Admin
|
The conflict and contradiction of life...
Posted : 13 Nov, 2009 11:10 PM
I believe on some level or another life is inherently conflicting and contradictory. And yet since we do exists (or some variant of "I think and therefore I am", etc) perhaps in an attempt to remain functionally sane most of us simply choose to find whatever it is that 'works for us' (whether it be science, religion, spirituality, worldly pursuits, beauty, love, relationships, etc) and to seek some sort of comfort, solace, absolution and deliverance with a particular 'object' that we hold with dear reverence in our mind's eye. Yet there is a sense that nothing really gives us genuine permanent satisfaction for an indefinite period of time.. It seems like even the greatest things (such as the most perfect loving relationship, the ultimate spiritual experience, the highest most beautiful aspects of life and light, etc) and most profound experiences are in the end nothing more than mere arbitrary placeholders that diverge to infinite regress in a self-similar self-referential circular manner.. The restless mind always seeks to find something to do.. We want what we want until we achieve it and then the mind (being the racing and restless nature that it is) compels us to move on to the next goal or objective in life and to experience new stimulating experiences and makes us appear like the hedonistic slaves that we really are.. Seldom do we even stop to emotionally relish our recent achievements! Naturally over time we adapt and become desensitized to what we are familiar with or what we see or do everyday.. Eventually and inevitably we derive less and less enjoyment and pleasure from whatever activities that used to make us happy and when marginal utility reaches zero we automatically seek out other newer, different, or more exotic ideals, believes, experiences, relationships, etc.. Likewise, and at the same time, these "other experiences" (insert whatever it is you try to refrain from indulging in..) only become more attractive over time when the rarity or "forbidden" status gains an irresistible appeal over us... So if there is not any one 'thing' (one emotional state, one belief, one relationship, one significant other, etc) that can provide us with ultimate everlasting happiness achieved in but a single moment.. then what is it all about? Is it about finding an equilibriumized balancing-point in the optimization of the different aspects of life? Why do we humans seek unity and yet crave diversity at the same time? We want to dedicate our entire lives to one belief, or cause (science, religion, career, etc) and/or to one person (soulmate, perfect love, marriage, happily ever after, etc) and yet even when/if we actually get what we want... over time it never seems to be psychologically "enough".. Even for those of us who say we want the truth, in reality we always wish for more, we want something better than what actually IS. Thus we make rules just to break them, we build walls just to tear them down, but yet without rules and without this 'structure' we'd all simply go insane! How can we re-normalize these irreconcilable and seemingly intractable and divergent compulsions? What happened to that fountain where supposedly you drink once and never again become thirsty? or is the cyclical satisfaction of desires intrinsically meaningful in and of itself?
There is something about human nature that is inherently hypocritical, contradictory, paradoxical and full of strife, turmoil, confusion and conflict.. almost like these things are ingrained into the very fabric of our flawed existence.. I could give plenty of examples, stories, analogies and allegories but being that this is a dating site forum I'll stick to something most here can related better with.... I can certainty attest to the fact that the male gender values physical feminine beauty (to distinguish from inner beauty of personality) to the extent of forsaking and marginalizing nearly everything else.. We are instinctively hardwired to equate physical attractiveness (aesthetic symmetrical features, etc) to 'value' and equity in a relationship, etc and any guy who doesn't agree with me is simply fooling himself.. You can run but you can not hide from who you really are.. In today's society we are constantly bombarded with the subliminal and all too politically/socially correct message of "beauty is in the eye of the beholder".. but no amount of this collective self-brainwashing really changes anything.. Objective physical beauty is just as valued as it ever was.. beauty does matter, and despite what we'd like to fool ourselves into believing.. love (chemistry and romance) is not an "equal opportunity" type of thing.. we judge a book by its contents and its cover. - this works both ways for both genders. Regardless of our leanings towards science or religion, the act of falling in love/lust exists in a realm and domain of its own right, outside of both the strictly logical and the supremely spiritual.
