What Wouldn’t Jesus Do? (A personal response to: A Philosophy of Pain, Suffering, & Humiliation).

Be it far from me to truly, and fully know Jesus’s teachings faithfully.  I would like to speculate for a moment, for those amongst us that would often ask, “What would Jesus do” when given a life challenge, or situation that seems difficult.

Well, let’s look at this perspective from a “negative space” angle (borrowing a term/concept from Artistic pursuits for a moment).

From what little I honestly know of his creed, I will state, that I could possibly infer several factors that Jesus would likely adhere to (if you’re willing to suspend my lack of formal credentials as a imposition to belief).  Let us say from an obvious example that Jesus would distrust betrayal from those deemed friends.  Unless he learned/realized that such infliction of hardship is within a “master-plan” from a Holy Father/Mother (Whatever terminology one would use for a “Holy Lord” *(Lord being in this case non-gendered, as touchy as it is nowadays)).

Should a betrayal as Judas Isacroit(?) wrought be forgiven?  It is not my place to say, only Jesus and God would know the full, and proper response to that.  Be that as it may, I’d like to think that Jesus would offer a chance of redemption (Christian core belief).

I don’t think he’d voluntarily submit to needless suffering, suffice to say, because that is legitimately stupid, and pointless.

There’s a highly good chance he’d love everyone he could in whatever little way that he could do so to brighten their day, at that junction in time, so there’s that.

There’s also a strong chance that he may be lenient towards deviancy because well, honestly he was one of a lineage of deviants *(Moses fled from Egypt…deviant inference made).

There may also be a chance, really off hand, that he may attempt to make reparations to those that were previously unjustly wronged, and encourage a strong sense of Justice.  The Christian God is reknown for that.  A sense of mutable Justice.  Meaning Justice is an evolving thing, we are growing from our lessons in Life, and through God’s education.

*(Note that’s a really strong reason to believe in Christianity, for The God, is understanding, and will enact what is necessary to create a sense of Justice….including, but not always limited to his own son’s Sacrifice).

As far as I can tell, Christianity is a Growing, and Living Faith which is highly admirable.

At this point I must disclose that I feel more inline with a reformed Baltic Faith of some form (thus I may be a “Neo-Pagan” in some way, but I’m still searching…as far as that True Faith goes).  The reasoning being that I may, or may not believe in a “Family History” of “Religious Persecution” (Look up the Baltic Crusades).  Although, I’ll gladly admit that every day my Faith grows, but I don’t know in what way.  Thus I’ll firmly state I’m a devout Humanist, of a Christian Origin.

Note: Humanism is a Philosophy, Christianity is a Religion.  Things change daily for us all, and I’m devising my own “philosophy” as far as I can make sense of “my world” on a daily basis.  I like to consider my “personal taste of life” to be in line with a made up term called “Zen Stoicism”, for I find myself drawing upon inspiration from around the World.

1st Ethos;  It Happened, Deal With It.  2nd Ethos; A Disciplined Mind is a Happy Mind.  3rd Ethos; Change Happens, Accept It.

From here on, it’s all “fun n’ games” of some sort.  Unless something “Changes”…, so there’s that.


KEO Time Capsule Submission

It is erroneous to think that fallacy is solely Humanitys domain. Everything errs to some extent, and so everything longs for a place in which their errors can be forgiven. This is not so, for how can one learn if they are not allowed to err?

To err? To be in the wrong? To have no idea, or a clue as to who or what one is supposed to be or do? That is one instance in what it means to be human. To know existential despair, and not know how to confront it. Only to realize that through the errors that one has committed that one has become more human. That one, by suffering errors, is granted that noble status as equals amongst all of humanity. For we all err, and reside in fallacy to some extent.

To realize that ideals, no matter how impressive, are still ideals, and as such shall be related to the realm of the divine. Ideals are meant to be endeavored for, and not lived with alone. The substance of ideals are not of this world, and such foster an ill will towards oneself and others when held too deeply.

To be alone in the darkness of the soul, to be in total isolation from one’s peers, and realize that illumination comes from within is another instance of what it means to be human. As of this time of writing, Humanity has spent most of its time isolated from others through the vastness of space, and this isolation has shaped the human character.

