beware, you are reading an atheists person's blog. if you are religious i kindly request not to read my silly blog for this page. since it holds some atheists talks.  i kindly request religious people not to any read. cause i dont want to be disliked by them since i talk atheist things:P i like also religious people. so i dont want them to read any this further paragraphs. cause iam an intp. i sometimes conceptualize alot without thinking emotional parts of topics. so in such situations, i kindly request to not read my blog's that parts. since feels insincere. to have a part that might kind of offend blog readers' beliefs/concepts. cause i also like religions even if i am atheist. i mean i have no problems with religions. except i dont want my life to get imposed by any religions' texts except the liberal texts that defines a shared common  moral codes. but otherelse, everyone lives in their own religion. everyone lives their life his her way. i mean i respect religions. so i kindly request religious people not to read this part of blog. (cause i think its impossible to deny existence of God. i mean God could exist/.not exst. so atheism has kind of i think logical fallacy or a partisan side in that. so i mean religions could be true. i mean what they say. i dont any know. i am just an atheist but surely knowing the shallowness of atheism in defying existernce of God cause its non defiable nor nonprovable eiother. so atheism is kind of a to me holds kind of non fully correct attitudein that. but i still even if is defectous like that, i am still surely an atheist. but kindly requesting religious people not to read specificaslly this part of the blog. since it wanders around sometimes religions which might be offensive if you are fond of religions. so i kindly beg/request religious people not to read any. since i also like religious people.

 

 listened amazing podcasts whilst resting at home these days.

i hadnt listened this one fully before.

really weird ideas passed through my mind, in listening this one. for instance whether Cambrian theory of brain or source of religion being linked to Cambrian brain structure theory of an important psycholog,  whether this theory could have been tested with different individualization models around the world as i read. with taking Foucault like attitude in a different context of different environmental and social factors, how our individualization concepts figure out. and regarding religions' sourcde, is it could it be Cambrian theories related really?

listening about different ways about individualisation processes around different contexts, different cultures, different geographies, different entropies of configurations of outside environment etc.

and coming to Kimbanguist version of holy ghost, that i loved to listyen about the day before, in where, people kind of do the reverse of individualization with assigning a person to its descendants.  and in this new podcast i listened, in this religion type of this culture, where reverse of our type of western type of individualization is present, where sameness, creating homogenius micro tribe is the topic that is defined as the most sacred trait to hold, we in reverse like to have an attitude to dislike that. I wonder why we dislike being same and why the culture i read defines as the to be reached state. I understand its these concepts are mixtures of nonaligned non similarly pattern components. i mean in creation of n many cultures along world, their own content holds many conflicting parts that interplay with being conflicting. i mean if everything worked to be developed on a model that favors the most integrated cultural concepts structure, i see that it happens very differently. i mean for instance, in this culture i read about, there is a big sense of inequality (with comparing to Western world) and its the default status quo of how life is. there is a scarcity a zero sum of resources and there is the mental image of rivalry being the only method to create any property/material topic. but in western cultures, the level of inequality level is less. and nothing is zero sum. and models of individualization favors similarity concept. i mean but coming back to religion topic, there in this culture holds a quite cambrian interpretation of religions i think even if podcast didnt refer to it like that. 

 

 

so i see cultures are mixtures of all conflicting parts that interplay well together. i mean they are very differnet conceptual structures developed with according to maybe mostly defined by the environmental context around a population and but in tandem, creates a micro cosmos of various parts/modules of conceptual constructs, that weirdly work well even if they are conflicting or look like that.

