There’s nothing more humbling than reading your old essays. I make myself sick…lol. I’m putting together a book using Amazon Createspace that will be available soon. Please don’t buy it……lol
I read an older humanist essay last night on Google Scholar, and basically this “humanist” was worried about the lack of emotion in humanist rational thinking. His idea was that somehow religion has captured this but humanism has not.
Emotion is something that you have, whether you want it or not. It is determined by the chemicals, and ordering of your body. What he is talking about, without actually identifying it, is contrived emotion. There’s a certain masturbatory aspect of religion that finds delight in believing things that are highly highly improbable. I compare it to the way a gang jumps in its members. It basically says, “Hey, if you can believe these things really happened, even if all aspects of life tell you it is highly improbable, then you can be one of us!” It’s the jump in aspect of SOME religions. Reality demands respect. Reality just IS. To defy it is masturbatory opportunism. The emotion this “humanist” claims is missing from the rationalist’s life is contrived, imaginary emotion. It does add another dimension to life, but a dimension not unlike a drug high. Instead of thinking we are losing this imaginary emotion, we should think that it was never real life to begin with. You want to be certain about your life? At your center, allow reality to be, don’t tell it how to look for you. That is the height of arrogance.
It’s an exhibition of incapability. So, you can’t BE a good person? There has to be a credible threat to force you to be one? People like this are just lost. A person is quantified as one. We know we are part of a system larger than ourselves. We know taking the life of another is an arrogant breach of the expectations of men, and a choice to end something we didn’t create, yet are a part of. Ethics stems from this, and it is determined. All over the world, every culture, and language and society in history has felt around this imposition. It’s not created by religion, but is the essence of humanism.
Pope Francis criticism stuns Vatican http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-30577368
So the Vatican is like your standard corporation. That’s pretty sad, considering they are in the business of virtue. I still think philosophy has more to say about being a good man, but disheartening none the less. It seems no one escapes the race to the bottom…..yet…
I was searching meritocracy on Twitter, and what I learned is upper class people seem to have hijacked the word to mean that their enrichment is justified. Somehow laissez faire capitalism’s free market has rewarded them for their genius. While I agree that merit should coincide with power, ALWAYS, it’s a huuuuuuge stretch to say all rich people deserve their riches.
Is there really two ways to live, one of honesty, integrity and ethical intent, and another of amoral opportunism? The way I feel is there is only one way to live. The other is denial, or a rationalization. How can one argue against integrity? Especially when one is not being watched.