On Union by Comfort & Familiarity Resulting in Complacency

A friend, ERXAvBXMR, made a comment about staying with your companion based on familiarity and complacency within that union, and not necessarily because one is happy or even in love. I replied, yes, to stay with someone solely based on familiarity and complacency was ridiculous, and if one wasn’t happy in their current state they should seek to improve their position -even if it means losing everything they knew.

I told her, in my experience, familiarity's positive provides the comfort of knowing that you stand by stability & that tomorrow will be okay because you made it through today. However, its negative acquits you of the challenge to face the New. If one is to take history as a lesson, which has proven countless times over, to fall behind with change is certain demise. This, I believe applies not only to great civilizations, but also to the self. Run from familiarity, if familiarity is all that binds you. Allow not this common bond to enslave you, ever. For in the end, the familiar is nothing but hollow, and it leaves you alienated from yourself.

How does familiarity alienate the individual? First I will presume change is inherent within nature; for it is change that renews life, reinvigorates dying stars and turns today into tomorrow. Second, it must also be assumed humans are included within the realm of the natural. The second argument, I doubt, requires much support, but it is my third that might take some persuasion. Third being, change provides nature with the ability to undermine its own laws and structures in order that it may remain constant, constantly evolving that is. Ultimately, if it is natural to change, humans' persistence to constancy is unnatural and thus grotesque.

Consider this, familiar is known and comforting, but the New is novel and exciting. There is definitely fear invoked when approaching the New, but that’s half its appeal. Long have humans explored the endless possibilities in regards to suffering, always inventing novel approaches to impeding and torturing the human and their soul. All of which makes for a tremendously regrettable sorrow, bearing in mind Happiness’ potential has barely been revealed. Instead of seeking out novel methods for joy, humanity has been recycling the same old methods over the last recollectable ages of history –namely revelry, discovery, companionship, idling and violence; too few choices for a species which has noted a thousand ways to die.

Ultimately, familiarity breeds complacency, not contempt. If contempt was truly was the case, how is it that humans allow themselves to be bred into classes and chaste; why do they tolerate the oppression of their oppressors, or what causes them to remain suffering in relationships with people they can no long stand? My answer: fear of the New, fear of revolution, fear of not knowing what to do once their free.

Being that it is unnatural to avoid change, not only for its futility and absurdity, who dares to hold onto familiarity as if it were noble or beneficial? There is no fulfillment achieved by refusing to evolve, happiness is only realized when one breaks from the common molds and dares to be free. As previously stated, familiarity is a slave bond, binding the soul to that which we know, not all that is possible.

Morality

I have a tiny issue to discuss on the difference between morality and justice. After starting into Spartacus I uncovered an aspect of Order, hegemony if you will, which I have failed to recognize thus far. Justice is not a matter of right or wrong, instead it deals with the maintenance of social order. The law makers don’t heed the voice of Morality; otherwise there would be less pollution, less waste, more empowerment towards the equality of all man. The charter of rights is not an equalizer of man; it is merely a declaration by democrats to attain as many votes from as many sources as possible. Morality rides on the coat tails of Justice, weighing down the cumbersome beast sufficiently enough as to keep it from flight. For if justice could soar, it would take off with the bourgeois high upon it. Morality is the light of righteousness, not making its decision based upon class, race, creed or gender. Morality shines within the soul of all, which empowers the force, yet with the corruption of man, it also stains it. In the time of Adam and Eve, morality only knew light. Shadows had yet to cast their fearsome shade upon the soul of man, and it was good. Then, with the dawn of original sin, morality took its present form, a liquid force from which we arise and also the path on which our future will ride forth. To leave on a note of discussion, justice is the decree of the strong over the weak, Hegemony; whereas morality is the soul’s cry for righteousness. The problem lies with the substance of the soul, whose ignorance cannot fully comprehend the depths from which right and wrong arise: Perhaps due to the fluctuation of the universe or rather a simple stain left at the fall of man.

