Category: Philosophy
How To Respect
(If you’re short on time, skip to the bottom for numbered instructions.)
He couldn’t be sure, but it seemed there was at least a correlation between the two. He thought it was more likely cause and effect than correlation though. But he knew it didn’t have to be. He knew that laziness was the real culprit.
Of course, he couldn’t blame anyone in particular. It certainly wasn’t the aggregators fault; they were just amassing the information. Likewise, it wasn’t the people who provided the information’s fault. All they did was volunteer knowledge–itself a pretty harmless action at worst.
There seemed to be no other option. It had to be the individual. Was the individual person the guilty party? Yes. He was sure of it. He knew it all along. He tried to pretend the responsibility didn’t fall on a single person’s shoulders, but it was clear now. As much as he wanted to shrug off the burden, a singular sensation passing through his body signaled that he was right. Everyone was accountable for the lack of respect permeating the culture.
In an instant, his mood changed. He felt cheery and seemed to see the world in a different light. If the problem had been identified, there could now be a solution. Of all people, he should have seen this bright conclusion earlier. It mattered not. He wouldn’t allow these thoughts to dampen his mood.
Up until recently, there did seem to be a direct relationship between how much information a person knew, and how wise they were. Naturally, the information age has saturated mankind with data. As a result, everyone acted on the belief that there were answers to life’s problems. People thought that information was wisdom. The mistake is forgivable. Nonetheless, it must be addressed. The starting place, is re-learning how to respect another person. He knew this point was tricky, as not every person behaves in a way that deserves respect. He also knew that people rise to the occasion, and in this country every person has the same inherent right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. In this manner, at least, all people deserve respect.
So how does one give respect? See below.
Instructions for How To Respect:
Step 1 – Listen.
Step 2 – Ask, “What are you going to do?”
Special Fourth of July Interview with A Mugwump
I’m excited to tell you all that I had an opportunity to interview A Mugwump this morning. I thought it was a fascinating conversation, but you judge for yourself.
Captain’s Log – How many ways can we spend money?
A Mugwump – Just two. The two ways we can spend our money are by choice or by compulsion.
CL – What is money?
AM – The dictionaries are wrong on this one. Big time. It’s not complicated. Money is a language. Unlike say, English which can communicate the breadth of the human experience, money can only communicate one thing. Money can only communicate value. Money is a language that communicates one thing. Money communicates value. That’s it. All the talk about recessions, depressions, inflation, the 99%, the 1%, Wall Street, Main Street, all of that is meaningless. Money is a language that communicates value.
CL – Are you saying that people with money are more valuable than people without money?
AM – No. This point is tricky, so pay attention. Money is only money when it is in motion. A dollar in my pocket is not a dollar. It is a piece of paper that looks like a dollar. When I take it out to purchase something, as I hand it to the seller, it transforms into money. It transforms into a communication of value. Whether we have a lot of money or no money has nothing to do with our value. When we choose to spend money, we communicate to others what we value. As I said, money in motion is the language we use to express value.
CL – Okay then, let’s return to the two ways we can spend our money, what is communicated when we choose to spend our money?
AM – When we spend our money by our own choice, we come to an agreement with the seller of the goods as to the value of the product or service. In short, when we choose to spend our money we communicate how much we value the product or service. If we think a particular TV is worth $300 and the person with the TV thinks it is worth $300, we hand over the $300 dollars and the seller hands us the TV. The money transferred communicates the agreed upon value of the TV.
CL – And what about when we are compelled?
AM – It is not the same when we talk about being compelled to spend our money. When we are compelled to spend our money, that money does not communicate the value of a product or service. Instead, when we are compelled to spend our money, the money communicates how much we think we’re worth as an individual. The money that an armed-robber forces us to give him was freely given to us in exchange for the value of a specific application of our time, skill, and/or energy. The armed-robber is giving us nothing of value in return for our money. Therefore, when we pay the armed-robber everything we have to stay alive, we’ve just communicated that we think our time, skill, and energy, in other words, our life, has no value. And the act of paying everything–our time, our skill, and our energy (our life)–to stay alive is another way to define slavery.
