Apparently it is a good thing to acknowledge your flaws, so some arm chair psychologist friends of mine suggest anyway.
Well, one of my flaws that is really frustrating me at the moment is my knack of getting myself into debates, usually in online forums, on topics I either know very little about or are not that interested in.
Somehow I have this ability, some might even say superpower, of seeking out threads that will very soon become heated then diving in headfirst to deposit my two cents directly into the piggy bank of the most volatile and knowledgeable poster of the opposite opinion, who then proceeds to latch on to me leech-like and drain my strength through a series of increasingly intense and confusing arguments.
So, do I calmly leave the thread to pursue avenues more suited to my tastes? Do I hell. Some unknown force keeps me lashed to the thread like a dying horse, so that I can get repeatedly flogged by posts that I don't agree with but lack the resolve and resources to properly counter.
Some small voice in the back of my mind keeps warning me about these threads, yet five minutes after hearing it there I am creating what I believe to be a relatively innocuous if not enlightening post that in reality turns out to be heat seeking missile of aggravation.
Perhaps only the Power of Grayskull can save me from this self destructive habit, that would be cool...
Friday, July 4, 2008
Saturday, June 21, 2008
Universal Indifference
Here's a Charles Darwin quote that is often ascribed to Richard Dawkins by... 'persons of a certain worldview'.
What would it matter to us if there were no great and mighty plan behind the universe? Why should you live your lives any differently depending on whether or not some one "up there" has a plan for you?
You have no clue what that plan might be, so you might as well just live your life the best you can, as if there were no plan, since you can't do anything to change said plan. And if you're going to do that, you might as well assume there is no plan and just live your life. That's not too stupid, right?
It seems for a lot of people that it is stupid to think like that, that the concept of the universe not centering around man, that it just is without any consciousness coordinating everything, is tantamount to thinking that the moon is a cardboard cut-out. Which brings us back to the why?
Why do people need to see purpose everywhere they look? And why does the thought that there isn't purpose fill even some atheists with a feeling of purposelessness and dread?
I reckon it's probably based in our self awareness. We're aware of our own existence, we're also aware of our own mortality. Seeing the universe as an indifferent monster, not caring whether the insignificant specks encrusting its planets run free or get splattered doesn't sit well, it brings home to us our eventual mortality and suggests that it could be sooner rather than later.
When you think of it like that, is it not surprising that people cling to ideas and stories about super powerful beings, that are like we are, and that look out for us? And is it then not surprising when the people who hold these stories and their characters dear, react in fear and anger when reality shoves their beliefs out the way and stares them in the face? We can't blame them for scrabbling after their myths and pasting them to their eyes with faith, at least I don't think we can.
So what are the alternatives to the denial outlined above? Well there is only one, acceptance, but the manner of acceptance can vary dramatically.
You can accept that you're an insignificant speck on the verruca of the toe pad of the universe's pet cat, and that acceptance can lead unto a feeling of depression and that life is inherently pointless and worthless. But is that real acceptance? I would say it's more like accepting that your golf day has been rained out, but then resenting the weather and moping around the house wishing you could be playing golf - uh huh, its that Buddhist concept of attachment creeping in again, its a wily devil that one.
So what is the correct way of accepting this reality I hear some of you ask, yes I'm talking to you in the back.
To find an answer to this we can look at the philosophies of dead people, the tastiest kind. We could try nihilism, since this whole post seems to pretty much scream about meaninglessness. But I feel if we walk down that road we're just going to come round full circle, so we'll try a related philosophy, it's first mention outside the Introduction, and that is H.P. Lovecraft's Cosmicism.
Within Cosmicism human insignificance and the indifference of the universe are emphasised, but unlike nihilism meaninglessness isn't. Cosmicism teaches us that we can accept our insignificance and relative unimportance on the universal scale, but we can also give life our own meaning, however insignificant and unimportant that may be to the grander influences of our world.
