I believe the most popular, but not necessarily the most important mystery, is the reason why we have to suffer. And it comes up most when we are faced with it, not only as individuals, but more as a society. Whether it’s suffering through a period of war, natural disasters, poverty, sickness, or even our own personal conflicts such as rage and jealousy, we look at the big picture and ask ourselves if all that suffering could be avoided. That is because we are a pleasure-seeking specie who will stop at nothing to reduce pain and increase pleasure. It is what drives our entire lives. And when something such as pain gets in the way, we go about trying to understand what the cause is, where it came from, and most common, how it can be avoided and eliminated.

Being as curious as we are, it is only natural that we begin to find the source of our anguish so that measures can be taken against it. This has led to the creation of entire systems and doctrines such as the medical system, psycho-therapy and charities worldwide in order to prevent mental and physical pain. My main goal in any philosophical topic is to dig up the root truth, which may or may not exist. In this article, I will talk about my views and beliefs about the causes of suffering and what suffering means. I have always been interested in my own suffering and the suffering of others. Not to say I get pleasure seeing others suffer, but I merely observe and try to discern the causes so I can better understand my existence. It is never pleasant to look at others suffer in order to understand the meanings of life, but in order to understand ourselves, it is something we have to face.

What is the root cause of physical suffering?

To put it plain and simple, the actual root cause of suffering is because of a defensive mechanism programmed in every species’ DNA in order to ensure our survival and to avoid death. From the simple mouse to the giant elephant to the homo sapiens, we are programmed to try and survive as long as possible. Why that’s the case is my biggest mystery. Why does life even want to exist if it has to put up with so much suffering and chaos? I know there’s the entire spiritual side of humans which brings us great joy, and a lot of people say that it’s the reason we exist, to experience God or the Great Spirit, but in the eyes of a cat or an ant, to say that humans are the reason is starting to sound really old and egocentric. What is the governing force behind everything dictating that life should exist or continue to exist at all? Simply saying that it’s God’s will isn’t an answer anymore and it’s always been too easy to fall back on. But living for the sole sake of avoiding death is also not feasible in my opinion. But let’s ignore that greater mystery and accept the force behind our existence as being a constant, something that will never change. We will always have that will to survive, and it’s that mechanism of pain, or more specifically, the mechanism of avoiding pain and death, that keeps us and every animal breathing. Without there being a consequence of a negative experience associated with an action that can cause our death, we would not survive very long. So even though we don’t know why we are here in the first place experiencing all of this right now(I assume there is a reason), it is essential that pain exists in order to continue this quest on the physical plane.

That inherit force that alerts us that death might be close by is called fear. We don’t have to have previously experienced the situation for the fear to come up and alert us. It simply exists inside all animals as an instinct, developed and gotten really complex over the millions of years of evolution. The fear is really telling us, ‘I don’t understand the outcome of this phenomena happening, so I alert you with this painful sensation of fear in order for you to focus on the situation so that you may avoid it, because it might cause death.’.

Some say that fear only stops as being an emotional feeling, like fearing the dark, but it is also physical in nature. If I cut myself, the reason I hurt is because the body is fearing death. The actual burning feeling is real fear in a sense. The brain makes me experience that unpleasant burning sensation in order for me to tend to my wound and prevent death. Over time, evolution has configured us in this way not because the force behind it is vengeful, evil, or trying to teach us something, but because It selfishly wants to live, so it unconsciously and accidentally self-programmed herself to feel pain through the process of natural selection. If we did not feel the burning pain of a cut, we wouldn’t exist very long. We wouldn’t notice our cuts and we would bleed to death.

On a lighter side, we can certainly file complaints on evolution in order to improve her system and make us suffer less. First, do we really need to feel seemingly unnecessary pains we might not have control over? Ignoring the miracles of science and technology because these are very new, how is an animal supposed to take care of his inner wounds or malaise? Why must he suffer for that? Nothing can be done about it, so stop zapping us with pain on the insides, dammit! I get it, for the “invention” of pain to work, it has to be connected to all organs and systems through a central nervous system, otherwise it wouldn’t always function for situations I can’t think of. I’m sure this pain mechanism can’t work any other way and it can’t be picky on the pains it chooses to give us, which is a bummer.

What is the root cause of emotional suffering?

