To make "film" philosophically self-consistent

Medium of "film" is debated - if it qualifies as an art form or not. Those who believe it's an art, find certain conditions to be able to do so. A primary condition is to enable film as a mediative source of invoking consciousness. The visual/verbal stimuli it delivers should make the audience understand/reflect on the form it delivers and become a participant in the form which the creator of film was already a part of. There are certain easy techniques to do that, which shouldn't become the sole method of making film an art. For example, to make characters recite a poem on screen makes film a medium to access another form. To make film an art, it has to crudely invoke consciousness in your mind by finding and establishing certain putative features of itself and using them. 

Having done that, let say, now my aim is to make a film as an art form do philosophy. If I am able to achieve that in a perfect wotld, it means that philosophy and art are abridged through the medium of film. In other words, a film has its crude elements which are philosophically rich (be it the mathematical sequences of images - logical positivism etc.) and act as a guiding medium of consciousness for the viewer. In effect, film resources do all the "hard" task of philosophy and what an audience gets is the "soft" part of arts portrayed thereby. Depending on the type of philosophy, the "hard" task can be undertaken by the creator (rational) or left for viewer to interpret (open ended). For the former, there is a clear distinction between arts and philosophy, while for the latter, both things are merged together seemlessly and the question of arts and philosophy is in the minds of viewer (creator can only attempt different techniques). 

It is quite interesting to think of ways to do that. In rational sense, the best approach is to try different philosophical systems and find technical means of putting them in film. It can be done using the seqeunce of images shown in film or some other visual means which are artistic in nature.

Key ideas - Structural (minimalist) films like Serene velocity 1970. 

Citation - Plato Stanford, philosophy of film.

Solution:

1. Web cam technique is a nice methodogical-practical technique to create infinite frames sequentially. 
2. Let's shoot near the grantchester river, to aim for a infinite long distance location - keeping the stand static. 
3.  Time lapse of the whole video would be best. 5 mins step. 

Thought, grave, and entropy.

A grave once said to a thought,

 "why do you look so engrossed:

 a heart troubles a head when in misery, 

are you trying to solve some mystery?"

 The thought said in a grim tone, 

"I've power, money but I feel alone. 

My pillars of thoughts attract flocks,

 who admire it, climb it, to get flopped. 

Some still manage to reach the top,

 and they end up voracious or in doubt." 

The grave quipped with a fossil tone,

 "You were the one to call stone a throne. 

Then, everyone started running after it.

 Those who got it, they got contented. 

Others polished it hard, to glow it more.

 But very few asked the episteme of throne. 

Those who asked it, got depressed, 

and stopped this quest and fell dead." 

The thought froze on hearing this,

 awaiting to fall into this vast abyss - 

of galaxies, stars, stellar gas and clouds, 

with sign of nothing but his own thoughts. 

As grave opened its arms to embrace him, 

a sudden idea like a thunderbolt struck him, 

"What if there's something beyond you and me?" 

Grave replied as if he saw this coming, 

"To not exist is beyond all. To be nothing".

 Building up his epiphany, the thought explained, 

"A man dismantles into atoms when dead. 

These atoms exist beyond all our senses, 

this simple fact can have lots of inferences.

I'm life because I'm thought,

 but it doesn't mean life is all thought. 

A bunch of packed atoms is what is life, 

just see that mold on you, living with strife.

 For me, life is a restriction with less entropy 

than death which is a state of maximum entropy. 

Entropy is an uncertainty in our lives, 

a cycle of love and quarrel with our wives. 

More than that, a life strives to interact with a life,

 imagine a specie living light years away in disguise.

 It's not a story to sell or a publicity stunt, 

a thought chasing that signal is mankind's hunt. 

A hunt to increase entropy without going to grave, 

for the joy of elevating entropy, while alive, is all I crave."

Rough -

The thought replied with grim face," I feel like dissolving into the space.Being tired of sitting on my own tower,I want to cede all my assets and power. "The grave remarked abruptly with a mirth,"Being human, you will dissolve in this Earth.One thought created another,each thought debated another,one thought conquered another,each thought killed its mother.Cyclones made of thoughts  lionise you and blind you,yet drift you to the top of mound, **cyclones - thoughts - drift - top - mound - Sitting there aloneDark clouds of thoughtsbefool, engross, and haunt. Every thought is in illusion,every system, thus, is delusion,every word is an aversionto the mind-matter unison.Every debate dies in confusion,every mind lies in Perching on top, you adore sky,obscured from beings that fly-geese, vultures, stars, comets,who are they, what do they feel?Heavy heads bogging down the bodiesand forging a convolute reality.Minds - sick, alone, gore, and torn,  lingering to transcend into oblivion. Before the impending escape,a signal struck the landscape shouting trillion miles away"You were never alone, so were we,You are not the app ******** everyone knows stuff till this part, everything after this is going to be the future. 

I love you, Wittgenstein

As I say a word,
it reminds me of you -
my world is not yours
and yours can't be mine.

As I surmount this ladder
of trying to say things -
you threw it away as if
you want to see me falling.

As I fall, I start whistling
the things I can't say -
like this crazy you who
said things he can't say.

As I start seeing semblances
a likely bias stops me -
for my intuition and illogic,
but you seem to hold me.

As I am about to touch down
you connect me to forms of life -
of thoughts, habits, and cultures,
of being able to love and loved by.

As I think of love, I think of you
and the moment expands to eternity -
my heart glazes intensely on imagining
your passion, profundity, and intensity.

Hill of wisdom

He got born in this world,

started gazing and listening,

yet not speaking a word.

He learnt from his architect,

speech, style, and sermon,

to utter ideas and then reflect.

