Knowledge Creates Nothing

What is knowledge?

When I look at all that is around me I experience existence. I see many different things, and I experience many different experiences. But for some reason, it is not enough for me to just experience what is around me in this mundane manner. I need knowledge of this existence.

Now I am trying to seek knowledge of this knowledge. I want to know what knowledge is, and I want to know why knowledge is needed. After much pondering into this question, I discovered that I do not feel comfortable with existence. Something about things that exist does not sit well with me. Think of it this way: If there was "nothing" then there would be no questions. The who, what, when, where, how, and why would all have the same answer: Nothing. A nonexistence seems to sit well with me. But when I look at the world I see existence. I don't just see one existence; I see many "different" existences. Now the endless questions begin. It would be much simpler if there was just "nothing."

Knowledge seems to be the quest for "nothing" (not to be confused with a "quest for nothing"). If the perfect "nothing" is not here, I have to approximate it by minimizing the amount of existence. By finding patterns in existence, I realize that there is much less "different" than originally thought. For example, I realize that paper is nothing more than wood pulp that came from a tree. Now I know that all of the pieces of paper in the world are not categorically different. Rather, there is a tree and a logical rule. Essentially, it seems that knowledge is a process by which I can limit the amount of existence and create more good old "nothing."

I Finally Have a Blog Title!!!

Everyone knows that the hardest part about starting an essay is coming up with the first few sentences. Similarly, the hardest part about starting a blog is figuring out what title to use. I don't claim that this truism applies to all people, and I don't think the first few bloggers had much trouble picking a nice creative title. But these days, with a saturation of bloggers on the Internet, creative people are forced to become superparamegaomegacreative. This is why it probably took me exponentially longer to think of a title than it took some other people, but I believe that I have finally been able to overcome this first obstacle.

After trying over a dozen superparacreative titles before realizing that most of the greatest titles were already taken (not to mention that they were already thought of as well), I decided to just be a little more normal. I didn't even intend to be acting superparamegacreative; I just made my blog address "normal." Of course, as can be expected in this normal world, "normal" was already taken. I then used a mathematical trick taken from my training in probability and statistics, and I changed my "normal" distribution or bell curve title into a "lognormal" distribution title. Unfortunately, others have already thought of taking the natural log of the "normal" title (I should have known that I am not the only one that knows that kind of math). I was forced to twist the title, and take it to the next level. As is done quite often in the "blog" titles, I added a "B" to the "lognormal" title. But this title didn't work either. It seems that "blognormal" is actually very normal. But then I took one last step. I decided that my blog would not be "blognormal" but "Ablognormal." At this point I seemed to have found some uncharted territory in the blogosphere, and I was very pleased with the discovery.

At this point I feel my title is either superparamegacreative, or it is just not normal.