hopelesshappiness.com

Has our nation become one giant festering wound no longer capable of fighting off adulteration? When an infection attacks the body, the body sends white blood cells to the site, the white blood cells attack the infection and as they degenerate they drain off (along with injured tissue) as pus. Gun violence is an impurity that because there is such vitriolic division (i.e. widespread infection) inflaming the living tissue of these United States we do not have the resources to spare to heal this other wound. All of our defenses are being spent on imperious entrenchment protecting us from them, whoever them may momentarily be, and allowing unchecked gun violence to continue.

There was another incident this week.

If only I could refer to the perpetrators as pus to be drained, but pus is a sign that we are healing; we are not. The perpetrators, the agitators, the perpetuators, are the feverish red streaks spreading tendrils of hate and violence ever outward. It is of considerable note that agitators and perpetuators are the caustic thruways enabling realization; and it could be argued that anyone shrugging and excusing their self with “What can I do?” is a perpetuator.

It is true that where there are guns there is gun violence. And it is true that our nation boasts more guns and more gun violence than any developed nation on this planet. This week I am once again reading a parade of statistics that show us for the fatuous simpletons we are. Individuals nurturing a system that is threatening our survival, bracing a structure that is collapsing in upon itself. Individuals pretending empathy and compassion to perpetuate irresponsible power. Individuals not in search of Beauty, Truth, Wisdom, Justice, but in defense of bureaucracy, convention, certainty, division. Individuals so full of their self they cannot see the self in another; they see all others as mere extensions in place to serve.

Agitators and perpetuators. This is our problem. Every nation, state, culture, group, faction and/or cohort includes individuals who (in their fight against them) may be inclined to perpetrate. In this nation, regarding gun violence, we (the fatuous simpletons) make it easy to perpetrate. America began as an experiment in which our government was created to protect individual freedom and it has evolved into a conflagration in which factions define then dictate only freedoms consistent with their specific ideology and agenda. United my ass. A country that allows the indiscriminate killing of its citizens, its children, to the comparable extent that this country does, is a country that does not care about its future.

I have always maintained that happiness as one's search for Beauty, Truth, Wisdom, Justice is hopeless in that we can only approach and will never attain Perfection in these Ideals. I have also always maintained that to advance, improve, progress we must (regardless) consistently work toward these Ideals. Yet partially because the future is accelerating but mostly because we are fatuous simpletons, as a nation we have now fallen so far behind in this effort that our future has given up. Our future has stepped aside allowing us to pass with nary a nod. Our future has become this moment; bureaucracy, convention, certainty, division. And this moment will only stretch… so… far…

What to do? What to do?

What depends on who.

Where and when, depending on who, fall within what somewhere between constraint and freedom.

Once at what, why is extraneous regardless of who.

When who is empowered and when who believes what is a decided certainty, an extensive why is not allowed.

Why is not what. In what there are no questions, only rules. In why the questions are forever.

Why leads to understanding; and wisdom is nearby.

When who is empowered and when who is lazy, an extensive why is not allowed.

What eventually leads back to why, if only for a moment, after landing somewhere between progress and status quo.

Why and what should be balanced; with a decided emphasis on why.

Who should struggle with why first, then what.

To struggle with who is to disrespect why and delay what.

Experts should take charge of why and have a larger say in what.

Consensus leadership should shut up about why, have a smaller say in what and guide where and when.

Today consensus leadership is more interested in struggling with who.

Empowerment makes who lazy.

Of these 5 elements, who, what, where, when and why, who is the least important. Of the remaining four, why should initiate proceedings and (if possible) check in with what, where and when throughout the process.

Of these 5 elements, who, what, where, when and why, why is the most underutilized. But urgency and circumstance determine which one is most important in a given stage of the process and/or in a given moment.

One must decide, carefully and thoughtfully, when why is appropriate; there is no if – why is always appropriate; perhaps less so when what is a fait accompli, in which case why can quickly degenerate into who.

Even when what is in progress, and even though who is the least important, it is difficult to remove who from why, or what; or even where or when.

Progress is determined by why then what, guided and encouraged by where and when. In a spiritual sense, who is largely inconsequential. In a worldly sense, who may be substantial and who may intermittently become essential.

Still, of these 5 elements, who, what, where, when and why, who is the least important.

