Flaws

Would growth, progress, and evolution of any kind be possible without flaws and weaknesses?

I have spent half a lifetime reading the biographies of various people who have interested me, all of whom were adjudged at one time or another to be Geniuses and Monsters and Saints and Maniacs and several shades of red and green in between. I have studied the habits of creative genius, as well as the forms of self-destruction and madness that frequently, but not always, accompany those who possess it. I can see from my comfortable 'book in hand - tilted back in a chair' perspective where and how such individuals went wrong, and the many means they devised to undermine their own efforts. What would a biography be without such instructional flaws? Would the history-making brilliant / delusional / prolific Artist - Tyrant have achieved what they did without such flaws to fuel their efforts? Could they have been somehow 'greater' if their flaws had been tamed, or absent altogether? It is a constant that the most interesting humans in history - to me – often appear as living contradictions and paradoxes.

This is a serious question that occupies my mind: If I could actually eliminate my own flaws and weaknesses, what would remain over? Would I be my ideal - exactly who I want to be – but with the parts I do not like simply abolished? Or is it more complex than that? If by abolishing my troubling aspects, would I also thereby abolish - Me? Would I abolish who I actually am in all respects, the 'good' included? To what extent are the qualities I value dependant upon those I do not? Is everything a necessity to the whole? To what extent is the Foul necessary for the development of the Fair; the Dark for Light; Failure for Success; Illness for Health? What is left of Strength without Weakness?

As Nietzsche made clear in his writings, nothing tempted him towards the abyss of pity more than witnessing the degeneration and ruination of the "higher man"; witnessing the fact that the higher man degenerates again and again. For a philosopher who made it an extreme point of honor to glorify life in all of its aspects, especially the strange, questionable, and terrible, this is an important point. Watching tremendous specimens of creative genius go astray and ruin themselves threatened his ability to say Yes to Life, and lured him towards Nihilism (life sucks, nothing is worth anything!) Nietzsche's own life story, marked by loneliness and illness ending in a decade long plunge into insanity before death, could well tempt the student and scholar towards the same abyss of pity, but the old Valkyrie would not have wanted that, nor deserved it.

Ultimately, biography is a study of oneself, a study in parallels, and a highly useful backdrop with which to measure one's own trials against, with the Long View in mind.

Is it possible to recognize our own mistakes as they happen, or even before, with the same clarity as a biography reader tilted back in a chair on a summit perspective of a hundred years from now? Suppose I had a time machine and traveled to the distant future and read a hypothetical bio of myself (assuming I did something to inspire it) and could sit in that elevated chair and say "yes, you fucked up with that! Of course such and such a project failed, what were you thinking?" Then I would travel back to the present and, possibly, correct the mistakes....and probably commit new ones!

Now, eliminate the time machine from the equation. Aye, fool that I be, it is not necessary to eliminate it because it was never there to begin with. Could all this biography reading give me a sharper Eagle Eye for myself? For the traps and pitfalls that I set for myself? As I perform the major work of my biography now (living it as it were) I can perhaps eliminate certain sections before they happen. Or can I? Can my cultivated perspective of so many other lives clarify my perspective for my own? For it to work, I must learn to train that critical eye for the flaws of others upon myself. Only then can I begin to overcome the fortress that I expertly raise against Self-knowledge, which nature has designed me to be more fortified against than any other.

Is this a difference between a Prince and a King, that one has arrived (static) and the other is always on the way (dynamic); that one is a god, and not "God".

Are the concepts of 'flaw' and 'perfection' merely categories of sentience and perception? Do they exist only in a creative and perceiving mind, and nowhere else? I will say Yes. Are there objective correlates outside of my perception? I will say Yes to this also, for the Gift of Set gives me the ability to see not only what is within me, but Beyond me.

Would human beings know a 'perfect world' if it bit them in the ass? Would it even be natural? No, it would not. We would probably have to fuck it up just so we could get on with the task of what we know -dealing with challenges, self-placed obstacles, and having something to work and strive and fight for. Without chaos in the Objective Universe, I would have nothing to measure my own inner chaos, growth, and order against. Great is the might of Set; greater still He thru us.

