One of the most difficult things in life is to accept the dissolution of a friendship or a closer relationship. When blessed/cursed with an analytical mind, one ponders all the whys and wherefores and tries to determine whether the relationship can be rekindled by some clever strategy, as in chess when one can convert a lost position into a winning one through skillful maneuvers. The answer is an emphatic No, ninety-nine times out of a hundred. People have their own reasons that make perfect sense to them. People are seldom open to changing their position, unless you are gifted with amazing charm and powers of persuasion. I am not. I have found that decisions about terminating a relationship tend to be final and not open for negotiation. Trying to rekindle a dead relationship is like sorcery. It just doesn't happen except in fairy tales. Nevertheless, conscientious people tend to be disturbed by losing friends or family. The verb "losing" illustrates the problem. One feels a palpable loss, as of a limb. Our friends and family to a large extent make up our own self-image, bolster our confidence and give us a reason to get up in the morning. Their absence or their disengagement is felt profoundly.
I have learned a useful trick. I will engage in post-relationship analysis for a long time like any other fool. I will wonder what happened and why and try to determine whether there is any possibility of salvaging whatever remains, begging the question of whether anything remains at all. Perhaps nothing remains that is worth salvaging. I reach the end of every logical path and find that further analysis is pointless. I am simply spinning my wheels, each time arriving at the same conclusion, that I am better off without Mr. X or Mrs. X because of X, Y, and Z, not to mention Q, R, and S. In most cases I find that I have more to offer Mr. X than Mr. X had to offer me, and that therefore they are the loser. This is because I am good and ruled by ethics, while their other friends may or may not be, so they must take their chances and throw dice with their destiny. Perhaps they will be lucky, but their fortune is no longer my concern.
I wish to know what is real and what is not. I do not want to be deceived, but want to know the truth. To stop thinking about people from the past who must remain in the past--a practice also known as brooding--I use a trick. I like to visualize a glass vase falling from a table and shattering on a floor into a thousand pieces. In the case of long-term friendships, the vase is instead a glass chess piece, a King, signifying resignation from a long and complicated game. Sometimes I imagine a baby crying and then ceasing to utter any sound and becoming still and cold. These images position me firmly in reality and remove me from nostalgia and sentimentality. This visual technique helps me to break away from interminable analysis, from pointless and pathetic thoughts. When a player knocks their King down, the chess game is over. That's that. Time to move on to another game.
Some relationships have a firm foundation based upon mutual interests, mutual needs, trust, and real regard and affection. Other relationships are based upon such things as convenience, locality, opportunity, and temporary, material or bodily needs. Those relationships tend to be transitory. Such "friends" come and go, but mostly go. It's good to recognize who your real friends are and stick with them. It's also good to recognize who are really not your friends and never were in the first place. Sometimes it is humbling to realize how many of our assumptions are based upon falsehoods, but the reason is that many people have no problem with lying, or have set up various parameters within their ethical code that justify lying. Such people do not possess a legitimate sense of honor. Such people can't really be friends to anyone at all. Losing such "friends" is really a net plus. One gains a greater amount of trust in one's personal sphere by discarding the deceiving entity or entities or at any rate being rid of them altogether.
Showing posts with label philosophy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label philosophy. Show all posts
Sunday, May 18, 2014
Tuesday, May 13, 2014
Past and Present, Good and Evil
The past is fast, while the present crawls. I can remember a lot of precise details that people hope I have forgotten. If someone says or does something that strikes me as extraordinary, then that is something I place in the vault. I may not say anything at the time. I may not remind them of it ever. It is enough for me to know. I do not need to share, not to them.
I think I am good judge of people and not easy to deceive. In those rare cases where I have been deceived, it has been someone I respected that did the deceiving. I had rendered myself vulnerable by suspending my good judgement. When the deception results in an injury to me, I castigate myself for being gullible. No one likes to feel like a fool.
I am really too hard on myself. Being deceived is not so bad. Nor is it uncommon. Everyone is deceived to an extent. People deceive themselves on a daily basis. Once betrayed, the advantage to me is that the betrayer is exposed. I can be betrayed once, but not often twice. I remember and will handle the betrayer in a different manner than I would someone I admire. My impression of a person decays rapidly after I know that they have been very dishonest with me.
Is trusting and loving worthwhile or not? To never trust or love certainly renders one highly resistant to deception. This seems to be the tact that some souls take. I suppose they are tired of encountering the tedious liars in our world, and so they withdraw into themselves, so as not to risk further injury.
Perhaps love is worth the risk of being deceived and betrayed. The reward for trusting and loving can be found through another who is also capable of the same trait. Backstabbing liars must contend with their own kind after being exposed as such, and there is no honor among thieves. Still, there may not be any cosmic justice in the universe. I'm not really sure on that point. It seems to me that evil-doers get away with their evil, if they are persistent and determined. There are also advantages to good, some obvious and some subtle, and sometimes--don't be surprised--good wins. I feel I have no choice but to be good. I find the mere thought of evil distressing and depressing. Perhaps some people have the stomach for it, but I don't. If evil always wins, then eventually there will be no good left, and then the evil will have to feed upon the evil, and that in itself is cosmic justice.
I think I am good judge of people and not easy to deceive. In those rare cases where I have been deceived, it has been someone I respected that did the deceiving. I had rendered myself vulnerable by suspending my good judgement. When the deception results in an injury to me, I castigate myself for being gullible. No one likes to feel like a fool.
I am really too hard on myself. Being deceived is not so bad. Nor is it uncommon. Everyone is deceived to an extent. People deceive themselves on a daily basis. Once betrayed, the advantage to me is that the betrayer is exposed. I can be betrayed once, but not often twice. I remember and will handle the betrayer in a different manner than I would someone I admire. My impression of a person decays rapidly after I know that they have been very dishonest with me.
Is trusting and loving worthwhile or not? To never trust or love certainly renders one highly resistant to deception. This seems to be the tact that some souls take. I suppose they are tired of encountering the tedious liars in our world, and so they withdraw into themselves, so as not to risk further injury.
Perhaps love is worth the risk of being deceived and betrayed. The reward for trusting and loving can be found through another who is also capable of the same trait. Backstabbing liars must contend with their own kind after being exposed as such, and there is no honor among thieves. Still, there may not be any cosmic justice in the universe. I'm not really sure on that point. It seems to me that evil-doers get away with their evil, if they are persistent and determined. There are also advantages to good, some obvious and some subtle, and sometimes--don't be surprised--good wins. I feel I have no choice but to be good. I find the mere thought of evil distressing and depressing. Perhaps some people have the stomach for it, but I don't. If evil always wins, then eventually there will be no good left, and then the evil will have to feed upon the evil, and that in itself is cosmic justice.
Saturday, May 10, 2014
Penetration
Meditation means different things to different people. To me it means sitting and thinking, occasionally with the assistance of mystical herbs. It is also possible to not think and just do. One is more productive that way, but what is the end result of this productivity? It is possible to be very productive and also wrong. Animals just do.
Richard Dawkins is widely misunderstood. I cannot even begin a discussion about Dawkins with some people, because they have already made up their mind. They have gathered enough falsehoods and exaggerations to inflame their passions against the man. They believe he espouses selfishness and capitalism. They will not listen. Those who do not listen cannot hope to understand. I do not bother discussing things with those who will not listen. They have ceased to possess a thinking mind. They are tools of another's thought.
I agree with Richard Dawkins in believing humans have a golden opportunity, because of our brains, to do other than what our selfish genes want. As Sarah Connor said in "Terminator 2," "There is no fate but what we make." No fate means liberation. Dawkins preaches a message of hope.
We can reflect upon things and try--but not necessarily succeed--to learn what is real and what is false. Everyone has opinions about things, but how often is it that one questions these assumptions? Perhaps a rule of thumb is true up to a certain point, but then the truth unravels upon further examination. Then the assumption must be cut back, reduced to reflect a deeper understanding. Thinking is the way and the light. Doing is of uncertain value without thinking.
What is true? What is untrue? These are difficult questions.
Where is safety? Where is danger? What are the threats, obvious and hidden? Some people never think about these things. From watching "I, Claudius," it is clear that Augustus was not a reflective man. He did not note the threats in his own palace until the threats bore fruit, and at the end for him, they bore literal fruit in the form of poisoned figs. Rome suffered as a consequence. Perhaps Rome was composed of fools. Romans, of course, were always doing, weren't they? Marching this way and that, shedding blood, teaching their neighbors to fear and hate and thirst for vengeance. How much thinking did they do? Rome imported its ideas from other places--Christianity, Hellenistic culture. Eventually, Rome collapsed due to bad ideas. That's the trouble with doing all the time and never bothering to sit down and think.
Richard Dawkins is widely misunderstood. I cannot even begin a discussion about Dawkins with some people, because they have already made up their mind. They have gathered enough falsehoods and exaggerations to inflame their passions against the man. They believe he espouses selfishness and capitalism. They will not listen. Those who do not listen cannot hope to understand. I do not bother discussing things with those who will not listen. They have ceased to possess a thinking mind. They are tools of another's thought.
I agree with Richard Dawkins in believing humans have a golden opportunity, because of our brains, to do other than what our selfish genes want. As Sarah Connor said in "Terminator 2," "There is no fate but what we make." No fate means liberation. Dawkins preaches a message of hope.
