Anthony
J Downey
San
Diego California
8/19/24
Meditations
of the Contemporary Misanthrope: A Take on 21st-Century Morality,
Philosophy, and Science
"Every religion is true one way or
another. It is true when understood metaphorically. But when it gets
stuck in its own metaphors, interpreting them as facts, then you are
in trouble." - Joseph
Campbell
The name of God though relevant
is merely a placeholder for a concept, which is beyond comprehension.
It is an attempt to grasp and conceptualize things, which are
immaterial. This is indicative of language in general. The words
themselves are tools to transmit ideas, which dwell within our mind.
Conflict arises when these words cannot fully communicate the idea we
are trying to represent. They are simply symbols, which agitate the
mind into manifesting images, and emotions, which innately reside
within us. This coincides with Carl Gustav Jung's archetypes as
symbols that transcend time and space. These archetypes are universal
patterns of human experience that manifest in various forms across
cultures and epochs, serving as a bridge between the conscious and
unconscious mind. They help us navigate complex concepts that are
difficult to articulate, yet they do so in a way that speaks directly
to our shared human experience. Jung, giving shape and form, coined
this with the term collective consciousness. This is connected to the
idea of the monad, which philosophers suggest as the totality of all
things. All these things are interwoven and connected to a source of
consciousness, which no being is separate from. With no beginning or
end, it is the foundation for all things. Some may use the analogy of
a web while others may refer to it as like an ocean. If we look at an
individual being, as a droplet that enters the ocean it is hard to
differentiate where one droplet begins and another ends, we come to
identify its fullness as the collective whole. Modern philosophers
and scientists also come to refer to this as the singularity. The
archetypes are symbols for concepts, which transcend time and space
revolving around the human condition. They are embodied in these
personas but they could easily be represented in various forms. In
ancient times, words were born out of direct experience and were
deeply connected to the realities they described. In contrast, modern
language often feels disconnected from the lived experience it seeks
to convey, relying on archetypes or symbolic representations to evoke
states of being that may be less tangible or more elusive. This
disconnection might be why many people feel that modern language
lacks the vitality or authenticity of more ancient expressions of
human experience. The words "love," "justice,"
"virtue," etc., may evoke certain ideas, but without the
lived experience behind them, they can feel hollow or incomplete. The
challenge lies in bridging that gap--finding ways to infuse these
words and symbols with the depth and richness of lived experience, so
they once again resonate with the fullness of their original meaning.
The modern man seems to find no use for myth and legend. It is often
seen as illogical, archaic, and a roadblock to the betterment of men.
Others may argue that these tales dwell within us. It shows us how we
all play a role in the narrative of life. It helps to inspire
something innately true about the self. Is it hard to conceive that
myths were used as instruments of understanding? They were developed
out of a type of necessity of trying to grasp the human psyche.
Therefore, we can point the finger at something ethereal and obscure.
To say "aha! There it is". It is essential to our understanding
of ourselves and our place in the world. By holding up a mirror to
society, myths allow us to confront the illusions and truths that
shape our lives, ultimately guiding us towards a deeper, more
meaningful existence. How can this be archaic?
|