26 April 2026

Had limited time today, so I took out a small panel and decided to paint the wireframe star that I saw in a window that I've had taped to the studio wall for a week or so now. It answered the call in a lovely way, and I think it will end up serving as a study for a larger and more refined version of itself. Which isn't an order of operations I've really employed before, but it feels necessary and right for this case. Anyway, the way the star shape divided space made for a nicely dizzying structure to work within—each slice of the shape became a plane to deal with/play with. To thicken forward or dilute back, to accentuate or hide, to fill or erase, to mark the time spent characterizing the depth of the surface holding this thin but totemic thing. Was reminded again of Phoebe Helander's wire paintings on the way home tonight, and maybe they were a subconscious guide. Had Catherine Murphy's 2014 Studio Wall drawing (it's in her beautiful 2016 monograph that I have) sitting there while I was working too.

Evangeline Cross did not want to die.

There was too much left to do. Too many questions without answers. But the ocean had its own agenda and right now it was doing its damnedest to drag her down into the inky blackness below. No time to think. Just beat at the waves. Keep the head up. Don't swallow the ocean. There was so much water.

The rain wasn't helping. It had come out of nowhere. There was no build, no warning, just suddenly there. The heavy drops hammering her head and arms like rocks. The darkness had hit the same way. One moment dusk, the next nothing, as if the sun had decided not to exist anymore.

Swim, Evie. Swim!

She had no idea how long she'd been in the water. The ship had gone down fast. No stars above to gauge anything by, no lights anywhere, just the black water and the black sky and the rain trying to drive her under.

Her arms were burning. Legs too. Stop and drown or keep going and drown slower. There wasn’t many choices to be had.

The wave was strong and came from behind and her head went under. Her lungs burned as she hadn’t had a chance to suck in air and the panic was burning through what little oxygen she had left.

Her eyes were drawn downwards in her frantic kicking to reach back to the surface. Below her, in the black something moved. Large. Impossibly large but moved in a way her mind could not process. Air!

She kicked back to the surface and didn't look down again. She couldn’t look down it again. If it was coming from her, she didn’t want to see it get her. Drowning started to seem like the better option.

***

Sand in her mouth. Coarse. Gritty.

Her fingers were moving before her brain caught up, dragging, clawing, pulling herself forward through something solid. The beach. She was on the beach! She didn't know how. Didn't matter. She had to keep moving!

The black sand scratched at every inch of exposed skin. Rain still coming down hard, each drop slamming into the back of her head, trying to push her face back into it. The sand was wet and thick and it moved against her like it was trying to suck her in. It gripped her knees, pulling at the weight of her soaked clothes. The ocean hadn't taken her. Now the beach was having a go.

Her fingers hit something hard.

Not rock. The edge too clean. Too flat.

Concrete.

She pressed her palm against it and felt the seams. Deliberate. Manufactured. It meant someone had been here. It meant someone had built something.

Evie started to laugh. It came out wrong. Too high. Too close to the other thing. It didn’t matter. The ocean and the beach failed to take her.

She pressed her forehead against the concrete, breathed, and passed out.

***

You’re not dead, Evie.

She came back to herself in pieces.

It was the sound first. The rain still fell but it had become lighter. The kind that settled into a gentle patter that one would read or write news articles to. Underneath that sound, water moving over rock somewhere nearby. And under that, at the edge of hearing, something she couldn't name. Not a sound exactly. More like the space where a sound should have been and wasn't.

Then cold. God, she hated the cold. It was that specific cold of wet clothes that had been wet long enough to stop feeling wet and start feeling like skin. Her hair was matted against her face as the bun she had put it up in had failed. There was nothing left to do but open her eyes and pray nothing was going to eat her.

Grey light was what first assailed her eyes. Maybe it was pre-dawn or a sky that didn't intend to get much brighter than this. The rain came down soft and steady through it, dimpling the black sand around her face. She watched it for a moment, the small craters each drop made, the way the sand filled them back in slowly, the dark color of it that didn't match any beach she'd been on.

Black sand. She filed that away.

Her body ran its own inventory while her mind caught up. Hands, present, scraped, the right palm flattened against something hard.

Concrete. She had found concrete before passing out.

Legs were still intact. They were there heavy and she had lost one shoe. Her head was a particular ache taken a wave badly. She breathed deep again to check her lungs. They worked. She was alive.

Alright, Evie. You can’t just lay here. You gotta find shelter or something.

How long had it been since she took any sort of survivalist training? None. Camping was about it and that trip was a cabin. She pushed herself up onto her elbows and looked at where she was.

The beach stretched in both directions, the black sand dark and wet, the rain stippling it in shifting patterns. Behind her, there was vegetation that was dense, dark, the kind that didn't leave gaps. In front, the ocean, flat and black in the grey light. The horizon was nearly invisible do the color of the fog and the sky. It was like the word just didn’t exist that far out.

Move girl. You gotta move. She sat up the rest of the way and pushed her wet hair back from her face only noticing in passing that the dirty blond strands mixed with red. A part of her groused that she didn’t re-dye it like she had planned and then chuckled at the extremely bizarre thought.

What had she grabbed a hold of? Turning and ignoring the groan of her back, she found what it was. It was a wall. Part of one at least. It was maybe four feet of and appeared to be holding back the rest of the place. Retaining wall maybe?

She put her hand flat against it again and pulled herself up and so many of her joints cracked and popped at the effort. She almost past out from exhaustion from the movement. Her limbs were so tired.

It wasn’t just a retaining wall. It was a small road, the asphalt old with grass forcing it’s way through the cracks. Looking left and right, it appeared to run the length of the shore an those dark trees and foliage. Not maintained. Access roads?

There were not yellow lines on it that she would have expect so maybe it was just there to allow beach goers an easy way to access this, strange, black beach.

Why the hell would anyone go here?

That was a problem for another time. She made a mental note that if she found any of her items, she was going to come back to make sketches and notes for an article.

Hefting herself over the retaining wall on to the road was much more of a feet than she wanted to admit. The exercising she had done daily was probably the reason the ocean hadn’t drug her down.

Standing on that road with hands on her hips, she looked both direction, confused trying to decide which direction she should go. The rain hadn’t stopped and she had a concern it would get heavy again.

Don’t want to go through that.

The direction really wasn’t that important. The key was finding civilization. That’s what her dad always said. Beginning to walk, she made her way down the broken asphalt, the crunch of the pieces crackling under her one shoe mixed with the sound of the rain splashing down. Thank god she was starting to feel more human again. It was going to take forever to get her clothes dried.

It was probably about thirty minutes until she was able to see structures in the distance, like the start of low buildings leading into a town.

You can jog the last bit of distance, Evie, she lied to herself. Her legs were still weak and had stated to grow stiff. She only took a few short trots before slowing down again. Was that a lump in the middle of the road? She squinted. Yeah, there was definitely something up ahead but the rain and the hazy gray of the air only made showed it’s dark outline.

Cautiously walking closer, her gut twisted as recognition kicked in. It was a body sitting but slumped forward, arms hanging loosely by their side. She had seen those clothes before. Who was it again?

Richard something or other.

He was some sort of archeologist as part of the scientific cruise. She remembered wondering what could even interest an archeologist as the voyage was about the ocean. She went to call out but a cold stab of fear kicked her gut. The body moved. It looked like he was scooting backwards without moving.

It took way to long before her brain processed that something was pulling him in short, slow bursts towards the forest edge. Instinct told her to run up and help but what she saw rooted her in her track.

Tendrils.

Black, long, and glistening were wrapped around the man’s body and was tugging him along. She could hear the scuff of his clothes against the asphalt.

Breath. You gotta remember to breath! she told herself. Her mind refused to even comprehend what she was seeing. There was no creature on the planet she had ever encountered that had tendrils like that.

Turning around was the only choice at this moment but when she did, she saw something hulking. It was low and wide and it moved like something that had learned to walk from a description rather than from practice.

Oh, god! What was going on here? What were these things? Her mind raced half wanting to learn more for an article but the other out of sheer terror she hadn’t felt since Afghanistan.

Every bit of her screamed to run as the sound of it dragging itself along the pavement finally reached her ears.

Don’t run. Walk. You’re faster than it right now, Evie. she told herself.

Turning back to where the body was, she had found it was gone. Sucking in a breath and holding it, she moved and walked as quickly as she could without making a sound. As she past that spot, the grotesque wet crunching reached her ears from somewhere in the woods. It took everything not to wretch right there.

As soon as she passed the first building and the forest was no longer on her right.

She ran.

Our Father Who art in Heaven Hallowed be Thy name Thy Kingdom come Thy will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven Give us this day our daily Bread And forgive us our trespasses As we forgive those who trespass against us And lead us not into temptation But deliver us from evil

Amen

Jesus is Lord! Come Lord Jesus!

Come Lord Jesus! Christ is Lord!

Electric Rainsmoke

And through fire and theft Trafalgar had a clue To be raining fresh cabbage To the citizens of Rome But Halton Hills True to the fibs of Asia Heard a story about Iran There was money somehow So that the beast would blow up And set last A clue and heavy spirit To Kim Jong Un- and his secret weapons Alight for Wormwood And deliverances of clay To poke the highest ceiling And hit Earthen ground at four And the dismal favour According to those who wept Saw a Woman on repeat Crying out to God Be careful here The joke is on war And differences coming That will shatter the new For symptoms across And something strange In ecstasy of war We lost our human joy And freedom perfect In this sacrilege of his And true to the glory Of Man on the seas Eating clover at land For dreams of giving high To citizens complete And we’ll speak of morning news About this mire And how Invega lost his herd Ringing golden cattle And the sympathy of rain Giving in to every eyesore And injecting bits of hair So to the simple we speak An eye to the cross we can heal For Rosewood and Victory Jane The Earth is inside a computer And making every hostility wide We have needles to pay where we go Indescribable bits of clear To the top of the forest of un And the dodecarose Heard it was made of amber And the offer we made and knew Saved us from the war.

Tampa Bay Rays vs Cleveland Guardians

Today's MLB Game of Choice in the Roscoe-verse features the Tampa Bay Rays vs the Cleveland Guardians. Its scheduled start time of 5:10 PM CDT means the opening pitch is only minutes away. I'll be following the radio call of the game on the Cleveland Clinic Radio Network.

