Archives for category: Life

Prisoner No. 12 is lent one of the tapes of the Architect of Our Dear Penitentiary by Officer. Owing to his ban from the library, this is the only way he can get access to the tape. They were tapes he recorded as journals, from what No. 12 hears; they were extemporaneous but no one believes that. Anyway, Architect has such a drag in his speech like someone who is perpetually dreaming, it is impossible to not notice. In truth, it is a good clue to go on but don’t people ignore the possibility of the impossible:

Any true philosopher, that is, one who is honest with himself, will end up having to change for the sake of the philosophy he creates. It happens because he makes the philosophy not for himself but for the society (town, city, state, world). To do this, he has to efface himself and take into account the myriad factors that allow propriety, that is, promote the continuity of the society. Unless he wishes not social participation for himself, he has to change on account of this philosophy. It thus ceases to be a personal philosophy – even though it is always going to be personal due to he being the originator – and becomes social.

It is important not to forget that any social philosophy eventually involves individual philosophy for it is among the myriad factors of society. Philosophy is nothing easy.

This I think is AN acme of love. The philosopher loves so much that he seeks to improve his relation with others (as a unit) and loves others so much that he seeks to improve their relations with each other. Also the philosopher loves individuals (himself included) so much that he gives them more to do, makes it difficult, to participate in society. And difficulty always works the same: unless there is loss of hope, effort is put in to endure the distressing situation. And as the level of difficulty is approximated by the persons abilities, the person improves – this is simply called Adaptation.

Philosophy is nothing easy.

Prisoner No. 12 watches from the yard as the pod falls from the tree in the distance. He turns, walks 5 paces to the right, 4 paces to the left, turns around in the direction of the tree again and launches into one of his soliloquys:

Mostly, hyper-individualism responds to hyper-individualism. It is an attitude that responds to tyranny. The boy goes off completely on his own and is hateful of anything that resembles his father – doctrines, attitudes, even just the critical attitude irks him. Interestingly, the father fears his sons tyranny too. In actual fact there is nothing like that there, it is only a lack of consciousness of other areas of oneself or plain hubris that wishes to be solely praised. Because the father does not see the possibilities, he rejects his sons aims. He believes it is impossible to do what he has not seen before or what he does not believe. It betrays a lack of belief in himself, notwithstanding the appalling faithlessness in his own son, for it is he who raised that son; was his influence that bad to raise him this weak? The son also becomes a hyper-individualist, continuing the line unconscious of actually resembling his father and contradicting himself.. haha.. how risible! haha.. how human!

It seems it is Change which is of the Gods after all, not vain immutability or intransigence.

As Prisoner No. 12 looks through a chain-link, a down-feather settles on his upper lip and he mutters:

In truth, there is nothing like a hyper-individual. We all need somebody. Even from the beginning, you needed somebody to transport you from the realm of possibility to that of actuality – whether your mother or a test tube. Even your emotions rebut you, don’t they? Quit the self-deception. Or you have magic?

Prisoner No. 12 looks through the chain-link around the prison yard into the distance and begins, as he sees the grass sway in the wind:

Any proper individual soon notices that his aims are thwarted by any hyper-individualism and so he must surrender a bit. It is much too difficult to do it all by oneself. Even the most rudimentary street science shows this, we do not need to calculate the energy needs.

Hyper-individuals seem to be severely plagued by anxiety for they believe the consequences of surrender of just a bit of their perspective will be nothing but failure. This is a radically abysmal way of thinking. A proper individual should be able to change and have faith that still he can accomplish the aim. Besides, one even amplifies the result – because of improved skill and view of issues – beyond the perceived limits of the aim. Hyper-individualism betrays a certain sense of fatalism that is disgusting because it accords not with life – that only one method can lead to a particular aim. This is a frame of mind belonging to believers in karma, and causality, too. And a frame of mind belonging to a bad father.

The officer has had this on his mind a number of days: he had been watching a factory off ants working and he repeatedly saw them ‘kiss’ themselves in their communal labor. That scene elicited a memory of his relation with his brother where his brother was rarely a conscientiously neighborly person – he always assumed for the other as if he were the centre of the world –  a behavior that had continued so long that it cost him his marriage too.

He strolls onto the block, absent-mindedly but present to his destination; he knows where at least a semblance of an answer may be got. He strolled to that young man’s cell, no. 12

Officer: So how does the sense of community develop or be developed?

Prisoner No. 12: Let’s assume first that humans are not born with that sense or more optimistically, born with the sense variously expressed so some express community fully and some do not express that sense whatsoever. It could also be a mix of the two so that there are those who do not have at all and those who do with either expressing or not. What if it’s a matter of those who can and those who can’t – that we all have it but we can’t all express it – this time, it’s not even a matter of repression, “don’t” but a matter of ability “can’t”.

So how does the sense of community develop? How do you turn an individual into a communal man? Can you train (including advice) it or do you place the man in such situations or do you “break the man’s heart” so he starts to feel for others?

To the first question, this is the answer: he’ll rebel or he’ll pretend or try and get tired. Why? A person adapts the way his person allows him to (this is with all the dynamics of personality I outlined initially) so what you are giving him just doesn’t match; we can be drastically truthful animals when it comes to personality.

2nd question: Placing him in such situations still faces the challenge of getting beyond his contextual adaptive measure.

3rd: Breaking his heart is only if it will cause that effect (heartbreak) and only if there is a heart to break. Besides, isn’t it unfeeling for us to do so? Maybe not, it’s for his own development. Good, evil, what are they?

12: “Every voice has its listener”..hmm..I’ve seen that somewhere before..

