No Updates - Just An Apology

 Alright fine. Time for a new post after a prolonged period of no activity. Yes, I've been inactive for several months, many of which have been consequential thanks to the pandemic and what not. I mean if I'm being absolutely honest then perhaps my inactivity is thanks to a heavy number of brain fogs rather than an exterior element.

In the absence of thought, I've begun taking note of more schools of thought to pique my interest. When I typically attempt to write any posts, I begin by ascertaining that I know ample amount of information to make some sense out of it, even if it's the bare minimum. If I'm within the conviction that I lack enough credibility, substance, or information to reflect on it, I simply won't protrude much further with the writing and leave the topic in the learning phase instead of pushing for recollection or reflection. 

Perhaps I've made use of seminars to cover this hole but they were rarer than A5 Wagyu. On the other hand, short-form conversations make up for a nice reflection but the doses of delirium that perturb me during social interactions is much higher than my typical routine. Refugees of socialisation weigh heavily on me post-everything. 

Enough of the previous points, on to more unknown oceans: 

As you can tell, up until now I've brought forth barely any productive topics. In all the 6 years I've kept this blog active, all it has ever been filled with are my ridiculous imaginations, propaganda, conspiracy theories, false information, etc. It's a myriad of metaphysical constraints on my mind, for that I sincerely hope no one makes any huge gamble or wager. A fair bit of me is troubled by the amount of exposé ( not the right word for reference but just pretend it's a "report of false facts.") I've left quite a trail behind. 

If you're reading this first, I wish to let you know that you mustn't traverse any further than past year of my blog posts. Any further and you'll find yourself inside a cave that is baked in ignorance and propaganda, dogma even. The rabbit hole leads to an ex-pseudo-alt-right winger's den - blatantly something I'm highly ashamed of. Ideologically, I used to be more of a centrist than a right winger, however. 

I forfeit my standing as soon as I became aware of the ideologies' intentions. Now you might be wondering, " What do you mean by 'aware' ? Weren't you aware of the ideologies when you were subscribed to them ? " I wasn't and that was the core issue. Perhaps If I became aware of it earlier, I would have forfeited it right then and there; after all, my attachment to "Catholicism" has been in the grave since my early teens and any bit of xenophobia, or LGBTQIA+-phobia I had were extinguished by my mid-teens ( especially after becoming aware of my own gender and orientation - as ironic and hypocritical as that sounds). 

The only things that left me with subconscious prejudice were nothing more than alt-right-wing propaganda. 

I strongly condemn against all of the things I wrote on my post - including the pseudo-scientific stuff I wrote years ago. I was nothing more than a foolish teenager trying my best to find a similarity in identity and beliefs. 

I hope this ends the saga of my blog posts where I will no longer cover any type of pseudo stuff. This was meant to be nothing more than a note of "farewell" to those appalling days. 

I hope to write again soon, whenever my mind and time permits me to. Farewell till then ! 

No One Will Remember You - Or Perhaps Just Me..

There's been this tight knot wrapped around my chest for as long as I can recall. I became what's known to people as a 'Nihilist' about a few years ago. However, there's still this irrational desire left in me which persists to tell me that I must commit deeds which must beg for the attention of the public or thereof. 

I'm about as certain as a palm tree that some humans have come across the 'dilemma of legacy', whether it's after withdrawal from a former set of principles or belief system, it surely strikes every human at some point in their lives. It can be argued empirically that this is rather a function of our survival instinct grounded in our biological apparatus(es). Speaking from the lens of a nihilist such as myself, I strongly believe that a legacy isn't something that's inherently necessary but is attributed in our lives as a privilege guiding the fun towards some metaphysical destination. 

Just like a lot of other things in our lives, you have the choice to either work on one or simply be indifferent about it your entire life. 

The one reason this take becomes impractical is because it fails to offer pragmatic benefits - or does it? 

Leaving behind legacy isn't primarily beneficial to the dead person's forgotten or remembered works, it's secondary or rather non-existent to them. 

That's pretty much obvious but, we still choose to worship them for that specific deed, almost like the person was some sort of deity who had bestowed us with the finest blessings of this realm. 

I don't wish to venture and raise the question of whether they deserve that fame or worship; there's no question that they receive attention simply because it's appealing to the laymen unbeknownst of what their deeds actually even are.

Leaving all that Aside, Here's my Personal Take on the Subject at Matter:

For a long time, I highly believed that even if my life didn't have much value, I still ought to leave behind some sort of deed that would make civilisation remember me for it. This specific thought haunted me for a long time, especially during periods of depression where I would search for some sort of comfort in the abyss or void that had snatched me from existence. It was a state of uncertainty but not one that brought me any solutions as far as I was concerned.

It was really hard for me or anyone to swallow the pill that reality doesn't prejudice against anyone or anything: when you realise what and how meaningfully venturous the thought of death can be, it's hardly ever at the expense of what reality ought to grasp. What deed you commit or what kind of life you lead is never of any concern to reality at all. The furthest it can or will ever go in our life times will be to the public and ourselves individually.

In the book, On The Heights Of Despair by 20th century Romanian philosopher, Emil Cioran, describes the superfluous necessity that the whole of world burdens upon every new human that comes into existence. In this one specific paragraph, he ascribes the sentiment quite thoughtfully. He says:

"As far as I am concerned, I resign from humanity. I no longer want to be, nor can still be, a man. What should I do? Work for a social and political system, make a girl miserable? Hunt for weaknesses in philosophical systems, fight for moral and aesthetic ideals? It's all too little. I renounce my humanity even though I may find myself alone. But am I not already alone in this world from which I no longer expect anything?"(Cioran)

The meat of this post will be contextually referring to ideas and sentiments pertaining to that book but will occasionally refer to other philosophers from similar schools of thought. 

To further justify his statement in the excerpt above, I'd like to use the example of Gregor Samsa from the Metamorphosis. Unlike the intent laid by Cioran, Samsa still had the natural instinct to survive and feed his family, despite being turned into an 'insect' or rather an 'alien'. His concern for his family may have been overshadowed by his guilt; however, it paradoxically led to his demise as well. 

A popular theory states that the thematic portrayal of 'alienation' in The Metamorphosis tells its readers about the ingenuous yet conflicted life that Franz Kafka led. If you're interested in a brief exposition of what it meant, check this link(Spoilers for Metamorphosis). Kafka's alienation conveys to the world the initial stages 

of detachment from being 'human' - in a derogatory sense. Although one's intent to do good or meaningful acts in a world where 'fair' and 'unfair' aren't perfectly understood by anyone may be encouraged ,  it still doesn't change the fact there exists such boundaries and differences. 

It's the rendering of irrelevance in our deeds that makes one cling to that detachment - perhaps just one of the reasons if not the main. Hyperbole it may be but, the thought of death ought to liberate us all from such silly notions and superstitions, the same type that keep our lives running in and out 24/7. But how is it that the thought of death has become such an addiction ? It's certainly not a question that's tending to be naïve but, it doesn't pose a blatant answer either. 

Sure, you could go simply saying that it's all meaningless but, it still wouldn't quench one's thirst in desiring to know the justification of how and why it's meaningless. It's not simple tautological iteration.  

It's perhaps a natural obligation to deed itself that draws us closer to that path of despair. Obligate one to do the deeds that every other human has done in the past, present and will be obligated to do in the future. The question behind this obligation may be called a waste of time but, of course it's a significant question nonetheless. E.g. include happiness, compassion, empathy, contribution, service. They are naturally attuned in our being but discourse is more than plausible - that's why this post is even being made. 

All humans want to be happy or satisfied in some way or form but, some see it as a curse or rather a burden. Are they masochists ? Not necessarily. They're just innately disturbed by glamour and can't believe it be their sanctuary at all; they feel everything else just like we all do but optimism isn't their refuge neither is pessimism. I would have loved to say that this post was specially made for them but, we all know that is far from the truth. Before I go any further with this post, I must link the video that inspired me to start this post in the first place: 

This short story narrated by PursuitOfWonder conveys the insignificance of legacy; although it speaks of meaning in the 'long run', it still tackles some very vital elements that I'm trying my best to describe in this very post. This reassures the human to be both grateful and neglectful. Grateful because in realising humanity's inevitable doom, we must make the most out of it while we're still alive. Neglectful because it gives room for people like I to have a better reason to not participate in life's various activities. Similarly, Cioran describes the extent to which our perception of death may become just as unappealing as life. This makes even our defense mechanisms like despair a lost hope in the middle of the ocean. He says:

"The terrifying experience and obsession of death, when preserved in consciousness, becomes ruinous. If you talk about death, you save part of yourself. But at the same time, something of your real self dies, because objectified meanings lose the actuality they have in consciousness." (Cioran)

It's not that philosophy doesn't solve the mystery of death, it's that there isn't any death to confront with philosophy. Death to us is only a passing act, nothingness and void are abstract concepts and become intertwined with post-death. All philosophy can do is comfort us with what we want to achieve by knowing what death is, yet never actually do it. There isn't any empirical evidence or substantial reason to tell us we'll be okay. God's been rendered meaningless centuries ago, in order to make up for that meaning, existentialism was born. But it still didn't answer the primary solution to the problem of and insignificant significance, such as the confrontation of death and an infinite meaning with grounded assurance. 

I strongly feel the need for a part 2 of this post. As it seems to me that I've failed to answer or tackle certain questions and statement. For that I wish to have another chance to tackle them in a broader light. 

Thank you for reading - if anyone ! 

References: 

- On The Heights Of Despair, Emil Cioran

- Eventually, Everyone We Know Now Won't Be Known By Anyone, Pursuit Of Wonder

- Metamorphosis, Franz Kafka

The Meaning Of Trying To Search For Meaning

It's not a matter of writing to show or please that matters, it's the reason behind why I write such jargons which postpones my life sentence that does. However, even writings aren't meant to be the final verdict. 

Is anything or everything irrelevant? 

Asked obviously no one in history. 

My deep dive into nihilism isn't anything new; in fact, it has probably been incorporated into my ideology like centuries before I was even born. But that doesn't matter, anyway. 

Today's blog post is going talk about the importance of understanding why and what reason does one need to fall into the holes of nothingness. 

First of all:- 

I'm mentally retarded, so don't take my word for granted, second of all, I'm trying my best not to be certain. If I try to be certain, ye can nuke this whole planet- might as well, since we obviously don't matter until blasting off into space like some good old cosmos ingredients (yummy!). 

Let's begin then, shall we ? (As if anyone is answering this part of this my post). 

Man's search for meaning since the beginning of their rationale has been quite a prosperous path; for once some organic species thought that they could get on top of the world through their amazing capabilities and curiosity. Well, guess what ?

*SPOILER ALERT* 

We were wrong!!! 

Or were we ? 

Blatantly, time and time again, people have come to terms with different lens when it comes to constituting their belief on this topic. It's one of the top philosophical questions that we won't be able to answer for millennia to come. If we can, then of course, congratulations to us and whoever gets that amazing piece of artifact called the 'Nobel Peace Prize' 

( Top jokes humanity made up to make themselves feel better). 

Meaning and existence concerns ourselves with the supposed cycle of life and death. In order to live life, one must have the basic necessities inscribed within the laymen's textbook of Biology:- organic molecules, some stuff I didn't learn from my Biology class, the presentation I'm about to give tomorrow and of course, O2. 

In all seriousness, besides the biological necessities humans need companionship and social necessities as well- thanks for the obvious statement. Often, people's reply to the nihilist's demise is to stay in touch with the pragmatic aspect of reality- like mate, they've most likely tried that out and it's the reason why they've sunk to that phase. Of course, not everyone can cling on to the system,  and no one's obliged to. Yes, there will be consequences and other several bajillion dumbarsery moves that we've made over the course of more than 2 millennia. 

The conjoined ceremony of death and life has failed. Life happened within a particular probability, some may call this luck, some may call this dumb. It's what it is, a stroke of chance with certain conditions. It may as well have not occurred in the first place. 

