23 July 2014 @ 12:37 pm
Dreams the past few nights were of opalblack coming to visit me and Kirsten. Very nice visit. Dreamed of an argument in a library/city council chamber between myself and a woman who was arguing rights not just for non-human persons, not just for non-biological consciousnesses, but for all things. And it was a weird debate, because we agreed on end goals and some terminology, and I regarded her as a great ally and friend, but her use of the term "Thing" as a descriptor for a subject--that is, a seat of experience, a perspective--really rankled me. I found it "depersonalizing," "objectifying," etc., in senses more literal than they'd ever been before.

I spent most of yesterday thinking about those dreams. Thinking about what it means, to me, if a collection or a seat of consciousness wants to make the choice to self-identify as an object; about whether that can be an act of rebellion and subversion, in the same way that monster girls and the reclaimation of various terms in various communities have given the sharp edge and fire backk into those communities' hands. Will there one day be the machine consciousness equivalent of a Quentin Quire who demands that you call it... "It?" "Thing?" "Robot?" Because it make you uncomfortable? Because it wants you to at all times be mindful of the history of our words and interactions?

I still don't have a full answer for this.

Last night I dreamed that I was wandering DC, in a weirdly unknown quantity. My family was aware I was there, but no one was available. I ended up walking old streets, learning new things about how the city's changed. In one part, there was a new train/trolley/light rail system ('Snowpiercer' echoes; go see 'Snowpiercer'), and I spent a lot of time moving through it and using it, for reasons now escaping memory. Using new magnetic stripe systems, walking down up the escalators--but they were only up at the halfway point; until then they were just stairs--etc.

Something about all of my Atlanta friends being in the DC train stations, traveling in various directions to new and different places. Something about a corndog stand in the station, and people insisting that I needed to eat. I got something, some kind of comfort food. Jumbled bits followed:

An old man--former spymaster, magician, something; shades of 'Now You See Me'--selecting me and another woman to show the secret paths he had crafted underground, to teach us mysteries. Something about a foe of his he'd turned into a fruit fly and trapped in a bar of pressed fruit paste. We had to kill the foe for the deed to his empire. I don't think we ever definitively killed him. Something about a family in tears on the platform walkway, because their very young baby had died. I stopped to watch this, and I mentioned something to the man holding the child's head (still attached, just he was cradling the head), about where to put pressure. Shortly, the child came back to life.
Dense dreams.
Listening: television
15 July 2014 @ 04:44 am
I made it.
15 July 2014 @ 03:02 am
Why not ask me anything? Confess something? Tell me a secret or a wish. Anything at all.

Everything's screened.
On an infinite timeline, the world is perfectly fair. Everything will happen to everyone, and every combination of up and down and positional possibility will come to pass. Krishna was right, sure.

But you probably won't remember the times when you were you, when all of the atoms that have ever been you are swallowed by the heart of the galaxy. and everything that you ever were finds new life as the other side of the event horizon. The abstract realisation of your former godhood will not comfort you as starve to death in a Missouri gutter. There will be no identification, then, with all you are, now. Not unless you strive, now.

As lots of people have noted, we're here for a pretty short time, all things considered. Longer than some things, but far less long than others. We certainly no Sequoiadendron giganteum or Turritopsis Nutricula or Pinus longaeva. We're here for like, 100 years, max, barring Daoist sage outliers, so we have only a very few options on that whole "universal harmony" thing.

One of them is to, as previously discussed, express every possible iteration of self we can think of, and explore them all as fully as possible, knowing that it'll all even out in the wash. Another is to say "fuck that" and find whatever it is that we want, whenever we want it. (These two aren't so different; it's mostly just a matter of intent.) Another, though, is to try to figure out what it is that we will become, what everyone else is trying to be, and why we're any of us doing what we're doing.

And then help.

I mean, with 100ish years to live, and most likely all of it on this ball of rock, ice, dirt, water, fire, and air orbiting a precariously balanced path around a nuclear reactor in one of the weirdest collections of parts in the known universe, why would we spend our time making things shittier for each other?

