On Life as it Passes

I have been wanting to post for a while now, but the fates seem to be against me. Every time my fingers start itching to write, I am removed from internet access. Meanwhile, when I have access, I am usually busy doing something that is actually necessary. Well fate has finally taken a turn and afforded me an opportunity to do some writing.
I am in the midst of a May term class in philosophy. That means it is an entire semester's worth of philosophical questions and ponderings condensed into three short weeks. Normally, I probably would not think that the brief delving into a broad survey of the philosophical would be all that grueling. However, condensing all of those topics into three hours a day five days a week does make it rather challenging. It is also frustrating because we only have time to scratch the surface of so many immense issues. A lot of them have made me want to blog just so I could get my thoughts out. Unfortunately, as I stated earlier, blogging has not been easily facilitated, so all my thinking has gone unwritten. Ah well, it matters not. I am sure I will have other opportunities to wrack my brain about the meaning of life and then post it here. Hopefully it won't be in an eight part series again, but you never know.
On the other hand, it has also been a very good time for me poetically. I go through spells where I am not really pleased with many of my poems or I think them banal, trite, or just bad. Right now, however, I am going through a spell where I feel like I am writing some very good stuff, maybe the best I've written since I went to LA back in march. The only question now is which to post.
This one I wrote after hanging out with my friends Katy and Chester and my girlfriend, Hannah the night before Katy left for Texas for two months. It was a very cool and pleasant evening and seemed worthy of a bit of poetry.

Skyglow

We lay on the grass
To watch the stars
But it was a cool night
And clouds crept into the country
In the distance to the northwest
We couls see it
The ever present glow
Of the sleepless city lights
Like a great burning on the horizon
Filling the night air
With a lurid gleam
And the clouds
That came to watch us
Were all tinged with that dull orange
Looking hellishly contrived
Set against the deep blue heavens
The city lights came down on us
Like radioactive fallout
Desaturating all
So when we looked to the sky
We saw blindness
And hid ourselves under blankets
Trying to find the darkness
To reclaim the night
But knowing already
That it's lost

Obviously I'm not very keen on skyglow. Anyone who's read a lot of my poetry probably knows that I love the stars and hate fluorescent orange streetlights. Sure, their function is nice, but they are just obnoxious--especially when they block out the stars that I so love.
I'm going to post another one because...well...this is my blog, and I shall do with it as I please, and I like this poem, so I'm going to post it. And there's nothing you can do to stop me! Well, now that that overly dramatic power trip, here is a poem about something completely different.

Is This Why We Hold our Breath When We Pass?

The dead lie
In ordered rows
Side by side
Quiet.
Every one of them
Quiet.
Still.
Row after row
Of the dead
In the pale light
Of morning
It's chilling.
Quiet.
We pass by
And stonecut names
Stare back
Speaking
The only words left
For the dead
Quiet.

On a Birthday Gift

The Journals

A new journal sits there

Watching me

Waiting for me

To finish

To begin

A wondrous telling in its pages

Oh the things I will write

The many wonders that lay ahead

Like a new year

Eager

For its elder to go to rest

Waiting

On Experiments with Poetry

Quietude

It is quiet...
And I fear the scratching of my pen may be too loud.
I hesitate--

Hesitate--

For the sleepers gathered here
Rest.
In far too deep a peace.


I dare not rouse them from their end...
Call on them
To rise again and fill my lines...
To imprison them within my verse.

Forever--
A ceaseless existence devoid of peace--
Devoid of rest...

Void


The stillness shudders--

I put my pen away.
And I close my book.
I hesitate--

I go.
I will disturb the sleepers no more...
No captives will I make of them...
Their stories shall remain their own--

On Further Evidence to Corroborate

"Telephones are, without question, useful devices. But they are also, it seems to me, the verbal equivalent of houses without toilets. Telephones allow minds to communicate with minds (or tongues with ears, at least) in clarity or turmoil, in semisomnolence or drunkenness, in lust, joy, hysteria, stupefaction or any other state that fails to render a human physically incapable of holding up a quarter-pound chunk of perforated plastic--which is most every state there is. That telephones can connect us in seconds to any creature on earth foolhardy enough to lift its own chunk of plastic is wonderful. But it's also terrible, given what a lot of people think and feel about each other. That's why, until they're equipped with some sort of flush or filter or wast-disposal system for the billions of words that ought not to be spoken, I'll not trust the things."

