“[The] capacity for self-recollection — for withdrawal from the outward to the inward — is in fact the condition of all noble and useful activity. If the sailor did not carry with him his own temperature he could not go from the pole to the equator, and remain himself in spite of all. The man who has no refuge in himself, who lives, so to speak, in his front rooms, in the outer whirlwind of things and opinions, is not properly a personality at all. He is one of a crowd, a taxpayer, an elector, an anonymity, but not a man.
He who floats with the current, who does not guide himself according to higher principles, who has no ideal, no convictions — such a man is a mere article of the world’s furniture — a thing moved, instead of a living and moving being — an echo, not a voice. The man who has no inner life is the slave of his surroundings, as the barometer is the obedient servant of the air at rest, and the weathercock the humble servant of the air in motion.”
— Henri Frederic Amiel
Tag: philosophy
Kant’s Deontological Ethics in Sum.
I. Kant begins The Grounding of the Metaphysics of Morals by reducing the self to reason in order to understand the foundations of right thought. He concludes that at the base of one’s thoughts, there is an intention or will that is at the core of self.
A good will is the only qualification for good action. Kant says: “A good will is good not because of what it effects or accomplishes, nor because of its fitness to attain some proposed end; it is good only though its willing, i.e., it is good in itself.” That is, a good will is good in itself, independent of any requirements that would make it good. Kant goes on to justify this by explaining that even if good will failed to achieve its end through action, it would still retain its value as good will because of its good intention.
Prehension.
If only people were more concerned with learning the truth than being right. It is uncomfortable, dare I say painful, to navigate into unfamiliar waters. You bump and skid and fumble in the murky unknown, moving ever so slowly and grasping ever so gently for something to guide you. This is where understanding begins to blossom.
I detest using language with sweeping generalities like ‘the majority of people’, but I’ll say it. The majority of people are more concerned with being right than being correct (correct in the sense that the focus of the intellect should be to reveal and expound upon truth, not defend pride). No ones senses are any better equipped at feeling out the world than another. Every human experience is valuable. Each person’s input contributes to the larger picture, the ethereal essence we swim through called life.
It is terribly difficult to live along side people who are uncompromising, and incorrect. They would rather form gross prejudices and have the world cater to narrow belief systems them venture into uncomfortable compromise. Learning from someone, especially someone who’s background is quite contrary to yours, is not only disorienting, it is threatening. You open yourself up to vulnerabilities. You arsenal of knowledge is useless in this foreign land. You are at the mercy of time and humiliation (humility should be practiced anyway).
Over time, after you’ve felt your way around the new sanctuary of perspicacity, you begin to make yourself at home. You begin to trust your senses and use the footings and tools previously overlooked. This is when understanding is garnered. Let others hurl insults from their fortified and familiar bunkers, filled with the stench of stale familiarity. They take no risks so they never breath the fresh zephyrs trailing after pursuit. Instead they become entrenched in their defenses, fastening themselves to the most hackneyed ground.
Sad, sad, world. If we would only unhinge from our precious securities, cast off the trammels holding us down, we would see a world beyond our narrow apertures as we explore the vast wilderness of imagination.
You must be willing to endure the humiliating pains of blindness before true insight is gained. anyway.
Nietzsche: Morals
“Here precisely is what has become a fatality for Europe—together with the fear of man we have also lost our love of him, our reverence for him, our hopes for him, even the will to him. The sight of man now makes us weary—what is nihilism today if it is not that?— We are weary of man.” (Genealogy of Morals, 11)
Nietzsche here diagnoses a malady of mankind: nihilism. Nietzsche was writing in 1888. Does his description of nihilism resonate with you today? If so, how do you specifically experience the nihilism of contemporary culture? Are you weary of man?
Or, perhaps, Nietzsche was just being an anti-democratic pig. Is he too harsh in his criticisms of the herd? Too elitist in his orientation? Can mass-culture be a stimulus to life?
(Firstly, I thought these writings were pretty difficult to decipher.)
Core to Nietsche’s writing so far is the idea of resentiment. Nietzsche has illustrated a dictomy between the slave morality and the master morality. The master morality, or noble valuation of things, is simple and indifferent and acts spontaneously (37). It exists in the present and gives little thought to the condition of the slave, other than a careless and impatient afterthought of contempt. The master morality is consumed with the happy and beautiful and noble self, only seeking invented and ‘falsified’ negative (‘bad’) contrasts (these contrasts are not rooted in reality) that would reinforce it more “gratefully and triumphantly” (37). Meanwhile, the slave morality is preoccupied with deep resentiment towards the master, a festering and poisoning passion that create an imaginary a world where “hatred grows to monstrous and uncanny proportions” (33 & 36). Slave morality rejects the hostile external world with a resounding no in a creative defiant act (37). It is in this covert imaginary world of unsatisfied hatred where the idea evil manifests itself, contrary to noble flighty idea of ‘bad’.
This is the most basic summary of what Nietzsche has laid out here. At the end of GM, 11, Nietzsche asserts that Europe has slipped into a nihilistic state due to Europe losing their fear of man, which has caused it to lose its “love of him, reverence for him, our hopes for him, and even the will to him” (44). This fear of man is necessary for the master morality, because noble man needs enemies as his mark of distinction (39). Nietzsche begs for “something still capable of arousing fear” in order for man to justify man (44).
I believe what Nietzsche is saying is that Europe has slipped into the slave morality because there is no fear and therefore no reason to grow greater (44). The slave morality is insidious and covert, residing not in the present, but in hope of the future. This removal from reality and the present is what dulls man and makes him weary and mediocre. Being “better” is simply man failing to grow by reducing the positive substance of inequality. The noble man needs a fear of the plebian man in order to justify his distinction.
So, if any of that is correct, does this resonate with me? Well, Nietzsche is very disorienting.
I believe that there are enough forces of fear at work in this culture that sustains mans self confidence and causes man to rise above and react and grow in their midst. Mass culture in itself a force that provides man a means to rise above and justify man.