The emotional sensory system is a lot more complicated to understand than the physical sensory system. We have become extremely complicated beings and we no longer suffer from physical pain and primitive fears alone. On top of that, we humans have an entire schmorgesborg of feelings and emotions we suffer with, which most say are more powerful and painful than mere physical pains. Not only do we have the basic primitive fears, but we also suffer a lot with more complex forms such as anger, jealousy, sadness, worthlessness, etc. I will start by telling you that by no means do I understand the reason we need such complex emotions, but it is evident that a system as complex as ours couldn’t be a fluke or an accident were it not directly attributed to our survival needs. The body has created protection measures just like our physical pain sensors. And again, the root drive of our emotional pain is fear in order to protect us. Right from birth, our brain is wired to always create new synaptic connections that constantly change our perception of how we see the world. Over time, we develop automatic reactions and triggers that the individual unintentionally created in order to protect themselves from the pain they perceived in the past to prevent it from happening again. These myriads of created perceptions happen early on in life as children, but get reinforced as we get older by continuously reacting the same way, not only causing the reactions themselves to become more intense, but also by making them more and more difficult to break free from them. Over time, if nothing was ever done about it, they turn into complex systems of unintended reactions, perceptions and anxieties causing the adult to suffer. It’s very difficult to pinpoint the root cause of a certain negative emotion because of the way they form connections with the other emotions. The emotional system is a complex network of sensations and perceptions developed and reinforced by the brain over time using a sophisticated feedback method to self-propagate new patterns of sensory input by reconnecting and reorganizing the brain’s neural pathways in order to help the individual make sense of the world and protect him from death.

Should we avoid suffering at all costs?

It is obvious we have come a long way in science and technology at fighting and eliminating physical and emotional suffering on this planet, and it will most likely continue until we feel no more pain at all. But is that such a good idea? Do we really want to eliminate all pain entirely? If not, which pains do we leave, and what are they good for? Looking at the trends these days, we suffer a lot less from physical and emotional pain than we used to because of pain killers and anesthetics just to name a few reasons. I can really understand the need for such an invention because who wants to suffer through pain when you don’t have to. Just pop this pill and feel no more. Over the years, the easy accessibility of body and mind numbing drugs has caused an entire planet to depend on pain killers and medication too much for any small reason. I don’t blame the planet for becoming addicted to the elimination of any discomfort. It’s a busy world and work needs to be done, we can’t waste time trying to manage this pain or that cold. Just take these meds and on you go.

Not only do we numb our pains with medication, but also with distractions. We are the most entertained generation of any other in existence. Any moment we have free we find a way to distract ourselves from our inner problems with television, computers, cell phones, music, hobbies, etc. Not that they are bad things, quite the opposite, but when you can’t sit still with yourself and stare at a wall if needed, then there’s a problem. We grow up in a world not being able to sit still and watch something like the clouds and feel satisfaction from it. The point I am trying to make is that we have become too accustomed to ignoring, repressing and numbing our pains that we ourselves, as individuals and as a society, have become numb. We no longer know how to feel anymore. We have become paralyzed by allowing small life-enhancing inventions turn into a frenzy of mass consumption. By allowing ourselves to join this gluttonous feast, we become more and more lazy, insensitive, agitated, anxious, depressed and unappreciative. And in this fast-paced modern world, it’s becoming too easy and almost necessary to join the feel-good race in order to fit in with the rest. The pressure to consume new ways that promise a quick fix is all around us and is very difficult to ignore. Like moths attracted to a light, we have been influenced all our lives by the corporate agenda which is designed to influence our emotions and thoughts to make us feel unsatisfied with our bodies and lives so that we can buy into their promises of quick satisfaction and happiness.

So it seems that numbing our pains at all costs furthers the development of an unhappy society. By slowing down and simplifying our lives, by practicing to feel and breath again, we can create the time and endurance necessary to tolerate, heal, and learn from our pains. We develop more patience and satisfaction this way. It is by this process that we become wise and happy, not by suppressing and ignoring our pains at all costs. What we do want is to find the root of our suffering and find ways to eliminate the misalignments in order for our bodies to express itself to its fullest potential naturally. Because the body performing at its fullest is one amazing machine.

