Where to begin?

I said in my first post in this blog  that we need to record our ideas so we can eternalize them.

However, by the time I started this blog, also started a personal page. This page still exists, but is to flies and virtually anyone visit it. Neither myself. Just out of curiosity, the access address is http://rosenvaldo.simoes.sites.uol.com.br/ and as I write this post, this site was visited 178 times, probably most of the time only for me.

He begins with a declaration of intent equal to the first post of this blog and then follows with a "Where to begin?".

This second text is an attempt to justify the reasons which lead me to write about my life and my ideas.

I do not know if I have time or motivation to comply with this plan to record my life and my ideas, but the text justification is reasonable and so I make available here now:

"Where to begin?

Everything has a beginning. Have a beginning, however, does not mean that this beginning is simple or known. In fact, things happen exactly in reverse. All beginnings are mysterious and complex, even when they appear otherwise. Just that we pay some attention to this supposed simplicity, and it will fade away like smoke. Endless causal chains, multiple interactions between very many causes, most unknown, makes the origin of things is always foggy, slippery, vague. How much deeper we dig in the past, less we know about everything. Time erases the traces left by the sequence of events that generate things, and what remains are ruins that tell little, speak little, clarify little. Hence the importance of memory.

We need to record the facts. But not only the facts. We need to register the complex inner world, that we call mind, because is in the mind that things do happen. But it is not easy. Starting where our work record? What we have to add to what is already registered? The answer to this question may be what we have to add to what is recorded is exactly what no one has yet recorded, nor may record, better than ourselves, namely, that which is not accessible to anyone else that we for ourselves. Finally, there are facts and facts. There are facts that are accessible to all, and there are unique facts of each one of us, our mental facts. Perhaps we need not record the facts of the real world, because there are a lot of effort in the world toward this purpose, but any effort in the world will be able to record what goes on inside our minds, but to ourselves, if we are willing to do so, obviously.

But what the reason for this? What have we in particular to offer that is original to the world? What information should come to the fore of our minds to the knowledge of the world?

If we divide the contents of what is recorded in our minds, we would have two categories of information: the first would be composed of our personal history and the second of our ideas about the world. No one may be able to meet our personal history better than us, and nobody can know the result of our reasoning, unless we have disposition to reveal them to the world. But again, what the value of these informations?

We do not know. Humanity may have had thousands of great men, great thinkers, who lived and died and were forgotten by the simple fact that there are no records available about them. But not only the quality of our reasoning counts. Our personal story is unique as we are unique and have our own value for our uniqueness. The mere fact that we existed and have lived is itself a priceless good. Not that those who lived and left no records have not been valuable lives, but it is human nature to want to share experiences, whatever they are. Our biographies may not be the most exciting, but still, naturally, are valuable and deserve to be shared with the rest of humanity.

From where do we begin our biographies?

In how many ways the past can be described? Will we see ourselves in our past from the standpoint of which lens? How many lenses have we? These are difficult questions to answer. However, we have to answer them. The quality of our records depends on how we look at our past. Have we some basis to start something with this complexity? What are the tools available for the task? History, as a science, may be the answer. "

Well, history as science may have some answers on how to describe our past, but first we must study the methods that history as science gives us. This is a  long issue and I will not be now that I'm going to detain me (à la Hegel ...) in it.

I think I'll kill this site UOL. indeed, I'll leave all that refers to UOL back.

But not now.

Now I have more to do ...