Romanians have a proverb.
‘Each of us makes his own bed’.
Like all other popular sayings, this one is only partially true.
In many cases – in most, actually, our individual ‘leeway’ is limited by those who are higher than us.
In many cases, again, those decision makers have climbed there with our full ‘blessing’.
In a sense, the above mentioned proverb is true on more than one ‘levels…’
According to Alan Hayek – the guy who claims the copyright for the relevant entry into the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, the wager doesn’t make any sense unless you consider that God is, however remotely, possible.
Now, that I grabbed your attention, let me point it to the subject du jour.
The face mask!
To wear or not to wear one…
Strangely enough, many of those who believe in God are adamantly refusing to wear a mask.
They don’t actually see God yet they find the world as THE argument for His existence.
And, at the same time, they refuse to acknowledge the seriousness of the Covid 19 pandemic. Which had already killed, or hastened the death of, more than 1.2 million people worldwide.
OK, almost no mask – specially the ones worn by us, civilians, is 100% fool-proof.
But wearing one is far better than none at all…
OK, most of us would weather the infection with relative ease.
But some would die!
Then why spread it around?
For that, if you didn’t already know, is more than half of what the masks do!
They make it harder for those of us who already have it – but don’t know it yet, to spread it around.
You still consider it to be a muzzle?
Why? Only because it is mandated by the government?
And you don’t trust your own government? While living in a democratic country?
But since when do you rely on your government to tell you which is the sensible thing to do?
Being married doesn’t come with such a huge array of ‘perks’.
Specially when you know how to cook a meal. Wash your underwear. Use the vacuum cleaner. Own a dishwasher…
The main ‘attraction’, for me, being the presence of the person I married.
The daily interaction with her.
Sex included!
No, we don’t have it every day! It would be nice but we’re not sexual athletes…
Which brings me to the point I was trying to make.
We’re currently isolating because of Covid.
She had lunch with some of her coworkers, one of them had it – a-symptomatically at that moment, and now all of them are quarantined. Rather mild symptoms for all of them, a week into the whole thing.
‘Isolating’ means that we no longer share a bed. That we no longer eat together. That when we need to talk to each other we wear masks and stand as far apart as the geography of the room allows it.
And, of course, no sex!
Which, for both of us, is a real loss! Specially for me…
I’m almost 60 now. I don’t expect to remain ‘fully functional’ for very long.
Five more years? That would be some 250 weeks…
Loosing two of them for nothing isn’t my idea of a ‘fair deal’!
Hope I made you laugh. Or at least smile.
Even if this isn’t a laughing matter!
Put your mask on!
Funny?
Obviously!
Does it make any sense?
Not really…
Then why are we sharing this kind of memes with so much gusto?
I can’t figure out, with any degree of certitude, what drives those who make them in the first place.
Some might find it funny, others might just be employed by those who make a living by selling advertising space…
But why do we, ‘innocent civilians’, share them?
Because they – those which we share, reinforce our stereotypes?
Sharing them makes us feel like ‘contributors’?
We cherish the likes we get?
Do we realize how divisive these memes are?
How they reinforce our tendency to divide people into ‘members of our group’ – the ‘right’ ones, and ‘the rest’?
How they reinforce our tendency to poke fun at ‘the rest’?
To consider them, if not outright ‘expendable’, at least ‘unworthy of consideration’?
Monotheists insist there’s only one.
– And why would this be of any interest?
– All current civilizations are off-springs of an Weltanschauung built on ‘monotheism’, aren’t they?
– Really?!? How about India? China? The Buddhist countries?
– Have you noticed the scare quotes? In my book, Hinduism, Confucianism and Buddhism are all forms of monotheism. Atheism also qualifies as such.
– ?!?
– I’ll make that point a little later.
Then, if monotheists insist there’s only one God, which one of them is the ‘real McCoy’?
When humans had first became conscious, as in aware of their own frailty, they needed a way to assuage their new acquired scares:
‘What would happen if the Sun will not come up tomorrow morning? If spring will never come back? If Mother Deer will not allow me to hunt another of her children?’Mother
So they started to raise prayers towards the Sun God. And towards other various agents held responsible with diverse aspects of human existence. Nowadays known as ‘totemic figures’.
Please note that each totemic figure was simultaneously responsible for one aspect of the human existence and the ‘founding father’ of a certain group of people.
