”Wrath is the only engine that makes me feel any hunger” a writer-director friend on Facebook wrote.
I love to meet people different from myself. I love to listen to people talking about their lives and experiences.
But sometimes I feel a monstrous urge to scream; to tell them that they are wrong, that they misunderstood life.
Which of course I have no rights to do.
Nobody has the ultimate truth about life. I might think I know the Truth, but I make a huge mistake if I sneer at everybody who doesn’t agree with my Truth. We are different and that is as it should be.
And there is no such thing as right and wrong.
Never the less a phrase like “wrath is the only engine that makes me feel any hunger” gives me The Shivers and I fear for mankind.
It is my deepest believes that we don’t evolve by falling back to our basic, primitive emotions. It is our ability to get passed this and see beyond our fundamental reactions that got us this far. And can take us even further.
To let anger and sexuality rule with the excuse that they are primal would put us on the same level as a pack of wolfs. I think the human mind deserve better.
Yet my primal urge to scream linger.
14 comments:
Oh believe me, you have every right to scream, to tell anyone that he or she is not in accordance. You have every right to feel your true emotions, to react upon what happens in the world and to honestly convey your stance. You have every right to cry, to betray yourself, to open yourself to others eyes, to start an exchange of devotion. You have every right to say "Forgive me" to the one you treat unjustly. You have every right to form a standard compared to which others as well as you can fall short. You have every right to believe in something - not because it is right, since that concept changes from predicament to predicament - but to strive for something you have decided to care and take the full responsibility for. You have the perfect right to implant a spine into your body and stand tall in the wind.
Personally, I consider these things, and a few more, not only basic human rights but also imperatives.
As to the wolves: considering that they've lived in harmony with their earthly conditions for millions of years and that we are rapidly destroying the planet including wolves and other species, I don't know who's in favour of recognition. And I did not mean falling back on primal drives and emotions in the first place (mostly being quite polite), I am rather talking about being very aware of what is behind our smiling faces. If we understand ourselves, I believe we are less likely to let ourselves go without realizing the effects.
By the way, the quote you started out from displayed a small but significant deviation from its original formulation. “Wrath is the only motor that makes me feel any lust” would be more appropriate. It depicts nothing but a personal inclination, kept within reasonably tight frames. Having children teaches you to hold your horses until they can do any good.
I know that wrath is considered one of the deadly sins. But so is acedia (which was later changed to “Sloth”).
You and I should both keep in mind that "What you teach best is what you most need to learn".
From a psychological point of view your comment above leaks a whisper from a soul who doesn’t quite know what to do the details of her inner luggage that she does not want to like. But this is seen and said from my horizon.
@Janne: A very interesting reply. Thank you. I would have been surprised if you agreed.
From my point of view, my soul has no problem with any inner luggage. I am in very much at peace. But some find that provocative or unbelievable.
As for the wolfs I understand your viewpoint. I don't on the other side believe that it is our mental development that caused pollution and destruction, but the opposite. If we had cared more for the development of our minds, we would have had a much better place to live. Politicians behaving like five-year-olds in a playground is a huge problem. Harmony is a nice word but it also stands for stagnation.
My translation was as you pointed out not completely accurate unfortunately. "Wrath" was a better word. But as for "lust" i misunderstood your intentions. As I understand the English "lust" it has only to do with sexual feelings. While the Swedish word you used also can mean to hunger for something or to feel enjoyment. I didn't think you meant that you only want to have sex when you felt wrath. Hence the use of "hunger" instead of "lust".
Your list of what I am entitled to do are very long. What I said (or meant) was that I have no right to tell someone else that they believe wrong. How you perceive things, what you believe in are always right, for your, because it is based on your whole life's experiences, your personality. If I say you believe wrong, I deny you your right to your personality.
Of course I am entitled to say my opinion and disagree - with the risk of upsetting - but that is not the same as showing disrespect to the other individual.
"What you teach best is what you most need to learn" ? I'm not sure about that. I know that teacher's learn a lot from their students, when they ask questions, but I don't think it is a good idea for me to teach economics for instance.
Thank you for visiting and your comments.
Eager to continue our interesting discussion I’ll get down to it without further ado:
Only in an idealised world would it be possible to develop our minds per se; I think the mind reflects our being one way, while our (bodily) needs do it another way. The ghost in the machine here is the separation of the two, a dualism instituted by the aggressive religions of the old world for historical reasons. When I encounter an idealised representation of mind and matter, I ask myself: Where’s the garbage hidden? When will it show up and in what form? The purest, most incorporeal development of the sublime mind that I can come to think of is Christian scholasticism, and unfortunately, it exerted evil as skilfully as any other, allegedly sanctioned by God. So I believe that recognition of the needs that don’t conform to the historically constituted ideals, is necessary for overcoming the threats of an overcrowded world. To me willingness to understand even the seemingly ugly sides of life, offers a way for development of mankind. And that doesn’t mean giving in to the wolves.