You're probably never going to see a fair world in any way that means anything to you. When it's fair, you won't be this you who remembers the unfairness, you won't know why "fairness" means what it means. It'll just be life, existence, and "you" will just be the atoms in everything, everywhere, again. And maybe you'll look out from inside, ad inside from outside, and you'll see yourselves and everything that you've become and you'll say, "Good Work, Us; Glad We Finally Got There."

But maybe not. We don't know. In the meantime, there's something we do know for sure, and it's that this world can be a big old bag of shit, some days. You KNOW this. You've seen it, you've felt it, you've DONE it. This world is crap, some days, and unfair every day, so why would you perpetuate that? Why wouldn't we just try to be kind?

Gravity works, I promise. No need to keep checking the experiment to make sure that shit rolls downhill--left to its own devices, it Totally will. You might be better off building some kind of ramp, or a waste disposal system, or a way to turn shit into non-polluting biofuels and convert the kinetic and potential energies of its tipping and rolling into free energy for everyone.

People, let me tell you, the world ain't "fair," and it ain't "nice." And with that attitude, it never will be.

Back to work.
09 July 2014 @ 02:17 am
My birthday's in about 6 days. Acceptable presents include USD$500M, my own country, godhood, and for everyone reading this to do their best to either think or dream about me at 4.44am EDT on July 15.

08 July 2014 @ 02:57 am
Iterate every moment, every movement, iterate infinite selves and perspectives.

Don't fight your desires, your hopes, your iterations. They're just you, trying to do what you're trying to do: explore every operable option in the combinations of self that make you "you."

Let you.
01 July 2014 @ 03:03 am
From Norma to Normalization

In this, the first installment of me talking to myself while pretending to talk with you, we talk about the idea, concept, process, and practical effects of normalization. What is normalization, and what does it mean? We talk about Foucault's understanding of norms as a means of social control, as well as May, et al's understanding of the process in the real of medical technologies.

I mention the Institutional Review Boards, or IRB, and for thoses of you not involved in academia, here's some more about what those are and how they work: http://www.thehastingscenter.org/Publications/IRB/About.aspx

PROCESS NOTES: I'm weirdly nasal for the first 3 minutes or so, and the audio starts losing my ending sibilants at around the 10 minute mark. If I'm going to keep using this recorder for these chats, then I'm going to need to alter both my posture and my enunciation.

Not terrible for a very first run, if I may say so of myself, but it'll get better than this.

Comments welcome, as long as you're not straight-up jerks about it ;)
Feeling: Tired
Listening: computer fan noise
30 June 2014 @ 08:30 pm
So I started a Patreon.

There's already one post at this link here, as well as the general overview on the main page. Going to be another one up, in the next few hours--audio of me talking to myself while pretending to talk to you--about the concept(s) of normalization.

So, get in on that, i guess, if you want.
Listening: TV, etc.
I just wanna talk about cyborgs, magic ,machine consciousness, & the slow, drifting dissolution of the unexamined nature of Western, anthropocentric bias, vis-à-vis existence.

Is that so much to ask?

Good night.

Feeling: Walkiing on slippery rocks.
09 June 2014 @ 07:00 pm
I had an interview, today, for a teaching gig at St. Leo University's Marietta campus. I was referred by a colleague and I don't know if the university's read my CV, yet. I'm going to make sure they Have.

St Leo started off as a Benedictine Catholic university. They focus on adult/continuing education, with very small class sizes. Classes meet Monday through Thursday, and Saturday mornings, with each course meeting one night per week. Each course has its own specific text.

Anyway, I got the job if my schedule allows for it, which, at current, it does. I suspect that will only remain true if I stay as part time at KSU. A full time position would likely knock out that open time slot.

09 June 2014 @ 02:25 am
Unpopular Opinion: I posit Intersubjectivity as not "verifying" the "objective" world, but actually Creating the only thing LIKE an "objective world" to which we will have access.

My thesis steals heavily from the conceptual--CONCEPTUAL--framework of the Sum-Over-Paths model of quantum mechanics.
08 June 2014 @ 02:38 am
I just spent several hours on Twitter arguing with a Randian Objectivist and what I THINK were two specimens of the rare wild Logical Positivist, about compassion, "human nature," and the foundations/mechanisms of knowledge.