On the destiny of Man: Part Three

No god said, “Let there be man”. It was man himself to divide the weeds from the flowers, classified and elevated the homosapiens a rank above all other creation. Yes, it was we, with our over blown ego that decided bacteria were germ and locus a form of pestilence. With that said, would it come to any surprise that God may not have created us in his own image, rather we devised God in our own reflection. There have been human traits attributed to gods, as well as to those beings so inspiring that we, for but a moment, believed they must have been conceived of divine blood. It seems inevitable now that man would become part of that holy pantheon as human creation grew beyond the control of nature: when buildings could stand longer than forests, when a page of text could inspire millennia, when a name could stand face to face with Kronus [sp?]. If the spirit resides in memory, then the afterlife does not exist somewhere transcendent, it only exists in the minds of the future, where no natural force can erode but merely scatter. To achieve immortality would not be to sit amongst the citadel with Christ; it would be to exist forever within the hearts and minds of those who came after. Reincarnation then could occur at any instance, when your spirit influenced a single soul or a nation. How elusive immortality is. Genealogy can become corrupted and foundation forgotten. With such a simple loss of history gods fall as easy as flowers during hail. So maybe we humans aren’t much different than flowers, we both bloom brightly seemingly of godly nature yet we both crumble with the grace of dried sandcastles.
….point being, the only significance of god is to boost our silly egos or simply to justify our measly existence. Very sad.

On the destiny of Man: Part Two

To return to yesterday’s entry, on the significance of God, I must quickly establish myself. Man has forever been in awe of their surroundings. In reverence of the soaring eagle and the beast we hunt; in reverence to the blistering sun which feeds the crops, the glowing moon which brings the tide and the pouring rain that provides substance to all life; in reverence of creation, in both birth and death; and until time ends Man will always revere the unknown –wherever it may reside. It has been common nature in all humans, regardless of which continent they call home, to deify the powerful unknown. We’ve known beastly Gods and Gods of conquest; Gods to each the sun, the moon and rain; Gods of life and death; and lest we forget, a story to recreate man’s conception. Regardless of continent, every human tribe recognizes some form of deity who rules over the vast expanse past human limitations. In the days of story telling education, during which generations were brought up around campfire instead of classrooms, memory was the only textbook available. Before the rise of the scientific method, the inexplicable was attributed to one deity or another. Then, as the universe began to be explained, man became lost. If there was no supremacy beyond ourselves, then what purpose could we serve? I don’t know right now, but I’ll return to this tomorrow.

On the destiny of Man

We all run an inevitable course throughout our birth, life, death and thereafter. That’s not to say our life’s fate is sealed within an unfaultable design, error and action are too strong a force to deny us all a unique and unpredictable experience. Rather we are all connected into the immense infinite known as Eternity. Our tangible and delicate bodies consist of the same properties with which all other matter, throughout the universe, is governed. The fundamental elements that construct our bodies occur within the most delicate flower, most vicious beast, even those cosmic entities light years away. This essential detail submits us all into the discourse of life and death, a reality even the Gods must kneel before. Our entrance into existence is the outcome of a process common in all mammals, embryonic conception. On a larger scale, our existence is the outcome of chaos and chance. Gravity brought our planet together, tectonic movement along side atmospheric development designed our environment, evolution introduced us… and then the Greeks civilized us. Thus, if our birth is of no special concern [neither our death nor decomposition], where do we find substance? God.

Commentary on V.Hugo

“Fate, it seemed, could be as malignant as the human intelligence, as remorseless as the human heart!” -Les Miserable

To describe human intelligence as malignant seems appropriate as the human being can barely accept a concept unless there is an aspect of suffering involved. The entirely beautiful and pure must be tainted before a man can commit himself and contribute to progress. I speak not as a skeptic, I speak as a human. The rise of a nation occurs not when all citizens contribute to its growth, for then it is merely a colony or state. A nation is born when others fear and respect the presence of the united. It is the belief of the Christians that all humans are born with original sin, so not even the innocence of children was exempt from blemish. The idea of financial progress is so skewed that one can only attain wealth through exploitation, for it is more economic to think than do. A million would be enslaved for the tomb of one. That is the extent of human intelligence.

The human heart is even crueler than the mind, for the mind can only create whereas the heart drives inspiration out of the cavern and into the reality of action. At best we can label this act as desire; at worst we must accept it to be a craving. The mind might create a utopia and then the heart would destroy all those who opposed. Love is hardly different from hate; both are passions that blind and incite violence. What the heart demands the soul must present upon its knees in rags. A man once liberated human from sin and offered them a place within God’s kingdom, in return the hearts of those in charge of his life thought it best to release a murderer in exchange for a bribe of coin. Morality is cast aside by the heart, when ambition takes control, replacing consuming desire in its place.

Looking back to the original quote, V. Hugo was right when he said Fate was malignant and remorseless for it sees no difference between beauty and suffering, only seeing progress; it does not divide the wicked from the righteous, instead allotting time for us all to exist.