tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12162432.post2117243300912873634..comments2009-05-24T20:38:18.701-05:00A.G. Lewishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01192576903850040854noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12162432.post-33391616648506851032009-05-24T20:38:18.701-05:002009-05-24T20:38:18.701-05:00By the way.. who wrote the diatribe.. do you know?? DALAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12162432.post-86066507352313503242009-05-24T20:34:31.499-05:002009-05-24T20:34:31.499-05:00WHY did you stop writing??Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12162432.post-64079525153130542422009-05-15T09:29:00.000-05:002009-05-15T09:29:00.000-05:00I actually had a dream that you wrote a new entry. Not kidding,Alyssahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00327925910042190698noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12162432.post-12271516396211582852008-11-05T21:55:00.000-05:002008-11-05T21:55:00.000-05:00lol just one month to go until the last post's anniversary. Wow almost a whole year since you've written anything. Do you want to start a blog together when we get married?Alyssahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00327925910042190698noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12162432.post-80978221142159797062008-10-28T10:34:00.000-05:002008-10-28T10:34:00.000-05:00i haven't been here in quite a while Adamin but as usual your stuff makes me think. I like thatAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12162432.post-4978138336786895032008-10-03T01:23:00.000-05:002008-10-03T01:23:00.000-05:00Wow. It's been almost a whole year since you posted this.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12162432.post-4574696753232412712008-03-15T13:06:00.000-05:002008-03-15T13:06:00.000-05:00Processing the word “God” synonymously with “truth” creates much the same effect; God being truth in, how you put it, “real, genuine, [and] not fake or fabricated” follows in a vein running parallel to the one you have proposed. It is a far more ambiguous vein, undoubtedly, yet it is essentially a different mean to the same end – a concept I find to be of the utmost importance when taking into consideration all accounts of humankind’s perception. <BR/><BR/>The origin(s) of the universe will not be known until entrance into the afterlife, and that goes for all convictions: Be it heaven, hell, purgatory, reincarnation, nothingness, or what have you, earthly faith and beliefs serve to complete the earthly soul by dint of faith, and nothing more; yes, in many religions faith on earth is a segue to eternal life, yet that eternal life is impossible to realize while one is in the state of the living. Hence is the division between the temporal and the perpetual: Existence in and of itself is far beyond human comprehension, and regardless of religious or otherwise personal convictions the totality of comprehension is impossible to realize during life on earth. This logic, or perception if you will, segues into an extended idea.<BR/><BR/>Perception certainly is not reality, although admittedly I wrote that with a nagging sense of a diametrical possibility; regarding life after death, I have no personal convictions as of late that are absolute, and in light of that ambivalence lies the ‘nagging sense’ and thus the continuation of the foregoing paragraph: For each individual, there is an individual truth, or God if you will; in all facets of religion this personal application is evident, and of course no more than it is today where the amalgamation of religious faiths – and lacks thereof -- has coalesced into a melting pot of all flavors of perspective; and on earth, perception is the reality of the situation that is truth, which is consequently relative.<BR/><BR/>But how can truth be pliant when, by all accounts of human comprehension, it is absolute? All that can be said in response to that is, “What better way to demonstrate that than by human comprehension itself?” And so Merriam-Webster defines ‘pliant’ as “suitable for varied uses,” substantiating the previous statement into the concept that truth is suitable for varied uses; and in truth being so, it follows that perception is reality and subsequently that ambiguity is reality: Ambiguity plagues the entirety of mankind, and the only ones who are truly saved are those who take it upon themselves to see disambiguation to fruition during any moment occurring before the instance of death.<BR/><BR/>Religious faith is a conviction that leads to such disambiguation, and that reaffirmation in personal truth -- or personal God, or personal perception – is what appropriately completes the course of human life in the only satisfying manner. Taking all of humanity into account alongside the universe and the universal destination, all that is completely within the realm of human comprehension is this earth; all else resides on a supernal plane dependent on faith; dependent on faith not for its existence, but its ability to complete the human life, which segues into another branch of thought.<BR/><BR/>One religion is not the answer for every person just as one perspective is not the answer for every person, and for each individual different standards will have to be met or otherwise come to terms with in order for him to fulfill his life and die to meet up with all answers unknown on earth in tranquility. It does make sense that there is one universal truth, that there is a solitary answer to the meaning of existence as it is for every living thing; however, that percept is of human derivation, and I for one cannot be secure in that conviction, and therein lies the point to this nonsensical rambling of mine: The completion of my life will not be achieved in the same manner as the completion of your life, although hopefully both of us will experience the same sentiment before death, which would be the sentiment of unfettered tranquility, complete peace with personal perspective and the surrounding world in its entirety.