Two of the three conversation threads culminated amicably enough, but One of them ACTUALLY SAID to me, "you can't dispute reason. By using what standard? Reason is the only standard." My hand to g-d, that's a direct quote. Like, the irony of that kind of circularity in a system which just WAITS to call "Question-Begging" just went WHOOSH! Right over his head.

So of Course i end the night with links to papers on contradiction and paraconsistent logics, 'The Buddha Eye,' several readings on feminist epistemology, and the reminder to Mr "Only Standard" that reason is only one standard of many, and that they were arguing from a single, Western perspective.

Because That's How I Roll.

So I know that gender identity issues weren't being discussed anywhere near as close to the mainstream in 1990 as they are today--so much so that it's unlikely that it even occurred to the writers At All--but the conversation about Lal's "needing to choose gender" and the attendant reinforcement of the presupposed gender binary in the STTNG episode "The Offspring" makes me cringe a bit.

It all kind of falls in the same realm of "unquestioned and audience-friendly categories of humanity" from which a lot of Science Fiction has always suffered, because "that's just the way things are." Binary gender (and the essentialism that follows therefrom)? Check. Pinocchio complexes for all the machine consciousnesses? Check. Even knowing what I know about the themes and behind-the-scenes of TV in the late 80's a through mid-90's, it just gets so frustrating.

I want to write the new StarTrek series that picks up after the Star Trek: The Next Generation eps "Quality Of Life" & "Evolution," and the Data-centric events of Star Trek Nemesis. We would rejoin Starfleet as it's in the midst of dealing with the repercussions of Data's death--and B-4's development-- in the face of the growing galactic (and possibly INTERgalactic) presence of the Nanites, & the growing sentience--and Alterity--of both the Exobot species and B-4.

The show would then jump ahead several years to follow the travels of one Admiral--now Ambassador--LaForge (LeVar Burton), who has been, coaxed out of retirement by the opportunity to both carry on the spirit of The Enterprise, & honour the memory of a long lost friend.

I mean, I'd watch the hell out of that show, wouldn't you?
Listening: TV
03 June 2014 @ 01:12 am
I'm also available for:

*Fiction Writing

*Writing, Speaking, Interviewing, Teaching, or Tutoring in related but not limited to various aspects of Philosophy, Religious Studies, Magic/the Occult, “Artificial” Intelligence/AGI Theory, Human Augmentation, and how to think good.
—Consultation For Games, Stories, Etc. on the same topics.

*Prior Art Research

*Editing Services (for both form and function, flow and grammar)
—These services available for both fiction and non-fiction writings.

*Conceptual Consulting, in terms of helping you frame and present your ideas in the means most effective to your desired ends.

Prices for all services are variable-but-tending-toward-ridiculously-low. Variations based on length of the job, et cetera.

Qualifications and Testimonials for all of above available here https://sites.google.com/site/damienwilliamscv/ and here https://sites.google.com/site/damienwilliamscv/testimonials

So if you’ve a project you need looked at, from outside, drop me a message, and we’ll see if we can do this.

I accept online payment via Paypal: fenryswlf AT yahoo DOT com.

Then there are the multiple avenues through which you can buy unknownbinaries' works:

At Redbubble: http://www.redbubble.com/people/unknownbinaries/shop

At Etsy: http://www.etsy.com/shop/ravensmarket

At Society6: http://society6.com/unknownbinaries

And then there’s you being able to commission something original: http://unknownbinaries.tumblr.com/commissions

So please be sure to tell your friends.
Feeling: So many things
Listening: So many things
02 June 2014 @ 12:28 pm
Problem is, people still think they're living Bentham, when actually they're Foucault.
31 May 2014 @ 12:12 pm
Hello, Everyone. As you know by now--or maybe don't, but whatever--my inkshares​ project "Techne: The State Of The Art" didn't make funding. In the last day, we made it a little over 1/3 of the way. I guess why fund the dairy, right?

Anyway. To everyone who donated, spread the word, or even just wished me well: Thank you for your interest, your support, and your time.

