Wednesday, November 26, 2014

A thought from William James

The italic portion of this typecast comes from an Adler J4, a beautifully preserved machine that was donated to WordPlay by Judith of Dante's Wardrobe; it will soon go on sale. The roman portion comes from a Brother Opus 901, a great find for $5 at the thrift store a little while ago; it, too, will be benefiting WordPlay.


  1. i just wonder for how long text images will be unsearchable, or whether they still are? on the merits, g'd prevent us from becoming telepathic beings! there is one star trek episode of the original series which deals with the topic. absolutely worth watching. as for the internet, there is still the filter of each individual creating a content. a certain and maybe treacherous amont of control left to us. not so the case with our thoughts.

  2. Replies
    1. And I'm glad you did.

      I don't remember that Star Trek episode, I'll have to check it out. For a good case against thought-reading see Dave Eggers' The Circle, especially the very end.

      I would not be surprised if someone (or rather something) is already performing OCR on all our typecasts. Handwriting remains pretty resistant to OCR, so that is the way to go if one wants to elude the search engines.

  3. Hm. An interesting thought for sure. The Bible says, "Be still and know that I am God." The words "be still" are key. The world hasn't lost its beauty, but our perception has changed, so I can see how some people could think the world is inferior. Spend too much time in the digital cloud and you'll forget what's on the outside.

    1. Nice points. The Internet and stillness are an almost impossible combination, although our friend at La Vie Graphite manages to achieve it.

      Happy Thanksgiving.

  4. It sounds like James is arguing for the acts of consciousness being discreet and distinct, with the implication of being unknowable, unshareable. But you'd wonder if, in the totality of humanity, the range of possible modes of perception and experience, if that could ultimately be true. Would there be enough unique individuals to prove it. Or maybe he's just arguing against another stream that was opening up in Psychology then: the common field of Intentionality (brentano et al). Drawing from the same whole. Hmmmm
    Either way, his brother Henry would say that's exactly what art, the novel, sets out to do. To break down those privacies, make them knowable.