Day 20
Twenty entries consecutively! It can actually be difficult to think of something to write every day, or, at least, something I believe you will find at least mildly interesting.
I've been blogging for quite some time now; prior to here I had a thing going at:
http://ironbooger57.spaces.live.com/
It is still there! There are many many entries dating back to may of '05, and several very long arguments within the comment sections of some entries. For a little bit of history on how my thoughts about the world have evolved over the four years I've spent studying philosophy, that's the place to go. I've taken the time to look back and read some of it; I am astonished at how much my thinking, or rather, my way of thinking has changed since first year.
Tonight is a night for catharsis: I shall make absolutely no effort to garner your interest as I write the following.
Recently I've begun to view the world in a highly amoral sort of way. Things that we normally consider terrible, or outstanding, from our moral perspectives, I look at as very small parts of a very large system. Donald Rumsfeld (USA Sec. of Defense during Iraq war) once got a great deal of criticism when he said that the country looked just fine from an aerial perspective. That is, he said that Baghdad looks as good as gumdrops from a helecopter at 10,000 feet up.
These were seemingly the words of a crazy person, and this quote wasn't taken out of context; he said it in a collected, deliberative sort of way. I never really made much of it, but then it occurred to me what he was actually saying. I think the idea he had stemmed from a radically different view of the world than most people have. He sees himself as an extremely powerful man, and views the world not as a collection of individuals, but rather as a history of mass movements, ideologies, wars, and soforth. Exempting those individuals that change the tides of nations, cultures, and religions, the rest are inconsequential; humans are less than pawns, they are the very squares of the board upon which the monumental pieces move and battle.
So, from this kind of belief it is concluded that particular instances of human violence and suffering have essentially no meaning: when added up, however, they become something that is more than the sum of its parts, and that thing is meaningful. Baghdad is still there, he is saying: it will be there in a year, in 10 years, and probably in 1000 years, with new generations of people and more of the events that define humanity as what it really is.
In this, the world becomes amoral. Other humans aren't "I" anymore: they are lions and antelopes on a nature show. The lion kills for food a mother antelope, leaving its helpless offspring to die in the unforgiving desert. We watch and we cannot turn away, but we do not dare wish that the film crew rescue the baby antelope, for we must allow nature to run its course.
I watch its dehydration
I watch its movements slow to a creep
I watch its desparate helplessness
I watch death between hyenas teeth
I wonder if the creature ever thought "why?"
But I don't ask that to myself
All I see is beauty.
Perhaps, then, to say "human nature" is to add a superfluous word to an already complete concept.
I've been blogging for quite some time now; prior to here I had a thing going at:
http://ironbooger57.spaces.live.com/
It is still there! There are many many entries dating back to may of '05, and several very long arguments within the comment sections of some entries. For a little bit of history on how my thoughts about the world have evolved over the four years I've spent studying philosophy, that's the place to go. I've taken the time to look back and read some of it; I am astonished at how much my thinking, or rather, my way of thinking has changed since first year.
Tonight is a night for catharsis: I shall make absolutely no effort to garner your interest as I write the following.
Recently I've begun to view the world in a highly amoral sort of way. Things that we normally consider terrible, or outstanding, from our moral perspectives, I look at as very small parts of a very large system. Donald Rumsfeld (USA Sec. of Defense during Iraq war) once got a great deal of criticism when he said that the country looked just fine from an aerial perspective. That is, he said that Baghdad looks as good as gumdrops from a helecopter at 10,000 feet up.
These were seemingly the words of a crazy person, and this quote wasn't taken out of context; he said it in a collected, deliberative sort of way. I never really made much of it, but then it occurred to me what he was actually saying. I think the idea he had stemmed from a radically different view of the world than most people have. He sees himself as an extremely powerful man, and views the world not as a collection of individuals, but rather as a history of mass movements, ideologies, wars, and soforth. Exempting those individuals that change the tides of nations, cultures, and religions, the rest are inconsequential; humans are less than pawns, they are the very squares of the board upon which the monumental pieces move and battle.
So, from this kind of belief it is concluded that particular instances of human violence and suffering have essentially no meaning: when added up, however, they become something that is more than the sum of its parts, and that thing is meaningful. Baghdad is still there, he is saying: it will be there in a year, in 10 years, and probably in 1000 years, with new generations of people and more of the events that define humanity as what it really is.
In this, the world becomes amoral. Other humans aren't "I" anymore: they are lions and antelopes on a nature show. The lion kills for food a mother antelope, leaving its helpless offspring to die in the unforgiving desert. We watch and we cannot turn away, but we do not dare wish that the film crew rescue the baby antelope, for we must allow nature to run its course.
I watch its dehydration
I watch its movements slow to a creep
I watch its desparate helplessness
I watch death between hyenas teeth
I wonder if the creature ever thought "why?"
But I don't ask that to myself
All I see is beauty.
Perhaps, then, to say "human nature" is to add a superfluous word to an already complete concept.
Comments