I also believe that our society has almost eliminated the need for fear, because we live in a (semi) functional democratic nation. This might cause man to slip into a weary nihilistic state. Specifically, because we live in a democratic nation, there is no notion of one presiding over another and therefore no fear of the plebian to base our noble valuations. This eliminates the master mentality, necessary for growth according to Nietzsche. By losing this fear we slip into a slave morality consumed with resentment towards… God? The government?
Nietzsche makes some pretty bizarre connections. I need to think more on everything I’ve read to decide if he’s too elitist. I think he’s just challenging the traditional foundations and rocking the boat.
Isocrates in Antidosis: Rhetoric
We ought… to think of the art of discourse just as we think of the other arts, and not to form opposite judgments about similar things, nor show ourselves intolerant toward that power which, of all the faculties which belong to the nature of man, is the source of most of our blessings. For in the other powers which we possess, … we are in no respect superior to other living creatures; nay, we are inferior to many in swiftness and in strength and in other resources; but, because there has been implanted in us the power to persuade each other and to make clear to each other whatever we desire, not only have we escaped the life of wild beasts, but we have come together and founded cities and made laws and invented arts; and generally speaking, there is no institution devised by man which the power of speech has not helped us to establish. For this it is which has laid down laws concerning things just and unjust, and things honorable and base; and if it were not for these ordinances we should not be able to live with one another. It is by this also that we confute the bad and extol the good. Through this we educate the ignorant and appraise the wise; for the power to speak well is taken as the surest index of a sound understanding, and discourse which is true and lawful and just is the outward image of a good and faithful soul.
– Isocrates in Antidosis
South Park and Open Society: A Response
An essay I recently wrote. Loved reading about Karl Popper, didn’t really like the essay.
South Park and Open Society: A Response
When examining a democratic society there should be ample evidence of open expression, where ideas can be examined and critiqued by the people as a whole. Professors David Curtis and Gerald Erion investigate this evidence in their essay South Park and the Open Society by presenting the controversial cartoon show South Park. South Park gained popularity in the nineties, and has since built the reputation of parading society’s most controversial topics for the public eye. Curtis and Erion provide examples of how the open examination found in South Park was intentionally designed to exercise and preserve the health of liberal democracy. To support their case and qualify the importance of an open society, the authors cite twentieth century political philosopher Karl Popper and his critique of totalitarianism, The Open Society and Its Enemies.
In the opening paragraphs of their essay, Curtis and Erion reference media theorist Douglas Rushkoff’s position that many social criticisms are intentionally interwoven into seemingly harmless entertainment mediums and serve to illustrate the fundamental principles of democratic philosophy at work (para 1). South Park, they instance, does this explicitly by portraying its characters as ‘overzealous political activists’. The show openly offers up caricatures of extremism on the right and left for ridicule and derision. Because South Park finds no person or subject taboo, it has been constantly targeted for censorship and cancelation. Curtis and Erion believe that the creator’s decision to allow open discussion of such extremism places them in a position safe from the extremists who threaten to shut down the show.
While South Park may come off as a crass cartoon filled with crude humor and ‘tasteless’ jokes, authors Curtis and Erion create convincing parallels between serious social and political gestalts that allow for deeper considerations of South Parks methods of free expression. What has protected South Park from much of this ridicule is that by silencing the shows message, many people would effectively be silencing their own. What lends credibility to the show is that it rests on the ideals of open society that are needed for critique and criticisms. It is just as natural that the show is a critic that it is producing critics.
Curtis and Erion cite South Park co–creators Trey Parkers and Matt Stone in a PBS interview as they remark on the importance of openly recognizing that people screaming on both sides of an issue are the same people, and that it is ‘OK’ to be in the middle and laugh at both of them (para 3). What is paramount here is that these extremists don’t stifle the message of one or the other. Curtis and Erion refer to Karl Poppers principle of intolerance for intolerance to support Parker and Stone’s position (para 14). This principle emphasizes what Popper saw as a necessity in a democratic society in order to ensure open discussion on all subjects that call for critique and lead to progress. While the creators may not intentionally have society’s best interest at heart, they are most definitely furthering the healthy process of examining controversial subjects so that progressive ideas can be exchanged.
When looking at the heart of this type of free expression in action, twentieth century scientific and politic philosopher Karl Popper provides the best framework for examining the system. As a major proponent of liberal democracy, Popper championed the notion of open society while criticizing the controls of government and customary myths perpetuating closed societies.
In order to avoid being subject to criticism from one extremist group or another, the creators of South Park opt to bash all sides, playing it safe in the middle ground. Referring to the remarks of the co-creators about the importance of extremism being expressed, Curtis and Erion find evidence of Poppers open society framework in the countless characters of South Park who openly embody this extremism and portray stereotypes of all kinds. Each of the main caricatures of SouthPark, Stan, Kyle, Cartman, and Kenny, encapsulate characterized beliefs within our culture.
Through the character Cartman, the obnoxious overweight authoritarian, the co-creators exhibit the abhorrent stereotypes associated with the right wing fanaticism (para 11). Curtis and Erion describe the qualities and character defects that Cartman poignantly displays in characterizing ‘un-democratic’ conservatives. He has no issue berating anyone with his foul mouth and fascist opinions and most often takes his anger out on Kenny, a character that best represents the poorer class.
With his coat covering his mouth and inhibiting recognizable speech, Kenny’s role usually consists of random muffles here and there, followed by his eventual death in most episodes. His lack of speech is similar to the lack of voice and influence within the poorer class. His regular deaths, and the utter lack of concern his friends share when he dies, represents the constant struggle within the lower classes that is often overlooked or ignored as a whole.
With just as much ease, Curtis and Erion reference the characters identified with the extreme political left. An episode with their teacher, Mr. Mackey, portrays the hypocrisy of the watered-down leftists as his attempts to get the students to stay away from drugs lead to his own addiction.
For middle ground the creators introduce Stan to exemplify the every day American middle class Christian populist. Along with Kyle, they represent an open and diplomatic approach to problems which allows the audience to receive him easily. While similar to Stan, Kyle is Jewish and embodies the prejudices as a minority.