--Kincaid Chance in the novel The Brothers K

This is just one more reason why telephones (and even more so cell phones) are overrated contraptions whose capacity for evil is rarely understood completely.

On the Development of my Thoughts (epilogue)

This has been quite the lengthy ordeal, and I fear that it has also been rather tedious reading. In print, all of those thoughts amount to a little over seventeen pages double spaced. They are a large part of my accumulated thoughts for the semester, mostly in response to reading Charles Taylor's A Secular Age, a weighty tome which was very insightful, but poorly written (my roommate and I agree that Taylor is greatly in need of an editor).
Muscling through page after page, I felt more like I was gleaning from the harvest than actually gaining a lot directly. Whether it was what I was meant to gain or not, reading Taylor's book spurred a lot of thoughts, things that I have passed through my mind before, but that I had never spent serious time contemplating.
There was a lot more that I wish had made its way into this essay (of course, that would have only made it longer), but there is so much more I could have said, so many more things that were churning about in my head: internet-constructed identities, marriage, absolute truth. However, I had a line of thinking I was following, and I decided it was better not to get too far off track. I think this issue of exclusive humanism is a major contributor to some of the major buzz-word topics in politics and religion today. Too seldom, people do not understand the true heart of issues or where they originated. A lot could be learned from a more careful exploration of motives and issues. Christians especially could benefit from understanding how the overarching Western worldview has shaped their thoughts. The statement remains true: "You can't know where you're going if you don't know where you've been."

On the Development of my Thoughts (part 8)

As with modernity, the church has taken its own spin on post-modernity as well. When I first mentioned Christianity above, I came fairly close to discussing its current situation. As with modernity at large, the number of opinions on religion has increased greatly due to the availability of resources, the increased weight placed on personal revelation, and the general undercurrent of society. Not surprisingly, this led to a form of relativity within Christianity as well. The problem with relativity within a religion based on absolute truth is that once issues become grey, it is harder to make definite stands on them. As a result, some churches have begun adopting strange or questionable doctrines which seem contradictory to scripture since they don’t know where to draw a line. The post-modern or emergent church is particularly noted for this trend. This is also the case with the aforementioned individuals who choose to give up on the church, especially if they set out on their own. Christianity without church creates some serious problems. Among these are deviations of religion and a much easier decent into unbelief.
Christianity has also had its own foray into the popularized issue of relationship. Though there has certainly been a great deal of strain on what proper relationships look like in the church, the main relational shift in Christianity has been in how God himself is viewed. Christians today will cry out until they are hoarse that Jesus is a relational God and that salvation is dependent upon this relationship. This is certainly a biblical principle, but it is a very narrow minded view of God. In scripture, he does not merely ask for conversation, he commands praise. There is more to Jesus' sacrifice than simply restoring right relations with the Father. However, the absolutes have begun to slip out of Christianity as well. Some Christians take Paul’s words in Corinthians, “Everything is permissible for me, but not everything is beneficial,” as a license to do what they please, provided it does not disrupt their relationship with Christ. There is an element of truth to this argument, but it is a dangerous view to adopt without fully understanding everything that comprises that passage. I (personally) believe in a God who demands obedience and a salvation that can be lost. However, I also believe that I have a loving relationship with the Father and that because of that relationship he will continue to offer me grace.
So what then is the solution to this convoluted maze? Shall I call for an attempt to eradicate exclusive humanism from Western society? Even if I did, I would be calling for the impossible. Exclusive humanism is an integral facet of society and can only be removed by changes which would take centuries. What then? Shall I long for the days before exclusive humanism? I could, but they had more than enough of their own faults which exclusive humanism has limited or fixed. The problem here is not with exclusive humanism itself, but with it being taken to excess. However, I know that the problems on which I have discoursed here are connected with exclusive humanism, and since I am an idealist, I want to believe that exclusive humanism can help to solve them. Additionally, I think that part of this cure must come from the church.
Unfortunately, judging by what I have written regarding the church in this paper, it has enough problems of its own. Christians must not fragment during this time and descend into division and eventual inconsequentiality. I believe that for Christianity to endure, then there must be unity, but this is something that can never be if Christians give up on the church. What sort of reform it would take for the church to recover, I cannot speculate, but I do not see how it would be beneficial in any way to further divide Christians by discarding church in favour of some new movement. What has become of Christ’s prayer that the believers would be brought to complete unity? Do even his followers value their own will above his? If this is so, what hope is there for any of us?