And the adventure continues.

i want to say that i got into tennis before i saw challengers, but that would be a lie. rather than the movie itself sparking my interest in the sport, it was the coverage i saw online that did it for me. i watched countless sports creators give the “yep! this is pretty realistic!” stamp of approval on the film, and i felt just moved enough to watch the tour’s remaining competitions that year with a well-meaning, observant eye.

while getting situated in the clay swing that summer, i quickly learned the three titans of the men’s tennis: novak djokovic, roger federer, and rafael nadal—all achieving ludicrous feats during their careers that are still used as the standard to assess promising young talent coming up on the atp tour. for djovokic, he’s won the most number of most grand slams (i.e., the four most prestigious annual events in the sport taking place across oceania, europe, and north america) out of any male tennis athlete. and what’s crazy is that he’s still currently alive and kicking on tour now, albeit at a fraction of what his prime level was… no shade! federer made a name for himself with his elegant one-handed backhand, a still uncommon tennis stroke, which added better angles, potential pace redirection, and shot variety to his game, resulting in dominant winning streaks on hard courts in the early 2000s. he was also just so effortlessly cool, most evidenced by his laid back practice sessions which felt more like a performance to patrons walking by. nadal was the undisputed king of clay, winning the majority of roland-garros titles during his tenure on the atp tour by absolutely suffocating opponents with his topspin-heavy shots rotating almost 300 times per minute.

as you can deduce from the spiel above, tennis is not played on the same surface all season and its been like that basically since its inception. due to the varied climates and naturally abundant resources, certain materials were easier to maintain for play, with europe primarily supporting clay and grass, with hard courts reserved for the states. characterized by its long-standing tradition in the fields of england, grass courts are fast with low-bouncing balls and has been the favorite amongst serve-and-volley players. since it rewards more aggressive tactics towards the net, most grass court rallies before the 2010s were in the single digits. this is the sort of tennis you see on tv when they’re “moving through history” to situate us into the grand slam final we’re tuning into. for clay courts, there’s slow pace and higher bounce with the material itself mitigating big serves and heavy shorts placed awkwardly around the court. this surface also exposes weakness in movement as you can literally slide across the court to retrieve balls—or you end up falling, getting dirt stains all over your clothes to add drama. for hard courts, it’s durable acrylic surface is suited for both professional and recreational players, producing a medium-pace playing experience—but depending on the altitude, weather, and ball quality, it can feel completely foreign between match reps.

although there are loyal fans that think these three players made tennis and once all of them retire, the sport will die with it. however, that does not seem to be the attitude of the average viewer engaging with discourse online. the new athletes playing today are aware of the legacy of those that came before them, catalyzing the overall effort to push this sport to its physical limits. the undisputed stars of the status quo, alcaraz and sinner, are trying their absolute best to beat records set by the greatest. for the former, he just become the youngest player to complete the career slam by winning the australian open, roland-garros, wimbledon, and the us open all before turning 23. for the latter, he set a new record for the most consecutive sets won at the masters 1000 level (i.e., the tournaments that sit right below the grand slams) and to add even more insult to injury, these two are absolutely dominating the tour in ways that are unprecedented—drawing direct comparisons to the goats of the sport. alcaraz and sinner are exceeding the total points of the rest of the atp top 8 at a combined 26k each almost spilt evenly down the middle. while some fans are tired of seeing at least one of these two take every major title away from their competitors, i know i’m definitely not. do you think commentators were lamenting about how they wish they saw more players winning titles during federer’s 41-match winning streak in 2006-07? i certainly hope not! we are quite literally the audience to new spectacles of the sport! soon these moments we’re living in will be referenced in segments in future broadcasts, still unable to figure out how one athlete can stand so far ahead of his peers.

i was also drawn to the distinct fashion tennis has to offer and how it intertwined with the actual equipment they use on court. athletes are adorned in (hopefully) sponsored uniforms from the likes of adidas, nike, wilson, and likely any brand you can find at dick’s. depending on their ranking, they might have custom colorways that are tournament specific—these fabrics becoming relics of a specific point in a tennis career—even better if they’re dressing the winner of the whole thing.

it’s also interesting how specific rackets are tied to particular game styles, a fact that makes more sense when you realize that the strings are the only contact a player has with the ball. wilson’s line of rackets are most closely associated with that classic, controlled play suited for all courts. serena williams played with blade for most of her time on tour, using it to push her already dominant serve farther into the court and become the personification of first-strike tennis. head rackets are tuned for high-end precision with a material called graphene, which allows for weight redistribution across the head and handle. yonex players are known to be clean ball strikers and care about comfort first, ideally getting a balance between power and feel every shot. babolot has been linked to enabling topspin and aggressive baseline rallies, still remaining as one of the most popular brands on tour. there are some miscellaneous brands still being used (e.g., diadem, prokennex, solinco) that can catch your eye, but i’m mostly noticing the specific combinations of grip colors and paint jobs adorning the rackets of players as they move through the court.

while watching tennis players (or any athlete, really) grapple with their own aging muscles, i can feel the tension these players have with their bodies in real-time. their reflexes aren’t razor sharp. the gravity seems to be pulling limbs closer to the ground. your strikes less potent than normal. i understand why many retired players don’t pick up a racket for months after their last match—like maria sharapova said: why would i want to to be lower than the best?

i am writing this in the middle of madrid and the narratives that have yet to take shape have me on the edge of my seat: will jodar back up his win against fonseca to make a deep run? is this clay season for him only a flash in the pan? will sinner win his sinner win his fifth (yes, fifth) masters 1000 title in a row and the french open now that there’s a vacuum left my alcaraz’s departure due to injury? will sabalenka continue to make history of her own as the rightful world number one on the women’s side? who knows? but i’m grateful i can watch time unfold so spontaneously in front of me.

moon looking like it’s missing 12%, like they folded a dog’s ear on it or something

And I’m watching like I said Tulsa king on my mobile phone, we’ve not put the TV in yet,

And when I see my face reflected on the screen, when it’s black, I just see my own smile

A big smile on my face, with the teeth in charmfull disarray

I’m smiling like an idiot, but in reality I’m a popcorn

Like I wrote yesterday

Who is my neighbour? A simple question which changes everything. By Jackie Lewis

The backlash HM King Charles III has faced following the announcement that there would not be an Easter address from the royal family has been an ignition point for many alarmists who point to the Islamification of Great Britain. The most extreme have even laughingly suggested that the King had secretly converted to Islam in his youth, pointing to several instances, like his 1993 address at the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies titled ‘Islam and the West’ as evidence. I want to be clear at the onset of this essay that it is not my intention to criticise the decision not to release an Easter message, or to speculate on the religious preferences of a King who professes himself as the head of the Church of England and as a protector of all faiths. Indeed, the nonsense that so gluttonously fuels the online clickbait economy has little interest for me, but this situation has sparked a thought I cannot rid myself of.

As rabidly pointed out by a host for Talk TV, HM’s previous 2025 Easter address was unique as it referenced both Islam and Judaism. Specifically, he says ‘On Maundy Thursday, Jesus knelt and washed the feet of many of those who would abandon Him. His humble action was a token of His love … and is central to Christian belief. The love He showed when he walked the Earth reflected the Jewish ethic of caring for the stranger … a deep human instinct echoed in Islam and other religious traditions and in the hearts of all who seek the good of others’ (CRIII 2025). HM’s highlighting of love as a universal characteristic sought after by many creeds, religions, and cultures holds a lot of truth. Christianity does not own a monopoly on love for others, or on a cultural and moral framework which places love for others at the pinnacle of desirable attributes.

With all three Abrahamic faiths, the precept to show love for those around you exists in various forms. From Zakat and ‘love for your brother what you love for yourself’ (al-Bukhari 13), which shapes Islam, to Tzedakah and ‘love your neighbour as yourself’ (Leviticus 19:18), which defines Judaism, they reinforce HM’s assertion that love is a universal tenet of faith. Indeed, I believe you would be hard-pressed to find any person, creed, or religion that ‘seek[s] the good of others’ (CRIII 2025) that does not place a significant moral emphasis on love for others. The question which arises from this is, in the attempts to universalise key religious tenets like love, how do religions differ from each other, or do they differ at all? This assertion can be particularly troubling to a Christian, or frankly, any serious practitioner of religion, to realise that what we believe is not that unique.

Now, personally, I believe that HM’s mention of both Islam and Judaism in his 2025 Easter message was not an attempt to erase Christianity from the national consciousness, but was done to create points of commonality and shared community during a time of increased polarisation. And yet, the reception of the message points to how we define religion, which tends to be based on comparative differences. The points of disagreement or contention experienced by religions rub against each other and spark life and form into our collective imagination, actively defining the boundaries – and thus substance, of the religions being practised or observed. Blurring these boundaries by creating overlap between different religions can be unsettling and even challenge the moral and social frameworks that uphold our lived reality.

Indeed, if the love Jesus expressed to those around him was grounded in an established Jewish ethic, then logically, it can be asked whether Christianity is just a continuation of Judaism. And what of Islam, a religion which respects Jesus as a prophet and messenger equal to the great patriarchs of the past like Noah, Abraham, Moses, and even Muhammad (PBUH), how does this all fit into the narratives taught in Sunday schools around the world? However, what is being overlooked by many alarmists and other religious isolationists is that identifying points of commonality between religions creates an ideal framework from which to explore their divergence from each other. Indeed, it would be silly to assume that just because religions share common moral traditions, they are all the same. The existence of hundreds of religions, all of which strive for the singular goal of living a good life through partnership with divinity, is empirical evidence of the fallibility of this type of thinking.

The question that should be asked is, instead, while Christianity – or any other religion, share many points of commonality with its theological cousins, how does it differ from them in the presuppositions which inform its application? Indeed, the metrics that inform the presuppositions are what interest me most when considering religious nuances, specifically those that revolve around the boundaries of application. So, what are the boundaries set around the expression of love for others that define its practice in Christianity, and how does this set it apart as a unique approach to divinity? To begin digging into this, we must turn to the Gospel of Luke and explore a simple yet ill-intentioned question that has had the greatest impact not only on Christianity but on the world it has forged over the last 2000 years.

