Social Capital

In our discussion of the Tenchi anime series, I mentioned how Tenchi formed the center of a web of different social groups. I compared this to twitter, other online social networks, and the more immediate connections we have with friends and family. Tenchi's first contact is his family. His father and grandfather - even his deceased mother - are his closest ties. Next is work and school - his obligations as a student and as a priest in training. After this, his connection with the various alien women that occupy his home.

Ryoko represents the wild side. A space pirate, she is bold, brash, immodest, crude. Mihoshi represents inexperience. A junior police officer, she is quick to emotions of happiness and sorrow. Ayeka represents tradition and high society. The first Princess of Jurai, she is wealthy, cultured, and haughty. Sasami represents childlike innocence. The second Princess of Jurai, she is honest, helpful, and without guile. Washu represents knowledge and skill. A renowned scientist, she is educated, curious, and inventive. Kiyone represents responsibility. A career police woman, she is meticulous, cautious, and frustrated.

Tenchi's relationship with each girl directly influences them in some way. Ryoko, usually very masculine in behavior, appears more feminine and vulnerable in his presence. Ayeka, normally of a composed demeanor, slips into fits of shameless infatuation and jealousy. The connection is stronger in some relationships than others, but each relationship affects both Tenchi and the girl in question to some degree. Furthermore, each girl influences not only Tenchi, but the other girls as well. Ayeka compares herself to Ryoko, thus confirming her social status. The Washu to Kiyone comparison is likewise clear, though less confrontational.

I have found on twitter that communities, or nodes, form around each profile. First, there were close friends and fellow members of the Legion of Tangent(.co.cc). Along with the Legion was, of course, my wife and fellow podcaster, Brandi. Through the course of tweeting I have met many people. I have met a number of bands, such as Twitch the Ripper and All My Faith Lost... Through the Gentlemen's Grindhouse podcast I have come into contact with several horror fans, bloggers, merchandisers, and podcasters. Furthermore, through TGG I met much of the rest of Geek Planet Online. I am known to tweet a great deal about music, and as such have made contact with several DJs, goths, record stores, and radio stations.

Each follower, for the most part, existed first as a separate entity. Then a small node formed around one profile or another. The InsideOutcast has a community of listeners as does Dark Horizons radio. Gradually, members of a node interacted with members of another. This may be due in part to Follow Friday, but is mostly through referencing other profiles in conversation. Horror fans met Sci Fi geeks, goths met rivetheads. Smaller nodes grew into larger ones as each overlapped with another.

That is not to say that twitter is a melting pot. If so, blocking would not be an option. Some nodes remain separate. Even still, the web is more intricate and broad than it may seem. What happens to one tweep can very well affect that entire node, for good or bad, and may even spread to other nodes. Hence many a trending topic. I know through my own tweets that I have had both positive and negative affects on individual tweeps as well as these communities of similar tweeps. Just recently I convinced a few members of one node to attend a live show at Digital Mindfield Radio. The IDM band, Bioassay, performed live from the house. This may lead to one node forming a stronger connection to another.

I, too, have been drawn into nodes, or rather, into a larger community. Dark Horizons is one such node. Theresa's Silly Question of the Week allowed me to access, through hashtags and mention of @DHRadio, other listeners. By doing this, I discovered tweeps with a similar taste in music, and by extension, a similar lifestyle.

But like Tenchi, the effect a relationship has on us directly correlates to the strength of the connection. Close friends and family have a greater impact on us than, say, a celebrity we happen to follow. Knowing when the next album drops is one thing, but discussing our personal lives is quite another. The celebrity cares little for our tweets. How can what we say matter when we are but 1 of 1,978,325 followers?

The value we hold in a social network is our social capital. Our influence may be stronger over one tweep than another. Furthermore, the tweets from one person may have greater influence over us. If the influence is mutual, then the value of social capital is even higher in that instance. Mutual respect in a relationship is preferred. It is one thing to be a teacher or a student, another to be a friend.