Justin Bohemier

Artificial intelligence is a field of science and engineering whose main objective is to develop methods that enable a machine or entity to behave in an intelligent manner. You can find this topic overlapping such fields as psychology, computer science, robotics, philosophy and neuroscience. Faithful artificial intelligence enthusiasts believe that one day, we will have the knowledge and the understanding to simulate the complexities of the human mind so that a machine can be designed and programmed to exhibit real and genuine intelligence, comparable, if not greater, to a human being’s.

But what does it mean to be intelligent? Can a computer be considered intelligent? Today’s computers have a perfect memory able to recall millions and millions of pages worth of information without forgetting, skewing or distorting any data. Today’s models can perform in a few seconds or minutes extremely complicated calculations that would take a team of humans several days, months or even years to solve by hand. They can multitask between large amounts of procedures flawlessly, they correct our spelling and grammar mistakes, and they can play chess games while beating some of the world’s strongest players. With these features, they certainly appear a lot more intelligent than we do. But can a computer write music like Mozart did? Can a robot paint a picture comparable to a Michelangelo? Can a machine have a stimulating discussion on business ethics, spirituality or philosophy? Is a robot able to laugh, cry, and feel bored? Does a computer ever wonder where he came from and who his creator was? Can it look in a mirror and wonder what it is and what it’s made of? Can it feel aware of itself the way we do? Can it dream?

It is obvious that we haven’t even come close to reaching these goals when comparing ourselves to our smartest machines. An intelligent being is much more than a sophisticated calculator. An intelligent being learns and adapts from its own experience, while developing its own perspective on matters. An intelligent being has emotional and instinctive responses to the outside world. An intelligent being has desires, hopes and aspirations. A computer or robot of today is nothing more than an automaton, a machine designed to follow directions a human programmed it to perform. Devoid of any consciousness, a computer is merely a mechanical and electrical clockwork of automated tasks and switches.

How would we be able to tell if we were looking at an intelligent machine? How can we be sure that a certain machine isn’t simply a great mimic, programmed so well that he fools us into believing he’s genuinely conscious and intelligent? One of the fathers of modern computing, Alan Turing, devised a test known as the Turing Test that would help us determine if a machine is intelligent or not. His test involves placing the machine and a real human inside a room cutoff from anyone else. A second human sitting in another room then engages in a natural language conversation with both parties, usually by means of a keyboard, where their responses are displayed on a screen in front of him. If after some time the interviewer cannot determine which responses belong to whom, the machine is said to be intelligent. So as to keep the test unbiased, the interviewer cannot know who the other human is. If he was interviewing a close friend of his, or maybe his brother, he might be able to guess which participant is the human based on subtle and recognizable personality traits and conversation mannerisms.

A powerful argument devised by American philosopher John Searle in 1980 claims that a computer can never be programmed to have a mind or real thoughts, no matter how authentic it appears. This was his reason: Let’s say a computer was designed to be able to speak fluent Chinese. It was designed to take in Chinese characters as input and spit out an intelligent response in Chinese. Let’s say it behaves so intelligent that it passes the Turing test. According to Turing’s theory, one can say then that the computer is intelligent. But does that mean the computer is really aware of itself the way we are and really “understands” what it is saying? Searle then asks you to consider that he is sitting in a room and has with him an English manual containing the complete logic flow of the computer at his disposal, along with paper and pencils. In front of him is a door with a little slot where someone feeds him on a piece of paper some Chinese characters as input. Using his large manual, Searle follows the computer’s logic and writes down the same characters the computer would have spit out and passes them in the slot. The people on the other side of the room might think that the responses are coming from an intelligent being who can speak Chinese, while the truth is, Searle doesn’t understand a single Chinese word. Searle argues that there are no differences between both scenarios. They are both strictly following step-by-step instructions and producing what looks like intelligence. So he concludes that the computer doesn’t understand Chinese.

Bots

A bot is an automaton very similar to a robot except for one thing; a bot is not made of metal, gears and wires. Instead, it is an artificial entity living inside the virtual realms of a computer. Bots are designed and programmed by humans and have to be given very specific orders and instructions in order to accomplish any task. These orders can be very simple and repetitive, or they can be complicated and unpredictable, depending on what the human wants it to accomplish. You can’t see a bot because its essence is a vague series of electrical signals confined to a computers circuit board. In case one wants to monitor the bot’s movement or activity, it can be represented as an icon, image or strings of data displayed on a computer monitor.