We can reflect upon things and try--but not necessarily succeed--to learn what is real and what is false. Everyone has opinions about things, but how often is it that one questions these assumptions? Perhaps a rule of thumb is true up to a certain point, but then the truth unravels upon further examination. Then the assumption must be cut back, reduced to reflect a deeper understanding. Thinking is the way and the light. Doing is of uncertain value without thinking.
What is true? What is untrue? These are difficult questions.
Where is safety? Where is danger? What are the threats, obvious and hidden? Some people never think about these things. From watching "I, Claudius," it is clear that Augustus was not a reflective man. He did not note the threats in his own palace until the threats bore fruit, and at the end for him, they bore literal fruit in the form of poisoned figs. Rome suffered as a consequence. Perhaps Rome was composed of fools. Romans, of course, were always doing, weren't they? Marching this way and that, shedding blood, teaching their neighbors to fear and hate and thirst for vengeance. How much thinking did they do? Rome imported its ideas from other places--Christianity, Hellenistic culture. Eventually, Rome collapsed due to bad ideas. That's the trouble with doing all the time and never bothering to sit down and think.
Avoidance
Negative people try to drag one down into the mud for a wallow. Usually, I find I have a choice. I look down, and there they are, my two feet. All I have to do is put one foot in front of the other and just walk away. Sometimes life really is that simple.
Monday, May 5, 2014
I Carried a Pocket Knife
A no-brainer news article points out that victims of bullies are more likely to carry weapons to school. Duh. When a person finds that their safety and well-being are at risk, that person will do whatever it takes to protect themselves. The principal is one of self-preservation.
Long ago, when I suffered from bullying, and the P.E. teacher made clear he would do nothing about it--other than punish me for complaining--I started carrying a pocket knife to school. But the little knife was not enough. I fantasized about carrying my gun and using it against the bully and the P.E. teacher. They deserved punishment for their actions, but on the other hand, I deserved only the best in life, and so I spared them. The same principal of self-preservation that led me to carry a pocket knife led me not to use it.
The desire for vengeance must be balanced with the potential cost. Sometimes, however, people are driven to such extremes that they no longer care about the cost. I fear some of the young killers of today lack the intellectual assets to calculate the costs. They are throwing away the best part of their lives and in some cases killing innocents, which is ugly and senseless and without any sense of honor at all. To harm innocents is to become a bully, to be just like the ones you hate.
The young killer's awareness about the world and about society is so impaired that he cannot predict the outcome of his deeds. I found it helpful to role-play with cold clarity and precision. This is the way to avoid grave errors that cannot be remedied. Role-play. The human animal has developed fantastic powers of imagination, because it is useful to predict the outcomes of actions. One can imagine the different futures arising from different strategies.
Many times, I imagined killing my enemy, the brutal and arrogant bully, using a variety of means. I imagined killing the cruel and heartless P.E. teacher. I imagined killing them both on the same day. I calculated the probabilities of success and the possibilities that something unexpected might happen. I imagined what would happen in the next minute, the next hour, the next day, and the years to come. I did not like what I saw. I also did not like the idea of violence. Vengeance is one thing, but violence is another. Violence is disturbing to me whether I am being hurt or hurting. It goes against everything ingrained in my personality and upbringing. The idea of committing a real crime and receiving the disapproval of others seemed worse to me than the idea of enduring further abuse.
Our society is pacifist. The only accepted outlet for violence is war, and wars happen overseas, far away. Most people are like me. We are taught to abstain from violence. There are consequences for people who engage in illegal acts of violence. There is no legal concept that permits premeditated vengeance.
In Viking society, the outcome would have been different. Vikings did not leave much in the hands of karma. Vikings were about vengeance. Vikings were about blood. There is something satisfying about that, something genuine, something that appeals to our animal nature. That does not make it right, but it does explain why the History Channel's "Vikings" is such an entertaining show. It seems to me the show is all about vengeance.
I do think it is important to eliminate bullying in schools, because violence is like a virus. Violence has a way of spreading, and not everyone calls upon their power of imagination to abstain from vengeance. Nor is everyone scrupulous in limiting collateral damage.
Long ago, when I suffered from bullying, and the P.E. teacher made clear he would do nothing about it--other than punish me for complaining--I started carrying a pocket knife to school. But the little knife was not enough. I fantasized about carrying my gun and using it against the bully and the P.E. teacher. They deserved punishment for their actions, but on the other hand, I deserved only the best in life, and so I spared them. The same principal of self-preservation that led me to carry a pocket knife led me not to use it.
The desire for vengeance must be balanced with the potential cost. Sometimes, however, people are driven to such extremes that they no longer care about the cost. I fear some of the young killers of today lack the intellectual assets to calculate the costs. They are throwing away the best part of their lives and in some cases killing innocents, which is ugly and senseless and without any sense of honor at all. To harm innocents is to become a bully, to be just like the ones you hate.
The young killer's awareness about the world and about society is so impaired that he cannot predict the outcome of his deeds. I found it helpful to role-play with cold clarity and precision. This is the way to avoid grave errors that cannot be remedied. Role-play. The human animal has developed fantastic powers of imagination, because it is useful to predict the outcomes of actions. One can imagine the different futures arising from different strategies.
Many times, I imagined killing my enemy, the brutal and arrogant bully, using a variety of means. I imagined killing the cruel and heartless P.E. teacher. I imagined killing them both on the same day. I calculated the probabilities of success and the possibilities that something unexpected might happen. I imagined what would happen in the next minute, the next hour, the next day, and the years to come. I did not like what I saw. I also did not like the idea of violence. Vengeance is one thing, but violence is another. Violence is disturbing to me whether I am being hurt or hurting. It goes against everything ingrained in my personality and upbringing. The idea of committing a real crime and receiving the disapproval of others seemed worse to me than the idea of enduring further abuse.
Our society is pacifist. The only accepted outlet for violence is war, and wars happen overseas, far away. Most people are like me. We are taught to abstain from violence. There are consequences for people who engage in illegal acts of violence. There is no legal concept that permits premeditated vengeance.
In Viking society, the outcome would have been different. Vikings did not leave much in the hands of karma. Vikings were about vengeance. Vikings were about blood. There is something satisfying about that, something genuine, something that appeals to our animal nature. That does not make it right, but it does explain why the History Channel's "Vikings" is such an entertaining show. It seems to me the show is all about vengeance.
I do think it is important to eliminate bullying in schools, because violence is like a virus. Violence has a way of spreading, and not everyone calls upon their power of imagination to abstain from vengeance. Nor is everyone scrupulous in limiting collateral damage.
Tuesday, April 29, 2014
Speak Softly
For me, anger is an artifact of youth. I was a spirit of fire. As well as being enthusiastic and zealous in love and friendship, I was quick to wrath and slow to cool. In fire, I saw kinship. I am not sure, but I think this was because I encountered so many other spirits of fire in school, in my neighborhood and in my own family. Of course my thirsty young mind drank deeply of their knowledge, ideas and opinions, absorbing their poisons like a plant growing in polluted water, and so I practiced what I learned.
One of the lessons I've learned with advanced age and from the influence of my good friends is to speak softly. Anger still occurs to me as a potential method of handling grievances and disputes, but I feel it is counter-productive, not necessarily to those I'm angry at, but to myself. My heart hates anger and loves to love. I like to love and hate to hate. I don't like getting angry and don't feel that there is much in the world worth getting angry about. Perhaps it is worth getting angry about something that threatens the well-being of a loved one, but such occasions are few. Most disputes I like to handle with a soft touch nowadays. I think of this as getting in touch with the deeper self, the true self, my full potential.
I find that understanding and empathy, which I am lucky to be endowed with, score points with people and gain me more in friends and allies than would anger. I have powers of negotiation that continue to astonish me in their achieved results. Speaking softly with kindness and understanding in one's eyes can influence others and can even change hearts and minds. Anger, by comparison, is a crude instrument, useful only for a limited set of circumstances.
Now the men I knew back in the day scorned empathy and understanding and thought such things were feminine and weak. They thought anger was being a man and could not divorce the idea of manliness from violence, vengeance and wrath. A man must avenge every slight to protect his honor. What a weak notion this honor is, then, if it is so fragile. I think now that those men were weak, because they were not willing to try alternative, effective strategies at getting what they want. They were close-minded, petty, and stupid like animals. Anger got them trouble, that is what anger got them. Some slights are not slights, others can be ignored, and still others can be handled with subtlety, in an indirect fashion.
So now I am no more a spirit of fire but one of air, and I aim to be as light as air.
One of the lessons I've learned with advanced age and from the influence of my good friends is to speak softly. Anger still occurs to me as a potential method of handling grievances and disputes, but I feel it is counter-productive, not necessarily to those I'm angry at, but to myself. My heart hates anger and loves to love. I like to love and hate to hate. I don't like getting angry and don't feel that there is much in the world worth getting angry about. Perhaps it is worth getting angry about something that threatens the well-being of a loved one, but such occasions are few. Most disputes I like to handle with a soft touch nowadays. I think of this as getting in touch with the deeper self, the true self, my full potential.