The friendship between these four not only illustrates the volatile dynamics within American culture as they interact, but creates a satirical stage as they encounter other residents and extremists within the show that demonstrate extreme beliefs and opinions. What makes the show so popular is how these characters encounter these extreme ideas and the scenarios they contain. As an audience we witness our own behaviors, biases and prejudices exhibited through the characters.
Curtis and Erion present convincing evidence in their essay South Park and the Open Society that South Park creators Parker and Stone share Karl Poppers political philosophy of an open society. By actively identifying and discussing the extremism on all sides, they offer themselves up as an extreme, and legitimize an important stake in open discussions. If Popper were alive to witness South Park on the air, he would rest assure that the health of American Democracy is alive and well.
Fundamental America
This is what a paper written in 1 hour and 20 minutes looks like.
Fundamental America: Free for a Price
Examining the paradoxes of social inequalities within the scope of democratic sentiments
Inherent Paradoxes
Two hundred and thirty years ago the American people declared their independence from tyrannical autocratic rule. The founders synthesized the enduring democratic rights and truths of the greatest philosophers that ever lived. Despite this, democracy was reserved for a margin of people and out of reach from the vast majority. Since our countries conception, great advances have been made to refine what democracy is and establish who has the right to contribute their voice. Major movements in women’s suffrage and later slavery and African American rights were milestones that helped shape the seemingly exclusive ideal of democracy. Currently America faces several fronts that challenge the legitimacy of our current democracy.
Social Inequalities
In our readings in Signs of Life in the USA, authors Sonia Maasik and Jack Solomon address a variety of paradoxes that exist within our American culture in chapter six, American Paradox. No paradox is more controversial and relevant than America’s simultaneous declaration of universal human freedom and equality and its long history of racism. This paradox addresses the tip of the iceberg of much larger paradox illustrating an advertised freedom that was not intended to be free.
Historical inequalities
Examining our American roots we can see that our puritanical Christian forefathers desired a society of their own, free from autocratic dictation. They envisioned this society for the United States. As time went on, these puritanical sentiments persisted and found their way into our legislation. Because their ideals subjugated the rights of women and African Americans, they were prevented from voicing themselves for the first half of American history. Only after massive opposition and generations of change have these become matters of the past.
Xenophobia of Middle Easterners
In our current culture racism seems to be localized to extreme fringe groups. Popular culture has seen women take center stage on political issues, and African Americans dominate multiple industries from entertainment to sports. However, social inequalities are still alive and well, and although racism may be withering, xenophobia continues to blossom with every generation. Most recently our country has been in multiple wars and with every war is an accompanying fear. Middle easterners have been the target of these fears as our government denounced radical Muslims and extremists from the middle east of reeking havoc world wide. While the atrocious crimes were committed by radical sects, the language used to single them out has effectively caused a mass hysteria directed towards the Middle East as a whole. Ignorant Americans forget that the numbers of such extremists are next to nothing.
Xenophobia of Illegal Immigrants
Another xenophobia gripping our nation is that of illegal immigration. The news of illegal immigrants storming our borders, scaling walls, digging tunnels, enduring deserts and dangers has America in a panic. While Americans national security has been called into question, another issue of economic security has been the focus of most news. Illegal immigrants are publicized as taking hard working tax paying American’s jobs. In light of our economic decline, this has been the spotlight of most Americans concern. To compound the issue further, America’s war on drugs is now directly battling the major trafficking of illegal drugs through our southern Mexican border.
Social Inequality of Homosexuality
The last social inequality that challenges the fabric of our constitution and agitates the ethical and moral minds of America is the issue of homosexuality. It seems it would be an inevitable topic given our ‘free’ country was founded by puritanical Christians. While the issue of homosexuality has made much headway in popular culture and open acceptance the past two decades, it has only recently been challenging the roots of America. Proposition 8 and the issue of same sex marriage has been the most widely publicized debate on the issue.
Examining the Paradoxes
Why are these paradoxical? While some might look at these issues and produce valid concerns for their legitimacy, they overlook the very foundations of America. This land, whatever the founder’s initial intent, was established as a haven for the persecuted, a home for those underfoot, those whose rights were molested or stripped. Social inequalities serve to destabilize the creed of freedom. To remove one man his rights would be to undermine the rights of all men. This, however, is what America has done throughout its history as it has attempted to reserve democracy to a select few.
Reserved Freedoms
These examples illustrate a major flaw in America’s declaration of freedom and equality: where the line of freedom is drawn. While we hold our relativistic and tolerant values supreme, we are terribly protective and afraid of anybody watering this down and wavering from these values. In the case of illegal immigration, most would think that America, of all places, would be the most receptive and lax about this process. Considering that there are no true natives other than the Indians, we should embrace the people who venture here to exercise their rights. The truth is that earning your citizenship and freedom in America is an arduous test of patience that many people simply do not have the time to pass.
Paradoxes: Generational Entrapment
Democracy is defined as a government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is retained and directly exercised by the people. These people make up the common people and dictate the governing rule through the legislative and judiciary process. However, problems arise when one generation’s laws improperly reflect the current generation. As the generation of one common people phases out, another phases in, often met in opposition to outdated traditions and beliefs that made their way in legislation. These tendencies create obstacles for progress, as is seen throughout American history with landowners only being able to vote, women’s rights, and African American rights.
Defining a Free Democracy
Another paradox that exists within these paradoxes is that of a free democracy itself. Any form of government is a form of control. Whether that control is derived from single or multiple sources detracts from that fact that there is a degree of freedom is forfeited. In a democracy this power is derived from the common people, the populous. This causes difficulties among those who compose a margin of the population or any minority with fringe beliefs and philosophies.
Conclusion
Overcoming these paradoxes will be the result of overcoming an inherent part of the human nature: fear, specifically the unknown. That includes all unfamiliarity extending to foreigners, homosexuality, or just change in general. While I would love to say these inequalities have all but disappeared with the advent of the mass media, internet, and other mediums of communication that break down the one sided walls of ignorance, the truth is they remain an enduring part of our culture. Though America once related with the tired huddled masses in Emma Lazarus’s words on the statue of liberty, we have grown alien to these feelings and are less empathetic to those who need it most.