CL – Slavery, huh? It sounds like you may be describing the government as an armed-robber. What do you think a government is?
AM – No, you misunderstand. The government is not an armed-robber. It does offer certain valuable things, which a private market cannot, in exchange for our money. What do I think a government is? To my mind, a description that fits all governments that have ever existed, in all time periods, for all cultures, for all nations, would have to be, “Other people making some of our decisions for us.” That is what a government is. A government is nothing more than another person or group of people making some of our decisions for us. I say “some” of our decisions because that’s what this is all about. How many of our decisions should a government make for us? That’s what we are constantly deciding in this life. To me, less is better. But I can see how others might not want the responsibility of decision-making, so they might want others to make the decisions for them.
CL – Of all days, why agree to this interview today?
AM – Today, July 4th, 2013, is a fitting day to remind people of the nature of things. America is the only group we’re all apart of today. And if your readers are anything like me, they know they have value. As a matter of fact, even if they’re nothing like me, I believe they have value. I believe this, not because I have any special knowledge, but because in order to secure my freedom, I must believe and act on the idea that everyone has value. I must act on the idea that no matter who we are, no matter what our background, no matter what mistakes we’ve made, we have value. It’s Independence Day. A holiday helping us remember that our country was founded because citizens disagreed with how/how much of their money they were compelled to spend. In other words, they believed they should be making more decisions than their government let them. It was founded because people believed they were worth more than their government thought. If we want to spend our money as we please, if we want the amount of money we’re compelled to spend to be as little as possible, we need to be reminded that we all have value. Everyone has value.
A Letter To My Friend (That I Hope To Write)
To My Friend,
We’ve known each other for some time now. We’ve seen how we each live, how we each make decisions, how we each handle problems. More than most, you’ve seen my relationships with women unfold.
I’m writing to you now because a new day has dawned. People like us, we’re different. Our brains maintain a tighter grip on information than most. We have been given all the tools necessary to accomplish great things in this life, you and I. That’s just a fact. We also know that leading a family must be one of those things. It is a timeless tradition that must be honored by all men aspiring to greatness. There is no escaping this feeling. We’re surrounded by weak men holding their hands out, expecting help. They’ve got it wrong. We’re the ones who give help, not receive help.
The point is, we made it this far, and owe it to everyone, literally everyone, to use the rest of our time to be an example.
Some maladjusted part within us wants us to believe that if a woman would have us, then she could be the one. First hand experience however, tells us that nothing could be further from the truth. First hand experience also tells us that that’s not enough. That’s why I’m writing this letter. We need to help each other stay focused on the goal. Alone, the future is bleak. Together, we can lead a revival.
Only because of you am I confident to share the news. You reminded me of something I once knew; something that over the last several years I repressed, hid, denied, and pretended to forget. You reminded me that I, too, believe ideal women exist. I, too, believe in women of such high quality that they seem unearthly. I’m talking about a quality so rare that it is only whispered about. I believe in ideal women who possess so much more than the ability to attract. My friend, we’ve always hoped we were right. Now I am certain we were, because I found mine. I hope this letter brings you good fortune, and motivates you to stay the course.
Your Friend,
A Mugwump
Grandparents Wanted
“Now that we know who is doing what, it’s time for the prepared speeches portion of the meeting. Each of our speakers today has prepared what I’m sure will be marvelous speeches. First up, giving her ‘Ice Breaker’ speech, is Debbie Hinkletoe. She has spoken many times in the past, but this is her first speech with us. It appears we are making her feel as nervous as Anne Frank practicing tuba, so let’s be sure to give her all the support we can muster,” joked the old man lovingly attempting ease Debbie’s visible nerves.
It was unclear whether the old man knew that the joke would, to put it mildly, step on a few toes. The few audience members cursed with the inability to resist a joke’s cue-to-laugh recognized their loneliness and quickly adopted silence.
Concluding the awkward moment, a respectable old woman declared, “Not funny.”