Wars, crusades, and ignorance has shaped our behavior towards each other throughout our past, and so has peace, charity, and awareness. To be human is to realize that as a species we’ve run the spectra of behavior. Some of it good, and some of it bad. All of it, Human.

The true answer to life is not what to live or how to live, but to simply live. Let life be one’s canvas, and illustrate it to the best of one’s abilities. Heeding only the cautions of others when one has begun to err too far, and then take stock of what is implied. Others often serve as a mirror to what lies within oneself. To see the evil in others is to see the evil in oneself, and to see the good in another is to see the good in oneself.

To find the path through life is human, to reach for the stars is human, to cry, to laugh, to curse, to bless, to atone, to sing, to speak, to think, to do nothing, and to finally die. All that and more is what it means to be Human.

Finally, to grasp the unknown, and to bring it closer to oneself. To find the truth, and realize that it was always at hand. To finally find out that to err is to be Human, and that one only learns through error.

We have learned….

Composed January 31, 2014

By RJP1989,12,22

Hate ‘Em, and Discriminate ‘Em

Well, it seems I’ve been wading into the current cultural conflict, and having unofficially joined the “wrong side” of this escapade.  I must make my position known, and at least semi-defendable from the point of view that I find myself entertaining.

Is it okay to “Hate”?  To some extent, I would say yes.  Is it okay to “Discriminate”, again to an extent, yes.  Carrying on, and attempting to justify just these two claims, for myself.  I will say, and start with a simple question to those who read, and disagree with those two claims.

What about those two phrases are you hating against, and discriminating against?  You hate the word “Hate”, and the connotations that may be inferred from it.  You dislike the word “Discriminate”, and all the contexts it may be used in.

Is this rational?  Not really from my perspective.  Mainly because if one is aiming for any goal in Life, whether it be as mundane as a morning breakfast, or as important as where you want to live.  Who you’d want to marry, and so forth.  You are actively, or subconsciously; “Hating, and Discriminating”.   You don’t feel like toast this morning, well disliking something is a slippery slope to hate, is it not?  It’s discrimination against the TOAST!  How can you not want Toast on a Daily Basis!  It’s Blasphemy!   Heretic…

Where things get tricky, in my opinion, is the level of zeal, and the threshold of extremism that resides within those two qualifiers of; “Hate”, and “Discrimination”.  If, for example, you absolutely loathe toast, and wish all bread would burn in Hell (oddly making toast).  People are going to see you as insane, and a little, if not outright kooky.

Thus we arrive at the age old idea of,… wait for it, …. moderation.  You can moderate your hate, and you can moderate your discrimination.  In fact, I highly recommend it!  Keep a nice little flame of hate going in you belly towards some absurd, if not useless target.  I personally despise Beets, and that is because I was on some level force fed them as a child.  I have no problem discriminating against beets, but here now!  We’re talking about food, not people.

IS that really a major factor?  To some, maybe, to others who follow the line of reasoning in odd, and interesting ways.  It’s not.  You pick, and choose daily.  Simple fact of Life.  We can’t all have the same outcome.  We can’t all date the same person (whomever that may be).  We have to choose, and that is a fact.

I choose to “Hate” and “Discriminate”, simply because it is an acknowledgement that I have to do so.  Mainly in order to have a Life I wish to Live, and a Life I will thoroughly enjoy.  If any of you have had a childhood, you too will know what it was like having choices made for you.  And that is why, I find myself turning towards the “Alt-Right”.

(Note:  I used to consider myself in the “Anarchist Camp” until I realized that too is just a state leading to Order, and Organization.  That was during college when I was still forming/developing my personal Life edifice, and I still am).

A Philosophy of Pain, Suffering, & Humiliation.

Well, this may be a darker toned one, but it may be interesting.  Let us suppose that there is one inexplicable psychological phenomena that defies explanation.  Let us call it “Pain”, it is an tormenting experience, and not often rated very highly in “hedons”  ( https://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Hedon ) in fact some have gone so far to create a term called “dolor” (apparently) to describe it.  Having created some sort of image of this concept, let us go further, and state most philosophies/religions are about allaying such concept.