Mind walk.
This world is an illusion. Meaning is subjective.
Imagination is everything. The ability to create and justify a reality that has yet to exist is salvation.
****
I am becoming a skeptic, in the philosophical sense. Certainty has been suspended.
I am a heap of matter. Matter programmed to process stimulating environmental energy. Within my brain resides the neural networks that comprise my mind and consciousness. I am a product of an environment.
My growing skepticism is a result of a world competing to imbue its beliefs and convictions into individuals. It is a virus that pervades everything we do. I am a virus. We staunchly defend the fabricated reality we’ve constructed for ourselves. The thought of our experiences deceiving us is beyond most. We are certain. We digest stimulation, reference past experiences, and strive to make sense of it. The older we grow the more ingrained we become.
Change our mind? Adopt a new philosophical gestalt? Feel differently towards this or that? How do we begin to rationalize our past? Was is for nought? We swear by these seemingly authentic experiences. Every seven years, every cell in our body will die and will successfully grow anew. We are not who we were seven years ago. Our mind is not the mind we were born and grew with. Our memories are not the experiences we judge by.
We are constantly being impressed with codes of thought. They pass by our conscious and accept them unnoticed… until we wake and find ourselves somewhere we don’t want to be and someone we’re not. But who are you?
Apathy allows one to become less and less impressionable. Action allows one to make sense of more stimulation.
Those who sit back and watch life accept the few experiences they’ve encountered and never seek to change their perceptions and biases. They are accustomed to rote behaviors and mindless routine.
Those who take charge and assume a role to make sense of as many experiences as possible imbue themselves with a stronger sense of self and maintain a broader sense of possibilities.
****
Everything goes back to what you want. Its comforting to believe that these desires are our own. The reality is we are products. Our genetics have afforded us with unique processes, our environment unique stimulation. How can we fathom additional colors to the rainbow? We cannot escape our environment. We can only instill it with our interpretive meaning. We think our delusion is unique, but it is a delusion nonetheless.
What is true happiness?
Hellen Keller once said, “Many people have a wrong idea of what constitutes true happiness. It is not attained through self-gratification, but through fidelity to a worthy purpose.”
I believe what Hellen Keller speaks of is Joy. While happiness is something that happens to us, joy comes from within. When one is committed to a worthy ideal, a worthy purpose, one is no longer waiting to arrive. Instead we recognize that the journey is the highest and most precious prize. No longer do we find ourselves waiting for better times, or seeking the ephemeral gratifications that life has to offer.
Earl Nightingale said, Success is the progressive realization of a worthy ideal. I cannot think of a better definition. Lasting success yields lasting joys because our treasures are stored up, not in things, but worthy ideals.
One of the turning points in my life was when I realized this sentiment. I use to yearn for someone or something to quench my thirst for contentment and color the pallid landscapes of my life. Every one of these fruitless endeavors I sought provided what I was yearning for. It was only when I realized that what I longed for was nothing this world could offer. It was what I could offer this world. This penchant ignited a flame within me as I began searching for ways to offer myself to people in need. I soon saw a world in need of real truth. What they yearned for was living water that can quench their thirst for a life more abundantly.
The fidelity that Hellen Keller speaks of is helping people discover this Truth. It requires that we die to ourselves, our gratifications and our selfish desires, and offer ourselves up as messengers of this truth. We must accept life as a journey where we give ourselves to others. This is by no means an easy task, but it is the only way to attain lasting joy, or the true happiness that Hellen Keller speaks of.
Camus: Silent Companionship
When I was young, I expected people to give me more than they could – continuous friendship, permanent emotion. Now I have learned to expect less of them than they can give – a silent companionship. And their emotions, their friendship, and noble gestures keep their full miraculous value in my eyes; wholly the fruit of grace.
From one of Camus’ entries; dated May, 1935:
He is at ease in sincerity. Very rare.
4am
I spend a lot of times trying to define things. I often have trouble trying to define myself. I let myself worry about other peoples perceptions. The last thing I’d want to do is miscommunicate myself to people and the world. If I’m misunderstood, so be it. But as long as I can help it, I’d like to.
Little bios and what not. I can’t express who I am in a biography. My nature? I’m constantly changing. Who I am changes in relation to the situation, the person. While I maintain a sense of integrity, I’m never the same.
****
Well… went to the bar this evening… got relatively intoxicated. It was one of those nights where you and your friends talk about all the deep ruminations that lay quietly at the foot of your mind. The ones that are seldom expressed and never elaborated. They were pretty fulfilling. There was a mutual eagerness to gain perspective and to share perspective.
So…I came home.. passed out. its 4am… dry as hell in the apartment. drank a bunch of water. So nice. bed time…
I can’t stop my mind. It’s racing. I lay in bed and it goes on and on. Mostly about things I’d rather not spend my time thinking about. I suppose I need to put more of the stuff i want to think about in my head.
I’ll write more later but Michel Foucault is an amazing philosopher with amazing ideas. I have been reading papers on him and how his views coincide with academic anxiety, something I used to wrestle with and can relate immensely to. Share more later.
licking the earth
No longer do I wish to form judgmental opinions of the world. I am as lost as the rest. I speak of ‘the rest’ as if they were somehow outside the sanctums of reality, disillusioned by choice. We are all disillusioned. I am as much a wanderer as anyone. My desires are as unpredictable as an infants first thoughts or an old mans last. Since I came into this world, my intuition has kindly afforded me with a singular constant: the feeling of strangeness. It has successfully weaved its way throughout my pursuits, pervading my heart and jading my innocence, so that I am left feeling alone and alienated in my own world. Whereas I thought understanding would provide a saving clairvoyance and break the shackles holding me back from the true world, it has only doubled the distortion and distanced me farther. Despite how far I run from the pining habits of subjectivism, or however poignant my desperation to shed the all encompassing feelings in relation to ‘me’, I am always straddled the nascent cogitations I’m trying to escape. Who can run from their thoughts? Does this make sense?