“Okay, meetings over. Thanks for nothing, you inconsiderate asshole!” seemed the words the audience expected to hear next. However, following General Waverly’s (White Christmas) advice, “If there’s one thing the army taught me, it was to be positive… …especially when you don’t know what you’re talking about,” the old man made the correct decision to let the moment pass and continue the meeting.
He couldn’t help but smile. He just witnessed an event only found in books: An old man putting to use his well-deserved ability to “not care”, and an old woman responding in kind. Oh, the subtleties of that moment. As if the back-and-forth had caused the air to congeal, a stillness overtook the room for but an instant. Neither mortal would yield. Neither should have. They both behaved perfectly. They both…were grandparents.
He always liked “grandparents” as a group, but he was never quite able to put his finger on why; until that exact moment.
But first, while it may seem obvious, the reader must learn what he believed a grandparent to be. A grandparent is not simply someone whose children have had children. By his thinking, to be a grandparent, one’s children must be (or have) raising their own children. Biological grandparents fulfilling the role of primary parent are not grandparents to him, then. This is a necessary qualification.
It seemed to him that something magical happened when an old person was fully released from parental responsibilities. The concern for ‘appropriate’ and ‘proper’ disappeared, rightfully so. Grandparents, then, were the living proof that even the loftiest concepts needed to be knocked off their pedestals every now and again. It was the exchange between these grandparents that revealed this truth clearly.
This realization had a second effect. It motivated him, for he was a parent. Moreover, he now understood that to earn his status as grandparent he must aggressively embrace his parental responsibility. Any wasted time or opportunity would only result in his missing out on the ability to someday be the salt of life, would result in his missing out on the near-sanctified duty to offend, provoke, insult, but also spoil, entertain, love.
More than that, he finally understood why, no matter what they did, he always felt loved by his own grandparents. It was because they wouldn’t be his grandparents if his parents hadn’t loved him first.
How Long Until We Learn? 12 Years? 20 Years? Never?
“Does everyone understand?” the professor asked. She just finished explaining a nuance regarding citations in academic writing. “Once more then, common knowledge doesn’t need to be cited, but other than that, it’s best to cite the source of your material. For example, that Pearl Harbor was attacked on December…9th..?” Snickers from the class. “…was it the 9th?” she begged for help.
“7th,” he spoke up. “December 7th.”
“That’s right, thank you. Now you all know that I don’t ‘do’ dates very well,” she joked.
“And that you don’t love your country,” he remarked half-joking, but seeking a status increase in his classmate’s eyes as well.
“Haha. Yes, apparently that too,” she laughed, genuinely appreciating the comment.
His helmet on and secure, he slowly backed the motorcycle out of its parking spot as he prepared to head home from class. Recognizing that a motorcyclist’s every movement is exposed, he concentrated on making his scan for obstacles look as cool as possible.
Finally, he was on the road. Warm air, no seat belt; he was one with the machine. “This will never get old,” he thought to himself. Seeing brake lights in front of him he looked up to see yellow become red. Downshifting, he slowed to a stop. The car in front of him had a sticker that caught his attention. It simply read, “9-11-01.” He couldn’t place the date. Adam and Eve themselves couldn’t describe the shame he felt as he realized his mistake. How many times did it have to happen until he learned that pride comes before the fall? Less than 10 minutes after enjoying a good laugh at the professors expense for not remembering the date Pearl Harbor was attacked, he didn’t recognize a sticker whose purpose was to help us never forget the events of September 11, 2001.
Frustrated he rode the rest of the way home analyzing how this could have happened. Suddenly, an interesting thought: “Wow. It has been 12 years. I wonder how everyone felt in 1953 about Pearl Harbor, compared to how we feel now about 9/11. I always hear about how great the 50s were… Will people in 2073 look back and romanticize this decade too?” It seemed unlikely.
**
Insecurity. Individuals feel it, nations feel it. In either case, it is a problem that should be stomped out as ferociously as possible. The attack on 9/11 spoke to life’s uncertainty. How long are we going to pretend that this was new information? No living thing is free from a risk of dying. Why are we still insecure?
