I began this draft in March, during a brief philosophical sparring match, between John, Matt and myself on Matt's blog, ColonelLuftwaffe. It was Matt's inaugural blog, actually, describing himself and his views on religion. It quickly evolved/devolved into a pretty fierce and productive debate on the Prime Mover, though. The debate covered a lot of ground over a week or so, but ended in stalemate (as most discussions on religion do).
The point I was trying to make at the time was to discount the premise that an infinite sequence of causes, stretching backwards in time for infinity isn't necessarily an unacceptable solution. Discounting that possibility is the starting point for the debate on cosmology, which ends, of course in necessitating a Prime Mover, or First Cause (a cause which, itself, has no cause). I argued that has no experience, or understanding of either an infinite regression or an uncaused cause, so what makes one solution superior to another?
The idea has been rattling around in my head ever since, and it seems timely - considering the solstice and impending new year - to revisit.
Why can we not understand beginnings and ends?
Well... because we've never experienced them. What we've experienced are translations from one form to another. We've witnessed links in the chain of causality - that is how we think of beginnings and endings. The end of a movie leads to gathering outside to discuss, which ends by way of splitting up to our separate cars, which follows in a lovely dinner. The goat leads to a baby goat, which leads to an adult goat, which leads to my kebab, which leads to, etc etc. In our minds, it cannot be "turtles all the way down", but we also cannot conceive of a first turtle, floating just above nothingness.
So what? It's an interesting paradox, a stimulating academic discussion. No, it's more than that. Because at some point we're each going to stare it in the face, not in an academic setting, but in our lives, in the form of our own death. Someday, I'll witness my own end. The end of Me, and the end of Me-ness. I don't know if I will experience an afterlife, but every bit of scientific knowledge tells me that my Self is housed in my brain. And I know that my brain is going to fall apart. All of those little bits of memory, held together in networked synapses to make Me - will be worm food. That is very... final. It's a difficult notion to come to terms with.
My flesh is another link in the chain of causality. But the abstract notion of my Self will end, absolutely. What will a state of nothingness feel like? Well, there's nothing to feel, and nothing to be felt. I will be remembered, for a while, but those remembrances will be a shadow, an aspect reflected from other people's selves.
Where am I going with this? What am I doing? It's ironic that for a blog about beginnings and endings, I cannot think of an ending. Well, what better way to close the 2011 chapter of Dungy-blog than by quoting Dune:
"Arrakis teaches the attitude of the knife — chopping off what’s incomplete and saying: 'Now it’s complete because it’s ended here.'"
DONE
Postscript: I'm ending my "Hiatus", and I plan on blogging more frequently starting next month. Sometime in January I plan to do a "State of the Blog" blog, describing a vision for the next year, and I invite John and Matt to do the same. Naturally, coverage of the Primary will resume in earnest for the Iowa Caucus and onward. I hope I'm not alone in believing this has been a very good year. We've covered a lot of ground, and even though we have little viewership, and we're making no grandiose contribution to solving the world's woes, I still feel that we've hit a vein of good conversation. Something like that is both common yet rare - and definately uniquely good. Cheers to all, here's to an excellent 2012.
Tuesday, December 27, 2011
Friday, December 23, 2011
Friday, December 16, 2011
Blog Event: God Comes Back And Doles Out The Harshness
This'll be a short one. The topic is: If God asked you to choose they way he returns to the scene, in a big, dramatic, apocalyptic way, what would you do?
"Very cute! It's whatever we think of! If we think of J. Edgar Hoover, J. Edgar Hoover will appear and destroy us. Empty your heads, don't think of anything!"
"I tried to think of the most harmless thing. Something I loved from my childhood. Something that could never, ever possibly destroy us: Mr. Stay Puff't."
