Beyond The Realms Of Understanding.

for it is the mark of an educated man to look for precision in each class of things just so far as the nature of the subject admits; it is evidently equally foolish to accept probable reasoning from a mathematician and to demand from a rhetorician demonstrative proofs.

Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics: Book I - The Good For Man page 3.

Dear general public.

Let it be made known with regard to philosophy that the subject matter is more expansive than the "To Kill" list belonging to Stalin, Hitler, and Pol Pot alike. Let it be made known that it simply much more than thinking; that when one practices philosophy well, one does not show it overtly, it is only a covert matter, unless one freely speaks his mind. One does not simply think, one loves. For philosophy is the love of wisdom. But I digress, and I shall stop. For philosophy is such a broad and expansive topic, it is quite improbable that you will love everything about it. I do not.

Let it be made known that humans are inherently arrogant. Let it be known that we as humans presuppose a sort of self importance and an ego upon ourselves when we are put forth into this world. I certainly cannot prove this position, but I can certainly support it. Why is it that metaphysics exists? Why is it that we try to push humanity to its full potential? Why is it that we must probe and probe into the vast expanses of the Noumenon that is space?
Let me ask you a question readers, if you were to own a jar, an empty jar, and it was stuck with you for the rest of your life, what would you do with it? You cannot break it; in doing so, you cease to exist as you know it. So what do you do your whole life with that jar? Do you attempt to fill it? Do you attempt to decorate it? Do you leave it as it is, leave it untouched?

Let me make that question a bit easier for you readers; what if that jar was your mind? What then? Well it's too late now, you didn't even have the chance. Your jar was filling up without your knowledge from the moment you were born. But now you know, your jar is there, and now you can see it in full sight. You can pick out what you want from that jar, and you can dispose of it.

Let it be made known that you now have control over your proverbial jars, let it be made known that your jar is yours, and no one else's. That to surrender your jar is to surrender your individuality. And what becomes of that recycled jar? It simply becomes recycled, you along with it, to the machine that is society. It becomes recycled and fed gruel, it is dressed and housed to the quality that any free thinking agent would find abhorrent, it becomes a program, the tabula rasa is gone. And it takes exceptional will to power to get it back.

>>
>>>
>>.

There are many things that annoy me in philosophy. For example, the whole metaphysics department. And for this, I simply wish to rehash the Aristotelian quote presented at the beginning of the post. One cannot argue beyond what a subject matter allows one to argue for. For instance, it is foolish to expect "probable" reasoning from the mathematician, and it is also foolish to expect strict logical reasoning (naturalistic fallacies and etc. aside) from the politician. And it is for this reason that I am almost repulsed in matters of metaphysics; that is, matters beyond the physical. Matters that are quite simply, absurd. Because while it is all good and fun for one to ponder the existence of a deity or not, it seems only humanly impossible to prove it. And we as humans, are flawed in this sense, for we have this inherent need to try and explain everything, yet we have an inability to find any meaning.

And this is where Aristotle's quote fits in nicely, for we are, for some reason, always trying to explain that which is unexplainable, we are always trying to find meaning in the meaningless, and reason behind the unreasonable. One cannot argue beyond the realms of the subject matter's understanding. And it is getting us nowhere. "

Let us weigh the gain and the loss in wagering that God is. Let us estimate these two chances. If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing. Wager, then, without hesitation that He is."

once said a philosopher named Pascal. The truth of the matter is, we do not lose "nothing" when we lose, history is evidence of this.
In short,

"Suppose we grant that there is indeed some small chance that God exists. Nevertheless, it could be said that you will lead a better, fuller life if you bet on his not existing, than if you bet on his existing and therefore squander your precious time on worshipping him, sacrificing to him, fighting and dying for him, etc."

said once an atheist by the name of Richard Dawkins [the very fool who attempted to use a subject matter to disprove matters beyond said subject matter's realm of understanding]. And thus is the rest of metaphysics, and other traditions alike, metaphysics, humans. Such is the nature of such vile, blind, absurd matters. Such is the nature of the object that attempts to understand more than what it is capable of. How banal.


Night readers.