First Proposition Let us consider the universe and existence from a purely human perspective. It may be true that the labels of ‘evil/negative’ and ‘good/positive’ have no real meaning other than as a subjective interpretation of events and phenomena from an individual or communal point of view. What is ‘good’ for you may be ‘evil’ for me, and vice versa, but there are certain general ideas that we agree, as living, conscious beings with shared interests, as to their nature. For instance most human beings will concur that darkness, cold, and death are negative forces whereas light, heat, and life are positive ones. {Let us ignore the fact that the labels can be reversed without losing any of the meaning so that we don’t get bogged down with semantics} Taking this shared humanistic perspective as a given and leaving behind more objective philosophical interpretations, we notice that the universe, as it relates to us, is mostly a negative place. Darkness, cold, and death predominate as the most common state of things but also need no effort to exist; they just are. In other words, they appear to be the ‘normal’ condition of the universe in general. Keeping this in mind we must suppose that negativity is the rule of the universe while positive forces are the exception to this rule. This because light, heat and life, as well as all other forces associated with positive ideas, require a sacrifice, a consumption and an effort to come to be and to continue being. When this effort, sacrifice and consumption ceases the universe returns to its natural, previous condition. The universe, in essence, is a place, as perceived by human minds, where positive forces push back the negative fabric in small temporary pockets and establish a momentary equilibrium in which consciousness is made possible. Man perceives this momentary balance of forces as order and mistakenly assumes that it is the general condition of the entire universe itself. Most go even further and suppose a dominant positive essence as the creating force of the universe, whereas in fact the opposite is more likely to be true. In the balance of positive and negative forces and in this constant battle of ‘the positive’ to gain a foothold in a ‘negative’ universe, change becomes a fundamental part of survival and makes evolution a necessary mechanism of continued existence in a universe striving to destroy life and to return to its normal condition of lifelessness as it strives to return to darkness and cold. From this first proposition, it is easy to conclude that life is, in fact, a constant striving and suffering caused by this pushing back of forces that seek to return to pre-existing circumstances. As Schopenhauer put it: “Life is need and need is suffering; therefore life is suffering” It was Schopenhauer also that defined pleasure as a negative idea, since it is merely the absence of suffering and a momentary reprieve from the natural state of consciousness. In other words death and pleasure are synonyms. Indeed life rewards with survival all those that have paid their dues to her in misery and action and embellishes, those of her creations, with superiority that have exerted and struggled on her behalf. It is in this continuous fight against death that life becomes creative, adaptive and ascends to higher and more complicated constructs. Within this interpretation of the universe lies the true spirit of asceticism and its real worth to man. Second Proposition Most, due to dictionary definitions and religious extremism, associate asceticism with a complete rejection of pleasure and luxury and a total denial of life itself. But I will propose a new perspective on asceticism that may prove advantageous and attractive to all seeking personal empowerment. It is true that Buddhism and Christianity have taught an extreme level of self-denial and many other religions and philosophies advocate abstinence as a form of escapism from life’s trappings and temptations, but for me one need not become so severe in order to benefit from asceticism’s merits. Asceticism, as I see it, is more akin to athleticism, where both strengthen an individual through pain and suffering but need only be practiced consistently, not continuously, in order to profit from them. Both athleticism and asceticism require self-control and an exposure to unwanted and mostly undeserved pain and suffering through which a body and a mind gain strength, discipline and stamina, necessary throughout life and under all circumstances. It isn’t a mistake to believe that misery is the sources of all mental and physical beauty given that nature denounces stagnation as death itself and imposes a constant striving and changing through the promise of pleasure. It may be disturbing for us to acknowledge that nature abhors conformity and lethargy and so rewards struggle and exertion with superiority, that is easily distinguishable in all those exposed to physical and mental suffering and becomes most beneficial to an individual who experiences and survives adversity, but it cannot be denied. In contrast the effects of comfort and overindulgence can also be plainly noticeable in individuals lacking any contact with suffering and effort; their intellectual naiveté and insecure, over-optimism will bear witness to their limited experiences in a dangerous and indifferent universe, just as their softness of muscle tone and inability to endure physical hardship will reveal their limited experience with physical effort and exertion. How appropriate that the Greek word ασκησης-askisis[exercise]- is used to denote athleticism but is also the root word for asceticism which denotes a mental exercise or an exertion of the mind. For what athleticism is for the body, asceticism is for the mind; alike but different only in the focus of their disciplines; interdependent