I used to describe myself as atheist at some point in my life. Vehemently opposed to worshipping a deity.Someone who could point to the ineradicable logic of Doug Stanhope. Pointing in ridicule at the absurdity of certain portions of The Bible wondering how someone could believe such nonsense.
I feel superior in a way. Yet, here I remain, alone in another impression. As if there was a dichotomy of my existence. The rational versus the unintelligible. I know my existence is futile, and also wish to be sublimated into a greater totality.
I read more than most. The American average is around seven books read per year. Four if you count the 25% of people who do not read any books in a year. I average around three hours a day reading. Varying on the length and difficulty this means about thirty to fifty books in a year.
This feeds that ego. This makes me enlightened. Or well read as referred by the average American. My intuition though mocks my intellect at its pseudo profundity. My intuition tells me to immerse and commune amongst them. I interact then am reminded how poorly the results of that has went so far.
Why does it feel that I care more than others? I have gone through a vegan stage in my life. That made me feel part of the good team. “How dare you perpetuate the horror of mammalian suffering!” Then there is also the perpetual libertarian ideology creeping into any argument. “If looking at statistics, since the implementation of affirmative action and minimum wage laws, the outcomes of the minorities has only worsened.” My logic was impervious to criticism in these areas. Why couldn’t everyone agree with me?!
My mind feels absolutely correct and right. And this is why my systemizing brain welcomed and adored The Righteous Mind by author Jonathan Haidt. It is an astounding book that informs how a person’s perspective of morality conforms to their political belief systems.
The book is really separated into three different concepts. The first dealing with how Western thought exalts reason.Western ideology is that the ideal man is rational first, with the rational (pre-frontal cortex) subjugating the lower animalistic functions of the brain afterwards.
Plato is noted in one of his works as positing that man should have reason subjugate the baser emotional functions. He is noted for saying that a man who lets emotions predominate his life will be reincarnated as a woman (the horror!).Thomas Jefferson comes in with the hopes that reason and his emotional love for a French woman could hopefully be partners. Sadly though David Hume seems the most correct when he analyzes that emotions dominate and then later reason justifies whatever happened.
Without reason, there is little justification in morality. At least that is the way
Later on at the end I will offer a commentary past a review that the book does not parlay the information
People interpret my silent demeanor as denoting intelligence when in actuality I just do not know what the proper response or action entails.
I am cautiously optimistic about myself. I do not foresee a bright future for others. It seems as if there is a producer who has pigeon-holed people for a role that they unwittingly act out. The liberal caretakers who wish for no others to incur the harm of risk. The gun toting conservative who says that it was the devil who made him do so. Then the libertarians who systematize that the free market, and only the free market, will make existence palpably good.