There is a myth that men only want sex and women (being the supposedly fairer gender) really just want 'love'.. This stereotype and sweeping generalization is not even remotely accurate. Both genders want the softer more gentle and loving aspects of a relationship (though it is true that estrogen infused women are much inclined to it than their testosterone pumped counterparts..) as well as the more direct, primitive, primal and lustful acts of physical intimacy.. (in fact in many sexual ways the two genders are much more similar than they are different..) So in essence women want 'sex' just as much as men do (and for the same pleasurable reasons) but just in a different superficially surface way. Likewise they are as swayed by beauty (or rather 'handsomeness') as are men hypnotized by an alluring specimen of the opposite gender. This is nothing "wrong" with this, but it becomes rather awkward when we try to deny it or the more demure individuals pretend it doesn't even matter. Another thing is a lot of the profiles of woman on here have remarks that they want to find a Christian (or religious) "leader".. And its not just on an online site, this happens in 'real life' all the time as well.. Women like competitive ambitious men (just like men like graceful elegant looking woman) regardless of what ideology they prescribe to. Here the worldly leader has been recast-ed and transmutated into a spiritual leader, but its nothing more than simply two sides of the one same coin.. Likewise Godly righteous men on here still would like (all else being equal) to find the prettiest face that they can have. Secular or nonsecular I think this just goes to show that the underlying nature of the human condition does not and cannot (and probably should not) really change on a fundamental level.. (or.. what about the fallacy that if we 'love' someone we would/should never 'cheat' on them? what exactly does 'love' have to do with 'sex'? sure biologically they are simply different means to the same end but qualitatively the corresponding neural correlates of consciousness are entirely different and different layers/regions of the brain are responsible for these different emotions, so if we take them as isolated components then there is no trouble, but when we mistakenly believe love correlates with sex and try to incorporate them as one entangled entity that is when all the problems crop up..)
Intuitively we all know what we want (or rather what/who we can obtain).. We all know what qualities we have and what we can get/trade with that purchasing power (as unromantic as it sounds, too much of life does follow an equation/economics..) Ultimately what makes any relationship work in the long term is core compatibility in areas that matter the most, and complementary or supplementary traits, and personality attributes in other areas where being "opposite" is attractive. This can be as simple or as complex as we each want to make it, but I think in the end it reduces down to "compatibility threshold".. People usually end up with others of similar social economical backgrounds, similar physical attractiveness levels, similar intellect, and personality.. We want someone like us, someone we can relate to and empathize with.. someone who makes us truly happy. So then perhaps in the end it all boils down to a search problem, in the sense that even qualities and essences as seemingly 'high and noble" as the ethereal, enchanting and ineffable experiences of "true love" can be reduced to a mere "search problem".. and in a sense that IS what everyone here is hoping to accomplish right? to search (or rather to find and to enjoy) someone 'right' for them?! After all, everything else that we do in life all sums up to this same teleological means to an end - the enjoyment of the different impressions of pleasures of life itself..
And yet in another sense it is truly all very vague, gray, arbitrary and 'random'.. Who we meet (regardless of whether it is online, offline, etc) and who we end up with is largely a function of luck, chance, timing, geographical location and our own social circles/realms.. There are SO many people in this world that there simply HAS to be tens of thousands (perhaps even more) of other people 'out there' somewhere .. who if we would have met under the right circumstances a friendship, or even lasting lifelong relationship could have formed.. So the 'potentiality' is functionally limitless.. As idealistic as it is to envision some sort of hypothetical or abstract theoretical 'archetype' of the 'perfect relationship' or the 'one' for us.. eventually 'potentiality' has to give way to something more 'concrete and tangible' .. we have to 'settle down' with someone 'good enough' that just so happens to be the physical (or near equivalent) embodiment of the man or woman of our dreams.. We need it (him/her) to be 'someone', to be actualized and real so that we can be beheld at last..