The objectives of this paper are to establish realistic and convincing theoretical methods of artificial intelligence applied to a bot trapped in a virtual maze in pursuit of another bot. The ‘Avoider’ bot is not the focus of this article, but is equally important. Topics that will be discussed are realistic methods and strategies a ‘Seeker’ bot would use to increase his chances to capture the Avoider bot. The Avoider bot is assumed to be continuously avoiding the Seeker bot while always remaining in motion, and avoiding areas where the Seeker bot was last seen. Certain methods will be ignored that would give the Seeker unfair advantages, like for example, giving the Seeker the ability to know where the Avoider is at any time without seeing him. Of course this would be an optimal advantage for the Seeker, but it is an unrealistic circumstance in the reality of the experiment. The theory in this article will be continually built upon previous strategies further being optimized along the way.

Let’s begin by imagining the simplest scenario where a Seeker and Avoider bot are placed inside a maze. The Avoider bot, assumed to already be fully functional, would immediately begin to move around, avoiding the Seeker bot whenever he spots it. At this point, our Seeker hasn’t been given instructions so he would remain idle, waiting patiently until he receives his first orders. Even if the Avoider were to pass right in front of him, our Seeker wouldn’t react, because he wasn’t instructed to. So let’s tell our Seeker to move. To keep things simple at first, lets instruct it to move around randomly for now. Proceeding is a flowchart that navigates through the bot’s instructions starting from the top:

This flowchart and the proceeding ones were simplified for the reader’s enjoyment. At each step, there might be dozens of other very specific steps that need to take place in order to get through these main ones. For example, if you were to dissect the first step, you would find several instructions that instruct the bot how to select the random direction. Since this paper is directed to the layman/amateur a.i. enthusiast, it might have been too overwhelming if I included the complete flowcharts.

Anyways, the Seeker bot is now moving randomly through the maze as if rolling a dice to determine his next move, not even being influenced by the Avoider yet, who might be right in front of him. The chances for the Seeker bot to capture the Avoider bot in this circumstance are very small, because it would be due to the Avoider accidentally colliding with the Seeker. This situation is the most implausible from the Seeker’s point of view, so we’ll need to install some upgrades.

One solution to increase his chances is to give the Seeker a way to determine when the Avoider is in his line of vision. This would eliminate some of the randomness because as soon as the Seeker sees the Avoider, he can be instructed to move towards him in that direction. So let’s give the Seeker some artificial eyes. At every instant, the Seeker will determine if the Avoider is in line of sight by looking in all directions. Every instant can mean many things. It can mean the bot checks every second, every step he takes, or only when he reaches an intersection. The longer the delay between checks, the longer he would be blind in between, because when he’s not checking, he can’t see if the Avoider is in front of him. So ideally, the seeker wants to check as much as possible, only to be limited by how short the delay would be in between checks. We will call every increment where he’s able to check a ‘step’.

We can now write a crude flowchart of a semi-smart bot. His movement and decisions are limited to the following: the Seeker will continue to move randomly in the maze checking all around him at every step. If the Avoider steps in his line of sight, the Seeker bot would move towards him on his next step. If the Avoider happens to still be in his line of site, the Seeker would of course detect him again and take another step towards him, hence repeating the cycle. Since the Seeker doesn’t have a memory yet, he forgets where the Avoider is as soon as he moves, so this is why the Seeker has to check at every step. This new flow chart illustrates our Seekers new upgrade:

The problem with this scenario is that when the Avoider is not in site, the Seeker then goes back to moving randomly and may be stuck going back and forth because the randomness generator that determines his next direction can essentially tell him to go forward, then go backward, then go forward, then go backward, making himself look real incompetent. We can improve this by making the bot select a new direction avoiding the direction he just came from. If there are no directions apart from the one he just came from, that means he ended up in a dead end and he would have no choice but to go back. Since the Seeker would have to remember where he came from last, he would now need a memory component. After making his move, the bot would store in his memory the direction he came from, and when he is later deciding where to go next, assuming the Avoider isn’t in site, he will retrieve it from his memory to make the new decision. The new flow chart would look like this:

This version is decent enough in which the Seeker will move around the maze in a normal fashion without having spurts of random idiocy, and at the same time chase the Avoider when spotted. A problem arises when the Seeker is chasing the Avoider, and the Avoider suddenly turns around a corner out of site. The Seeker can no longer see him, so he will immediately resume his search following the right-hand side of the decision procedure above, possibly choosing to turn at any arbitrary intersection. To make the Seeker smarter, he should be able to realize at each step where he last saw the Avoider and what direction it was going. Then, if the Avoider turns a corner and is out of site, all the Seeker has to do is go to where he last saw him and turn in the same direction the Avoider did. From there he may be in site once again. We can then actually modify the above flow-chart slightly so that instead of the Seeker taking a step towards the Avoider directly, he takes a step towards the Avoider’s last position. That way, if the Avoider turns a corner, the Seeker will still go towards his last known spot, and knowing what direction he turned, the Seeker does the same and has a better chance at finding him further on. The following is the updated flow chart:

With these new modifications, the Seeker will now be able to keep track of where the Avoider was last and where he was headed, so even if he loses site of the Avoider, the Seeker will still move to where the Avoider was last seen, and move in the same direction he last saw him turn, dramatically increasing his chances of capturing him.

Another way the seeker can increase his chances are to have the layout of the maze stored in his memory unit beforehand. This wouldn’t be considered an unfair advantage for the Avoider because that still doesn’t tell the Seeker where the Avoider is at any given time. The Seeker can use this information to make predictive estimations on where the Avoider might be headed. If the Seeker can determine where he might end up, he has a chance at intercepting him. Take a look at the following diagram:

The red triangle represents the Seeker and the blue circle the Avoider. The Seeker just spotted the Avoider heading down the top-right corridor from intersection ‘A’. A knowledgeable bot that knows the layout of the maze would predict that he has to end up at intersection ‘B’ if he continues along that path. The Seeker would then try to intercept the Avoider instead of chasing after him, demonstrated in the following diagram:

To be able to do this effectively without possibly diminishing his odds, the Seeker has to be equipped with a ‘path finding’ unit. Path finding is a branch of artificial intelligence that deals with devising the best method for determining the quickest and fastest route from one arbitrary location to the next on a given map. Many factors can variably come into play that can affect the method used and the time it takes to find the answer, such as the topography, or obstacles that might be in the way. Path finding is another complete subject in itself, so we won’t delve into it. For now, we will assume the Seeker bot is equipped with the best possible path-finding unit available. The reason the Seeker bot should be equipped with this device is so he can calculate whether or not he should try to intercept the Avoider by determining the quickest route to the Avoider’s anticipated position. He should do this because it won’t always be plausible to try to intercept. Sometimes following him would be the best solution. An example of this can be seen here:

In this scenario, the Seeker noticed the Avoider going down a corridor towards intersection ‘A’. With his path-finding unit, the Seeker determines that going around to intercept is a longer path than going strait through. If he would try to intercept him at point ‘A’ by going around, the Avoider would most likely be long gone by the time he gets there. So here he has better odds if he follows him directly.

Conclusion

Even though there are several more improvements we can add, I think I have been able to give you a little taste of the joys I get in giving life to something lifeless. Seeing how complicated it can get trying to make a simple bot play tag makes me appreciate the larger accomplishments like Deep Blue and Honda’s Asimo. I hope to make my own contributions to this wonderful field one day. I hope you have enjoyed this article.

Justin Bohemier

]]> http://ophelius.wordpress.com/2009/06/30/bots/feed/ 2 ophelius 1 2 3 4 diagram1 diagram2 diagram3 http://ophelius.wordpress.com/2009/06/26/ape-genius/ http://ophelius.wordpress.com/2009/06/26/ape-genius/#comments Fri, 26 Jun 2009 17:40:07 +0000 Justin Bohemier http://ophelius.wordpress.com/?p=3 ]]> I watched an amazing NOVA documentary on PBS last night titled ‘Ape Genius’. It showcased an hour of experiments, footage and commentary showing us that apes are more like humans than we ever thought possible. What they were trying to find were the little details that sets us apart from the apes. Why were we able to have evolved to where we are today, and why have they stayed primitive? They were able to show that apes have culture like we do. They have the ability to use tools, to reason and the ability to cooperate. They are able to understand complex arbitrary sentences, and able to count as well. I always knew that apes were pretty smart, but I realised after watching that we might need to redefine what it means to be human.