Stoicism, detaching from things that may cause pain.  The same goes for Buddhism, and I’m sure plenty of others that are eluding me right now.  Why is this so?  If Pain is the only psychological phenomena that we can be certain of experiencing.  Why would we want to negate suffering?  What is so surreal about pain that we can’t accept it into our lives?  Instead we blunt it out, and are we in turn blunting ourselves?  We censor others that offend us, and we avoid anything that seems harsh.  To me, at least, it seems that we are.

I should mention that I don’t see myself as a sadist, or a masochist.  I just think that pain, as an authentic experience shouldn’t be ignored.  Dig into it, and extract the wound.  There’s the remark of, “Doctor, Heal Thyself!”, but if Doctors, and nonetheless ourselves, are unwilling to reach into our own personal pits of turmoil to extract the thorn that causes us grief.  Just what are we actually doing?

As I sit here writing, and composing my thoughts for this article.  I keep coming back to a notion of Christianity.  I know very little of it as a doctrine, and I’m laity when it comes to actually having read the Bible.  And yet, from my cursory knowledge/experience of it.  It does not seem like a light airy religion, it seems to have a fairly dark edge to it which is oddly attractive.  Call it a morbid curiosity, or an attraction to the Dark Side (of the force).

Consider for a moment, this thought, taken out of context, perhaps, of Jesus himself.  A man stripped down, flogged, and nailed, I repeat nailed to a Cross.  He was made to carry his own impending device of suffering 600 meters (~2000 ft).  That does not seem like a doctrine that would entail much dignity for the guilty (unlike what we “civilized” folk have now for suffering and shame).  Crowned with a briar of thorns, Jesus did this, and endured it.

At this point I just want to cry both emotionally, and spiritually.  I just want to scream out, “Look here!  This Man of Faith, this King, and Son of God.  Brought low by fellow man, and debased of all worth!  High claims rent to ground.  His bones, dust, his blood, ash, and yet he lives on!”

Now taking into context our daily lives, they don’t seem so bad now, do they?  We may suffer the stones, and arrows of verbal assaults (on occasion).  Even more rarely, physical assaults.  Although, does any of us know true suffering?  To be called, “King of the Jews”?

Oddly, I’m reminded of those bracelets of, “What Would Jesus Do?”.  Well, from this superficial understanding, he’d voluntarily accept his suffering, and not reject the “Burden of God/Cross”.

If I knew nothing else about the figure of Jesus, the aforementioned alone would inspire me with a sense of respect if not admiration.  I mean consider how easily do we take flight for moments of respite, or offshore responsibility for our misdeeds onto others?  Did, and does Humanity deserve Jesus?

I don’t know, we apparently did, but I don’t know.


The Monkey Chain of Hierarchies, (or Breaking the “Self” to Realize the Self).

(Ensure that you’ve read “The Divide” post before putting much weight behind this one).

One of the things that I seem to find myself butting my head against more often than not is the notion of “hierarchy”.  At least that’s what a cursory understanding may imply, but digging deeper to try and express what I’m aiming at seems to lead to a notion of the following.  The idea that no matter what, a person, or individual is embedded within a larger social context.  We are after all social creatures, but we seldom maintain one “level” of status consistently.

To some, if not most, people a person encounters in their waking life.  They are an individual of low worth, or indeterminate worth.  You’re still recognized as human for the most part, but other than that you may as well be a stereotype, or a 2-dimensional stock character, a trope.  This is what equality leads to, a sort of dehumanization of the human element in some sense.  A King, a President, a serf, or a slave…all have to use the same/similar “throne” (toilet) at some point during the day.  And yet, the majority of us don’t think of it that way.  We defer to those with “Authority” which in itself has it’s own perks, and cons.

The point I’m attempting to hone in upon is a notion that for as lauded as some people may appear to be, their shit still stinks as with our own, and until they come up with android bodies where we don’t need to use the “Facilities”.  It likely won’t change.  Regardless of this, we clamor, and use whatever slight of mind to discern, and advance ourselves above some sort of “Other”.  An “Other” being something, or someone that is simply not a part of “Us”.

