![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
andrewduckerThere is a Zen Koan:
"First there is a mountain; Then there is no mountain; Then there is."
Back in the olden days of 1992 (and before, all the way back to 1970), I believed in concepts such as Good, Evil, Right, Wrong, Beauty, etc. I have nothing to say in my defence except that I was young and hadn't really thought about anything very much.
And then, thanks to my exposure to such books as The Principia Discordia and the Schrödinger's Cat Trilogy, I came to realise that all of the above concepts were entirely relative and had no absolute definition whatsoever. I felt entirely too pleased with myself over this, and spend quite a long time with my head in a whirl, refusing to believe in anything and generally feeling superior to anyone that did.
And now, a few years further on, the idea of total subjectivity seems normal to me. While it's the basis of my beliefs, it's not something I feel particularly strongly about, any more than the sun rising every morning is something I feel strongly about. It's just there. I've rebuilt my morals on top of this new basis, and by strange coincidence they seem to be remarkably similar to my old morals. Whether this is because both sets of morals are/were based on emotion rather logic is something I'm still working through.
From what I can tell, children are basically idea-fascists. They have definite ideas about what the world is, and how it works. The breaking down of those preconceptions seems like an important part of growing up, and understanding of the subjectivity and fluidity of the world seems like an important part of adulthood.
And it's gratifying and reassuring to discover other people who have gone through this before, and to watch new people go through it again.
"First there is a mountain; Then there is no mountain; Then there is."
Back in the olden days of 1992 (and before, all the way back to 1970), I believed in concepts such as Good, Evil, Right, Wrong, Beauty, etc. I have nothing to say in my defence except that I was young and hadn't really thought about anything very much.
And then, thanks to my exposure to such books as The Principia Discordia and the Schrödinger's Cat Trilogy, I came to realise that all of the above concepts were entirely relative and had no absolute definition whatsoever. I felt entirely too pleased with myself over this, and spend quite a long time with my head in a whirl, refusing to believe in anything and generally feeling superior to anyone that did.
And now, a few years further on, the idea of total subjectivity seems normal to me. While it's the basis of my beliefs, it's not something I feel particularly strongly about, any more than the sun rising every morning is something I feel strongly about. It's just there. I've rebuilt my morals on top of this new basis, and by strange coincidence they seem to be remarkably similar to my old morals. Whether this is because both sets of morals are/were based on emotion rather logic is something I'm still working through.
From what I can tell, children are basically idea-fascists. They have definite ideas about what the world is, and how it works. The breaking down of those preconceptions seems like an important part of growing up, and understanding of the subjectivity and fluidity of the world seems like an important part of adulthood.
And it's gratifying and reassuring to discover other people who have gone through this before, and to watch new people go through it again.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2002-04-02 08:04 pm (UTC)"Good" people are concerned with mutually positive exchanges, where "evil" people will seek exchanges that benefit themselves over others.
"Beauty" in the classic sense has been the degree to which something adheres to or refines my mind's icon of a given concept (woman, environment, peas), combined with an evenly balanced spatial distribution (a large circle looks better next to two small circles than it does next to a single small circle) and well-matched colors (continuity of vibrance or hue for each discrete shape).
I don't feel strongly about any of these, as you don't with your subjective perception, but it's (I think always) been my working model for the world.
Do you think this is unusual, or do you think it's a different brand of being locked into definite ideas about the world and its workings?
Other people
Date: 2002-04-03 12:19 am (UTC)Sounds like living in fear of the bullies. I avoid being too public about some of the things I do, but I can't think of anything I don't do just because it'll get me in trouble. Hmm, I keep some of my journal entries private, to avoid annoying the lovely people at work, I suppose.
"Good" people are concerned with mutually positive exchanges, where "evil" people will seek exchanges that benefit themselves over others.
There's something to that, although I tend to prefer "social" and "antisocial" to "good" and "evil" in those situations, because it's clearer what exactly I mean. I try to avoid "good" and "evil" as terms if at all possible, because they're horribly abused as words, and can mean almost anything. They usually mean something absolute too, as opposed to the relativist wishy-washy terms I'd want them to mean.