I now have the materials I need, photographically, to start my new webcomic, and I have content for a first comic (the second comic had content, but I decided that to use that content would be grossly insensitive to someone I know, so I won't use that plot thread). I am presently unsure if I want to have a comic before I write the software to manage it, or if I want to wait until I have time to write the software I know I'm eventually going to want anyhow. The webcomic won't be a regular thing -- it'll be posted whenever I have an idea and have time to comic-ise it.
I was surprised to find that the subject line of this entry, which I wrote in German (that is, I didn't think it out in English first and translate it), is translated very elegantly into English by Googlefish as "Work makes money -- Only liberty frees man". It's almost as elegant as it is in German.
Yesterday, I did bouldering with some KGBFolk, and my hands and thighs are consequently very sore, as I haven't climbed for about half a year. It didn't work out very well for socialising -- I still think there's a barrier, probably part of my personality or part of my age/position that makes it hard for me to effectively socialise with KGB. It's something to work on... Or not. *shrug*
I've recently had bad gut reactions to a few people I occasionally rub elbows with who don't understand or have concerns for society at all beyond the most mem-rich parts of the web. They seem almost two-dimensional to me. I suppose in the end their myopia will fade (I hope), it's just irritating for me to hear people speak as if the latest animation someone put together is the most important thing in the world (even when the animation is quite cool), and never hear anything else pass their lips. I always respect people with a creed, or people who can think, or who can see the big picture clearly, even if they see it very differently from me (as a foe even). I do not believe that anyone who sees things differently than me suffers philosophical glaucoma - there are many ways to see things clearly, although there are also many more ways to see things less clearly, and there are degrees and kinds of distortions of the lens that can shape our individual Weltanschauungen.
Amusingly, one of the most interesting philosophical challenges I've ever recieved was in the form of personal criticism, where I was called arrogant. It got me thinking, as although I often win (and in almost all other cases reach stalemate) philosophical discussions, my self-image in philosophy is that of a certain deep humility -- my understanding of values suggests that, for sufficiently philosophically aware people with philosophies that are likewise well-enough-worked-out, there is no way anyone can gainsay anyone else based on solid argument, at least when it comes to value-conclusions. I see this as profoundly value-egalitarian. However, back to the claim, I initially claimed that the notion of arrogance was incoherent, challenging the person to define it. They declined, leaving me with the ghost of "arrogance" to attempt to shore up. I still think that use of the term is often used as an expression of frustration in certain circumstances, but I'm trying understand the details of those circumstances more deeply. Some of them don't seem to me to be real criticisms -- attacking foundations of philosophy that are held sacred, but there are other situations, relating to self-aggrandisement, where it still may still be a solid criticism. The meaning of and evaluation of arrogance is an interesting puzzle. I am not discounting the possibility that I might be properly called arrogant, nor even the idea that it is a fault in me, but I want to fully understand the claim, if it is a fault, and if it is a necessary characteristic and mitigated for/by being one who calls themself a philosopher.