14 Nov.
Where're the lines?
The lines by virtue of which we justify anything. Is there even a value in a perceived reason for our action?
Where does logic end and madness begin?
Where does cruelty begin and righteousness end?
Where do things move out of your hands, and where is inaction a crime?
It suddenly seems funny that while there are answers, there are never answers enough. It's bewildering that while it's still an open issue, some perceive their own will to be cast in iron, and enforce it onto others.
Funny, that while our actions thread precariously on the brink of insanity, some have confidence in them to perpetuate it beyond their personal capacity.
How? When the only actions that one may ever hope to justify lie in the ones that affect merely themselves.
I don't mean to advocate passivity, for the fear of being wrong doesn't exonerate people from the crime of inaction when inaction itself brings about negative effects.
But how can one live except to accept people who check them, to listen to people ideally regardless of presentation, but particularly when one carries the keys to self-reformation, for improvement?
Is it a dependence on that will as the foundation of their being?
Is it fear at the impact knowledge of wrongdoing, for it holds an undeniable strength in undermining the person they've built through the years- the thing that cannot escape judgement?
And when we speak of rights... Why do we think we have any at all?
We must have. But how do we determine the rights we have?
Furthermore, what happens when the rights of two parties are in conflict with each other?
To assert your own, is it just to ignore the other's?
To reach a compromise- is it to lose?
To meet two perspectives- where will we end up bulldozing, blinded to what is discussed at hand to assert what we believe to be true?
"Knowledge is justified true belief."
What if both sides have them? In conflict with each other?
Their quarrel appear to be my own, yet I don't feel like interfering. I don't even feel certain of my biased input- not sure where it stands in the distinct but logical perspectives they hold.
Comical that we humans walk the earth when at least some of us haven't even figured these out. Not even formulated a consistent approach in which to apply to our lives. Don't they worry at all, that not tackling this by some stage of our lives leaves us with minimal advantage over animals? They don't have to justify their actions either. Their world is one whereby power triumphs. Yet their actions at least don't bring about the degree of destruction mankind wield, being social, interacting with fellows, influencing...
Doesn't it threaten the virtue of our actions? What's the point of a mind which fails to think, which fails to figure out the delicate balance between obligation to the individuals and obligations to others in society, then the collective whole?
Or perhaps it's only me. Perhaps others will not be stumped by the multitude of implications, and can coherently explain their lives, their decisions, their decision-making processes.
Perhaps there are others who can justify their deviations from a modus operandi, when, why, how.
Where does that leave me?
Where does that leave them, if their method turns out unjust, unethical, or self-centred?
Pursuit of happiness.
When will it cease to be a noble ideal and instead infringe on the very lines in humanity we are obligated as equals to not cross?
Pursuit of logic.
Where will it start becoming unfeeling, and where is it acceptable rationality?
Pursuit of knowledge.
But what does one do with the newfound grey area? For as long as thoughts continue to be voiced, as long as things are learnt, there will be things to dispute over.
Pursuit of humanity.
What shall we answer if others accuse us of a moral high ground and indicate that by our pursuit, we demonize things that are actually understandable, infringe the individual right to do what they want, claiming to know better?
Pursuit of acceptance.
When will it close our eyes to what is right in order to stay within the flock? When will it smother our voices simply because we avoid "bad form"?
Pursuit of anything- if not checked, isn't the extreme hedonism?
Yet amidst the black cloud of doubt I've just pushed into the forefront of my thoughts, I get the sense that things aren't that bad.
I have the feeling that the pursuit of answers would be instructive, even if humankind must definitely fail to arrive at consensus.
I have the feeling that given a better frame of mind, I would be able to reach into myself and half-formulate my standards, my ways, my methods.
But is it cheating myself into a sense of well being? For fault will only be amplified if the person committing it knows.
Knowing, yet doing... Versus knowing, yet not doing. Which would be worse?