Would growth and progress be possible without flaws to overcome? Would they be conceivable? As it goes - we will never know - And that is good!

That we must struggle eternally is a Great Blessing for our Species.
That we create formidable mountains to climb is our Great Gift.
That we may Destroy and Create Ourselves is our great privilege.

Here's to our flaws - that they may be the beginning, and not the end!

-Werbinox

Saying "No" to the Global Boot Party

How, and by what standard a human being is to conduct themselves thru life is a never ending subject amongst our species, animated and labored as we are by the alternate blessing & curse of our intelligence. If the answer we happen to give to such a question is not satisfactory to everyone, it should be recognized that, owing to the different types of human beings that exist, it cannot and should not be an answer for everyone. People are not the same, so what nourishes us psychologically and spiritually cannot be the same. At the very least, our answer will be a profound confession of our own nature.

My own answer to how one should conduct oneself in a world where all values and institutions are seemingly decaying and self-destructing is the same answer I give to how one should conduct oneself in a world where all values and institutions are prospering and thriving: live according to your own self-direction and value, if you are able!

People often speak of values as if they are a given thing that one is taught by others who at some mystical point in the past received them from a deity, or possibly as something one can discover within themselves if they are properly trained, or give their hearts to the “Lord”. In either case, values are presented to us as completed formulations that can either be had or not had. Such a view ignores the fact that values evolve from a dynamic process, and can continue to evolve if the individual is willing to engage in the work of self-discovery, and to continue learning about the nature and requirements of certain paths thru the objective world.

The divide over values in our country expresses itself in our political division, which has exhaustively been cast as conservative vs. liberal, individual vs. collective, selfish vs. selfless. To give a very old yet recently emergent spin on this divide, we need look no further than the growing "alternative spirituality" scene, which casts the value divide as the Right Hand Path vs. the Left Hand Path

Nietzsche asked the question – “Can you give yourself your own good and your own evil, and hang your will over yourself as your highest law?” Those who can honestly answer “Yes” to such a question are (whether they know it or not) adherents of what is often called the Left Hand Path. The Right Hand Path, on the contrary, involves the following of definitions of good and evil as given by one’s society, and hanging an externally determined group-will over oneself as one’s highest law. It should be obvious that the majority of the world’s religions and moral codes are modes of the Right Hand Path.

It is easy to see how the Left Hand Path is not for everyone. It is not supposed to be. It is a discernable fact that many follow, and few lead. This realization achieves even more clarity when one contemplates how many are able to lead and follow themselves, as opposed to following others. Our present culture, despite its verbiage to the contrary, does not promote self-leadership, for it is counter to its interests and instincts. Our age is one of decay and destruction, which requires ‘following’ to be a virtue of the highest order. No one likes to admit this to themselves, however, and everyone fancies his or her self an “individual” and thinks they are “being different” when they join a crowd of like-minded people. The formless pariahs, who lack all self-direction and who cannot even live up to the physical health of the ‘animal ideal’ they fancy themselves embodying, want to rule the world, and seek cultural and global domination accordingly, not from any superior vision or ability, but simply because they have an ego large enough for it, and come from a society that tells them it is their right to do so. Even the stupid have a will to power, and all too often they have the strongest form of it. Having said all that, the best thing about our time is that it is also an age of transition; an Age of Metamorphosis.

I hear many voices opposed to what I am saying. “Does not the doom of our age lie in the fact that all too many say ‘do what thou wilt’, and accordingly go it alone, oblivious to community and the better good, sticking it to everyone for their own selfish gratification?” I have had this question asked of me more than once, by more than a few people. The answer is “no, the doom of our age does not come from those who lead and determine themselves, but from those who are unable to do so”.

Only the irrational equate selfishness with the need to walk over corpses to achieve one’s goals. The rational know how unnecessary, destructive, and counter-productive such actions are. One cannot be Pro-Self while invoking vengeful and destructive forces against oneself at the same time. The self-destruction involved in pursuing even the semblance of short-term gains at the expense of long-term survival is the very definition of “selflessness”.