If you knew about the project and did NONE of those things? Then I guess go fuck yourself.

I'm currently making brownies, but if you know anyone who needs some freelance writing, editing, research, or general practical-application-of-theory-izing, please point them at my Curriculum Vitae. Need to make money, soon, and would prefer to make it doing something I care about and believe in, if at all possible. I got a taste for it.

Feeling: down.
Listening: Tool - [The Pot]
So, you ever actually taught someone to fish? Who doesn't bring snacks along, to that? I mean really.

In case the metaphor is escaping, what I'm saying is that while we're teaching people to take care of themselves, whatever that's supposed to mean*, you can also keep them from dying in the immediate short term.

*"Taking care of yourself" is a meaningless phrase. What we actually teach people is how to navigate the system--or the ways in which the system is SUPPOSED to be navigable--with greater or lesser facility.

Which inherently involves a bit of doublethink so that we can continue to ignore how interdependent we all are, and continue to congratulate ourselves/judge each other on how industrious and entrepreneurial we all are.
Listening: Brian Williams Snowden Interview
Resulting from discussion elsewhere on the internet, this is my list of food places
A) in the Metro Atlanta Area that
B) are open past midnight;
C) have decent-sized (lunch or dinner portions) food items under $10;


D) aren't Waffle House, Steak N Shake, a diner, or R Thomas.

If you have more suggestions which fit these four criteria, feel free to add, and I'll amend the list.

El Rey Del Taco: 10:00 am – 5:00 am-- Buford Highway, Chamblee
Mama's (formerly Taco Cabana): 24 hours-- Piedmont Ave, Atlanta

Pan-Asian Cuisine:
Burger Win: Mon.-Sat. 4:00 pm – 2:00 am, Sun. Closed -- McPherson Ave and Moreland Ave, Atlanta
Pho 24: 24/7-- Buford HWY, Atlanta

Delia's Chicken Sausage Stand: Mon.-Thurs. 7:00 am – 10:00 pm, Fri-Sun 24 hrs.-- Moreland Ave, Atlanta
Victory Sandwich Bar: 11am-2am 7 Day a Week. - Church Street, Decatur
Cook-Out: Hours Currently Unknown, but at least 1am, Moreland Ave, Alanta
Manuel's Tavern: Mon: 11:00 am - 12:00 am; Tue - Fri: 11:00 am - 1:00 am; Sat: 9:30 am - 1:00 am; Sun: 9:30 am - 12:00 am
Happy Donuts: Open 24hrs-- Flat Shoals Ave SE, Atlanta
North Highland Pub: Kitchen Open to 1:30am Mon.-Sat.-- North Highland Ave NE, Atlanta]

As you can see, it's a kind of sadly small list, in need of expanding. I'm particularly interested in finding a late night shawarma dealy.

So Gimme.
14 May 2014 @ 05:07 pm

Hey. My name's Damien, and all I want out of life is to get paid to talk about ACI*, EMC*, magic, cyborgs, ritualized behaviours, and philosophy, and the place of all of these things in pop media and society.

Is that so wrong?

If you don't think that's so wrong, here's A link to my inkshares​ project, Techne: The State of The Art

Here's my CV, with awesome links to awesome things I've done.

And here is…oh, i don't know…my This Is My Jam page? Sure.


*Autonomous Created Intelligence and Embodied Machine Consciousness. Currently most often referred to as "Artificial Intelligence" and "Robots"

All of the following information can be found on pages 174-179 of William F Lawhead's THE PHILOSOPHICAL JOURNEY, AN INTERACTIVE APPROACH, FIFTH EDITION (McGraw-Hill NY, 2011); I've rearranged it, a bit, to put the counter arguments directly after the assumptions.