But more than accepting reality for what it is, if we embrace it we can "go with the flow" much more easily. Rather than accepting the rain but mourning our ruined day of golf, we can embrace the rain and use it's presence to our advantage by carrying out other tasks we find meaningful but would otherwise not have the time for, such as writing, meditation, painting, rabbit shaving, the list is endless.
However, more important than all of this, if we embrace an indifferent universe we are also embracing a significant part of own nature which is what enlightenment is really all about. You can't wake up to the world if you're constantly gluing your eyelids shut with fantasy and the desire for the unattainable.
That's all for now folks, I'll try to make the next post less essay-like and with a dash more humour.
Ceryx
"The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if thereGenerally I imagine this inspires either anger or listlessness amongst those who read it, anger in those "differently mentally abled" individuals mentioned above, listlessness in the rest of us - a kind of psychological "meh". But why?
is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind,
pitiless indifference."
What would it matter to us if there were no great and mighty plan behind the universe? Why should you live your lives any differently depending on whether or not some one "up there" has a plan for you?
You have no clue what that plan might be, so you might as well just live your life the best you can, as if there were no plan, since you can't do anything to change said plan. And if you're going to do that, you might as well assume there is no plan and just live your life. That's not too stupid, right?
It seems for a lot of people that it is stupid to think like that, that the concept of the universe not centering around man, that it just is without any consciousness coordinating everything, is tantamount to thinking that the moon is a cardboard cut-out. Which brings us back to the why?
Why do people need to see purpose everywhere they look? And why does the thought that there isn't purpose fill even some atheists with a feeling of purposelessness and dread?
I reckon it's probably based in our self awareness. We're aware of our own existence, we're also aware of our own mortality. Seeing the universe as an indifferent monster, not caring whether the insignificant specks encrusting its planets run free or get splattered doesn't sit well, it brings home to us our eventual mortality and suggests that it could be sooner rather than later.
When you think of it like that, is it not surprising that people cling to ideas and stories about super powerful beings, that are like we are, and that look out for us? And is it then not surprising when the people who hold these stories and their characters dear, react in fear and anger when reality shoves their beliefs out the way and stares them in the face? We can't blame them for scrabbling after their myths and pasting them to their eyes with faith, at least I don't think we can.
So what are the alternatives to the denial outlined above? Well there is only one, acceptance, but the manner of acceptance can vary dramatically.
You can accept that you're an insignificant speck on the verruca of the toe pad of the universe's pet cat, and that acceptance can lead unto a feeling of depression and that life is inherently pointless and worthless. But is that real acceptance? I would say it's more like accepting that your golf day has been rained out, but then resenting the weather and moping around the house wishing you could be playing golf - uh huh, its that Buddhist concept of attachment creeping in again, its a wily devil that one.
So what is the correct way of accepting this reality I hear some of you ask, yes I'm talking to you in the back.
To find an answer to this we can look at the philosophies of dead people, the tastiest kind. We could try nihilism, since this whole post seems to pretty much scream about meaninglessness. But I feel if we walk down that road we're just going to come round full circle, so we'll try a related philosophy, it's first mention outside the Introduction, and that is H.P. Lovecraft's Cosmicism.
Within Cosmicism human insignificance and the indifference of the universe are emphasised, but unlike nihilism meaninglessness isn't. Cosmicism teaches us that we can accept our insignificance and relative unimportance on the universal scale, but we can also give life our own meaning, however insignificant and unimportant that may be to the grander influences of our world.
But more than accepting reality for what it is, if we embrace it we can "go with the flow" much more easily. Rather than accepting the rain but mourning our ruined day of golf, we can embrace the rain and use it's presence to our advantage by carrying out other tasks we find meaningful but would otherwise not have the time for, such as writing, meditation, painting, rabbit shaving, the list is endless.
However, more important than all of this, if we embrace an indifferent universe we are also embracing a significant part of own nature which is what enlightenment is really all about. You can't wake up to the world if you're constantly gluing your eyelids shut with fantasy and the desire for the unattainable.
That's all for now folks, I'll try to make the next post less essay-like and with a dash more humour.