So I would like to thank my many twitter friends for the social capital bestowed on me. I hope not to piss away your investment in me. In the third series, Tenchi in Tokyo, Tenchi's power derives from the social capital, the connection, he has with the girls. The stronger their trust in him and love for him, the mightier he becomes. As defender of the Earth, that power is without price. I, however, am not a defender of the Earth as such. I do not carry a magical sword (yet). Just the same, it is comforting to know that someone out there holds me in esteem.

Selfishness and Selflessness

There are two opposing views of moral philosophy and they are mutually exclusive. On the one hand, morality is self serving. This is known as objective egoism as put forward by novelist, Ayn Rand. The other system of morality serves others. It is altruistic as in Christian charity. Each system has benefits and liabilities.

OBJECTIVE EGOISM

Ayn Rand's philosophy of enlightened self interests suggests that the right thing to do is that which benefits the self. There is nothing in nature that conditionally guarantees the survival and well being of an individual. To promote one's own being, one has to serve one's own interests. No one is required to feed you, clothe you, shelter you. Your subsistence rests on your shoulders alone. In that respect, actions that do not promote the self are not morally right. They cause more harm than good.

This is a difficult concept for most to wrap their heads around. We are taught from a very young age to share our toys, to put the needs of others before our own. Rand would say that this is ultimately detrimental to society. If we continually give of ourselves to help others, we will eventually have nothing for ourselves. On the other hand, if everyone reasonably serves their own interests, then each has their needs fulfilled. The stress is on reason. One's best interests must be rationally determined. The individual need not serve every whim. Rand denies the equation of the objective egoist with the selfish brute. Most view selfishness with the bloody tooth and claw of some Nietzschean superman, treading over the bones of his enemies in order to claim his prize.

Satisfying every whim is irrational and in the long run will not further one's goals. In fact, that which will better serve the advancement of the ego is pushed aside. Hard work, creativity, ingenuity - these things are shoved aside for no other purpose than to sate one's appetite. Rand would regard this as shallow. It is acceptable to satisfy the appetites, but not at the expense of one's best interest. Drug addiction, alcoholism, womanizing in the end will do more harm than good.

On sharing and charity, objective egoism turns a critical eye. Giving to charity does not serve the self. Moreover, it insults the receiver of charity. As the moral principle is self serving, to serve someone else's interests is to deny them the independence of their actions, which damages the self esteem. Charity breeds pity and resentment. Sharing breeds resentment as well. A possession shared loses it's value the more people share their enjoyment of it. In the Fountainhead, Gail Wynand purchases a statue that he keeps in a private museum. It exists only for his enjoyment. This same statue of a nude woman was once viewed by the ignorant masses with disgust. In Wynand's possession, the statue maintains its artistic integrity. If beauty is in the eye of the beholder, then it is as beautiful as Gail says it is. This suggests that all art should be privatized. The Mona Lisa, beloved by nearly everyone, is actually worthless as is anything meant for public consumption.

Objective egoism is a hard philosophy to follow. The serving of one's own interest above all just goes against the grain. It pits the individual against society by putting the individual above society. Followers either commit suicide, end up in therapy, or abuse or misunderstand the moral principles. It is a philosophy for perfect men. As there are no perfect men it is designed to fail. It arms the selfish with an excuse to be selfish. Furthermore, objective egoism requires one not to believe in god. Belief in the existence of God presupposes the belief in the gospel. If one believes in God, he either follows God's laws or disobeys God. By behaving selfishly, he defies God's laws. The irony is how Christian conservatives cling to Rand's philosophy. This demonstrates just how far Christians have strayed from Christ's original teachings.

Ayn Rand was of Russian descent. She understood all too well the dangers of socialist thought. That society could take the property of an individual and distribute it willy nilly across the population was something she held in great contempt. As such, she developed her capitalist system of man worship to firmly plant the individual above society.

