Rey and The Meaning of Life

I don't want to sound brash, to sound condescending or for my words to be without celebration. To wither away anything that could be taken away from what I'm about to explain through hubris and heavy-handedness. My racket is not the racket of those who believe the possess powers greater than other men; secular and spiritual alike. No, I wish merely to make a modest proposal.

I must thank you in advance if you've taken the time to click the link leading you to this posting, it's not every day that one comes across a claim such as mine without dismissing it with the skepticism that our world drives us to employ. Be wary, there are many who speak of this subject not in earnest, but in unfounded assertion. Perhaps I am no better, perhaps I am like those I have grown to scorn?

To say one has discovered the meaning of life, especially a man so far removed from the realm of transcendentalism and spirituality as I, would be met with revulsion. With apathy and just a not-so-subtle touch of bitterness at word's end. But one must ask themselves the meaning of "meaning."

The truth is, nothing has meaning unless we give it meaning. A rainbow is merely the refraction of sunlight through water vapor. However, in Italy the rainbow has become a symbol of peace. Christians cite from the pages of Genesis, that the rainbow is God's promise that He shall never again flood the earth, and is in turn a sign of trust from this of many other "creators." Perhaps this could be lacking in literalism or context, but the image is the same sharp contrast of colors coming together; the symbolism in the image is the same.

So it should go, that in the understanding that words, places, things, people have only the meaning we give to them. So now I must ask, vice assert, the question "Is life impervious to the meaning we give it?" Must life have a solid, concrete and objective meaning when we arbitrarily assign meaning to all that we encounter within it? To some, it may not seem so arbitrary, but in the scope of things how is it not?

Now I ask, given that the meaning of life is the meaning we give to it and all things within it, why not choose the meaning to be a positive one? That life can be a most wonderous and eventful thing? That it means to cherish all within the time that we have it? Why not that?

I suppose, in summary, I'm merely asking that instead of finding the meaning, we give the meaning?

War is Inevitable? Says Who?

Having a fondness for political lectures, I've noticed another troubling pattern in the rhetoric of Right-leaning speakers to the tune of "war is inevitable." In most cases, I would brush this aside as another scare tactic employed to shake up the base in their faction. Unfortunately, it has become endemic and the rhetoric is slowly crossing party lines. The question is, how can we as a species abide this?

There are lots of things that are inevitable: The collapse of a star, the expiration of our lives and hell, the expiration of milk. Birds fly, fish swim, and we try to kill as many of each other as one can in their lifetime? Really? The impermanent nature of being is one we become acquainted with early in our childhood, though at such an age we are unable to articulate our opinions on the subject concisely. We understand that there are things we simply have no control over unless technological, economic and social advances manage to overcome them. But in terms of war, an event reliant on the perogative of the aggressor to take effect, it is hard for me to see the parallel.

When a person says "war is inevitable," it sends a clear message that it is no one's fault. The language, even in legalese, implies that no one is culpable. From the voter who cast their ballot for the warhawk head of state to the head of state himself, anyone involved can be held responsible, could they not? The question of whether or not we are going to admit where we as a people come to take ownership in this.

National defense spending in the United States, regardless of figures and times after the Second World War, remains the highest of any one nation on this planet. This tremendous and ever-increasing sum seems to be spurred on by the perceived inevitablity of war, but why is no one stopping to take a look at the root of the problem? John F. Kennedy may have said "It is an unfortunate fact that we can secure peace only by preparing for war" but is he not the same man who said "Our problems are man-made, therefore they may be solved by man. No problem of human destiny is beyond human beings"?

Humbly though I submit my opinion, I would dare to say that war is a man-made problem, a dreadful invention that at this point in our history as a species, can destroy the world at the turn of a key and recitation of code. Keys, codes, buttons: All of these things are made by us, for us or more accurately, in spite of us. I challenge anyone to deny this; I challenge you! Could not the world be a better place were we to deny ourselves the indulgence of this dark fantasy? Can our curiosity for how much destruction we ourselves can wreak on our own planet not be sated?

But what of this dread-fascination? This death-preoccupation? I have seen it in religion too, as I can't shake the feeling that though many on the religious front may be expecting an apocalypse. Unfortunately, since I don't believe in such things, this appears to me as a self-fulfilling one if the wrong person gets their hands on the right means. Even in some polytheistic religions from antiquity, there are deities exhalted as patrons of war. Ares, Tyr and Mars to name but a mere fraction of the tie-ins between religion and war.

No, I say no to all of it. No to the foolishness of waiting for war. What is there to wait for? If the desire to see bloodshed is in the heart of men with the means to do so, it will be done. What we as a species must do is surpass this. War is not "inevitable," it is the perogative of a mere consequential few.

An Open Letter To Theists

Dear Believers,

Ah, and so I come to you again. I wanted to see how things were going. I'm pretty sure you're cross with me, and while not necessarily a good reason, it is a reason that I don't agree with you. How are you? How's the family? I'm sure they're doing quite well, whatever the standard opinion of "well" may be. In any case I'd like to say the following:

There's a limit to your faith.