Substantial? Or essential? One's choice. To be substantial is to cause or create. To be essential is to first struggle mightily with uncertainty.

This is my God.

God requires uncertainty. God demands that we question Her existence. God asks that we struggle mightily in every moment, with every thought, with every decision, with every act. In God's mind to be substantial is not enough. In God's mind the greatest sin is Certainty. One who claims to know God goes against God by refuting the Mystery; by belittling another's understanding. To come back to God, or to come to God for the first time, one must first acknowledge the actuality and the necessity of differing opinions; of varied interpretations. Once acknowledged, one must work to understand differing opinions; varied interpretations. And this task, put in front of us by God, is such a monumental undertaking it has never been and never will be accomplished in a single lifetime. I believe this to explain the Mystery; the Uncertainty. Despite teachings to the contrary, God does not want us to know Him, God wants us to know Us; Life; All Life. As a species, one day we may know God. As an individual, knowing Her is not what God requires; or even desires.

To cause or create, to be substantial as a response to our superficiality, is far too frequently mistaken as knowing. To be essential is to admit to the hopelessness of ever knowing and to act accordingly, which for many is unthinkable; and this is why so many reject essentiality and embrace superficial substantiality. Why is it so important to know? Fear? In recent years I have become more afraid of the consequences of knowing than I am of the constancy of uncertainty. And perhaps it helps to understand that the constancy of uncertainty will lead us closer to Beauty, Truth, Wisdom, Justice. And perhaps it helps to understand that the constancy of uncertainty is critical to our survival; and ultimately to our salvation. And perhaps it helps to understand that the constancy of uncertainty is the Will of God.

By saying this, I am not arguing that there is a God. “We should not be arguing over the existence of God or His role. We should be deliberating the existence, conscious acknowledgement, revelation and manifestation of consensus uncertainty.” God is backstage. The Will of God is front and center.

To claim to know is to deny God. If God wanted us to Know, with certainty, there would be no differing opinions; no varied interpretations. To be certain is to reject personal learning and growth. I do not worship my God; I focus on Her Will. I struggle mightily in every moment, with every thought, with every decision, with every act. I remain steadfast in my conviction that the constancy of uncertainty, the struggle between Goodness and Malevolence, Compassion and Cruelty, Empathy and Indifference, a desire for Justice and a self-serving greed, is necessary for essentiality, which in turn is necessary for survival; and ultimately salvation.

This is my God.

This week I see Life as an effort to balance form, function, discipline, indulgence.

1. Form: The manner or style of arranging and coordinating parts for a pleasing or effective result. Due or proper shape; orderly arrangement of parts. The structure, pattern, organization, or essential nature of anything.
2. Function: The kind of action or activity proper to a person, thing, or institution.
3. Discipline: An activity, exercise, or regimen that develops or improves a skill. The rigor or training effect of experience. Behavior in accord with rules of conduct. Well-considered action or observation.
4. Indulgence: The act or practice of yielding to an inclination or desire.

(Definitions from dictionary.com).

Louis Sullivan said, “Form follows function.” Frank Lloyd Wright said, “Form and function should be one, joined in a spiritual union.” I think I might argue that (ideally) form and function should be one but function should (and more often does) take the lead. I would also maintain that more times than not, indulgence guides discipline; and (again, ideally) discipline and indulgence should be one. But because we are an imperfect species, we will continue to live (in both cases) this natural progression.

Furthermore, from form comes peace or disorder. From function comes purpose or insignificance. From discipline comes reason or fear. From indulgence comes passion or cruelty. Peace will lead one closer to Beauty, disorder to Bureaucracy. Purpose will lead one closer to Truth, insignificance to Convention. Reason will lead one closer to Wisdom, fear to Certainty. Passion will lead one closer to Justice, cruelty to Division. In addition it is logical that Beauty follows Truth and Justice guides Wisdom. And it is logical that Bureaucracy follows Convention and Division guides Certainty. And from there we can further bridge the gaps by studying the thoughtfulness of purpose, the fear of insignificance, the wisdom of truth and the certainty of convention. This is a lot to take in. I would like to disentangle and examine more closely.