ALTRUISM

Christian charity, as well as socialism, suggests that the moral principle stems from the serving of others before the self. Sacrifice is crucial to both systems. In Christianity, Jesus gave up his life to take on the sins of man (depending on how you view the crucifixion). In socialist Russia, men gave up their property, their desires for some utopian future. While Jesus had at least the benefit of being glorified and worshipped, Russians had to work long hours, stand in lines for toilet paper, and suffer under the iron hand of an oppressive government.

Even so, there is something appealing about doing things to benefit others. Whether it is donating to charity, helping an old woman across the street, digging a neighbors car out of the snow, or just holding the door open for someone carrying bags - helping is satisfying on a deep level. But is it right? Is Rand correct in that we deny others their independence. Do we pity them or cause resentment. Well, if the help is not wanted, certainly. On the other hand, there are those moments wherein one is grateful to receive help.

Why do we help others? Is it for this sense of satisfaction? Is it to stroke our conscience? As Nietzsche wrote, if we train our conscience well it will kiss us as it bites. Perhaps we help others out of a greater sense of community. I help those in distress that one day, when I am distressed, others may help me. However, this in not a truly selfless act. Even being charitable because God ordains it is not selfless. To do good in order to get to heaven suggests an ulterior motive, making the act selfish. Can one truly be altruistic?

Selflessness cannot be a total conviction. If one feeds other before feeding oneself, then one starves in the end. Complete selflessness is unattainable. One can only help when possible. Also, is one obligated to assist the misfortunate? It is one thing to donate your time and money in a time of need. The drought in Ethiopia or the recent earthquake in Haiti marks a period of need, where people give from the goodness of their hearts. However these are widely publicized events. People are starving all of the time all round the world. Are they any less worthy of help? Are we obligated to help everyone less fortunate than ourselves? If so, then the quality of life for everyone must be equal. This is the goal of socialism, to bring the quality of living of every individual to exactly the same level. The doctor is on par with the village idiot. There is no distinction made based on personal merit, not on skill, not on contribution to society. Society is served before the individual.

Altruism appears just as impossible a system to follow. Giving the shirt off your back, though noble in intention, just leaves one naked. In a system where each supports the other, one should in turn offer his shirt to you. But is it noble to accept this gift? Is it not demeaning? You can not put others before yourself every waking moment. Doing so only taxes your strength and your resources, rendering you no help to anyone, especially yourself.

A BALANCED PERSPECTIVE

To escape the traps present in either system, one must serve oneself and others. It is worthwhile for one to pursue his own interests as long as they do no great harm to others. Jesus said not to bury your talents in the dirt. Even that pinnacle of self sacrifice suggested that one should not abandon one's aspirations. Treat yourself. Advance your knowledge. Improve your mind, body, and spirit. Just don't do so at the expense of others. If you can, lend a helping hand. Preferably perform good deeds in secret. The unseen hand leads to less resentment.

Eastern philosophy treads this balance just as carefully. The Buddhist or Daoist shuns material gain. However, this is not that others may take more of the share, it is more that the ego attaches itself to material possessions. One is more concerned about things than their Buddha nature. Importance given to things creates stress, namely jealousy, greed, and suspicion. In Daoism it is much the same. Concern over possessions saps the vital energy, weakening the spirit. The spirit weakened, the body weakens as well, eventually leading to diseases of stress such as hypertension, cancer, and insomnia. The point is that supposed selflessness may have roots in selfish behavior. Meanwhile selfish behavior may have roots in selflessness. A classmate may struggle with a quiz. He asks you for the answers. You could tell him, but what does this achieve? He learns nothing. He passes the test. You don't tell him and this is viewed as selfish, a way to improve the bell curve to your favor. In actuality, you refused for a less selfish reason. If the student fails the test, perhaps he will study harder for the next one.

Luckily most people live in between the two extremes. They serve their own interests, yet help others when necessary. I think it naive to expect one to live solely by one moral philosophy or the other. People are complex. Life is complex. One's moral philosophy, then, should be more adaptable. Tend yourself that you can better tend others. Tend others that you may better tend yourself.