We (the “royal we”), claim to be (insert age) Souls, or whatever level of spiritual/intellectual/cognitive development where we attempt to set ourselves up as some sort of “Status” icon.  At least to ourselves, and at most to those around us.  Thus it starts to boil down to a game of “monkey chain”.  Those who play the best end up at the “top”, but everyone else is beneath them holding on for dear life.  Whereas the one at the bottom has no other burden other than themselves, but they get all sort of “messages” from above.

If one were to construe this as a “moral message”, it would be along the lines of, “abase oneself of their own inflated worth”.  You aren’t special, if simply because until you realize that you aren’t so.  You have no sense of specialty.

To illustrate what I mean by this.  Consider that your entire identity, and sense of “Self” was concocted outside of your own sense of “Self”.  Your Name, given to you by your parents.  Your friends, determined mostly by your social status/grouping.  Your Nation, just a larger group.  It all boils down from above with the notion of “social identification”.  You are “granted/given” a #Number# at birth, and registered with the local official body (for the most part).  And yet, how much of your identity is tied up within these constructs?  Lose said #Number#, or have it “Stolen” and you’ve lost your “Identity”.

Once a person truly realizes this, and integrates it into their consciousness.  There’s no going back.  Your identity is a construct, you aren’t being “Authentic” despite whatever showy actions one takes until this realization is made (or so I think).  At the base you are just another object given a name.  A hunk of carbon, water, and other various chemical compounds that moves, and acts “Human”.  Yet in some sense is still missing a “Soul”.  You have an “Identity”, so much as it is recognized by “Others”.  And yet, this seems really hollow.  You had no say over it as an individual, it just happened.

You are a “Nothing” playing at being “Something”, (this whole post is building off of the last post where Sartre’s Authenticity was mentioned.  That sense of True Self).  A person isn’t truly an individual until they’ve cast aside whatever constructs they have used to precipice their “Identity”.  This is why “Individuation” is so hard, and ego shattering.  It is because that is exactly what one is doing.  Destroying, and allowing their Ego to be destroyed.  Only because they’ve realized that their Ego is, and was completely fabricated by another outside Entity.  Ie; Not their-selves.

It is a Hellish experience to go through, but it is one of the most rewarding ones that a person can experience in their entire lives (as it feels to me).  To realize that you are an animal, that you can be trained “Pavlov Style” (Classical Psychological Conditioning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_conditioning ).  As my personal thesis, I think that a person can gain control of themselves, but they first need to be “mastered” by another.  A different person, who may, or may not have their newly found servants best interest at heart.  This is to be so because, one is essentially being shown how they’ve been “Domesticated” by society, or whatever culture.

Taking another step from this, One once being mastered, (broken like a wild horse, for analogy) is presented with an option.  To be the eternal servant/slave of “God”, or to struggle/fight for Freedom (become a Prince in Hell).  A person can’t faithfully serve two masters, that should be easily understood.  One Master is external, and are the ones who originally “broke/domesticated you” (say they potty trained you).  The other True, and Honest Master is the one that resides within.  Your True sense of Self, and let me say this, “You’ll always have to live with yourself.”

Thus having been “Socially built” (broken by the external master), and forcibly re-broken/rebuilt by the Internal Master.  One may achieve their sense of Self, and become a True Unique Individual.  After all, if you personally know what it takes to break you, and destroy you.  What is there to fear except yourself, but you are your own Master at that point.  Thus there is no fear, no remorse, no guilt, not one single ounce of internal conflict.

Realizing all of this may be mental gymnastics though, but I wouldn’t be surprised if veterans could relate to this.  The metaphorical “Hump” in Boot-Camp.  The point where one wants to give up upon themselves, and just quit.  To washout.  Pushing through that, and “breaking oneself” once again allows one to remold themselves completely.  Simply because as an analogy the Sergeants have “broken you down at that point”.  One must simply do it to themselves now.  They (The External Master) have demonstrated all the skills needed to do so.

As a quip…., “Spiritualism calls for Ego-Death, but doesn’t that imply something is actively killing or has killed the Ego?”.

The Divide

Well, to continue with the incoherent theme my blog seems to have taken of late.  I will say that the past few months has been me delving into the “psychological archives”, and reading some books about Jungian Depth Psychology.  Mainly “The Portable Jung” by Joseph Campbell (conveniently found here for free & legally https://archive.org/details/ThePortableJung ), and “Maps of Meaning” by Jordan B. Peterson.