I agree with you when it comes to the basic right to have an opinion. But I also think we have the right to criticize each others opinions. It is the meaning of it all, the only way we can develop. Inherent in that is also the right to claim that someone is wrong, nota bene not factually wrong but wrong according to the claimer’s point of view. I cannot claim that your opinion is wrong under any circumstance, I can just state that I think it’s wrong (under any circumstance).
I derive what I have written above from the following ontological reasoning: Since the birth of philosophy as we know it (and most likely even before then), thinkers have been trying to come up with a proof that reality exists. But no proof so far has proved valid. If your nerve system was connected to a capacitive computer that induced the same pattern of electrochemical impulses that corresponds to your experience of an outer, interactive world – how would you be able to tell? How can you know that all things you see around you are more than sensations in your own mind? You can’t. Your brain does not see or hear them as themselves, it does not sense them. It just experiences a stream of neurotransmissions the exact cause of which we cannot determine with any certainty. The German philosopher Immanuel Kant formulated this already in the eighteenth century. The film “Matrix” uses this argument as the basis for its plot. I use it as the basis for my life.
To me this means that even supposing that reality exists in the way we all seem reasonably agreed upon, is an opinion. When you assert reality as a fact, you have made a choice (albeit in most cases unconsciously). Realizing this can make you humble before the rights of others in your supposed world to make their own choices. But it can also paralyze you. I would say that you have a responsibility to form a picture of the world, a system of opinions, and you also have the responsibility for these opinions and their effects in your active live. You will meet the opinions of others and your interests will inevitably clash from time to time. That is the basis of development as well as of war. Staying somewhat humble, open minded and honest is a reasonable way to avoid war.
To simulate war on an intellectual level, i.e. discussing like we are doing now, is the practice of humbleness, open mindedness and honesty. I think it must be allowed to be run by all the means of a real war: attack, rejection, fight, compromise and peace agreements. I think discussions are actually always run that way, either we recognize it or not. By attacking someone’s opinion I risk my own and the willingness to risk them spells honesty to me. I don’t think we stand all that far from each other. The whole issue is mostly a question of style.
By the way, letting the word “lust” denote merely sexual desire is to my knowledge a too strenuous a limitation. In psychology, especially in connection to Freud, the concept of lust goes along with pleasure or libido, although the terminology isn’t always crystal clear. “Hunger” as you suggested accounts only for the yet unsatisfied need. But I guess “pleasure” would be the best word for what I meant.
I must add that it's relieving to have a discussion beyond the general facebook level. Good that there are a few people like you out there.
@Janne: I was so amazed and honored by your last sentence that cat caught my tongue.
For a while.
Most people look for hidden garbage when something is too good to be true. I think it is healthy to be critical, but to deny yourself your right to believe that something really can be that good, is also limiting.
There are people who experienced so much that would have made them bitter and angry, but they are not. And I do believe that they really overcome all those negative feelings. For me, this a proof that soul can "win" over the brain.
I think my first reaction to something comes from the brain. And me reconsidering, thinking twice, reflecting, in encouraged from the soul. And after a while the brain has learned and the first reaction will be different.
I agree with you about opinions.
When it comes to reality and Matrix-philosophy. . . Well, I can't say that I disagree, but for me it is mostly a matter of remembering that my world is not your world and we might experience things differently. I mean, we can't even prove that colors look the same to all that aren't color-blind. Two people eating the same food are know to experience this differently, why not colors? And other things? But I don't believe that there is something else, some True Reality. What I have is my reality, and that is my True Reality.
I think that most of us have reasonably the same opinion about the world, the reality, because there are those that obviously are very far from the general opinion. If we were all scattered and had completely different experiences, I think we would have a different society. But as you say, there are no way of proving anything.
I've never thought about it before, but a discussion with an open mind do risk my own opinion. And then I need to be prestige less and not cling to it as a Holy Grail. Politicians do that in a debate. I would like to see one who says "gee, you're right, I've never thought about it that way." Thank you for pointing this out to me.
One thing you definitely thought me is that I still have much to learn when it comes to English. I feel that your English is far better than mine.
In this discussion I think we have mainly been trying to calibrate our opinions and attitudes towards a possible mutual understanding. At least that’s been one of the trends in our exchange. But there’s also a line of reasoning that deals more with defining ourselves as persons and staying true to our personal outlines. By now, I guess we’ve reached just about as far as possible to come in that respect. You stand out as a distinct human being before my perception, though there are traits that are still diffuse.