Why peace from form? “A pleasing or effective result.” “Due or proper shape; orderly arrangement.” “Essential nature.” These pieces of the definition indicate order and (in my mind) create a calm; a peace. On the other end if these qualities are lacking, there is disorder. And because we instinctively desire order, overwhelming disorder leads us to create a cumbersome and equally chaotic bureaucracy. Whereas the peace found in even a remnant of essentiality brings us around to recognize and actively appreciate the inherent beauty of proper form. So why is form (i.e. Beauty) often subjective? I believe that comes from one's remaining balance of function, discipline and indulgence. As an example, those who subjectively claim beauty in bureaucracy, the geometry of rules, are following the certainty of convention as guided by the cruelty of division. In other words perhaps Beauty is not subjective; perhaps it is misinterpreted by one’s balance of function, discipline, and/or indulgence. If we could meld form and function into one, and likewise with discipline and indulgence, perhaps we would come closer to the Ideal: Beauty, Truth, Wisdom, Justice.

Why purpose from function? Perhaps it is more obvious, a more direct connection to its definition, but one's perceived function or purpose moves beyond itself by creating meaning and providing direction for all other elements. As a human individual, admittedly or not, there is doubt, uncertainty, thoughts of insignificance. And if these thoughts lead to a dominant fear, then one's wisdom and truth can become a certainty entrenched in convention. Convention can be dogma, ritual, doctrine, or simple conformity, loyalty to a state or nation, family, work or social group, religion, ideology, or tradition; anything that provides a pre-packaged, customizable (within parameters) life experience replete with meaning. Much easier to be told than to think. Much easier to belong than to be ostracized. Much easier to be defined than to define oneself. Much easier to accept a truth than to fall short of Truth.

Why reason from discipline? To reason requires discipline. To reason from fact, or from consensus or expert opinion requires greater discipline. To reason from belief based on convention (even seeming consensus convention) is to build on shifting sand. And this is another example of the influence of function or purpose. If one’s purpose is a search for Truth, then discipline ultimately results in a greater wisdom. If however, one’s purpose is to perpetuate convention as driven by one’s fear of insignificance, then discipline becomes a rigorous, regimented certainty; on shifting sand.

Why passion from indulgence? Passion as intensity or fervor reflects an integral and many would argue essential part of one’s Humanity, and from indulgence naturally flows strong often conflicting feelings. So we are faced with choices. To focus indulgence on the inclinations and desires of all Humanity as one, is to move toward greater justice. But not held in check one’s more selfish inclinations and desires can easily transform passion into wanton disregard for others. Be it from overt prejudice, more subtle bias, nationalism, politics, today’s wealth gap, or any number of other entrenched beliefs and behaviors that serve as the first dividers and divisions, the inability of an individual to move beyond oneself or one’s cohort and to understand Humanity as one is the pivot point where passion becomes cruelty and division becomes or remains the norm.

Beauty. Truth. Wisdom. Justice.

It is much easier to pretend to be happy with division, certainty, convention, bureaucracy.

For the first time in my life, I feel like I am stuck. In hindsight though, I have always been stuck. In hindsight previous decisions to become unstuck were in actuality merely a change of scenery and (according to the rules I refused to follow) frequently a step or two backwards. The rules are dumb. But now, today, in this moment, because I am stuck in place, in job, in health, in life, I have no choice but to follow the rules; and pretend that is okay. I am sad. It is not clear to me if it is sadder that I pretended autonomy and independence for 40 years or that I now must, in order to live out the rest of my life, pretend happiness. The definition should have given it away: “Idealism – the tendency to represent things in an ideal form, or as they might or should be rather than as they are, with emphasis on values.” Happiness is unattainable.

I have long maintained that Happiness is the search for Truth and Wisdom implying Truth and Wisdom (capitalized) is unattainable. Now, here I am, later in life finding that the search has been rather inconsequential (at best). I am contemplating capitulation; not in any dramatic sort of way, simply an acknowledgement that I am relatively powerless. I am no match for the dumb rules.

Would it be better to have more power having followed (and worse) believed in dumb rules? Or perhaps attaining even greater power by seeking an Ideal within the confines of these dumb rules? Or am I just as well off, or somehow better off, having searched to no consequential worldly avail yet once or twice (feel like I have) glimpsed an outermost perimeter of Truth and Wisdom and prepared myself for the (very, highly, extremely, very) unlikely possibility of personal power. I will maintain my daily/weekly regimen of thoughtful consideration. Not only just in case, but also because it has become habit and because the rules are dumb.