Sunday, September 30, 2012

Rising Up from Being Beasts of the Field


QUOTE: "I think that the closest that we can get to an absolute truth might be termed “objective truth,” which starts with an objective assessment of existence and leads to falsifiable conclusions. In a sense, one starts with axiom(s) and follows the logical consequences."

Yes, but remember how the Founding Fathers/John Locke look at truth and “lock one into the other.”

1 – God’s Law = Absolute Truth
2 – Natural Law = Objective Truth
3 – Civil Law = Relative/Subjective Truth

I agree that the best “we” can know is the objective truth… but we must go higher and acknowledge the existence of this Absolute Truth – because sometimes the objective truth changes, with history or technology or what not, what is true today is not true always.

An example of this is found in Orwell’s book 1984. The storyline is essentially a struggle between the Relative Truth (or lies) surrounding the main character who believes in an External Truth.

And, aside from direct philosophical discussion about “finding Truth” – what I keep seeing is the necessity for Truth to exist. An external truth – one that can’t be changed – one we can’t deny. Whether there actually is Truth might not be as important as the human need to believe in Truth.

There has never really been a civilization that has ever existed that didn’t have some form of religion.

In order to “rise up from being a beast of the field” we need to grab onto a Truth – a never changing one.

In Angry Harry’s piece Men Are More Intelligent Than Women, he points out how the more you emote, the less you think… and which sex would one think, even by their own admission, is the “most emotional,” and which sex, by their own admission, “is more in touch with their emotions?”

Alright ladies, I’ll believe you.

But it is also clear that, the more you emote, the less you “think.” The more your emotions lead you, the less your reason leads you. “Passion” is all great and fine, until it becomes “murder in the heat of passion” or a bazillion other things resulting from a highly emotional state leading to a person “not thinking.”

Life by “passion” is the life of living by instinct, which is the life of an animal.

Now, I am not a neurosurgeon either, but I have read of the “three brains.”

The first brain/lower brain/reptilian brain is the one that doesn’t “think.” This is the one where your fight or flight comes from and a whole host of other things that don’t involve “thinking.” It is also where our sexual instinct comes from.

"Mating behavior does NOT get mediated in the new brain, or the cortex. It happens in the brain-stem and spinal cord, the old or “reptile” brain.

In the days when such experiments were still allowed, you could open a cat’s skull and suck out all the cortex. Sexual and mating behavior was not affected at all, but social behavior was destroyed."

The next brain is the mammalian brain, and this is the brain where emotions come from, or "our passions." Animals have emotions. Ever separate a cow from its calf? Ever seen a dog wag its tail when it sees its owner?

The new brain, or cortex, is where we “think.”

So, in order to “rise up from being beasts of the field” we have to “think.”

As we get assaulted with things – violently or emotionally or in any number of ways – our brains “shut down.” The “thinking brain” will shut down in favour of the mammal brain, which will in turn, in emergency, shut down if it has to and run completely on instinct – fight or flight. There is no “thinking” or “emotion” in it. It just “happens.”

So, we have to keep “rising up” in order to find enlightenment.

And now, these highly emotional creatures with hairy triangles between their legs, what do they do to us? They get our emotions running all the time. All of the girls that wing their shaming insults around are trying to control men emotionally instead of rationally.

There were several posts near the end of The Elusive Wapiti’s totalitarian essay a while back where we were discussing Schopenhauer and Weininger’s observations on female manipulative behaviour, and how women have challenges with truth and a lack of moral character because, to women, their passions cause them to change the truth to be that which they want it to be right now. If it suits her to change the truth 20 minutes later, she will do it, even though it contradicts what she said earlier 100% – and she actually believes it, it appears!

The Feminine is constantly manipulating away from the truth with emotions.

If there is an external unchanging standard of truth to compare things to, men can much better pull themselves out of being led by their mammalian brain, and lead themselves by their “thinking” brain.

By the way. Guys like Weininger as well, he talks about the Male Principle/Condition and the Female Principle/Condition.

This is true – the Masculine and the Feminine is within each of us. Just like in the diagram of the Yin and Yang, there is a dot of the opposite within each half. What happens is that men have the Masculine Principle as their dominant characteristic while females are dominated by the Feminine Principle. No-one is “purely male” or “purely female.” This is why you get variability between the behaviours of individual men and women, but still can generalize behavioural characteristics that relate to each sex separately.
"Because you listened to your wife and ate from the tree about which I commanded you…"
Previous Index Next



…. \_/...........