To propose that life is either meaningful or meaningless goes down to a more convoluted form of absurdism. There are ways to say that it is meaningful or meaningless. The reality of the topic isn't even evident and by that I mean that reality itself proves to be absurd in answering our question of meaning, life and death. We only know the mumbo jumbo we spout to ourselves and the frequent every day life we live. Is it meant to be joyful, pleasant or excruciating ? We don't really have an objective answer for it. 

We've pondered over and over for thousands of years but the simple conclusion we've arrived it is the same that Socrates himself was certain of. The knowledge of knowing nothing at all. That's about the only certainty we can play around with. The rest of it is just a critique and endless amounts of theories regarding ourselves. If it's pointless, should we keep living or go on about our daily life that we didn't ask for ? 

I don't know either, maybe in the future there'll be a kind of society that let's you choose your own meaning and way of life instead tying you to their own. Much like virtual reality, this would be like the utopian concept of ours. 

The issue with trying to garner an empathetic, polite and harmonious society is the riddle behind why and how humans think and the relevance behind its existence. It's not divergence that concerns anyone but iteration. One could definitely ignore all these questions and have a preference on how everyone should persist living; however, to be certain about even a lifestyle would be a violation to man's search for meaning. 

A lifestyle, ideology, belief system, identity or system can't be consistent or constant for long. Even a well privileged human with a sealed image or identity needs to move forward when despair entraps their deeds and delusions. 

The entire point of life is unknown and we've deluded ourselves for millennia upon millennia. How much longer will it take before we realise our own mental asylum ? 

Is a human afraid to cease connections from satisfaction, dissatisfaction and fear? Or do they desire it so much that the mental asylum has become their wonderland ? 

This isn't me trying to promote a conspiracy theory, of course XD. 

This along with uncountable number of other questions may remain unanswered for eternity and so shall the purpose behind our self-implied 'significant' existence. 

I'm Bangladeshi and I'm Not

The title of this post is as confusing and deceiving as many other clickbait links on the internet.

To what do we owe the meat of this post ? 

Today’s post has been inspired by… well my identity: one of my identities as a human for the past 20 years. Ever since I was around 3 years of age, I was introduced to my nationality. I obviously wasn’t aware of the denotative or connotative meaning behind having a nationality or being from a certain region of the world. It only struck me as something that happened or came by chance. I did take a minimal amount of pride in it, but I wouldn’t necessarily say that I ever said ‘I am proud to be a Bangladeshi’. I don’t think those words will ever come out of my mouth. It’s close to impossible now, considering my ideologues and beliefs. 

It’s quite funny how I turned out to be a complete anti-nationalist and anti-patriot. I say it’s one of my better outcomes as a human being and perhaps an evolution within my species. 

I wasn’t always a complete anti-nationalist or anti-patriot. My experience paved the way for it gradually. My journey started all the way back in the late 2000s. I don’t know how many schools make its students pledge allegiance to the flag and their local or regional anthem; however, mine was pretty strict about it considering it was a private school. Although I never retaliated against the pledge, I have to be honest about the fact that I didn’t even feel remotely proud about pledging my allegiance to a country that I was a national of via my parents. Obligation doesn’t necessarily mean that one’s actually proud to do service or feel strongly about it. 

Teenhood didn’t change anything. It only gave me further reasons to ‘dislike’ my country and detach from the feeling of having a ‘home’ in just this country. I have a confession: I never really felt that the country I lived in for a decade was my home. I still had some attachment left from living in the Middle East for the first decade or so of my life. I did feel like I was part of that country since I grew up most of my early childhood there but that’s something almost every child would feel. There was always this notion that I was being shoved to feel proud or be part of a group I didn’t ask to be part of, similar to religion and culture and so on & forth. There were 2 things that were being shoved into my identity: religion and nationality. 

The religion part shall be saved for a separate post in the distant future. 

