tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post1852264761037749485..comments2024-02-13T12:50:30.457-05:00Comments on Rants Within the Undead God: Asceticism and the Existential CrisisBenjamin Cainhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00661999592897690031noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-10976144849186302592019-06-30T08:34:22.245-04:002019-06-30T08:34:22.245-04:00Thanks, but I doubt that balance should be a parti...Thanks, but I doubt that balance should be a particularly high ideal. It strikes me as nobler to suffer for the right reasons. Happiness is for sheep and for slumbering consumers, not for philosophers. <br /><br />When you say reality is what you want it to be, that sounds like the New Thought "Law of Attraction," which is that "positive or negative thoughts bring positive or negative experiences into a person's life." May I ask where you're coming from in terms of your critical perspective? When you say there are infinite truths, is that based on the multiverse theory in physics?<br /><br />I don't claim to have all the answers. I'm working out this worldview in these writings on my blog. Benjamin Cainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00661999592897690031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-73853465714524183322019-06-29T21:48:46.110-04:002019-06-29T21:48:46.110-04:00Interesting read. I see many layers of perspective...Interesting read. I see many layers of perspective. Do you feel that yours is superior or the ultimate truth? Do you continue to seek knowledge? Have you found that your enlightenment has caused you grief in your life? Would you rather be happy? You can descend infinitely deep into thought and never reach a conclusion. Some layers of thought may even repeat themselves depending on what pieces you are putting together. Reality is what you want it to be. There are infinite truths because there is no one truth. Perspective is everything. You will never understand everything. I recognized many of the topics you discussed. I hope you find balance.Amineke Buinunenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-53125190025383786412018-07-02T09:00:25.749-04:002018-07-02T09:00:25.749-04:00We likely would be making our ancestors cry, as it...We likely would be making our ancestors cry, as it were, because postmodern feminism and our over-reliance on technology make us soft. Still, should we really be proud of our ancestors? Macho culture is fully psychotic. The ancients were tough but also ignorant and tribal. Our distant ancestors survived and thus gave us our chance at life, but survival should be the bare minimum standard, given our special mental capacities. Benjamin Cainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00661999592897690031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-55973717116375664232018-06-28T12:40:47.102-04:002018-06-28T12:40:47.102-04:00How to become spiritually abnormal.
Truth is you’r...How to become spiritually abnormal.<br />Truth is you’re rebellious to anything. Let’s just say we are making our ancestors cry and we can see further than this. I hope your journey takes you far.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-6766352982212447032014-10-19T15:13:08.345-04:002014-10-19T15:13:08.345-04:00Many of Woody's films are funny and thoughtful...Many of Woody's films are funny and thoughtful.<br /><br />RE: Ascetics, or people who practice severe self-discipline and abstention. I want to be careful not to lump all ascetics into one category. There's religious, physical, intellectual, artistic, virtually all kinds of motivations for a person to subject themselves to severe discipline and abstention. Olympic athletes are an example. Writers who shut themselves into their rooms to finish a book or play. Monks who sit in meditation for hours everyday. The method is a means to an end. In the case of the monks, the illusion of finding a miraculous power within oneself or the universe is probably a waste of time. Yet, the discipline and insights into the mind and the illusions of self can be useful.<br /><br />I'll have to read more of your posts to get your undeadness ideas. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-26248177980653570372014-10-18T09:11:01.531-04:002014-10-18T09:11:01.531-04:00Yes, I remember our correspondence. You were an as...Yes, I remember our correspondence. You were an ascetic for a long while, as I recall. What do you think about this combination of existentialism and asceticism? Someone like Woody Allen who's supposed to be familiar with the dark truths of nature says we shouldn't stew in angst or in introverted meditation, but should get out there and live life while we have the chance. That's a very Jewish attitude (writing as a Jew myself). Secular Judaism is pretty lame now, though. As I write elsewhere, Judaism was once a religion for outsiders who wandered for years in the desert and merely fantasized about having imperial power like their neighbours. Now that Jews have that power, via Israel's protection by the US, their double-crossing this-worldliness is utterly obnoxious. They appropriate the fantasies of their introverted, angst-ridden ancient ancestors so they can pretend that even though they're materialistic, they're spiritually noble because they have their traditions and their social club. As I see it, Judaism doesn't even warrant atheistic refutation. (Hmm, I wonder where that rant came from.)<br /><br />I'm not sure you quite have the undeadness idea. My point was to formulate a postmodern kind of pantheism, so the idea is that *all* natural things as such are undead, meaning they're neither intelligently directed nor inert or chaotic. The universe simulates artistic creativity when it creates worlds upon worlds, but its forces and elements flow like a zombie horde. The universe creates itself as a crumbling zombie creates its altering corpse, by decaying greatly over time.<br /><br />The exception is that organisms are alive, even though physically we're undead too. This makes for the existential crisis: how should living things react to realizing that they're tics in a zombie's decaying corpse, i.e. in a lifeless abomination of a world that creates itself in a mockery of our pretensions to greatness on spiritual or artistic grounds? How could humans be noble creatures when undead (physical, chemical, etc) systems are far superior creators?Benjamin Cainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00661999592897690031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-24612633754392812042014-10-16T19:12:09.375-04:002014-10-16T19:12:09.375-04:00Hi Ben: I read your definitions of undead in your ...Hi Ben: I read your definitions of undead in your Darwinism post. Let's see if I understand what you mean by "undead". I assume you are using "undead" as a rhetorical meme for all living/dead beings as zombies. I agree life is a mix of death. But zombies are fictional, and more dead than alive. Whereas humans are actual, and more alive than dead. Maybe I get it?<br /><br />Loved your post on Asceticism, Mysticism and Creativity. I think and write about that "exclusively" on my blog SkepticMeditations. We corresponded early this year. I hope your new career and work is going well. Scott<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-90243599366514384232014-09-15T06:14:51.311-04:002014-09-15T06:14:51.311-04:00I agree that genuine scientific models are better ...I agree that genuine scientific models are better than pseudo-scientific models for living by, and I can imagine what you write about would work well if scientific understanding and practice were as integral to a given society as consumerism is to Western Society. Science is a practice/vocation requires both community and individuality. The original Greek idea of Democracy was based on a restricted active citizenship (slaves, women, and children could not fight therefore could not become citizens). If we could make scientific endeavour a condition of citizenship of society and broaden the means of admission into literate scientific activity then it would be big experiment indeed. Perhaps with the widespread knowledge of global warming we need that, and in part now have the potential for it. But it is a different model of citizenship to anything we know now, when 3 billion humans in the world cannot read. Bearzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11288030980271753436noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-56938852643690356002014-09-13T20:06:00.133-04:002014-09-13T20:06:00.133-04:00I'd like to read that blog post of yours.