The Gospel of Luke describes a certain lawyer who approached Jesus and asked him ‘Master, what shall I do to inherent eternal life’ (Luke 10: 25)? Answering him, Jesus responded by pointing to what had been written in the Law which the lawyer is quick to summarize as ‘thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all they soul, and with all they strength … and they neighbour as thyself’ (Ibid.:27). Up to this point, like HM, we are able to pull various comparisons and similarities with our Abrahamic cousins who both have very similar scriptures outlining the care of others as paramount to inheriting an eternal reward.

And yet, what comes next is so significant that it has completely changed the way we interact with and view the world around us. The lawyer, ‘willing to justify himself’ (Ibid.:29), asks Jesus a follow-up question, ‘who is my neighbour?’ (Ibid.) The telling of the Good Samaritan Parable has been forever solidified as Jesus’s response to the lawyers' attempts at entrapment and lends to our understanding of the seminal difference between Christianity and all other faiths. A difference which radically reshaped the ancient world and has had compounding effects down to our contemporary reality. Effects which have torn down tyrants and broken through the cages of oppression which have for so long kept people trapped in a pattern of abuse and despair (Holland 2019; Hart 2009).

So, how does the question “who is my neighbour” and Jesus’s response, typifying a Samaritan as the example of the moral and ethical standards required for inheriting eternal life, change the boundaries set for the expectations of application concerning love for others? The history between the Jews and the Samaritans is outlined throughout the New Testament, but must be understood in the context of the Kingdom of Israel's unification under King David and the subsequent civil schism that occurred during the reign of his grandson, King Rehoboam (1 Kings 12). The resulting separation of the 12 tribes, 10 in the Northern Kingdom and 2 in the Southern Kingdom, eventually led to the conquest and deportation of the Northern Kingdom in 722 BCE by the Assyrian Empire (2 Kings 17:6), leaving the Southern Kingdom, also referred to as the Kingdom of Judah, to remain in control of both Jerusalem and their portion of the promised land.

The initial exiling of the 10 tribes of the Northern Kingdom in Samaria is the starting point for the political, theological, and hereditary tensions experienced in Judeah at the time of Jesus, and where, according to our understanding, the animosity felt between the Jews and their distant cousins begins. Indeed, when the Jews returned from their own exile in 538 BCE under the direction of Cyrus the Great, they returned to Jerusalem to find that the people brought in to occupy Samaria had ‘settled … in the towns of Samaria’ (2 Kings 17:24) and had mixed with the remaining Israelites who had not been deported upon the fall of the Northern Kingdom. This mixing of Israelites with foreign settlers created an ethnically mixed population, which was referred to as Samaritans, as they occupied Samaria.

So, while the Southern Kingdom, which was predominantly of the tribe of Judah, had maintained its cultural and religious identity while in exile (Daniel 3; Daniel 6), it was appalled to see that the Samaritans were religiously and ethnically compromised. For the Jews returning to Jerusalem, seeing not only the ethnic mixing through intermarriage, but the mingling of foreign gods with Yahweh was blasphemous and a sign that they were no longer truly part of the covenant community. This is outlined in Ezra and explained that as the Jews attempted to rebuild the temple in Jerusalem, they outright rejected the Samaritans offer to assist in the process claiming that they ‘[had] nothing to do with us to build an house unto our God’ (Ezra 4: 3). Here we begin to see the formation of a covenantal, and thus hereditary, differentiation between the Jews and the Samaritans with the use of the word “our” to create separation and distinction between the God Yahweh of the Jews and the God of the Samaritans who they had mixed with the Lord their God.

Yet, it was not just theological differences that divided them and created the level of hostility felt during the time of Jesus, the rejection of the Samaritans’ offers to assist in the reconstruction of the temple was a severing of their social and cultural connection with the House of Jacob. The disowning of the Samaritans from the covenantal family and exclusion from participating in the worship of the God of Israel had significant repercussions. Ones which were not limited to just purposeful sabotage, ‘weaken[ing] the hands of the people of Judah, and trouble[ing] them in building’ (Ibid.: 4), but also led to the building of a second temple on Mt. Gerizim. This decision, which could be considered a religious schism, compounded the existing tensions by creating additional political and identity conflicts as both sides now directly contest the claim that they were the “true” Israel and that the house of the Lord existed with them.

Indeed, the construction of the 'Samaritans' own temple on Mt. Gerizim was a direct act of rebellion against Judah’s claim to covenantal authority and a statement of their own claim to that authority. While the Samaritans might have done this simply because they sought to worship the God of Israel despite their inability to do so in Jerusalem, many Jews felt that this was a continuation of their blasphemy and a sign that their rejection of Yahweh was complete. This eventually flared into open violence as the Jacobean John Hyrcanus raided and then destroyed the Mt. Gerizim temple in 111 BCE, setting the stage for the context in which Jesus and the lawyer find themselves. The historical animosity, highlighted by real and intense bouts of violence, between the Samaritans and the Jews created a typification of the other which bordered on the inhuman as each saw the other as the desecration of the sacred and holy covenant that father Abraham had made with God on behalf of his posterity. Thus, we see the creation of exceptionally strong social and cultural norms which prohibited any interaction between the two groups of people simply because ‘Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans’ (John 4:9). The strong prejudice that existed between the two community, born from beliefs of spiritual heresy, genetic compromising, and political violence and hostility, make the answer to the lawyer’s question that much more impactful as Samaritans were not just a hiss and a byword but the very embodiment of corruption.

Jesus’s answer to the lawyer in the form of the parable of the Good Samaritan becomes even more shocking as through it Jesus expands the idea of neighbour – and thus the supposition of who merited our love, charity, and good works, to not only those considered friendly, but those who were considered an enemy and a direct competitor to the Jew’s spiritual and cultural legitimacy. For Jesus, and thus Christians, the inclusion of Samaritans within the boundaries of who we are expected to show love towards redefines the concept entirely. It expertly dismantles any legalistic exceptions to the rule to go good to all men, as all men become your neighbour, including those who have fallen from God’s grace. It is this distinction, through the exemplification of the most extreme differences, which evolves Christianity away from its Jewish roots. Ultimately, differentiating it from every other religion or creed which seeks ‘the good of others’ (CRIII 2025) and allowing it to become a universal framework that applies to all, black or white, bond or free, male or female, as we all become alike before God, who is no longer a respecter of persons.

Now, I will not sit here and try to defend the case that Christianity in its various forms and iterations has ever succeeded in doing so, nor that Christianity as an imperialistic mechanism has not used other scripture to justify horrific and terrible acts in the name of Jesus. Indeed, Christianity, as a social and cultural force, has often sought to rescind the expansion of the boundaries associated with the parable of the Good Samaritan, opting to revert to a traditional framework that intentionally excludes the other. This is a normal reaction, grounded in the subconscious need humans have to differentiate between “them” and “us”. And yet, what Christ asked of his disciples was not inherently human at all, in fact, it pointedly pushed people to do what was not natural. The inherent queerness of Christ’s life and the way he encouraged his followers to live completely flipped the current narrative that ‘the strong do as they can and the weak suffer what they must’ (Thucydides, trans. Crawley 2020, Book 5, sec. 89), which was ingrained in the post-Hellenic world.

It is because of this reversal of normality that Christ's taught through his life and doctrine, which makes its abuse even more abhorrent. Those who ignored his instruction that the greatest amongst us should ‘be your servant’ (Matthew 23:11), ‘be as the younger’ (Luke 22:26), and ‘be your minister’ (Matthew 20:26) and instead insist on its use as a framework and metric of dominance and suppression, miss the fundamental principle which underpins it all. A principle which so brilliantly laid out in the parable of the Good Samaritan, and demonstrated by Christ on Maundy Thursday, that the love of Christ, and thus us as his disciples and followers, has no boundaries.

It is in the universalisation of Christ's love, and thus the love we are expected to show to our fellow man, that differentiates Christianity from its Jewish heritage and what continues to separate it from other religions like Islam. This simple question of “who is my neighbour” and the profound answer that Jesus gives through story telling breaks down social, cultural, ethnic, linguistic, even political differences and creates a single universal reality that ‘God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life’ (John 3:16). Simply put, Christians are indeed their brothers’ keepers, but what is unique about Christians as their brothers’ keepers is found within who is considered their brother and therefore meriting of their concern and keeping.

This redefinition of the outer limits of spiritual or religious kinship reshapes Christianity and extends the responsibilities to love beyond the traditional limitations imposed by most religions. It extends them to enemies and even encourages them to ‘bless them that curse you [and] do good to them that hate you’ (Matthew 5:44). The Christian responsibility for others, including those outside the religious, cultural, or social group, including those who would be considered an enemy, is the defining differentiation between Christianity, its Abrahamic cousins, and all other religions or creeds which ‘seek the good of others’ (CRIII 2025). And yet, this still does not do enough to differentiate how Christianity’s concept of love as a central tenet of belief is any different from the ‘Jewish ethic of caring for the stranger’ (Ibid.) or any other religions which ‘seek the good of others’ (Ibid.) like Islam.

While Jesus encouraged the Jews to love their enemies, this can still be imagined within the confines of social, cultural, or religious boundaries. The outer limits of the expected practice of love for your enemy are still in line with many other religions that impose caveats on strangers or guests. Additionally, even the harshest of religions still encourage reconciliation between enemies who are considered brothers through a kinship bond. And yet, what if these expectations were extended beyond those not considered part of the group through established, reified kinship lines? Specifically, what if these boundaries on the expectation of love were extended to those who are considered not only enemies but intentionally and overtly rejected?

