Connections, 2


As I was watching James Burke passionately explain the interconnectedness of everything, I was reminded of my friend and psychoactive-substance-made-hominid, Matt Webb.

In this epic post, Webb lays claim to being the auteur of the first BBC factual documentary series (or holomemetic thoughtgift injectionseeds) that they commission after we all collapse into the supercontext of the singularity.

“our cities are unfolded instances of the hippocampus, as a game of Ludo or, rather, Stuck in the Mud is the first and second and n-order unfolding of the game rules + social behaviour + history. Surfaces, ha!”

Ouch! Brilliant!

UPDATE: gordon bennett. loads of comments about this essentially flippant little post.

Since moving to typepad I’ve notice that posting a blog entry is more like handing in your homework, at a particularly strict school run by ascetic ex-Jesuits expelled from the order for their extremism. All I’ve had a re comments telling me (and matt webb) off for our self-indulgence and lack of intellectual rigour.

Newsflash – this is a personal site, it is ALL self-indulgence. Moreover, I have the intellectual rigour of a frisbee. Anyway – I have removed the “recent comments” feature from the sidebar in the hope of redcuing the ‘pile-on’ that happens.

  1. John F. said:

    Not to pick a nit, but the names on the pictures are switched around: James Burke is the gentleman on the right, while (I presume) Matt Webb is the gentleman on the left.

  2. Derek Chambers said:

    you’re not serious. that’s the messiest, least rigorous and most self-indulgent crap I’ve ever seen. even for a weblog that’s bad.

  3. Matt said:

    John – thanks for picking nits (as Robin Dunbar maintains that was the birth of our gift for conversation) – but switching the captions around on the picture was just my little joke.

    Derek: (a) I’m not rigorous, or serious and this entire place is a messy self-indulgence and (b) I guess you have to know him…

  4. Derek Chambers said:

    why do you like it? it’s just words in order that seem to mean things but don’t. so he’s talking about the way our minds make models of the world and how we divide stuff up into objects. fine. but how do we create objects from ‘condensations and potentials and locality and unfolding’? how do we make these models in our minds from locality? or from unfolding? it’s balls. he’s trying to sound smart but really sounds like he’s done too much pot.

  5. anne onymous said:

    Yawn. Derek, troll elsewhere, won’t you?

  6. ChrisL said:

    Nope, Derek’s right. That’s a load of bollocks.

  7. MacDara said:

    People, please! Aren’t you taking this a little too seriously? Mr. Webb’s website is a personal space to share his thoughts with the world, not a bleedin’ PhD thesis! So what if it’s self-indulgent: as far as I can see, the context protects it from such criticism. If you don’t like it, then you don’t like it. Simple as that. Unless you paid for it, quit yer whinin’.

%d bloggers like this: