You are here


Draephon and I are having a major conflict over my views on certain matters. They are matters both moral and philosophical, and really deal with my world view in general. What follows is probably not of general interest, and contains an exposition of my view of the world, and how it conflicts with Draephon's.

I think that it is necessary to state at the outset that I consider myself to have been "born wrong" by most of society's standards. I do not now have, and never have had, a "moral sense" or conscience as regards most of the world.

At 30 years old, I have spent nearly half of my life looking for a code by which to live, so that I can function in human society. I have studied religions, philosophies both eastern and western, and I have hoped to find some indication of what the best way to live a good life is. I have spent days and weeks reading bibles, sagas, vedas, Bhuddist texts, western mystery texts, the thought of Ghandi, Kant, Hume, Mill, Rawls, Nozick, Locke, Nietzsche and others. I have made every effort to allow myself to be persuaded by their arguments, and have at times adopted the pose of living and thinking in accordance with the principals put forth.

The outcome of all of this is that I believe that human society is a mechanical and inescapable process - not deterministic, but rather that it has become rigid, and patterned to the point of claustrophobia, and that the human social experiment is doomed to fail at the scale at which it attempts to operate in this aeon. Human society and culture is subject to a very definite cap on it's sustainability, well below the scope of millions and billions of people on which it attempts to operate, after which a few things occur: technology becomes sufficiently advanced to interfere with the natural order of the world on a very large scale; participation of the individual in society becomes mandatory, and thereby appeals to the social contract are invalidated, since individuals enter into the contract in a state of ignorance at best, and duress at worst; human society becomes inherently self-detructive, as proximity to other humans is no longer a matter of choice, but something that is forced on the majority of individuals as a matter of survival.

I have become increasingly convinced that I was born at least 1500 years too late- that I am an anachronism and a throwback in terms of human development, if only insofar as there is no real possibility of completely exiting 21st human society having once been born into it, short of suicide, (which in most cases I consider abhorrent).

By my nature, I am an introvert, an extremist, a hedonist and an activist - (not in the sense of the hippie activist, in in the sense of one who believes that talking accomplishes little of value, and that an individual is defined by what that individual does. )

But what my world view amounts to at this point can be summed up pretty simple statements:

Most people have no relationship to me, and are therefore not to be considered- they are non-entities, and unless they come in range of me and mine, can go fuck a duck till tuesday for all they matter.

People and things that do matter to me matter in a very consuming way. They become anchors on which I depends to keep from capsizing.

Anything or anyone that harms anyone or anything of mine is an enemy. For small harms, they will be shunned. After that, retribution is an accelerative process, and it is not a proportional or balanced acceleration in most people's view, by supposition, and in Draephon's view, by statement and display. I will subscribe very quickly to black-earth tactics, and have little or no compunction against using violence on those whom I do not consider pack.

Finally, I do not tolerate attempts to thwart my will, or the will of my pack. Attempts to interfere with that collective Will will likewise make an enemy of the interfering entity, and their ability to interfere will be removed by whatever means are most effective and from which the greatest long-term benefit can be derived for me and mine. Depending on the direction of my will, and the nature of the interference, violence is again not out of the question, and may be considered optimal.

I tried for many years as a child, to resolve wrongs against me and mine through the "appropriate" social mechanisms. What I learned is that it rarely makes any difference: social authority exists to protect itself, and the authority that it appeals to in perverse, self-justifying recursion that doesn't end until an appeal to divinity is made. In the end, authority protects itself, and does not subscribe to a notion of justice, but rather is driven by a primitive survival instinct.