Ceryx
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Darkness And Light
I once had a debate with a very nice Baha'i lady on the topic of the origin of good and evil. According to her beliefs, she explained, there is no such thing as evil, evil is merely the absence of good just like darkness is merely the absence of light.
Ok, I thought, that's a reasonably logical position for a person of faith to take (despite the obvious fact that using that logic, good could just as easily be the absence of evil), but it made me ponder the way in which people use light as a symbol for God and goodness, and darkness as a symbol for the opposite.
I'm not a theist, I don't believe in a God or gods, but I do believe in light. And I know that light has some monumental limitations. For a start light is only "light" (as opposed to electromagnetic radiation of any other kind) if it can actually be perceived. For a blind person "light" is a non-entity. It's also only ever temporary, being pure energy it is easily absorbed or reflected, so that in any space at any particular time light is not a permanent thing. The light will eventually be destroyed or vacate the space it occupies.
And yet light is assigned to the divine, which presumably is supposed to be the least limited principle in the universe, limitless even.
Now lets look at darkness. To a person born blind darkness is all they know, it is the default, the base, if they were ever given medical treatment to allow them some sight, then this could only ever be a happy addition to that default. If they go into a dark room and close their eyes the darkness inevitably returns, because in reality it never left, it is the natural state upon which the mirage of light and sight can only play for a finite time.
So, if anything, darkness is the immortal one of the pair; it "exists" without a source, it cannot be destroyed or absorbed, it can only ever be temporarily concealed.
So what does this say of such light based god-concepts and the people who purport them, if anything?
Well, to me it only goes to demonstrate the significance people place upon the impermanent aspects of their existence (not that I'm blaming them or calling them silly, it's quite a natural thing to do). That they choose to use such a temporary and mortal entity as a symbol for that which they consider good and divine, while relegating that far more permanent and natural state of being into a position of distaste and fear says a great deal about how we as a species generally perceive the world.
That we fear the loss of the light, or perhaps the absence of God if you're that way inclined, shows us just how attached we are to the impermanent states of existence that surround us.
According to one wikipedia article Nirvana can be defined as "the reality that knows no change, no decay or death." If that doesn't describe darkness and it's dichotomy with light, I don't know what does.
Bringing all this waffle back into the context of the blog, darkness is of course symbolic of Oblivion - the eternal stage upon which the opera of life is briefly played out before being sucked back into the depths. Thus if anything, it is the opinion of this blogger that darkness is a far more fitting symbol of what is eternal, of what is powerful and "divine" in our lives than light ever could be.
Thank you for reading and goodnight.
Ceryx
Ok, I thought, that's a reasonably logical position for a person of faith to take (despite the obvious fact that using that logic, good could just as easily be the absence of evil), but it made me ponder the way in which people use light as a symbol for God and goodness, and darkness as a symbol for the opposite.
I'm not a theist, I don't believe in a God or gods, but I do believe in light. And I know that light has some monumental limitations. For a start light is only "light" (as opposed to electromagnetic radiation of any other kind) if it can actually be perceived. For a blind person "light" is a non-entity. It's also only ever temporary, being pure energy it is easily absorbed or reflected, so that in any space at any particular time light is not a permanent thing. The light will eventually be destroyed or vacate the space it occupies.
And yet light is assigned to the divine, which presumably is supposed to be the least limited principle in the universe, limitless even.
Now lets look at darkness. To a person born blind darkness is all they know, it is the default, the base, if they were ever given medical treatment to allow them some sight, then this could only ever be a happy addition to that default. If they go into a dark room and close their eyes the darkness inevitably returns, because in reality it never left, it is the natural state upon which the mirage of light and sight can only play for a finite time.
So, if anything, darkness is the immortal one of the pair; it "exists" without a source, it cannot be destroyed or absorbed, it can only ever be temporarily concealed.
So what does this say of such light based god-concepts and the people who purport them, if anything?