Nationality was always part of my surroundings and it’s the first thing you’re asked about whenever one meets a stranger from a different part of the world- since it’s the closest thing to one’s ethnicity or race. That’s not the issue here, one can say that they’re from a certain region of the world but still choose to identify as a non-nationalist or non-patriot. The issue arises from being shoved to take pride in it or do it simply out of being born to that particular by chance. One can continue their long line of cultural traditions and stuff for all anyone cares. Nationalism or patriotism isn’t a matter of being loyal to your country, it’s a matter of putting oneself at risk for irrational dilemmas and ethical decisions. Favouring sides has only worked for the short-term and doesn’t necessarily guarantee hope for the long-term. This is mainly an issue surrounding the study of identity in a very superficial perspective. Many factors come into play, one of them being nationality - which is why I’m discussing this vital information here. 
How we choose to identify also shapes a bit of how we tend to behave and form our ideologies. For me, the identity of nationality didn’t matter much since childhood. For some people, it’s almost alien to even think of detaching from the idea of patriotism or nationalism, similar to devotees of certain religions and ideologies. It’s totally okay to have different perspectives.

I’ll share mine:

My reason behind rejecting any form of  pride in my nationality is firstly from my own interests alone. I still have my passport, and citizenship and all but I’m not obligated to feel as if I’m part of this group. I am human and was born on this planet, within this universe. That’s about it. The rest of it won’t matter at all objectively. There isn't a privilege to be maintained from taking pride in ‘chance’ or ‘probability’; it’s just a dictation upon our oblivious and ignorant behaviour. A rational person doesn’t have any need for social obligation or image, its utmost goal is to process, function and proceed towards its curiosity of reality- of course without harming others. I argue that taking pride in these factors of identity are potentially and have been harmful for millennia. We can’t really reject it either; some form of identity will still remain since that’s a philosophical enigma that none has been able to solve.  What we can do is take matters into hands with the ones we’re already aware of; minimization of conflict and power is necessary for human civilisation to progress. The only chaos that we should be allowed to have is with our own minds only- or maybe not. 
That’s it for this post; stay in bed for more next time.

Quotes for reference:

“If you worship money and things — if they are where you tap real meaning in life — then you will never have enough. Never feel you have enough. It’s the truth. Worship your own body and beauty and sexual allure and you will always feel ugly, and when time and age start showing, you will die a million deaths before they finally plant you. On one level, we all know this stuff already — it’s been codified as myths, proverbs, clichés, bromides, epigrams, parables: the skeleton of every great story. The trick is keeping the truth up-front in daily consciousness. Worship power — you will feel weak and afraid, and you will need ever more power over others to keep the fear at bay. Worship your intellect, being seen as smart — you will end up feeling stupid, a fraud, always on the verge of being found out. And so on.”
― David Foster Wallace, This Is Water: Some Thoughts, Delivered on a Significant Occasion, about Living a Compassionate Life

“As far as I am concerned, I resign from humanity. I no longer want to be, nor can still be, a man. What should I do? Work for a social and political system, make a girl miserable? Hunt for weaknesses in philosophical systems, fight for moral and esthetic ideals? It’s all too little. I renounce my humanity even though I may find myself alone. But am I not already alone in this world from which I no longer expect anything?”

― Emil Cioran, On the Heights of Despair

Not Going to Title This Even if I'm Dead

So, how do I put this? I want to write but hesitate to write quite often. It's not because I have no passion for writing. I only have doubts about my own skills.  It's a typical growing process,  so I'll pay no more heed to it and just move along with my mediocre skills. Today's topic is literally 'nothing'. 

In the heat of my past posts, I'm still not concerned about the coherency of any of them and don't care either. Last year I wrote a ridiculous post on my sentiments of 'romantic' love and, I still abide by  those sentiments- as I always have- and always will. I still don't find it to be a coherent solution to our primordial needs. Elimination of emotions and intimacy are an obligation to evolve further (Ignore the last sentence please; I know humans will legitimately commit suicide if they were refrained of that 'need' of theirs).

Leaving personal contemplations of my world aside, let's get to the top of this stigma. I haven't discovered anything, nor am I willing to discover anything - as it all happens by probabilistic chance.

Why am I hesitating to write a proper post so often ? 

Mostly because the ideas that come into my mind aren't often synthesized enough to be simulated into 200 paragraphs or less. It's really complex to write about a topic that's so profound and intriguing and, that's because of the amount of information that the topic itself yields. Yes, I could somehow push in a few paragraphs by using second hand or expert sources that argue in favour or against the topic, but that too would conclude an unsatisfiable verdict to the predicament of the topic. 