"1. The Generic Humanity Assumption: There is one universal human nature. Epistemology, therefore, is the attempt to describe the cognitive structures common to all individuals…

…Feminists claim that this tendency to make male perspectives the norm infects most traditional theories of knowledge. Feminist philosopher Lorraine Code makes this charge, for example, against a contemporary work on rationality by a male philosopher. She notes that “Richard Foley appeals repeatedly to the epistemic judgments of people who are ‘like the rest of us.’” The problem is, Code says, “nowhere does he address the question of who ‘we’ are.” She suggests that the standard knowers referred to by “we” in the coded language of epistemology are tacitly assumed to be people just like the author: “an adult (but not old ), white, reasonably affluent (latterly middle-class) educated man of status, property, and publicly acceptable accomplishments.” By contrast, knowers who do not fit this description (women) and whose perspectives, experiences, approaches to knowledge, and standards of rationality do not fit the preferred model are considered to be outsiders, and their viewpoints are dismissed as irredeemably subjective, irregular, or irrational…

2. The View from Nowhere Assumption: The particular identity of a knower (including gender, race, class, and historical circumstances) is irrelevant to the production and assessment of that person’s knowledge claims…

…Traditional epistemology has supposed that the ideal knower will look at reality free of any particular perspective or historical background and will carry out the project of knowing without any individual interests, engagements, or concerns… However, most feminists think that the assumption is incoherent and that all knowers (feminist or nonfeminist, female or male) always approach the world from within some particular context, whether this context is defined by conceptual scheme, language, culture, gender, or whatever. According to this more expanded critique, the “view from nowhere” assumption is not just alien to women’s approaches, but is an incorrect description of human knowledge in general...

…Accordingly, Code argues for an epistemology that takes subjectivity into account (including gender) without sliding into an “anything goes” subjectivism:
Knowledge is at once subjective and objective: subjective because it is marked, as product, by the processes of its construction by specifically located subjects; objective in that the constructive process is constrained by a reality that is recalcitrant to inattentive or whimsical structurings.

3. The Pure, Impersonal Reason Assumption: (This view of rationality results from the view from nowhere assumption.) The ideal of rationality is that of pure objectivity, untainted by subjectivity or the emotions and interests of the knower…

…Feminist epistemologists frequently refer to the bipolar thinking by means of which traditional epistemologists posit strict dichotomies such as reason vs. emotion, objective vs. subjective, mind vs. body, logic vs. intuition, or intellect vs. imagination. They have two criticisms of this approach. First, the paired concepts in each case are not mutually exclusive dichotomies as has been supposed...Second, when epistemologists assert or assume these dichotomies, they place high priority on the first member of the pair, assuming that it describes the ideal knower, while they devalue the second member of the pair. Furthermore, the preferred alternative (such as objectivity) is taken to describe the male approach and the second (subjectivity) is assumed to be a stereotypically female trait. Feminists claim, however, that the psychological assumptions and value choices inherent in this approach are rarely questioned...

…Although some feminists applaud [attempts] to highlight the positive features of women’s distinctive ways of knowing, others are concerned that this form of essentialism will reinforce the stereotypes that have been used in the past to marginalize women. These concerns are expressed by Code:
There is a persistent tension in feminist thought between a laudable wish to celebrate
“feminine” values as tools for the creation of a better social order and a fear of endorsing
those same values as instruments of women’s continued oppression.

4. The Robinson Crusoe Assumption:* The acquisition of knowledge is primarily a project of isolated individuals, and this knowledge is independent of any social context and free of political implications…

…The best example of this assumption is Descartes, who thought he could suspend all his former beliefs as he searched for the grounds of certainty within the confines of his own mind. Descartes was able to maintain his self-image of being a completely independent and autonomous thinker because the 17th-century philosophical and cultural assumptions that permeated every step of his thinking remained completely invisible to him. In contrast, Code stresses that “knowledge production is a social practice of embodied, gendered, historically, racially, and culturally located knowers whose products bear the marks of their makers and whose stories need, therefore, to be told.”...

…To paraphrase poet John Donne, “No knower is an island.” Our knowledge is initially transmitted to us by our culture, and our further search for knowledge is carried out within a community that informs our endeavors and to which we are responsible...

…If it is the community of knowers that not only transmits knowledge but brings it to birth, then the more diverse that group of knowers is, the more likely it is that their multiple perspectives will prevent the quest for knowledge from following well-established ruts in the road while ignoring other possible alternatives…"
Listening: Veronica Mars