Well, to me it only goes to demonstrate the significance people place upon the impermanent aspects of their existence (not that I'm blaming them or calling them silly, it's quite a natural thing to do). That they choose to use such a temporary and mortal entity as a symbol for that which they consider good and divine, while relegating that far more permanent and natural state of being into a position of distaste and fear says a great deal about how we as a species generally perceive the world.
That we fear the loss of the light, or perhaps the absence of God if you're that way inclined, shows us just how attached we are to the impermanent states of existence that surround us.
According to one wikipedia article Nirvana can be defined as "the reality that knows no change, no decay or death." If that doesn't describe darkness and it's dichotomy with light, I don't know what does.
Bringing all this waffle back into the context of the blog, darkness is of course symbolic of Oblivion - the eternal stage upon which the opera of life is briefly played out before being sucked back into the depths. Thus if anything, it is the opinion of this blogger that darkness is a far more fitting symbol of what is eternal, of what is powerful and "divine" in our lives than light ever could be.
Thank you for reading and goodnight.
Ceryx
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Boiling Down Buddhism
For my first proper post I'm going to talk about Buddhism.
But instead of giving the usual spiel about who Buddha was, his crazy antics as a prince and his long sit down under a tree, I want to discuss how Buddhism fits into my personal philosophy, what aspects of it I find to be beneficial and how I see it relating to the real world. For that other stuff you can go to wikipedia, or one of a billion or so other blogs - or maybe even a book if you're feeling really adventurous.
So... Buddhism. What can we say? Well, Buddhism is like a detective novel - you have your detective who's only after the truth, but between him and the truth are a bunch of clues and characters, some of which are helpful and others a hindrance to his quest.
In Buddhism you have various schools, a number of sutras, countless Bodhisattvas, a myriad of different paths and methods to enlightenment (one of which found in the Pure Land School consists of a faith-based system not unlike the faith-based salvation of protestant Christianity - much to my own perplexity).
Now don't get me wrong, these things are all fascinating in their own way, but for someone who's not looking for a reason to circumambulate their house chanting "Om Mani Padme Hum" or prostrate themselves in front of an icon of Kwan Yin, they are limited in their usefulness.
Like a detective, the seeker of the core of Buddhism needs to separate out the fundamental aspects from the ornamental extravagances. In doing so we are left with some pretty common sense teachings that aren't hard to grasp and don't require supernatural intervention to comprehend.
What Buddhism boils down to is this; the concept that people have a tendency to become attached to objects, entities and events in their lives. And when those things are taken away from them, or are never given to them or in some other way denied them, they get stressed, depressed, panicked, angry or in a multitude of other ways cause themselves suffering.
The Buddha taught "Hey, relax guy. There will always be points in your life where something you crave or delight in is withheld or taken from you, in fact it'll probably happen every day. But here's the thing, if you listen to what I have to say I can help you let go of your attachments and cravings, I can help you see how the world really functions and how you can best function in that world."
In short, practicing the teachings of the Buddha (often called the middle way) can help you learn to be happy with what you have, and not grieve when what you do have is gone.
This fits neatly in with the various other components of my philosophy. The importance I place upon Oblivion i.e. that aspect of reality which is constantly taking from us, be it time, material possessions or our lives, is somewhat equivalent to what the Buddha termed anicca or impermanence - all things change, all forms are temporary, and all forms are eventually destroyed.
Oblivion eventually consumes all things, there is no point in ignoring this fact, or denying it. In fact, comprehending this simple truth is fundamental to learning how to detach from the temporary phenomena that surround us, and in doing so relieves us of the suffering which that temporary nature inevitably engenders.
The simplistic nature of the Buddha's teachings have been expounded in relatively few places, I can only presume that this is because most Buddhists embrace the whole of the religion (or at least the whole of what their particular school determines to be the religion) rather than looking for the fundamentals alone.
Of those few places, I can recommend two from personal experience;
First a book by Stephen Batchelor titled Buddhism Without Beliefs: A Contemporary Guide to Awakening.