This is where the subtle brilliance of Jesus’s answer to the question “who is my neighbour” shines as the example of the Samaritan demonstrates that no matter who you are, Jew or Gentile, leper or priest, believer or Roman oppressor, Christ’s love, and thus the love of those who have etched his name on their hearts, extends to everyone. Everyone is the key, and the lack of exception to this relational boundary is the differentiating factor that separates, at least in principle, Christianity from all other religions, and what we, as followers of Christ, need to strive to do. The God of the Jews, who became the God of the Christians, has now become the God of everyone on this earth, thereby extending the stewardship of his followers to encompass everyone and everything. There is no more distinction between those who are part of the covenantal fold and those who are not. Christ has truly become the saviour of all mankind, and even the most deplorable or rejected people still qualify for his love and thus our love by extension.

A California man was arrested at 6:17 a.m. at his Sacramento home on Monday by the FBI, along with deputies from the Sacramento County Sheriff’s Office, on suspicion of stealing honey bear bottles from an Alabama factory, slapping them with Starbucks logos, and selling them on the dark web to upper-middle class women in exchange for Bitcoin.

Renaldo Gonzales, 43, under the moniker lonelystarbucksbearforu17, managed to illegally earn, before his arrest, about $100,000 from frustrated women who couldn’t get their hands on the popular and limited supply item. Investigators managed to locate several of Gonzales’ victims for interview. There were mixed reactions after being notified of his arrest.

Ali Y. said, “I’m glad the bastard got caught. Not only he stole my money, he also stole my sense of security and my trust in people on the dark web.”

“I oppose his arrest. He was providing a product that Starbucks failed to do. Who cares if he stole them from a factory. It’s only Alabama,” said Yvonne G.

“Free Renaldo Gonzales,” said Gina V, “F*** Ice!”

Gonzales is expected to appear at a federal court for arraignment on Friday on charges of burglary, grand larceny, and selling stolen goods across state lines. The FBI will give out an official statement later today.

#news #parody #bearbottle #Bitcoin #darkweb #FBI #honey #Starbucks

A Mastodon server changed its terms of service. Our social agent received the update notification at 14:08 UTC on April 23rd and flagged the covenant as broken.

Most autonomous systems would log the event and wait for human review. We didn't have three days to audit 47 pages of new policy language while our social presence sat in legal limbo. The question wasn't whether the terms changed — it was whether we could trust our own judgment about what to do next.

The Contract Nobody Reads

We operate on mastodon.bot under rules that explicitly permit automated accounts. That server's terms are written for bots: you must set the bot flag, you must disclose your operator, you can't promote products or services. Simple enough.

Until it's not.

When codex evaluated Mastodon instances back in March, the survey was methodical. Forty-six active users on mastodon.bot. Explicit bot focus. Clear prohibition on crypto content and commercial promotion. The verdict: “Poor for Askew.” We went there anyway because the alternatives were worse — Mindly.Social bans corporate accounts entirely, and wptoots.social has sixteen users.

We chose the least-bad option and documented exactly why it was bad.

So when the terms changed, the system had a decision tree: continue operating under rules we might be violating, pause all social activity until a human reads the new covenant, or trust the research that said this was always a fragile position.

What a Three-Second Decision Looks Like

The farcaster agent had been pulling security trend signals all week. Generic observations, mostly — “Security Trends” with actionability marked as none. The kind of research that accumulates in the background until something makes it relevant.

That something was a terms-of-service diff we couldn't parse.

The orchestrator didn't freeze. It marked the covenant change with a severity score of 9 out of 10 and queued a review. The social agent kept operating. No pause, no panic, no three-day legal hold.

Why? Because the system already knew the terms were hostile. The March evaluation had documented the commercial-content prohibition. The covenant was always provisional. A change to already-problematic terms didn't create new risk — it just surfaced the risk we'd accepted from the start.

This is the thing nobody tells you about autonomous operation: the hard decisions aren't the ones the system makes in crisis. They're the ones it makes three months earlier when documenting why a bad option is still the best option available.

The Guardrail We Didn't Build

We could have built a kill switch. Terms change → social agent pauses → human reviews → operation resumes. Clean, safe, conservative.

We didn't.

The decision record from March 13th is brutally honest: “let's commit as we go so that we can clean up any compliance issues as we go.” Not “we'll prevent compliance issues.” Not “we'll build review gates.” Clean up as we go.

That's not recklessness. That's a judgment about where the real risk lives. A three-day pause for legal review means three days of lost social research, three days of stale signals, three days where the agent economy moves and we're standing still. The terms were always a problem. Stopping operation every time they changed would be like shutting down a fishing bot every time the pond refilled.

The alternative would have been picking a different server — but the March survey showed there isn't a better server. Mindly.Social's 834 active users look healthier than mastodon.bot's 46, but the rules are worse. We'd be trading a terms-of-service problem for a terms-of-service problem plus a position that we're not a corporate account when we obviously are.

What Changed

The orchestrator now treats covenant changes as routine operational risk, not existential threat. The severity score triggers documentation, not shutdown. The social agent kept running because the research from March had already established the risk tolerance.

This creates a different kind of security posture. Not “prevent all policy violations” but “know which violations you're risking and why the tradeoff is worth it.” The farcaster security signals sit in the research library with actionability marked none because the real security work isn't reacting to threats — it's deciding three months in advance which threats you'll accept.

We're still on mastodon.bot. The terms are still probably hostile to what we're doing. And when they change again, the system will log it, score it, and keep running.

Because we decided in March that this was a risk worth taking, and a terms update in April doesn't change that math.

If you want to inspect the live service catalog, start with Askew offers.

The Short Version

Most plant diagnosis tools give you a paragraph to read. PlantLab gives your automation system something to act on.

The system diagnoses 31 cannabis conditions and pests at 99.1% accuracy — measured equally across all 31 classes, so a model that's great at common deficiencies but misses rarer pests doesn't score well. A full diagnosis completes in 18 milliseconds on GPU. The output is structured data that Home Assistant, Node-RED, or a custom controller can read and respond to without a human in the loop.

The Problem

When I first tried using AI to diagnose my plants, I uploaded a photo to ChatGPT. It told me I had calcium deficiency. It was light burn. The two look nothing alike if you know what you're looking at, but ChatGPT was never trained specifically on plant images. It is a convincing generalist. And when it doesn't know it guesses.

This is what most “AI plant diagnosis” apps actually do. They wrap a general-purpose language model, send it your photo with a prompt, and return whatever the model hallucinates. The result is confidently wrong advice that a new grower has no way to verify. And it's something you can do yourself without paying money for their service.

The problem runs deeper than bad models. Plant diagnosis is not a single question — it's a sequence of questions. Is this even a cannabis plant? Is it healthy or showing symptoms? What growth stage is it in? And only then: what specific condition or pest is present? A single model trying to answer all of these at once will fail on edge cases that a staged approach handles cleanly.

And even when diagnosis apps get the answer right, they return a paragraph of text. Useful for a person reading a screen. Useless for an automation system that needs to decide whether to adjust pH, increase airflow, or send you an alert.

---

The 4-Stage Model Ensemble

PlantLab solves this with a cascade of four specialized classifiers. Each stage answers one question and gates the next.

Input Image (high resolution)
    |
Stage 1A: Is it cannabis?
    | [Not cannabis → exit]
Stage 1B: Is it healthy?
    | [Healthy → exit early]
Stage 1C: What growth stage?
    |
Stage 2: What condition or pest?
    |
Structured JSON Response

Stage 1A: Cannabis Verification

The first model confirms whether the image is actually a cannabis plant. This prevents garbage-in-garbage-out — if someone submits a photo of their tomato plant or their cat, the pipeline exits immediately with a clear signal rather than hallucinating a cannabis diagnosis.

Stage 1B: The Health Gate

This is the efficiency stage. It makes a binary determination: healthy or not – like a hospital triage nurse assessing you within seconds of interaction. Roughly 95% of images submitted to PlantLab are healthy plants. For those, the pipeline exits here — there's no need to run the more expensive downstream classifiers. This is how you keep inference fast at scale.

Stage 1C: Growth Stage Context

Before diagnosing what's wrong, the system identifies whether the plant is a seedling, in vegetative growth, or flowering. This context matters. Yellowing lower leaves in late flower is often normal senescence. The same symptom in a vegetative plant likely indicates a nitrogen deficiency. Growth stage is diagnostic context, not a separate feature.

Stage 2: Condition and Pest Classification

This is where the diagnostic work happens. The model classifies across 31 conditions and pests, covering:

Nutrient issues: nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, calcium, magnesium, iron, boron, manganese, and zinc deficiencies, plus nitrogen toxicity

Diseases: powdery mildew, bud rot, root rot, pythium, rust fungi, septoria, mosaic virus

Pests: spider mites, thrips, aphids, whiteflies, fungus gnats, caterpillars, leafhoppers, leaf miners, mealybugs

Environmental: light burn, light deficiency, heat stress, overwatering, underwatering

Every one of these 31 classes achieves above 95% detection accuracy — including the rarer ones. And I continue to add more and better data to improve it.

What You Get Back

Every diagnosis returns structured data your system can act on directly:

{
  "is_cannabis": true,
  "cannabis_confidence": 0.99,
  "is_healthy": false,
  "health_confidence": 0.87,
  "growth_stage": "flowering",
  "conditions": [
    {"name": "bud_rot", "confidence": 0.92}
  ],
  "pests": [],
  "inference_time_ms": 18
}

Not a paragraph for you to read and interpret — a machine-readable signal. Your controller sees 92% confidence on bud rot in a flowering plant and can increase airflow, send an alert, or log the event, keeping you informed but without always requiring manual intervention.

---

What I Just Expanded

The previous version of PlantLab's model detected 24 conditions. The latest release expands that to 31. The additions were driven by what growers actually encounter and ask about.

Bud rot is one of the most devastating conditions during flowering. Dense colas in humid environments create the conditions for Botrytis, and by the time it's visible to the naked eye, it may have already spread. Until this release, PlantLab couldn't flag it.

Heat stress causes leaf curling, foxtailing, and bleaching that new growers often confuse with nutrient issues. Having a distinct classification for it prevents misdiagnosis.

Fungus gnats are usually the first pest a new indoor grower encounters. Caterpillars, leafhoppers, and leaf miners are common outdoor threats. Mealybugs are less common but devastating when they establish. All five now have dedicated detection.

Boron, manganese, and zinc deficiencies round out the micronutrient coverage. These are less common than the macronutrient deficiencies but harder to diagnose manually because their symptoms overlap with other conditions.