Serious Scenario - The Quickening
I would ask God to cause every person on Earth to experience their own death. Not just a spontaneous, drop dead thing. But to experience their own, unique death. Whatever that would eventually be for each person. Some would experience a death bed thing, surrounded by family. Some would have get shot in the face. Some would get hit by a bus. However you're fated to die, you spontaneously skip to that moment. And after death, you get the experience your judgement by God. You'll be scrutinized by the man upstairs, and given the objective, unadulterated truth.
Then, everyone snaps back to their life. We get to keep the memory of the experience, and would hopefully walk away with a new perspective and a better attitude. And, we'd know that God exists into the bargain. Win-win.
Not Serious Scenario - Hobo Awakening
I'd ask God to give every homeless person in the world super mutant powers. X-men style, where it's totally random. Some would be mega sweet (telekinesis is the best - fact), some would be super lame (ability to grow finger nails at an accelerated rate ala Family Guy). But the overall affect is that we, the sane and employed normals would be forced to submit to our new crazed hobo overlords. They would probably force us into service as still operators, cranking out the bathtub hooch that they require to keep their energy levels high, and minds limber.
The stench would be... incalculable.
"Very cute! It's whatever we think of! If we think of J. Edgar Hoover, J. Edgar Hoover will appear and destroy us. Empty your heads, don't think of anything!"
"I tried to think of the most harmless thing. Something I loved from my childhood. Something that could never, ever possibly destroy us: Mr. Stay Puff't."
Serious Scenario - The Quickening
I would ask God to cause every person on Earth to experience their own death. Not just a spontaneous, drop dead thing. But to experience their own, unique death. Whatever that would eventually be for each person. Some would experience a death bed thing, surrounded by family. Some would have get shot in the face. Some would get hit by a bus. However you're fated to die, you spontaneously skip to that moment. And after death, you get the experience your judgement by God. You'll be scrutinized by the man upstairs, and given the objective, unadulterated truth.
Then, everyone snaps back to their life. We get to keep the memory of the experience, and would hopefully walk away with a new perspective and a better attitude. And, we'd know that God exists into the bargain. Win-win.
Not Serious Scenario - Hobo Awakening
I'd ask God to give every homeless person in the world super mutant powers. X-men style, where it's totally random. Some would be mega sweet (telekinesis is the best - fact), some would be super lame (ability to grow finger nails at an accelerated rate ala Family Guy). But the overall affect is that we, the sane and employed normals would be forced to submit to our new crazed hobo overlords. They would probably force us into service as still operators, cranking out the bathtub hooch that they require to keep their energy levels high, and minds limber.
The stench would be... incalculable.
Thursday, December 15, 2011
Primary Update
This is still premature, but my compliments to friend-of-the-blog John Stegeman on the quality of his bet in this years primary wager. He's the only man with more than one horse still in the race. John's $1 bet on Ron Paul may end up winning the whole thing. If it goes to Romney, John and I tie. If Gingrich, then God help us all.
I still consider Paul to be a "speculative" candidate, but he's been polling pretty consistently in the top three since Cain dropped out. Those who are crushed by apathy toward Romney, and revolted by everything that is Gingrich seem to be wising up that Paul is a true-blue libertarian who has a faint hope of changing the game in a general election. That's all a little pie-in-the-sky, but it might be true that those right-leaners who realize they're probably going to lose, would rather lose big on someone they actually like, and care about.
For all of the races for an "unconventional", third party type of candidate, this is it. I decree: If Paul doesn't win Iowa or New Hampshire, it seals the fate of any similar candidates in future races. Might as well hang it up, because this is the time. This is the perfect storm. The only competition is a robot and a sociopath. The Lord of Abraham has parted the Red Sea, and cleared a path of safety. If Ron Paul lacks the muscle to push through the crossing, then this was a lost cause to start with.
I don't want to make any predictions, because Iowa is so decidedly unpredictable. It in the hands of Almighty Fate, now. A blowup or burnout from the front runners is possible, but we're at T-Minus 19 days and counting. Best to hold off judgement, and see what comes out the other side of Iowa. After that we can survey the landscape again.
