Saturday, October 22, 2005

Wehn hlaf an ecnesse ptsos ...

... Envtheriyg gtes rlelay mesesd up! *Shakes himself* But be that as it may, I am still alive and kicking. I just had a rather strange thought, and most certainly not all-encompassing thought that I wanted to share with all of you.

What is pride? What is this grand illusion that the most powerful of the angels bought into because he did not serve God? How does one avoid its many coils, how does one avoid having it motivate his every action? Well, here is a thought on the subject. Perhaps pride is nothing more than the belief that one is omniscient. Consider the atheist, and consider the East. Each says, "I have wieghed the stars in a balance, and brought the sky to a scale." In that "scio" man sets himself far outside of creation and passes judgement on it as if it were his own. There is no sense of limit, there is no acknowledgement of weakness. It is pride that causes the general rejection of reality found in many eastern philosophies and in several of the more modern schools of thought. Through this sin materialists today can ignore all first premises, all that men throughout the ages have believed and say "there is no God and the material universe is uncreated; therefore, since material universe exists, there cannot be a God." If reality does something that seems to contradict the "known" theory then reality, not the theory is to be called into question. Facts are ignored in favor of fantasy. The materialist claims to completely understand the purpose of the universe. He says, "all things are purposeless. They are ordered out of chaos and they fall back into chaos, all for no reason and by no power." This universe, this colossal orb spanned from end to end with furious fires, each drawn to the others by invisible lines stronger than adamant is to him nothing more than a weary spark, a hollow noise caused by the random swerving of a single atom.
Pride can only be destroyed by humility, the habitual action of glimpsing where one actually stands in knowledge. This act of seeing, this "speculo" or "cogno", is the polar opposite of the "scio" of a materialist. The man who sees this way says "I have known the stars for a moment, the world for an instant, and I have glimpsed beyond the curtain something far greater than everything I can barely see." It does not reject reality as materialists do, because it accepts that it does not know perfectly, and therefore is not surprised when reality does something that does not conform to its understanding. It says, "I see the world, and the world is ordered, therefore there must be an orderer." And, as events have shown, the orderer is willing to show man even more than he could know on his own. The man who acknowledges his limits, who knows that there is more than he could ever know that he does not know, knows more than those who think they do know, and more than he thought he could know. (Socrates is the perfect example of this.) To the man who knows that what he knows is as nothing, every scrap of information he acquires makes sense to some degree, because it is a part of the big picture that cannot be completely comprehended. (See St. Thomas Aquinas)

All right, enough rambling for now. Just wanted to get that off my chest, and down somewhere where I could look at it again once I got back to school. I'll probably remove it then, so if anyone wants to comment, do it before it vanishes (or let me know when you see me, or don't say anything at all. *wink*)

Oh, by the way, I just saw Batman Begins, in fact, it sparked off this interesting post with some of its characters and situations. [No this post didn't come out of the blue, but it did come out of the dark.] I have to say, I rather liked it. If you like Batman, it's worth renting. It was a decent movie overall, not spectacular in many departments, but adequate in almost all. (Not like Serenity. Oh well ... movie ticket; eight bucks. Ability to say "I am a leaf in the wind" and laugh with your friends over it; priceless.)

See you all in a day or two.

3 comments:

  1. Oh man, I cracked up when I saw the title.
    25 points to you for not only blogging, but for blogging in a profound maner. :)
    Although I'd have to take 28 points from you if you remove it.
    What the heck? When did we develope a point system. Ren is right, what are they giving me? :P
    Good to know you're still alive. (From two days ago.)

    ReplyDelete
  2. frqtxyOk. I thought that the post was gonna be an interesting discussion I would pay attention to. I will have to read this again when I'm not listening to TV. Or I can squeeze it out of the Captain when I'm back at school.

    ReplyDelete
  3. +JMJ+
    Well, well, well, so very glad to see our philosophical, Dr. Cuddeback-ish Captain is back! (Never change that personality!) I am curious as to what particular part in Batman Returns sparked such deep thought--whatever the case, I thought it was a good "ramble," however, to quote our wonderful Bracy Bersnak: it was merely a "digression" (that one's for you WP!) I would have to say it's neither--I would consider it the contemplative thoughts of THE CAPTAIN! ;-) And there is NOTHING ramble-ish about that . . . that's one of many many many reasons of why we all love ya' ta' death! Can't wait to see you!

    ReplyDelete