I have a wish for the world, which I understand to be a contradiction

Thread replies: 4
Thread images: 1

Anonymous
2016-07-11 05:49:09 Post No. 29870209
[Report] Image search: [Google]

File: kek.jpg (25 KB, 603x464) Image search: [Google]

Anonymous 2016-07-11 05:49:09 Post No. 29870209 [Report]

I have a wish for the world, which I understand to be a contradiction in terms. Nevertheless, I am convinced that my view is right, and so I present it here for you to consider it.

What I want is of course to live in a world which is much better than this one. But since this is not really meaningfully tenable, I provisionally return to a more realistic consideration of our present world. What can and should be done with regard to this one world in which we may live?

We should live in the world, and we should have a particular attitude towards the world, based upon evidence - it is these two truths which are contradictory. Since I resign myself to this world, to make the best of it I can, here is what I want: I want to live in a world where the basic, more pleasant aspects of human society continue - if you keel over, an ambulace will get you. You can usually warlk around outside at night without being killed, sometimes eat delicious food. That type of thing. At the exact same time, I want to live in a world where the uniform cultural acknowledgement and understanding of things, is of a nihilistic outlook towards the world. A basic godlessness and purposelessness is understood to be most likely the case, and that even if it weren't, then it is incumbent on the Deity to show itself, otherwise we are not obliged to seriously bother about it. I want to live in a society of outwardly productive, civil nihilists, who yet acknowledge that where it really counts, we are all equal in the end.

Of course, these two conceits are contradictory in the sense that if you really truly believe in your heart of hearts that existence is meaningless, then there is nothing stopping you from walking off your paramedic job in the middle of treating a dying man, etc. But my thought is that we require both truth to make the best available decisions, and yet we are still also constrained by our animal motivations. As slaves to our animal bodies, this "keeps us honest", to a point.

>>

Anonymous 2016-07-11 06:05:20 Post No.29870551
[Report]

Anonymous 2016-07-11 06:05:20 Post No.29870551 [Report]

>>29870209
just letting you know, I read all of it. thanks for sharing.

>>

Anonymous 2016-07-11 06:05:53 Post No.29870568
[Report]

Anonymous 2016-07-11 06:05:53 Post No.29870568 [Report]

>>29870209
is that Cioran?

>>

Anonymous 2016-07-11 06:06:46 Post No.29870587
[Report]

Anonymous 2016-07-11 06:06:46 Post No.29870587 [Report]

>>29870209
>it is incumbent on the Deity to show itself

I was following you until I got to this sentiment. You seem to be a man of sound mind, but this idea that you are owed something like this is foolish.

Ants are industrious like people. They build their anthills on the lawns of beings utterly beyond them in scope, physically and mentally. If an ant somehow wanted proof of something beyond itself and somehow got it, it would not even be able to recognize it. Ants don't even know giants walk among them all the time, building machines that could obliterate the planet - of which they have no understanding.

Human beings are not ants obviously. We are self-aware, and the more thoughtful ones constantly seek to understand a grander formulation of reality beyond themselves. Some have even written about finding it. All we can say for certain, is that personal experience trumps all theory.

Deity showing or not showing itself is a moot point. People go through life regardless. What IS important, is the individual's attempt to experience this thing which is beyond themselves. Be it ideology, a philosophy, a sense of duty, responsibility, etc. It isn't always "Deity."

Your formulation is not practical, because you cannot reconcile your theories with reality. You fail to resolve the contradiction, which is what philosophers do, and instead keep things fragmented.