Being Reasonably Unreasonable

It's been a while since I've waxed philosophical. I'm expecting some readers, upon reading that last sentence to be groaning. Just like when your mother offered you some new healthy food alternative or told you to do your chores. "Look, it's muslix!" Or, "I know something fun you could do - weed the garden!" Well, this philosophical waxing will be even better. Think eating muslix and weeding the garden at the same time. I bet you're giddy.

I will start with a quote from Lord Byron, although some people might argue that it wasn't he who said it:

"The heart has reasons that reason does not understand."

I want to let that sit. Like butter melting on your hot pancakes. Wait. Do not think yet. The butter needs to melt.

Ok. What that means, is that reason cannot always be the ultimate arbiter in human affairs. It has limitations as does everything in our finite existence. We often laud ourselves or others for their even-keeled rationality and careful deliberation, and lambast others who do not use logic to deduce the best answer. Well I'm hear to say that is folly. While quite often you might think that reason appeals to everyone, everywhere, all the time, the truth is, it doesn't. There is truth (if we assume right now that that is the goal of reason, to attain truth) in art, poetry, music, love, and irrationality as a whole. But I suppose saying all that begs another question. What is irrational? And can we at times act rationally while doing something seemingly irrational? The answer is yes. Because, while saving one's brother or mother from harm might seem rational, unconnected with anything else, if it comes down to saving one's brother versus saving an entire village, rationality would have us choose the village. Perhaps that isn't the best example but it brings me to an important point. The truth that escapes reason is the truth of the particular, the love of one's own, the value in honor. The truth that reason strives for is abstract, general, and universal. The problem is, we cannot reasonably say one is always better. Reason wouldn't allow it. Or would it?

I do not want to ask too many questions. But what I do want to point out is that passion, emotion, art, love, instinct, yearning and many more things fall outside the realm of reason and yet are just as, if not at times more important than reason. Being reasonable is balancing your reason with your irrationality. Here is an example that will appeal to you:

Let's say you go to a family reunion. At this reunion everyone poses for a group picture. In this picture everyone is wearing coordinated outfits, is smiling, and has a marvelously picturesque background behind them. The photographer snaps the picture. But, the picture doesn't really satisfy. It doesn't hold the whole truth, as truthful as the camera lens has been to its subjects. Now, a little later, a painter takes that photograph and repaints the family. In his painting little kids are running around pulling on skirt hems and a grotchity uncle is elbowing someone next to him, and Aunt Edna is sticking her tongue out in disdain. While none of this happened while the picture was taken, it more accurately describes the family, its temperament, and reality as a whole. Extrapolating from this example you can see how simple rationality does not get at the whole, or, gets at only the edges of the whole and not the parts.

Now, enjoy your muslix, and I'll be back in a little while to check on the garden.

My Valentine's Day Philosophy

There are a lot of Valentine's Day haters out there. A lot of people have been disappointed on Valentine's Day. Some never get asked to do anything on Valentine's Day. Some are never in a relationship when it comes around. Some are in a relationship but either vow not to do anything because they're afraid of it never meeting expectations, or don't do something because one or the other is a schmuck. Well folks, here is my Valentine's Day philosophy:

I don't hate Valentine's Day. It's never made me bitter or upset. It is a day of love. There is no reason why a single guy can't ask out some girl on Valentine's Day and show her a good time. You don't have to worry if it's going to go anywhere. It's nice to have a day where you can just lavish gifts and romantic praise on someone. It makes the asker feel good because they have someone that day, and aren't relegated to 'stay at home loser' status, and the askee should feel great because of the same reason and that they got asked (so someone was at least thinking of them). If you do want to start something good luck. If you are already in a relationship relish in it. Of course you can go out on nice dates and buy exorbitant gifts on any day, but Valentine's Day gives you an excuse to go over the top and not feel bad about it.

Here are some good reasons to enjoy Valentine's Day:

1. Chocolate

2. Sensuous meals

3. Creative floral arrangements

4. Sweet Nothings

So, there you have it. Live it up this Valentine's Day. Just be careful with the sweet nothings.

Distracted from distraction by distraction

"We spend so much time with what we think matters that we don't really think about what really matters."

This thought has been with me for a long time. It has constantly resurfaced as I study philosophy. It can be seen in Heidegger, Tocqueville, Aristotle, and even Nietzsche. However, I am not going to write an enormous post showing how each one of those philosophers led me to this belief, but rather I want clarify what I mean by it.

So often we subject ourselves to long work days, mundane chores, and rather insignificant tasks. We are so busy distracting ourselves with distraction, that we don't know what to do with ourselves when we don't have a quest. We look for ways to be more efficient for efficiency's sake. We don't use microwaves so we can spend our leisure time philosophizing. We use them so we can spend more of our leisure time working to make more microwaves. In truth, thinking technologically, we have no leisure time.

The soul is empty without a root in the metaphysical, or even in the local world around us. Breathing in the air, smelling the roses, watching the clouds, or the mere act of walking helps root us in a reality made real by a hierarchical metaphysical foundation. Everything denotes there is a God. Regardless of how advanced your temporal conjectures are, they will always be lacking. So if we only focus on the newest, best, and fastest, we distract ourselves from the reality that we always fall short of the mark. There must be something better. Something needs to fill the void of our failure. We cannot find satisfaction in being infinitely dissatisfied. I cannot compete with the Joneses. I have to look up before I look sideways.

I don't say stop going to school, stop climbing the corporate ladder, stop fixing car engines and plumbing fixtures, but put it on pause. Know why you do it. Enjoy your relationships with friends, family, and God. Spend time thinking about the world in a particular way. Don't try to surmise the whole and make sense of it all with general ideas and theorems. Just try to understand what's important. What you can understand in your frame of reference.

Juggling=transcendental truth

I was talking to a friend yesterday about life, the universe, and everything and she mentioned that she was taking a yoga class (a university course). I said, "That's cool, but what's with the lacrosse balls?" She then replied that she was trying to learn how to juggle. I said, "What does juggling have to do with yoga?" She then said she didn't know, but that she had to learn for the class. I proceeded to question the logic, so she then blurted out, "It's transcendental." To which I responded, "WHAT?! Juggling is transcendental? Who told you that? That's crazy."

Or is it? Maybe juggling is the one thing I've been missing in life. Maybe juggling is what will help me discover that higher philosophic truth that has been alluding me all these years. Maybe juggling is that one small piece of the puzzle that Plato, Aristotle, Descartes, Hume, and Heidegger missed. I should have known. 

By throwing balls (or any other object) in the air we focus not on a single ball, nor on all the balls, but on the action of maintaining the balls airborne. We must focus, but not too much. We need to see the whole and the parts - simultaneously. It is a hermeneutical circle. To understand the whole we must understand the parts, and the meaning of the parts in sequence. Wow. 

I bet that juggling is only the beginning. I bet that there are amazing truths to be discovered in playing catch, jumping jacks, doing crossword puzzles, or eating oatmeal. And, now that I know the sources of all meaning, I can finally write the definitive work on universal truth. 

I'm inflammatory

It was Sunday. I was en route to a dinner with friends, and my friend Bob* was on his cell phone. I overhead him saying, "Oh, yeah. I know. Well Michael's right here, you want to talk to him? Ok."

So I get the phone. It is Bob's and my mutual friend Georgina*. We dispense with pleasantries, then I say, "I read your blog all the time." To which she replies, "I read yours sometimes, but it's really inflammatory." Then she said, "Come to think of it, you're pretty inflammatory, and I don't know why I'm saying this, but yeah." So I said, "Could it be because we're on the phone and you can't say it to my face?" To which she said, "I think that proves my point. I don't think I could say it to your face."

So I'm inflammatory. I get that. In some ways that is fair. Everything I touch burns. It's a general statement, but it could easily be agreed upon by more than one person I'm sure. So not long after the phone call, I thought of how I could maintain my newly discovered 'inflammatory' status. Well, the most obvious thing is to react adversely and take the opposite position on anything and everything anyone around me says, and then do all that is humanly possible to get a rise out of them. But I think it would probably be even more fun to be literal. I could let out my inner 'Pyro' and burn things. Now that would be fun.

But before I indulge in either of those possible methods, I would like to break down my own psyche for the average reader. I am a student of political science, philosophy, and I love good arguments (not screaming contests, but methodically logical/sometimes flawed discourse), and debate. For example, to this point in college I have taken three parliamentary and world debate classes, and I am currently taking a class on Alexis de Tocqueville and another class on the philosophy of the social sciences. What that entails is a lot of reading, digestion of information, and then a careful, logical, analysis, often followed by discussion in class. Now this discussion is not heated. I in fact find it quite easy to detach my emotions and biases to look at the merits of the arguments. Philosophically I like to deconstruct arguments and poke holes in them, putting forth my best critiques not to detract from the other side, but to understand it better. If I do not put forth a good argument, I expect my fellow students will find its flaws and help reconstruct or negate it thoroughly. Again, it's hardly personal. In order to get the best feedback and counter-arguments, I have found that I need to put forth a good, well-conceived argument of my own. 

Now here's the problem. With this mindset, often times I take umbrage with friends, colleagues, and family members when they put forth weak arguments. I sometimes unwittingly offend, because I'm trying to understand their argument, and so I question, and even brashly challenge their line of reasoning. But instead of getting it handed to me, and hearing a good argument in return, as I would with my political science/debate/philosophy student colleagues, I get a flustered response and often times extremely bothered friends or family members.

So I am a confrontational person. I know I should let more things go, and remove myself from the philosopher/debater mindset sometimes. But, for now I think I'll just light things on fire, and apologize with a bucket of icy water.

*note: real names not used to protect the people who think I'm inflammatory

Great Paradox

Sometimes, when you feel most powerful, you are in fact the most insignificant. Then, when you feel quite insignificant, you are the most powerful. It is a strange state of irony, but it very often holds true. The more our confidence pushes us toward arrogance, the weaker our moral position becomes, while the more our confidence pushes us to understand the greatness of the whole and our small part in it, the more the world opens up to us. It wanes toward the biblical and the God-fearing, and I find it interesting.

I have had a philosophy for some time now, that I am better off being bold, brazen, and visible rather than quiet, meek, and hidden. My rationale is that if I am confident, and believe I have something good to give or share, it is my duty to share it. It's like the candle under the bushel. I'm not a fan of that. It might catch the bushel on fire. So, while many might find my ways arrogant and cocky, the motives behind them are pure my aim is to be anything but that. I hope at times that my confidence, ambition, and determination inspire hope and optimism rather than irritation, cynicism, and contempt. But the world cannot judge us by our motives.

As much as people would like to prosecute 'hate crimes' differently than other crimes, we cannot become a society that looks to punish for motive. We punish for the deed. What differentiates a 'hate crime' from 'crime?' There are in fact both wrong, but I think the hubris required to attempt to punish someone for their intent, without being able to really gauge it is folly. In the same way, I will continue to be me. I will say what I say, stand up for what I believe, and try to be a visible example. Of course I will falter, make mistakes, do and say stupid things, but my intent is good. And men cannot judge my intent. That is for God.