last night i couldn't sleep, for various reasons. then, i thought that i would blog about this topic today, because i need to. i need for people to look at these ideas and tell me i am crazy or not, AND WHY. so, here we go. thank you.
what if human nature is neither good nor evil - but merely choice? i know i have written about this before, but please, stick with me here. okay, so if human nature is choice, why do we more often than not (or so it seems) choose what turns out to be harmful? i think that the answer lies in habituation. since conception, we have received stimuli that direct in one way or another, creating a rut in us to lend toward one way of thinking - one of choosing - over another. people might label this as 'original sin' but it isn't. we choose every action that we take; we have responsibility for the consequences, therefore, grace abounds all that more.
if human nature is choice, it always explains why 'bad people' can do 'good things'. in that moment in which they choose to act to create more harmony and peace and love in the world, they 'overcome' their habituation and act out against the rut. it also explains why 'good people' can sometimes do the most hurtful thing at random. so what makes the choice?
the gods in antiquity were always less than the fates, because even they had to obey what was dictated 'to be'. then along comes the judeo-christian GOD, who could be seen (if argued properly, though perhaps not correctly) as the combination and de-anthropomorphizing of the fates and the gods. but these views (perhaps also incorrect) of a GOD who demonstrates GOD's power through an all-knowing perception led to the despairing of life and the community and the individual, because most submit (inshallah), and though they continue to have actions, they lack drive, desire, purpose - for their purpose is not their own; it has been established. i am not saying that this is the normal, or what it has to be always like, we humans are fantastic at rationalizing and conjucturing, because we don't like facing truth, because always truth hurts, since we cannot hide any longer.
so what becomes of purpose? or life, if everything is a choice - since that's what we are from the moment we enter screaming. it becomes infused in our very subjective, individual sense to seek out that purpose and that plan - those choices we must make, because time, time is ever-forward rushing. but is there some common, some universal purpose? the answer is simple - no; if there is no universal entity bearing the universal standard. this is where everything goes bonkers. arguments over whether god, gods, GOD, the 'cosmos' or whatever binding forces there is exists or not, and what it is like.
but that is for another time. if we are choice, if we are infused with purpose, what do we want our communities to become? what do we want to become? those two questions, i believe can lead us to very common ground. do we want to become better than what we are currently? many would answer yes. do we want to see more good in the world; people helping people, and neighborhoods and states and countries seeking peace instead of war or fear or mistrust? yes. what should we do? choose that. simple. but most truths are - even if they place the burden of responsibility not on the government, not on the state, not on the community, and not even on the family, but the individual, and the individual comprises all of those things. everyone bears all the responsibility.
if we are choices, potentialities waiting to unfold, amid community, habituated toward certain tendencies, which are not impossible to break, beyond good and evil, having been infused with purpose, what will we become? shall we perpuate the hiroshimas of everyday atrotricities, or shall we bear the mantle of reconciliation, of peace, of hope, of faith, of love?
what are we becoming?
5 comments:
I want to respond intelligently to this post. I'll be back.
And hopefully the internet does not go anywhere.
Don't know if this is intelligent...
I like that us being 'choice' leaves a lot of possibility for change. If you're sticking to Christian doctrine though, you're kicking a tree. It pretty much says we're bad. But you know me, I'm all for moving beyond that.
Anyway, in The Brothers Karamazov it talks about how choice is the most unbearable sort of suffering. It's what we hate most. Part of why Ivan rejects Christianity is that he thinks God made the wrong decision to give us choice instead of happiness. Maybe you're right - interesting though, Dostoevsky couldn't think of anything more terrible.
i think you raise the central problem - the terribleness (terriblity?) of choice. i have no idea of how to let it be anything other than that.
as for christian doctrine - i think it was st. augustine (or as i prefer calling him in clandestine conversations (good blog title), the devil's philosopher) that come up with original sin. jesus himself believed in people. i mean, he left the kingdom of GOD up to eleven guys. he said, here you go. i'm out of here, it's your responsibility.
as for the wrong decision, choice over happiness. could there really be happiness without choice? i mean, what is happiness, but the contentment with one state over another, that you have either arrived it or gained somehow - would not that be impossible without the choice of another state to be in? i don't know; it's 3:30 in the morning, but that's when we do are best thinking.
and you're right. it's terrible. but is there anything better?
But what is the value of happiness if you have nothing to compare it to?
I cannot even begin to imagine a world with no choice and only this so-called happiness. Looking back, I am truly grateful for God giving us choice because it's the hard times that have made the good times what they are.
Maybe it's silly but I don't think happiness would have any true value unless you can choose to be happy.
Post a Comment