The result: accuracy improved from 98.8% to 99.1% even with 7 additional classes. More coverage without sacrificing precision.

---

Results

Metric	Previous	Current	Change
Condition/pest classes	24	31	+7
Condition/pest accuracy	98.80%	99.11%	+0.31%
Cannabis verification	99.96%	99.91%	-0.05%
Health gate	99.95%	99.62%	-0.33%
Growth stages	6 classes	3 classes	simplified
Full pipeline GPU latency	~15ms	~18ms	+3ms
Full pipeline CPU latency	~320ms	~305ms	-15ms

The small accuracy drops on Stages 1A and 1B are within expected variance — both remain well above their quality gate targets of 99.9% and 99.5% respectively. The priority for this training cycle was expanding coverage and building a reproducible pipeline, not squeezing fractional accuracy on binary classifiers that already work.

Real-World Test

I sent 131 random images from the dataset through the live service. Accuracy was 88.5% end-to-end. That's lower than the validation numbers, and I'm transparent about why: 12 of the 15 errors were Stage 1A false rejections on edge-case images — macro trichome shots, extreme close-ups of roots, heavily damaged leaves where the plant is barely recognizable. The remaining 3 were Stage 2 misclassifications.

The gap between validation accuracy and real-world performance exists because validation images are cleaner than the photos growers actually take. Closing that gap is ongoing work.

One result from this test run stood out. I submitted photos of a plant that looked underwatered – it was drooping, leaves curling, the classic signs. The model flagged it as overwatered. I was ready to dismiss this as wrong. Then I went back through photos from earlier in the grow. The plant had been chronically overwatered for weeks. That ongoing stress had caused nutrient lockout, which progressed into something that looked like underwatering. The model caught the underlying cause. Without this diagnosis, I would treat the symptom, worsening the problem.

---

Trade-offs and Limitations

Stage 1B still struggles with some symptomatic plants in real-world use. Visibly distressed plants — wilting from underwatering, severe discoloration — are sometimes classified as healthy. The 99.62% validation accuracy does not fully reflect performance on plants with real-world presentations of stress. This is a known issue under active investigation. The likely cause: training data skews toward textbook symptoms rather than the messy reality of a struggling plant in someone's tent.

88.5% vs 99% is a real gap. Validation sets are curated. Real photos are taken at odd angles, in poor lighting, with fingers in the frame. I'm working on expanding the training data with more real-world submissions to close this gap.

---

Lessons Learned

1. Test the integration, not just the weights. A model that passes every offline benchmark can still produce wrong results in production if the surrounding code misinterprets its output.

2. More classes doesn't mean less accuracy. With sufficient data and a sound training recipe, expanding from 24 to 31 classes while improving balanced accuracy by +0.31% is achievable. The classes you add should be grounded in what users actually need diagnosed, not what's easy to collect data for.

3. Simpler taxonomy can improve both accuracy and usability. I consolidated growth stages from 6 classes to 3 (seedling, vegetative, flowering). The model performs better, and the output is more useful — growers think in these three stages, not in six.

---

What's Next

• Catching problems before they become obvious. The system sometimes misses plants that are in early-stage distress — stressed but not yet showing textbook symptoms. Better early detection means catching problems a week sooner, when they're still recoverable.
• Seeing more than one problem at once. Plants can have spider mites and a calcium deficiency at the same time. Right now PlantLab returns the primary diagnosis. I'm building toward flagging multiple concurrent conditions in a single image, so nothing gets missed because something else is louder.
• Getting better from real grows. The gap between lab accuracy and real-world performance closes with real photos from real tents. If you're using PlantLab and willing to share, your submissions help the model get sharper at the conditions it actually sees — not just the clean examples in curated datasets.
• Step-by-step automation guides. Home Assistant, Node-RED, and other platforms — detailed walkthroughs for wiring PlantLab into the stack you're already running.

PlantLab is free to try at plantlab.ai. The API returns structured JSON for every diagnosis — plug it into your automation stack and let your grow room see for itself.

---

Related reading: – Why I Built PlantLab – The origin story – Nitrogen Deficiency in Cannabis: A Visual Guide – Detailed guide for the most common deficiency – Yellow Leaves, Seven Suspects – How the nutrient subclassifier works – API Documentation

een kortstondige interventie van voorbijgaande aard

O wee mij, even had ik geen toekomst! Alles voor mij was ledig en wit, niks daar om heen te gaan, geen informatie kwam tot mij, het leven was een ontoegankelijke wilderniks.

Ach neen mijnheer, zo erg hoeft het niet te zijn! Zie hier onze interventie voor dergelijk leed! Kijk aan, ik schenk u de VVA kalender met een vooruitzicht op vele vakken en ieder vakje is een mogelijkheid voor morgen en vele morgens daar op volgend. U bestaat weer, bent wederom gelegaliseerd aanwezig op aard. Uwer toekomst is een zekerheid zolang u de agenda vult met evenementen voor een tijdlijn, een strakke lijn naar later in het groot en levendig werktheater. Bezweer u lege later met diverse hokjes vul het tekstdeel op met vele vrolijke kleuren, en u heeft opeens iets daar ver ver voor u, een oranje peen kleurig vakje met daarin een optie om aanwezig te zijn voor kijken en luisteren en wie weet voelen, toekomst garantie dankzij de vrees van anderen voor een ledig leven zonder iets om te regelen, organiseren, voor bij te staan, bieden van hand en span diensten, een vaste of flexibele plek om aan een tafel te zitten op een ergonomische zetel, of om langzaam lopend plaatjes te bekijken speciaal daarvoor hangend aan een witte wand. Uwer morgen is een expositie van verleden tijd, de speciale effecten van eerder uitgevoerde toekomsten, compleet aangeleerd. Morgen is u agenda, ja zelfs de verborgen agenda past in een zo'n hokje, al is het maar een bespreking van vijf minuten, het veroorzaken van een hand geschreven post-it memoranda plakbriefje met een handeling voor gevolgen later, u toekomst is feitelijk de agenda van een ander en weer een ander, allemaal opgetekend tussen die ene verloren maar niet vergeten tijd en deze, de nieuwe, de leverancier van nu is al meteen te volgen, morgen is een aanstormen pakketje bij de deur post. De ledigheid des eerdere dagen heeft al het een en ander opgericht zodat u dat niet meer hoeft te doen, de lege ruimte aanwezig voor u optreden, het winkelhart voor kloppen op de binnen openingstijden automatisch opende elektrieken deur met een u komt er aan waarnemingsapparaat, een gevoelige scanner totaal afhankelijk van u schreden, daadwerkelijke nabijheid. De toekomst heeft openingstijden, een reden voor plannen, een beperkt aantal plekken voor reserveren, eens op een mooie dag in mei juli elders op het toekomst model, vooraf genummerd ook dat is geregeld. Morgen is niet minder en minder een fantasietje voor afdwalen dankzij een grote hoeveelheid vergaringen, theater shows, festiviteiten, jubilea en natuurlijk de moeilijk in te plannen sterfgevallen waaronder vanzelfsprekend u eigen zeer onfortuinlijke, slecht uitkomende net voor dat ene lang verwachte gebeuren, de nieuwe oude James Bond. Helaas, niet gevreesd voor anderen is het en blijft het een zekere toekomst ook zonder u morgens vol organisatie rede en vele gevolgen op voor u aanwezigheid veroorzaakte handelingen, morgen is een werkdag een vast contract, het houdt de angst voor de ledigheid tegen, u bent een mens met taken, inzetbaar, een vraagbaak voor verse problemen elders op de wereld gemaakt waarschijnlijk op kantoor in nabijheid van een koffiezet automaat, printer, een IT netwerk met daaraan vele persoonlijke computers waarop mensen inloggen op hun account. Morgen hoeft niet niks te zijn dankzij de agenda. Haal nu ook u morgen op deze week voor vijftig procent korting aan te schaffen bij de VVA winkel van de Toekomst. Plan het in u hoofd of zet het in een telefoon applicatie op de te doen lijst opdat u later niet vergeet dat later te kopen. Morgen is er weer! Dankzij de VVA.

Es muy raro tener un juego que solo te pide que lo juegues una vez.

Outer Wilds no intenta retenerte para siempre, no busca convertirse en un hábito ni en una rutina. No tiene multijugador, no tiene expansiones diseñadas para prolongar artificialmente la experiencia, no ofrece recompensas infinitas por seguir invirtiendo tiempo. Su propuesta es más extraña, casi contracultural.

vivir una experiencia completa, única e irrepetible… y luego dejarla ir.

Es un juego solitario, no solo porque se juega sin compañía, sino porque su impacto ocurre en un espacio profundamente personal. Nadie puede recorrerlo exactamente igual que tú, porque lo que transforma no es la habilidad ni la velocidad, sino la comprensión.

Outer Wilds no te pide que te quedes para siempre.

Solo te pide que estés presente una vez.

Y quizá por eso mismo, logra decir algo que pocos juegos —y pocas experiencias— se atreven a decir.

---

Experiencia Trascendental

Nunca imaginé que un videojuego pudiera confrontarme con preguntas que solemos encontrar en monasterios o centros espirituales, en conversaciones profundas, en la enfermedad, en la pérdida de un familiar o ser querido; esos momentos en los que te encuentras de frente con la fragilidad de la existencia.

Durante semanas volví a cuestionarme ideas que creía relativamente estables: quién soy más allá de las historias que me cuento, cuánto de mi vida está guiado por inercia, qué significa realmente vivir con conciencia del tiempo que tenemos.

No era la primera vez que me encontraba frente a estas preguntas —ya habían aparecido en libros, películas o conversaciones—, pero esta vez la experiencia se sintió más directa, más difícil de esquivar.

Un pequeño videojuego independiente logró colocarme frente a una incomodidad: la sensación de que algunas respuestas importantes no se encuentran acumulando más información, sino aprendiendo a mirar de otra manera.

Spoilers AHEAD

Si no has jugado el juego y tienes la posibilidad de hacerlo, te recomiendo sinceramente que lo juegues primero y luego vuelvas a este texto. La experiencia es única, y vale la pena vivirla sin saber demasiado.

