SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - View Single Post

P_Funk · 05-27-12, 07:58 AM

@Skybird

Indeed I don't believe that spirituality need die in association with religion. I feel that there is an inherent truth to much spritual thinking, insofar as it pertains to the concept of perception and insight. In that sense the rational self aware atheist can easily call himself spiritual without sacrificing any of his good sense.

Also, I agree about the notion that our susceptibility towards this dogmatic thinking likely is a function of evolution. I however am apt to think this is all a byproduct of the evolution of the rational self aware mind and it being at odds with the pre-existing primal survival instinct, the one that tends towards conformism at the cost of the individual in favor of the group.

I think of self awareness like its some unfavorable mutation that has yet to find its equilibrium. Really it'd be so much better if we just could shut up and get on with the currents.

Really though its a very curious mutation. To be self aware and capable of essentially reaching a point of defining so much of what we are is both freeing and powerful but also entirely depending on so many factors that its a much messier way to be. Those that conform to the more dogmatic mindset obviously are the backbone of our species still, basically forming the survival-buoyancy necessary for us 'dreamers' to strive towards self improvement and expand our self awareness. What does a poet add to the human race that is substantially more valuable to survival that is not utterly eclipsed by the simple mundane product of the farmer? The insight into self in not necessary for the farmer to buoy the human race's continued existence, but the failure of the Poet has much less impact compared to the failure of the farmer. Yet you must turn around and say if there are no poets why bother farming? Where do we go from there? Even the most mundane of thinkers fully inculcated into the dogma of narrow conformism is in some way motivated by that essential desire for more than just survival.

So it comes to me the fact that those two elements of humanity, the animal; the survivor, and the thinker; the self aware creature, don't function as a whole the way most elements of a creature's evolutionary package do. Mostly one finds a tail bone, the vestigial marker of a previous form, yet this is hardly at odds with the new evolutionary form.

Basically, I think neurosis is the manifestation of the essential dysfucntional nature of our bizarre evolutionary model. More than any other creature we struggle to find our equilibrium. Other creatures struggle with surviving the elements and the biosphere, we struggle with surviving the argument over our own true nature.

Or, to be coy, I believe that answer to the meaning of life is that we're just a well and truly f**ked up evolutionary mistake.

05-27-12, 07:58 AM	#26
P_Funk Ocean Warrior Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Canada, eh? Posts: 2,537 Downloads: 129 Uploads: 0	@Skybird Indeed I don't believe that spirituality need die in association with religion. I feel that there is an inherent truth to much spritual thinking, insofar as it pertains to the concept of perception and insight. In that sense the rational self aware atheist can easily call himself spiritual without sacrificing any of his good sense. Also, I agree about the notion that our susceptibility towards this dogmatic thinking likely is a function of evolution. I however am apt to think this is all a byproduct of the evolution of the rational self aware mind and it being at odds with the pre-existing primal survival instinct, the one that tends towards conformism at the cost of the individual in favor of the group. I think of self awareness like its some unfavorable mutation that has yet to find its equilibrium. Really it'd be so much better if we just could shut up and get on with the currents. Really though its a very curious mutation. To be self aware and capable of essentially reaching a point of defining so much of what we are is both freeing and powerful but also entirely depending on so many factors that its a much messier way to be. Those that conform to the more dogmatic mindset obviously are the backbone of our species still, basically forming the survival-buoyancy necessary for us 'dreamers' to strive towards self improvement and expand our self awareness. What does a poet add to the human race that is substantially more valuable to survival that is not utterly eclipsed by the simple mundane product of the farmer? The insight into self in not necessary for the farmer to buoy the human race's continued existence, but the failure of the Poet has much less impact compared to the failure of the farmer. Yet you must turn around and say if there are no poets why bother farming? Where do we go from there? Even the most mundane of thinkers fully inculcated into the dogma of narrow conformism is in some way motivated by that essential desire for more than just survival. So it comes to me the fact that those two elements of humanity, the animal; the survivor, and the thinker; the self aware creature, don't function as a whole the way most elements of a creature's evolutionary package do. Mostly one finds a tail bone, the vestigial marker of a previous form, yet this is hardly at odds with the new evolutionary form. Basically, I think neurosis is the manifestation of the essential dysfucntional nature of our bizarre evolutionary model. More than any other creature we struggle to find our equilibrium. Other creatures struggle with surviving the elements and the biosphere, we struggle with surviving the argument over our own true nature. Or, to be coy, I believe that answer to the meaning of life is that we're just a well and truly f**ked up evolutionary mistake. __________________