Vectors, Arcs, and Spirals

With such a title you may expect me to discuss subatomic particles. Maybe one day after I replace my brain. No, this post details the concepts of linear, circular, and spiral within the martial arts. One may categorize attacks and defenses within these parameters.

LINEAR

As you would imagine, a linear attack or defense travels in a straight line. As the shortest distance between two points is a straight line, martial arts that prefer offense and speed lean to linear applications. An attack comes on like the firing of a cannon. Apply force directly at the enemy. Attacks include thrusting kicks, front kicks, side kicks, back kicks, diagonal kicks, straight punches, lunge punches, cross punches, and the like. The diagonal kick bring the leg up and then extends the foot from the knee in a straight line. This kick is common to karate. One can kick with the same leg multiple times without bringing down the knee. Tae kwon do students often do this very thing. The cross represents a linear punch, one that extends diagonally from the shoulder. A left hand cross, then, travels to the right in a fairly straight line. A cross is an effective punch to the head.

A linear defense meets an opponent's attack directly. In kung fu, this is known as the broken fangs technique. The concept is to meet incoming force with greater outgoing force, fighting fire with fire. In the purist sense, one can punch an incoming fist, kick and incoming leg, or head butt and incoming forehead. In such a match up, the stronger force wins. Whoever has the hardest fist, leg, or forehead delivers greater damage. The downside is that contact still is made, and the defender suffers damage however minimal. Those versed in broken fangs know how to use the hardest, sharpest points of their anatomy to deflect blows. The knees and elbows are primary defensive weapons in this case.

CIRCULAR

Proponent's of circular techniques do not dispute the case that the shortest distance is a straight line. However, they suggest that linear attacks may not offer the best course of action. In circular attacks, force is delivered in arcs. Instead of a cannonball, the attack is more like a wheel. A wheel rotates from the center. Furthermore, the outside surface of the wheel travels faster than the hub. By rotation at the waist, one can transfer considerable force into the limbs for an attack. Circular offenses include circle kicks, crescent kicks, wheel kicks, lotus kicks, roundhouse kicks, spinning kicks, back hand strikes, elbow strikes, hammer fists, sword hand strikes, and the like. The lotus kick of kung fu may be an outside kick (begins from outside the frame of the body and travels inward) or an inside kick (begins inside the frame of the body and travels outward). A blow from a circle kick may have enough arcing force to knock an opponent down. The roundhouse punch follows an arc from outside the body towards the opponent. The benefit of a roundhouse punch is that it may disappear within the opponent's blind spot and subsequently catch him in the temple or ear.

Circular defenses form the basis of many self defense styles, even those with linear attacks, such as karate. In this instance, an arc of force is used to deflect an attack. The circular parry of karate is designed to block any attack to the head or torso. As one hand moves in an upward blocking arc, the other hand follows a downward arc. The circle serves as a useful defense in that the defender may move in the direction of an attack, thus negating it's force. This is a central concept in Judo and Jujutsu.

Arcs of force influence throws as well.

SPIRAL

Spiral attacks are an extension of the circular. The primary difference resides in body mechanics. Rotation comes not just from the waist, but the entire body. It takes the form of a whip. In the case of the whip, the attack unfurls, coiling out until striking with the furthermost extension, typically some striking point of the hand. The energy stored within the coiled arm releases on impact. The hidden hand punch of taijiquan starts from the foot, spirals up through the ankle and knee, into the hip and waist, up through the shoulder and elbow, and into the wrist and fist. At each point of articulation, the spiral energy increases. Finally, this energy is transfered in a drilling blow to the opponent. The hidden hand punch demonstrates the spiral energy moving outward. Energy can also spiral inward.

In aikido, opponents brought into the circle are neutralized. The aikidoist seizes the punch and pulls the attacker inward in a spiraling arc. This arc first follows, then controls, then leads the attacking force, drawing it down into a throw or an immobilizing hold.

Even the most linear martial arts retain some circular elements. Each has its uses in attacking or defending. As with all martial arts, the success of an application depends more on the Martial Artist's understanding and skill that on the kind of technique used.

