Can you not believe in ghosts but believe in God at the same time?
What's the difference in believing in ghosts and God? After all, both are as intangible. Just that the idea of a supreme being appeals more to the head. We all need a little light and organization in our lives. The idea that I'm trying to push through here would be that God is man-made, an invention, a utility to all questions that seemingly have no answers to. He is the jigsaw piece that makes our puzzles complete.
He is Our jigsaw piece. We really do need it. So we make one ourselves. Why question? We need it anyway. These are people living in different places. Some look at the jigsaw puzzle from afar. Others want to be part of the jigsaw puzzle.
So much one can talk about but-
After reading CL's blog I feel like blogging intelligent stuff but I realized that there's a social limit to your intelligence - any further show of knowledge and lack of ignorance would mean transgressing The border!
Thus preceding the sudden possibility of a private blog.
Which is useless because the private journal would be a better option.
But it really is better to run these thoughts through your own mind (at least for me so that I don't get heckled by people for being 'extra' - those badass memories coming from The Musical Chord). And keep the journals occupied with musical stuff, experiences, and observations.
But you're wrong about life not just revolving around music and you. It's always good to keep it simple and less cloudy. Clear, simple, directions. There's already a hell lot of things to do with music, anyway! Obviously there are more things in lfe to think about, but these are just the cardinal ones, duh.
I prefer my life to be that way. Definitely doesn't make my life any less interesting, right?
Do bloggers plan what they type before they start, or do the thought processes happen concurrently? Am I wasting my time thinking about this? Probably not. At this age it's only normal to keep asking questions. Then when we get older we hardly find time to ask these questons and realize at some point that all the while we have been working to earn more money, raise a family, and lead a comfortable life.
Then we return to these questions. It's a cyclical thing I guess. Stop, reflect, go on. Stop, reflect, go on. Maybe the only thing that matters is which stage you are at when you pass on. Were you at a state of desperation, with no one to turn to? Were you surrounded by friends and leading a comfortable life?
Yeah, that's all that matters right? You either die a sad or happy or contemplative death. Like, a frozen frame. That's how your life ended. Here, tis' a picture taking when you died. You left in the dead of the night, your wife beside you, your children and grandchildren all asleep.
You've done it. You have ended it on a good note. Great. All the highs and lows, pleasures and pains, but really, ALL, all that matters is you died Good. A morally-high ending. No one cares about the bad things you have done in life. As long as. Yeah, he's dead already, forgive him.
Imagine what would have happened if you ended on a moral low. Your histories would tilt towards the ending. The things you have done that made the ending this way. Not good. Bad life.
No death does justice to the person.
1 comment:
Hi Jonathan, what a terribly interesting blog you have. I wish I had encountered it much earlier in my years at YST. It is honest and entertaining with this slight (deliberate?) touch of dysfunction that I relish. You have quite a gift with words, cliche not intended. In many ways your blog is so personal I even feel apprehensive about leaving comments. Nevertheless in this post, you caught my attention with your suggestion that God is merely an invention by needy man who feels inadequate at times.
Since you appear to be the sort who randomly tackles topics of profound depth for the fun of it (a most healthy thing to do), I hope you allow me the liberty of getting a little more philosophical in this response.
The assertion that religious people are delusional in some sense can be traced back not only to Karl Marx, who described religion as the 'opiate of the masses' because it numbs people to their sufferings; the idea also has its roots in the writings of Ludwig Feuerbach, a German philosopher who lived around the same period. Feuerbach's argument against religion was that people believed in God or gods because they want consolation, or some sort of spiritual crutch to help them cope with life. God does not exist. He is simply a projection of human longing.
There are a few reasons as to why this argument is ineffective in proving that religious people are delusional. Firstly, longing for something is not a demonstration that it does not exist. For instance, hunger and thirst point to, rather than deny, the existence of food and water. Next, the conclusion of this argument does not prove God does not exist. Rather, it merely proceeds from the baseless premise that God does not exist. In other words, the true logical sequence of this argument is as follows:
1. (Premise) God does not exist.
2. So people who think he exists are wrong.
3. What then is the reason that they think he is real?
4. The reason is that they want him to exist because they need support in their lives.
What does this mean? Well, it means religious people can very easily come up with a counter-argument using quite the same logical
sequence that Feuerbach's argument rests on. And this is how it may sound:
1. (Premise) God does exist.
2. So people who think he doesn't exist are wrong.
3. What then is the reason so many people think he is not real?
4. The reason is that they do not want him to exist because they do not want to be held accountable for anything. Their atheism stems from their desire for self-centered autonomy.
In other words, the logical flow of Feuerbach's argument can cut both ways. Speaking of such double-edged ideas, I would also like to highlight part of an essay by the poet Czeslaw Milosz, a Noble laureate. Entitled 'The Discreet Charm of Nihilism', it provides a potent twist to the idea of an 'opiate of the masses':
"And now we are witnessing a transformation. A true opium of the people is a belief in nothingness after death--the huge solace of thinking that our betrayals, greed, cowardice, murders are not going to be judged."
I hope to have shown how certain ideas and arguments can be interpreted by people of opposing worldviews to support their different stands. I'm afraid religion cannot be dismantled so easily.
Also, on a personal note, preferring to think about the endless complexities of music rather than pondering the reality of God feels to me like ignoring a perilous chasm two feet behind oneself just because one thinks the flowers three feet in front of him have enough detail to last a lifetime and one prefers to look at them in any case. I'd much rather consider first the risks of the chasm before I continue contemplating the flora.
Lastly, don't be offended by my writing ah! I may sometimes sound overzealous but I mean no harm absolutely. Do continue with your blog please. I shall try to follow it regularly.
Post a Comment