Just a thought on thoughts … this that or the other

There are so many thoughts to be had, so many riddles to be mulled, so many reasons to be fathomed. This must be done, however, encumbered by the drive to make the module that is you cooperate symbiotically with some machine that is the world–an invented world, ironically, devoid of thought, devoid of riddle, and devoid of reason.

Last night, I posted the paragraph quoted above as a Facebook status update.  Many of you (assuming there are enough of you readers out there to justify calling a subset of you “many”) are aware of my existential pontifications, so it was nothing new, but, as I read back over it, I feel the need to comment a bit more verbosely — perhaps elaborate.  Simply, we have social imperatives (which are mostly a human construct, the rest biological/evolutionary) that do little more than impede the meanderings of the very powerful tool (our brain) that allowed us to construct the imperatives in the first place.

I want to go ahead and note that there are so many concepts that I will derive conclusions from that I just don’t have the energy to describe in detail.  I am going to hope that they reveal themselves indirectly by invoking them.

We evolved an overpowered brain that allows us to think deeply about the universe, but we still have obligatory evolutionary trappings that assist our species in persisting.

I think constantly about this that or the other.  I’m constantly infuriated by this that or the other, frustrated by this that or the other, mesmerized by this that or the other, and ultimately part of this that or the other, but most days it just falls to the wayside, because I, for some reason, have things to do.  However, occasionally, one of those thats or others seem to spark and catalyze a wildfire of raging brain activity — a cacophony of highly excited dancing electrical eruptions — a sort of aggregation of disheartened reality that somehow opens my pores of perception — rendering me better able, and more compelled, to evaluate the universe and where I fit into its poetry, usually, necessarily, recursively constructing a seemingly unanswerable array of questions:  Why can’t I fit into this society, why do I want to, and what the heck does it all mean?

Ultimately, we all want to know that the people who have experienced us are happy to have done so.  For whatever evolutionary, social, psychological reason, we simply want to play an important role in the transition from the present to the future.  Another related quote of mine that is relevant:

Life: The fruitless attempt to turn the present into the future as the present consistently, invariably becomes the past.

I would say that, when you boil it all down, there is no better choice than to ponder the meaning of it all.  Simplest reason?  Because you can!

When you consider the known (or at least apparent) vastness of this universe both spatially and temporally, you can’t help but marvel in and be humbled by your own insignificance.  Yet, insignificant as you may or may not be, you have this consciousness that makes you (apparently) uniquely aware of it all, and, while you undergo your social, biological, and evolutionary imperative to eat, breathe, breed, and sleep, your over-powered brain allows you to question and, occasionally, understand the deeper complexities of chemistry, biology, sociology, psychology, philosophy, and the venue that invites them all to demonstrate their masteries: physics.

It is indeed difficult to imagine a world that you cannot understand, yet here we are in one — a cosmic arena so vast whose subtleties are lost on the strange phenomenon that resulted in us — to quote Carl Sagan: “Star stuff contemplating the stars.”

I’m not going to go off on a thorough justification of the Big Bang and evolution.  I don’t care who believes what.  Science is nothing more than observation, deduction, evaluation of cause and effect.  We witness what is there, and we make it make sense.  Often, science gives us clear data that subverts past biases and superstitions (easy example: the Sun orbits the Earth), but science is very flexible, as it can simply change as its pretenses are clarified or nullified, disproved or defined.  In other words, science lets us perceive all that is there, but it allows for the evolution of our definition of “perception.”  Science is a collection of observations whose conclusions are obvious.  If I hit a rock with a hammer correctly, it will break.  This is observable, demonstrable, and questionable only if you question the legitimacy of my ability to trust what I observe.

I just want to know anything (actually, everything) about the universe, but I keep having to dance in this social ritual to which I’m really, apparently, quite allergic.  I’m spending my life fighting the social prison into which I was born, even though my over-powered brain tells me that the prison is irrelevant given what I can imagine.  It’s as if we accidentally evolved this powerful brain, so, by necessity, we developed this intricate web of social existence to thwart it.