Given the occasion to ‘get the jump’ on the yearly discussion, I don’t mind taking the first stab. We’re still insecure because we don’t understand where security comes from.
Here’s the situation as I see it: After taking until the mid-1980s to repress Vietnam’s memory, we built a military of overwhelming strength. The end of the 80s saw the end of The Cold War. Less than a few years later, we literally obliterated Iraq’s military during Gulf War One. (Our pilots were shooting down Iraqi pilots before they could retract their landing gear on takeoff.) This victory made it impossible to resist feeling invulnerable.
The trouble, however, was that the “we” that became invulnerable included the greatest generation. By 9/11, “we” no longer included the greatest generation or their experience-based (vs secondhand) knowledge and wisdom. What did they know that would have helped us? What might we have learned from existing with them, rather than reading about them? What information do we need to internalize so we can rid ourselves of the wasting disease called insecurity?
Security comes from within.
It won’t come from Obama. It wouldn’t have come from Romney. It won’t come from Clinton or Christie.
Whether Hippocrates ever intended his paraphrased oath to be applied by everyone is inconsequential. “Do no knowing harm.” That goes for everyone. All the time. Whether at work or at play. In your personal life, in your professional life.
Is life complicated? Yes. Has our government acted honorably all the time? No. Do people capitalize on every opportunity to take advantage of each other? Yes. These questions and answers do not paint a pretty picture. So what. Not one of them has any bearing on the decision you are about to make right now.
The only way to overcome this problem is to stop doing knowing harm. Today. No matter who is telling you, “It’s okay.” Whatever consequence you fear will happen if you disobey, you must risk it. Past mistakes are irrelevant. The rest of the planet is longing for Americans to wisely use the power we hold. You know what I’m talking about. You can’t feign ignorance any longer.
I need your help. The only way to get there is together.
Experience’s Danger
The reason pilots debrief a flight after landing is to see what lessons the experience can offer. The end goal being to use the lessons learned to improve their performance during the next flight. A continual striving, as it were. But, at its core, experience is not an exclusively positive thing. If left unquestioned, it can have negative consequences too. Seasoned pilots know this all too well.
I’m talking about the danger in mistaking the current situation to be the same as a past experience. For pilots, this occurs most when troubleshooting a malfunction. Pilots have a tendency to enjoy being able to say, “Oh, that’s nothing to worry about, I’ve seen it before.” However, choosing a course of quickly reaching a conclusion without proper evaluation of the situation can create larger problems down the road. For pilots in the air, this course, if uninterrupted, leads to death. While grounded people don’t face immediate death for mistaking “this” for “that”, the result is definitely unpleasant.
Who can’t relate to this lesson? I’ve had many, many arguments with loved ones that only after they went to great pains to rephrase and re-rephrase their point did I realize, “Hey, while it seemed like they just wanted to re-hash some past grievance, it actually turns out they aren’t thinking about it at all.” I then experience the wonderful feeling of dumbfounded shame. All the energy I had been putting into the argument up to that point was misguided. Instead of devaluing their position and jumping to the conclusion that this was the “same ol’, same ol'”, I should have given them the benefit of the the doubt and really listened.
Ask yourself, “Have I ever actually been hurt because I gave the benefit of the doubt to the other person until more information could be gathered?” Unlike pilots, who have a strict and short time-table to work with, I have seen no reason to act under the guise that life has a time table. We can take all the time in the world to hear each other out. In fact, that might lead to a longer life in the end anyhow.
I can hear a few of you right now, “But that’s the thing… I really don’t have the time to deal with (Insert your favorite combatant).” Hmm. Sure. Okay. We’ll do it your way then. Instead of being patient and seeking understanding, which has been proven time and again to result in strengthening relationships (regardless the outcome of that particular discussion), let’s rush to a bad decision. Come to think of it, I now see why you want to rush to a bad decision. If I rush to a bad decision, I will then have even more time for even more rushed, bad decisions based on misunderstandings. Just think about how many bad decisions I’ll be able to make in one lifetime if I hurry! Sorry, no. I’ll take my cues from pilots. If their unique and ongoing relationship with death teaches them to gather all the data before making a decision, rather than forcing the current problem to look like a past experience, then I, too, will treat every situation as unique until proven otherwise.
What about you? How will you use this experience?
How To Live Uncensored
(If you’re short on time, skip to the bottom for numbered instructions.)
A professor of mine recently led a classroom discussion on censorship. I am embarrassed, therefore compelled, to admit that this is a hot-button issue for me. I cannot stand censorship. Why should one human being have power over what another human being is exposed to?
Just the same, I can surely see the other side of the story. Wait, no I can’t. What is the problem again? Has there ever been any data to support that uncensored living is problematic? Sure, there seems to be well established correlations between those who watch violence and those who perpetrate it, and the like. But causal?
There has to be an identifiable problem before we can start solving it! What is the problem?!
So this got me thinking. What, even, is censorship?
Censorship definitions refer us back to the word ‘censor’, which is a noun. By noun, we mean a person, place or thing. In this case, a censor is clearly a person. This is extremely important to the following philosophizing or interpretation of life. (Why is it important to spell out that a censor is a person? Because as free and alive men and women, we should want to live uncensored. Since we don’t right now, we need to know what that would even look like.) So a censor is another person. This makes sense because fundamentally censorship really can’t be imposed on oneself. By definition, a censor is someone who views/hears/reads something, deems it objectionable and then suppresses it. If I view/hear/read something, I can’t reverse that. I can’t censor myself. So we’ve learned something: The minimum number of humans required to bring forth the concept of censorship is two.
Why is this important? Because now we’re getting to the heart of the concept. There must be two people in order for one person to act as a censor.
Furthermore, it seems to me that censorship deals exclusively in the realm of surprise. As in, people clamor for censorship when they’ve been surprised. Or the well-intended censor believes if he doesn’t act, the audience will be unpleasantly surprised. Are you with me? Taking a page out of history, picture this: a well-tailored family sits down to watch the Ed Sullivan show. Everything is as it should be. Then, surprise! A man humps the air! This isn’t what they were expecting at all. Oh, boy. What are they ever to do?
Well, what did happen? What did they do? Maybe some turned off the TV. Maybe others wrote letters. Maybe others discussed it. Maybe others ignored it.
Could the surprise have been avoided? YES! Most definitely. When in history did adult men and women give other adult men and women control over their life in the way that those parents did with TV? As if there was something inherently congenial about what was broadcast on TV? “There was up until that point…”, you say? Well then, lesson learned.
What lesson? Don’t believe there is another living person worthy of control over your life.
The good news is, the information age is here. Not a single human being alive should be surprised by what they see or hear. If you value the freedom you have, and want even more of it, you’ll recognize this as a good thing. If censorship is inherently about limiting surprise, and surprise is coming to an end, the end of censorship is therefore near. Without the ability to be surprised, individuals have regained some of the control they gave up with the advent of TV and other forms of mass communication. And anytime we as individuals gain back control, it is a victory for freedom.
Censorship is about controlling life in the present to promote a desired future. Am I being clear? The thing being censored must really exist in order to be censored. Something not yet real cannot be censored. For example, whether fiction or non-fiction, censored violence is still violence. It still was brought forth into reality. How foolish are we to expect that life, inherently full of unknowns, should have a moment where we can for sure know the future? How did people ever make it to this, “Alright children… For the next short while, we are all going to stare at this optical illusion. Unlike the rest of the day, we should be totally safe from surprises. You see, there are men and women behind the scenes making sure that nothing we don’t expect will happen.” Are you kidding me?
For me, the burden of proof is on the censor. What is he trying to protect? I hope to have shown his answer is irrelevant. It isn’t about protecting. It is about control. Why does he want control? Because ‘he’-the censor and ‘he’-the individual calling for censorship don’t know how to live in the present. They are captivated by the notion of the future. They only know how to live in such a way that demonstrates their denial of the present. They simply put up with the present, in hopes for a better future. If they’re children, we need to teach them. If they are adults, they should be embarrassed.
