deadPix3l

Imagine a pile of wood. Ask anyone what it is, and you may get some varied answers, but mostly you will get one: its a pile of wood. Is this a joke? are you dumb? And they are right. Its only natural that most people would answer this way, it is all they can see. To say that you see anything else is absurd. But it also asks nothing of you but facts.

But ask the lumberjack and he may say “it was a tree!” and he is right! and yet, some people will want to argue semantics, “it WAS a tree, but it IS a pile of wood now!” and hes right, but fuck that guy. He’s annoying.

Others still, will long for a simpler time, a time of trees. #MakeWoodTreesAgain this makes sense in some contexts, but not this one. Thats not how it works this time. You cannot revert a 2x4 into a tree, some things just dont make sense. All you can do is move forward. Trying to explain this to them is an assault on their foundational beliefs, and they do not take kindly.

Or maybe it is you who is ignorant of the new reverse lumberfication process! Now all lumber can be retreeified! Science marches on! Never be absolutely certain that you are right. Many were certain the flying machine was impossible. Based on our current understanding, bees flying IS impossible. Except they do…

Ask the furniture maker and he may say “It is a chair!”, for that is what he sees. SHould he answer differently? Many may argue with him, for they do not see a chair anywhere, but walk in 2 hours later and ask him again “what is that?” as he hunches over 75% of a chair. You understand what he means. It will be a chair, when it is done. So where does this threshold lie? If he sees the chair at 0% completion, just raw materials, is he wrong? I don’t think so. He is just more aware.

Ask the engineer and he may say “it is so many possible things, chair among them, but the possibilies are endless!”, and the architect may say “it is what i design it to be, i am the creator!” This answer, in my experience, pisses people off immediately. It is an exclamation that you see not just what is, but what could be, as well as the paths to bridge the two. Because they can only see what is, they are inclined to argue that you are wrong. They are not open to seeing the paths. This is an assault on their worldview.

To say you see the tree or the chair is eccentric but within reach for many people. They have an understanding that chairs come from wood and wood comes from trees. But to say that you see the possibilities frustrates them, even angers them, because they cannot. They do not understand the possibilities, because they have never experienced the possibilities. They have never built them. They have never even pondered them.

I am becoming so exhausted of the fight. Of trying to convince others of the complex machinery I see all around. Maybe one day, when the machine reaches its threshhold, they will see it like I do. But until then, with an exasperated sigh, I answer “its a pile of wood”, as I ponder the possibilties and build in silence.