Reboot

From my first philosophical entries up to the latest poetic musings, two themes have kept recurring, defining me in a feverish way: the necessity of ethics and the sanctity of the individual. I suppose I tend towards these themes so forcefully due to their lost importance in this out of whack world of politics as predatory sport and academic rigor mortis.  Even the locked-in devices from which I strive to compose my thoughts provoke some response.  Ethics and individualism are quickly eroding away, a battle taking place inside of me as much as out.  The modern world is not all bad of course, and to an extent I accept what it gives as inevitable and sometimes necessary agitations, to be the gadflies stirring me awake lest I become too fanatic about my solitary ideas.  I live in the world I indict, let the record show I am aware of this surface hypocrisy, but in my defense, asceticism is not an option, not an ethical one at least.  One cannot help but speak the language provided and get caught in its web (when you play by their rules they have already won).

Every so often I break down and need to establish a perimeter of words to (however naïvely) preserve my sacred space.  And so the rant goes…

At some point it was no longer a question of having something to say and someone to process it.  It is still language, it is still talking and writing and reading, but what has changed is the goal: where once the text mattered, the subtext now dominates. Each utterance has become a territorial pissing that taunts the yet to be expressed to do the same.  Like pups stepping over each other for the same teat, to be there first, we pivot our value around the concept of outward acknowledgement: the more followers, the more reblogs, the more likes, and then the next day you start over again, you keep going back daily, hourly, at speeds incommensurable with quality or craftsmanship - just be there first.  We go at these speeds not because we have so much to say, but because we feel the need to remain relevant, as if we would dissolve entirely without a status update. With no time to cultivate an inner life outside of the exhibition, a whole generation has been raised in this accelerating culture, and, if nothing changes, they will raise the next generation in the only manner they have been taught, refining away any semblance of the individual.  It is in the hesitations, the individual resides.

The flaw we bear is not recognizing that it is a choice, and how this choice comes to inform not just our online personas but our perception of what is valuable, and ethical, and reasonable in every facet of human activity.  It is simple but so rarely given voice:  you don’t need to prove yourself to the world, if anything the world needs to prove itself to you.  If it has value, it should radiate inside you and ask nothing more than that you find your own path of least resistance.  Find happiness irrespective of how minor it may seem.  

To some this is self-delusion; to me, self-clarity.  There is a seductive inclination to be defined one way or the other, supplant one narrative for another: if not the academic marvel than the starving artist, if not the wealthy than the ascetic. It is considered a slight to call someone a jack of all trades, to weave through life without a pliable narrative that may be socially digested.  The flaw is in thinking in regards to a narrative foremost, being overly concerned with how you are read, rather than reading yourself out and editing away to your own familiar voice.  Abandon all narratives and follow your childish instinct to play.  Use whatever capacities you have to offset roadblocks to this pursuit.  Rather, see more clearly your goal, how little is required to be happy once you have whittled away the antagonisms (competition and antagonism reduced to sport).  A clarity of self sees that one lives every day through peaks and valleys of relative satisfaction, that one lives in the crevices of stories not the well-rehearsed anecdotes and finding a way to live pleasurably in the immediate and not the secondhand account ought to be the true occupation of your life. This kind of thinking may derail the ten year plan, the jockeying for position if such a position is in service only of keeping you busy and hungry for the carrot dangled in font of you.  So be it.  Defy the anecdotal life.

The pleasure of life has become secondary, what good is it to fight for a future when the present goes unopened?  Why forfeit the now, and the ability to ferret out the good in every moment?  A resourceful inner life stays with you no matter the climate, protects you better than an army. But here the rhetoric begs an antagonism I must step back from, for it is not either/or, but weaving through with a part of you always alive and playful, being the justification for any pursuit for higher level petitioning, having something to show for, something to call upon rather than empty rhetoric.  When you say life is important, dignity is important, basic human rights are important you should not meme the idea, but hold yourself up as material evidence.  It is so easy to become the ghost haunting a body still alive, to ghost all values in pursuit of some nominal gain.  It is scary how easy it is to cease to be a person and become a personage: the body dies and people can see it, smell it; when the life inside it dies it can go a lifetime unreported so long as a rudimentary set of outward markers are achieved.