I do hope that Paul wins. I would not and will not vote for him, not just because of the candidate himself, but because of the state of the party as a whole. It's not ready for power yet. It needs defeat. But in Paul I see someone who is both representative of the Tea Party as well as sincere and decent. He deserves to run for President. Not to mention, the debates between Obama and Paul would be interesting. A Gingrich run would be fun to watch, in a way; but morally corrupting. The man infects everything he touches like a putrid fever. Anyway, he doesn't deserve the prize. No, I'm putting my hopes in a Paul victory, followed by a Paul defeat. So let it be written. So let it be done.
I still consider Paul to be a "speculative" candidate, but he's been polling pretty consistently in the top three since Cain dropped out. Those who are crushed by apathy toward Romney, and revolted by everything that is Gingrich seem to be wising up that Paul is a true-blue libertarian who has a faint hope of changing the game in a general election. That's all a little pie-in-the-sky, but it might be true that those right-leaners who realize they're probably going to lose, would rather lose big on someone they actually like, and care about.
For all of the races for an "unconventional", third party type of candidate, this is it. I decree: If Paul doesn't win Iowa or New Hampshire, it seals the fate of any similar candidates in future races. Might as well hang it up, because this is the time. This is the perfect storm. The only competition is a robot and a sociopath. The Lord of Abraham has parted the Red Sea, and cleared a path of safety. If Ron Paul lacks the muscle to push through the crossing, then this was a lost cause to start with.
I don't want to make any predictions, because Iowa is so decidedly unpredictable. It in the hands of Almighty Fate, now. A blowup or burnout from the front runners is possible, but we're at T-Minus 19 days and counting. Best to hold off judgement, and see what comes out the other side of Iowa. After that we can survey the landscape again.
I do hope that Paul wins. I would not and will not vote for him, not just because of the candidate himself, but because of the state of the party as a whole. It's not ready for power yet. It needs defeat. But in Paul I see someone who is both representative of the Tea Party as well as sincere and decent. He deserves to run for President. Not to mention, the debates between Obama and Paul would be interesting. A Gingrich run would be fun to watch, in a way; but morally corrupting. The man infects everything he touches like a putrid fever. Anyway, he doesn't deserve the prize. No, I'm putting my hopes in a Paul victory, followed by a Paul defeat. So let it be written. So let it be done.
Tuesday, December 6, 2011
Random Thought
Most of our lives are spent thinking - either consciously or not - about what we want, and how to go about getting it. It's an endless cycle of wanting and getting, or wanting and not getting and wanting some more. Acquire and advance. Move from one desire to another: objects, status, recognition, feelings, control, perspective, knowledge. Wanting, wanting, wanting. The key moment is when something gives us pause, and we can see this happening, just for a moment, in a detached, objective way.
And we feel... Disgust? Maybe boredom? I'm not sure, but we see how silly and generally pointless this is. And, if we're lucky, we put a little thought into finding a better way to think, just any other way to look at the world than through the filter of desire and need. That small moment of enlightened perspective may be the beginning of real morality, spinning out from thought to action. A human being is an engine; but an engine of what? The purpose depends on the program, and pervasive crimethink keeps us from acheiving moral ends. Perspective is our weapon, applying self-analysis to root out thought crime and replace it with something else.
And we feel... Disgust? Maybe boredom? I'm not sure, but we see how silly and generally pointless this is. And, if we're lucky, we put a little thought into finding a better way to think, just any other way to look at the world than through the filter of desire and need. That small moment of enlightened perspective may be the beginning of real morality, spinning out from thought to action. A human being is an engine; but an engine of what? The purpose depends on the program, and pervasive crimethink keeps us from acheiving moral ends. Perspective is our weapon, applying self-analysis to root out thought crime and replace it with something else.
Monday, December 5, 2011
To Mr. Joel Griffith
You are a propagandist.
If you are aware of that, you are acting in bad faith.
If not, you are deluding yourself.
The former makes you a villain.