Second a website, Ryu Cope's Bad Buddhist Radio, the link to which can be found in the Website Link section of this blog.
I plan to give both of these excellent resources their own individual reviews at some later date, so stay tuned if that sounds interesting to you.
You've probably noticed that I haven't really gone into any of the teachings themselves, that's because this is an overview - you didn't expect me to exhaust all the juicy bits in a single post now did you? You can expect many other Buddhism related posts from me ladies and gentlemen. If going by this post that prospect scares you, please don't run and hide, because I'll also be posting lots of other mind-destroying abominations for you to play with too.
And if you disagree with anything I say about Buddhism, here or later on, feel free to post a comment so that I can tell you in precise terms exactly how wrong you are. :)
Ceryx
But instead of giving the usual spiel about who Buddha was, his crazy antics as a prince and his long sit down under a tree, I want to discuss how Buddhism fits into my personal philosophy, what aspects of it I find to be beneficial and how I see it relating to the real world. For that other stuff you can go to wikipedia, or one of a billion or so other blogs - or maybe even a book if you're feeling really adventurous.
So... Buddhism. What can we say? Well, Buddhism is like a detective novel - you have your detective who's only after the truth, but between him and the truth are a bunch of clues and characters, some of which are helpful and others a hindrance to his quest.
In Buddhism you have various schools, a number of sutras, countless Bodhisattvas, a myriad of different paths and methods to enlightenment (one of which found in the Pure Land School consists of a faith-based system not unlike the faith-based salvation of protestant Christianity - much to my own perplexity).
Now don't get me wrong, these things are all fascinating in their own way, but for someone who's not looking for a reason to circumambulate their house chanting "Om Mani Padme Hum" or prostrate themselves in front of an icon of Kwan Yin, they are limited in their usefulness.
Like a detective, the seeker of the core of Buddhism needs to separate out the fundamental aspects from the ornamental extravagances. In doing so we are left with some pretty common sense teachings that aren't hard to grasp and don't require supernatural intervention to comprehend.
What Buddhism boils down to is this; the concept that people have a tendency to become attached to objects, entities and events in their lives. And when those things are taken away from them, or are never given to them or in some other way denied them, they get stressed, depressed, panicked, angry or in a multitude of other ways cause themselves suffering.
The Buddha taught "Hey, relax guy. There will always be points in your life where something you crave or delight in is withheld or taken from you, in fact it'll probably happen every day. But here's the thing, if you listen to what I have to say I can help you let go of your attachments and cravings, I can help you see how the world really functions and how you can best function in that world."
In short, practicing the teachings of the Buddha (often called the middle way) can help you learn to be happy with what you have, and not grieve when what you do have is gone.
This fits neatly in with the various other components of my philosophy. The importance I place upon Oblivion i.e. that aspect of reality which is constantly taking from us, be it time, material possessions or our lives, is somewhat equivalent to what the Buddha termed anicca or impermanence - all things change, all forms are temporary, and all forms are eventually destroyed.
Oblivion eventually consumes all things, there is no point in ignoring this fact, or denying it. In fact, comprehending this simple truth is fundamental to learning how to detach from the temporary phenomena that surround us, and in doing so relieves us of the suffering which that temporary nature inevitably engenders.
The simplistic nature of the Buddha's teachings have been expounded in relatively few places, I can only presume that this is because most Buddhists embrace the whole of the religion (or at least the whole of what their particular school determines to be the religion) rather than looking for the fundamentals alone.
Of those few places, I can recommend two from personal experience;
First a book by Stephen Batchelor titled Buddhism Without Beliefs: A Contemporary Guide to Awakening.
Second a website, Ryu Cope's Bad Buddhist Radio, the link to which can be found in the Website Link section of this blog.
I plan to give both of these excellent resources their own individual reviews at some later date, so stay tuned if that sounds interesting to you.
You've probably noticed that I haven't really gone into any of the teachings themselves, that's because this is an overview - you didn't expect me to exhaust all the juicy bits in a single post now did you? You can expect many other Buddhism related posts from me ladies and gentlemen. If going by this post that prospect scares you, please don't run and hide, because I'll also be posting lots of other mind-destroying abominations for you to play with too.