On the Development of my Thoughts (part 7)

This, then, creates an enormous inconsistency in our culture. Individualism is a penultimate value, but it is one that is unattainable. Not only is it an unattainable goal, but the closest approximation involves separation from others, from those who ascribe so much of life’s meaning, as has already been established. Is it any wonder that so many people suffer from depression? Exclusive humanism has wreaked havoc on our society.
However, perhaps society has figured out that individuality is an inaccessible goal. There is another shift in our society, one that is still in the process of developing. Any time there is an extreme push, there will be some form of backlash. In this case, it is post-modernism. It is arguable that post-modernity is not a new era of its own, but merely an extension, or the next necessary step of the modern age, though this will be impossible to determine for quite some time. It does seem like it is just the next logical jump for a society which has become organized around an individual focus. Unfortunately, this pursuit of independence and individuality has not been eradicated, but simply augmented.
One of the primary traits of post-modernity is relativity, a loss of absolutes. The rise of exclusive humanism gives value to people on an individual basis, which then gives a sense of validation to their opinions. Simultaneously, the individual focus of society creates a sort of societally ingrained self-centredness. Thus, people prize themselves as individuals and behave as if they were, while the society further encourages this by catering to them as such. The result is a conglomeration of individuals shouting to be heard amidst the din of other voices proclaiming their opinions, each of which must be taken as valid. It is bound to occur that two people will have contrasting opinions, so for both to be considered valid, there must be relativity. There is more to post-modernity than this, but this is an essential part of it.
In this regard, absolutes begin to fade into grey areas. Context more and more becomes the determiner of right and wrong. Everyone has heard the phrase: “What’s right for me may not be what’s right for you.” This coincides with the concept of a worldview. This is a fairly recent idea to enter society. It is the understanding that all people have a different way of perceiving events, which determines their behaviour. Since it prevails that all opinions are valid, it becomes taboo to judge other people’s worldviews by any standard other than their own. This is regarded as unfair or even cruel since a person’s worldview must be factored into the context of every action taken. In some ways, this idea of relativity and context removes blame and guilt from any individual. There is always some formative event or person who can be pointed to as the excuse for shaping someone’s behaviour. It is a variety of determinism, but it is a pluralistic one which exploits determinism to achieve the freedom to make any desired choices.
Another facet of the backlash against modernity has been a return from impersonality and individualism to an emphasis on relationships. However, there is a sense that it is too late to go back. Perhaps exclusive humanism has already taken society past a point of no return. This facet of post modernity creates a sort of pluralism. There is a longing for true deep and intimate relationships, but the individuality wrought by exclusive humanism cannot be undone. People hope to be connected to one another while still maintaining their autonomy. This is done through a range of means.
The sexual revolution is one example. It started in the 60’s as a rejection of strict sexual repression and a quest for meaning, but it has degenerated somewhat since then. As the norms regarding sex have slackened, intercourse has become more about the relationship than the protest. However, the pluralism of post-modernity is felt strongly here. Sex is a deeply intimate and binding act, but people either distance themselves from knowledge of this fact in order to remain independent or pursue this relational intimacy to excess, making it unachievable. In addition, the stress on independence and the impersonalizing of relationships cheapened them. So, when the emphasis was renewed, it created new forms of relationships which resembled their predecessors, but were lacking in commitment because of the already ingrained love of independence.
Another way this relational independence manifests itself is on the internet. The worldwide web was supposed to connect people all over the earth. In a way, it has (one could also argue that everyone in the world was already interconnected, the internet just tightened the gaps). People from opposite sides of the world can communicate almost instantaneously, but what is the quality of their communication? Often, it seems rather lacking. The shining silver turns out to be nothing more than polished iron. Though the communication initially seems genuine, the distance and imperfection of it keep the interaction from being completely authentic. Because the opposite ends of conversation are so far removed from one another, there is a sense of impersonality to even the deepest, most personal dialogues.
In both of these situations, the sexual revolution and internet communication, a new sort of anomie is present. It is different from Durkheim’s initial speculation on the loneliness of living in modern society. However, the present condition is perhaps worse because there is an illusion of true connection that is still an unsatisfying facade. The disillusionment is even deeper.
Darker.