After the advent of agriculture had transformed everything – including human social arrangements, things dully changed.
Agriculture gave birth to private property. Individuals needed to know which was their land and who owned the harvest. Otherwise, why bother?
Private property needs to be protected. Which demands a certain social structure. A hierarchy of social roles.
Around the Mediterranean Sea – due to geographic conditions, the ‘top brass’ were never that far removed from the ‘bottom’ as to make them ‘impervious’ to the social reality. Hence the hierarchy of Gods. Belonging to successive generations. Very similar to the succession of the dynasties which ruled the ‘land under the sky’.
At the opposite end of the Euro-Asian continent, were the emperor was further removed from the vulgus, things took a different path. Since no communication was any longer possible – between the ordinary people and the rulers/gods, gods and rulers were melted into one. Confucianism mandated that people cherish their ‘elders’.
Meanwhile Buddhism made away altogether with gods. And rulers.
The most interesting situation had evolved in India. Due to the high density of population – coupled with the diversity of languages/subcultures, the local leaders continued to be in touch with the general population while the highers up were equally insulated as their Chinese equivalents. Hence the survival of the plethora of Indian gods coupled with the advent of karma. The concept of individual responsibility for ones own fate.
The individuals’ responsibility for their own fates…
This being the common place between all ‘monotheistic’ religions. The way I see it, anyway. All three ‘sisters’ relying on the Holy Book, Hinduism, Confucianism, Buddhism… Atheism…
So, then again, how many Gods are out there?
Or, more likely, how many images of the same God – a.k.a. ‘reality’, have we, humans, carved out? Out of the before mentioned reality?
How many faces of the single reality available have we been able to identify? According to the prevalent local circumstances?
And how much more time do we need? To understand that we live under the same umbrella? According to the same set of broad rules?
Which makes us all members of the same family?
Children of the same God?
My father uttering this, again, convinced me to share with you the interim conclusion of my informal study. “The consequences of our limited conscience”
Consciousness is a ‘phase of matter‘ which has an intrinsic characteristic.
One which closely resembles inertia.
The prevalent tendency of consciousness is to preserve itself, even if this means putting the individual hosting it in mortal danger.
Doesn’t make much sense?
How many of you still smoke? Or did smoke? Had an occasional ‘one drink too many?’ Carry around a couple of ‘extra pounds’? Used drugs?
All these knowing too well that ‘it’s bad for you’?
I challenge you to remember the arguments you used to quell your worries.
More precisely, the arguments used by your conscience to quell its worries…
‘I’ll give them up ‘sometimes’.’
‘One cannot hurt me.’ Much…
‘My grandad lived for almost a century and smoked to his last day.’
See what I mean?
Our consciousness is more concerned about keeping itself ‘together’ rather than preserving the well being of the host it inhabits. On which it depends. For its dear life…
It actually prefers to lie to itself rather than face the reality.
Until the shit hits the fan…
And sometimes no amount of ‘wake-up calls’ can do the trick. I know a few people with cirrhosis of the liver who continue to drink – ‘I’m already dead, why bother?’ and a few people who cough their lungs out in the morning and go on smoking.
Same thing in politics.
After an individual had made up his mind…. it is very hard for him to change his opinion. It would mean to accept that last time he had been wrong. That he had been duped.
So he keeps looking for the flimsiest reason to continue on the old path …
Or, if the guy/party he had chosen doesn’t have any chance… he prefers to stay at home, rather than to vote for a looser. Which would mean he had knowingly placed himself on the loosing side. Unacceptable.
I’m sure you’ve already figured out what I want to convey.
It is rational to consider that one cigarette won’t kill you. But it’s unreasonable to smoke. Period.
It is rational to consider that one glass won’t kill you. If you don’t drink and drive, of course…. But it’s unreasonable to drink yourself to death!
It’s rational to stay at home if ‘your team’ has no chance to accede to power.
But your staying home doesn’t spell the whole truth. By staying home you transmit the message that you don’t care. That you are satisfied with what’s going on around you. Or too ‘tired’ to care…
Which practically gives carte blanche to whomever gets elected!
‘If so many of them do not care about their own well being, why should I? Let me take care of my own people and to hell with the rest’.
See what I mean? Not everything our consciousness feels good about is actually good for us.
We really need to get our heads out of our asses if we want to look forward.
“Every morning, the CEO of a large bank in Manhattan walks to the corner where a shoe shine is always located.