Ask yourself, “Do I want a better future?” or “Do I want to live life?” They are not the same thing.
Instructions for How To Live Uncensored:
Step 1– Stop believing you can influence the future.
Step 2- Understand that there is only one step.
Why Philosophy? The Answer is Mathematical.
The sound of the car door closing should have woken them. In any case, he was too excited to care. Up the stairs he went. Listening first for what he hoped to never hear, he finally knocked on their door.
“What?” his mother asked.
“I’m home.” he replied opening the door.
“Good…” she acknowledged.
“‘THE MATRIX’ IS THE BEST MOVIE EVER!!!” he burst.
“That’s great. Tell me about it in the morning.”
“No, you don’t understand, I have to go see it again. You have to see it. Dad, what are you doing tomorrow night? I mean, I could feel my jeans shaking from the bass it was so loud.”
That was me. April 1999.
In the fall of 1999 I learned that the ancient Greek’s had mused that we could all really just be brains in jars being stimulated to believe life as we know it is happening. Wow. I cannot tell you how powerful that one fact was. That begged the question, “What else did people thousands of years ago think about that is being presented as new today?”
Around the same time, this knowledge became slightly depressing. If “The Matrix” was actually thousands of years old, what hope did we have for ever thinking something new?
A decade later, I stumbled upon Heidegger. Intense. Taken together, Heidegger and a plagiarized Matrix have revealed how wrong the famous “to remain ignorant of history is to remain forever a child” saying is.
Love history, study history, worship history; just don’t believe that you’re somehow better for it. More and more it is becoming clear to me that “life” is perfectly synonymous with “now.” Simply acknowledging this gives me all the hope I need. Anxiety disappears.
For the doubtful reader, the best argument I can muster is the following personal story.
I attended college from 1999-2003. I am back in college for kicks right now. If you’ll allow my other writings to qualify me to make an observation, it seems US universities are really only interested in one thing: “How to Prevent the Holocaust.” The Stanford Prison Experiment. The Milgram Experiment. Professors and students alike stand in awe of their revelations. Somehow they miss the elephant in the room. They miss that humans are totally capable of taking part in another holocaust. This direct attempt to prevent the holocaust will not work. To accomplish the goal, universities would be better served if they backed up a step and challenged students to accept responsibility for the present. As I’ve written before, this idea of building a [fill in the blank] future is fundamentally flawed.
The only way I see to prevent another holocaust is to live for right now. I’m not talking about “immediate gratification.” I’m talking about an idea I first heard from Peter Drucker. In his book “Management,” he discusses that the Hippocratic Oath doesn’t apply only to the medical field. In his book, he makes the case that managers in any business have to live by it as well. I’d go a step further and say everyone should use it as a guide. Drucker paraphrases the oath down to, “Do no knowing harm.” Implied is you can’t “do” the future. You can only “do” the present.
By way of example, while deployed I hung on my wall some of the Samurai’s Bushido-type sayings. One was, “Courage is living when it is right to live, and dying when it is right to die.” I can tell you I have put a lot of though into it, and if the situation presents the “my life or me taking another’s life” dichotomy, I’m choosing the bullet. The German people chose poorly. They seem to have thought, “Even though this is wrong, if I do it now, at least I’ll make it to the future.” Wrong. No way am I making the same choice. Only someone avoiding “the now” could murder on command. Personal story turned rant over.
To recap, (“The Matrix” + Ancient Greek Philosophy + Martin Heidegger – Cicero + (Two x College) + Peter Drucker + Bushido) x Me^Infinity = Philosophy or interpreting existence is fascinating to me. What’s your story?
How To Do The Inconceivable.
(If you’re short on time, skip to the bottom for numbered instructions.)
Because it is time, that’s why. Someone needs to grab the bull by the horns and reveal the secret to accomplishing anything. The following few paragraphs are going to give you the tips you need to do anything you can conceive.
In the recent Tom Cruise movie Oblivion, T.C. and his female counterpart are two-weeks away from completing their mission on the ‘remote site’ that is Planet Earth. After the two weeks, they will return to the new human settlement with those who survived the war. Granted, the work they were doing was not in itself particularly difficult or boring. Loneliness seemed to be the biggest negative. And the dream of how life would be like in two weeks’ time kept them going.
