The only knowable Truth.

In the classic thought experiment of Rene Descartes it is argued, through the use of a Grand Deceiver, that the only thing that we can truly know is that we think. I think, therefore I am. Everything else can be denied as being the work of the Grand Deceiver. The only thing that we cannot deny is that we think.

This is indeed very true. As individuals, all we can know is ourselves and nothing else. Our experiences with the world around us is through our senses, on which we rely to function in the world. We have five in total and through the information we gather from these senses we interpret the world that we inhabit.

But how much can we rely upon these senses? We might have a condition like colour blindness which means that we will doubt certain information that our sight presents us with. We might be deaf, at which point we gain no information from our hearing at all. In these cases, we discount the information (or lack of it) and compensate accordingly.

But what if we do not have such a deficiency in our senses? What if we feel we are able to rely upon them? What happens if we are told that what our senses are telling us is wrong?

This is a difficult position to be in. If we are told that one of our senses is giving wrong information then we can fall back onto medical science to have it checked. Could it not be that there is a deficiency in that sense that we do not know about? This will lead us into a situation where we can correct the information from this sense in future situations.

The situation is more complicated when we are told that in a situation two of our senses have failed us. Our senses are, in essence, independent of each other. Each one gives us different information, from which we build our picture of the world. If one of these senses fails us in a given situation then we have the other four to rely upon. But if two of the five fails us then what then?

How is it possible to function in the world when we cannot rely upon these two senses that, up to that point, we have always been able to rely upon? We have never had cause to doubt them before. They have always provided us with reliable information up to that point. Or have they?

And this is the problem. Doubt. Doubting of the information that we have received. If we cannot rely upon this information then where are we? We are back where we started. All we can know is that we think and that is it. We cannot rely upon anything else since our senses may well be deceiving us.

We know that we think, and that is all. We can only know our own thoughts and nothing else. Everything else can be denied. Nothing else can be trusted to be true.

The only truth in the world is that we think. Everything else is just interpretation. An opinion. A viewpoint. Nothing more.

No matter what happens in our lives, we must always be truly alone. It is the only thing that can be known. The only thing that can be held to be true.

I think, therefore I am, and nothing more.

Everything old is new again

There seems to be a trend these days in the world of TV to reinvent/reboot/re-imagine the classic shows of old for a modern audience. This usually means a more glossy portrayal with better production values and effects. This also usually meets with cries that our childhoods are being raped and that the premise of the original series is being betrayed.

A good example of where this as been done well would be the recent Battlestar Galactica series. Visually, this series outstripped the original series. But in addition to this was the way it approached the story. Instead of the standalone/double-parters of the the original narrative there was an over-arching story arc. The new BSG was very much an ongoing saga, a journey following the rag tag fugitive fleet's quest to find Earth. I personally found it to be a very rewarding series.

A good example of where old and new collides would be the new Doctor Who. It is very much more stylish. The original format as been ditched in favour of stand alone episodes that form an overarching narrative which pays of with the finale. However, opinion is very much split. There are those who hate the Nu Who because it is not the old. There are those who are just fans of Nu Who and cannot stand the "slowness" of the four-part episode format of old.

For me, my heart will always belong to old Who because it was the programme of my childhood. I grew up with it. However, I can still enjoy Nu Who for what it is - which is very much entertainment. I find the episodes a joy to watch, including those that are traditionally panned by "fandom" (then again, I also enjoy Time and the Rani so what do I know).

When I look at the debate that rages within Whodom over the new series I sometimes think that some people are missing the point. For me, Nu Who is not written for me. I am not the target audience. Nu Who is targeted to the 10 years old of today, just as classic Who was targeted to the 10 year olds of my generation. I feel lucky that I am able to enjoy it for what it is. I find it entertaining. But I also remember that it is the modern generation, the 10 year olds of today, who it belongs to.

