I started this ramble in a personal, almost confessional tone, and by the time I stopped it had become almost the opposite, very abstract. I was going to edit it, but then I decided I like it better as it is. It's more interesting. I stopped writing because I was tired. I do wish I had "finished" it, but I doubt that would have happened anyway. My trains of thought generally don't work that way. I almost never set out with a definite goal in mind, and I seldom arrive at any final conclusions. Most times I go simply to enjoy the ride, and do so until I decide the time has come to get off.
The Ramble:
I find it hard to be honest with people because I find it hard to be honest with myself. It isn't that I lie to myself,l; I just don't know what the truth is.
Honesty requires a certain degree of certainty, which I just don't have. Ultimately, my problem is a lack of faith. I have doubts about everything, even about myself and my intentions.
It is a horrid existence, that is at least one thing I'm certain of. I think many people see faith as no more than a sign of weakness. In truth, it is a source of strength. Moreover, faith is the only source of strength, apart from the meaningless fluctuations of nature.
I think there were times when this was understood, but now it is nearly impossible to even express without sounding archaic. Words like wisdom, fortune, virtue - they refer to a worldview that we have rejected, although in favour of what, we cannot say.
We ridicule these words today. We dismiss them on the basis that they do not pass our current test of acceptability. They do not meet our standards. But when asked to identity the candidates who have succeeded, we are silent.
There is a very real practice of constant and perpetual censorship that occurs in all human interaction.
There is an unspoken code governing what can be expressed and what is forbidden.
The code is negotiated between the members of the group involved in the interaction.
The code gives the individuals a feeling of security, because it provides predictability.
Humans are capable of a vast range of wildly varying behaviour.
Unlike animals, we have no biologically fixed patterns of behaviour. Our complexity and individuality would cause chaos if we had no social codes.
We feel uncomfortable around strangers because we haven't yet established a code, so we cannot predict how the interaction will unfold.
But there is a price for safety. As individuals, we are also bound by whatever code is established.
The reason we have "friends" is because we favor the particular code we have established with that particular person/persons.
When groups reach a certain size, it becomes necessary to make a physical marker to refer to certain aspects of the code. This ensures these aspects of the code will not be challenged or subverted. Unlike human memory, a physical object is permanent and unchanging.
Written languages, currencies, laws and nations are just highly evolved forms of such markers. The codes they relate to have been negotiated over millenia and involve billions of individuals.
The enlightenment witnessed a challenge to certain codes on the basis that they obstructed the progress of scientific discovery. The enlightenment challenge was based on the notion that reason is distinct from codes. Reason is somehow separate. It is like a physical marker that exists everywhere and nowhere.
No comments:
Post a Comment