1/22/12
Diary of An American Devil - Part the 6th
This rug is filled with the scent of revolt -
The incense of liberty
Awarded of discipline.
Shiva dances here and smiles. Becoming -
What is and what-is-not;
And so, this space is not destination,
But gateway.
Eminations have been here arranged
Upon this motif of life
As land fertile and water irrigating,
Of both Form and Flow -
Holiest of mysteries.
Its texture is pain and pleasure indivisible,
The magus and the fool meet
In absolute presence.
Red and blue, shades slither in the dim
Or cower if white light flashes forth;
Freedom is the word of Man who is God.
Summoned here is All and Null,
A spirit obedient only to Will;
But above all (as below)
Mine.
1/16/12
Shaking Hands,
Steady Hands
Manifest!
It is called on a late night, evoked
By a room filled with smoke
Command
Petition
Invoke
Pace thine intercourse, but
Be Thou rapt!
Never bend the knee.
Having spoken It's piece
One needs be graciously thankful
And bid Peace
Depart!
12/10/11
Thoughts stemmed from writing about John Dewey
But also strongly influenced by No Quarter (The Song Remains The Same)
Religion as a social club amounts to everybody compromising too much honesty... because the Supernatural is inexpressible and so in religion people pretend to agree upon that which no one has spoken. I would prefer to redefine Religion as 'system for interpreting reality' so that religion can be defined as to not require a personal God, but obviously allowing for that possibility.
The religious on the other hand is the experience, not the ex post facto attempt to codify the experience into orthodoxy. This lends itself to art as the ultimate religious expression, as expression (an artistic movement) can be arguably presented a basis for an aesthetic system for the interpretation of reality - and thus religion (morality?), art, and science can be defined identically.
Venture the path where no one goes."
- Robert Plant
12/4/11
Concerning the Subjectiveness of Morality
This essay is intended appeal is to the poetic faculties; It is dedicated to The Daemon.
- St. John
There is a tendency among philosophers to take for granted that Reason was from the first Divine, and rightly so; the error is to assume that Reason alone was from the first Divine.
Some philosophers would have us believe that Reason is the basis for moral judgments. I believe that this neither is the case, nor should be the case.
My original thesis was simple enough: Morality is always ultimately Subjective and can be cultivated toward a Willful Collective.
Unfortunately, to demonstrate this would further necessitate demonstrating the meaning(s) of: Morality, Subject, cultivation toward, Willful, and also Collective. At which point I wonder why I am attempting to communicate any idea, because I would obviously have the wrong audience.
Taken from another angle I could claim that the thesis is: The artistic Genius of man (The Will itself), which in fact birthed Reason, must be intentionally incorporated into our sense of Ethics, for it is ever present and its denial is pointless.
For reasons such as above, this will also not do, for those who know The Genius need not be introduced as to a stranger.
Thesis:
Consideration: Those whom appeal to a specific ethical standard, be it 'I am a Christian', 'I am a Kantian', 'I am a Hegelian', 'I am a Muslim', 'I am a Jew', 'I am a philosopher', and so on, have all denied the proclamation 'I am I'; they are fooling themselves.
There is but one Right common to All: to struggle for existence until extinction, which right is at times forfeited.
Pleroma alone is changeless.
In any particular instance each Subject exists as a unique network of relationships, which is to say a Nexus of possibilities and responsibilities.
This Nexus, the human subject, is a process and so simultaneously junctions Being, Non-Being, and Becoming; Identity then is always partial; similarly Knowledge is also always partial. And so, individual responsibility is partially unknowable/ knowable to all and of all at all times.
Systems of Absolute Morality assume no varying situations, and so apply to no particular Subject which does exist in a real situation.
Every idea is filtered through the Subject. When the Subject claims knowledge it is claiming to know at least as much as any external standard that one claims to verify, otherwise one could not verify that standard. So, external standards of morality are by their nature of no worth.
The mechanism by which an ultimate choice is made is Preference which is in accord with the Aesthetic faculty, and so morality is Subjective.
There is, therefore, and can only be no higher standard of Morality than the Subject.
Pt. II - Reason Alone
- Protagoras
The appeal to Rights in the fabrication of morality is limited by the fact that there are indeed very few rights that can ever be substantiated. By right do we mean something beyond what can be guaranteed? This would be nonsensical; the classic 'right of life' is no right at all but an almost universally sought want.
Nothing more can reasonably be promised, and so nothing more is a universal right. So, applying Reason to morality from a Human Rights perspective gets us nowhere if we are honest about what Rights humans really have.
On another front, Logical systems cannot generate moral absolutes, because true 'identity' applies only to what does not change, namely Pleroma. The human Subject is a process and so simultaneously junctions Being, Non-Being, and Becoming; Identity then is always partial; similarly Knowledge is also always partial, and so responsibility and morality remain subjectively dependent. This problem in discussion of Absolutes create a gap in reason that renders Logic incapable of coming to conclusions regarding Ethics, since each Subject to which morality may apply is only partially 'identifiable' in the logical sense. The medium through which these two prior systems (Logic and Ethics) interact is Aesthetics. An intelligent Ethics must acknowledge the Subjective, and intentionally involve a Preference (as aesthetic element), because this is the character of behavior - people choose based upon their ideas of beauty, their preferences.
Another shortcoming of reasoned ethics is that Logical systems use as axioms what are merely conventions which are rooted in inference. Furthermore, not all logic systems agree on the same axiomatic assumptions, so seemingly legitimate and scholarly methods and systems of logic can be used to generate conflicting moral edicts (contradictions). In other words, the choice of logical apparatus would ultimately rely on Preference, and so Aesthetics again rears itself as necessary in ethical decisions.
