What’s all the to do about god?

If you’re one of those types that  will defer judgment in favor of dictionaries, I’m speaking of this definition:

a person or thing of supreme value

Supreme as the highest rank of authority.  Some examples: Money, Family, Friends, Material Goods, Knowledge, Approval, Celebrity, Station, Accomplishments,  etc.

Ideas can be god.  Especially when they are placed on an altar of worship.  What get’s your attention?  What would you hold in such high regard? What would make you immovable? What drives you and towards what?

Apathy expressed towards the mundane is because it’s dull and lacks luster.   All things banal and uninteresting, where  the extraordinary is sought to be experienced.  Where none can be found, people tend to seek out some higher purpose, or some semblance of vision.  The imagination tends to play a role in this, a place where ideas are replaced with ideals.

It may account for why so many people are in the thralls of sociopolitical topics like Human Rights and Freedom.  It adds a sheen to daily routine as if talking ideals has altered the reality of what one is actually doing.  The ‘to-do’ has some rather interesting synonyms (among others):

noun commotion, excitement

this-is-your-god-marry-and-reproduce

Agitation is an efficient communicator, at the very least it can tell you when something has your attention.  Otherwise, apathy takes care when a topic is raised.  There’s only a small number of topics I find interesting enough to intrigue my thoughts. Topics that demonstrates human absurdity.  In writing for various publications over the years, at the Editor’s request the phrase “human condition” had been used when I’d breach a topic.  Condition is a funny sort of word, it can be both an adjective and noun, especially when describing the state of being human.

I’ve often been described as being a confrontational or insulting writer. The focus on condescension has always been intriguing to me.  I get the same descriptor when I talk and I always write in the same manner in which I speak.  Maybe these people just need to spend a year in New England, to pick up the essence of it, the form is merely consequential.  Born and raised there, I can distinguish what is cultural from my pathology but the two are intertwined.  The Latin caduceus would be a suitable symbol to carry this message not so unlike the kAru in Sanskrit. Both an art and a science.

I’ve been told that I should adjust if I want to gain a fan base.  I’ve been removed from writer’s lists, banned from message boards and told (in the politest way possible) that I’m just too agitating.    As if gaining a fan base was my end goal.  It never has been.  If readers become the anti-fan, then my efforts weren’t for naught.  If my presence doesn’t invoke a deep-sigh, then I’m just as mundane as doing the dishes.    The truth is, I’m well aware that I’m over-analytical, seem to talk in circles and tend to exhaust the audience.  That’s sort of the point.  As Marcus Aurelius put it:

“For Myself”.

It’s a rather interesting experiment to conduct, just to see how strongly a person holds ideas (or things) Supreme (including my own).  Will they falter?  Hold ground?  Does the topic stand on its own merit or will it come crashing down like a house of cards?

That old saying that if you stand for nothing, you’ll fall for anything doesn’t ring true, at least not in my head.  Anything can be approached from many angles, chipped away at, and until only dust remains.

“This thing, what is it in itself, in its own constitution? What is its substance and material?” {Marcus Aurelius}

Perhaps this is where the leap is taken to Nihilism, if one misunderstands the form and its contents, then it accounts for this reductionist approach.  Ideas can be annihilated but it doesn’t mean the person holding the idea goes down in flames with it.    If the activity gives rise to depression and existential crisis, then god is dead.

I can’t help but applaud to that.

Sin Jones