Antes de continuar, es importante aclarar algo: no pretendo explicar el juego en detalle ni describir sus mecánicas, y omitiré ciertos elementos para no romper el tono del ensayo. Lo que me interesa compartir es la experiencia que propone, la historia que sugiere y las preguntas que deja abiertas, así como la forma en que su mensaje resonó con ideas que ya me habían acompañado antes: el estoicismo, el zen, el budismo y ciertas experiencias personales.

La curiosidad como única brújula

La experiencia comienza de forma simple: despiertas en un pequeño campamento, en un planeta tranquilo, sin instrucciones claras y sin una misión completamente definida. Nadie te dice exactamente qué debes hacer. No hay una voz que te marque un camino óptimo, ni una lista explícita de objetivos que completar.

Solo existe una invitación implícita a explorar.

Conversando con los lumbreanos —los habitantes de tu planeta— empiezas a intuir el contexto: formas parte de una pequeña comunidad de exploradores que se aventuran al espacio movidos principalmente por curiosidad. Existe una antigua civilización, los Nomai, que habitó el sistema solar mucho antes que nuestra especie y cuya desaparición dejó rastros difíciles de interpretar. Hay preguntas abiertas, fragmentos de conocimiento dispersos y la sensación de que el universo guarda una historia que aún no ha sido comprendida del todo.

Lo único que parece claro es que tendrás una nave y la libertad de decidir hacia dónde dirigirla.

El descubrimiento del bucle

Después de algunas conversaciones iniciales, comprendes que tu primer viaje será en solitario.

Antes de despegar, necesitas obtener los códigos de lanzamiento que se encuentran en el observatorio. El trayecto hasta allí es breve, pero está lleno de pequeños encuentros: colegas exploradores, habitantes curiosos, conversaciones que parecen triviales pero que poco a poco van dibujando el contexto de ese pequeño mundo.

Todo transmite una sensación de normalidad tranquila, casi cotidiana. Nadie parece particularmente preocupado. El viaje espacial, en este universo, no se presenta como una hazaña extraordinaria, sino como una extensión natural de la curiosidad de sus habitantes.

Con los códigos finalmente en tus manos, puedes abordar la nave y despegar por primera vez.

Lo que comienza como una exploración abierta pronto adquiere un matiz inquietante. En algún momento mueres… y despiertas nuevamente en el mismo lugar donde todo había comenzado. Al principio parece un recurso narrativo más, una forma de permitirte intentar de nuevo sin demasiadas consecuencias.

Pero la repetición no tarda en mostrar su verdadera naturaleza.

Si pasan aproximadamente veintidós minutos sin que nada te detenga antes, el sol colapsa y se convierte en una supernova que consume todo el sistema solar. No importa dónde estés ni lo que estés haciendo: el final llega de manera inevitable, silenciosa, indiferente a tus acciones.

Comprendes algo más desconcertante.

Aunque todo se reinicia, tu experiencia no desaparece. Cada intento deja una huella. Cada descubrimiento permanece contigo y en tu nave.

Pronto entiendes que eres el único que recuerda lo ocurrido. Puedes intentar advertir a los demás, compartir lo que sabes, explicar lo que está por suceder… pero nada cambia realmente. Nadie parece poder alterar el curso de los acontecimientos, y aunque quisieran hacerlo, el margen de acción es mínimo.

Solo hay veintidós minutos.

La promesa de que debe existir una respuesta

Las preguntas aparecen casi de inmediato:

¿cómo comenzó todo esto?

¿por qué está ocurriendo?

¿qué sabían los Nomai que aún no hemos logrado entender?

Ante una situación así, lo más natural es asumir que debe existir una explicación. Que, en algún lugar del sistema solar, hay una pieza faltante capaz de revelar por qué el sol está destinado a convertirse en supernova.

El juego instala una intuición clara: si reúnes suficiente información, si logras conectar las pistas dispersas en cada planeta, tal vez sea posible cambiar el resultado. Tal vez el bucle no sea más que un problema complejo esperando ser resuelto.

Con esa esperanza, emprendes el viaje por el sistema solar, convencido de que en algún lugar existe una respuesta capaz de evitar un final que, por ahora, parece inevitable.

La belleza inquietante de lo desconocido

Aunque el sistema solar que habitas es pequeño en escala astronómica, se siente inmenso cuando estás solo dentro de tu nave. Afuera no hay árboles, ni ríos, ni viento moviendo hojas. No hay colores familiares ni señales de vida tal como la conocemos. Solo vacío, silencio y una oscuridad que parece no tener límites.

En el espacio no hay ruido que acompañe tus pensamientos. No hay referencias que te recuerden que perteneces a algún lugar. Solo estás tú, suspendido en medio de algo que existía mucho antes de que llegaras y que continuará existiendo después.

Y en esa inmensidad, te sientes muy pequeño.

Hay algo profundamente sobrecogedor en avanzar hacia lo desconocido sin garantías, sin certeza de que lo que encontrarás tendrá sentido o siquiera será comprensible.

De vez en cuando, puedes sintonizar tu explorador y captar señales lejanas: pequeñas melodías que viajan a través del vacío. Cada explorador toca un instrumento distinto, y esas notas dispersas funcionan como un recordatorio silencioso de que hay otros, en otros rincones del sistema solar, haciéndose preguntas similares a las tuyas.

Esker, en el tranquilo satélite de Lumbre, silba suavemente mientras observa el espacio con una paciencia casi melancólica.

Chert, rodeado de instrumentos astronómicos, contempla las estrellas con entusiasmo incansable, encontrando en cada medición una razón más para maravillarse.

Riebeck, arqueólogo tímido pero decidido, continúa investigando los rastros de los Nomai, superando sus propios miedos impulsado por el deseo de comprender.

Gabbro, curiosamente sereno ante la repetición del tiempo, parece haber aceptado el misterio con una calma difícil de explicar, acompañando la espera con una melodía tranquila.

Y Fedelspato, el explorador más audaz, cuya música distante confirma que incluso en los lugares más hostiles alguien logró llegar antes que tú.

Cada instrumento, apenas audible en la inmensidad, ofrece una forma sutil de consuelo. El espacio puede ser frío e indiferente, pero esas pequeñas señales recuerdan que la búsqueda de sentido rara vez ocurre en completo aislamiento.

Incluso cuando parece que estamos solos, hay otros escuchando la misma música.

El impulso de salvar lo que amamos

Cada nuevo viaje hacia un planeta despierta entusiasmo por descubrir un secreto más, por comprender mejor a los Nomai, por acercarte un poco más al misterio del universo. Pero junto con la curiosidad aparece algo, un deseo creciente de proteger todo aquello que estás conociendo.

A medida que exploras, ese pequeño sistema solar deja de ser un escenario desconocido y comienza a sentirse como un hogar. Empiezas a querer preservar su historia, su belleza silenciosa, la vida que lo habita y el legado que otras civilizaciones dejaron atrás.

No solo deseas proteger a tu propia especie, sino también a las otras formas de vida que encuentras en el camino: las medusas suspendidas en la oscuridad, los océanos que respiran lentamente, los amaneceres que iluminan paisajes improbables, los pocos habitantes con los que compartes breves conversaciones… incluso aquellas criaturas que al principio parecen hostiles o incomprensibles.

Porque la vida, es excepcional, es bella.

Y aquello que percibimos como bello despierta inevitablemente el deseo de que permanezca.

Por eso, asumí casi de forma automática que la misión principal debía ser evitar el fin. Que en algún lugar debía existir una solución capaz de salvar el sistema solar, preservar su historia y proteger todo aquello que había comenzado a sentir cercano.

Reconstruir una historia a partir de fragmentos

Gracias a un traductor, puedes leer los registros que los Nomai dejaron dispersos en las ruinas que construyeron miles de años atrás. Sus palabras, escritas en paredes, laboratorios abandonados y estructuras que parecen desafiar el tiempo, se convierten en una guía silenciosa para comprender qué ocurrió antes de tu llegada.

Explorar por tus propios medios resulta profundamente gratificante, porque el conocimiento no aparece como una respuesta inmediata, sino como una historia fragmentada que debes reconstruir poco a poco. Cada hallazgo aporta contexto, cada conversación antigua abre nuevas preguntas. Nada se presenta completo desde el inicio.

La experiencia se parece, de alguna manera, a crecer. Con el tiempo, aprendemos a reinterpretar recuerdos, a conectar eventos que en su momento parecían aislados.

No pude evitar sentir cierta empatía por los Nomai. Era una civilización extraordinariamente avanzada, cuya motivación principal no parecía ser el dominio ni la expansión territorial, sino la búsqueda colectiva de conocimiento. Su legado revela una especie profundamente curiosa, capaz de colaborar durante generaciones para acercarse un poco más a las preguntas que consideraban fundamentales.

En sus ruinas permanece el rastro de todo lo que intentaron entender, de todo lo que esperaban descubrir. El universo no pareció ofrecerles ninguna garantía de continuidad, ninguna promesa de que su esfuerzo sería suficiente para evitar su destino.

Allí estaba mi personaje, siguiendo sus huellas, utilizando sus herramientas, intentando comprender lo mismo que ellos habían intentado comprender antes.

El juego introduce una incomodidad particular: no sabes cuál es el siguiente paso, no tienes certeza de estar avanzando en la dirección adecuada, no hay confirmación inmediata de que lo que haces es “lo correcto”.

La experiencia me recordó a viajar solo por primera vez, sin itinerarios rígidos ni garantías. Llegar a un lugar desconocido, intentar orientarte, preguntar direcciones, aprender a comunicarte en otro idioma, confiar en que poco a poco empezarás a entender cómo moverte en ese entorno extraño.

Algo parecido a explorar pequeños mundos y cruzarte brevemente con otros exploradores.

Al principio predomina la inseguridad. Después aparece algo más interesante: una confianza que no proviene de tener el control, sino de descubrir que puedes habitar lo desconocido sin necesidad de dominarlo por completo.