I find that understanding and empathy, which I am lucky to be endowed with, score points with people and gain me more in friends and allies than would anger. I have powers of negotiation that continue to astonish me in their achieved results. Speaking softly with kindness and understanding in one's eyes can influence others and can even change hearts and minds. Anger, by comparison, is a crude instrument, useful only for a limited set of circumstances.
Now the men I knew back in the day scorned empathy and understanding and thought such things were feminine and weak. They thought anger was being a man and could not divorce the idea of manliness from violence, vengeance and wrath. A man must avenge every slight to protect his honor. What a weak notion this honor is, then, if it is so fragile. I think now that those men were weak, because they were not willing to try alternative, effective strategies at getting what they want. They were close-minded, petty, and stupid like animals. Anger got them trouble, that is what anger got them. Some slights are not slights, others can be ignored, and still others can be handled with subtlety, in an indirect fashion.
So now I am no more a spirit of fire but one of air, and I aim to be as light as air.
Monday, April 7, 2014
Listen to Other People
One of my saving graces is I listen to other people. I've always been that way, interested in the opinions and ideas of others. If someone else has a bright idea, never do I find that threatening or annoying. Instead, I'm pleased. I like nothing better than to take other people's ideas and run with them. And before the Ayn Rand crowd points the finger and calls me a "second-hander," I'd like to point out everybody's a second-hander that uses a computer, car, or phone, period, case closed. If you get around with only the things you came up with yourself, then you must be a wild man out in the woods. More power to you, but I doubt you're going to set the world on fire anytime soon.
I never did warm to Ayn Rand's arrogance in declaring that a tiny minority of people are fountainheads to be exalted and revered and everybody else is disposable garbage. People are fountainheads to varying extents, but probably no one is original more than 1% of the time. The vast majority of ideas are pilfered, and anyone who doesn't accept that is not living in the real world. Even the great minds like Edison stole ideas from gents like Tesla, from what I understand reading The Oatmeal. Give genius its due, but don't go overboard. Everybody deserves a place at the table, decent working conditions, good times, and good health. Such a policy preserves the peace.
I never did warm to Ayn Rand's arrogance in declaring that a tiny minority of people are fountainheads to be exalted and revered and everybody else is disposable garbage. People are fountainheads to varying extents, but probably no one is original more than 1% of the time. The vast majority of ideas are pilfered, and anyone who doesn't accept that is not living in the real world. Even the great minds like Edison stole ideas from gents like Tesla, from what I understand reading The Oatmeal. Give genius its due, but don't go overboard. Everybody deserves a place at the table, decent working conditions, good times, and good health. Such a policy preserves the peace.
Wednesday, April 2, 2014
Chocolate Vs. Marijuana
Which is better, chocolate or marijuana? This is a difficult question, because both are good in their own way and for their own purposes. The only way to choose between the two is to envision being stranded on a desert island with only one or the other.
Overall, I would have to go with chocolate. I have noticed that very dark chocolate (cocao content > 80%) acts as an effective antidepressant and overall stimulant. I feel better and think better under the influence of chocolate. Chocolate does not detract from intellectual agility in the way that marijuana does. It is legal and comparatively much cheaper. The lower caloric cost of marijuana is counterbalanced by the munchies. Marijuana actually results in increased caloric consumption, so that the effect on diet is probably much worse than that resulting from chocolate's high amount of saturated fat.
My hobbies, such as chess, reading, and working on web sites, aren't exactly rocket science, but they do require a certain amount of intellectual agility, and because of that, chocolate is more compatible with me. Marijuana dumbs me down and requires a lot of adjustments and is better for those rare occasions when I have nothing to do, as when I am in a waiting mode, waiting for something to begin.
I think weed is useful for medicinal purposes in order to decay the memory of unpleasant experiences. It is also effective at addressing anxiety and boredom. I think it can open up non-spiritual people to spiritual experiences. Without marijuana, it is almost impossible for me to really understand religious phenomena. I am very grounded in the material world. Under the influence of marijuana, I leave this world and its concerns, drift up into the atmosphere and can look at the "big picture," so to speak.
I am very happy I quit drinking almost completely. I will drink at a party once in a while, maybe once every three months, just to prove my immunity to the temptation. Such occasional drinking does not result in any relapse. I don't feel tempted the next day to get more. Instead, I feel reinforced in my conviction not to drink for the most part.
Since I gave up drinking, I find that I am less compatible with drinkers and vice versa. Drinkers aren't much for thinking. They aren't much for ideas. Drinkers only want to hang out with other drinkers, so I find that my not-drinking results in fewer social invitations. Besides, it's not fun being the sober one around a bunch of sloppy drunks. There are many people whose idea of fun begins and ends with a bottle of liquor, wine or beer. I won't say I'm immune to the attraction, but as I got older I found that alcohol did not agree with my body or mind and had too many negative consequences. I do not like myself when I am under the influence of alcohol. I'm not a "happy drunk." Rather, I perceive that evil gets a foothold into my world when I drink. When I see a bottle now, I just see potential problems rather than a bottle of fun like some of my friends. I see alcohol as a means by which evil enters this world. Fuel for demons.
It is very interesting to me to observe that many, although not all drinkers tend to dislike marijuana. I think they do not like it because it is variable and somewhat unpredictable. Alcohol on the other hand is Old Reliable. They know exactly what they are getting into when they drink.
Marijuana is an ancient sacrament and a precursor to spiritual awakening. I think that it has been an overall positive influence in my own life. One of its features that outshine all other substances is that it is non-addictive. One can quit just so, overnight. It is not in any way difficult. When the need for sobriety arises, then one puts it aside. Sometimes the Goddess appears at the gateway and instructs the user to go back to the world. This is what unpleasant experiences are about. They are a warning to return. There are times when the marijuana can be useful, and times when one has had enough.
Among marijuana users that I know, for many of them, weed is just another item on the recreational menu along with alcohol, unfortunately. I do not know why that is, but I would like it to change. I wish that more people awakened to the knowledge that marijuana is better than alcohol by any measure at all. I wish that more people knew that alcohol is very harmful. Unfortunately, there are many social pressures against marijuana, whereas alcohol is accepted by law enforcement, employers, and society at large. All of the pressure from the law and from society is focused upon the less harmful substance. This is due to a lack of understanding.
Overall, I would have to go with chocolate. I have noticed that very dark chocolate (cocao content > 80%) acts as an effective antidepressant and overall stimulant. I feel better and think better under the influence of chocolate. Chocolate does not detract from intellectual agility in the way that marijuana does. It is legal and comparatively much cheaper. The lower caloric cost of marijuana is counterbalanced by the munchies. Marijuana actually results in increased caloric consumption, so that the effect on diet is probably much worse than that resulting from chocolate's high amount of saturated fat.
My hobbies, such as chess, reading, and working on web sites, aren't exactly rocket science, but they do require a certain amount of intellectual agility, and because of that, chocolate is more compatible with me. Marijuana dumbs me down and requires a lot of adjustments and is better for those rare occasions when I have nothing to do, as when I am in a waiting mode, waiting for something to begin.
I think weed is useful for medicinal purposes in order to decay the memory of unpleasant experiences. It is also effective at addressing anxiety and boredom. I think it can open up non-spiritual people to spiritual experiences. Without marijuana, it is almost impossible for me to really understand religious phenomena. I am very grounded in the material world. Under the influence of marijuana, I leave this world and its concerns, drift up into the atmosphere and can look at the "big picture," so to speak.
I am very happy I quit drinking almost completely. I will drink at a party once in a while, maybe once every three months, just to prove my immunity to the temptation. Such occasional drinking does not result in any relapse. I don't feel tempted the next day to get more. Instead, I feel reinforced in my conviction not to drink for the most part.
Since I gave up drinking, I find that I am less compatible with drinkers and vice versa. Drinkers aren't much for thinking. They aren't much for ideas. Drinkers only want to hang out with other drinkers, so I find that my not-drinking results in fewer social invitations. Besides, it's not fun being the sober one around a bunch of sloppy drunks. There are many people whose idea of fun begins and ends with a bottle of liquor, wine or beer. I won't say I'm immune to the attraction, but as I got older I found that alcohol did not agree with my body or mind and had too many negative consequences. I do not like myself when I am under the influence of alcohol. I'm not a "happy drunk." Rather, I perceive that evil gets a foothold into my world when I drink. When I see a bottle now, I just see potential problems rather than a bottle of fun like some of my friends. I see alcohol as a means by which evil enters this world. Fuel for demons.
It is very interesting to me to observe that many, although not all drinkers tend to dislike marijuana. I think they do not like it because it is variable and somewhat unpredictable. Alcohol on the other hand is Old Reliable. They know exactly what they are getting into when they drink.
Marijuana is an ancient sacrament and a precursor to spiritual awakening. I think that it has been an overall positive influence in my own life. One of its features that outshine all other substances is that it is non-addictive. One can quit just so, overnight. It is not in any way difficult. When the need for sobriety arises, then one puts it aside. Sometimes the Goddess appears at the gateway and instructs the user to go back to the world. This is what unpleasant experiences are about. They are a warning to return. There are times when the marijuana can be useful, and times when one has had enough.