Paradoxes of Time

So, the wife has me watching Doctor Who. This is not an altogether bad thing. I have enjoyed David Tennant's portrayal of the Time Lord and despite the much maligned writing style of Russel T. Davies, have enjoyed many of the episodes as well. Granted I am not a Who fan per se, just a casual viewer. As such, I am not as invested in the Doctor and therefore less prone to attacks of fandom good or bad.

The adventures of the last of the Time Lords brings up several ideas about the nature of time. I won't go into great detail on the Doctor's treatment of time as I haven't the sufficient background as a fan to do so. Just the same, he will get the occasional mention. So, here is a brief overview of various time paradoxes.

THE GRANDFATHER PARADOX

This one blows my mind. Take into consideration that you are a traveler through time. Back several decades you encounter a woman. You develop a relationship, fall in love, possibly marry, and beget a child. That child grows older, marries, begets a child. That child grows older, becomes a traveler in time and meets the same woman you did.

In other words, you meet your grandmother and with her beget your father. You become your own grandfather. The rub of this paradox is that to be you qua you, that is to be as you have always been you would have had to meet your grandmother before ever being born. The very fact that you were born verifies the fact that you had already gone back in time. If you had not travelled through time, you would have never been born.

Mind blown.

The grandfather paradox was first introduced by fiction writer, Rene Barjavel, in his novel, The Imprudent Traveller. However, in his novel the time traveller kills his grandfather, thus negating the chance he will ever be born. The aspect of becoming one's own grandfather was addressed in an episode of Futurama.

The grandfather paradox appears to be inescapable and theoretically could lead to the destruction of the universe. However, if the traveller kills his grandfather and therefore is never born, then he could never go back in time to kill his grandfather, thus ensuring that he is born. The circle is viscious. Back to the Future confronts the issue of the traveller compromising his own existence. Marty McFly interferes with the meeting between his mother and father. To restore the timeline, he must get his mother and father to fall in love.

TIME LOCKED EVENTS

The nature of time tat Doctor Who seems to keep to is that of Nabikov's Self-Consistency Principle. In this sense time travel is possible provided the time traveller will not drastically alter the timeline. In other words, what happens in the time line is destined to happen. The time traveller may have certain room to move within the timeline provided key events that are "time locked" are not affected. In Waters of Mars, the Doctor comes to the first Mars colony. He realizes everyone there is destined to die. Having grown tired of so much loss, he attempts to save the colony. In the end, the leader of the colony knowing that she was destined to die, takes her own life. When the Doctor went to Pompeii, he instigated events that led up to the eruption of Vesuvius. As the eruption of Pompeii is an historical event, this suggests it has always been so and the Doctor's actions were permissible.

The problem with destiny is that it undermines freedom of choice. If events are destined to take place, then the efforts of man are pointless. What is meant to occur will occur nonetheless despite all efforts to the contrary.

ALTERNATE TIMELINES

Alternate timelines and parallel universes are favored by science-fiction and comic books. This allows the time traveller full reign over the timeline with little consequences. Any change to the timeline creates an alternate reality. Events taking place at and after the change splinter from the true timeline, that is, the time line from which the traveller originated. What If? comic book scenarios and various Star Trek episodes explore this aspect of time travel. The new Star Trek movie addresses this issue in depth, developing a time line far removed from that of the original series.

Other series such as Red Dwarf have fun with this concept, taking into account that there is a different timeline for each choice made by each individual. This suggests a near infinite amount of parallel universes. Rimmer meets his alternate self, who happens to be brave, charming, handsome, and confident. This extreme departure from Rimmer's jealousy, awkwardness, and self hatred stems from one event. In one timeline Rimmer is held back a year in school. As such, he applies himself, becoming a more upstanding person in the long run. The Jet Li vehicle, The One, suggests a more limited number of alternate timelines. Were one to kill off all the alternate versions of oneself, one would gain their power. This culminates in a showdown between two alternate selves with the equal amount of power absorbed from the destroyed selves.