 

so, actually, there is no norm in these topics i think. i reference Foucault alot. but it looks like is aa nice way to define reframe the context i talk everytime, that it just happent this way due to this and that and that way in another context, but there plays randomness, environmental factors like land type/habitat/climate/resources quite defines creates an orchestrated constructs set that are neither inferior or superior to neither of possible cultures. 

now coming to the major queries, in a world of different cultures, how could cultural integration play out, might be figured out with looking to how conflicting modules of an even single culture works. since i am an expat, for instance i am also an immigrant like. living in a country i wernt born from. in future, i remember, the migration would happen in grandiose degrees. so i wonder how this cultural integration topics are to be handled. i mean to me, as i saw start to see that, even in a single culture like culture i listned podcast of tends to hold conflicting modules, that work out together coherently. i mean i see that maybe these topics are not easy to reducable or could not be analyzed in a mechanical way.  i think those concepts are usually created randomly and then progress through the ephemerality degree of them. maybe through memetics these concepts thrive mahybe dependent of our life time or reproductive time period, but in the end, i think two different forces of nature: individualization versus wanting to become similar. its really weird to me, to this culture i read about, in which there is a different form of individualization happens, holds a praisal to similarity topic. two conflicting concepts praising each other in a single culture. so what i mean maybe, culture topics is not a functionally easily modelled area.  i mean i never thought of that conflicting concepts inside a single culture before. saw that even a single culture holds many conflicting concepts at once at the same time. some nice topic i learnt from this podcast.  

like you expect in a culture of where initial disposed material beings are all equal, but then are all distributed by people's own will in this culture, but then there is no persistent distribution in this culture i read. i mean anytime any person in this culture i read could lose their belongings. there is a constant rivalry/fight for possession but the possessions gathered are just ephemeral. in such sense, i wonder why they had not become nihilistic. i mean there is no bound posessions and but that rivalry for possessions is one component of this culture i read about. i mean this is the normal state of this culture i read. that people could any time lose tjheir possessions and it looked as a quite different concept to me. i think its super interesting to read about different cultures. to see how same concepts or different concepts developed differnetly in completely different contexts.  i lost the focus.

