Satyrnalium

An old post of mine...

Much has been said about the aristocracy of strength and the ideal of obstinate will.
Even more has been said about the creative influences of aggression and the progressive drives of violence and destruction.
Setting aside our modern prejudices and our civilized sensibilities, for a moment, it would not be very hard to admit that, in general, it has been man’s basest nature and animal instincts – which have been labeled negative and deemed undesirable in more recent times – that are to be held responsible for man’s most exceptional discoveries and conquests.
Western Civilization, in particular, owes much of its success and popularity to a foundation of unrelenting struggle, a spirit of competitiveness and a tradition of ruthlessness, arrogance and brutality.
Instead of resisting self and denying natures dictums, in an effort to rise above them or become separate and indifferent to them, western man – except for those instances of external intervention by eastern philosophies and the effects of decadence – has been more inclined to accept reality as it is perceived and to embrace the totality of what it means to be a conscious, living being; science being just one more product of this western tradition.
So, it should not astound us to discover that it has been a predominately western intellectual practice to expand upon the efficiencies of natural selection, the virtues of the Will to Power, the natural tendencies of Capitalism, the majesty of, what the Hellenes termed, “friendly competition,” the merits of scientific methodology, the beneficial consequences of, what some have aptly called, the Lucifer Principle, and to excuse any destructive consequences or remain unapologetic about the ramifications and their collateral damages.
It’s a dog-eat-dog world out there, so it would seem prudent to aspire towards top dog status. Recognizing the rules, after all, is the first step towards empowerment, admitting them to one’s self is the second step and the next step, after that, is coming to terms with the implications.
It has been curious, therefore, for me to discover that a dominant common characteristic of a mind blessed or burdened with heightened awareness, which eventually leads to this sort of evaluation, is this, sometimes, contradictory exaggerated sensitivity – what I once referred to in an earlier essay as Hypersensitivity – and this inclination towards compassion, reverence and sympathy, in contradiction to, the before mentioned, evaluations.
The brightest and most interesting minds I’ve met, almost always, exhibited a profound over-sensitivity and a genuine, natural empathy towards all suffering and misery.
It’s as if, this struggle for power and control, gained through knowledge, is improved or even provoked by a deeper understanding of misery and helplessness.
Who better, then, can possess this connection to despair than one that has experienced it in one’s own life directly or that can, through imagination and empathy, connect to the wretchedness and powerlessness of another and experience it indirectly?
Here is why much of what is called wisdom, is in reference to a mind that understands what torment and weakness is and that has found methods and systems of dealing with it.
In my own compulsion to understand self and to analyze and control my environment and the sources of human rationality, I have acquired, as a side-effect, a deeper comprehension of human nature.
I hope.
I have been guided to the revelation that the root cause of all awareness and understanding is the ability to use imagination, with some degree of accuracy, which enables the mind to experience multiple perspectives without having to empirically experience them for itself.
It is evident that, there are two methods of acquiring information:
--The first is by personal experience, which places self in dangerous and precarious situations and is, by far, superior to any other, even if time consuming and inefficient.
--The second is using observation, analysis and deduction of second-hand experiences, which unburdens the individual from many of the costs but can only provide a hypothetical and uncertain judgment, resting on a foundation of faith.
But this second method, when used consistently, has a curious by-product, when coupled with a powerful imagination and an empathic disposition. It results in abstract reasoning.
This abstraction of reality, or the ability to construct precise mental models of external phenomena, so as to analyze them spherically and completely from a distance, enables the mind to avoid the personal consequences of direct experience and it surpasses sensual, physical limitations, maximizing efficiency and effectiveness at the expense of accuracy and certainty.
It also intensifies the minds capacity to become self-reliant, in the acquisition of reality and more independent in its production of belief.
This gift is often called critical thought and is dependent on sensual sensitivity and mental flexibility.
If it is sufficiently exercised and honed, this practice of extrapolation can even become more precise than the direct evaluations of a lesser mind’s experiential based deductions.
Here we must recognize that no judgment can be thoroughly accurate and that all evaluations must, as Kant put it, find correspondence and a connection to external empirical phenomena, as interpreted by the mind through sensual representation.
No abstract model can stand separate from sensual reality, for even the concept of self is the separation of sensual representations, what it called external, from intuitive mental processes and a priori concepts, what is called internal, realities.
The differentiating properties of critical reasoning can be readily perceived in how a mind remains skeptical and uncertain about its constructs, even in the face of supporting evidence, whereas another remains convinced and absolute about things it only superficially perceives, despite the absence of any evidence at all.