I, personally, get frustrated with having to live, having to pay for a house, having to find food, having to behave a certain way in order for my cohorts in existence (namely, other humans, but occasionally DEER WHO EAT MY TREES) to behave in a way that permits my extracurricular pursuits (notably, the understanding of all that is) to move along freely and to thrive.  Maybe I want to spend all day writing, or composing, or simply pursuing something I find interesting.  Selfish reasoning, perhaps, but it is strictly being beholden to social norms that keeps me from that.

Of course, obviously, humans did not invent the need to survive.  For a species that is going to persist, it is simply advantageous to survive as opposed to dying.  So, survival is an essential precursor to both our social pomp and our philosophical inquisition.  All organisms need to survive to actively do anything at all.  One has to consider that, it’s just that humans have invented this very strange way of surviving.  (Given that, however, it would not be difficult to question whether or not anything really actually DOES anything other than react, but I digress.)  I am, of course, referring to my own social prison, that of Western Civilization here in the United States.  All social systems all have their entrapments, my reference point is simply my own social system.

The world of “void” in my quote is, indeed, this sociological dance we all seem to find important: having a job, making money, enjoying “success.” It is a completely invented world.  It’s a play that only exists because actors are performing it.  The universe, on the other hand, exists in spite of human perception and beyond human existence, and it is for precisely this reason that the evolutionary process that yielded our over-powered brains is so interesting.

It is easy to imagine that all we do is simply systemic, and that our ability to observe is simply a phenomenon.  In other words, it is not hard to fathom that we think about physics simply because quarks, leptons, and bosons exist and have inherent properties which cause them to collect into entities such as protons, photons, and motional phenomena, which then collect into matter and energy, and ultimately make living organisms that simply do what they do for the same reason that the moon orbits the earth.  (Obvious! This is what hydrogen atoms do given 14 billion years of evolution! a la Brian Cox)

Most truths of reality are this way.  Electrons orbit around protons, because that is what electrons do.  Atoms bond into molecules, because that is what atoms do.  Molecules collect into cells, because that’s what molecules do.  Cells collect into organisms, because that is what cells do.  Organisms eat and breed, because that is what organisms do.  Planets orbit around stars, because that is what planets do.  Obviously, there are so many more rules than these, and many variations on these, but the apparent underlying fact is simple: everything is a system, everything happens as a result of something else.

We, as humans, however, have, because of these systems, developed this apparently unique ability to observe it all, and, even though we can see past it, we are still beholden to our sociological and biological imperatives. Our reality — as in the movement that drives our daily actions (waking up to an alarm, drinking coffee, driving to work, doing something at work, eating lunch, going home, shake, repeat) — is only meaningful to and mostly fabricated by us.  It is, effectively, nothing more than a complex mating ritual, as its end result is still only successful if the human species propagates.

We have two existences: one driven biologically and one driven psychologically, and although the biological one gave/gives rise to the psychological one, it is the psychological observation of the universe that makes us (again, apparently) unique.  It is this one that interests me and it is this one that must constantly jump sociological hurdles.  To quickly simplify, and to summarize, to worry about paying the electric bill or even worrying about whether people like you when we have at least 13.7 billion years of history to uncover is our biology constraining our psychology.

Just a thought …

To be who you are, you must first be someone else

I felt the urge to examine the following quote from John Stuart Mill and attempt to rationalize the gist of the concept.

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.

There is a very simple point here:  War is terrible, but refuting war on principle, even when doing so jeopardizes one’s personal freedoms, is far more terrible.

It is very easy to agree with this, because a general philosophy should be that no truth is so absolute that it can contradict another absolute truth.

Now, to examine, I will state that there is a very distinct law in my own personal philosophy: Any state of being is a prison.  Poetically justified: Anything you are is the consummate shadow of everything else that you are not.

In other words, everyone inhabits some sort of prison.  Some have just hung curtains and plants and are happy there, while others are more content fighting to find a better prison.

Thus, the inherent contradiction in this quote becomes evident.  For the idea to hold true, if you want to be anti-war, you must first succumb to a presumed logical inevitability (extraneous to your belief) that you must accept war as a viable method of protecting your belief.

In other words, you are free to be anti war, but to keep it that way, you must think like everyone else and fight a war on your own behalf.  To be who you are, you must first be someone else.

