Do you ever just sit down, stare at your paper and pen, or your screen and keyboard and just kind of sigh. When you have so many thoughts but none of them string together in a cohesive alignment, or none of them fit the same context, or at the very worst you’re not even sure what they mean? Well yea, that is me, right now.
And that will be my topic I will align my thoughts to. Why do we feel the need to express our thoughts? Even when we’re sat alone at home, why do we find it necessary to find an outlet for them? I guess it could be due to our natural inclination to be open with one another. Or it could be a defence mechanism for coping with the thoughts – particularly if they are negative. Or it could be in order to better ourselves. Jotting down thoughts certainly gives us the closest to a third person perspective we could ever ask for. And that enables us to analyse them, it enables us as well to exude these negative thoughts and thus examine them with a clearer, more neutral mind.
One thing these things have in common is subtracting a certain amount of thoughts from being stuck within us. A way of ridding them. I’m sure we’ve all ‘thought’ (oh the irony..) that we would like to switch of our brains for a bit. Or that we would like to permanently erase something from our memories. This idea of ridding thoughts is of course just that, just an idea. So the only realistic pursuit of this being possible is the ability to somehow monitor or distract, or expel them from ourselves. By turning them into a physical object (ink on paper) rather than an elusive enigma of floating consciousness that troubles us, saddens us and can drive us insane.
That’s a lot of thought bashing. It brings me to the question of what is so good about them… I mean really, what is good about thoughts? Yes it allows us to analyse situations in a complex manor, it allows us to be self-aware, it allows us to plan ahead to try and create a life that we believe is best for us. If wed ignore the black whole side of thoughts, the side that sucks our mood into it in a moment of mental masturbation then I guess we can start thinking about these positives. But would we really need to plan a life if we had no thoughts in the first place, we’re planning because we get upset by things because of how we feel and think – we’re thinking to help previous negative thinking.. What.
The only conclusion this leads me to is, thoughts are life. They allow us to interpret things, soak them in rather than having them penetrate right through us without so much a ripple of conscious effect. And this is good. Because despite life as we know it existing without our thoughts, it doesn’t exist to us. And if the only way I can experience life is by coping with a cocktail of complex thought processes then that is a sacrifice I am willing to make.
In a previous post I’ve discussed my view on personhood, I believe we’re purely a bundle of biology (not that that’s a bad thing..) I also believe in determinism, a combination that gives my life very little meaning or hope, but anyway.
Today I watched a documentary on the serial killer Arthur shawcross and not only did it illuminate the absence of any remorse, empathy or guilt Arthur lacked but suggested that he had an ‘abnormality’ in the brain, common in serial killers, or even killers for that matter. Identifying this it was argued that Arthur couldn’t be held responsible because he couldn’t help act in the way he did due to his innate programming, he didn’t chose to have this biological abnormality. Well of course he didn’t because he IS this biological abnormality and therefor he is fully to blame.
But similarly then, caring people, charitable people, loving people, cannot be praised for good deeds because they are programmed that way inclined. I couldn’t commit a murder, so by not I’m no better than Arthur why should I be praised for something I cannot possibly be do anyway?
Ok ok ok contradictions all over the place! I’m saying we are not responsible for anything we do, and therefore punishment and praise are irrelevant.. But really we are fully responsible for everything we do because what we are IS what we do. For example I am a person who happens to obtain a sympathetic mind, Arthur is a person who happens to contain an abnormality in the brain. He is the abnormality and I am the caring brain. There is no ‘me’ or ‘him’ seperate to the entities within my brain. I and my brain, and all contained within my brain are not distinguishable. All are one. So yes, I can fully blaim Arthur.
As a quick starting point to this post, I feel it necessary to say that all previous posts have been atleast composed, if not posted within the early hours of the morning/late hours of night. For some reason nightfall seems to provoke spontaneous and somewhat annoying amounts of thoughts. I mean I can’t sleep so let’s go onto wordpress. The site I’ve abandoned.