Yes, call it a wager, an impolite remark reserved for someone trying to get in your head (as if your ilk didn't try to get into mine in my formative years.) But there is some observable truth to my claim, a truth that you yourself confirm quite easily. Were I forced to, there would be untold scores of books I could write on the subject. But since you seldom bother to read the one book you swear by in its entirety, it would be a waste of energy to write more than one on the subject. As I've written this so far, I cannot help but find myself contemplating the events in Genesis 22:5-8. The "Binding of Isaac" was one of many Bible-approved examples of displaying one's faith in God, but then I find myself muttering the old adage "Talk to God; call it prayer. Talked to by God; call a psychiatrist." But it goes much deeper than that, oh yes. It goes right down to you, Theist. It goes right down to your humanity and what you'd do to prove your faith.

Remember that lovely family of yours? The one I asked about? Yes, that one. Would you be willing to tie any one of them to patio furniture, any one at all? Would you, could you, be willing to carve them to bits in His mercy? Let us dispense with paltry excuses highlighting how merciful God is when the Bible is a litany of how unmerciful one with great power can be. Let us instead stay focused on you. Because I'm not writing to you about any one god, I'm writing about you, to you.

Not one to bandy about metaphysical concepts, but I can almost sense your hesitance. If you were to answer "no" you'd find yourself locked in a paradoxical crisis of faith. Trapped in a room where the purrs and gentle reassurances of your oh-so-laughable cognitive dissonance cannot save you. But, were you to say "yes" then not only would you be looked upon as insane, but your family would start looking at you funny, and I'm pretty sure the spouse would be filing for divorce.

But as I mentioned before, there are several examples that would push your faith to its breaking point; the aforementioned is merely the one that sticks out the most in my mind. But now, it sticks out in your mind as well. So look on the bright side, for the first time in a long time, we are like-minded individuals. In any case, send the family my love, and don't go stabbing anyone.

Sincerely,
Rey Ignatius Fawkes

An Open Letter to 2012 Apocalypse Believers

Dear "Believers",

I'd like to start this letter with a quote from kinesiologist Mark Rippetoe:

"Just because some jackass asserts a thing does not mean that it is worthy of refutation. If the same guy tells you that every space shuttle launch perturbs the Earth's orbit, and that the cumulative effects are just about to start the process of the loss of the atmosphere into space, thus creating a vacuum that will destroy all life on the planet in approximately 36 hours, would you deem this necessary to refute? How much time would you spend explaining to him why this cannot happen? Would not your time be spent better doing other things? And if you devise a concise explanation, why would you assume he would understand?"

See that? That's the look of silent judgement from Coach Rippetoe himself...

The above quote is why I waited to the eleventh hour (see what I did there?) to write this letter to you, in hopes that you wouldn't do anything foolish when the ball drops or any time after. It seems counter-intuitive for me to write this despite the above quote, but I felt a moral imperative to let you know why you're wrong. Why you're an idiot, why you make life unbearable and therefore why I despise everything it is you have to say.

I think it's cute that the spiritually inclined seem to have an answer for everything, even though they're just as fallible as any other person walking this earth. As if they had a direct-to-God hotline on the universe and how it unfolds. What's really knock-your-socks-off adorable is that this type of thinking has been going on for years, of note during the rule of the Mayans. True, they revolutionized mathematical theory with the concept of zero, but they also believed that the only way to sate the gods was by cutting out the still-beating heart of a person.

But apparently this wasn't absurd enough for you to dismiss, oh no! "They had ancient wisdom which in turn made them more spiritually aligned with the ways of the universe!" you would claim. Well look here, buddy. It's "ancient wisdom" for a reason: The "wisdom" is obsolete. I mean, lets take a good look at some Mayan innovations, check out my list:

Obsidian Swords? Check

Advanced Architecture? Check

Telescope? Crap!

Not. Even. Close...

Well damn! No telescope for the Jaguar aficionados, eh? What a shame! I suppose we'll have to fall on modern science. That, or just admit the fact that there is a whole lot of universe, and not a lot of stone with which to carve hieroglyphics. That the Mayan calendar simply ran out of room. You mean to tell me that these clowns could predict the end of the world, but didn't know that Spain would soon come to their shores with a jones to rape and pillage the shit out of them? Really? This is precisely the sword you seem to fall on every time.

The "spiritually awakened" of your ilk will take the (pseudo)scientific approach and argue that the poles of the earth will shift, which is absurd considering that polar shifts occur over the course of billions of years, vice three days like certain films would claim. Others will swear up and down that "Planet 'X'" or "Nibiru" is set on a collision course with our planet, which is worse considering that no astronomer has spotted such a planet, and if over the course of a few months a planet that size were set to collide we would have seen it by now with the simplest of telescopes. Add on the fact that our planet is not a static object but a body in constant motion and it just leaves you, like your argument, "cussed out and comin' up short" as they say down South.

Seriously, dude, read a book...

I know that I have a tendency to "hop on my atheist high horse" and question everything that comes my way and refute it until I'm blue in the face, but this isn't an "unknown-unknown." This is not some "impossible to disprove" argument. This is a fact, a fact based in opposition to a foolish assertion with tangible evidence to support it. It has been DISPROVEN! FACT! But now, sadly, I have to share a deep and terrible realization with you.

You're going to (presumably) live to see the 21st of December, and you're going to study. You're going to begin to question everything that comes your way. You're going to apply logic, reason and all of those nice things. You're going to stop falling back on the old soothsayers comfort of "knowing when our world shall end." In short, you're going to think.

No, dude, not like that. Well maybe, but without auto-tune.

And that, my friend, is a beautiful prediction. Happy New Year!

Sincerely,
Rey Ignatius Fawkes