Take pride in being a slacker, a jack of all trades, a melancholic, a resigned member of a society that is in such a big hurry to say nothing long enough for you to forget there is anything else to think, feel, or be.  A toast to all the thoughts left unsaid, and to those thoughts that if uttered, would still go unheard.

a caprice

the diameter of a thought is naught point naught

I know this, having measured it myself

feel free to check on your end just what the math knew

for what is knowledge, by god, if not peer-reviewed?


a capricious fiction I dare think

or worse, an ingrown hypothesis

neither tested nor earthly bound

the proven end concealed

in another dimension (let’s say)

too clever to ever be found

One’s own free and unfettered volition, one’s own caprice, however wild, one’s own fancy, inflamed sometimes to the point of madness - that is the one best and greatest good, which is never taken into consideration because it cannot fit into any classification and the omission of which sends all systems and theories to the devil.

Fyodor DostoyevskyNotes from Underground (via evocativesynthesis)

(via dostoyevsky)

“We recognize that evolution has given rise to multiple organisms that have a good, so that things can go well or badly for them, and that in some of those organisms there has appeared the additional capacity to aim consciously at their own good, and ultimately at what is good in itself. From a realist perspective this cannot be merely an accidental side effect of natural selection, and a teleological explanation satisfies this condition. On a teleological account, the existence of value is not an accident, because that is part of the explanation of why there is such a thing as life, with all its possibilities of development and variation. In brief, value is not just an accidental side effect of life; rather, there is life because life is a necessary condition of value.

This is a revision of the Darwinian picture rather than an outright denial of it. A teleological hypothesis will acknowledge that the details of that historical development are explained largely through natural selection among the available possibilities on the basis of reproductive fitness in changing environments. But even though natural selection partly determines the details of the forms of life and consciousness that exist, and the relations among them, the existence of the genetic material and the possible forms it makes available for selection have to be explained in some other way. The teleological hypothesis is that these things may be determined not merely by value-free chemistry and physics but also by something else, namely a cosmic predisposition to the formation of life, consciousness, and the value that is inseparable from them.”

Thomas Nagel, Mind & Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature is Almost Certainly False

Reboot (new edit)

From my first philosophical posts up to the latest poetic musings, there have been two themes that I keep returning to, which seem to define me in a feverish way: the necessity of ethics and the sanctity of the individual. I suppose I tend towards these themes so forcefully because of their lost importance in the modern world, a world of political squawk, academic rigor mortis, positivists, archivists, and the locked-in devices from which I strive to compose my thoughts.  Ethics and individualism are quickly eroding away, a battle taking place inside me as much as outside.  The modern world is not all bad of course, and to an extent I accept what it gives as inevitable and even necessary agitations, to be the gadflies stirring me awake lest I become too fanatic about my solitary ideas.  I live in the world I indict, let the record show I am aware of this surface hypocrisy, but in my defense, asceticism is not an option, not an ethical one at least.  One cannot help but speak the language provided and get caught in its web (when you play by their rules they have already won).  

Every so often I break down and need to establish a perimeter of words to (however naively) preserve my sacred space.  And so the rant goes…

At some point it was no longer a question of having something to say and someone to process it.  It is still language, it is still talking and writing and reading, but what has changed is the goal: where once the text mattered, the subtext now dominates. Each utterance has become a territorial pissing that goads the yet to be expressed to do the same.  Like pups stepping over each other for the same teat, to be there first, we pivot our value around the concept of outward acknowledgement: the more followers, the more reblogs, the more likes, and then the next day you start over again, you keep going back daily, hourly, at speeds in-commensurable with quality or craftsmanship - just be there first.  We go at these speeds not because we have so much to say, but because we feel the need to remain relevant, as if we would dissolve entirely without a status update. With no time to cultivate an inner life outside of the exhibition, a whole generation has been raised in this accelerating culture, and, if nothing changes, they will raise the next generation in the only manner they have been taught, refining away any semblance of the individual.  It is in the hesitations, the individual resides.