The latter makes you an animal.
Sincerely,
Me
If you are aware of that, you are acting in bad faith.
If not, you are deluding yourself.
The former makes you a villain.
The latter makes you an animal.
Sincerely,
Me
Thursday, December 1, 2011
Follow up on Blog Event
I apologize to Matt (but not John, as he was too consumed with novel writing) for abruptly terminating my word exchange. Work and holiday junk brought the figurative hammer down on me, hard. I've been wanting to write, but my brain has been in a state of disarray and I've temporarily (I hope) lost the capacity for rational thought.
Reflecting on this, I'm feeling more like deciding NOT to vote in this primary is probably the Right Thing To Do. However, I'm still far from absolute, metaphysical certitude on the issue.
What I've realized is that by voting for a Tea Party candidate who might not get the nomination without my help, I'm - by definition - propping up a loser. I'm taking a fringe, or borderline fringe, candidate and artifically inflating them into the mainstream. If the Tea Party ethos was representative of the GOP majority, it wouldn't need my help in the first place, no? If, however, GOP voters (due to indecision or lack of principles or whatever) lean towards the more electable plastic conservativism, then that's the ideology and policy (not just the man) that they are endorsing, whether they realize it or not.
I want to see a defeat dealt to what I see as "false conservativism", rather than some beige, vaguely Right-wing, populist pap. That's not a bad thing to want. It's well intentioned, sure. But I liken it to convincing a small time criminal to attempt a bigger, more violent crime - all for the hope of getting him greater prison time when he's eventually caught. That's not an unjust intention, sure. But there are more straightforward ways of confronting injustice than such a convoluted - and frankly, dirty - plan. What if I talk him into a murder and he's never caught? Or he get's off on a technicality, like the arresting officer forgot to read him Miranda? I would bear responsibility for whatever crime he commited. Same thing.
In a VERY extreme circumstance, such methods might be OK. If all other avenues to justice are closed, and the stakes are high enough, then such a convoluted plan might be the only way. But that's not the case here.
At any rate, this all feels less dire now. Romney seems to be slowly losing the "electability" appeal as all other candidates, ANY other candidate is having some time in the spotlight (now it's Gingrich, God help us). Who knows, maybe Huntsman will even have 15 minutes to shine.
Reflecting on this, I'm feeling more like deciding NOT to vote in this primary is probably the Right Thing To Do. However, I'm still far from absolute, metaphysical certitude on the issue.
What I've realized is that by voting for a Tea Party candidate who might not get the nomination without my help, I'm - by definition - propping up a loser. I'm taking a fringe, or borderline fringe, candidate and artifically inflating them into the mainstream. If the Tea Party ethos was representative of the GOP majority, it wouldn't need my help in the first place, no? If, however, GOP voters (due to indecision or lack of principles or whatever) lean towards the more electable plastic conservativism, then that's the ideology and policy (not just the man) that they are endorsing, whether they realize it or not.
I want to see a defeat dealt to what I see as "false conservativism", rather than some beige, vaguely Right-wing, populist pap. That's not a bad thing to want. It's well intentioned, sure. But I liken it to convincing a small time criminal to attempt a bigger, more violent crime - all for the hope of getting him greater prison time when he's eventually caught. That's not an unjust intention, sure. But there are more straightforward ways of confronting injustice than such a convoluted - and frankly, dirty - plan. What if I talk him into a murder and he's never caught? Or he get's off on a technicality, like the arresting officer forgot to read him Miranda? I would bear responsibility for whatever crime he commited. Same thing.
In a VERY extreme circumstance, such methods might be OK. If all other avenues to justice are closed, and the stakes are high enough, then such a convoluted plan might be the only way. But that's not the case here.
At any rate, this all feels less dire now. Romney seems to be slowly losing the "electability" appeal as all other candidates, ANY other candidate is having some time in the spotlight (now it's Gingrich, God help us). Who knows, maybe Huntsman will even have 15 minutes to shine.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)