He started climbing a hill,

made by sages of the past,

to view the world at his will.

He learnt mounting from masters -

learning, failing, trying, repeating,

and building the path as he wanders.

He matured as he moved places -

new milieu, masters, and mantras,

his thoughts felt like zillion spaces.

He chose to do an abstract hiking -

of logic, philosophy, and poetry,

he didn't feel climbing but flying.

He spirited high to find hilltop 

to sit, sense, and solve the world,

but failed to find any such top.

He grew old and forgot his goal,

still soaring in his spectral space,

now, he adores his untold hope.

A love story of two stars

Two stars,

light-years apart,

glimmer and glance

at each other to ask

some eternal questions:

why they exist ,

why they met,

and why they are apart.

Humans, the God of logic,

told them the story of accumulation

of gas clouds of dense concentration

ultimately creating and rearing them.

Happy to know this,

now they ask

why they are close

yet miles apart.

Humans, the God of rationality,

bashed them at their stupid question:

in an ocean of billion stars, 

lots of stars are near or far. 

Sad to know this,

now they ask

when will they meet

as they seem

to like each other.

Humans, the God of predictability,

told them that after millions of years,

gravity will bring them closer and closer

until they clash, mash, and perish together.

Dancing in this hope,

they relish this moment

of glancing at each other

knowing their destiny.

On the nature of sex

On the nature of sex

Sex is undeniably the most talked about and fundamental aspect of a human psyche. Skipping its historical perspectives, I am interested in this blogpost to talk directly about what place sex has in our lives today. In this post-modern world, the old beliefs on sex are being continously and progressively shunned by most classes (economic or intellectual). Most of the banal conversations between well-to-do humans is on the topics like, polyamory, casual sex, threesome, gender sexual identity, choosing partners, extra-marital sex, open relationships etc. I am interested to find what's the most fundamental consideration to hold while deciding on your decision or belief system, when your future actions are falling into this domain of life.

Unarguably, the human body (including mind) is a complex unit of intermingled biological, emotional, rational, irrational, evolutionary and lot other facets. These are so jumbled up that there is no point of even delineating them and explaining them - but everyone is so keen to play with these divisions while deciding their actions. For example, while choosing a partner for marriage a rational reason invokes to find yourself a stable partner in financial, social aspect but while choosing a partner for sex a psychological reason invokes to find yourself a sexually compatible partner. Given the fact that human changes variably with time and so do their goals and baseline facets for making decisions, it is safe to say that human can never have a control over him/her-self. When I say control, I mean self-awareness. The least I am sure about human pscyhe is its own self-awareness to why it is making a certain decision. It just happens to be. For this reason, drawing a reason from baseline facet to explain your decision is a task susceptible to self-bias, making-it-up, and such psychological issues. Mapping these inferences to another person, it is even more safe to say that a human can never understand even to a fair agree the intermingled facets of another person (a potential partner in our case). Hence, the idea of loving the soul (metaphor for intermingled facets) of the person is purely metaphorical and you can never explain or word it down. But experimentally, love happens as evident from billions of people throughout the course of human history who have again and again re-iterated this proposition. So, I can not write anything about love here. But what about sex? Sex is another talked about topic just like love and they both have some psycholoical correlations. However, sex is an action stemming from the intermingled facets I mentioned above. To decide to do sex is to understand these facets. If you choose not to understand these facets, you are not a human as you should be. But humans can not understand these facets because of limits in our cognition. Hence, it might be safe say that one shouldn't do sex. One might argue that just like love, the act of sex just happens to be. If it is the case, then sex should be as abstract as the love is - for love just happens in your mind, so the sex should be. But what's the origin of love? Is it the phsyical proximity with that person or an idea of that person. My contention is that love is with the idea of that person, existing in your person. So even though, love can have causal factors like physical proximity, finance, social factor, genetic factor, psychological factor, the most fundamental and common trademark of love is the idea of person existing in your mind. That's how love becomes abstract for it exists only in your mind. If you decide to do sex by not finding a fundamental trademark of sex, then it is a fairly common act and you can always find arguments to choose any side on the topics related to sex like casual sex, threesome etc. For example, homosexual incest is a perfectly normal act because there is no chance of pregnancy and from biological perspective, it should be legal/normal/open. "But is such an act fundamentally understood or felt before executed?" -- You can say it is felt like it should be done it is done. "But when you felt it, what should you do about what you felt"? -- I will just do it when I felt like doing it. "So the act happened physically and altered something in brain, but you ignored the brain part and focused on the physical part and that's it" -- But you said that there are some intermingled aspects as causal factors of sex which you can't delineate properly and there is nothing other than doing sex which you can do." -- Yes, so I just need to do it and not think at all. But there's something missing in your argument of "just doing it". "It was an experience in your brain which was so abstract and fundamental and omniscient that you forgot to notice. This experience is that of re-creating sex in your brain. Just like love, sex is all in your brain and you can imagine sex with any person/animal/object possible in the known universe and it is legally/socially/morally acceptable. What I mean to say is that though you can do sex without thinking, but just thinking about sex is a better action that actually doing it. When I say thinking about sex, it means writing, drawing, talking, any everything imaginary about sex than the actual physical sex. The game of imagination has much higher payoffs than an actual game. The possibilities of abstract sex is immensely larger even to write than few possibilities of phsyical sex (and its evolution) which always bring moral/legal/social issues in societies. Sex is important for humanity but not doing and just imagining sex is a well-thought, constructed, pleasurable, diverse act with immense benefits. Choice is yours.

Love is an art

The ring she wears to be on cloud nine

is an art - baffling, pleasing, and divine.

Flying high on red hills of sloppy snow

 she's an art - wilful, blushing, and zero.