The first part of the film we get a glimpse at their ability to use tools and solve problems. At the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, psychologist Josep Call puts a clear tube in one of the chimp’s cage. He then puts a peanut at the bottom of the tube. The chimp sees the peanut and tries to stick his finger inside to get it, but can’t reach it. After pacing back and forth for 10 minutes, he gets a Eureka moment. He goes to his water dish and fills his mouth full of water. He then goes to the tube and spits the water into the tube which causes the peanut to float. There wasn’t enough water the first time to lift the peanut high enough, so he goes back for few more water trips until eventually there’s enough water in the tube so that he can grab the peanut. “They have to understand that they can use the water as a tool. This is interesting, because the water itself doesn’t have any shape.“, remarks Call. I find this remarkable because this puzzle might be tough even to some adult humans.

Another display of cunningness takes us to Senegal, Africa, where anthropologist Jill Pruetz and psychologist Andrew Whiten were witness to something few have seen before. The chimps were observed using spears to hunt bush babies, a small nocturnal primate. Bush babies are one of the chimp’s staples in that area. To make the spears, the chimps would cut off a long branch, remove the leaves, and chew the tip to sharpen it. They would then proceed to find bush baby nests, which are holes in the trees, and strike the spears repeatedly inside it. I felt I was in the Twilight Zone watching this. The picture seemed crazy to me. Apes with spears, actual weapons that they themselves figured out how to construct and use. It’s mind boggling! The spear hunting also spread to the other chimps in the group. Generating ideas and sharing technology is a scientific definition of culture, so can we say that apes are cultured then? It sounds strange thinking about it. When I think of culture I think of it only as a collection of human marvels like music, literature and dance.

But how did they all acquire the knowledge of spear making? One ape first had to come up with the idea, a pretty complicated task in itself. Hatching up new ideas was belived to be what separated us apart from all creatures in the first place. To come up with an idea is a process of many complicated steps. It requires awareness, planning, creativity, memory and reason. So let’s try to reenact the discovery of spears for apes to see how they might have done so. Let’s say that an ape is playing with a stick by whacking it at different things because it finds that amusing. It hits various objects like a few trees, some rocks, and is having a jolly good time doing it. He is feeling the sensation of cause and effect and likes it very much. At one point the ape accidently hits a bird who was flying by. The bird falls to the ground and dies. The ape saw the bird slam into his stick and fall to the ground. If the ape had no ability to come up with new ideas, then this scenario could happen again and again and the ape would never piece it together that the stick was responsible for killing the bird. But at one point, instead the ape had to have made that connection, otherwise there wouldn’t be any spear hunting apes today. To make that connection, it has to have a memory and awareness because it has to remember that the bird hit the stick previously. It has to be able to reason that it was the stick that was responsible for the free meal, so that requires a basic sense of logic(if A happens, then B is the outcome). Of course it wasn’t thinking in words, but rather in pictures. The next time it got hungry, it remembered the bird and the stick and how he was swinging it around. Maybe if he swings it around this time, he thinks, he can catch another meal. Only this time, he’s not just playing; he’s swinging the stick while looking for birds. He has it planned out in a basic way. So maybe now he sees a bird. He keeps his awareness on the bird this time while swinging the stick like crazy, trying to make the bird fall. He probably starts screeching in excitement jumping up and down, swinging his stick like cazy and screeching some more ape sounds. All the while the bird is long gone, having been scared by all the excitement. Because apes learn well by observing other apes and mimicking, I can imagine the other apes at this point might also pick up sticks. Soon after, all the apes are rampaging through the forest hitting things, jumping around and screeching, until eventually one starts to go after little critters. Maybe he manages to hit it and kill it reinforcing the collective idea that hitting food that is usually hard to catch can go limp if it is hit with a stick, making it easier to catch. Again, this is not thought out in words, but instead with pictures of past occurences and instincts of cause and effect. So in no time, they are all grabbing sticks to hunt for food and without realising it, have advanced ape technology.

Through many more demonstrations showing monkeys’ ability to count, cooperate, and understand language, the program concludes that it’s not because apes lack the ability to reason and invent that they have remained primitive. It is because apes do not have a shared commitment to a shared goal. They remain passive about their discoveries, where we humans pass down knowledge and improve it. It is because humans want and have the mental capacity to teach our young that we progress while apes don’t. Monkey see, monkey do; human see, human publishes findings.