The flaw we bear is not recognizing that it is a choice, and how this choice comes to inform not just our online personas but our perception of what is valuable, and ethical, and reasonable in every facet of human activity.  It is simple but so rarely given voice:  you don’t need to prove yourself to the world, if anything the world needs to prove itself to you.  If it has value, it should radiate inside you and ask nothing more than that you find your own path of least resistance.  Find happiness irrespective of how minor it may seem.  Defy the anecdotal life.  

To some this is self-delusion, but I call it self-clarity.  There is a seductive inclination to be defined one way or the other, supplant one narrative for another: if not the academic marvel than the starving artist, if not the wealthy than the ascetic. It is considered a slight to call someone a jack of all trades, to weave through life without a pliable narrative that may be socially digested.  The flaw is in thinking in regards to a narrative foremost, being overly concerned with how you are read, rather than reading yourself out and editing away to your own familiar voice.  Abandon all narratives and follow your childish instinct to play.  Use whatever capacities you have to offset roadblocks to this pursuit - naivete is its own roadblock.  Rather, see more clearly your goal, how little is required to be happy once you have whittled away the antagonisms (competition and antagonism reduced to sport).  A clarity of self sees that one lives every day through peaks and valleys of relative satisfaction, that one lives in the crevices of stories not the well-rehearsed anecdotes and finding a way to live pleasurably in the immediate and not the secondhand account ought to be the true occupation of your life. This kind of thinking may derail the ten year plan, the jockeying for position if such a position is in service only of keeping you busy and hungry for the carrot dangled in font of you.  So be it.

My generation celebrated the slacker, but since the word has gone out of currency somewhat, in its stead, comes the manifold issue-driven, idea-movers, moving ideas from one side of the internet to the other, squandering their limited free-time to meme out a promise of a better future. The pleasure of life has become secondary, what good is it to fight for a future when the present goes unopened?  Why forfeit the now, and the ability to ferret out the good in every moment?  A resourceful inner life stays with you no matter the climate, protects you better than an army. But here the rhetoric begs an antagonism I must step back from, for it is not either/or, but weaving through with a part of you always alive and playful, being the justification for any pursuit for higher level petitioning, having something to show for, something to call upon rather than empty rhetoric.  When you say life is important, dignity is important, basic human rights are important you should not meme the idea, but hold yourself up as material evidence.  It is so easy to become the ghost haunting a body still alive, to ghost all values in pursuit of some nominal gain.  It is scary how easy it is to cease to be a person and become a personage: the body dies and people can see it, smell it; when the life inside it dies it can go a lifetime unreported so long as a rudimentary set of outward markers are achieved.  

Take pride in being a slacker, a jack of all trades, a melancholic, a resigned member of a society that is in such a big hurry to say nothing long enough for you to forget there is anything else to think, feel, or be.  A toast to all the thoughts left unsaid, and to those thoughts that if uttered, would still go unheard.

Alone but Alive

Writing is a ritualistic act to smoke out old selves that, left unsought, wisp formless into the stratosphere.  From this cultivation of selves we must stage a mutiny on the everyday and redact every last contact made with the networked collective formerly known by name.  It may be as sad and tragic as they say, but so long as we resist how things appear we may safely stowaway in our ignorance.  Better to befriend ourselves and keep those fires burning than grow cold and friendless in the self-congratulating world we got going.  Somewhere skipped a track, even if people deny it, even if it seems we are saying more than ever, that the celebration of self has never been this raucous. We will die in our dreams, boots pressed firmly to the ground, die terrified of the mistakes we made while typing…

if we don’t talk to ourselves, carry the rumor of our hearts, walk stubbornly back and start over, alone but alive, trudging defiantly to the place where we left off. 