The premise of the view that equates selfishness with irrationality comes from a total misunderstanding of what is actually involved in the rigorous process of determining one’s own values. The individual who follows the Left Hand Path must connect with the higher reason that is accessible to everyone with an average level of human intelligence, and even for those with less, for it is just as much a function of “character” as it is of intelligence. In this context, “higher reason” is that state of mind where reason and instinct, stability and transformation, stasis and change, the actual and the potential of one's being, and self-preservation and progressive growth meet. The self-determined individual must not only discover the workings of the Objective universe and the laws by which it operates, but also discover their own inner Subjective universe and its creative requirements, the “higher laws” by which it evolves and transcends itself. Then, from the crucible of an ongoing, never-ending exploration of the inner and outer realms, one must forge a dynamic union of the Objective world and their own Subjective universe.

Even more, one must actively bring oneself more and more into being by a vigorous process of self-examination and selective emphasis that involves a sloughing off of that which has passed itself off as one’s own conscience and values for many years, yet has in fact been added on and inculcated by a lifetime of brain-washing by the herd of one’s own culture, as well as an alchemical “solve et coagula” – a shattering and recombination of one’s own psychic components – that brings one’s true Self forth in progressive stages of psychic evolution. Life and death are initiations that never end.

From such a dynamic union all true values are born. By “values” I do not mean the artificial proto-values that serve one provisionally and developmentally in the earliest stages of life (the values of one’s parents, clan, and society which are bred into one automatically, and serve as self-preservational tools for the tribe) but the profound operating code and hierarchical ordering that one must discover in oneself -“as oneself”- in order to be an authentically self-possessed, self-directed person. The true difference between the Right Hand and the Left Hand Path is the amount of work involved; whether or not you do your own work, or accept the earlier work that was done by long dead people you will never meet; work that may or may not be relevant to the requirements of your own soul.

The people of our time who ride roughshod over everyone else in order to achieve instant gratification at the expense of long-term growth and sanity are not the products of the rigorous process that produces one’s own personal ethics and values, but the exact opposite. They are followers of the ethic that our culture teaches them in its actions. It is well known, even by those who will not admit it, that our culture preaches one thing and does another.

As for America being a Christian nation, it is the biggest lie of all. The altruism of modern Christianity has been redirected by conservative political activists and fundamentalist culture-warriors into a self-sacrificial ideology that promotes global economic & military conquest, conformity, self-righteous judgmentalism, intolerance, and the blind pursuit of a narrowly conceptualized vision of what wealth and worldly success can be. Although Christ commanded his followers to "render unto Caesar", he did not advocate patriotism of any kind, and recognized no national boundaries. The acquisition of wealth runs counter to the ethic he promoted, as does the existence of a military. Violence for any reason was expressly condemned, even to the point of a refusal to defend oneself. In short, a "Christian Nation" would be everything the United States is not - non-national, non-militarist, and non-bigoted. In real world terms, the United States continues to stand and thrive precisely because it is not a Christian Nation. The ethic of altruism is promoted in our culture simply to brain-wash the populace into sacrificing themselves for the ill-conceived goals of those who fancy themselves our "leaders".

The multitudes that create our corporatist culture of dishonesty, duplicity, thievery, and short-term gain for long-term bankruptcy are precisely those who follow the lead that our society is giving them. Monkey see, monkey do.

Those who have the intelligence and the intestinal fortitude to construct their own values and self-direction out of the crucible of their own dynamic examination of themselves and the world around them are not the cause of the worlds’ present misfortune, but its hopeful future, if it is to have one at all. The men and women of reason know that it is not necessary to screw other people over to prosper, that it is in fact detrimental to one’s own long-term success and livelihood to defraud other people; that it is self-destructive to harm and destroy other people as a means to achieving one’s goals; that one reaps the harvest of doom and death when they sow it as a means to gratification.

In a culture of disintegration it is the Right Hand Path followers of an external standard of conduct that spread disintegration, not the “selfish” Left Hand Path followers of personal virtue, who will take no part in the orgiastic global Boot Party that the herd is conducting upon itself.

-Werbinox