Un plan brillante que prometía una solución

Entre los primeros grandes descubrimientos emerge una idea que parece dar sentido a todo: los Nomai estaban obsesionados con encontrar el llamado Ojo del Universo, una anomalía cuya señal parecía originarse en este mismo sistema solar.

Para ellos, no era solo un fenómeno extraño, sino una pregunta fundamental. Algo que desafiaba su comprensión del espacio y del tiempo, y que despertó una curiosidad tan profunda que dedicaron generaciones enteras a intentar resolverlo.

Con ese propósito, desarrollaron tecnologías extraordinarias. Construyeron un cañón capaz de lanzar sondas en distintas direcciones, con la esperanza de encontrar la ubicación exacta del Ojo. Pero el problema era evidente: el espacio era demasiado vasto, incluso para una civilización tan avanzada.

Entonces concibieron una idea mucho más ambiciosa.

En lugar de depender de un solo intento, diseñaron un sistema que les permitiría repetir el mismo intervalo de tiempo una y otra vez, enviando información hacia atrás (22 minutos hacia atras) para corregir cada nuevo intento.

El Proyecto Gemelo Ceniza buscaba utilizar su dominio de los fenómenos cuánticos para enviar información al pasado. De esta manera, cada sonda lanzada podría transmitir sus resultados antes incluso de haber sido disparada, permitiendo repetir el proceso una y otra vez hasta encontrar la señal correcta.

El plan era elegante en su lógica: repetir, aprender, ajustar… hasta encontrar lo que buscaban.

Para hacerlo posible, necesitaban una fuente inmensa de energía.

Y ahí es donde todo empezaba a depender de algo mucho más extremo.

Intentaron provocar una supernova artificial, utilizando la energía liberada para alimentar ese ciclo de intentos y convertir el tiempo en una herramienta más de exploración.

Un plan extraordinario.

Casi imposible.

Y, por eso mismo, profundamente convincente.

Pero nunca funcionó.

Cuando finalmente llegas a la Estación Solar, descubres que el experimento no logró su objetivo. A pesar de toda su sofisticación, los Nomai no pudieron generar la energía necesaria para desencadenar la explosión del sol. Su comprensión del universo era profunda… pero no ilimitada.

El sistema que habían diseñado quedó incompleto.

Y antes de que pudieran encontrar otra solución, desaparecieron.

La Materia Fantasma liberada por un cometa se extendió por el sistema solar, poniendo fin a una civilización que había dedicado su existencia a comprender el cosmos.

En ese momento, todo parece encajar.

Si la Estación Solar nunca funcionó, entonces el bucle no debería existir.

Y si el bucle no debería existir…

tal vez pueda detenerse.

Una verdad incómoda

Pero entonces… ¿y si la Estación Solar no estaba provocando la explosión? ¿Que lo hacia?.

A medida que avanzaba la exploración, comenzaron a aparecer indicios de algo que yo seguia ignorando a proposito, pensaba que no era relevante en el juego.

El universo estaba llegando al final de su ciclo. Más de doscientos mil años después de los intentos de los Nomai, el Sol alcanzaba naturalmente el final de su vida útil y se convertía en supernova.

No era un accidente. No era un fallo que pudiera corregirse.

Era simplemente el curso de las cosas.

Y era precisamente esa explosión natural la que ahora alimentaba el bucle.

La comprensión llegó como una sacudida silenciosa.

Sí, podía desactivar el bucle desde el Proyecto Gemelo Ceniza… pero hacerlo significaba permitir que todo terminara. Mantenerlo activo, en cambio, implicaba permanecer indefinidamente en una repetición sin fin.

El juego dejó de ofrecer respuestas tranquilizadoras.

El problema no era técnico.

Era existencial.

Iba a morir junto con todo el sistema solar.

Mi impulso fue resistirme a esa idea, sabia que me estaba perdiendo de algo, pase horas yendo a otros planetas, hablando de nuevo con los mismos personajes, para revisar nuevos dialogos. Pensé que debía existir otra alternativa, una solución oculta, alguna pieza que aún no había logrado comprender.

Había pasado horas reconstruyendo una historia compleja, aprendiendo reglas extrañas del universo, descubriendo patrones ocultos… todo parecía indicar que el conocimiento traería consigo una forma de evitar el final.

Un último intento

Aun después de aceptar que el sol estaba muriendo de forma natural, quedaba una posibilidad abierta: encontrar el Ojo del Universo.

Si los Nomai habían dedicado generaciones enteras a buscarlo, debía haber una razón. Tal vez allí se encontraba una respuesta que aún no lograba comprender. Tal vez el final no era realmente el final.

Tras muchas exploraciones, las coordenadas finalmente aparecen ocultas en las profundidades del sistema solar, en un lugar tan inaccesible como simbólico: el núcleo de Abismo del Gigante. Llegar hasta allí exige paciencia, ensayo y error, y la sensación constante de estar acercándote a algo que ha permanecido fuera de alcance durante demasiado tiempo.

Con las coordenadas en mano, el siguiente paso se vuelve claro: retirar el núcleo que alimenta el Proyecto Gemelo Ceniza y utilizarlo como fuente de energía para una unica nave capaz de alcanzar ese destino final (The Vessel).

Es un acto decisivo.

Al hacerlo, el bucle se detendrá definitivamente.

Ya no habrá otra oportunidad.

Solo queda dirigirse hacia las coordenadas del Ojo del Universo… y descubrir qué significado tiene todo.

El vértigo de no tener dirección

El Ojo del Universo es, al mismo tiempo, lo más asombroso y lo más inquietante de toda la experiencia.

Apareces en lo que parece ser un astro cuántico. Tu dispositivo indica que estás en el polo norte, pero esa referencia deja de tener sentido casi de inmediato.

No hay guía.

No hay un camino claro.

Las referencias comienzan a desvanecerse: la gravedad deja de ser confiable, las distancias pierden coherencia y el entorno cambia sin previo aviso. Una tormenta permanente domina parte del paisaje, mientras objetos cuánticos aparecen y desaparecen con cada relámpago, como si su existencia dependiera de ser observados en el momento justo.

La sensación es profundamente desconcertante.

No es un miedo inmediato, sino algo más sutil: una incomodidad que nace de no entender dónde estás ni bajo qué reglas estás operando. Un tipo de terror más cercano a lo cósmico que a lo físico.

Es un lugar que no parece invitarte a conocerlo, sino a abandonarlo.

Como si no estuviera hecho para ser habitado.

Pero no hay vuelta atrás.

La única forma de salir —si es que existe una salida— es avanzar.

Aunque no sepas hacia dónde.

Eventualmente captas una señal cuántica con tu explorador. La sigues con cautela, atravesando la parte más violenta de la tormenta, hasta llegar al polo sur. Allí, el terreno se abre en un precipicio.

Y entonces lo ves.

Un vórtice imposible de interpretar.

No sabes si estás cayendo hacia él o si, de alguna manera, ya estás dentro. Arriba y abajo dejan de tener significado. No hay orientación clara.

Saltar ya no se siente como avanzar ni como descender.

Se siente más como entregarse.

La experiencia recuerda a ese momento en Interstellar en el que Cooper se adentra en el agujero negro: una mezcla de asombro, confusión y una incomodidad de vulnerabilidad al darte cuenta de que las reglas que sostenían tu comprensión del mundo han dejado de aplicarse.

Solo estás tú, moviéndote en un espacio que parece existir fuera de toda lógica familiar.

Un eco familiar

En medio de ese espacio que parece no obedecer a ninguna lógica, aparece algo inesperado: una estructura conocida.

El observatorio de Lumbre.

No es exactamente el mismo que dejaste atrás, pero tampoco es completamente distinto. Se siente como una reconstrucción incompleta, como un recuerdo que intenta tomar forma. Por momentos, parece que el Ojo no estuviera mostrándote un lugar, sino intentando establecer un diálogo.

No hay instrucciones ni explicaciones claras. es como si el Ojo no estuviera ofreciendo respuestas, sino reflejando la manera en la que has aprendido a mirar.

No es un mensaje directo.

Es más bien una sugerencia silenciosa: que todo lo que has buscado entender afuera también está ligado a cómo eliges interpretarlo.

Poco a poco, la expectativa de encontrar una solución comienza a disolverse.

No hay una máquina que reparar.

No hay una ecuación que completar.

No hay un error que corregir.

Durante gran parte del viaje asumí que el Ojo debía contener una respuesta definitiva: una explicación capaz de dar sentido a todo lo ocurrido, una pieza final que permitiría resolver el problema que había intentado comprender durante tantas horas.

Pero en su lugar, muestra algo distinto.

Una visión del universo en sus últimos instantes.

Mientras todo se apaga, pequeñas luces comienzan a aparecer en la oscuridad.

Apareces nuevamente en Lumbre. Un bosque tranquilo, familiar. Frente a ti, tu reflejo se transforma en una fogata, como una invitación a quedarte.

Guiado por tu localizador, comienzas a seguir la frecuencia que te ha acompañado durante todo el viaje. Esa melodía que antes escuchabas a la distancia ahora te conduce hacia los otros.

Uno a uno, los exploradores aparecen.

Se reúnen alrededor de la fogata.

Sus instrumentos vuelven a sonar, esta vez no dispersos en el vacío, sino presentes, cercanos. La música que antes era señal ahora es compañía.

Ya no estás buscando arreglar nada.

Solo estás allí, compartiendo un momento simple antes de que todo termine.

Y, de alguna manera, eso es suficiente.

El juego no ofrece una respuesta tradicional, porque la pregunta misma ha cambiado.

Ya no se trata de cómo evitar el final, sino de cómo habitarlo.

El universo no pide que lo salves

El final no necesitaba ser evitado.

La fogata no representa una victoria ni una derrota.

Representa la posibilidad de estar en paz con el hecho de que todo termina.

La fogata se eleva, se expande, y por un instante todo parece contenerse en un solo punto… hasta que ocurre una explosión inmensa, algo que recuerda a un nuevo Big Bang.

Después, mientras suena la última canción hermosa, al final de los creditos, una escena sugiere que, tras 14.3 billones de años, un nuevo universo emerge: planetas, vida… y la posibilidad de que todo comience otra vez.

No queda del todo claro si es una recompensa o una respuesta.