Is there any security other than the affirmations I authenticate with my own will? That alone leaves me doubting. Doubt is corrosive. It imbues the heart with malignant motives. It does not fortify a cause but weakens it.
The question is: If I decide reality, how should I decide it to be? Do I adopt another’s philosophical gestalt? or is it subjective? If I want the most accurate representation of whats going on, how should I perceive? What should I perceive? What matters most? Do I gauge reality through my senses? Do senses exact accuracy? Do I render through feelings? Are good feelings trustworthy? Are positive feelings to be trusted? What is good? What is positive? No no no no no no.
Feelings lie. My imagination corrupts the sensual reality. All man sees is a hallucination. Man needs laws and governing principles to construct his reality, and faith that they are workable. Enough faith to test them and find them true. Otherwise man in all his decadence goes on “Licking the earth” as Muggeridge put it. Trifling pursuits of instant gratification, indulging in feelings and pleasures fabricated by mundane impulses, striving to fill the vacuity of a soul meant for a unification with its creator.
Words are powerful. They invoke reality. They color and illustrate the pallid landscapes of the mind.
Would it be too hard to believe that a God revealed himself to the world through those who opened themselves to Him? Who, disenchanted by the things (impulses, satisfactions, feelings, pleasures, pains, etc.) of this world, looked to a metaphysical unification, a relationship, with something greater? Could this something greater have genuinely instilled truth through their pen, despite their flawed human condition?
gotta go..
****
“There is something ridiculous and even quite indecent in an individual claiming to be happy. Still more a people or a nation making such a claim. The pursuit of happiness… is without any question the most fatuous which could possibly be undertaken. This lamentable phrase ”the pursuit of happiness” is responsible for a good part of the ills and miseries of the modern world.” Muggeridge
“When I look back on my life nowadays, which I sometimes do, what strikes me most forcibly about it is that what seemed at the time most significant and seductive, seems now most futile and absurd. For instance, success in all of its various guises, being known and praised, ostensible pleasures like acquiring money or seducing women, or traveling, going to and fro in the world and up and down in it like Satan, explaining and experiencing whatever Vanity Fair has to offer. In retrospect, all these exercises in self-gratification seem pure fantasy, what Pascal called, ‘licking the earth’.” Malcolm Muggeridge
****
higher
Damn this world. Meaning. All I’ve strive to accomplish and for what? At the end of the day I’m still pitted against the vacuum of emptiness, a void. Where is the meaning? The pursuit of meaning just might be more meaningful than the goal I’m reaching to attain.
Where is my mind? Despite all the philosophers of antiquity, all the poets past and present, no matter how eloquently stated- nothing remains certain. No matter how much is written, no matter how long the debates rage, there is still little evidence that the life of an individual is worth any more now than when he started. Even after examining the assets accumulated, the people touched, the love kindled, one is still forced to face the ultimate reality which nullifies all efforts- death. This is a nihilistic state that I’m literally dying to escape.
So I’m faced with the care of my direction. All my energy has seemed to have left my limbs, the muses departed, leaving me with the reflection of a boy, scared and alone. I once cherished the kindled relationships with other human spirits above any other ideal. Now there seems to be a shallow reality that they are as lost as I. Meaning…
I’m trying to adopt a different tone. This nihilistic feeling leaves me powerless. I’m learning to shun the idea of expecting anything from life, but embrace the expectations that life holds for me. That may be the only escape from this mental torture.
I’ve sabotaged my integrity with illogical optimism. I need to regain footing and stand again with a renewed sense of purpose. I need to be confident in my ability to reach swelling heights of achievement. I am here and, like a tree, I will never question how high I am destined to grow.
write more later.
Humanism and The Odyssey: An Analysis
Examining the Pursuit of Mans Sense of Self
Success is a humanistic notion. It is man achieving. One definition describes success as the progressive realization of a worthy ideal. The fact that humans are in control of their success or failure, and essentially their fate, is a unique concept that originated in Greek society. When man loses the will to seek answers he effectively relinquishes control over his circumstances, causing him to accept his circumstances as divinely appointed and beyond his control. He accepts the direction of his fate and deemphasizes the importance of his desires and abilities. The humanist, however, maintains optimism towards his current circumstances and places faith in his ability to change those circumstances. The continual pursuit of refining those abilities to achieve his circumstances is what encompasses the idea of arête—excellence. Aristotle said “We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act but a habit.” The notion of anything less than excellence contradicts humanism and sends man at the mercy of circumstances beyond his control. Homer’s work The Odyssey paints the prescription for all humanists to come as Odysseus battles to overcome circumstances and fulfill his desire to return home.
The humanist is one who cherishes the very highest ideals. At his essence is self-discipline, a persistence and determination that fuels his effort to achieve those ideals. Humanists are concerned with the refinement of their being—their character, intellect, morals—seeking out the very highest reason, virtues, ethics, and ideals in order to aid in the ability of self-actualization. They believe in the cultivation of man to create the most fulfilling life possible.
Throughout The Odyssey Odysseus struggles against harsh circumstances that deter his efforts to return home. He’s buffeted against the waves, stranded on islands, held captive, and blown across seas for more than twenty years. Yet, despite these forces, he continually presses on. The Odyssey shows that while man is subject to circumstances, either external or internal, he is no longer a victim. While gods are present throughout the story they never miraculously save him, nor do they prevent him from achieving. As a whole they are unsuccessful at countering or waiving Odysseus’s strong will to return home.
When examining The Odyssey as a humanistic work, it appears that the gods remain as fixtures of the story that fill in occurrences that would otherwise happen anyway. Homer portrays their acts more as symbols of luck or inspiration that either aid or hinder Odysseus rather than the gods inescapable will to save or condemn him. Interestingly, Odysseus is often compared to Athene in their witty, cunning and sly nature. It seems that the gods are a result of creative explanations for things with unknown origins such as natural occurrences and inspiration. Each time Odysseus faces a set of circumstances and the gods intervene they are shown providing insight and help that Odysseus can choose to heed or ignore. This is also illustrated when Telemachus was approached by Athene to stand up and fulfill his desire to rid his house of the suitors and see his father again. Despite his age and the odds against him he successfully chose to pursue the ideal and overcome the challenges (Homer 90). Illustrating the ability to choose and achieve such choices was a first for a literary work in a world governed by deities and supernatural forces.