Among marijuana users that I know, for many of them, weed is just another item on the recreational menu along with alcohol, unfortunately. I do not know why that is, but I would like it to change. I wish that more people awakened to the knowledge that marijuana is better than alcohol by any measure at all. I wish that more people knew that alcohol is very harmful. Unfortunately, there are many social pressures against marijuana, whereas alcohol is accepted by law enforcement, employers, and society at large. All of the pressure from the law and from society is focused upon the less harmful substance. This is due to a lack of understanding.
Tuesday, March 25, 2014
Does So-and-So Like Me?
There's no fool like an old fool. Old people like to imagine that young people have the hots for them. They can't see themselves unless they look in the mirror, and when they look in the mirror, they put a spin on what they see. Perhaps they see themselves as they were twenty or thirty years ago.
As a general rule of thumb, I think that young people are attracted to young people, and old people are attracted to young people, and the main exception to this would be where an old person has enough money to make it worth one's while to feign blindness to physical appearance.
Recently, an older friend of mine has fallen in love with a fellow in his twenties. His heart is twisted in knots and his self-inflicted torture is painful to watch, in part because I've been there myself.
If one has to wonder whether another person is attracted to them, the correct answer is probably No. Certainly the safest answer is No.
One of the supreme humiliations is to woo and be rejected out of hand. It is painful to endure a powerful, all-consuming infatuation, as I indeed have, only to discover that all of one's feelings and all of one's plans are regarded by another as being without any value whatsoever. The offer of love, the offer of support, one's hand in marriage and one's whole life may be rejected simply by hanging up a phone or with a terse email as cold as ice.
I am not a great judge of other people's feelings. I'm not that bad, but rate my skills at people-reading as merely average at best. I no longer trust my intuition about whether people are attracted to me. I am very suspicious of wishful thinking and the failure to detect deception.
Sometimes, when I was much younger and more attractive, of course, people feigned attraction to me for their own ends. A lesbian struggling with her orientation, pretending to be bisexual, was one example. I was useful to let her think she was being "good" as judged by the values of her Catholic parents, and useful besides as an attractive mate to flaunt around her girlfriends and make them jealous. I remember her friends, because she introduced me to so many of them, just brief meetings to ensure they got their eyes on me and would tell everyone they knew about her and me together.
People often feign attraction or interest because they enjoy the flattery of another person. They feel better about themselves for being loved by another, even if the love represents something that they could never reciprocate.
A lesbian is a lesbian in part because of sex, but mostly because they prefer to love a woman and not a man. There is the physical factor, but the emotional factor is more important. As for me, friendships with women have never endured for any period of time. I have never experienced a close friendship with a woman that lasted more than a month. Other than my mother and grandmother, there has never been a woman I would feel comfortable calling on the phone just to chat. I do not know why this is, but I think it is a strong indicator that a gay relationship is what's right for me. With women, everything just seems wrong. I have more difficulty reading women than I do reading men. By contrast, men are easy, whether straight or gay. I can predict what they are thinking with much greater accuracy. Perhaps that is why I prefer the company of men.
My father has a problem with reading people that has only grown more severe with age. He deludes himself into thinking that various women are secretly attracted to him. His imagination engages, and he composes elaborate theories that have no basis in reality. The consequences are humiliating and sometimes dangerous.
For my part, I intend to avoid such foolishness, but if an age arrives at which my mind is no longer capable of resisting the siren call of delusion, then I hope I will have enough wit and resolve to end my life with some semblance of order and decorum and salvage some dignity. One of the great tragedies of our civilization is that old people are expected to simply go on, long after their wits have left them, on and on until such time as natural death occurs. Death is not compassionate. Nor is Death prompt. Rather, Death toys with his victims like a cat, letting them suffer and inflict misery and confusion upon their loved ones and their communities.
As a general rule of thumb, I think that young people are attracted to young people, and old people are attracted to young people, and the main exception to this would be where an old person has enough money to make it worth one's while to feign blindness to physical appearance.
Recently, an older friend of mine has fallen in love with a fellow in his twenties. His heart is twisted in knots and his self-inflicted torture is painful to watch, in part because I've been there myself.
If one has to wonder whether another person is attracted to them, the correct answer is probably No. Certainly the safest answer is No.
One of the supreme humiliations is to woo and be rejected out of hand. It is painful to endure a powerful, all-consuming infatuation, as I indeed have, only to discover that all of one's feelings and all of one's plans are regarded by another as being without any value whatsoever. The offer of love, the offer of support, one's hand in marriage and one's whole life may be rejected simply by hanging up a phone or with a terse email as cold as ice.
I am not a great judge of other people's feelings. I'm not that bad, but rate my skills at people-reading as merely average at best. I no longer trust my intuition about whether people are attracted to me. I am very suspicious of wishful thinking and the failure to detect deception.
Sometimes, when I was much younger and more attractive, of course, people feigned attraction to me for their own ends. A lesbian struggling with her orientation, pretending to be bisexual, was one example. I was useful to let her think she was being "good" as judged by the values of her Catholic parents, and useful besides as an attractive mate to flaunt around her girlfriends and make them jealous. I remember her friends, because she introduced me to so many of them, just brief meetings to ensure they got their eyes on me and would tell everyone they knew about her and me together.
People often feign attraction or interest because they enjoy the flattery of another person. They feel better about themselves for being loved by another, even if the love represents something that they could never reciprocate.
A lesbian is a lesbian in part because of sex, but mostly because they prefer to love a woman and not a man. There is the physical factor, but the emotional factor is more important. As for me, friendships with women have never endured for any period of time. I have never experienced a close friendship with a woman that lasted more than a month. Other than my mother and grandmother, there has never been a woman I would feel comfortable calling on the phone just to chat. I do not know why this is, but I think it is a strong indicator that a gay relationship is what's right for me. With women, everything just seems wrong. I have more difficulty reading women than I do reading men. By contrast, men are easy, whether straight or gay. I can predict what they are thinking with much greater accuracy. Perhaps that is why I prefer the company of men.
My father has a problem with reading people that has only grown more severe with age. He deludes himself into thinking that various women are secretly attracted to him. His imagination engages, and he composes elaborate theories that have no basis in reality. The consequences are humiliating and sometimes dangerous.
For my part, I intend to avoid such foolishness, but if an age arrives at which my mind is no longer capable of resisting the siren call of delusion, then I hope I will have enough wit and resolve to end my life with some semblance of order and decorum and salvage some dignity. One of the great tragedies of our civilization is that old people are expected to simply go on, long after their wits have left them, on and on until such time as natural death occurs. Death is not compassionate. Nor is Death prompt. Rather, Death toys with his victims like a cat, letting them suffer and inflict misery and confusion upon their loved ones and their communities.
Wednesday, March 19, 2014
When Foul Seems Fair, Beware
When evil-doers employ words and forms that match their souls, be thankful. It is a small mercy. They have not guile. They are weak.
When foul seems fair, like Sauron in exile among elves and men, assuming the guise of virtue, then there is danger, for that is a crafty foe.
When foul seems fair, like Sauron in exile among elves and men, assuming the guise of virtue, then there is danger, for that is a crafty foe.
Wednesday, March 12, 2014
Anger
Of the two chief negative emotions, anger and sadness, anger presents the most risk to heart health because of its intensity. Sadness is something that can fade after a nap, or if not, then it may be amenable to medication, such as chocolate. Anger tends to come on quickly and cause the release of adrenal hormones, with the elevation of heart rate and blood pressure.
Upon reflection, I do not think there are many things worth getting angry over. However, the fast pace of modern life, with its endless complexity and injustices great and small, leaves many people vulnerable to anger. Those who are angry tend to infect others with the same emotion, perpetuating a cycle of anger throughout society.
Society is divided into tribes that bicker and find fault with one another. Male vs. female is common, followed by old vs. young, straight vs. gay, white vs. black, religious vs. secular, or conservative vs. liberal. One must continually lower expectations, because beings that present a rational and high-minded front to the world may prove to be tribal animals, quick to judge others for the slightest pretence.
I recognize my own propensity to anger as being similar to that of my father's. I call this beast "Sgt. Silly," imagining a red-faced drill sergeant yelling at fresh recruits for some petty, insignificant infraction.
On the whole, anger has seldom been really useful, but more often been harmful. The harm is not always defined by actions or words but rather the insidious effects on internal organs, such as the heart, because anger acts like a potent toxin. Recovery from anger is slow, and the effects appear to be long-lasting.
Anger is best indulged by the rich and powerful, who can effect real change in the world when motivated by anger. I think that happens from time to time. Certainly those who donate millions of dollars to various causes, political or social or charitable, are not always motivated by mere greed. Sometimes they are angry, or concerned, or enthusiastic. Whatever their emotional motivation, they wish to change the world.
For the poor, anger is typically only harmful to the bearer, because with few exceptions, the poor can do little or nothing to change the world in a useful, meaningful way.
One of the reasons that I have used marijuana from time to time is to find liberation from anger and anxiety. Marijuana seems effective to that end. I am not sure it is possible to be angry while high. Marijuana bestows forgetfulness, a blessed decaying of the memories of past injustices, of which every life must have a record. Yet marijuana dulls the intellect, and for that reason, for the time being, I follow the path of abstinence, because I need all my wits about me, every iota of intelligence. I look forward to a time in the future when I can sit down again beside the old tree and watch the stars.
Upon reflection, I do not think there are many things worth getting angry over. However, the fast pace of modern life, with its endless complexity and injustices great and small, leaves many people vulnerable to anger. Those who are angry tend to infect others with the same emotion, perpetuating a cycle of anger throughout society.