Both of which relate to the mindset I have found myself in the past couple of years, and the boundaries I’ve been pushing (probably a little too much).  Anyways, as far as I understand Jung’s thoughts, and what I’ve been thinking about personally.  Is the following diagram to illustrate the ideas.Realities

To start with Ego, Ego is the little bit of awareness that a person generally has until they “confront, and amend” their “Shadow” (Personal Unconscious).  Both of which reside in the Self.  The Ego overlaps, with the Personal Unconsciousness and the Collective World/Consciousness.  A person can only be aware of what is within their “Ego” (generally), and it plays a part of how they interact with the world around them (Reality).

Adjusting to the Personal Unconsciousness (The Shadow) is the trick of Jungian Individuation.  A process that can’t really be detailed, but can experienced by everyone.  It’s just that few choose to do so because it risks flirting with “Insanity”, and “Cognitive Regression”.  Along with social retribution/isolation for “breaking norms”.  The payoff is to truly know yourself, and to become an Individual.

Moving onto the Self, Self is the part that subsumes Ego, and The Personal Unconsciousness.  It is truly a person’s “Soul”.  My thoughts on it roughly tie in Sartre’s Authenticity, Nietzsche’s Nihilism/Ubermensch, Kierkegaard’s Knight of Faith, and a whole host of other thoughts.  Crudely, it could be described as Existence precedes Essence, which predates Recognition, and then Acceptance of said Essence.  A “person” is born into the world, but they aren’t fully “aware” of it, nor themselves.  Mainly because the “Brain/Ego/Self” is still being generated/compiled from stimuli, and experiences.  An early trap to fall in to is the notion of “Roles”.  Identifying oneself via the tasks they perform, and the activities they do during conscious life.  This is not so.  That ties in with Authenticity by realizing that those are just acts a person does.  Masks, if you will.  Nietzsche’s Nihilism comes along, and hammers away all these masks…The “Twilight of the Idol(s)”, so to speak.  Building upon the bare fundamentals of annihilation, for what are we except “dust in the wind”.  One constructs their notion of Self through the Culture they are immersed in daily, but not through identification as previously.  They take the facets they like/enjoy, and discard the rest into the “Nihilistic Abyss”, for those things have no meaning to the True Individual.  The “Knight of Faith” is comparable to the Ubermensch in the aspects that both take into account their selves as creations.  The Ubermensch reevaluates all external meanings/mores whereas the Knight of Faith applies meaning to the Self/God.  They are not opposed, but cantilevers to the thesis/anti-thesis/synthesis aspect of development.

Transitioning to the Collective Unconsciousness, it could be roughly described as the “History” that isn’t written, but is still kept in mind.  It is composed of “Archetypes”, or “Fictional Heroes”.

Collective Consciousness is the world that is “Historically Written”.  It is transcribed in books, and the actors are “Real” (Non-Fictional whatever that means at this point) beings.  It is the world that we are all actors in as far as we know, and constitutes our daily lives.  We may overlap with other “Actors” during our lives, but the bubbles of Self/Ego/Personal Unconscious are truly our own.  As they shall always be.  Humanities bubble, as a species, is the Speculated/Potential Universe.  It can, and probably will overlap with an “Alien Species” at some point, but those species themselves will likely have their own history/bubbles (Unconscious functions due to Evolution, if Universal).

The Speculated/Potential Universe is the aspect of Reality that we as a united species is exploring, and can reach to the best of our present theories.  It, as with all of the above bubbles, is expanding.

The Unknown, is the Cosmic Chaos, and the Reality that we can’t, or haven’t explored.


…Suffice to say, the above is just my mental model for making sense of Reality, and I truly do believe that there are several definitions of what constitute as Real.  To me if it is possible to be conceived of, it is likely to be, or become Real at some point in Existence.

Faux Worlds

Its been a while since I’ve managed to find time to sprout my thoughts to the internet, so I guess now is a good time.  At least good of time as any.  The idea is that we each live, and are completely immersed in our own mental idealizations of the world.  This isn’t new, but the extent at which I’ve been realizing it just drives the message home even more.