He sits on the couch, examines the Wall Street Journal, and the shoe shine gives his shoes a shiny, excellent look.
One morning the shoeshine asks the Executive Director:
– What do you think about the situation in the stock market?
The Director asks in turn arrogantly:
– Why are you so interested in that – that topic?
“I have a million dollars in your bank,” the shoeshine says, “and I’m considering investing some of the money in the capital market.”
– What your name? –Asks the Director.
– John Smith H.
The Director arrives at the bank and asks the Manager of the Customer Department:
– Do we have a client named John Smith H.?
– Certainly –answers the Customer Service Manager–, he is a highly esteemed customer. He has a million dollars in his account.
The Director comes out, approaches the shoeshine, and says:
– Mr. Smith, I ask you this coming Monday to be the guest of honor at our board meeting and tell us the story of your life. I am sure we will have something to learn from you.
At the board meeting, the Executive Director introduces him to the board members:
– We all know Mr. Smith, who makes our shoes shine in the corner; But Mr. Smith is also our esteemed customer with a million dollars in his account. I invited him to tell us the story of his life. I am sure we can learn from him.
Mr. Smith began his story:
– I came to this country fifty years ago as a young immigrant from Europe with an unpronounceable name. I got off the ship without a penny. The first thing I did was change my name to Smith. I was hungry and exhausted. I started wandering around looking for a job but to no avail. Suddenly I found a coin on the sidewalk. I bought an apple. I had two options: eat the apple and quench my hunger or start a business. I sold the apple for two dollars and bought two apples with the money. I also sold them and continued in business. When I started accumulating dollars, I was able to buy a set of used brushes and shoe polish and started polishing shoes. I didn’t spend a penny on entertainment or clothing, I just bought bread and some cheese to survive. I saved penny by penny and after a while, I bought a new set of shoe brushes and ointments in different shades and expanded my clientele. I lived like a monk and saved penny by penny. After a while I was able to buy an armchair so that my clients could sit comfortably while cleaning their shoes, and that brought me more clients. I did not spend a penny on the joys of life. I kept saving every penny. A few years ago, when the previous shoe shine on the corner decided to retire, I had already saved enough money to buy his shoeshine location at this great place.
Finally, three months ago, my sister, who was a whore in Chicago, passed away and left me a million dollars.”
Somebody sent me this as a Whatsapp message.
I looked it up and shared it with you for a very simple reason.
A new pandemic is gripping us.
By our egos!
One which is a hell of a lot more dangerous than Covid….
In fact, narrow mindedness is a disease which occurs naturally. It probably affects some 10 percent of the population in ‘normal’ times.
When things are no longer normal – and people become nervous because uncertainty does all kind of ‘funny’ things to our minds, narrow mindedness becomes an opportunity.
A golden opportunity for those who ‘professionally’ fish in troubled waters.
“For a proposition to be true, it is not enough for it to be logically correct. It also needs to make epistemological sense.” Oscar Hoffman
Ricky Gervais is right, right?
There’s no logical connection between being offended and being right…
There’s no doubt about this!
Only Gervais is wrong.
Wrong in saying it, not in what he said.
Yes, there are people who declare themselves to be offended in an attempt to get something. Sympathy, some slack… or even the others to accept their version of things. That ‘they’ are ‘right’.
But this is not always the case!
Some (other) people are so offended by the manner in which things are unfolding that they actually need to express their feelings.
To send the warning ‘don’t continue in this manner or you’ll loose my attention/will to cooperate’.
In this sense, Gervais is actually wrong.
His saying had been used by numerous meme builders to create a bubble inside which callousness is actively encouraged.
‘Go on disregarding other people’s sentiments. They’re nothing but pussies.
It’s just words, not sticks nor stones.’
Here’s a more detailed analysis:
So fucking what?!?
Somebody just told you they are not going to stop paying any real attention to what you are trying to say to them and you don’t care?
Why did you start communicating in the first place? Or ‘performing’ the ‘offensive’ thing in public?
Was the ‘offense’ premeditated? For a reason or just for fun? Then it’s not ‘so fucking what’ anymore…
Or you just hadn’t thought about it beforehand? And you’re looking for an easy way out?
No, you don’t have to pretend to like people when you don’t.
But, in the longer time frame, it pays to honestly respect those you get in contact with. All of them.
Your life will get a lot better!