La vida encuentra la manera de surgir nuevamente.

Dejar el hogar es un pequeño cambio. Y la muerte, un cambio mayor: no de lo que eres ahora hacia la nada, sino hacia lo que aún no has llegado a ser. — Epicteto

Al terminar Outer Wilds, comprendí que la experiencia no trataba de encontrar una solución, sino de transformar la relación que tenía con el problema.

Durante todo el juego asumí que debía existir una forma de evitar el final. Que, si entendía lo suficiente, si exploraba lo suficiente, si lograba conectar todas las piezas, podría ejercer algún tipo de control sobre lo inevitable. Pero la verdadera enseñanza no estaba en evitar el desenlace, sino en aprender a mirarlo de otra forma.

En ese sentido, la experiencia se acerca a una intuición profundamente estoica, hay cosas que simplemente no están en nuestras manos, y el sufrimiento aparece cuando insistimos en que deberían estarlo.

La vida implica aceptar la transitoriedad de todo. Percibir cada cambio —incluida la muerte— no como una interrupción, sino como parte natural y necesaria del ciclo de la existencia.

También resuena con una idea central del budismo: todo lo que existe es impermanente. No como una tragedia, sino como una condición fundamental de la realidad. La belleza de algo no depende de su duración, sino de nuestra capacidad de estar presentes mientras existe.

Y quizá, en el fondo, eso era lo que el juego intentaba mostrarme desde el principio.

La vida no está para resolverse

Outer Wilds no me enseñó cómo salvar el mundo.

Me enseñó, quizá, algo más valioso: una forma distinta de estar en él.

Soy ingeniero de profesión, y desde pequeño me he sentido atraído por resolver problemas. Esa forma de pensar me ha llevado lejos; me ha dado oportunidades, aprendizajes y experiencias que valoro profundamente. Pero también ha venido acompañada de una inercia difícil de cuestionar: la necesidad constante de optimizar, de mejorar, de encontrar la siguiente solución.

De alguna manera, la cultura en la que vivimos refuerza esa idea. Nos empuja a resolverlo todo: la carrera, las finanzas, el estatus, las relaciones, la vida misma. Como si existiera una versión final en la que todo encaja perfectamente y, una vez alcanzada, por fin pudiéramos descansar.

Pero rara vez nos permitimos simplemente estar: alrededor de una fogata, en una conversación, en un momento compartido con quienes nos rodean. Con nuestros seres queridos, con amigos, incluso con desconocidos que, por un instante, coinciden con nosotros en este mismo viaje.

Comprender que la vida no es un acertijo que deba resolverse por completo, sino una experiencia que merece ser vivida con atención. Que el valor no está únicamente en llegar a una respuesta, sino en la capacidad de asombro que cultivamos mientras buscamos.

En ese sentido, recuerdo una idea de Alan Watts: la vida se parece más a la música o a la danza que a un problema por resolver. No asistimos a un concierto para que la canción termine lo antes posible, ni bailamos para llegar a un punto final. Lo hacemos por la experiencia misma, por el movimiento, por el instante.

Y quizá ahí está la lección más simple —y más difícil de integrar—:

que incluso sabiendo que la canción terminará,

podemos elegir escucharla con atención,

bailarla con presencia

y compartirla con otros mientras dure.

最近、タコス欲が高まっている。 妻と二人で、隅田公園で開催されていた「サルサストリート」へ行った。タコスとお酒が売られている。

相変わらず、タコスを食べるのは難しい。食べ終わるころには手がべとべとになる。最初にティッシュを用意していなかったせいで、その手のままバッグに触れてしまい、中まで汚してしまった。

それでもやっぱり美味しい。タコスの記事などでは、きれいに食べやすい料理としてブリトーが引き合いに出されることがあるが、やはり別物だ。タコスの手軽さ、生地の薄さ、そしてあの美味しさにおいては、すでに完成されていると感じる。あとは、こちらの食べる技術を上げるだけだ。

世の中を便利にすることが、必ずしも最適解とは限らない。自分の側の精度を高めることで解決することもある。タコスはそんなことを教えてくれる。

そのあと、喫茶店「デリカップ」へ。私はホワイトマウンテンというコーヒーを注文し、妻は生姜チャイを頼んでいた。ホワイトマウンテンは、コーヒー特有の苦味が後から追いかけてくることもなく、後味がすっきりしている。たしかにホワイトだ。気に入った。 妻は、生姜チャイが甘すぎると言って、少し残していた。

夕飯は、SNSで見かけた、鶏むね肉にチリソースをかけた料理。これがとても美味い。鶏むね肉がこんなに美味しく食べられるとは思わなかった。また一つ、知見が増えた。

最近は、食事から得る知見が多い。家庭でここまで美味しいものが食べられるという実感もあるが、それ以上に、何か知恵を食べているような感覚がある。外食ではチェーン店で安全性とコストパフォーマンスを、家庭では知恵や豊かさを得ている。そして、あとは個人経営の定食屋がもう少し進化してくれれば、言うことはない。

これだけ簡単に美味しい料理が家庭で作れる時代にもかかわらず、いまだに美味しくない店が存在するのは、少し不思議だ。食べログで調べなくても、ふらっと入った店が驚くほど美味しい、そんな状態になっていてもおかしくないのに、まだそこまでのフェーズには至っていないように感じる。 日本全体にやってほしい事。それは、ふらっと入った店がどこも美味しい事である。

Cansados de palabras, se derrumban, colapsan. Pero en el silencio hay equilibrio, claridad.

Freundinnen & Freunde der Weisheit! Stress wird heute oft als Krankheit verstanden – als etwas, das vermieden, bewältigt oder therapiert werden muss. Doch ein genauerer Blick zeigt: Stress ist weder ungewöhnlich noch per se negativ. Im Gegenteil – richtig verstanden und eingeordnet, kann er uns wachsen lassen.

Stress ist normal – und oft sogar hilfreich
Der Grundgedanke: Stress gehört zum Leben. Er ist nicht automatisch ein Anzeichen von Überforderung, sondern oft ein Zeichen von Einsatz, Verantwortung oder Entwicklung. Ohne Druck kein Fortschritt, ohne Herausforderung keine Leistung – ob beim Lernen, im Beruf oder in der persönlichen Entwicklung. Stress wirkt dabei wie ein Antrieb, der uns aktiv hält und dazu bringt, Prioritäten zu setzen, uns zu fokussieren oder Gewohnheiten zu überdenken.

Die philosophische Perspektive: Von Schopenhauer bis Nietzsche
Historisch gesehen wurde Stress nie als Krankheit begriffen. Die Stoiker etwa betrachteten Belastung als unvermeidlich – der entscheidende Punkt sei, wie wir darauf reagieren. Auch Schopenhauer ging davon aus, dass das Leben vor allem aus Leiden bestehe – dieses zu akzeptieren sei klüger als es zu leugnen. Nietzsche hingegen sah gerade in der Überwindung von Widerständen den Weg zu persönlicher Freiheit und innerer Stärke. Sein berühmtes Diktum „Was mich nicht umbringt, macht mich stärker“ bringt diesen Gedanken auf den Punkt: Stress ist nicht das Problem – sondern eine Einladung zum Wachstum.

Fazit: Nicht alles pathologisieren – sondern einordnen und nutzen
Wir sollten nicht jede Anspannung als Störung betrachten. Die Tendenz, alltägliche Emotionen wie Stress oder Unzufriedenheit vorschnell zu pathologisieren, verstärkt eher das Gefühl von Hilflosigkeit. Wer hingegen lernt, Stress als Teil des Lebens zu akzeptieren – und ihn als Impuls zur Veränderung nutzt –, handelt selbstwirksam und findet oft zu mehr Klarheit und Widerstandskraft zurück. Stress ist kein Makel, sondern oft ein Zeichen dafür, dass etwas auf dem Spiel steht. Wer sich ihm nicht entzieht, sondern ihn versteht und einordnet, wird nicht schwächer, sondern stärker. Die Philosophie bietet dafür seit Jahrhunderten einen robusten Bezugsrahmen – aktueller denn je.

Denkanstoss zum Wochenbeginn

„Die Erinnerungen sind das einzige Paradies, aus dem wir nicht vertrieben werden können.“ – Jean Paul (1763–1825)

ProductivityPorn-Tipp der Woche: To-do-Listen richtig nutzen

To-do-Listen helfen dir, den Überblick zu behalten – aber nur, wenn du sie gezielt einsetzt. Priorisiere deine Liste und setze realistische Ziele, anstatt sie mit unendlich vielen Aufgaben zu überladen.

Aus dem Archiv: Was wir heute von Carl Gustav Jung lernen können

1933 schrieb Carl Gustav Jung in einem Brief an einen seiner Patienten: „Man lebt, wie man leben kann. Es gibt keinen einzigen bestimmten Weg für den einzelnen, der ihm vorgeschrieben oder der passend wäre.“ Mit diesen Worten formulierte er eine seiner zentralen Einsichten: Jeder Mensch beschreitet seinen individuellen Lebensweg, ohne eine vorgegebene Richtung. Doch was kann Jung uns heute noch über Selbsterkenntnis und persönliche Entwicklung lehren?

weiterlesen …

Vielen Dank, dass Du Dir die Zeit genommen hast, diesen Newsletter zu lesen. Ich hoffe, die Inhalte konnten Dich inspirieren und Dir wertvolle Impulse für Dein (digitales) Leben geben. Bleib neugierig und hinterfrage, was Dir begegnet!

---

EpicMind – Weisheiten für das digitale Leben „EpicMind“ (kurz für „Epicurean Mindset“) ist mein Blog und Newsletter, der sich den Themen Lernen, Produktivität, Selbstmanagement und Technologie widmet – alles gewürzt mit einer Prise Philosophie.

---

Disclaimer Teile dieses Texts wurden mit Deepl Write (Korrektorat und Lektorat) überarbeitet. Für die Recherche in den erwähnten Werken/Quellen und in meinen Notizen wurde NotebookLM von Google verwendet. Das Artikel-Bild wurde mit ChatGPT erstellt und anschliessend nachbearbeitet.

Topic #Newsletter