Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.


Expand Messages
  • Jim Aiden
    Aug 15, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      I am well aware of the ineffectiveness of my decision making
      process and have been for quite awhile. Based on replies, yet again I
      see my limitations. To be more clear, I study the current and
      historical schools of thought, but am far more interested in what the
      next ones may be.

      I like to think I understand the Buddhist concept of 'oneness' (or
      nothingness) and the Existential concept of 'self' quite well (as a
      few others in-between). Whether that has anything to do with reality
      is quite another story. Yes I am suggesting that neither model seems
      to be the most efficient to describe reality to me nor to guide my
      actions, for which we seem to be in agreement. But I am not saying, to
      go on with our lives and ignore these forces. I am saying lets
      continue to sharpen our understanding, generation by generation. I
      have already accepted I will not have the answers in my life, but this
      does not mean someone might not someday. Just as in the 19th century
      Jules Verne could dream and inspire the idea of going to the moon.

      This is where the idea of fault tolerance comes in for me. Call
      it fuzzy logic if you want or fuzzywizzle. What I am saying, the next
      step in philosophy seems to be one that builds in a certain level of
      error acceptance, paranoia, humour, self criticism,
      scientific/mathematical/observational logic, and especially renewed
      (com)passion. Every philosophy and religion argues it's absolute
      nature, but they all fail or end up with blanks at times and upon
      close examination are forced to perform actions that run contrary to
      their own stated philosophical beliefs. Most modern philosophies (and
      philosophers) are dead in the water, because they have moved to
      extremities of gibberish, ridicule or abstractions that cannot be
      converted into clear useful (towards life) action, just words. I
      assume that continuation of the species (or themselves) is the
      objective of most viable life forms.

      At one point, I took deconstruction to an extreme of nothingness,
      and it was a definitive moment in my life. Although I was recently
      (rightfully) pointed out to me, it is possible that there are
      alternatives, when you step on the mental time bomb, that everything
      from the serious to the absurd, from logic to the irrational, from
      love to hate, from selfishness to compassion, from physicality to
      the metaphysical, from absolute morality, to relativism, from
      mathematics to semantics, from the scientific method to voodoo, from
      freedom to slavery, from suffering to happiness, can be questioned.
      TIME (if not infinitely). YET IF WE DO NOT QUESTION, WE CERTAINLY

      Then you pause for a brief moment.... and decide if you should move
      from that moment on. This has nothing to do with depression, only with
      the chore of dealing with our own and especially others stupidity for
      lifetime. We think because we are 'superior' to other societies in the
      past, that we somehow are not along a line of other far wiser
      civilizations. I'm not talking about technology, I'm talking about
      thought processes (or philosophy if you prefer)

      A while ago, I mentioned that Aristotle's crystal sphere model of
      universe worked dandy for 2000 years. On closer inspection in started
      to crack. Copernicus and Galileo filled in the blanks. Their model has
      cracked as well. It was not deep enough in scope. It keeps moving
      forward. The religious models of the past have for the most part
      failed close inspection (in the West) and an existentialist model has
      filled in the void. But Existentialism/Phenomenology are showing their
      cracks as well, and something needs to fill the void. If it does not,
      that is where I fear that the decay of our civilization will happen.
      People need reasons to survive, to make choices, to perform action.

      One can participate in life or ignore it, that is their choice.
      Perhaps some do not care or are so absorbed by the idea of self, are
      blinded to the rest of the universe. I do care though. I want to
      survive. I want the human race to survive and evolve or else I believe
      we will crumble from within just as other cultures of the past have
      when faced with obvious hypocrisy. There are no guarantees of
      survival. Our actions will likely determine part of that. Inaction can
      be useful in the idea of nonaggression, but does not put food on the
      table, cure polio, or prevent asteroid collisions. Perhaps our rush to
      'know' will ultimately destroy us quicker, but I can tell you of many
      other things that will eventually destroy us for certain if we do

      You can argue you do not need a philosophical model to exist in a
      society, but that is something that is a myth in humans for now.
      Everything in our lives, the real infrastructure of our political,
      justice, moral, and logical systems are in some way or another
      dependent on philosophy. The Mcveigh conversation is a perfect example
      of it, because those philosophical issues in someway got imperfectly
      translated into an action that ended his life, 160 others, and
      influenced many many others.

      Does it not seem that the de facto philosophy is in fact becoming
      the idea that our decision making process is not a hundred percent
      accurate? Does it not make sense to evolve that line of reasoning into
      a methodology for performing actions that are based on new
      philosophical premises? Rather than the polarized absolutes of 'self'
      or 'oneness'.

      I'm NOT saying lets give up to the nothingness. I'm not saying
      this will be the definitive philosophy for all time. I'm saying lets
      continue forward as our ancestors did and not talk ourselves into
      giving up because it is hard or because we personally might never know
      the answers. That is from the well I gather my own meaning.

      J. Aiden
    • Show all 193 messages in this topic