<BR/><BR/>Again, it is in this light that all religions are true. I have often heard the line, “How many gods do you think there can be?” and my response is “a minimum of 6.5 billion.” Regardless of the possibility of there being a universal truth, i.e. an overseeing God that is of one nature and one entity, unchanged since the formation of time itself, there is without a doubt a universal dream that resides within every human being, and that concept is the one with which I am more concerned. Death is inevitable: It is “real, genuine, [and] not fake or fabricated.” I am sure that some may live solely for the afterlife, as their convictions are so strong as to guarantee to them the existence of such: The Puritan faith as demonstrated in the writings of William Bradford and Ann Bradstreet were extremely uplifting, and showed two human beings that were of the highest comfort and assurance in their convictions, leading them fearlessly beyond the door of death, for example; yet, I am equally sure that some may live without a definite idea or even regard for the afterlife, choosing to focus their efforts on worldliness (a word that comes closest to what I intend to convey, yet is largely ineffective in terms of connotation); by ‘worldliness’ I do not mean engagement in material affairs, yet engagement in the betterment of humanity so that as much of it as possible may be saved by its own self-understanding.<BR/><BR/>In essence, we all have this urge to better humanity so that it may be saved; surely there are many who see the majority of humanity as damned and hopeless regarding salvation, yet discounting the race of which we are all a part of is a parochial approach; there are many who are corrupt and depraved, yet society and external influence must have most or all to do with this; genetic predisposition to personality or what have you is somewhat plausible, yet it is the environment and social surroundings that spur drastic changes and elicit the worst in people – again, this is all subjective, as to my knowledge there have not been any studies where a serial killer or other committer of heinous crimes had every second of his social experiences document or every thought that entered his head as a result analyzed – therefore, it is the inclination of those who see this corruption in the world to rectify it and prevent it for future generations. As the former is improbable, the idea of catching depravity early on and extirpating it seems far more achievable. As an additional note, every sentient being in existence has history of depravity, misguidedness, and wrongdoing in general; it is furthermore that guilt or awareness of corruption in one’s own self that spurs the desire to crush it or come to terms with it before we ‘find out what it’s all about.’ <BR/><BR/>In short, as a result of my apparently incorrigible habit of meandering in the realm of wanderlust often to no avail, it is my hope that I conveyed the concept of insularity with some degree of clarity; perception pertains to the individual, and absolute truth is pliant in that regard; absolute truth is a personal conviction as it is intangible, although I have no reason to believe that personal conviction may not be true in the grandest of senses; in other words, regardless of the truth of the Bible or any other religious text or religious belief, the truth among humankind is the only that remains unchanged as far as human perception can fathom that concept; in this sense, perception is the truth of the living, and if the perception of a portrait of a woman leads one to believe that she is crying and results in reassurance of some notion that ultimately leads to a greater self-understanding and complete self-actualization, the author’s revelation of the contrary being true is of no practical relevance or importance, spiritual or otherwise. <BR/><BR/>As a final note, I would like to add that I hold a great respect for your conviction, as it is in no way insular, parochial, or any other term synonymous with narrow-mindedness. The level of thought and logic you have demonstrated in this entry alongside the evident level of comfort and reassurance speak highly of you and your character, as such are traits that are increasingly difficult to come by nowadays. Thank you for taking the time and effort to share your thoughts, as they have proven to be beneficial to others such as myself – hopefully it is beneficial to you as well, as I should think it a great tragedy for your notions and sentiments to go unreciprocated.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12162432.post-14011037050712522152008-03-05T12:08:00.000-05:002008-03-05T12:08:00.000-05:00So my perception that your blog has not been updated since December is NOT reality? That's a relief! :-)<BR/><BR/>Please come back! I love reading your blog!Miscellaneous From Missyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01436000954617741702noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12162432.post-49586447394902202142008-01-10T10:57:00.000-05:002008-01-10T10:57:00.000-05:00I read through this again and it really is a great entry. Very thought provoking. And it excites me to know that there IS an absolute truth, and that truth is not based on humanity's flawed perception of things. I hate that some people think that whatever they feel to be true, must be true. If that were the case, I'd never have to worry about another test.<BR/><BR/>But even with art, I can see how this applies. With drawing from life, for example, you are drawing what you see, but only to some degree. You still have to check yourself, measuring with a stick or something, on proportions and how things relate spacially. The most important part of drawing from life, though, is drawing what you know. This has happened with me many times in figure drawing. I might see one thing happening, but knowing what is actually supposed to be happening under the skin(muscles, bones, etc), it is easier to make a more acurate-looking figure.<BR/><BR/>Actually, if you think about the way children draw(besides the idea that their dexterity might not be quite developed), eyes look like eyes, but not a true eye. It might be a circle within a larger circle. Two of those next to each other within a larger oval shape and we understand what they mean. "This is a face." But it is not an acurate representation. With this in mind, actually, you can't really say that any "realistic" art is really real. It might look real, but it never will be. All my figure drawings? Just charcoal marks organized in such a way that the illusion is that there is a person sitting, but in reality, in truth, it is still just charcoal on paper. There is no person there.Alyssahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00327925910042190698noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12162432.post-86094814237590656012007-12-27T09:58:00.000-05:002007-12-27T09:58:00.000-05:00Word.Alyssahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00327925910042190698noreply@blogger.com