SAT. AUG. 30 & SUN. AUG. 31: (AKA THIS WEEKEND)
SAN FRANCISCO ZINE FEST.
I’ll be selling a bunch of comics by me (and Matt!), new prints, original drawings, that kind of thing.
The above image is by Matt and I, for Prophet Strikefile #2, possibly out in September. You’ll be able to check out the originals at the show.
Here is a page from a comic I made, and a reminder that Brian Herrick’s Milk and Carrots #3 is debuting at SF Zinefest real soon. This page is that very book, and is accompanied by seven other pages with which it forms a complete story.
More of Barlowe’s Guide to Extraterrestrials - art by Wayne Barlowe (1979)
Whoever seeks mere edification, who wants to surround the diversity of his existence and thought in a kind of fog, and who then demands an indeterminate enjoyment of this indeterminate divinity, may look wherever he pleases to find it, and he will quite easily find the resources to enable him both to get on his high horse and then to rant and rave. However, philosophy must keep up its guard against the desire to be edifying.GWF Hegel, in the Preface to The Phenomenology of Spirit
I’m rebloggin’ some digital art that I love
It’s that thing we’re working on.
A panel from the short comic I’m working on. There is a pretty drastic shift in style in this story… hopefully I pull it off…
This is some world class illustratin’ right here folks
Bridge to Nowhere
Here is bit more formal rendition of an enthymeme I ran into today, and see all too often:
- a's are 'wired' for x, therefore a's should x -
As I saw it today, it was stated as, “a's biology lends it to x,” but, in any case that I have come across the argument, the term that replaces my term “wiring” is meant to refer to the result of the evolutionary development of the “a”*.
unpacked, It looks something like this
1. a's are wired for x**
2. the flourishing of a is maximized when it acts according to its wiring
3. if an a desires to flourish it should act according to its wiring
4. a's do desire to flourish
5. a's should x
I am fairly sure this is a valid argument, but it is not sound (one or more of its premises are probably not true).
I think that both 2 and 3 are unsound (and 4 is dubious - as Nietzsche said, “only the Englishman does”), but I will simply consider 2. All one needs to undermine 2 is an instance of an action that is in accord with the wiring of a creature that does not promote the flourishing of that creature.
There might be a way to make this line of thought plausible, but I am skeptical. At best, this way of thinking supplies an excuse for such and such a behavior, but hardly a warrant (and people who look to practical reason for excuses are idiots, thank you).
*I take it that as used here “wiring” or “biology” are naive evolutionary-psychological terms. Wiring refers to the behavioral tendencies that have arisen as a result of selection pressures on the species in question.
** Or! More dramatically, “a's have been wired for x by millions and millions of years of evolution.”
"Mirror of Time," by Vladimir Tarasov, 1967. A ten-minute film about the Soviet future.
Watch this slice of retro-futuristic history, and follow my Maddd Science tumblr for more while you’re at it.
Creepy hall with @malachiward