Monday, July 13, 2009
Nine One what?
New Collaboration. Michael NightTime And Mr. Doug rocking the wobble and the twisted bass sounds!!
hint: turn this volume waaaayyy up
Tuesday, July 07, 2009
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Monday, June 08, 2009
Moral Musings.
I am an intensely moral person.
Now, before those of you whose mouths and minds are quick to form glib remarks about the absolute extent to which the previous statement is untrue, pause for a moment to consider that actual nature of the claim. I will grant you immediately that the codified morality to which I abide so fervently is not the usual,normal, and some would say natural, one. This does not change the strictness with which I believe in, and follow it. It does not change the fact that when examined in light of my own rules and morals, I am without sin. It raises the question though that is the point of talking about this at all.
Let us, for a moment, abstract my moral code into one that is much more disagreeable. While in some instances people may find my choices tasteless or foreign, in the day to day I generally get along fairly well with the world. Any true morality is defined by how it speaks to our actions (or else it is just an empty religion, purely rhetoric to further some alternative goal) and in turn all of our actions have some moral implication.
When one examines the total abstraction of our own complete moral opposite, there the problems begin to arise. This person, this antithesis of everything that we do, and thus everything that we are, must be our nemesis, and we will view them as evil. For, is that not the very soul of what is evil? to act in a way contrary to what we believe to be true, proper, and good? In such a situation, however, this constructed inversion of a persona would also must find us to be equally evil, equally abhorrent in their own moral stationing in the world. There are those in the world who know themselves to have on some level prescribed to a given code, but choose to ignore it for whatever reason. I have no time for these people, not in my own living nor in today's thought experiment. I suppose I am simply trying to breach the larger subject concerning the nature of morality itself, specifically it's intrinsic (or not so) connection to what we see as good/evil.
If one presupposes god, the question is moot. Indeed, if one presupposes any absolute morality to the world, existing outside of the simple minds of humanity, then there is good, and there is bad. We do good things and we do bad things, and they exist as such independent of what we believe to be right or true.
I don't know which is more terrifying.
Are we judged against an arbitrary but absolute set of rules? An absolute morality demands the existence of god, or some external judge. If this is true, every recorded moral code in history is different. Certainly, many contain similarities, but there are no absolutes. There are always exceptions. Which is right? Is it, too, malleable? if it is, what sort of moral absolute is that?
Is this truly a "morally blank world"? (to quote a comic in this sort of exposition is odd, but it is both temporally, socially, and contextually fitting)
wherein all that is good/evil is only according to the morality of the majority, or even the morality of the strong? If I live according to moral code, so that I may look myself in the mirror, have I fulfilled my obligation to my self? to the world?
What then is the impetus for not doing "evil" as others see it, if it holds no barring in our own moral structure? The fear of punishment?
Conversely, what drives us to do "good" as others may see it, if there is no impetus in our own morality to do so?
Most importantly, if by not doing, or by doing these things we are betraying our own sense of morality, breaking our own rules, what sort of position does that leave us to live in?
to quote another comic-philosopher
"Either way, I'm scared to try it"
Now, before those of you whose mouths and minds are quick to form glib remarks about the absolute extent to which the previous statement is untrue, pause for a moment to consider that actual nature of the claim. I will grant you immediately that the codified morality to which I abide so fervently is not the usual,normal, and some would say natural, one. This does not change the strictness with which I believe in, and follow it. It does not change the fact that when examined in light of my own rules and morals, I am without sin. It raises the question though that is the point of talking about this at all.
Let us, for a moment, abstract my moral code into one that is much more disagreeable. While in some instances people may find my choices tasteless or foreign, in the day to day I generally get along fairly well with the world. Any true morality is defined by how it speaks to our actions (or else it is just an empty religion, purely rhetoric to further some alternative goal) and in turn all of our actions have some moral implication.
When one examines the total abstraction of our own complete moral opposite, there the problems begin to arise. This person, this antithesis of everything that we do, and thus everything that we are, must be our nemesis, and we will view them as evil. For, is that not the very soul of what is evil? to act in a way contrary to what we believe to be true, proper, and good? In such a situation, however, this constructed inversion of a persona would also must find us to be equally evil, equally abhorrent in their own moral stationing in the world. There are those in the world who know themselves to have on some level prescribed to a given code, but choose to ignore it for whatever reason. I have no time for these people, not in my own living nor in today's thought experiment. I suppose I am simply trying to breach the larger subject concerning the nature of morality itself, specifically it's intrinsic (or not so) connection to what we see as good/evil.
If one presupposes god, the question is moot. Indeed, if one presupposes any absolute morality to the world, existing outside of the simple minds of humanity, then there is good, and there is bad. We do good things and we do bad things, and they exist as such independent of what we believe to be right or true.
I don't know which is more terrifying.
Are we judged against an arbitrary but absolute set of rules? An absolute morality demands the existence of god, or some external judge. If this is true, every recorded moral code in history is different. Certainly, many contain similarities, but there are no absolutes. There are always exceptions. Which is right? Is it, too, malleable? if it is, what sort of moral absolute is that?
Is this truly a "morally blank world"? (to quote a comic in this sort of exposition is odd, but it is both temporally, socially, and contextually fitting)
wherein all that is good/evil is only according to the morality of the majority, or even the morality of the strong? If I live according to moral code, so that I may look myself in the mirror, have I fulfilled my obligation to my self? to the world?
What then is the impetus for not doing "evil" as others see it, if it holds no barring in our own moral structure? The fear of punishment?
Conversely, what drives us to do "good" as others may see it, if there is no impetus in our own morality to do so?
Most importantly, if by not doing, or by doing these things we are betraying our own sense of morality, breaking our own rules, what sort of position does that leave us to live in?
to quote another comic-philosopher
"Either way, I'm scared to try it"
Sunday, May 31, 2009
halfupdate
Party was bangin'
I made people dance to hard in the beginning. So everyone was to tired by like 1:30. Still, got a good 2/3 hours of solid dance floor in there, so was very happy. It was nothing like my Wickerman floors, but at least I could see the people. They want me to do a monthly there, which would be problematic when i move, but we'll see. So far the previously mentioned Sigil has provided two of it's three will points impressively. If I get a job on Monday I am never doubting chaos Magick again.
Heading to DC for a couple of days, then maybe baltimore? back here, then Philly, then Boston ideally, then back here? who knows hopefully I'll have a job by that point and that will heavily influence my plans. PEX fest July 3-5 then Transformus mid july?
I made people dance to hard in the beginning. So everyone was to tired by like 1:30. Still, got a good 2/3 hours of solid dance floor in there, so was very happy. It was nothing like my Wickerman floors, but at least I could see the people. They want me to do a monthly there, which would be problematic when i move, but we'll see. So far the previously mentioned Sigil has provided two of it's three will points impressively. If I get a job on Monday I am never doubting chaos Magick again.
Heading to DC for a couple of days, then maybe baltimore? back here, then Philly, then Boston ideally, then back here? who knows hopefully I'll have a job by that point and that will heavily influence my plans. PEX fest July 3-5 then Transformus mid july?
Saturday, May 30, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