Society is divided into tribes that bicker and find fault with one another. Male vs. female is common, followed by old vs. young, straight vs. gay, white vs. black, religious vs. secular, or conservative vs. liberal. One must continually lower expectations, because beings that present a rational and high-minded front to the world may prove to be tribal animals, quick to judge others for the slightest pretence.
I recognize my own propensity to anger as being similar to that of my father's. I call this beast "Sgt. Silly," imagining a red-faced drill sergeant yelling at fresh recruits for some petty, insignificant infraction.
On the whole, anger has seldom been really useful, but more often been harmful. The harm is not always defined by actions or words but rather the insidious effects on internal organs, such as the heart, because anger acts like a potent toxin. Recovery from anger is slow, and the effects appear to be long-lasting.
Anger is best indulged by the rich and powerful, who can effect real change in the world when motivated by anger. I think that happens from time to time. Certainly those who donate millions of dollars to various causes, political or social or charitable, are not always motivated by mere greed. Sometimes they are angry, or concerned, or enthusiastic. Whatever their emotional motivation, they wish to change the world.
For the poor, anger is typically only harmful to the bearer, because with few exceptions, the poor can do little or nothing to change the world in a useful, meaningful way.
One of the reasons that I have used marijuana from time to time is to find liberation from anger and anxiety. Marijuana seems effective to that end. I am not sure it is possible to be angry while high. Marijuana bestows forgetfulness, a blessed decaying of the memories of past injustices, of which every life must have a record. Yet marijuana dulls the intellect, and for that reason, for the time being, I follow the path of abstinence, because I need all my wits about me, every iota of intelligence. I look forward to a time in the future when I can sit down again beside the old tree and watch the stars.
Monday, February 17, 2014
God's Indifference
Some believe in religion. Who can say where the truth lies or whether the priest lies? If there are gods, I think that they are indifferent to our fate. Our suffering moves them not at all. In a human being, such cold-blooded ambivalence is deemed evil. God is given a pass, but what is God?
Riddle me this. Precisely to what do you pray and why? I have spoken with many believers, but never received a satisfactory answer to that question.
In the Bible, HE remains anonymous with no history and no background. HE displays neither visible form nor audible voice. HE could be anything at all--devil, charlatan, fiction, alien, or arch-villain, take your pick. Perhaps this is a strategic rather than accidental omission. HE adapts to his audience, shape-changing to appear just a little bit different to every believer. HE is the playdough of philosophy, adapting like a virus to the requirements of his individual hosts. This is why there are so many different sects and even within the sects, individuals believe different things. There is no agreement among believers.
I do not think any religions have got God right. They do not even know what they worship. They are placing all of their money on the table to buy a mystery gift box without knowing what is inside the box. I think it would be better to know what is inside the box first.
---
Common ground among believers and non-believers can be found on practical issues, such as morality. I do not think religion is necessary for morality, and it may even get in the way by inserting an unnecessary and fragile support structure.
---
I see many references in classified advertisements to so-and-so being a Christian, implying that therefore they will be honest and not cheat others, but I think that such a statement reveals spiritual immaturity and spiritual arrogance. There are countless cases of professed Christians doing evil. I think it is more likely a professed atheist would be honest and not cheat others, because more honesty is required to admit to a minority belief. I avoid those who insert a statement about their religion while advertising a product or service, because I think that they may have something to hide. They are playing upon the prejudices of gullible believers and seeking out those who are easy to cheat.
---
The most foolish among the non-believers, especially those who have recently lost their religion, assume that, since there may be no divine punishment or reward for behavior, they should do whatever they please. Perhaps the choice for good or evil is a matter of taste, but if so, evil is in poor taste and more likely to obtain poor results in the long run. There are examples in history of both believers and non-believers doing evil and doing good. I am not sure what the correlation is between belief system and moral behavior and probably no one really knows.
---
The greatest tragedy of modern religion is the low calibre of modern priests. The exodus of the intelligent over the centuries has forced churches to subsist with dim lights indeed. Of course the churches must change fundamentally not only their opinions upon social issues but their very doctrine in order to attract the intelligent in large numbers. Some perceive that, but many resist change, because change is a disturbing thing for many people who do not wish to think about the ramifications. Unfortunately, the world that we live in is extremely complicated, and there is a natural human desire for simplicity. I love to watch movies about magic, gods and goddesses. Such things appeal to me a great deal. I do think the world could be a better, more interesting place with gods and magic, although there is a possibility it could be worse.
I believe that the church must retreat to a proper sphere, that of morality alone, and leave questions of history, science and theology alone. Perhaps the Unitarians are closest to this ideal at present. Of course it is tempting to venture into other fields, writing opinions about things such as God and angels and passing them off as facts, but doing so places credibility at risk. Better it is to say, I am human, and I do not know of such matters, nor can I know. In regard to those religions that claim to know what they cannot, I am atheist. I do like to think about a goddess watching over me, because that would be nice, having a protector and all, but I doubt she would really bother. Surely she would have better things to do with her time, being a goddess. At any rate, lately I've noticed that when I am in need, she hits the snooze button and can't be reached on the telephone.
I do not think that many churches have mastered the basics of morality, because they are so tied up in knots over relatively simple questions of human sexuality. If they cannot understand issues having to do with mere genitalia, then it is difficult to see how they will ever cope with weightier issues, and indeed the church was missing in action over all the big issues of the twentieth century. Where were the priests when the Holocaust happened? They were busy chastising their flock about such matters as divorce, contraception and homosexuality, no doubt.
Riddle me this. Precisely to what do you pray and why? I have spoken with many believers, but never received a satisfactory answer to that question.
In the Bible, HE remains anonymous with no history and no background. HE displays neither visible form nor audible voice. HE could be anything at all--devil, charlatan, fiction, alien, or arch-villain, take your pick. Perhaps this is a strategic rather than accidental omission. HE adapts to his audience, shape-changing to appear just a little bit different to every believer. HE is the playdough of philosophy, adapting like a virus to the requirements of his individual hosts. This is why there are so many different sects and even within the sects, individuals believe different things. There is no agreement among believers.
I do not think any religions have got God right. They do not even know what they worship. They are placing all of their money on the table to buy a mystery gift box without knowing what is inside the box. I think it would be better to know what is inside the box first.
---
Common ground among believers and non-believers can be found on practical issues, such as morality. I do not think religion is necessary for morality, and it may even get in the way by inserting an unnecessary and fragile support structure.
---
I see many references in classified advertisements to so-and-so being a Christian, implying that therefore they will be honest and not cheat others, but I think that such a statement reveals spiritual immaturity and spiritual arrogance. There are countless cases of professed Christians doing evil. I think it is more likely a professed atheist would be honest and not cheat others, because more honesty is required to admit to a minority belief. I avoid those who insert a statement about their religion while advertising a product or service, because I think that they may have something to hide. They are playing upon the prejudices of gullible believers and seeking out those who are easy to cheat.
---
The most foolish among the non-believers, especially those who have recently lost their religion, assume that, since there may be no divine punishment or reward for behavior, they should do whatever they please. Perhaps the choice for good or evil is a matter of taste, but if so, evil is in poor taste and more likely to obtain poor results in the long run. There are examples in history of both believers and non-believers doing evil and doing good. I am not sure what the correlation is between belief system and moral behavior and probably no one really knows.
---
The greatest tragedy of modern religion is the low calibre of modern priests. The exodus of the intelligent over the centuries has forced churches to subsist with dim lights indeed. Of course the churches must change fundamentally not only their opinions upon social issues but their very doctrine in order to attract the intelligent in large numbers. Some perceive that, but many resist change, because change is a disturbing thing for many people who do not wish to think about the ramifications. Unfortunately, the world that we live in is extremely complicated, and there is a natural human desire for simplicity. I love to watch movies about magic, gods and goddesses. Such things appeal to me a great deal. I do think the world could be a better, more interesting place with gods and magic, although there is a possibility it could be worse.
I believe that the church must retreat to a proper sphere, that of morality alone, and leave questions of history, science and theology alone. Perhaps the Unitarians are closest to this ideal at present. Of course it is tempting to venture into other fields, writing opinions about things such as God and angels and passing them off as facts, but doing so places credibility at risk. Better it is to say, I am human, and I do not know of such matters, nor can I know. In regard to those religions that claim to know what they cannot, I am atheist. I do like to think about a goddess watching over me, because that would be nice, having a protector and all, but I doubt she would really bother. Surely she would have better things to do with her time, being a goddess. At any rate, lately I've noticed that when I am in need, she hits the snooze button and can't be reached on the telephone.
I do not think that many churches have mastered the basics of morality, because they are so tied up in knots over relatively simple questions of human sexuality. If they cannot understand issues having to do with mere genitalia, then it is difficult to see how they will ever cope with weightier issues, and indeed the church was missing in action over all the big issues of the twentieth century. Where were the priests when the Holocaust happened? They were busy chastising their flock about such matters as divorce, contraception and homosexuality, no doubt.
Wednesday, February 5, 2014
Snags
The world is not an even playing field. Every society has snags that ensnare the unwary or the unlucky. Some are very wary, but unlucky and get caught in a snag. The better society has fewer snags, and the worse society has more and deadlier snags.