Say for instance that a person is claiming that they’ve done such-n-such thing.  One could seek veracity on multiple levels (photo evidence, word of mouth, sight…etc), but in reality does any number of sources actually lend credence to said event.  To an extreme skeptic, no.  To someone who’s willing to believe, and suspend their own sense of denial.  Even if for a moment, then yes, evidence does matter.

Ex; Say for instance that I were to start claiming Divinity as state of personal nature.  Clearly the majority of people would start avoiding me, and/or declare me batshit insane.  And yet, in a round about manner each, and every one of us does so.  Daily.  We seek to set our interpretation of world events over that of our prior selves, and over that of others.  We rewrite our personal narratives daily, for the events are constantly in flux (so it seems).

Let’s take for instance that Divinization ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divinization_(Christian) ) of being elevated to Sainthood by God is True.  We are all co-creators in God’s Project.  We’re all Children of God.  Thus why is there such a innate revulsion when someone starts mouthing such thoughts publicly (at least in my life, or so I’ve thought/experienced)?

The “Fact of the Matter” is that when one starts claiming special privileges, or narrative rights.  They have to have some sort of veracity, or evidence to support their claims.

Ex; A few times within the last couple of months, I was experiencing strange thoughts/memories (delusions I suppose) where I was a U.S. Marine.  I was thinking about enlisting, but I’m too old for it.  Further thoughts on the matter tie in notions of Temporal Service (Time Travel to a Different Reality…Serve 20 years, and time travel back.  Upon doing so, memory erased.  You never Served because there’s “no” evidence, or it’s been negated).

Further thoughts upon that idea was a notion that I had reached Brigadier General level of rank within said Service, and this was a strong “Delusion” I had experienced after my “mental breakdown”, and complete loss of identity for a year (circa 2010-11).

I have no proof of any claims for this mindset, and I don’t know why I would develop said mental identification.  It’s eerie, but I’m powerless in the sense regarding this because I can’t provide any sort of evidence.  Thus I’m rendered “insane”.  Even though there have been recent publications about “Time-Crystals”, and other micro-Time-Travel shenanigans in scientific journals (you know it’s going to happen someday now).

I guess the hardest part about this idea is the feeling of isolation, and desolation it brings not being able to know one’s own Reality is “Concrete”.  That they may have been such a figure, but then they now aren’t.  Although how is this any different than Reincarnation, or a Transcendence to Heaven?

One can’t prove it in any context, it is a matter of Faith.  Personally, I feel like this World, despite its “Evils”…is Heaven.  Simply because I’m alive, and I know that non-existence is never preferable to Existence.  To Exist is Life.

Myth As Reality

To start with a potential disclaimer;  I have no idea of if the thoughts to be expressed in the following post is valid, or “True”.  I merely mention them for the sake of self expression, and to provoke thought.

Having stated that, I’m personally beginning to feel that Reality is more Myth than a common objective standard.  Solely because of the amount of conflict that has escalated in the American Culture Wars.  From the perspective of a fairly disinterested individual in the thoughts being hurled around.  I would like to state that there at least appears to be “Two Camps” of thought being advocated for.  One of the “Liberal Bent”, and the other of a “Conservative Bent”.

I don’t identify whole sale with either disposition, for they both seemingly have their merits, and their flaws.  Regardless, the item I’d like to point out is parallel to these identifications in the sense that they underlie the seeming conflict in ideology (from my point of view).

The idea/item I’m pointing out is the notion of Myth as World-builder.  We as people are fostered from youth within a set mindset.  That of Christianity, Islam, Hindu, Buddhist, Shinto, or what have you (this also includes, but is not limited to Formal Education, Atheism, New Age Beliefs, or whatever).  I’m calling it ALL out, for all stem from a mindset of cultural conditioning and identity.  Racism, cultural conditioning.  Sexism, cultural conditioning.  Class-ism, cultural conditioning.   Nations, cultural conditioning.

Everything, and I do fully mean everything that one encounters in their daily lives, and from their own point of view is seemingly conditioned, and a myth.  A narrative of Life that we, or one can live by.  I’m not implying that such a behavior is either good, or bad, for that is another set of culturally conditioned thinking.

