Standing on the steps of Stroud Hall, the epicenter of the philosophy, philology, theology and anthropology departments @ the University of M_____ - the dapper professor in the bow tie and the pointed loafers, with a large tuft of miscreant white hairs wafting across his forehead - greeted us with a look of supreme confidence. His specialty - > that strain of deep thought referred to as natural theology - a conjoining of skeptical traditions (in philosophy) with mystical traditions (in theology) with the stated aim of reaching some absolute common ground between believer and non-believer; this man, so justly famous (among a select group of scholars numbering no more than 17) for his 897 page treatise on the Absolute Mystery - a large umbrella concept meant to embrace the SET containing all possible speculations whether upon God or gods or higher intelligence/s, or cosmic underpinnings or "Laws of Nature" or Mind/Matter dichotomies, overarching randomness, chance and entropy or dark matter or any other postulate of "nothingness" which may underlie the something-ness of the visible-tangible universe. A field trip such as this was designed to be like cat-nip for one wayward amnesia patient - whose mantra had always been to strive for completion - to "map out all possibilities" on a particular question - and what topic more important than this... And so Professor, you believe this concept allows for an absolute starting point - perhaps a catalyst for greater consensus among those who would be otherwise tempted to reject the claims of opposing camps? There is no doubt that this represents a huge step in ecumenical discourse...And do you to take a position on whether the principle you name as the A.M. (if I may abbreviate) represents any kind of power or intelligence... Yes - I would expect such a question for starters. As to power - at the very least, I would say yes in so far as the concept itself has a "hold" over the minds of many if not all humans as such (one cannot speak for animals), provoking reactions and various emotions, guiding the course of entire lives, posing questions that would seem to demand answers. Morover - as a repository for all subsequence causation or chains of cause-and-effect within the known universe - the source that everything else falls back upon for its "being" and "self-generated activity" - well - such would seem to lay claim to representing an ultimate type of power - also known as sheer possibility or dynamis as the Greeks would say. As for intelligence - yes, insofar as the object, stimulator, catalyst, harbinger of thought or a vast line of thought - giving rise to infinite speculations on our part counts as intelligence - although for those who posit "nothingness" or "chance" or "dark matter" as the basis for A.M. - then it becomes tricky - because one does not typically assign the quality of intelligence to a non-thinking non-entity. Splendid answer... I thank you... So - but - you are acknowledging here this strange sense of bonding that takes place between the human mind and this utterly incomprehensible principle - call it what you like - an attachment between act-of-thinking and object-of-thought (to bring in intentionality for a moment) - that grabs a hold of us perhaps in a way that is unlike any kind of tangible sensory or imaginary percept. You mention this "bond" or "communion" perhaps (which tells us something about you own inclinations no doubt) - but I should add that it is entirely plausible that the A.M. could be utterly ignored, downplayed or disparaged by various people. There is no requirement as to attitude that a person must undertake. And so....what is the minimum requirement... of attention that must be paid? Well - my good sir - could we not imagine someone gazing up into the sky (in whatever century of human history) - imagining planets, stars, galaxies and vast tracts of empty space - with whatever principles of invisible "energy" are contained in such cosmic matrices - and being content with that? In what way? In such a way as to require no "bonding" ritual - no sense of worship - no obligation to philosophize regarding... And no emotion? No emotion in reaction to apart from what is given as immediate conditions for existence - living with the elements, seeking out survival needs, making one's way within society... What you say is all very nice - of course - but I have my own theory of the higher reality - that I should like to share. By all means? This little field trip has given me this opportunity and Nurse Amanda and Dr. Heinrich - well - they believe it will help to spur even more of my jumbled memory banks...But my feeling is that we should all like more from the A.M. ... Some answer needs to be given which counts as perhaps "confirmation" of something - but even more so - of consolation. I'm not sure that I understand - what are you asking for exactly? Well - I refer to it as the press conference that the A.M. must provide in some form. Are you suggesting that the A.M. (under whatever designation) "owes" something to us humans? Well - yes - in a way - given our own hyper-sensitivity to these matters? But here I must push back my dear sir - is everyone so hyper-sensitive as yourself? The part cannot help but wonder about the whole... Perhaps - but consider how many spend mere minutes without finding themselves suspended in either over-rigorous faith or crippling doubt and uncertainty...
Prologue - > We are fortunate to live in a time, or so it is said, when we of the future no longer feel the burden of gender to such a degree as in previous ages; nowadays there is no pre-established norm or "role" for us to perform or hold onto like a chain about the neck. There was a time, of course, and not so long ago, when men were de facto expected to be tough strong, resilient, athletic, assertive... and which to judge by the role models in movies and popular culture which we could add on silent, stoical, protective, while no great shock was registered if there should be a woman or more than one who in some degree was known (also through popular culture, movies, novels, songs, etc. in comparison with her male counterparts) as: soft, demure, flirtatious, sociable, wise, and to which one might add on: practical, prescient, intuitive, gregarious, solicitous, nurturing and perhaps multi-tasking, socially-aware, loyal, resilient . With regard t...
Comments
Post a Comment