense of 'what the fuck is this guy doing' to 'i can't believe how fucked up this is' and 'i am no longer certain that this author does not suck on purpose.' That confusion and that sense of wonderful, slack-jawed corners-of-mouth-turned-up confusion and joy are the essence of what's going on here. I think.

And anyway, ultimately, what does science want to tell us? Everything. That's a little bit pretentious, don't you think? I mean, everything? Nah man, it can't tell us everything. Like, one day the scientific community intends to publish a billion-volume book- you know, once they've figured everything out- called Everything, in which they'll just list everything and how it works and how it correlates to everything else plus some other stuff we haven't even thought of, about everything? Nah man, no, even if that could happen, it wouldn't really be helpful because then nobody could read it. You'd still totally have to specialize in whatever you specialize in, and specialization is already so specific that some great biologists can't even talk to other great biologists because their respective work deals with such different stuff.

Nope. What we need is an ill science that talks to each of us individually and can discuss our experiences of emotions, because really, science has led us to computers, and computers have led us back to ones and zeroes- boring, stagnating binary oppositions- which are useless in making us feel anything. And life is about feeling.

Life is about feeling. How simple, right? This is why, even though it looks like art is superfluous and doesn't forward mankind in any way- not like the great "normal" science does- it persists: it makes us feel. So what we need is to take everything we've learned from the boring grasp of science, which does of course, admittedly, have a tangential relationship to reality- it's not really useless- and apply it to art, which we use to get at emotion, because man, that's a synthesis I want to see.

So, I'ma try to post here pretty often, with bits of genius and ill science. I mean, you know, I didn't say I could pull this off; I just like complaining.

You are totally invited to help. I mean, I'm just pulling all this out of my ass, anyway, and I know you can do the same thing. It's kind of liberating.

aimee bender, alain robbe-grillet, analogies, argyle, art beats logic, being post-everything, being ridiculous, bottoming out, bourbon, brain mazes, buddhism, constant uncertainty, contradiction, correlation, cussin', dada, danger unexploded bomb, de-emented for-ever, deconstruction, design, different meanings of words, discovery, droppin' science, dropping the f bomb, drunk html ninja skillz, ed cohen, epiphanies, exclusion, existentialism, experiments, exploding binary oppositions, faking seriousness, friedrich nietzsche, fuck everything, fuck the self-righteous fucks, fucking up, gaea theory, genderfuck, high vs. low [crash], hum, humor endorphins, ill science, improvisation, inclusion, intellectual vigilanteism, internal logic, inverting binaries, is this a joke?, kate bornstein, keeping it real, labyrinthine thinking, language that's alive, life as art, literature trumps science, logistical nightmares, magical realism, making fun of everything, making love stay, making things up, meta, meta-everything, metaphors, michel foucault, multiple causality, neoteny, noisy fucking lucidity, non-logic that makes sense, novelty, odd relationships with self-esteem, poetry*prose=?, polaroids of sad cardigans, post-meta, post-modernism, post-structuralism, potentiality, processes, pseudointellectualism, punk fucking philosophy, questions, refusal to acknowledge answers, rock music as transcendence, rock music for self-grounding, rock music subgenre etymology, roland barthes, roland barthes sucks, science, science as a metaphor, scientific bling bling, scraping, shoes, simulacra, subcutaneous understanding, subverting things, surrealism, synthesis, taking everything really seriously, talking out my/your ass, the getting-to-know-you stage, the rule of thirds, theory, things that rhyme, thinking- not thought, throwing down, throwing out all rules, transcendence, tricking people via appearance, un-underlined interests, up yours hypocrite, vernacular, vigilante cinema, ways of thinking, which art is high?, which art is low?, words as metaphors, writing like you talk