i were thinking about roots of religion. in this culture, i saw really very cambrian way of religious thoughts. in western cultures, religions are quite different than cambrian models. so why is different like that? i really wonder, being an atheist, for whether religions has cambrian roots? a bunch of unrelated topics/contexts i written. but these two podcasts i last day listened are very nice. i really like Foucault like brainstormings. and when i read a very different culture it feels like trying to understand normative concepts/mechanisms in culture with looking their development or different versions in another culture. and understanding comiong to Camus again. that nominalist approach. but not at the atomicity of our brains/souls. the nominalism applied to even culture. from Camus' view. if we sense the world in such absrd state,  where we are all nominalist creates and our culutres are no different than us and different permutations of different structures,  coming to Camus's side, that all is absurd. then one says luckily Camus defined happiness in absurdness. recently i read post about Camus and remembered my dilemmas when i read about. and my misudnerstanding of Camus. or how people devaluated existentialism in contemporary age. i dont know if it would gain focus again. but i think,, to me it really looks quite legit, the way Camus saw how topics are.  but in the sense, i think world is much more interesting than in time Camus lived. i mean for instance, one can find meaning in various topics. like hobbies etc. that might even create very different projects. i mean, even if all looks absurd at times, its also a hppy world. i wish myself being protected from the psycho stalker problem. and i am happy i started to relisten podcasts agains and make my silly brain be busy on topics i liked to listen learn about 5 years ago (sociology/anthropology) instead of ptsd behaviors regarding to the situation of having a severe form of psytcho type of stalker that does sociopathy acts against me. (constasnt stalk/smear campaign. a severe type of psycho from sisli place is stalking me i think. )  anyway, i liked this starting to not think about stalk/slander state of mine and making my brain busy thinking of topics i actually like to think. instead of thinking stalk/slander. anthropology podcasts is my lovely anti-trauma place, a place away from stupid people (with stupid i said that to the psycho type of stalker that stalks/slanders me/does character assasination to me. what kind of sick i dont know but is very sick i think)  i am happy i found a happy universe of anthropology podcasts. i always love this university's podcasts of humanity areas' sciences. i think i found my stalk/slander  theraphy. its listening anthropology. or linguistics might also be good. but i think i like the most anthropology podcasts. it were before sociology topic i were interested to learn. i love listening anthropology podcasts of this university super much. its like trauma therapy:) listening somethin g of nonstupid domains. (since i conftonted a worst form of stupidity, stalk/slander. i think slander is the most stupid act any person would do. and confrontibng such form of stupidty is quite overwhelming. i like to be inside non stupid intellectual spheres not confront raw stupidity. i think slander is the uttermost stupidity type. hacing confronted slander/chaaracter assasination has been hard. but its also  very overwhelming levels of stupidity confrontation and also hard due to that. i like listening non stupidity. like my fav non stupid topic these years is anthropology area. i wish that the psycho type of stalker would give up stalk/slander named super stupid acts one day.  but i am happy i found a universe i lost in and feel no trauma of stalk/slander such forms of raw very raw stupidity. i think only a stupid would set up goals of slandering people for 5 years. i think media or people like to depict psychopaths sociopaths as nefariusly intellgnt. i do think quite reverse.. cause i dont think any intellgble human being would invest time to slandering some other human like my raw maniac raw psychopath sociopath stalker does like to. his goal his accomplishment in life is like, slandering me/doing character assasination to me. i mean what kind of duymb people type set such goals to themselves, lijke trying to setup downdfall of other epoople with slandering them fr 5 years? what kind of stupids do these type of acts? surely its nice that world also holds intellgnt people along with stupid ones (that likes to slander) and nice that the intellgnt ones l;ikes to  create the podcasts we like to listen. unlike the stupids people's tantrums of slander/stalk goals/or trying to destroy a person with slandering her like life goals the stupids try to take on as life goals, intellgnt poeople take nicer life goal unlike to stupid people whom takes it as a task to slander people. people who take on goals to destroy other people with false words/nontrue words i think are the most stupid type of people. i mean what kind of people take on such goals as responsibility i wonder. sick people. that creates goals of trying to destroy other people with no matter what type of means like even using resorting to slander.  dangerously stupid i call these type of psychos. i mean being stupid that much that cant create any reasonable goals in life other than trying to destroy others with even resorting to false ways/with slandering people ways. i think there is a stupidity level that becomesx utterly dangerous. and i think slanderer type of people are such type of stupids. though i found my trauma free universe. anthropology podcasts of this university are always packs of dopamin of compressed knowledge units that are lots of dopamin to consume. it would might create diabetes of knowledge in this area. holds too much dense of information every podcast i listen from them is just amazing. very dense of dopamin form. makes forget of trauma :) a complete anti trauma pills. these podcasts of this university are. in a world where stupids exists that has no goals in life other than trying to destroy others with even doing sociopathy against others,  these podcasts are so pill like. blue pills to blind our senses to feel less destructed by raw stupidity or a place of happiness away from thinking stupid sociopath people's sociopathy acts. these podcasts are always very nice very happy. shelter against stupid people's stupid sociopathy words of stalk of slander that create ptsd in our brain.  a ptsd cure is getting lost inside a topic very interesting that makes forget of trauma or inhibits replay of trauma moments in brain. i figure out i spend alot time thinking of trauma(having a psycho that fixated me and stalks me slanders me, does sociopathy against me for 5 years, psycho has first fixated to this interesting or super levels of uninteresting being named guh( & stalked me everywhere e.g. when i would go anywhere any distance like 2 hours or 1 hours, always stalked me). then stalk/slander happent as i shouted psycho stop stalking me, then trying to destroy with slander happens. likes to stalk me persistently. and slander also. but it could be something of ideological domain this topic. due to properties of the stalk. it might not be just a psycho sociopath type of sgtalker but a stupid warrior of an idepology that thinks i am enemy of their ideology maybe. i dont any know. looks to me it might be as well something ideological. since GPS like stalk happent. stalker had enormous resources assigned to stalk./slander acts. seemed to me is an organization that selects people and slanders them type of topic is going on. i mean i think it might be an ideological topic i think. dissident guh to which ideology? if is an ideology i wonder which one. surely its not any individualistic ideology that would had target guh the one whom likes individualism. i mean if an ideoklogy stalks me slanders me taking me as a dissident, i am pretty confident the ideologiy that would target me as dissident would not be any individualistic ideology. either guh has a super levels of psycho stalker (moriarty level) from 5 years ago place. or guh is a dissident that an ideology wants to destroy since is a dissident to an ideology. either one of these two happent/happens i think.    ). but found this soliution. (couldnt found a detective yet awhile.)  this are so captivating for me these podcasts, i dont even think any trauma when i listen them and get amazed to when listening.a sure way of trauma therapy. a place where is none stupidyt.  even if i a