but mutually exclusive in their areas of influence. To better clarify the relationship between asceticism and athleticism it may be profitable to juxtapose the two. Athleticism is the training of the body. It hardens flabbiness and denies lethargy through which a body is weakened and becomes soft and vulnerable to external forces and phenomena. Asceticism is the training of the mind. It invokes mental discipline, focuses energies, and denies apathy and pleasure through which a mind becomes complacent and susceptible to external temptations. Athleticism does not require a continuous exertion, even if it was possible, but through temporary strain the body becomes more efficient even at rest. Similarly asceticism does not require continuous self-denial, but through momentary or selective resistance the mind gains discipline and resolve that become helpful even when indulging in pleasure or giving in to need. The effects of athleticism are hard to ignore since they appear in the empirical world accessible to all, through the senses, equally; acknowledging the benefits of exercise and physical effort and the aesthetically beautiful physical form it leads to cannot be argued away no matter how much we wish to do so. Reversely, the effects of asceticism are hard to prove since they appear in the mental world accessibly only, through introspection, to the individual; so acknowledging the benefits of cerebral exercise and mental effort and the intellectual symmetry it leads to cannot be confidently argued for. Despite this, I believe, all can recognize that denial of the will creates a mental framework by which an individual becomes a master of his own being and not merely an instrument of instinctual desire. A man devoid of all self-restraint and discipline becomes a victim of his own emotions and cravings. Like a rudderless ship he is cast to-and-fro by any subtle wind and becomes a man with no direction and no purpose; a helpless victim of his own whims and a vulnerable prey to clever predators. For the ship to be controlled a strong rudder is needed and an even stronger captain to direct it. This rudder is mans mind and the captain must be mans intellect. Final Proposition All men seek to minimize their exposure to pain and suffering and it is therefore a contradiction of goals that this very compulsion is detrimental to survival and the continued promise of pleasure. This conundrum is what plagues human existence in its entirety. We reach for happiness and comfort and yet it is this very striving that causes the opposite condition of suffering and discomfort; we dream of an absence of need and an existence devoid of all torment and yet its realization is the very definition of death; we dream of power and self-reliance and yet we must give up power and become dependant to achieve it. The Greeks understood the irony of existence and they fully expressed it in their art, in their philosophy and in their total acceptance of it as a part of human existence. Man is in a very precarious position; not fully intellectual, not completely instinctual. The choice arises in every thinking mans life as to what path he will choose: will he give in to his instincts and live entirely within the dictations of his nature as an animal, where the mind is simply the facilitator of instinctual desire or will he deny both pain and pleasure and become pure intellect devoid of all need and in complete control of his being ? But there is a third, more reasonable, choice. A choice embraced by the Greeks and now offered, through Nietzsche, by them to us: will we embrace both pain and pleasure as parts of our total being and focus our efforts in enjoying life’s pleasures and experiencing the rapture of consciousness and yet will we not forget that it is suffering that elevates and strengthens us and it is this payment, which we pay willingly, that makes us more than just animals and ennobles us before a universe wanting to degrade, embarrass and destroy us? Whether we like it or not, suffering and pain are the natural participants in life’s experiment. We either recognize them as such and use them to our advantage or we spend a lifetime running from them into futility. It is this aspect of life’s truth that most spend their entire lives escaping from and in the process become weak, gullible, naïve, soft and easily manipulated. How unfortunate for them that even the temporary escape from life’s truth cannot save them from its eventual inevitability. The signs of human disorderly existence are everywhere plain to see; from the lack of self-discipline in nutritional consumption that leads to obesity and disease to the absence of sexual self-control that leads to promiscuity and immaturity. The ‘easy way’ is searched for by all those lacking the discipline to go at it the ‘hard way’ and the realization comes to them too late, that there is no ‘easy way’ and those offering it are either con-artists or manipulators. The controlled exposure to suffering, made possible through athleticism, creates a strong and durable body that will be ready, in a time of need, to meet life’s unforeseen challenges and come out of every battle, a survivor. It will reveal itself to all in its harmony, symmetry and beauty; it will speak of its superiority in graceful movement and efficiency. It will be something to admire and inspire. But more importantly, the controlled exposure to suffering and pain through asceticism creates a strong and durable mind that will be easily adaptable to a variation of environments and challenges and come out of every confrontation the dominator. It will reveal itself, more subtly than the body but no less magnificently, in its harmony, order, and virtue; it will speak of its superiority with noble ideals and strength of will. It will be something to admire and inspire.