My view is that what is most responsible for rampant brutality and cruelty or even for the opposing phenomena of rampant gentleness and kindness, is this mis-evaluation of what lies at the heart of all men, by individuals lacking the capability to empathize – a mind that is unable to place one’s self in another’s shoes and from there deduce and induce motivations and perspectives, is incapable of grasping reality in any way approximating completeness – or the ability to doubt and question itself to any degree, leading to an absolute certainty about one’s own perspectives.
The determining factor for heightened perception is the effect of superior sensual receptivity and empathic interconnectivity which begins, in its early stages, with a veracious curiosity and an appreciation for minute detail.
Those able to consciously perceive detail and include it in the construction of opinion possess an advantage over those that can only perceive detail unconsciously, giving rise to intuitions, feelings or premonitions, or that cannot perceive detail to a comparable degree.
This because, one that is conscious of the totality of what participates in his or her judgments, has a better comprehension of the object or the concept being evaluated and judged, as opposed to someone sensing things without being able to explain how or why.
I can only explain this appreciation for detail as a result of genetic predispositions which is nurtured through an environment of necessity.
We can assume that a creature of the wild is more attuned to sensual details because its life depends on it whereas an animal brought up in captivity and relative safety is less sensitive, by comparison.
This hypersensitivity often expresses itself, early on, in a profound gentleness towards all living things and a desire to defend and to protect the most vulnerable and misunderstood, since the first realization of a rational mind is its own limitations, vulnerability and its shared destiny with every other living organism.
One becomes amicable to that which reminds it of its own hidden insecurities.
From this starting position of heightened receptivity and interconnectivity comes the recognition of personal imperfections and the psychological fatigue derived from the struggle to come to terms with one’s own powers and the confines of one’s control.
The world is not only a dangerous and unpredictable place but it is also indifferent to personal desires and hopes. The consequent pain and suffering, this leads to, and the inability to remain blind to it concludes, in those blessed or damned with the gift, in self-destructiveness, insanity or in an eventual exaggerated hardening of the spirit necessitated by self-preservation.
I am convinced that many of the philosophical positions espousing and glorifying confrontation, struggle, viciousness and the acceptance of natural inclinations, are grounded in a deep frustration with mankind’s impotence and a reaction against the weight of exaggerated sensitivity.
History’s greatest misanthropes have been sensitive souls that became disillusioned with mankind’s potential to become more than what it is and eventually came to realize that all creation is the result of the very things they abhorred.
I would also claim that history’s greatest villains were the product of hatred towards the perception of weakness and helplessness in the self, projected outward to those representing extreme cases of it.
For, what can be more disconcerting to awareness than the understanding that most altruistic, loving and compassionate ideologies are embedded in hypocrisy, selfishness and intolerance, and that there is nothing to be done about it, and what can be more distressing, to it, than the realization that pain and suffering are inseparable particles of what it means to be alive and, from which, only death can save us?
One is torn, at once, by a sense of gratitude and ingratitude with existence. To what direction one leans, on the scales of thankfulness and cynicism, is determined by factors out of our control.
Quite frustrating then, that it has always been those that have most vehemently proclaimed their own righteousness, benevolence and compassion, who have been the guiltiest of the opposite and ignorant about it, as well.
There are temples, churches and various places for worshiping “good”, “loving” gods, filled with the vilest and most unaware amongst us and the greatest tragedies that have befallen mankind have all begun with “good” intentions.
They, these simpleton absolutists, are the first and the loudest to declare their own “goodness,” humility and compassion in an effort, I suppose, to believe in it themselves or perhaps to disguise their innate vileness and primitiveness.
I would say that, in contradiction to common belief, the most genuine emotions of love and of compassion, can be found in those most fervidly denying the truthfulness and purity of these emotions, as a reaction against the vulnerability this exposes them to and partly owing to the slandering of these passions by individuals incapable of appreciating them honestly, purely and to their fullest.
It has also been those that proclaimed the gloriousness of war and the honor of battle, often displaying their willingness to prove their worth through artificial means of sporting events, digital simulations and extravagant verbalizations of machismo, which have been the guiltiest of ignorance concerning the realities of what they declared.
Only a fool would admit to an appetite for violence when all it is, is a projection of inner frustration, defensiveness and fear when facing a potential threat.
How appropriate, then, that those most often indulging in their primordial need for violence are the very ones that are the least aware of what this entails and the ones with the most to prove, through it.
The road a sensitive soul must take is fraught with danger, temptations and entrapments.
Yet, it is a necessary journey towards enlightenment.
Here are the stages of enlightenment, as I perceive them:

First Stage – An awakening to the world of sensual detail and empathic connectivity.
During this time the mind is struck by the callousness and brutality of the world around it and it seeks to sooth the troubled soul by offering guidance and help to those most in need of protection and nurturing.
Empathy for others is an indirect projection of love for self through others and the understanding that the fates of all are intertwined in an unforeseeable future.
All aware minds are differentiated from other, less aware, minds by the degree in which they are touched by pain and suffering in all things.
The inability to cause harm to animals, for instance, is a characteristic of heightened sensitivity to the world around it, by a mind seeking a way out of its own vulnerability.
This is the time when a mind is attracted to ideologies and utopian dogmas, promising much and delivering nothing.
Communism, Christianity, Equalitarianism, Liberalism, Nationalism become the life-preservers a mind grabs onto in despair.

Second Stage – An awakening to the limitations and powerlessness of the self against insurmountable odds and uncontrollable and imperceptible forces.
During this stage the limits of personal power are understood and the ensuing sense of helplessness and the consequent feelings of self-hatred, resulting in a desire to escape reality, either through death or through denial of need and self, come forth.
This is the period where the aware mind seeks peace and solitude and emotions are perceived as undesirable distractions that prevent reason from finding an earthly salvation.
Some find solace in nihilistic tendencies, of the Schopenhauer type, either through a Buddhist escape or a desire to cease to exist through suicide; some find solace in pre-existing ideologies and dogmas and embrace, what has been previously denied, in an effort to return to the first stage of naïve idealism and based on the hypothesis that all is probable if its impossibility cannot be proven absolutely; some turn inward in an effort to separate self from the world that is so vile and chaotic, often burying awareness by distracting it through fantasy or books or drugs or music or imagination separated from sensual perception; some literally seclude themselves – like Kaczynski attempted to do but failed in the end – cutting themselves off from the sources of their sensual distress. The sensual awareness of reality cannot be turned off, unless one uses artificial means, so one might attempt to limit the amount of information one is exposed to.

Third Stage – An awakening to the merits of callousness and indifference.
During this stage, and if the previous two are survived and surpassed, the mind rebels against its own empathy and connection to the universe.
The survival instinct kicks-in and self is placed on the pedestal of importance that was denied to it early on.
This is the time when the recognition of worthiness is emphasized and one’s own empathy, compassion and love is carefully offered only to those that warrant such sacrifices to psychological wellbeing and free-will.
This hardening of the skin should not be misinterpreted as an imitation of callousness and indifference of lesser minds that function instinctively and intuitively and with little understanding.
The differences being in that here, and after all the stages have been passed, the ability of compassion and empathy and love still exists but are now doled out sparingly and with stricter criteria than the old “Love thy neighbor” because they become precious commodities reserved for only the few.
Once the realization that the self is not like all the others and so redemption cannot be acquired in unison; that the mind cannot exist separated from its nature and the rules cannot be escaped by simply turning away from them; and that many living beings, particularly of the human kind, are really quit deserving of hatred and indifference, then the mind seeks out personal fulfillment and social interaction governed by reason rather than instinct.
No longer do the pains and sufferings of all find a sympathetic ear in one who has discovered the real quality of the average man and who has come to terms with man’s overall character and with nature’s methods.
Here I must mention, in conclusion, that we mustn’t misinterpret sensitivity, at least the sort I’m talking about here, as a kind of fragility or weakness, no more than we can call a man burdened with a two-hundred pound backpack feeble, when he buckles under the weight when his companion does not, under the weight of a one hundred pound backpack.
Exceptional receptivity can become a useful tool and an advantageous attribute, but it can also become detrimental to the individual possessing it, threatening not only sanity but life as well.
Whether the advantages outweigh the disadvantages, in this case, is a matter of perspective.