At best this is a conundrum, and by no means is this a logical disproof of war.  It is a simple demonstration that the path laid out by many as a journey to purity will inevitably require a very direct sacrifice of purity to conquer.

There are many branches to this concept, and I have personally examined a large portion of them in depth, but this general idea is a good entry to the philosophy of “breaking one’s chains.”

More on the concept of free will

I want to first mention the fact that I have written a lot — I mean a LOT — over the years about many philosophical themes.  Common among them are existentialism and purpose, as well as a host of others that just don’t seem to deliver themselves to my fingers at the moment, but undoubtedly, the most common theme is free will.  It’s a concept that really is paradoxically, if nothing else, contradictory.

Regardless of my prolific writing in the past, lately, philosophy is something that comes only in a moment where immediate reason and clarification are required.  Evidence:  I haven’t written a song in over 3 years.  More evidence:  I have no philosophical writings to speak of in about the same time period.  Keep in mind, as well, that the majority of my philosophical writings are scribble on class notes in college or random thoughts in a text-file “note-journal” in which I used to regularly write.

Ideally, I would get back to the stage where those thoughts and theoretical elucidations would flow from my mind as easily as anything else I say in a day.  (I do have misgivings on how “easy” that really is, but since it is a common occurrence, it has to be comparatively mundane.)  Then again, I go back over a lot of my writings, and I realize I’ve said pretty much all I can imagine saying.

The trouble is, I’m not 100% sure what I’ve said has affected anyone, so I develop pangs of purpose.  Anyway, since that is a completely different topic, I will stray from my tangent.  Albeit likely narcissisticly, I read over even my songs that I’ve written and am almost amazed by the points I’ve brought out.  I’ve somehow documented myself abstractly but definitively through rather convoluted metaphor.  This pleases me, yet the lack of such documentation has always been the drive to produce more songs, more writings, more philosophy.  Have I succeeded or failed?

Please don’t interpret this as a cry for assurance.  The ultimate problem that exists here is not whether I have affected anyone, but whether doing so really meant anything to begin with.

I am relatively contented in what I have produced.  I can objectively quantify the discoveries of my life, yet even with the lull — the hiatus — currently present, I still feel the need to boil down all philosophical doctrines to a simple truth — hopefully one that delivers purpose.

There is much more to say here, and it’s somewhat regrettable that I’m insisting on leaving it out of this particular article, but I will get back to it some day.  The great thing is, the more I write, the more I realize I’d like to say again.

Since this blog is effectively a new forum, I do not have as much concern with rehashing old, delivered truths, because they’re relevant to new potential postulations.  I will, therefore, simply state that at one point in my life, I did all I could to abandon all values, morals, doctrines, that were, well, indoctrinated into me, in order to take a more pragmatic, premise-conclusion based set of ideals.

That being said, there is one ultimate rule that I have concluded, one assumption from which all explanations are nascent.

“Everything is a system.”

Simple, right?  Obvious, right?  But it’s the truth.  The fact is, nothing can be without something already having been before it, excluding, of course, the obvious “thing” that started it all.

Continuing, I want to rehash something I had previously written.  I am not going to take the time to support or argue its validity, because I’m pretty convinced on its truth.  I always welcome debate, and I will respond, but, nonetheless, the proposed “Law” is pretty self-explanatory.


LAW:  One cannot have something to say without having heard something said.
Corollary:  One quotation deserves another thirty.
Related:  Mulder, Small Potatoes “… ultimately maybe it’s other people’s
reactions to us that make us who we are”

[I tend to quote TV shows and the like.  This is, of course, an X-Files reference]

:: A reaction to a statement is just that; this reaction depends on the
statement in accordance with the reactors contextual assocations and
previous experience.  It has nothing to do with his or her intelligence
or will.
:: Our actions are but re
actions to other actions; the resulting reactions
define how we will react in the future.  It is somewhat broader than
implied by “Mulder” in that our personality in words is defined through
others personalities in words, but our interpretations belong to the
realm of all observation, linguistic, and ultimately, sensual.

The obvious conclusion is, free will is almost impossible, because everything happens as a result of something else.  Think about it, and get back to me.

There is a host of additional derivations that can result, but I will leave it as pure statement.  I can already feel the philosophy brewing again, and I can see more elaborations to come.  😀