For a human being, a snag might be a disability, quirk, minority status, or physical or psychological limitation. Humans are extremely complicated machines. Life is a roll of the dice. Some souls inhabit bodies that thrive in the environment they find themselves in. Some souls may have splendid bodies, yet exist in an unfavorable environment. Some are unlucky enough to inhabit both a poor body and environment. It is a mistake to look down upon the unsuccessful and the unlucky. They are not "bad." Placed in a different environment, such an individual may thrive. They are unlucky. Luck is fickle, however, and those that are on top today may fall from grace tomorrow, because life is ever-changing, and life soon gives way to death, so that all who are high today will be low tomorrow.
It is always a mistake to jump to conclusions. First impressions are helpful, but one should never cease listening and watching and absorbing new data as it comes to light, because first impressions are often inaccurate. The whole story is not told. First impressions provide merely the title of the book and the cover picture. How much information does that transmit? Not very much. I would not expect to know much about Jane Austen's "Pride and Prejudice" by looking at the cover. And yet some people persist in leaping to conclusions about others based upon their first impression, which they neglect to modify.
For a human being, a snag might be a disability, quirk, minority status, or physical or psychological limitation. Humans are extremely complicated machines. Life is a roll of the dice. Some souls inhabit bodies that thrive in the environment they find themselves in. Some souls may have splendid bodies, yet exist in an unfavorable environment. Some are unlucky enough to inhabit both a poor body and environment. It is a mistake to look down upon the unsuccessful and the unlucky. They are not "bad." Placed in a different environment, such an individual may thrive. They are unlucky. Luck is fickle, however, and those that are on top today may fall from grace tomorrow, because life is ever-changing, and life soon gives way to death, so that all who are high today will be low tomorrow.
It is always a mistake to jump to conclusions. First impressions are helpful, but one should never cease listening and watching and absorbing new data as it comes to light, because first impressions are often inaccurate. The whole story is not told. First impressions provide merely the title of the book and the cover picture. How much information does that transmit? Not very much. I would not expect to know much about Jane Austen's "Pride and Prejudice" by looking at the cover. And yet some people persist in leaping to conclusions about others based upon their first impression, which they neglect to modify.
Monday, January 27, 2014
Good and Evil
My local newspaper is depressing. Crime is the main thread throughout the paper. It is because there are no investigative journalists anymore. The paper takes free news from the local police department. I suppose that saves money on the salary for a real journalist.
This week, I read about men shooting one another and / or themselves either in my own town or the nation.
A fool and his money are soon parted, but a fool with a gun is soon departed.
I think there are too many guns, too many gun nuts and too many angry young men in the world who don't know why they're angry and don't know who they should be angry at.
I think it's a pity guns don't require the solving of a random quadratic equation in order to be operated. Guns and other weapons are far too simple and far too powerful. They cheapen life.
The greatest problem of our species is advanced technology coupled with low morality and a small understanding. This is why the U.S. does not want Iran to have nuclear weapons, because Iran has low morality and a small understanding. That North Korea has nuclear weapons is bad enough.
I also read a disturbing story about some unknown evil-doer living in a nice, middle-class suburb who is poisoning his neighbor's beloved cats and dogs. I would imagine the poisoner is either a young man, because young men often do evil in their ignorance, or else an angry older man that is enraged because cats and dogs stray onto his property or he hears dogs barking and wants silence.
I would like to be a policeman just to investigate such a crime and identify and arrest the culprit. I think I would be good at that. Unfortunately, policemen often spend their time on trivial matters. Crimes against animals are not perceived in their proper light as practice for crimes against humans. The perpetrator is evil and has chosen an easy target for his very first practice-murders, because house pets are ignorant of the evil of humans, yet I believe that an investigator could find him by studying the residents of the neighborhood and talking to the people who live nearby.
The case reminds me of a knock on the door I received years ago. I opened the door to find a scowling elderly neighbor holding a dead cat in his arms. He told me that he had found my cat in his yard. He told me I shouldn't have let my cat wander onto his yard. "Look, see? Now it's dead." I replied that it was not my cat. He insisted that it was, but he was a deranged old man. I reiterated what I had said before, but his stubbornness persisted until finally I ordered him to leave my property and take the carcass with him. He was used to orders, being ex-military, and I think that was just what he needed. It was the only interaction that he and I ever had in all the years I lived at my home. He died several months later of natural causes, and I can only assume that his mental state had declined along with his physical. Upon reflection, I have wondered whether the old man had killed the cat himself. There are a lot of angry and sad old men in the world living alone who have driven their friends and relatives away with their bad manners. After he died, his children inherited and moved into his home. I had never known he had so much family. They had not been interested in visiting when he was alive, which is no great mystery. People do create their own worlds, driving others away or attracting them, as the case may be.
To harm human beings or their beloved pets, their cats and dogs, is a wicked blasphemy. It changes destiny. The changer cannot possibly know how many thousands of alterations will be wrought far into the future. In his ignorance, he may not even care.
A humble soul respects the complexity of this great chess game between Darkness and Light. One does not shake the board and remove random pieces, because there are ramifications that cannot possibly be fully understood, complications that cannot possibly be calculated to their conclusion by a human being. How much better it is to pass through this life in quiet reflection while leaving this world unchanged!
Some believe that having a mighty name and many possessions is the most important thing, but such matters are temporary. Even the humblest of the poor has a better lot than the mightiest of the dead.
Perhaps there is no divine punishment for dark deeds. Evil-doers operate with seeming impunity in savage times and places. They scorn what is good and boast about their evil deeds. Perhaps the choice between good and evil is merely one of taste, with the more refined preferring good and the primitive preferring evil.
Divine judge or no, consequences may still be observed by those who watch and listen. Those who prefer wickedness find themselves among the wicked, for the righteous will not suffer the company of the wicked. To dwell among the wicked is hell. Those who prefer righteousness will dwell among the righteous, and that is heaven.
I think that an evil-doer must suffer in the memory of wrongs committed in the past. Contrariwise, to know that one has done well and given happiness to others is a reward in itself. If I die tomorrow--and there is no guarantee that any of us will not--then I will pass from existence without regrets on the spiritual level. There will be others. We are not the last generation. There are many chapters still. The world is mysterious and complex, regenerating and always changing, and the simple math of subtraction and addition isn't all that existence is about.
This week, I read about men shooting one another and / or themselves either in my own town or the nation.
A fool and his money are soon parted, but a fool with a gun is soon departed.
I think there are too many guns, too many gun nuts and too many angry young men in the world who don't know why they're angry and don't know who they should be angry at.
I think it's a pity guns don't require the solving of a random quadratic equation in order to be operated. Guns and other weapons are far too simple and far too powerful. They cheapen life.
The greatest problem of our species is advanced technology coupled with low morality and a small understanding. This is why the U.S. does not want Iran to have nuclear weapons, because Iran has low morality and a small understanding. That North Korea has nuclear weapons is bad enough.
I also read a disturbing story about some unknown evil-doer living in a nice, middle-class suburb who is poisoning his neighbor's beloved cats and dogs. I would imagine the poisoner is either a young man, because young men often do evil in their ignorance, or else an angry older man that is enraged because cats and dogs stray onto his property or he hears dogs barking and wants silence.
I would like to be a policeman just to investigate such a crime and identify and arrest the culprit. I think I would be good at that. Unfortunately, policemen often spend their time on trivial matters. Crimes against animals are not perceived in their proper light as practice for crimes against humans. The perpetrator is evil and has chosen an easy target for his very first practice-murders, because house pets are ignorant of the evil of humans, yet I believe that an investigator could find him by studying the residents of the neighborhood and talking to the people who live nearby.
The case reminds me of a knock on the door I received years ago. I opened the door to find a scowling elderly neighbor holding a dead cat in his arms. He told me that he had found my cat in his yard. He told me I shouldn't have let my cat wander onto his yard. "Look, see? Now it's dead." I replied that it was not my cat. He insisted that it was, but he was a deranged old man. I reiterated what I had said before, but his stubbornness persisted until finally I ordered him to leave my property and take the carcass with him. He was used to orders, being ex-military, and I think that was just what he needed. It was the only interaction that he and I ever had in all the years I lived at my home. He died several months later of natural causes, and I can only assume that his mental state had declined along with his physical. Upon reflection, I have wondered whether the old man had killed the cat himself. There are a lot of angry and sad old men in the world living alone who have driven their friends and relatives away with their bad manners. After he died, his children inherited and moved into his home. I had never known he had so much family. They had not been interested in visiting when he was alive, which is no great mystery. People do create their own worlds, driving others away or attracting them, as the case may be.
To harm human beings or their beloved pets, their cats and dogs, is a wicked blasphemy. It changes destiny. The changer cannot possibly know how many thousands of alterations will be wrought far into the future. In his ignorance, he may not even care.
A humble soul respects the complexity of this great chess game between Darkness and Light. One does not shake the board and remove random pieces, because there are ramifications that cannot possibly be fully understood, complications that cannot possibly be calculated to their conclusion by a human being. How much better it is to pass through this life in quiet reflection while leaving this world unchanged!
Some believe that having a mighty name and many possessions is the most important thing, but such matters are temporary. Even the humblest of the poor has a better lot than the mightiest of the dead.