A major theme throughout The Odyssey is the idea of light and darkness and it’s symbolism of order and chaos as well as life and death. Humanism is a philosophy of change and the process to achieve that change. It is man coming to know himself and his world, overcoming his savage nature, restoring order, and living life to the fullest. It is achieved through personal development and refinement by overcoming challenges. Homer incorporated these elements of humanism not only in Odysseus, but in the overall societal atmosphere of The Odyssey. Homer used light in association with order and life. King Nestor, Menelaus, and Alcinous had ordered kingdoms, good manners, and tremendous success. They spoke eloquently and maintained high ideals for themselves and their guests. The Phaeacians displayed not only the virtue of xenia, but illustrated the idea of achieving arête through competitive sporting events as well as their unparalleled mastery of the sea. In contrast, darkness represents that of chaos and death, qualities that humanism strives to overcome. The suitors, barbarous and destructive, represent chaos and disorder soon to be overcome by Odysseus, the model humanist. When Odysseus arrives in Ithaca he finds himself in a deep fog that makes his home unrecognizable. His victory over this darkness comes when he defeats the suitors, showing triumph over chaos and the return of order.
Odysseus can be considered a model for all humanists. The Odyssey displays him maintaining the highest degree of excellence in all his endeavors. His courage is tested time and time again as he approached the most daunting tasks such as facing giants and sorcerers, and even going to Hades (Homer 150). His discipline is displayed in the continual pursuit of his homeland despite the forces he wrestles. His keen intellect is displayed through his ability to choose his words and actions carefully. His cunning speech deceives his enemies and persuades new friends in order to defeat or win favor. His manners and use of words is so good, that he wins favor with the princess Nausicaa of Phaeacia, despite his nude and ravaged appearance (Homer 81). His physical strengths are seen every time he competes. After all the suitors fail, he is the only one more than able to string the great bow and shoots it precisely through the axe holes (Homer 286). He proves his vastly superior athleticism when he competes at the Phaeacian games and out does all the competition (Homer 99). His knowledge of strategy and war is evident through his conquests of cities and kingdoms (Homer 96). His patience and temperance are evident in the insightful plans to defeat the Cyclops and the suitors (Homer 118, 216). As a whole, Odysseus and his struggles manage to convey a viable exemplar of a true humanist.
The Odyssey also contains, however, contradicting elements of humanism that seem to raise the question of whether or not it accurately portrays humanism. While Odysseus has heroic qualities of achievement, he’s often portrayed as weak and easily fallible to vices such as women and pride, specifically hubris. The obvious cases of his temptation of women can be seen with Calypso and Circe (Homer 66, 133). He easily succumbs to the temptation of women and forgets about his wife Penelope whom, in cases he mentions her, he desperately longs to see.
Odysseus’s pride is another obstacle that interferes with his success many times. While kleos, the Greek word for glory, was something to be sought out and cherished in Ancient Greece, too much can cause devastating effects and invoke hubris, considered the greatest of sins in ancient Greece. Hubris is the overabundance of self pride that causes arrogance and self confidence, usually resulting in showing off or putting someone down for personal gratification. This was illustrated during Odysseus’s encounter with the Cyclops Polyphemus when he taunts the Cyclops after cunningly escaping from his captivity (Homer 123). Odysseus’s hubris almost cost him his life and the lives of his crew members when the giant threw boulders at his ship. Additionally, even after surviving the close call, he gloated even more, disclosing his name to the one eyed giant who later proved to be Poseidon’s son. His overabundance of pride resulted in causing more problems than any other single factor throughout his quest to return home. Hubris also is seen when retribution is being served. Clear cases of this occurred when Odysseus slaughter’s his betrayers and the suitors. He mutilated and butchered Melanthius and ruthlessly beheaded Leodes even after he asked for forgiveness (Homer 292, 296). He also killed all but twelve maids after they were ordered to clean up the bloody corpses. These examples are presented as paradoxical to the notion of humanism and the honor, virtue and excellence it stands for.
These faults, however, can be cleverly considered one of two ways. At first glance, one can view Odysseus as a proud individual of self-indulgence who does his best to boost his image while disregarding the life of anyone who undermines him. On the other hand, further examination reveals that Odysseus is battling normal human struggles and vices. When considering the cause and effect of his actions, the reader is shown not what to do, but what not to do. His love of women caused him to stay with the beautiful Calypso for seven years while his hubris causes even more immense problems with Poseidon’s fury. The humanistic theme is preserved when the work is read as an honest portrayal of the human condition illustrating the challenges faced when striving to actualize ones desires and achieve arête. It depicts Odysseus as a normal human who’s fallible and imperfect despite his reputation and ideals. His mistakes never prevent him from achieving his desire no matter what the misery. Humanism involves cultivating one’s life through temperance by avoiding the obstacles and vices that hinder fulfillment. The Odyssey vividly conveys the essence of persisting to overcome struggles through its characters.
The Odyssey further exemplifies the humanistic element as a quintessential work of literature. The complex characters, deep storylines, and metaphorical relationships embody the holistic quality of writing one would expect from a humanistic work. Even its prose and syntax reinforce the idea of arête by providing a concise and relatable text that has endured as an unparalleled work of art. The word andra, or man, placed as the very first word of The Odyssey proves to further signify the importance of man in a Homeric world.
The Odyssey provides the first example of a human’s will being the central component of their fate. Everything about it points to the significance of man in creating his world. This provided the framework of western thought that has propelled so much of our achievement. This Homeric epic shaped the ancient Greek culture that emphasized the importance of man seeking arête to cultivate his world. This introduced the importance of an individual’s thought and ability to reason, prompting the philosophy of modern humanities, modern democracy, and modern science. Whatever Homer’s original intent, he was successful at epitomizing humanism in every element of The Odyssey.