m not highly intellgnt, i am in Mr. Wolfram mood today:) (since i used stupid word alot:DDDDDDDDD) i read Mr. Feynmanns letters to Mr. Wolfram and there is quite fun topic that went:)  (Not that i referenced these super ibntellgnt people means i am intellgnt. i think i am neither intellgnt nor stupid maybe atmost stupid i am but not very stupid surely ) though quite liked the discussion in between Mr. Feynmann and Mr. Wolfram:D i like reading about these sometimes asperger looking behaviors of genius type of scientiests :D its always funny:D to see when sometimes genius scientists behave temporarily like real life Sheldons. (as i read i saw Mr. Woflram did some real life sheldon acts at some point of time and it were fun to read about:) Mr. Feynmann's words are very kind :) )  ok that these people's life's are not private is kind of unfair. that we read their letters. but cant deny i smiled laughed as if i am watching Big Bang theory's Sheldon:) :D not smiled to Mr. Feynmann';s kind words but Mr. Wolfram's Sheldon like outbursts. yeah its always super funny/fun to read about real life Sheldons.(since i like Sheldon characterization in that movie alot:D )  (since i also behave like that at times it comes more funnier to me. though i am not any intellgnt like these referenced people any slightest degree. i dont share any commonality with them in terms of intellect in science areas nor intellgnce in science) (i  am a stupid version of intp stereotype. definitely stupid. not very stupid surely. a stupid version of intp sterotype i am.

 

 since i am also an intp (though being a stupid version) Sheldon charcterization feels super funny to me. since i have commonalities. not in intellgnce but some intp behaviors i mean i have commonalities. maybe related to having low eq i dont know. possible.)

 i am getting over trauma of a horrible level of stalk/s;lander/character assasination. some dumbo tries tried to kill my life with stalk and slander (stalked me everywhere. a definite psycho. it were like, stalked me everywher ei went like if its seaside or else. stalking people were main responsibility in life this stalker that stalked me is it looked like that. and also had responsibility of slandering. had fgoal of slandering me. and accomplished that act of slandering me. i meanthis psycho had noithingto do else than following stalking me then slandered. its super hard to confront sickness of a sick person whomever the stalker is, whilst i dont even like to read about psytchology since i find it very hard domain(since its super sad area, i cant even very hardly read psychpology articles in sociology books, cause i find it the most sad topic its super sad, i cant read. i think psychologs are like priests. i mean becxause they do a very important task. cause that topics are super super super sad i think. i just cant even read about. ) , whilst i confront in my life a psychopath a sociopath's stalk/slander/fixation. its really hard. but i am learning to get out of trayma. i think it might be either ideological. the pshycho might be doing psycho acts based on an ideology(hired to slander stalk me by an ideology). or doing based on just being a psycho. i dont any know. i dont any care either. i care that i am healing from trauma topic. and started to not care stalk/slander as i used to. ) . but i am weirdly healing from it:) i meamn i hadnt expected such healing progress from me.  

 

tomorrow, this silly's day is planned as: cleansing home first. then hackathon continueation. i wish i could work on measure theory this weekedn after i go over abstract algebra's unfinished chapters. this project goes on with full speed upon 1 week delay. 

 

 

yayyyy i figured out my pills against trauma of being stalked/slandered. its this dept's anthropology podcasts. they are so filled with dopamin that makes life super fun and erases trauma from my silly brain. i mean i observe replaying of trauma incidents of stalk/slander incidents happens very alot in my life every day maybe. but i figure out whilst listenig these podcasts, it inhibits that replay of traumatic stalk/slander incident moment. its really like a theraphy to trauma :) i am fond of humanities sciences' anthropology area alot.  changes mhy brain's mood from replaying stalk/slander incidents to these super interesting anthropology topics that i love to read/learn about. actually i am also still interested to sociology in tandem. but this, this department i think i like the most. 