Perhaps there is no divine punishment for dark deeds. Evil-doers operate with seeming impunity in savage times and places. They scorn what is good and boast about their evil deeds. Perhaps the choice between good and evil is merely one of taste, with the more refined preferring good and the primitive preferring evil.
Divine judge or no, consequences may still be observed by those who watch and listen. Those who prefer wickedness find themselves among the wicked, for the righteous will not suffer the company of the wicked. To dwell among the wicked is hell. Those who prefer righteousness will dwell among the righteous, and that is heaven.
I think that an evil-doer must suffer in the memory of wrongs committed in the past. Contrariwise, to know that one has done well and given happiness to others is a reward in itself. If I die tomorrow--and there is no guarantee that any of us will not--then I will pass from existence without regrets on the spiritual level. There will be others. We are not the last generation. There are many chapters still. The world is mysterious and complex, regenerating and always changing, and the simple math of subtraction and addition isn't all that existence is about.
Friday, January 17, 2014
The Death Penalty
Those who favor the death penalty must contend with cases like Paco's in the Philippines. In the U.S., our government also behaves in an irrational manner sometimes. Mistakes are made. All governments are capable of error and their error rate is high.
Anyone who has worked to create and maintain extremely complicated systems understands the ways in which unexpected and exceptional cases, or errors, can arise. I know that errors almost certainly arise. The more complexity, the more possibility of error. Legal systems are extremely complicated. That is why expensive, highly trained lawyers are required. If a legal system is isolated from all political and social pressure, then it may crafted in such a way as to become resistant to error, but such a legal system has never existed in the history of mankind. Only a naive person would assume the legal system to be free of error. Such a person would not make a good engineer.
Death is a permanent decision that cannot be corrected, yet the possibility of error remains high. Human beings have not created a legal system that is free of error.
When there is a possibility of error, a good engineer will introduce an error-correcting mechanism. Only an incompetent and sloppy engineer would let the error wreak havoc. In the case of a legal system, an error might result in the maximum punishment assigned to an innocent person. A competent engineer will prefer a maximum punishment amenable to correction. We must be vigilant against mistakes. Mistakes can arise from corruption, simple incompetence, and other unexpected causes. It is not possible to foresee all the reasons for every error.
Life imprisonment can be partially corrected by early release. Death cannot be corrected. Indeed, the chief advantage of the death penalty accrues to the psychopathic criminals who have wormed their way into the system and misuse the law to their own ends. There are likely to be Trojan horses of one form or another in every government--in law enforcement agencies and in the judicial system. These systems are all vulnerable to Trojan horses in proportion to their size and complexity and are ill-protected from them.
Therefore I conclude the death penalty is wrong until such time that governments reduce their error rate to 0%. The death penalty may not be the greatest evil in a society. The greatest evil may be the waging of needless war or the corruption that influences our leaders to divert public funds to their rich cronies. Yet it is evil and reflects sloppy and careless design.
Anyone who has worked to create and maintain extremely complicated systems understands the ways in which unexpected and exceptional cases, or errors, can arise. I know that errors almost certainly arise. The more complexity, the more possibility of error. Legal systems are extremely complicated. That is why expensive, highly trained lawyers are required. If a legal system is isolated from all political and social pressure, then it may crafted in such a way as to become resistant to error, but such a legal system has never existed in the history of mankind. Only a naive person would assume the legal system to be free of error. Such a person would not make a good engineer.
Death is a permanent decision that cannot be corrected, yet the possibility of error remains high. Human beings have not created a legal system that is free of error.
When there is a possibility of error, a good engineer will introduce an error-correcting mechanism. Only an incompetent and sloppy engineer would let the error wreak havoc. In the case of a legal system, an error might result in the maximum punishment assigned to an innocent person. A competent engineer will prefer a maximum punishment amenable to correction. We must be vigilant against mistakes. Mistakes can arise from corruption, simple incompetence, and other unexpected causes. It is not possible to foresee all the reasons for every error.
Life imprisonment can be partially corrected by early release. Death cannot be corrected. Indeed, the chief advantage of the death penalty accrues to the psychopathic criminals who have wormed their way into the system and misuse the law to their own ends. There are likely to be Trojan horses of one form or another in every government--in law enforcement agencies and in the judicial system. These systems are all vulnerable to Trojan horses in proportion to their size and complexity and are ill-protected from them.
Therefore I conclude the death penalty is wrong until such time that governments reduce their error rate to 0%. The death penalty may not be the greatest evil in a society. The greatest evil may be the waging of needless war or the corruption that influences our leaders to divert public funds to their rich cronies. Yet it is evil and reflects sloppy and careless design.
Monday, December 30, 2013
The Case of the Pregnant Nurse
I found the story of a pregnant nurse fired over a flu shot interesting. Her employer grants exceptions in the case of religious objections. Had the nurse joined the Church of the Narrow Mind, she could have declined the flu shot and remained employed. "Special rights" are accorded to cultists only, the privileged ones that know better than the rest of us.
I remember back in the day, when one suggested that gay people should not be fired merely for being gay, the cultists charged that this was "special rights for gays". That old jug did not hold water, because equal rights are not "special" rights. However, "special rights" are indeed accorded to cultists in America, where religion and religion alone is afforded special privileges and considerations. On the other hand, philosophy and conscience receive little protection. This is a strange state of affairs with many far-reaching implications.
Is not religion the derivative of conscience? I would hope so. If religion is instead the cause, rather than the effect of conscience, then that creates a vulnerability in conscience. Conscience should have no dependencies. Losing one's religion could result in losing one's conscience. I lost my moral framework when I lost my religion at the age of fourteen. I knew very little about philosophy at that age and was not in the slightest way philosophical.
Church taught the history of certain religious figures, flavored by the Church's bias. That was not useful to me for inculcating morality. I learned the history of every book in the Bible. In many cases, the lessons were taught multiple times. Such knowledge was interesting, as I tend to find all knowledge interesting, and rather colorful actually, but not useful. I have forgotten much over the decades since. However, I love history and love imagining people of old, so I eagerly devoured the books of the Bible. No one could maintain against all argument that the books of the Bible were written without bias and even vindictiveness in some instances, but I do find the Bible interesting. I do not imbue the stories with the gravity that some do. They are stories. Some I like more than others.
I believe that if a comparison must be made, then conscience and philosophy are more important than religion. Religion is someone else's thoughts taken second-hand, is it not? If not, then one's belief isn't religion at all, but heresy or even shamanism.
Returning to the case of the pregnant nurse, I am not for firing workers over trivial things. I believe the nurse's employer should allow her to take an unpaid leave of absence until she gives birth. That seems like a fair resolution of the matter to me. As I understand the issue, she is willing to take the flu shot after, but not during her pregnancy. A decent and caring employer should show willingness to make a minor accommodation for a pregnant woman's conscience.
I remember back in the day, when one suggested that gay people should not be fired merely for being gay, the cultists charged that this was "special rights for gays". That old jug did not hold water, because equal rights are not "special" rights. However, "special rights" are indeed accorded to cultists in America, where religion and religion alone is afforded special privileges and considerations. On the other hand, philosophy and conscience receive little protection. This is a strange state of affairs with many far-reaching implications.
Is not religion the derivative of conscience? I would hope so. If religion is instead the cause, rather than the effect of conscience, then that creates a vulnerability in conscience. Conscience should have no dependencies. Losing one's religion could result in losing one's conscience. I lost my moral framework when I lost my religion at the age of fourteen. I knew very little about philosophy at that age and was not in the slightest way philosophical.
Church taught the history of certain religious figures, flavored by the Church's bias. That was not useful to me for inculcating morality. I learned the history of every book in the Bible. In many cases, the lessons were taught multiple times. Such knowledge was interesting, as I tend to find all knowledge interesting, and rather colorful actually, but not useful. I have forgotten much over the decades since. However, I love history and love imagining people of old, so I eagerly devoured the books of the Bible. No one could maintain against all argument that the books of the Bible were written without bias and even vindictiveness in some instances, but I do find the Bible interesting. I do not imbue the stories with the gravity that some do. They are stories. Some I like more than others.
I believe that if a comparison must be made, then conscience and philosophy are more important than religion. Religion is someone else's thoughts taken second-hand, is it not? If not, then one's belief isn't religion at all, but heresy or even shamanism.
Returning to the case of the pregnant nurse, I am not for firing workers over trivial things. I believe the nurse's employer should allow her to take an unpaid leave of absence until she gives birth. That seems like a fair resolution of the matter to me. As I understand the issue, she is willing to take the flu shot after, but not during her pregnancy. A decent and caring employer should show willingness to make a minor accommodation for a pregnant woman's conscience.
Thursday, December 26, 2013
A Litmus Test for Kindness
I think that much is revealed by a person's treatment of animals. Good, kind people treat the weaker species with understanding, patience, and gentleness. Such people must be good and kind, because the power differential between the animals and ourselves is vast. We are like gods to our pets. We have god-like abilities. How could a cat understand the way by which we control light, sound, temperature, and even the availability of food and water with seemingly little or no effort? Other humans can defend themselves, or are otherwise protected by our community. Animals are largely defenseless, with only a thin degree of protection by the law and custom. For reason of their defenselessness, it is particularly wicked to mistreat animals. I believe that if someone is mean to an animal, then they are capable of worse deeds towards human beings.