Officer: It’s written underneath the portrait of the architect of this prison building at the end of the 2nd floor of this block.

12: know I just flashed on how it would apply in a context for girl-boy relationships, you know, catching a dove..for my dear adolescent friends who think there’s some grand trick to catching em.

Officer: I’m listening..

12: You see if every voice has its listener, a boy – I use boy for simplicity – must speak in his own voice for the right listener to come to him.

Officer: This reminds me of that Ms. Right idea. It’s such a waste of time to be doing that load of bollocks. You spend time waiting for Mr./Ms. Right and you’ll start catching crows.

12: What kinda sense is that? I don’t get it..oo okay..he has made himself a scarewoman so now birds come to perch on his shoulders.

Officer: (snickering) and he’ll now roam the world in adventure like a beastmaster, looking for Ms. Right (slaps thigh in amusement).

12: Back to my point, it isn’t that he’s waiting for Ms. Right, he’s just not using that fabled ‘trick’ that is written about in the air that deceives so many into going out of their way, out of themselves, to attract actually very unsuitable doves. If he had used his true voice, he would have attracted his suitable listener.

Officer: I see it, I like it. But, there’s one possibility you’re not mentioning, his listener might hear his voice behind the robotic software. After all, it is his voice that stands behind the apparent voice?

12: You make a good point there but the questions remain to be asked “how many are as sensitive as that?” and “wouldn’t it be more comfortable, less stressful, in trying to speak nothing but your own voice?”. My friend, have you tried mimicking a lion’s roar?

Officer: (shakes head)

12: wonder you don’t know what I refer to. Try it and see how sore your throat gets, it’s as if a whirlwind that gathered nothing but sharps went through there. And, you are never satisfied with the product..ever!

Besides, though, also, it is quite possible that the sensitivity distrust is as result of our own hypersensitivity, with so much stress on people, don’t you think their sensitivities might be dampened?

Officer: I agree, one will have a better bet getting them on holidays but how many of that do we get these days? Even holidays are spent thinking of stress. It’s like that portrait on our floor says “war is planned in times of peace”. (smiles and leans against the wall of Prisoner No. 12’s cell, they begin talking about the flowers they’ve been planting in the garden and the pond they plan to build).

12: Writers always think they have something to say. *scoff* self-deception. How much influence do they have over life and death, compared to the scientists? Hmm?

Officer: At least, they influence, if not determine, the quality of the lived life.

12: hmmm…you have a point there. A man is not just happy to be alive, be kept alive, there are other spices to his life. But, if we find a man who is perfectly happy with simple alive-ness, what happens to your theory? Does it wilt or is the man wrong or is he stupid?

Officer: It means the quality of his life is basal. If we count all that he can and might do, he has a low quality of life, although, he will not think so, since he is happy. Happiness is not the judge of quality?

12: From what you’re saying, it looks like it is experience.

Officer: It might also be action or activity. Because, you are either done onto (experience) or you do onto (action).

12: So, then, we judge by how much of his potential he is able to fulfil. That puts happiness against potential – which we have seen to be equal to quality. Happiness versus quality.

Officer: I am concerned, our study looks so bland. By what process do we proceed?

12: I think it is logical, there are no valuational or ethical concerns here, we only think about what is basic and what that means for the man?

Officer: But, human potential is an ethical concern?

12: Yes, it is, but we are discounting his value here. If he can have a value (happy) for a poor life, he has a poor ethical concern thus cannot be counted among our set of humans, otherwise put, he is wrong, otherwise put, he is untrue.

The thing about ethics is a value for a value whether it makes sense or not. This is why an ethical king has a soft heart for the ascetic. The king knows the ascetic can have a better quality of life but due to his ethical concern, he leaves the ascetic alone.

12: a prisoner with a penchant for weirdness. A quintessential journeyman who has done many things. He is amoral, he is complicated but has the opinion of himself as the only true human

Officer: a prison officer who has taken a liking to the crazy prisoner, 12. He has been quickened and rediscovered a side of him he thought he had lost, that aspect of Dialectic.]

(Here, a method is used which the actor chooses to call “The Scientific Method”. It isn’t THE Scientific Method, however, it resembles it in many ways, being that these are empirical issues, they can be verified in the actual matters mentioned here if you walk around and observe them)

Warden comes to Prisoner No. 12’s cell, the warden is very dejected.

The Warden: My friend, your mates arranged to have me murdered today. How could they be so…

Prisoner No. 12: wicked? Tell me, how many times have you even come around to them, you rarely speak to them, did you give them any lectures on what your significance is for them?

The Warden: But, they can’t just think whatever they want and…

Prisoner No. 12: *scoff* When you estrange yourself from people, don’t be surprised that they go behind you and don’t be self-righteous to think that they are wrong in doing it – you drew first blood by your estrangement, your abstention from their company, like a very good snob.

Nowadays, we learn so much of our environments but little of ourselves – an unfortunate paradigm of this modern era [a paradigm I too was caught up in]

As a consequence, we lose that link between self and world and our own cultivation at that. That cultivation, self and world – a phenomenon which becomes known as culture

[I, a thief? Good. I like it when such things happen – ah, the feeling of strength and growth; growth to come, strength to result, strength of now to bear]

We don’t need fire and brimstone, we face our judgments every day

Too cynical and depressing? – the laughing face says “Why so serious?!”

Sacrifice everything in service of your aims and aspirations? – the laughing face says “Why so serious?!”

Too much levity? – the laughing face says “Why so serious?!”

Too uplifting? – the laughing face says “Why so serious?!”

[After all the self-education of the years, I am said to be a thief, thief of ideas *sigh* :-)]