Forgetting Freedom

We are bound by and enslaved to the societal doctrines, dogmas and institutions that constitute the context of our lives. We the people are at the whim of our government and freedom is a personal liberty that only has merit within the limitations imposed by those in power.

Information is scrubbed, redacted and processed, forming minds that help to continue the status quo – or make slight alterations that make people feel they are moving forward. Instead, we are mistaking motion for progress. We are merely tipping the scale towards a side. Change gives the illusion of progress. We feel that we are moving linearly, when we are in fact moving, at best, in a see-saw motion, and, at worst, a circular one.

People will never be entirely free so long as we keep believing in our freedom without ever examining the restrictions to it. And, until we rise to this reality, we will continue to fight one another on issue after issue perpetuating hatred and a societal ‘us-them’ mindset; thus, continuing a cycle of vengeance that feeds the egoic mind and continues us to further entrap ourselves into this world run on binary code and dualism.

Individual’s can find their way out from the imposed constraints of society, and that certainly is laudable. But, that is not where it should end. We should not stop because we ourselves feel that we understand the invisible hand pulling the strings of society, or be anesthetized by relativistic thinking, comparing ourselves to those of the past or those still disenfranchised today.

If we the people feel that our right to freedom has been, is, or will be infringed upon, it is our right as citizens of a nation that is founded on freedom to utilize that tool and examine the components that comprise the system that provide the infrastructure of our lives. We should examine what purpose they serve and what beliefs they are founded upon.

Freedom shouldn’t be some stale assumed quality that we believe we possess, but rather a tool that allows the masses to prune government to better serve them – the people. This does not simply mean voting. Freedom is not something that should be limited to a single idea or action no matter how significant. Freedom is, by its very nature, without limits. Freedom needs to be an integral tool that is engaged in all the aspects of our lives: Our speech, our writings, our schools, our churches, our workplace, and, most importantly, our minds.

 

Proof of Life

Have you ever had a moment where you questioned your own life – no, I don’t mean like existentially question your life, but rather experience something that makes you question whether you’re alive or not?

If you have, then think back to that moment (or a similar one), and, if you haven’t, try and imagine.

So, you have this thought of uncertainty about whether you’re alive or dead, nothing too strange with this experience. What is strange is that we determine that we are indeed alive. You might say, “Why is this strange?” Well, it is strange because what is it that caused you to quell the idea that you are dead? What signs did you look for? What evidence did you need to verify that you were in fact not dead, but alive?

I don’t know the answer to this. My answer is simply that I know, which sounds tautological (and is), but it’s the best explanation I have.

What are your thoughts?

Leap of Faith

We seperate ourselves from Christ by emphasizing his divinity and undermining his humanity. Instead of seeking to imitate him, we are actually avoiding him by alienating ourselves from him.

We choose this because it is easier than wrestling with the paradox that is Jesus: man and God, meek carpenter and savior of the world, blameless but convicted. We struggle with gray areas, and we are hardwired for dualistic – black and white – thinking.

We logic our way into believing in God instead of surrendering our way to having faith in God. The former is a test of memory, facts, evidence and proofs, while the latter is one of pure inituion – fear and trembling in the face of the reality of what existence is truly about.

 

Standard Form

How does believing in multiple realities and multiple perspectives automatically justifies the idea that there can be no absolute as well? I feel these ideas are not in contradiction. A simple maxim for summarizing the postmodern viewpoint is that “the only absolute truth is there are no absolute truths.” However, this statement in and of itself demonstrates that an absolute truth can exist within the same system as that which believes all truths are relative. This very maxim uses the word ‘only’ which signifies that this can apply in every case, except this one. This maxim shows that at least a single absolute truth can exist within a reality ruled by no absolute truths. And a rule with one exception does not look the same as a rule with no exceptions.
If my assertion above is true, all I am really saying is that there are rules that can exist that appear paradoxical when looking through the lens of a two-value truth system (true/false). However, if when looked at through a three-value truth system (true, undetermined/unknown, false), then there exists no opposition between the fundamental assumptions put forth by modernism and postmodernism.

Binary Oppositions

“You are an expression of your culture.” – Stephen West

Binary oppositions help us navigate the world but breakdown when forced to interpret the signified or thing referenced. If you say is this shirt clean or dirty? We know but if we say is mars clean or dirty we don’t know what to do with it. The binary opposition of clean or dirty are still there but the signified object has changed from shirt to mars. The meaning then does not lie in the terms or the rule but in the relation between the terms and their governing rules.

How does the term operate under those perimeters? Can it be answered? Or does it need further inquire? Better yet, how many signified objects do we use daily that more than likely need further analysis? We need to first understand both the operator and operated upon before we can understand their byproduct of meaning.

Zoroaster: The Person You Might Not Know

Zoroaster saw the human condition as the mental struggle between asa, which means truth, and druj meaning lie. Asa is very intricate and only vaguely translatable, but it deals with the creator, creation and existence.

Our purpose, as any creation, is to sustain asa. This is exercised throughout life through the use of constructive thoughts, words and deeds.

In 2005, the Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy ranked Zarathustra as first in the chronology of philosophers. Zarathustra influenced modern day thought by influencing the ancient Greeks. He himself dated back to around 1000 B.C. and came up with the word Mazda-Yasna, which means”the worship of wisdom.” Later, his followers, Zoroastrians, educated greats like Pythagoras, who is the person credited with coining “philosophy,” which means the lover of wisdom.

Zoroaster put a special emphasis on the individual’s personal right to exercise their freedom to either choose to accept asa (truth) and ignore druj (ignorance/chaos), or give into druj and therefore isolate themselves from asa. Because truth can see through ignorance, because it is about it, but ignorance cannot see truth, for it ignores it.

Zoroaster taught that if we have good thoughts, good works, and good deeds, then we were not slaves but became co creators of both the world and ourselves.