I ...I'd like to read that blog post of yours. <br /><br />I try to provide links to relevant background articles that go further into the key terms. You're right that in this one I didn't do that for "undead." The main article where I introduce the term is called "Darwinism and Nature's Undeadness" (links below). Another helpful background article might be "God and Science: The Ironic Theophany." The undeadness metaphor also ties into Philipp Mainlander's dark theology, which I discuss in "The World's Creation as God's Self-Destruction." One of my favourite articles that I wrote "Life as Art: Nature's Strangeness and the Aesthetic Attitude." <br /><br />But if you're interested just in what I mean by "undead god," you might check out that first article I mentioned. Don't forget that they're all in the Map of the Rants (if you're reading this on a mobile device, try loading the web version of the page and going to Map of the Rants in the top bar).<br /><br />http://rantswithintheundeadgod.blogspot.com/2012/10/darwinism-and-natures-undeadness.html<br /><br />http://rantswithintheundeadgod.blogspot.com/2012/11/god-and-science-ironic-theophany.html<br /><br />http://rantswithintheundeadgod.blogspot.com/2012/09/divine-creation-as-gods-self-destruction.html<br /><br />http://rantswithintheundeadgod.blogspot.ca/2013/11/life-as-art-morality-and-natures.htmlBenjamin Cainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00661999592897690031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-66908152424684805642014-09-13T18:01:05.538-04:002014-09-13T18:01:05.538-04:00Hey Ben,
I kind-of grasp, intellectually, your ar...Hey Ben, <br />I kind-of grasp, intellectually, your archetype of renunciant artist. Or, asceticism for aestheticism. <br /><br />A big motivation that I had for practicing yoga meditation and taking vows of renunciation (I was an ordained monk for 14 years) was to "tap" into my intuitive and creative "powers". It seems strange, looking back now. I was a rock musician in high school and college, writing songs, seeking creativity. Somehow I segued my art into being a renunciant, ascetic monk. I'll have to reflect on this artistic monastic aesthetic archetype some more to grasp what it's deep significance to me. Maybe I'll try to write a blog post, inspired by yours, to try to share more about my experience of monasticism and creativity or art. <br /><br />You mention "cosmic zombie" and "undead god" frequently. It would be helpful, since you use those concepts lots and they are not familiar, if you provided "definitions" in a link, diagram, or maybe a page of key concepts defined. Just a humble suggestion from a grateful reader.<br /><br />Cheers<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-58563865930158579222014-09-13T07:46:13.709-04:002014-09-13T07:46:13.709-04:00I meant to be talking there about objective knowle...I meant to be talking there about objective knowledge, such as the scientific kind. It's a kind of progress in that a worldview can be more or less adequate to the world. It's like having a better or a worse map of the terrain. Scientific models are better than pseudoscientific ones, for example. Instead of anything being predestined, though, the value of having an adequate map is subjective since it depends on our interest in surviving by controlling natural processes through technology. Anyway, thanks for reading!Benjamin Cainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00661999592897690031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-23047839585293711492014-09-13T06:03:05.030-04:002014-09-13T06:03:05.030-04:00I can go with the last paragraph of this succinct ...I can go with the last paragraph of this succinct rant quite well, anger and sadness are good markers to have and recognise in ourselves, and markers of difference from others. Anger and sadness help us recognise others too. But 'As reason and consciousness are more and more finely attuned, as humans build up more rigorous conceptions of the facts'? does seem to suggest some inexorable sub-Calvinist Progress to something ever bigger and worse/better depending on how you believe predestination divides species and people. I accept change and accept that some changes are measurable improvements. Putting an end to battery farming does improve life for chickens for instance. But I do not subscribe to progress through division ala Calvinism or Popular Darwinism, both of which feed the ego with poison. Good food for thought all through, though. Thanks. Bearzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11288030980271753436noreply@blogger.com