One thing I can’t grasp is your reasoning about brain and soul. However I try I can’t find a definition that accounts for the nature of these two concepts and the difference between them. I frequently use the word “soul” myself in artistic contexts but I use it metaphorically and I don’t really think it corresponds to anything identifiable. To me it’s an idealization stripping my existence of its flesh, roots and sensuality. So when I ask where the garbage is stuffed away I mean by garbage all that is kept out of idealized concepts. The beauty of my world has a bittersweet tinge, in the same way as I want my food rich in taste and with a sting of heat. I don’t find that the least negative. Just as I don’t want to be protected from the evils of the world but rather want to defend the good against it.
When writing I define a conflict and follow its development. I guess you do the same. The end of the process is never a happy end in my writing, since I don’t know what good that would do. The fulfilment of the dream of heaven? Heaven on earth? Since I wouldn’t like any of these outcomes for my own part, I rather prefer loose ends, pushing the reader to further process the existential question within reach of a personal attitude. Personally I think that a book or a film that doesn’t make me feel a bit uncomfortable, that doesn’t challenge me and ask for something in return, wasn’t really worth reading. I can manufacture my own happiness but I want to know more about the world.
To some extent this attitude has to do with a certain sensitivity. I never experience harmony. But I don’t believe it’s because I’m less harmonious than others but rather because I’m sensitive enough to constantly be aware of the contradicting forces that every equilibrium rests upon (like the atom, for instance). And I wouldn’t like to lose that sensitivity. To me it’s the basis of a nuanced more true experience of life.
If you have traced bitterness in my confessed anger, I believe it’s attributable to both of us. Some parts of me have been deformed by the friction of life, I find that inevitable considering the life I’ve lead (yet not regretting a single day). But most of all I experience my anger as a fresh power that can be used to alter bad conditions. I sometimes feel short of using it as efficiently and boldly as I think I’m obliged to. Our western style of life rests upon a fundamental injustice; there’s so much more to do, even right outside my door. It’s way too seldom that I get my ass out of the wagon. The bad guys don’t leave the hood simply because we wish them to.
In addition to all this, I believe that people are different in a way that’s beyond reasoning. Some like it hot, others do not. That’s the fascination of life and it is also what I mean by saying that you stand out as a distinct person.
For me brain and soul are two different things. They live in symbiosis, but are not the same thing.
If you follow this link: http://writerofmoviescripts.blogspot.com/search?q=brain you will find some blog entries on the subject.
For me, happy endings are essential. They don't need to be all pink clouds (Heaven forbid) but some form of happiness need to be there. I'll get back to this in a blog entry soon.
Harmony is something that most people think of as something positive and to some extent I think it is. But harmony means balance and balance means that things are not in motion, that all is still. And that I don't think is a good thing in the long run. We need challenges, both body, brain and soul.
No, I've not traced bitterness. I sensed that you are rather content with life, but in a way that would never make me feel content.
Your arguments, statements and questions have made me think about my own standpoints and opinions and that is very refreshing.
I'm glad I made your acquaintance.
And I'm glad I made your acquaintance. I don't think we can reach much further in this particular discussion but I'd be glad if you noticed me about new interesting topics, in case I'd lack the occasion to check your blog.
A last remark (have I said that before?): From a strictly semantic point of view your distinction between "brain" and "soul" doesn´t stick. I say that after having read most of the blog texts your link referred to. You can't qualify a concept just by stating that it exists. Conceptual stringency is of fundamental importance also for a writer of fiction. I might be wrong but I believe that even the most refined poetic ambiguity requires an underlying clarity concerning the nature of the concepts to be ambiguous about. According to what we've said before about the relativity of "truth" you might think that I shouldn't be so definite about this. Nevertheless, it concerns the intersubjective means enabling us to have discussions at all. If I don’t know what you mean by something you say and you can’t offer me an explanation, how can I form an attitude to it? This is sheer logic, the only possible form for our thoughts. Nothing can both be and not be at the same time. Without that fundamental law we wouldn’t be able to distinguish one object from another.
I don't care if you don't feel it "stick" and it is not in my interest to convince anybody. I write about it, to explain myself and the way I am.
The brain and the soul are are not the same thing. I know this. That is the Truth. For me.
You're not fragile, are you?
No. Why do you ask?
Your reaction above was like a fence at a certain moment.
My written text has a tendency to be read as aggressive statements. I try to improve myself to convey my intentions better.
I just wanted to say that I have a belief. And this is not rooted in science or logic. If you feel it doesn't sick - that's alright with me.
If you want to discuss it, that's fine too, and could be interesting, but it is another type of discussion than previous and we are not likely to meet in the middle. Some thing you just know in your heart to be True.
Just as much as I felt my oldest son's soul arrive, probably even before the sperm met the egg. I felt it arrive just the same.
So, I'm not fragile. On the contrary.
Post a Comment