The problem with alternate timelines is that they lack credibility. As they veer from the original time line, what happens seems to matter less and less as whatever the traveller does has no repercussions in his own time line. This may be why I didn't care much for the new Star Trek movie. That and I seem to be allergic to JJ Abrams.

THE BUTTERFLY EFFECT

The grandfather paradox is but example of the butterfly effect. The butterfly effect is a concept introduced in chaos theory that suggests, metaphorically, that the beating of a butterfly's wings in one part of the word can build over time to a hurricane on the other side of the globe. In short, any simple alteration to the timeline will incur drastic effects over time. A misspoken word, delayed travel, a moved object may instigate a series of misadventures leading up to a completely altered timeline.

The classic example is the tale of time traveller tourists observes dinosaurs. As long as they remain on the established path, the timeline is ensured. However, in trying to take a photo, one tourists steps off the path and crushes an insect. In returning to the present, he finds the alphabet and spoken language to have altered drastically. The events between are unclear, even illogical, suggesting that there is a fragile bond between all things that we not completely understand. Chaos theory suggests that events follow mathematical patterns. However, when a change occurs in the pattern, that change is compounded over time ultimately developing into a different result.

Left Turn in the Doctor Who series explores this aspect of time. Donna Noble is prevented from turning right, thus determining that she never meets the Doctor. As their paths never cross, events from that moment forward also take a different turn leading to the possible extinction of the human race. Only in returning to the moment of diversion can the original timeline be restored.

A Halloween Simpsons episode played with this concept, displaying different results for each different event that takes place back in time. Results varied from raining doughnuts to serpent tongued people.

RUBBER BAND EFFECT - TEMPORAL MODIFICATION NEGATION

If time can be viewed as a flowing river, then it's course can be diverted, blocked, slowed, or quickened, but the flow remains. Eventually the river will claim its original course. So, too, with time. At least that is what this theory suggests.

What ever alteration is made to the timeline is restored over time. The time traveller can do whatever in the past, even killing his own grandfather. However, when returned to his present timeline he will find that the actions he had taken have been negated as though he had never gone back in time. It is like pressing your palm down on a foal rubber mattress. At first it makes and impression. Eventually, though, the impression is restored to the point where no trace of a handprint remains.

Again there appears to be no repercussions, rendering this theory meaningless in a literary sense. What aims at nothing achieves nothing.

RESTRICTED TIMELINES

In a restricted timelines, any attempt to alter the timeline will either fail or ironically contribute to the historical effect. Let us say you go back in time to assassinate Adolf Hitler. As you take aim with your period rifle and fire, another assassin steps in the path of the bullet. You kill the would be assassin, in turn saving Hitler's life.

This fatalist attitude towards time travel makes for a good story. In HG Well's The Time Machine, our hero attempts to save the life of his lover. However, each attempt only leads to her demise in some other fashion. Murdered, drowned, struck by a cart. Similarly, in The Crow television series, Eric is given the opportunity to go back in time. He attempts to prevent the murder of his love only to find her dying by some other means. Having to continually witness the death of your love would become a living hell. Eventually one must accept the event and move on.

This basically is a more limited version of the time locked scenario.

AFTERTHOUGHT

So that is a brief sampling of various time paradoxes. A few more words on time is Nietsche's theory of eternal recurrence. Time is a spiral, like a coil or spring. Though it moves forward, it circles above past events. It follows the same valleys and peaks of decades past. In this sense, certain periods of war and peace repeat. Periods of wealth are followed by economic crashes. Classical art is followed by periods of romanticism.

In Eastern philosophy, time is regarded in less linear terms. Past, present, and future are regarded as coexisting side by side. Just as events in the present color the future, they also color the past. Look to how the discovery of Troy has changed how we look at the Iliad and the Odyssey. Events that have yet to take place, such as the birth of one's child, may influence who we are today. This more semiotic view of history is one of the major cultural gaps between the East and the West.