Justin Bohemier

He stood up and stretched. Around him was an empty white void extending in all directions. He wasn’t able to determine how far it extended because there was nothing to focus on. There was a floor because he could feel it under him while he was walking. He just couldn’t see it. It was made of the same textureless whiteness that filled the air. The only thing that existed in his world was him and a 5 foot pole that came out of the ground. The pole had a sign on it which read, “Do not venture away from me! Beyond lies a void incomprehensibly large, an infinite sea that never ends. There is nothing out there to see. If you lose track of me, you will most likely never find me again. I am all that remains real. I am what holds you together, what keeps you sane. Do not venture away from me!”

He had stopped questioning the sign a long time ago. He has grown tired trying to figure out if it was true or not, if there was something else out there, if he did need the sign to stay sane. He has attempted many times in the past to see if there was something beyond the horizon. But with no way of marking a trail that leads back to the sign, he was careful as to never lose sight of it. He’s come close to losing it several times because he went too far. Luckily for him that didn’t happen. He always made sure it stayed in view. He wouldn’t know what to do if the pole was no longer with him anymore. The pole was his world. It was the only thing that told him he was not alone, that something else existed besides him. He’s had nightmares of him venturing out too far and losing track of the pole. He remembers in his dreams running, panicking, screaming into the void, trying to capture a glimpse of it, wishing he only listened to the sign. He was relieved when he discovered that they were only dreams.

Many times he wished he could kill himself. But apparently he couldn’t die. He obviously didn’t have to eat or drink, because he would’ve died a long time ago. He tried smashing his head against the sign a few times but that didn’t work. It only gave him a bump on the head. He didn’t have any teeth or nails, so he couldn’t cut himself open and bleed to death if he wanted to. It seemed he was stuck in this place forever. This discovery has driven him to the edge of insanity and back many times. Several occasions he was ready to give up the pole and leave it behind for the chance that he might discover something else out there. He was so sick of the pole at times. He had read the sign out of boredom millions of times. The message was engrained in his soul forever. Who cares if I never see it again, he thought. But he couldn’t do it. He tried many times but always stopped in his tracks before it disappeared from the horizon. It always managed to pull him back. His conclusion was always that it was better to have its company than no company at all. He might be risking his only friend, the one thing that keeps him sane.

As far as he concluded he was in hell. Either that or it was some sick experiment that he was caught in to see what he would do. Maybe it would all end if he went far enough and showed them that he can give up the pole, he thought many times. Maybe that’s what they were waiting for him to do, seeing how long it would take him to figure that out. These questions and many more plagued his mind for eons. It was too risky, he thought. He couldn’t take that risk. There was too much at stake. On the other hand, what would he gain if it turned out to be a way out of here? He would gain everything. The dilemma is that he also gains everything if he stays, for everything for him right now happens to be the pole. He couldn’t bear to think what it would be like to walk forever lost into the white abyss. He wouldn’t even be able to tell if he’s moving. The only thing that tells him that he’s moving is the relative motion of the pole moving in the opposite direction. Without that sense of space he would surely go completely insane, and into a much darker hell. He dared not think of that. It wasn’t an option anymore.

Another million years pass by, give or take. It has dawned on him many eons ago that he is here to stay, for eternity. The millions of years that he felt go by were but a fraction of a second in comparison to the foreverness of infinite time. He has stopped thinking and trying to find new ways to pass the time. It didn’t matter he thought. No matter how much he distracted himself from the feeling of time, more of it will come.

For the first million years he spent most of that time asleep, learning how to travel in his dreams. But even that became mundane, for his mind had eventually stopped being able to imagine new things, and forgot of the old ones. The whiteness has plagued his mind numbing his ability to dream. He used to dream of wonderful places, people and experiences. Eventually his dreams became more about different textures and colors. And slowly, without him noticing, he had forgotten how to dream. There was as much a void inside his mind as outside of it. He even stopped paying attention to his pole. Sometimes he would go years without noticing it. Nothing mattered to him anymore. Time stopped having any meaning. Years would go by which now felt like seconds. Then, it was centuries that felt like seconds. Time could’ve been standing still and he would not notice. Though, every so often, maybe every million years or so, he would come back to reality to make sure his pole was still there. Sure enough, it was. He would put his arm around it and curl next to it, smile, and fade away into another million years of slumber.

Justin Bohemier