Logic is essential to Ethical discussion, otherwise it is not discussion at all but merely babble. However, though Logic can both analyze and synthesize, but it cannot Judge (an aesthetic element), though logic can also be rightly described to be one's preferred method of excuse, employed ex post facto.
Ultimately a Choice must be made, which choice is according to Preference as an aesthetic element; Logic does not and cannot exhibit this preference and as the saying goes 'it ought not'. This being the case, we can see the limitation of Logic in discussions of Ethics. We also see that a preference in accord with Subjective judgment of Beauty is the root of ultimate choice. Logic is simply not sufficient grounds for Ethical decisions, though it is a necessary component in Moral Refinement.
Pt. III - Reason contributes to Aesthetic Cultivation
Every idea is filtered through the subject. When the Subject claims Knowledge it is claiming to know at least as much as any external standard that one claims to verify, otherwise one could not verify that standard. So, external standards of morality are by their nature of no worth. Stated otherwise,
Absolute Morality systems, including religious authorities (including 'holy' books), 'Imperative' demands, and civil laws all have pseudo-logical rationale to excuse their acceptance and existence, but ultimately cannot have greater authority than the Subject.
Morality definitively requires the abilities to choose and to do. All Subjects claim a right to act(/war) in reality as they see fit, which is to say according to one's own perceptions and reasoning. This leads to only one eventual standard for all claims of morality: Preference.
Can morality be cultured? If so, then is it further possible that Subjective Moralities can converge upon agreement? On what ground would this be possible? What is the role of Reason in morality?
There are attempts at ethics which rely on statements such as 'a rational being'-this and 'a rational being'-that, as if all rational beings would behave the same in all circumstances, much less that all rational persons DO exist in the same circumstances, and as if all rational beings possess identical capabilities (including knowledge). And because Full Knowledge of those circumstances and capabilities is unknown, it is impossible to simply and conveniently generate moral edicts that can cover all cases. It is for these reasons that it is a weak goal to achieve collective morality through rules generated by any external methods.
The person claiming that their morality is based upon 'rationale' seeks that morality of rationale based upon a preference to do so. Furthermore, the assumption itself that a 'rational being' would do this-or-that is nothing more than preferential appeal. And as those preferences themselves do and only can proceed from one's own ideals and standards, we can rightly say that the preferences are in accord with one's perception of Beauty.
Addressing the previous question 'can morality be cultured?' - can the Aesthetic become cultured, refined, perfected? Of course, for this is The Best in Man, the God-creator, to refine one's self continually, to cause Change to take place in accordance with Will, to be Terrible in Beauty, to Create Worlds, more specifically to Create the World according to One's Own Image - to be possessed of Genius.
The common ground upon which Collective Morality can be cultured is Aesthetics, which does include the element of Reason and couples it with the element of Beauty, so that the Understanding of Beauty Itself is continually refined! Our rational and artistic faculties educate oneanother, just as Reason and Beauty adorn eachother. I would further claim that The Will is best satisfied, accomplished, or otherwise 'carried out' through creative self-expression, and inversely that historical moral catastrophes are the result of peoples rendered incapacitated to Create according to Subjective Will. Human existence is a pressure-cooker.
Ought implies can, but can does not imply ought - choice is involved. At any rate, Preference exists, and none tend to give it up lightly once they come to recognize it. The reality of individual choice in matters of morality is unavoidable. Without choice all claims of ethical behavior become meaningless, and accordingly we recognize the Subjective component of Ethics. However, Ethical responsibility (an application of 'ought') cannot be stated in the absolute because understanding (an application of 'can') varies between subjects. The belief in morality generators is naive; be they religious, reasoned, or otherwise they fail to account for the 'ought-ness' of Subjective Knowledge - they would only work for communities possessing mental telepathy and complete collective knowledge. I have never witnessed the existence of such a collective, and so oppose the manipulation that such external moral generators ultimately represent in real situations.
As academics do we not claim (because it is indeed our experience) that liberal arts education induces (and is in fact intended to induce) a more finely cultivated sense of liberality through aesthetic broadening? Yes, by very definition we endorse education for this exact reason: so that the educated person may best act civically, exemplarily, and successfully.
And so we return to the original thesis: Morality is always ultimately Subjective and can be cultivated toward a Willful Collective. I amend this statement by further claiming that the moral state of any Subject is elevated by development of faculties of Reason and Beauty (Logic and Aesthetics) which 'grow together' in continual refinement.
The process of Ethics must recognize its own mechanics; that it may be raised up intelligently, and so must ultimately also be Creative, Evolutionary so that the individual and the society may move together toward Perfection.
It is specifically the "Bestness" of Humans that must be cultivated to create a mutuality of what is deemed Ethical. And the solid foundation of this mutuality is the creative power of the Genius which is the Human Will. Failed moralities are those in which people aim at achieving outcomes that are unsatisfactory or in fact unattainable; or is it disputable that The Will is free in as much as it is without obstacle?
From these considerations arise the notion that morality is always ultimately Subjective and can be cultivated toward a Willful Collective to the degree that Liberal Arts education (a conjunction of Reason and Beauty) proliferates the collective itself.
11/19/11
6 a.m.
Over time ghosts linger
The names and faces change
You callous that part of your soul
So that you can't feel anything
And what remains is the heart of a beast
- C.E.T. translators