What I’m actually saying though is the thought that our Reality is fully manifested via ourselves from the Myths and thoughts that we believe.  Not some pseudo-“Law of Attraction” thing, but more of a this is what happens when one believes in something, and they act upon said belief.

A concrete example;  Does a Country exist?  Let’s take the United States as example.  In theory/thought it does exist, but as a tangible object does the “United States” exist outside our mindset?  Suppose you were a native of Mars, and completely foreign to the notion of Earth’s History (Shout out to Robert Heinlein’s “Stranger In a Strange Land”, for the idea inspiration).  To drill down into more personal details, go to you backyard, and grab a fist full of soil.  Is this “DIRT”, a Country/State/Province/City/County…etc?  No, it is a hunk of dirt, but we’re willing to fight, and shed blood for the ideological notion that this is our “Homeland”.  Our “Property”.  Our “God Given Rights”.

This is not so, from my current opinion (notice the caveat).  All that exists within our world is a myth that we’ve concocted to believe in.  Including ourself as ourself.  Digging into this mindset one shall arrive at a notion of what can actually exist?  And what is Authentic?  Does a person actually have a physical, concrete, form/body?  Or could they already be embodied in some form of an “Afterlife” (spiritual/virtual dimension)?

Now isn’t this too “Myth-Making”?  That I’m establishing postulates, and characteristic ideologies that espouse my mindset?  All of these words should effectively mean nothing to you, as a “Realized Individual”.  They are effectively another school of doctrine/thought that espouses to hold the “Absolute Truth”.  This not so, for the only Truth that a person may ever have is THEIR TRUTH.  Enforcing it upon another, or getting up in arms about it is no different than all the crusaders, jihadists, inquisitors, and other cultural zealots that fight for, or fend off “attackers” from other “Cultural Mindsets”.

This should all be fairly easy to see, for the first component of a “Culture”…is a “Cult”.  Note:  None of this forebears sharing your ideas, or beliefs.  It simply means that trying to ram your thoughts home, and to “convert followers”…is somewhat offensive.  Especially, to those who aren’t deigning to be fully involved in the present cultural (CULT) wars.

Split Realities, and Loci of Existence.

As can be experienced in nearly everyday life, a person is a member of multiple levels of reality.  There’s the virtual with social networking, the tangible, and the spiritual.  There’s probably many more depending upon one’s definition of Reality, but the task I’m aiming for here is the notion of the mentioned three.  Virtual, Physical, and Spiritual.

One of the intended points of my game is to invoke the feelings of multiple planes of existence within one local.  A character within the game can interact with computers (virtual), and be embodied in a physical form.  Their mind, called ego/soul in the game, is another aspect of the character’s multi-dimensional nature.  Said ego/soul is meant to represent the spiritual/intangible realm.  A thought that keeps occurring to me while I dabble with this project is that a person/player can’t really tell where the exact threshold between virtual/physical/spiritual realities lie.  Unlike a video game there isn’t a “loading screen” to portray when one mindset takes over from another.

Tying this into thoughts about Real Reality which has lately been appearing as more subjective than objective in some cases.  For the brain has to interpret signals from whatever stimuli it is focused on in exactly the same manner regardless of source.  Engaging on a social network is similar to engaging a virtual rendition of a character.  You’re sitting “alone” focused upon a rendered embodiment of someone who is presenting pre-processed information (self-censoring is easier when there’s no immediate response time).

We weave narratives online, but also in person.  And yet it is apparently “easier” online to forget that we are a certain so-n-so.  Forget notions of a “natural world” in some sense, for the Universe/Reality encompasses all of the distinct renditions of split realities.  A person can easily grasp that their physical life is separate from their virtual one, but yet a person cannot easily relinquish their online life once established.

Now why would there be a separation of the Spiritual from the Physical or Virtual?  Are these mere categorizations we use to help distinguish one reality from another?  Is this even valid?  Could I not in fact be operating from a brain in a jar/vat connected to a network of other brains?   That what I’m seeing is illusion, and/or uncertain as to “realness”?  Most assuredly yes, else there’d be no point to the whole school of “Western Thought”.