As an atheist I’m often asked and infact often question the point of anything. I mean I don’t really think there is a point or a purpose to life and I’m ok with accepting that but I’m not sure whether I should be trying to create one, and if I should, what I should create it to be. Should it be to make an impact in the world? Maybe create a charity, or get involved with politics or perhaps to be as successful as I can, selfishly and just make money, live for me and no one else. Or should I try and stack up some experiences maybe go travelling, maybe challenge myself with a skydive? I mean all of these have benefits but it’s the sort of position I feel in when I have too many tests or something coming up and there’s so much to do that I decide to do nothing.. And if this happens with my life, I’m in trouble.
And then I realised that the very worst one I could pick would be the selfish one, obviously. But that actually that’s the one almost everyone does pick. I mean this earth is so unjust, people are flying around the world first class, buying designer handbags, eating in fancy restaurants, buying new phones for a slightly more pixelated camera and meanwhile there’s children starving all over the world, there are enough resources for everyone, anyone flying first class should feel seriously guilty, I mean you’re selfish, selfish as fuck. Because what we’re doing is accepting this SYSTEM were accepting that if it’s not us it’s ok. We can voluntarily make ourselves blind to it, close off the starvation because it isn’t in our little bubble, that new iPhones important to me, in my bubble, so I’ll get it, what difference does it make? But everyone thinks like this. And it’s seen as ok to think like this, it isn’t ok. This whole world is fucked up. People are dying now, right now. And the naivity of charity’s. I know they help, but as a concept they barely scratch the surface of the problem, charities aren’t using money efficiently because giving more money into a corrupt system won’t help in the long run. We need to change to system.
Why celebrate the amount of money we raise annually for children in need? So we can feel good about texting the word ‘help’ to 70005 so celebrities living in mansions can hike up a mountain before giving themselves a pat on the back and recovering back home to their mansion. There’s no point climbing that mountain, if you really cared, you’d downgrade your house, you wouldn’t expect average working class people to sponsor you, I mean the cheek. It’s ludicrous. We’re all playing this game. We say we want world starvation to end but if everyone who’s said that ment it, it would have ended. It’s unbelievable that we can live with ourselves. But we do, because ‘that’s life’. It’s just ‘life’ that some people get the short straw. And if you’ve not got that straw you bloody well lather it up in the long straw. But off course you still say you care. Oh off course, because publicly denying to care would lead to uproar, because it wouldn’t abide by the rules of the game. So long as everyone keeps lying, it’ll be ok. So long as everyone keeps ignoring the problems, they aren’t there.
It’s not a question I’ve pondered on a lot, that is until recently, I’m not sure what triggered me to even consider such a question I guess maybe the way in which we use our language to label almost everything. Everything including things we don’t understand or can’t claim to be ‘true’ I.e. God, love, pain etc. We can’t define these things and they are certainly subjective.. Are these traits applicable to the idea of a ‘future’?
If one doesn’t believe in any form of divinity or destiny then surely one must accept that the future doesn’t exist, for to exist it would be predetermined. For example one might claim that the future is say in two minutes time from now, the present. But to say with certainty that the future exists would rely on the concept of a greater being that had already put it in place. Something that had determined that there is going to be a ‘in two minutes time’. But surely if ‘in two minutes’ time is already determined it isn’t the future at all, because it is already ‘there’, it is currently, presently existing. Therefor it is ‘present’ but just not present in our current time.
Another argument is that we never experience the future, only the present. It is impossible for anything or anyone to ever exist in the future, because the present is inescapable, therefor the ‘future’ is unobservable by any of the senses, it is also, as expressed earlier unexplainable by definition. Or is it? A way of defining the future could indeed be ‘things still to come’. Although things still to come are in my opinion a continuous set of ‘presents’. However the ambiguity of the ‘future’ surely allows for interpretation, although ‘events yet to come’ are unanimously almost entirely ‘unknown’ why not label it with a word ‘future’ allowing future to vaguely assert a more conclusive concept. Although the future is arguably ‘nothing’ and never will be this doesn’t mean it can’t have a word to it. A meaningless word but nonetheless a quicker more efficient way of expressing ourselves.