It is just the same with the other revivals. Knight Rider, 90210, Melrose Place, the new V. These are all shows for a new audience, and they are not for the audience of old. I think this is why I like the term re-imagining to describe them. They are taking the original premise and giving it a new spin, a modern spin, for hopefully a new audience to enjoy.

Now, I am concerned with this at the moment for a reason. I firmly believe in what I have said. These re-imaginings are not written with me in mind. Yes, I enjoyed the originals but these new shows are for the present generation, and I hope that they will enjoy their version of the shows as much as I enjoyed the originals.

However, there is something that I have waiting for me to watch. It is a series that as been re-imagined. It is a TV show that the words iconic, cult, and classic were made for. I am talking about Prisoner. The original was just a thing of beauty, and if you have not seen it then I heartedly recommend it. It is thought provoking. Actually, it is very thought provoking. I also consider it to be perfection in itself. I cannot understand why there was a need for it to be re-imagined.

So, I very much expect that when I watch it at some point this week I am going to be screaming at the screen that my childhood as been raped. I do not have high hopes for the "televisual event". I cannot see how it can live up to the original in any way, shape, or form. But, I am going to give it a go. I might be surprised. It might actually capture the essence of the original. It might capture the spirit and soul. I really hope that it does and that I am proved wrong. But if not I must remember that it is a new show, for a new audience,just using a premise from a TV show that I enjoyed in my youth.

Mid-week Catch Up

Well, this should be fun. I am conscious that I have not written anything in a while but I also do not know what to write. I do not have anything specific to say or an agenda to layout. But I also feel that I should really be writing something.

Shall we see where this goes?


So, last weekend saw me in Newcastle attending a DW Convention. It was a good weekend, spent in fine company, and involving some rather nice alcohol as well. I have only done one convention this year because of everything that was happening with work and I was glad that I did it. It was slightly weird in that not many of the usual crowd were present. But this was good also since it meant that I had to socialise outside of my comfort zone, so to speak. It is always nice to meet new people.

I also bought some stuff whilst I was there as well. I have finally righted a long standing social wrong and purchased both of Anneke Wills's books - Self Portrait and Naked. I am looking forward to reading these for two reasons. Firstly, Anneke is a wonderful lady and I am interested in her story. Secondly, I do not normally do autobiographies, or even biographies for that matter, preferring fiction instead. So, I am hoping that these books will make a wonderful introduction into the world of non-academic non-fiction.

I also purchased "Love songs for the shy and cynical" by Robert Shearman. From what I have read so far I am very impressed by it but I will save a review of it until I have finished the entire book.

I also purchased two of the three Big Finish Short Trips that contain stories by a friend of mine. It as definitely taken me ages to get round to picking them up and I look forward to letting him know that I have finally done it.


After such a lovely weekend, this week as been a bit of a downer. Over the last two weeks I have been up for three different jobs. Yesterday I found out that I am not getting a second interview for a job that I should have been a guaranteed second interview for. We have been given a reason, which both me and my agent agree is a bit of a sham excuse, but it as knocked me for six really. Of all the three jobs I have been for this one should have been a guaranteed offer. Not really know why it as not happened and I am sure that someday I will find out why it was the case. Life is like that. So, of the three I have only one more outstanding. Interview was on Tuesday and I am rather positive about both the interview and the role itself. The role sounds very exciting and so I am keeping my fingers crossed.


Nothing else really to report. Had a nice shopping trip to Manchesterford yesterday which resulted in some DVDs being purchased (including but not limited to the complete Thunderbirds box-set reduced from £125 to £20. Bargain city). I'm also presently reading a book called "Teach Yourself Nietzsche". I realised the other week that my academic career kind of skipped his work so this is my way of trying to get, as a minimum, and overview of his work and philosophy. I am thinking of reading at least one of his works as well, and I am presently leaning toward Beyond Good and Evil but I will make up my final mind when I have got the overview.

So, for now, I shall sign off and will hopefully have something less mundane to blog about next time.