Both of my cats like me and seek out my company. They do not hide when I am around. I feel like they consider me to be their friend. I feel like they both understand my ways. I can communicate easily with them about simple things. They do not understand English, but understand the basic parameters of reading my body language. When I tell them something, if it is simple and can be easily guessed, then more times than not, they guess the correct meaning. I respect their intelligence, such as it is. I feel flattered and privileged to have their friendship.
Both of my cats like me and seek out my company. They do not hide when I am around. I feel like they consider me to be their friend. I feel like they both understand my ways. I can communicate easily with them about simple things. They do not understand English, but understand the basic parameters of reading my body language. When I tell them something, if it is simple and can be easily guessed, then more times than not, they guess the correct meaning. I respect their intelligence, such as it is. I feel flattered and privileged to have their friendship.
Saturday, December 21, 2013
Depression
A depressed mind scapegoats issues as the cause of depression. Our minds are perpetual problem-solvers and trouble-shooters, and so we always try to look for a reason. It is only natural to look for the cause of a problem and try to resolve it. But if the cause is in reality biochemical, then it is invisible and cannot be perceived by the mind. Thus we run the risk of mistaking visible things for being the cause of depression, when in reality, they are just things.
One key to alleviating depression, anger, shame, and other negative emotions, I think, is to accept that things do not matter. I suppose nothing matters ultimately. Things do not matter in the sense that they are not worth feeling unhappy about for any extended period of time.
I think high-achievers have difficulty finding happiness. They feel upset when things are not going their way, because they are used to ensuring that things go their way. They are used to working hard and experiencing success. Once one has tasted the sweet flavor of success, it is difficult to get used to the bitter dregs of failure.
Although some people are excellent problem-solvers, unfortunately, as one gets older, one encounters problems that are intractable and have no resolution. Such problems might as well be accepted as the normal state of being. Acceptance is freedom, freedom from care and worry. There is no sense in fighting a battle that has already been lost. One lives and tries to make the most of each situation. Happiness sometimes requires reducing expectations and accepting imperfection and impermanence. Happiness is about being satisfied with a "C" and not expecting an "A". Sometimes the "grading policy" is such that an "A" cannot be achieved. It is impossible to make an "A". Instead, a "C" is the best one can do. In such a scenario, one might as well be happy with the "C".
The reality is we are dust. From star-dust we derived and to dust we return. There is only so much an ordinary human being can do. We are feeble, limited, temporary creatures, dead and gone and forgotten. Impermanence seems self-evident yet is not often emphasized.
Many people believe that the individual consciousness is so important that the soul survives death and persists somehow. They do not know how, and so they employ abstract words to describe the process by which the soul lingers on after the body dies. Even the concept of the soul itself is rather abstract.
Socrates believed in the immortality of the soul, although he never defined the soul in an adequate manner for my satisfaction. His definition of the soul resembles DNA to me. He did not know about DNA or many other things to do with science, but I think he can be forgiven that. He found a belief in the afterlife to be a comforting thought, given that he was condemned to die. None of his arguments persuade me.
I think we are just aspects of the whole, and our individual consciousness is unimportant and will be unpreserved. Such a belief does not make me fear death any more than anyone else. I think the belief in immortality is a symptom of vanity. Humans are vain creatures. To my mind, we have no more right to a soul than a cat. What is special about a human, except that we have more agile brains?
One key to alleviating depression, anger, shame, and other negative emotions, I think, is to accept that things do not matter. I suppose nothing matters ultimately. Things do not matter in the sense that they are not worth feeling unhappy about for any extended period of time.
I think high-achievers have difficulty finding happiness. They feel upset when things are not going their way, because they are used to ensuring that things go their way. They are used to working hard and experiencing success. Once one has tasted the sweet flavor of success, it is difficult to get used to the bitter dregs of failure.
Although some people are excellent problem-solvers, unfortunately, as one gets older, one encounters problems that are intractable and have no resolution. Such problems might as well be accepted as the normal state of being. Acceptance is freedom, freedom from care and worry. There is no sense in fighting a battle that has already been lost. One lives and tries to make the most of each situation. Happiness sometimes requires reducing expectations and accepting imperfection and impermanence. Happiness is about being satisfied with a "C" and not expecting an "A". Sometimes the "grading policy" is such that an "A" cannot be achieved. It is impossible to make an "A". Instead, a "C" is the best one can do. In such a scenario, one might as well be happy with the "C".
The reality is we are dust. From star-dust we derived and to dust we return. There is only so much an ordinary human being can do. We are feeble, limited, temporary creatures, dead and gone and forgotten. Impermanence seems self-evident yet is not often emphasized.
Many people believe that the individual consciousness is so important that the soul survives death and persists somehow. They do not know how, and so they employ abstract words to describe the process by which the soul lingers on after the body dies. Even the concept of the soul itself is rather abstract.
Socrates believed in the immortality of the soul, although he never defined the soul in an adequate manner for my satisfaction. His definition of the soul resembles DNA to me. He did not know about DNA or many other things to do with science, but I think he can be forgiven that. He found a belief in the afterlife to be a comforting thought, given that he was condemned to die. None of his arguments persuade me.
I think we are just aspects of the whole, and our individual consciousness is unimportant and will be unpreserved. Such a belief does not make me fear death any more than anyone else. I think the belief in immortality is a symptom of vanity. Humans are vain creatures. To my mind, we have no more right to a soul than a cat. What is special about a human, except that we have more agile brains?
Thursday, December 19, 2013
Socrates Talked a Lot of Nonsense
I have trouble following Socrates. He talked a lot of nonsense. Not many of his arguments have the power to persuade. I am annoyed none of his followers ever spent the least effort at a refutation to any of his wild, rambling arguments. Nevertheless I like his story. The drama appeals to me--friends gathering about a condemned man to hear his last outpourings of what they perceive as wisdom. I think he was an ancestor to the modern mind. There would be many changes to his model in the course of history. I also have a certain regard for the intellectual integrity of Socrates. I think if Socrates knew then what we know now, his arguments would undergo vast revisions as he assimilated the knowledge and corrected his many errors.
Sunday, December 15, 2013
Thanks for the Belly-Laugh
On November 30th, 2013, someone wrote a message on Usenet to express their opinion on cheating in Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup.
The world has no lack of nerd-tyrants revealing how things would be ordered under their regime. I may be a bit of a nerd myself, but I flatter myself on being more democratic. I don't care so much how others order their affairs, as long as their behavior doesn't harm others. The idea of someone cheating on a game in the privacy of their own home does not send me into a lather nor cause frothing at the mouth.
Over on Craigslist, I posted a message in support of my favorite computer program, and people promptly wrote in to speculate on my sex life. They assessed my mental capacity as being subnormal, and then said that actually I must be a spammer, because the definition of "spammer" apparently has been expanded to include anyone that disagrees with one's viewpoint.
I stay away from online arenas that have such examples of incivility. They can be amusing, it is true, but the problem is that sometimes I am not in the mood to laugh. Sometimes I find myself tempted to respond in like manner, which is a regression to a more primitive state of mind, a juvenile state. I prefer to surround myself with examples of behavior I would like to emulate, rather than behavior I should never want to emulate. I find that I learn from example and that I profit from observing good examples. I like being around good people.
I think it would be dangerous to be a police officer. The danger from physical violence perhaps is not quite as great as the danger from spiritual violence. That is to say, having to deal with evil-doers for a long time offers many temptations and many bad examples, so that a person would require extraordinary resilience to avoid regressing, to avoid turning from good to evil.
"This is pathetic. If you're going to save scum, don't play."It is amusing to imagine how the world would be ordered if a nerd-tyrant seized control of all living beings. I suppose I would be denied forever the privilege of playing Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup the very moment I attempted to run a script file that preserved my save files from deletion by the game. My punishment would be life without Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup. Somehow I'd manage. I suppose I'd play chess more often or perhaps Wesnoth or Lexulous.
The world has no lack of nerd-tyrants revealing how things would be ordered under their regime. I may be a bit of a nerd myself, but I flatter myself on being more democratic. I don't care so much how others order their affairs, as long as their behavior doesn't harm others. The idea of someone cheating on a game in the privacy of their own home does not send me into a lather nor cause frothing at the mouth.
Over on Craigslist, I posted a message in support of my favorite computer program, and people promptly wrote in to speculate on my sex life. They assessed my mental capacity as being subnormal, and then said that actually I must be a spammer, because the definition of "spammer" apparently has been expanded to include anyone that disagrees with one's viewpoint.
I stay away from online arenas that have such examples of incivility. They can be amusing, it is true, but the problem is that sometimes I am not in the mood to laugh. Sometimes I find myself tempted to respond in like manner, which is a regression to a more primitive state of mind, a juvenile state. I prefer to surround myself with examples of behavior I would like to emulate, rather than behavior I should never want to emulate. I find that I learn from example and that I profit from observing good examples. I like being around good people.
I think it would be dangerous to be a police officer. The danger from physical violence perhaps is not quite as great as the danger from spiritual violence. That is to say, having to deal with evil-doers for a long time offers many temptations and many bad examples, so that a person would require extraordinary resilience to avoid regressing, to avoid turning from good to evil.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)