Bibliography
Homer, and E.V.Rieu. The Odyssey. 3rd Ed.. London, England: The Penguin Group, 1946.
Meaningless Existence
Do the laws of the universe create life? Do the forces that act on all matter inevitably lead to reactions causing organization that begets more organization? And begets organization to the point where the molecules begin to question themselves and their intent? Organized states of matter drawing from the universe around them that produce something out of nothing? Ideas? Truth? Philosophical concepts and laws to live and govern by? I would rather say we are gods. If we are not, we are made in God likeness. A consciousness exists within us that is more than the resulting whole we’re composed of. If we were solely matter, we would be no more relevant in the scheme of time than dust in the wind. Our experiences would be lies. Lies would be lies. There would be no right or wrong. The evolutionary reaction would persist until it fizzles out. All of these thoughts, however personal we make them, attached with sentimental penchants to make it worth understanding, are nothing. Do not convince yourself they are more than the reality you accept them to be. You swallow lies if you think you are worth more than the ashes that construct and guide these inclinations. If there is no real meaning to life, and everything is meaningless- aside from the lie you’re convinced it to be- than knowing this is meaningless. Getting to the bottom of anything, the truth about something, knowing everything- is pointless. You will not be any better off.
I suppose people, once they’re convinced that there is no origin, no God or purpose or real plan, they can begin to make life whatever they want it to be. They are masters of their fate. The opportunity chance has given them allows them to be a god for a brief moment in time. They infuse their decisions with the illusion of meaning, deciding and believing in a fabricated existence. They declare their own laws and morals and philosophies to be paramount to anyone around them. Even if they’re tolerant, they’ve arrived at the conclusion that everyone can believe whatever they want because there is no meaning, and they are right because they believe it to be so. This is called existentialism. This is the current state mankind has found for itself. Because there is no truth, and all is relative, everything is debatable. True meaning is vapid.
Is there a God? If he is, why are we separated from him? If all that is can be measured and calculated before our eyes, where is this God? What is love? What is faith? What is honesty? What is truth? What is compassion? What is empathy? What is kindness? What is a will? Are they mere reactions? behaviors? patterns? How can these things be measured? Is right and wrong measurable by a definite scale? If not, why do be place faith in such things as hope?
If God is real, why would he allow people to suffer? Is it his will we suffer or, like a father’s love for his child, does his heart break to see us struggle? Does he pain and weep when he sees us scrape by in life, accepting pathetic answers for help instead of looking to him? Does he want to know us? Does he even care? Did he make us for the insignificant novelty of it all? Little beings hurting, hurting others, suffering to survive, questioning life and existing, crawling through life on their hands and knees to spread themselves over as much material or immaterial gains as possible, only to find themselves on their deathbed with the cold reality that it was all for nothing. The suffering, the joy, the relationships, were for nothing, and they slip into oblivion. Or do they find themselves in other place, confronted with answers to the questions? Are they blinded by the radiating perfection of a just God who they’ve reserved as an afterthought? Does this God accept them to a place they never wished to seek? Does a door open to those who don’t knock? Is there a place where a relationship with a perfect God exists? A God who you never desired to look for or know? Where would a perfect justice place the blame? On God or us?
fear and desire
People don’t change unless there is a recognized need to change. No one changes for no reason. When a need presents itself it’s accompanied by two forms of motivating factors that fuel the need to change. Desire and Fear. Those two dynamics hugely impact our lives on a daily basis. Fear allows us to survive, yet it inhibits growth. Fear is the last thing you want governing your needs. Desire is the most powerful emotion in the world. Love and sex are probably the two most powerful desires within the human psyche. They’re also the most important for relationships and, of course, reproduction.
I was thinking about the topics of fear and desire. Desire requires a lot more faith and energy. Fear is almost programmed into us. Its cowardice. Its shame to confront the facts and truths and obeying the desires dwelling within you because of the lack of confidence people have in themselves. The fear of failure. They suppress who they are and what they want. WHY. FEAR. It’s a lie. We have nothing to lose. I wish I could buy into this myself, cause as I say this I feel like there are things I’m afraid to see out, for fear of rejection or failure. It’s a load. I, nor anyone else has anything to lose.
My desire to be fueled with faith; seeking out my passions until they fulfill me, or satisfied with all that I could have done or is worth doing.
My Ethics.
Over the years I’ve developed a strong understanding and conviction of proper morals and ethics through a variety of my life experiences. For a long time the ethics and morals I held for myself were relative to the situational occurrences and were usually based on how my actions would leave me feeling at the time. This philosophy quickly eroded as it was tested and failed time and time again. I realized that my ethics are a direct reflection of my character and a strong character is something that not only I can rely on in times of doubt, but others can look to for valuable guidance. A strong character is consistent, noble, respected, and trustworthy. Being morally and ethically sound involves being full of integrity, doing what’s right no matter who’s looking, being straightforward and honest, and being selfless in the decisions you make to benefit others as well as yourself. I think a man’s character is the only thing he has when all is stripped away. It’s the reputation that precedes him as well legacy he leaves behind. I realize there were flaws in my personal philosophy and ethical standards that were detrimental to my success. Upon realizing this, I made a resolution to refine myself to exemplify excellence in every endeavor or thought I undertook. My thirst for success motivated me to turn my search for answers to those who were successful and exemplified a life of excellence and honor, so that I could assimilate the best of what they learned and lived into my own life. My pursuit led me to read books of awe inspiring truth and wisdom such as the Bible, to books by authors such as James Allen, Napoleon Hill, John Maxwell, W. Clement Stone, Claude Bristol, Dale Carnegie, and other honorable men. My father is also a source of inspiration in his unwavering conviction to pursue what’s right and flee from what is wrong no matter what the consequence. When interacting with others, I often revert to the golden rule in one form or another to judge my decisions by placing myself in the situation of whomever I’m interacting with.
During my youth I was involved with many toxic activities which, in hindsight, caused many setbacks toward my long term aspirations. Due to moving over twelve times and attending twelve different schools throughout the first twenty years of my life, I developed a strong love and appreciation for people. This love often caused me to compromise my ethics and morals in order to satisfy or appease my friends and their expectations. Though I tried my best to exemplify my convictions, I often found myself compromising many of my ethical and moral standards when I was around my friends.
