A recurrent source of disagreement I have with nearly everybody, and going back to about 2008; is that I am acutely aware that our civilization is in a really, really bad way - much, much worse than almost almost-anybody is prepared even to entertain as a possibility.
This seems to me very obvious! And also that the problems are as deep as such problems can be - problems of false fundamental assumptions concerning reality, and problems that the strongest human motivations in this life are disordered...
The problem of habitual and compulsive dishonesty (including, most damagingly, with oneself), and the problem of being unable or unwilling to learn from repeated experiences.
...To mention only some of the fundamental problems.
I suppose one reason that this conviction of mine is hardly shared, is that people evaluate civilization first in terms of how they personally are feeling, here-and-now - and if they are feeling OK or happy, they infer that nothing can be seriously wrong.
Or that people evaluate civilization in terms of sheer abstract survival and continuity. SO that as long as things haven't actually collapsed, or can - at least - be imaged as rebounding or self-correcting (even over multigenerational timescales) then nothing can be seriously wrong.
And under this is the truth that matters of civilization aren't our concern, really. Civilizations are not as product of human will and planning - and neither is their continuation. They are a kind of unavoidable backdrop and essential sustenance - and (evidently) a colossal influence in spiritual aspirations, beliefs, perceptions - and yet these matters cannot be positively influenced in an overall or top-down fashion (although they can be negatively affected).
In the end, spiritually speaking; we are individual persons and agents - no matter how much we try to elude this; and our primary social concern is with loving relationships - which are the only like that "society" has to the great dramas of spiritual learning and salvation.
Therefore I am not-at-all saying that we ought to recognize how very bad things actually are because this might help us to make them better!
What I am saying here; is that - unless we recognize how bad things actually are - then we Will Not Actually pursue the real business of our lives - i.e. the great dramas of spiritual learning and salvation.
While some may argue that we don't need to acknowledge the evil nature of the Big Picture in order our-selves to be good; this seems decisively to be refuted by experience. Unless people feel themselves spiritually detached from our civilization in a profound metaphysical and motivational way; then for so long they will be aligned with the agenda of evil - and at a deep level of affiliation that subverts surface declarations and practices.
In other words: observation of what happens when not; brings me to the conviction that we need (yes need) to sense, know, acknowledge, take-account of; just how very bad things really are civilizationally - if we our-selves are to be able to become clear about this mortal life - and make Christian personal discernments and choices.
To be free to choose to follow Jesus, and to learn from our actual lives; entails that we know the nature of our spiritual situation in this world.
Anything less just doesn't cut it.
***
NOTE ADDED: I would like to emphasize that the fullest recognition of how very bad things are; is, or can be, in its effect a great and immediate liberation.
By it we are freed from futile engagement with that utterly vast, and impossibly complicated, web of distortions and manipulations that is the realm of public discourse.
Positively: we become true agents; with both authority and need to stand on our own evaluations.
And thereby we become primarily responsible for understanding our place in this world, and deciding our desired destination beyond it.
9 comments:
It seems to me that things are now so bad that even attempts to counter the rot are part of it. They react against one part of the decay while supporting other parts. It's come to the point that anything that is allowed any publicity at all is only allowed it in order to deflect attention away from the real problem. Any person who gains a place in the public forum either is compromised from the beginning or soon becomes so. If in any rare case they start to realise the true state of affairs then they are removed in one way or another.
@William - " attempts to counter the rot are part of it. They react against one part of the decay while supporting other parts. ".
That's very well put! And the big problem with ameliorative attempts - they need to reinforce one aspect of the system, in order to palliate another aspect.
"they need to reinforce one aspect of the system, in order to palliate another aspect." Also very well put!
And this necessary recognition is utterly unpleasant and despairing, unless the person has firm foundations based on love to stand on, that is marriage, religion, family - and these must be in good condition to be of any help.
@VF - It is almost inevitable that full recognition seems despair-inducing unless someone is confident that he will get that which he wants - and which provides hope - beyond death.
As for the good things of this life being in good condition - that cannot be relied upon by anyone as a pre-requisite to recognition of the badness.
On the other hand, unless there is a faith in and wish for the matters of personal loving relationships - in an eternal and transcendent way -- I don't suppose someone would want the Heaven offered us by Jesus.
I was interested in philosoohy and introduced to the works of Oswald Spengler during high school. I absorbed Spengler from a Nietzschean atheistic perspective and thought that it was obvious that we are experiencing the downfall of the West. This was liberating for a teenager as I felt liberated from the mundane aspirations of the society. But it was also despair-inducing as there was no positive outcome to look forward to. Spengler's vision of the future might have been a blooming of Russian culture but I had a look and Russian culture seemed very crude and materialistic in the 1990's.
Eventually, during studies, I dishonestly tried to act as if I was interested and engaged with the system. After some kind of mental breakdown and in connection to the financial crisis in 2007-2008, when I realized that the system is not so stable as it seemed, I reverted back to the realization of the collapse of civilization, but this time from a Christian perspective. This background has influenced all my decisions in life.
Now I'm married and have a family but the situation is what it is and everyone has issues and problems in their life regardless of the status of civilization. I would attest that the full recognition of the situation is liberating even if it is unpleasant and induces despair. During the years, I have had some discussions on the state of the system with friends and family, but no one has been close to willing to entertain this kind of mental liberation. People may be very attached to their particular achievements or favourite ideas and the perspective of civilizational collapse would diminish the importance of these.
@MF - I'd like to make clear that pessimism about the future is not the same as *despair* - https://charltonteaching.blogspot.com/2021/01/on-limitations-of-palantir-tolkien-on.html . Of course, like many sins, despair is sometimes unavoidable - yet we ought to repent it, and recognize it as irrational and unfaithful.
Thank you for the correction, pessimism and despair are indeed not the same. Mostly, I think it's a great time to be alive. In a society that would induce optimism, I might have wasted my efforts in an attempt to develop the system and the later realization of the futility might have led to bitterness and spite. Now, I'm mostly pessimistic yet hopeful about things in general.
Thank you for this, yes, very consoling
Post a Comment