And yet (and yet) it is never really about that actual "person" either, is it? Our judgment and evaluation of relationships are always in retrospect and done 'after the fact'.. When it doesn't work out we console ourselves by pretending to know that all along "it wasn't meant to be anyway".. And when it does work out we say "I told you so" like appealing to some dyadic anthropic principle.. Even in cases where we fall in love and stay in love what happens if our partner dies in a tragic accident or is consumed by a fatal illness? Sure we'd mourn the loss and need time to heal and come to terms with everything.. but eventually as a human being and as part of life and nature we'd 'move on' and find something else to replace that aspect of our lives that was abruptly taken away from us.. we'd find another human being to love us and fulfill our physical and emotional needs and wants.. this is all a part of life, and living and being alive ... This is natural and appropriate and acceptable, but yet it goes to show not only the fragility and impermanence of life but also its arbitrariness in that no one person is ever irreplaceable.. not to society, not to our communities, and not even to the one we hold closest and most dear to our hearts. In every sense of the analysis we are just mere numbers, statistics, labels, placeholders, instantiations and convenient physical approximations and representations of other people's projections and ideals - and vice versa. It is difficult enough to make sense of beauty, love, sex, romance, life, etc even when one reduces the problem down to a mere 'biological' level - it becomes altogether impossible to deal with when one tacks on superfluous fluffy layers of rhetorical extensions such as the whole biblical "virginity", "no divorce", "til death do us part", and "afterlife" concepts.. So what happens when a spouse dies and the other one remarries and has more children, how does one sort out the family relationships in 'heaven' or who is who's wife/husband - or is it too 'resolved' by a magical wand waving by the invisible hand of God as well?
So you see, it really isn't ever about any one particular person (or as special or as distinct as romantic partners or star crossed lovers would be predisposed to hastily make such lofty and flowery proclamations..) but it is about our own needs, wants, and desires being met, and so we simply attempt to foray out there to find someone that can be that particular expression for us and it is a relationship of mutual symbiosis and limbic resonance, physiological regulation, etc... We want to fall in love with the process (or ideal) of falling in love much more so than actually being with any one person.. they are simply a projection and representation of all that we want and hope for.. and yet we need someone to fit that role, and when we grow emotionally attached and codependent on them we think to ourselves that this person is the most special person in the world.. so here too there is a paradox between subjective and objective reality, in essence when we are in love (or infatuation) we often can't see things quite clearly. And yet seeing 'clearly' is often boring.. we live and die for an emotion, for the way things, people, and relationships make us feel about ourselves, others and the world. The only thing is that feeling doesn't last forever. Human nature is fickle.
But does getting who we really want (or who is really good for us) make us perpetually satisfied and happy? We are flawed and yet we try to be perfect!? The divorce rate is 50%+ and yet everyone goes into a marriage thinking it will last, thinking it is exactly what they want.. probably very few newlywed couples stop to think that there is a 50% chance THEY will be another statistic - I guess this shows how naive most people really are.. After a lifetime of being together and seeing one another each and everyday, doesn't the sweetest intimacy lose its fragrance? it's almost inevitable that even 'soulmates' eventually need their own space to pursue their own hobbies, interests, etc..? It seems like people often set themselves up for failure and disappointment, and yet what better alternatives or options are there? We can't have the sweet without the bitter, the good without the bad!
The irony is if life is not really about adhering to any steadfast rule (whether biblical, societal, moral, or even self-imposed) or structure and instead should be about just doing whatever it is that makes us the most happiest at that particular point in time.. this would be all fine and dandy if it wasn't the for reality of the fact that at one or more of these all inclusive 'points in time' we just so happen to also want to give ourselves completely to one person, one relationship, one emotional state of being.. and yet it doesn't last forever because at other juxtaposed and different discrete "points in time" we often want something very different or something else totally altogether.. and when we try to unify these as one concept they contradict and our coveted worldviews fracture and break apart.. We cannot simply enumerate, rank, prioritize, hierarchize or standardize/normalize all the distinct qualitative feelings in life.. Yet society, culture, and many institutions and religions keep telling us that we SHOULD be able to.
It seems like there is no real way to re-normalize, unify, reconcile or come to terms with all the different, distinct and divergent (often conflicting and contradictory) experiences, emotions, sensations, qualia, wants, needs, desires, etc in life.. And yet here we are.. existing in a largely arbitrary, relativistic, and senseless world where not only are we perpetually flawed but to add to that flaw we (perhaps incorrectly) believe we can become more perfect.. and so perhaps the only thing that is real and unchanging is this paradox of life that we find in ourselves and in all of the totality of existence. In a universe that is seemingly governed by logic perhaps it is actually 'contradiction' (the impossible, magic, miracle, abracadabra, the unknown, etc) that gives rise to 'existence' at all!?
Post Reply
|