Reboot

From my first philosophical entries up to the latest poetic musings, two themes have kept recurring, defining me in a feverish way: the necessity of ethics and the sanctity of the individual. I suppose I tend towards these themes so forcefully due to their lost importance in this out of whack world of politics as predatory sport and academic rigor mortis.  Even the locked-in devices from which I strive to compose my thoughts provoke some response.  Ethics and individualism are quickly eroding away, a battle taking place inside of me as much as out.  The modern world is not all bad of course, and to an extent I accept what it gives as inevitable and sometimes necessary agitations, to be the gadflies stirring me awake lest I become too fanatic about my solitary ideas.  I live in the world I indict, let the record show I am aware of this surface hypocrisy, but in my defense, asceticism is not an option, not an ethical one at least.  One cannot help but speak the language provided and get caught in its web (when you play by their rules they have already won).

Every so often I break down and need to establish a perimeter of words to (however naïvely) preserve my sacred space.  And so the rant goes…

At some point it was no longer a question of having something to say and someone to process it.  It is still language, it is still talking and writing and reading, but what has changed is the goal: where once the text mattered, the subtext now dominates. Each utterance has become a territorial pissing that taunts the yet to be expressed to do the same.  Like pups stepping over each other for the same teat, to be there first, we pivot our value around the concept of outward acknowledgement: the more followers, the more reblogs, the more likes, and then the next day you start over again, you keep going back daily, hourly, at speeds incommensurable with quality or craftsmanship - just be there first.  We go at these speeds not because we have so much to say, but because we feel the need to remain relevant, as if we would dissolve entirely without a status update. With no time to cultivate an inner life outside of the exhibition, a whole generation has been raised in this accelerating culture, and, if nothing changes, they will raise the next generation in the only manner they have been taught, refining away any semblance of the individual.  It is in the hesitations, the individual resides.

The flaw we bear is not recognizing that it is a choice, and how this choice comes to inform not just our online personas but our perception of what is valuable, and ethical, and reasonable in every facet of human activity.  It is simple but so rarely given voice:  you don’t need to prove yourself to the world, if anything the world needs to prove itself to you.  If it has value, it should radiate inside you and ask nothing more than that you find your own path of least resistance.  Find happiness irrespective of how minor it may seem.  

To some this is self-delusion; to me, self-clarity.  There is a seductive inclination to be defined one way or the other, supplant one narrative for another: if not the academic marvel than the starving artist, if not the wealthy than the ascetic. It is considered a slight to call someone a jack of all trades, to weave through life without a pliable narrative that may be socially digested.  The flaw is in thinking in regards to a narrative foremost, being overly concerned with how you are read, rather than reading yourself out and editing away to your own familiar voice.  Abandon all narratives and follow your childish instinct to play.  Use whatever capacities you have to offset roadblocks to this pursuit.  Rather, see more clearly your goal, how little is required to be happy once you have whittled away the antagonisms (competition and antagonism reduced to sport).  A clarity of self sees that one lives every day through peaks and valleys of relative satisfaction, that one lives in the crevices of stories not the well-rehearsed anecdotes and finding a way to live pleasurably in the immediate and not the secondhand account ought to be the true occupation of your life. This kind of thinking may derail the ten year plan, the jockeying for position if such a position is in service only of keeping you busy and hungry for the carrot dangled in font of you.  So be it.  Defy the anecdotal life.

The pleasure of life has become secondary, what good is it to fight for a future when the present goes unopened?  Why forfeit the now, and the ability to ferret out the good in every moment?  A resourceful inner life stays with you no matter the climate, protects you better than an army. But here the rhetoric begs an antagonism I must step back from, for it is not either/or, but weaving through with a part of you always alive and playful, being the justification for any pursuit for higher level petitioning, having something to show for, something to call upon rather than empty rhetoric.  When you say life is important, dignity is important, basic human rights are important you should not meme the idea, but hold yourself up as material evidence.  It is so easy to become the ghost haunting a body still alive, to ghost all values in pursuit of some nominal gain.  It is scary how easy it is to cease to be a person and become a personage: the body dies and people can see it, smell it; when the life inside it dies it can go a lifetime unreported so long as a rudimentary set of outward markers are achieved.

Take pride in being a slacker, a jack of all trades, a melancholic, a resigned member of a society that is in such a big hurry to say nothing long enough for you to forget there is anything else to think, feel, or be.  A toast to all the thoughts left unsaid, and to those thoughts that if uttered, would still go unheard.