Many of the situations and dilemmas that caused me to compromise my ethics tended to be more internal clashes as opposed to visible confrontations. I do my best to assume full responsibility for my actions in the midst of any adversity. I consider myself a terrible liar, and as much as I dislike the feeling of being dishonest towards other people who trust me, I most of all despise lying to myself. When I get caught for doing something wrong, I embrace the responsibility for my actions and accept the consequence of my shortsighted mistakes. I do my best to spot these incongruencies in order to eliminate any detrimental conflicts with my values. I find it important to acknowledge the mistake without hesitation and take the appropriate measures to remediate.
I have learned that problems never go away until they are fixed. If you put off fixing problems they will eventually build up to overwhelm or drown you. They never fix themselves. When I was a younger I had misconception of responsibility. Taking the form of procrastination, many problems would pile up and eventually lead to a downward spiral. The same analogy goes for flawed ethical decisions which, if not immediately and emphatically fixed, pile up, causing severe damage to you in the end.
Interior & Exterior relationships
Stories. Stories transcend explanation.
In every experience, in every interpretation, there lies a relationship between self and that of the occurrence. Either literally or metaphorically, you are engaged in a meaningful intimate relationship that is prompted by the desire to examine the dynamics involved, as well as how they react towards previous experiences. I will state that reality is rarely real, rather a conjecture of assimilated facts and relationships. The facts of any reality are reinforced outcomes that provide a constant source of reliance when testing variables to other unknowns; or when hypothesizing (you might say philosophizing) the relationships that exist between these facts. The dynamics are endless and soon supporting evidence, namely facts for the sake of stability, run out. What remains is a question in which you must settle for an answer based on what your assimilated experiences and intuitions have led you to deduct as true. This seems like a faulty way of approaching life but it seems that this is the way people perceive reality.
The exterior landscape of our mind acts much like a collage would if we glanced at the array of snapshots organized and orchestrated to provide the most significant meaningful interpretation possible. It’s the exterior landscape. Our eyes look at what is, through our eyes. We choose to see matter existing and we allow it to pass through our eyes and encode itself into an image that we place in the back of our mind. Now the greater collection of these images the more correlations can be made. The exterior landscape of our mind consists of the logical processes of life. What the sky looks like. How clouds move and form and dissipate through evaporation or precipitation. What a woman looks like. What the sound of laughter resembles. What different forms the landscape portrays. The erosion in the soil, the rivers and streams, the luminous trees extending upward coated in a sheen brilliance of chlorophyll saturated leaves, the ocherous discrepancies in a striated mountain. People of different races. A vibrant color, a shape, a design. There are the elements we use to shape our exterior landscape. We perceive them to be real.
The interior landscape exists on a much more universal plane. It deals with metaphorical, analogical, relational consistencies and patterns. This is the formula we use to deduce meaning from the exterior landscape. It makes the inanimate, animate. The interior landscape sees beyond tangible patterns and explores the relationship between one perceived entity and another. This creates understanding that fuels future assumptions and allows more significance to be gleaned from the exterior landscape. New concepts, insights, and ideas are aroused that give substantial meaning to once potentially unimaginable visions and experiences. The interior landscape is a universal language that can only be spoken and understood if the proper exterior landscape exists to incubate these metaphorical connections. The interior landscape must be tilled through extensive attention to detail. Keen and open experiences, even brief aphorisms that resonate and illustrate tangible tested qualities of truth- provide details, that paint and color in the regions of intentional brush strokes left by the assimilation of the interior landscape. The less color- the less comprehension is transcended to others for relation. You can work with very little experiences and deduct very similar conclusions. Your limits are imposed by your lack of imagination within the interior landscape. Not due to lack of tools and opportunities provided by abundant experiences supplementing your exterior.
The drive for communicating foreign contexts of exterior landscapes and the intrinsic meaningful relationships of the interior landscape behind them, from one person to another, truly relies on the ability and understanding to communicate on an interior level. To make the relationships identifiable through sheer honesty of the formula used to assimilate the experience. Every story has a formula that consists of much more than basic nouns and pro-nouns and prepositions. It is the diction, the rhetoric, the language, and gesture, and style- totally separate from intellect- that fits together in a universal communicable truth that arrives at the ears of the listener. It involves the faculties of the metaphysical intuition, which resonate with truth and integrity, to embrace the extended shared experience. You can grow just from hearing another’s story. His interpretation- His perception of assimilated events stowed away carefully in a supportive woven web of meaning.
No matter if you don’t understand this concept. The significance of thinking has degraded generously the past century. Thinking is a job, and as long as we aren’t getting paid to do so, we’d rather rely on tangible crutches to do our thinking and form the relationships we use to signify meaning. It seems rare in this culture at least that creativity is original. It’s all copped and cropped. We are no longer stimulated to think. I feel that this lack of enthusiasm is due to the misconception that it’s all been thought before. That all your answers are out there. Except for the basic anomalies of God and existence and dimensions- there are only lose ends to be tied up and soon enough they will too be explored. It may be hard to recognize the meaning in something so trivial as the lost art communicating of multiple levels.
There is a dark giant cloud of cultural, economic, and political oppression that exists to convince us that our interpretations are as irrelevant in the scheme of life as a single drop of water is irrelevant to the whole ocean. I’d like to see beyond that significance.
ideal emotions
the tv blurbs in the distant. candescent rays stretch their fingers to the far reaches of the room. the hum of electric machinery puts my mind into a hypnotic daze. I peruse over my introspective findings, carefully examining my character. Im trying understand why people try convincing themselves and others that there are monsters out there waiting for an opprotunity to ravage their hearts and minds. i uncover weakness in my walls of defense. ive assembled a wall around the idealism that ive formed to match perfection. Ive mapped out an ideal life that covers every conceieveable need. Life, Wife, Job, Social logically it can be harmonious and sound. emotional entanglement throws off logic creating weakness in my de
William Dare 