How many of us ever thought we’d spend as much time and energy as we have to accomplish so little? How did we do it? Where did we get the strength from? Were we born with it? Even if we were born with it, we must fight the desire to victimize ourselves. Instead, as a group we need to accept total responsibility for our lives.
Where did the strength to put up with a life we never conceived come from? The strength came from believing a lie. The lie that there will be more time in the future. Break down the concept of the future a little and you’ll see why this is a lie. The future has not happened. The present is happening. The future “is not”. The present “is”. What do you gain if when you trade what “is” for what “is not”?
The future will never be. Can you understand this? The future will never “exist.” It will never “be.” That’s it’s definition. If you believe that the future is something that “will be”, then you’re no longer describing the same abstract idea that’s being discussed here, and is commonly labeled “the future.” There is no catching-up. There is no getting ahead. These are impossibilities.
I have been nearly exclusively reading the classics for almost a decade now, and a common theme is best summed up by Jon J. Muth in his children’s book, “The Three Questions”, based on Leo Tolstoy’s ideas. “Remember then that there is only one important time, and that time is now. The most important one is always the one you are with. And the most important thing is to do good for the one who is standing at your side. For these, my dear boy, are the answers to what is most important in this world.”
The choice is always yours. If you want to do the inconceivable follow the instructions below. If you want to exist in reality, stick with living in the present.
Instructions for How to Do The Inconceivable:
Step 1 – Believe that after you’ve accomplished it, you’ll have time to do what you really want.
Step 2 – Understand that there is only one step.
How To Philosophize
I recently took an undergraduate philosophy course for pay. (Highly recommended if you get the chance.) Martin Heidegger was the thinker we studied the most. That man knew how to philosophize. The professor had us read Heidegger’s, “Phenomenological Interpretations with Respect to Aristotle: Indication of the Hermeneutical Situation.” Quite the title, no? Apparently, this paper put him on the map.
It is extremely difficult to read. Supposedly this was purposeful. It seems Heidegger’s intent in everything he did was to get people to live in the moment. He wrote with such depth and complexity that his readers can’t be thinking about something else and understand what he was trying to communicate.
So what made this paper so important? In it, Heidegger argues that the time has come for someone (himself in this case) to remind humanity that no matter how smart we think we are, we don’t actually want to find answers to our questions. We don’t actually want the ‘seeking for truth’ to conclude. As in, we think we do, but that’s only because we have a fundamental misunderstanding of what it means to be human.
That might not sound radical upon first reading. Think about it this way. There are several problem-solving techniques. One in particular has six steps. 1. Recognize the problem. 2. Gather the data. 3. List the possible solutions. 4. Test the possible solutions. 5. Select a solution. 6. Implement the solution. Heidegger was given a place at the table because he convincingly argued that life is always and only about step one, or recognizing the problem. He wrote this while other great thinkers of his day (and today) made arguments regarding how to perform step six, the final step. “Implement the solution.”
There are some thinkers today who concern themselves with prescriptive philosophy. They recommend things like censoring children from religion because research shows that once people internalize the scientific method they don’t return to their childhood faith. In his paper, Heidegger questions this whole concept. He basically argues that the idea of doing everything according to a logical system which centers around adding longevity to our lives is an escape. We shouldn’t be trying to build Utopia. I take his writing to argue that this Utopia some seem to be striving to create would rob life of meaning. What is more important, more difficult, and more worthy is continually defining our existence. Why do we want to live forever? What is appealing about world peace? What does a world of well-fed people actually look like? This is because no matter what answers the past has given us, the very nature of the questions demand continual asking. For all I know, the Greek philosophers didn’t even exist. What do I care what their answers were?
Thousands of years into our existence one man was still able to gain notoriety by simply reminding us that the fun part of living, or what might be more easily understood as the ‘being’ part of human being, is step one. That is, recognizing the problem. And that’s how to philosophize.