And if you disagree with anything I say about Buddhism, here or later on, feel free to post a comment so that I can tell you in precise terms exactly how wrong you are. :)
Ceryx
Monday, June 9, 2008
Introduction
This blog is intended to be a record of the thoughts, opinions, beliefs and understandings that together congeal to form my personal religious philosophy.
The name "The Bronze Gate" comes from an H.P. Lovecraft story titled "Ex Oblivione", H.P. Lovecraft being an early 20th century horror and science fiction writer who's work (usually) had its foundation in his philosophy of mechanistic materialism. The bronze gate of the story was a mysterious doorway about which many fables had been written, some telling of exotic wonders, others of unutterable horrors lying beyond, the only consensus amongst the tales being that whomever crossed through the gate could not return.
The protagonist does what is necessary to unlock the mysterious gate, and upon entering discovers that beyond the doorway lies Oblivion, non-existence, the infinite void of death.
I named the blog after the gate of the story because of the significant role Oblivion plays in my own religious philosophy. Other facets of which include; Buddhist influences, nihilism, Lovecraft's mechanistic materialism and Cosmicism, Gnosticism and various other bits and pieces from the world's literature, religions and philosophies.
At first glance this may all seem pessimistic and depressing, but I feel that it is only through understanding our own intimate relationship with Oblivion and her related concepts, especially our own mortality and fragility, that we can truly come to appreciate our lives, overcome the various fantasies we generate to make us feel safe, and thus come to understand ourselves fully.
What you can expect from me are posts discussing various aspects of philosophy and world religions, sometimes politics and the news if I'm in the mood, reviews of books and films that I think are important or interesting, and (despite this very, and deliberately, dry introduction) my own brand of unusual (read disturbing) humour. ;)
Please feel free to comment on any of my posts, or e-mail me if you're not comfortable with the public nature of comments. Be aware though that all spam, proselytizing and any personal attacks aimed at myself or other commenters will be deleted at my discretion, and if you catch me on a bad day I'll grass you up too.
Thanks for reading this introduction, and I hope you enjoy my blog.
Ceryx.
The name "The Bronze Gate" comes from an H.P. Lovecraft story titled "Ex Oblivione", H.P. Lovecraft being an early 20th century horror and science fiction writer who's work (usually) had its foundation in his philosophy of mechanistic materialism. The bronze gate of the story was a mysterious doorway about which many fables had been written, some telling of exotic wonders, others of unutterable horrors lying beyond, the only consensus amongst the tales being that whomever crossed through the gate could not return.
The protagonist does what is necessary to unlock the mysterious gate, and upon entering discovers that beyond the doorway lies Oblivion, non-existence, the infinite void of death.
I named the blog after the gate of the story because of the significant role Oblivion plays in my own religious philosophy. Other facets of which include; Buddhist influences, nihilism, Lovecraft's mechanistic materialism and Cosmicism, Gnosticism and various other bits and pieces from the world's literature, religions and philosophies.
At first glance this may all seem pessimistic and depressing, but I feel that it is only through understanding our own intimate relationship with Oblivion and her related concepts, especially our own mortality and fragility, that we can truly come to appreciate our lives, overcome the various fantasies we generate to make us feel safe, and thus come to understand ourselves fully.
What you can expect from me are posts discussing various aspects of philosophy and world religions, sometimes politics and the news if I'm in the mood, reviews of books and films that I think are important or interesting, and (despite this very, and deliberately, dry introduction) my own brand of unusual (read disturbing) humour. ;)
Please feel free to comment on any of my posts, or e-mail me if you're not comfortable with the public nature of comments. Be aware though that all spam, proselytizing and any personal attacks aimed at myself or other commenters will be deleted at my discretion, and if you catch me on a bad day I'll grass you up too.
Thanks for reading this introduction, and I hope you enjoy my blog.
Ceryx.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