whilst my mom and dad spends time in village where dad is born, i listen actually relisten(cause listened this once more whilst driving my car along Sweden/Germany roads in snow holiday i went) a podcast about villages.  i love these podcasts so much since i listen various different perspectives on various different subjects. sometimes i dont share the perspective. sometimes i share. but always fun to listen/learn about and extend my understanding.

 in mean while i cleansed home in morning i woke up late. home were so unclean again like every week it happens to become unclean i dont know how but everytime happens like that. i wonder in what frequency people cleanse their homes. i do it weekly and it feels as it becomes very unclean. do people clean also many times during week? i wonder. 

i learnt relearnt neologism. and learnt that urban is a neologism.

ayy i wish i setup a new hobby. of writing sociology blogs :) in medium. hmm. might happen in future. since my interest to humanities side is back. though my articles would be like humanities students articles  not professionally written articles any it would be. 

listening how world worked, how it works now, and predicting future. or thinking of future. the goal of the articles would be discussion different possible futures. or might not be any like that either. it might be about any idea i wonder wish to talk about.

for instance these days i got interested to origins of religions. or possible origins or Cambrian theory of religion. i might start with that topic. or maybe modules of culture topic. i dont want to be seen as a strict functionalist (aw the delusion of positivism that everything could be viewed managed by reductionism, i think i dont have that fever of being so deluded by that everything is such easy to model, i mean when i say modules of culture, i wish it is not understood in any structuralist/functionalist or reductionist sense. but rather emergentist sense. )   i forgot labels of these words and checked them to remember. like reductionism. one new topic i saw last day were vitalism. i would also investigate that topic. i mean my articles would not have the disentanglement in platonistic fashion or trying to see topics as easy to make up modules. but rather with a very emergentist approach.  cause i would investigate the complexity of such processes of formed cultural concepts/modules, that since randomness plays a big role in their construction and ephemerality being devised by habitat/cultural changes/shifts or such topics like memetics or their core nature. even if my ideas slides to the reductionist approaches (since this silly is a coder) i would like to stay emergentist. cause even from yesterday's podcast, its very easy that these topics are super complex, one module complete creates the contrarian output in another context. not possible to do the usual reductionist views or create predictions on how these modules behave/form/perform/change/persist.  i want to get out of curse of reductionist thinking or thinking inductively even if inductive thinking is in contrary principles to reductionism, they both work in similar traits. like trying to simplify a topic. inductivism tries not to compose from parts but rather define with heuristic inductive statements. but reductionism tries to compose an infinitum from parts, that might be impossible in various cases and possible in limited cases. so if i were going to explore this topic, i would beware from staying reductionism. causde the way reductionism works is like how our current maths works. we dont know if its the correct way. i mean how real numbers works and how infinity is constructed. could we do model a simulacra of culture topic, with configurations and controlled changed of those configurations? We actually can not know i think whethe rour way to conquer infinity topic is correct. I mean what i mean is, even measure theory applies to these areas also. That the way reductionism works and its analogies in measure theory maths side. Or for instance to me, Camus' existentialism is an inductive thinking approach. but inductive thinking approach also paints all same color to some color all covered topics somehow or has an influental main color that likes to color the topic to same color like an inductive process would do as. Whilst reductionism is holding more configurations in such modeling, reductionism lacks capability to define infinitum well either. So in such critism of possible all approaches,  i think emergentism seems safer than these criticised parts of those approaches. I mean i think one shouldnt either get lost in either reductionism nor inductive approaches nor emergentism. I think we need to mix them all together. And even create new ways of to model infinitum. to also in tandem create different approaches other than these 3 i mentioned. i think modeling culture or sociological processes, i think the matter of these areas are super complex. but would investigate. again with running away from a single approach at all at any time.

 

i am in love to these anthropology podcasts(dopamin:D sole dopamin:D definitely dopamin:D something of undefinable levels of dopamin its to listen these podcasts.).  ok lets listen another one today(trying to control my addiction to these timeboxes of dopamin of anthropology podcasts). then the hackathon project would proceed.