You know, Plato’s Allegory of the Cave?  An individual chained within darkness (ignorance) while a fire plays illusionary shadows upon their senses?  That once broken free, and set off from the Cave.  That they have entered, and seen the “Great Fire” that lies within a bigger “Cave”?  There is no way out of the notion of residing within an illusion.  At least none that I can readily think of, but does this matter?  Is the stimuli any less “real”?  I’d say not.  Thus when an individual comes to realize the illusion of illusions.  That there seems to be everything within existence, but only if you can project the shedding light from your own cognitive fire upon the shadows around you.

Spiritual, Physical, …Virtual…all three, and probably more are vectors to Reality.  There is no difference between the three portrayed.  It is an illusion.  Different Terminology for a “different implied understanding”.  Magic, and miracles happen everyday, but we are so used to them that we don’t acknowledge their uniqueness.

…I am a light in the darkness, casting my own shadows upon other’s consciousnesses while trying to play shadow puppets with myself.  Is this because I’m “afraid of the dark”?  Ignorance?  The “Unknown”?  Or is it just because my own little flame can cast only so much light in such a big cosmic arena?  And yet, gazing into the Heavens, at night, one can see the entire sky illuminated….


The Dark Messiah

This idea has influences from several possible sources.  Namely; Der Ubermensch (Nietzsche), Knight of Faith (Kierkegaard), Religions & Myths, and a “Caring Antagonist” in thoughts once expressed by my Brother.

In my present conception, The Dark Messiah, is neither a hero, a savior, nor an “anti-hero”.  The Dark Messiah is a personality that is so beyond conventional moralities of “Good & Evil”, and exerts a will onto itself.  That is capable of withstanding all common conceptions of what is “Good”, and what is “Evil”.  It is a character that has taken Neutrality, Indifference, Rationality, Emotionalism, Apathy, Impartiality, Mutability, and Self-Interest to an extreme.

In the draft of life, The Dark Messiah, would ideally be vested above all in their own self-interests/pursuits, but paradoxically they’d be vested in said interests by their chosen Deity/Ideal/Cause.  Thus they’d feel obligated to serve a “higher power”, but they have chosen said “higher power” for themselves.  They weren’t indoctrinated into said belief/worship.  In some sense it is a “auto-theistic” notion of the Dark Messiah.

It should be noted that a Dark Messiah is not Narcissistic, for they would have to render themselves completely open to ridicule, and criticism.  In fact that would be the function they would serve.  To embody the ever mutable Other of Philosophy/Tribalism into a tangible being/idea/focus.

The Dark Messiah, is a contrarian, and a rebel to every position.  Including their own.  They take doubt to new levels, and meta levels of is the doubt of this idea even doubtful?   The basis of their thought could be the contradiction within the Nihilistic Nothing mentioned previously upon/within this blog.  The tension generated by tearing oneself asunder at every moment of every decision is what grants the Dark Messiah their strength, and credibility.  They realize the need for “Strong Figures”, and “Weak Figures” for they have been both in their lives.  They are the fulcrum upon which the balance of Good and Evil is rent.

The Dark Messiah, simply doesn’t care about base needs, nor immediate desires.  Their desires is what matters most, but they sublimate the immediate minor ones in favor of the greater long term ones.  They realize that they are connected to an embodied system of Life.  That in order for themselves to exist, and benefit to the way that they have developed.  They too must align themselves with the “general course”, or zeitgeist of the times.  They can’t directly oppose said flow of Life unless the opportunity presents itself.

They are survivors who’ve been burdened, and alienated by the system they were fostered in.  Not because they failed to conform, or conformed too readily.  They are this way because they’ve been foisted into a realization that they’ve grown beyond the system they once knew.  That they’ve changed.  That they’ve become the Alien, the Other, The Outsider.  The alienated that no longer desires to bend a knee to a society that sacrificed them.

In some essence, it may be characterized by the protagonist of the original Fallout game.

After risking their life, and everything about them as a character.  The protagonist of Fallout is condemned to exile by the home he spent the entire game trying to save.  The Dark Messiah, may be what happens after the protagonist of Fallout makes his way into the wasteland.  He is neither a hero, nor a savior to his people.  He’s just another “Drifter/Lost Soul” in a nuclear scorched wasteland.  That goes on in the interlude to Fallout 2 to have set up his own village far away from his vault.