Or death is the ultimate pleasure? Wow, deep stuff...according to that i am a feeble, pathetic being who runs for the easy way. Did you write this? or did you copy+Paste? I found my self agreeing to a lot of stuff and being amazed at some of the other ideas it presents. Never thought of it this way untill now, very interesting. heh.....so true.
I enjoyed this position because it falls in line with many of the things I have always thought about. However, I wouldn't fall into the Malevolent Universe Premise, because this seems to be the way part of your thesis is heading. The universe is absurd, but it is not opposed to us completely, or we wouldn't be here. Perhaps I am reading you wrongly. I think your final conclusion is the one that rings true, but scares people the most. For any positive change in yourself you must be disciplined. For an entire country, strife will be necessary, and that would mean taking away 'rights' (an imaginary value) and subjecting others to massive amounts of pain. It would mean totalitarianism. The results are uplifting though, and instill a sense of godliness in every individual. Take boot camp for example: it turns boys into men and girls into women through extreme discipline. However, this is nothing compared to the power of Tibetan Monks, who are so disciplined in such an Orwellian manner, that they are able to smash bricks with their heads and sleep naked in -20 F blizzards.
sargentlard Your scepticism is one I'm used to. I am the thinker not the cut and paster. Visit my web page [see below] and read more of my stuff. But if you still doubt wait and see my following posts. Just ask Xev about me she'll tell you. and2000x The universe in neither malevolent nor benevolent it is what it is. It's the way we percieve it that makes it either 'good' or 'bad'. But if your question is if the universe is threatening to life and to humanity or not then the answer is yes. Life is a struggle and it is so because it is threatened constantly. This is why being in top form and in total control is essential. Through my web-page my book, now available in amazon.com in e-book format, can be found called: 'The Wandering thoughts of a Restless Mind" http://hometown.aol.ca/c66c/myhomepage/philosophiespolitics.html
Very interesting thoughts Wanderer. A lot of this stuff is pretty much how I think. I'm actually working on my own book on a variety of topics. Perhaps these sites might give you some good information for future thoughts, as they have inspired me to a great magnitude: www.anus.com (Amerikan Nihilsit Underground Society- a neo-romantic vision of the world.) www.datejesus.com (This guy sounds a lot like you in some respects) www.nazi.org (Libertarian National Socialist Green Party- a bunch of eco-fascists who fight for ancient and natural values) I don't subscribe to all of these ideas (I'm not a Nazi), but they are interesting nonetheless.
you have found the importance of the Middle Path taught by Buddha. Buddism today is not what Buddha taught, as Christianity today is not what Christ taught. Thank you for the westernb reasources that you list, I will have to read more on them. I would recommend that you read the discourses of Buddha, and the New English translations of the bible, and forget what you know about both religions from pop culture sources. Both teachers tend to recommened what you are suggesting, while one proposes a God, and the other doesn't. I like Buddha's freedom a bit more, but they are largely similar. Thanks, a very good post.
shit. i hate it when i have to agree with people, arguing is so much more fun!!! but, alas, i must concure. i agree with nearly every point you show.
Confrontations I prefer confrontation myself, as those who know me admit, it keeps me struggling and searching. Agreement leads nowhere but to a momentary state of respite; which is pleasurable but uncreative.