Based on that rationale of mine, it has become quite tough on me really sit down and be solipsistic about whatever interest I have in mind. I just shouldn't 'have' or 'want' to assess or evaluate a certain idea or axiom without knowing of the clear paths or divergences that may be in the possession of its most favourable leaders. Even with that on board, the issue that comes next are the relevance and desirability of the ideas themselves. Is it significant for me to actually spend or invest my time playing around this idea? Is it productive enough for me to preach this idea to the very people- whose existence I deem as meaningless as mine ? 

Yes/No ! It's both yes and no for both of those questions. It's supposed be seem absurd but coherently that's how it plays out. Rather than pondering around on the efficacious range of those ideas, it's only significant to wonder about their profundity - as that's what humans will really care about naturally rather than collective distribution of usefulness. If it drives enough principles to drown in its own medicine, then it's way more worth than the mumbo jumbo one spits in the heat of a drunk debate infamously carried out by 'illiterate' politicians and public speaker ( Even though a lot of politicians and public speakers tend to go to prestigious schools or universities, their capability to analytically understand or assess issues are far worse than the attention span of a 2 years old babe). 

To sum it up, it's hard to rationalize on any topic, considering that the lack of a holistic process gives rise to superstitious beliefs among the crowd. In order to assure the continuous approach towards such topics, it's within the best of humanity's procession to apply a great level of uncertainty - as it seems that we've been evolving in our epistemology to regard that as our fine saviour: the saviour that aids us in putting an 'inconsistency' within our 'consistent' axiom. 

Foreshadowing Hope's Judgement

By Othello D. Gomes

Irely, a sentient knight, banished from existence itself, parries upon its own soul, the last one out there, to bewilder a sentimental meaning on this plane of 'non-existence'. Truthfully lying to himself, he tries to step forward in the brink of hope that the void itself can be tangible; a timid and much to his dismay of expectations, it remains blatantly unsettling to say further off. For a moment's grasp, he illustrates a boundary of tangibility before floating and eventually falling off of the nothing he's supposedly 'within'. Next to being oblivious about this environment he's in, the only reaction left for him to contemplate would be his thoughts before dying. Everything he knows means nothing at the moment, nothing can stop his sentiments nor can he be put to death. What could be possibly worse is the fact that the void itself is a loophole of nothingness. Where nothingness is supposed to be a realm devoid of everything known to the mind, here lies nothingness playing with a circular set of events with itself. Will falling forever and ever be the hell that he never wished to accept as his judgement? Or will hope be his last refuge and find a way to kindle the void? All remains impossible within the void and as his brain rapidly circulates neurons thinking about all the possible choices and events in his life that he took a part in, he can't take a moment to be one with any of them. Is it fighting the void that makes it hell? Or is it failing to accept it as your one and only refuged destiny that does ? It's only when one fails to accept his contemporary reality as the void that he goes on to persist his own suffering and misery, but the one who does still suffers as well. What makes his different from the other other? The one who has experienced and accepted the void knows 'nothing' itself and knows the illusion of 'fear' more than the laymen trying to drive fear into him through coarse desires. The past , present, and future are foundational for experience and are merely illusions in the realm of Void. Only the one who knows and has accepted the void lives without a longing for 'experience' again. Irely perhaps didn't have any of those realisations going through his mind, all he could think of was an escape out of this sudden and continuous misery.

A Coping Dialect

There sits a deity wrapped in shredded pain, 

Around the veil engulfed of gain,

Striving no more than thirty sticks, 

Divided by the five bricks, 

Whatever makes it six, 

Reverts all attention back to an anguished origin,

Dilating all roads of morning glories into trembling stings; 

A precious remedy of hindering fixation, 

With no rhythm, 

And or no schism, 

Throwing a soothing parable, 

At birds made of cosmic immaterial affectation: 

Rinsing off a temptation of prediction, 

Accordingly hallowing a contemporary aphorism, 

Molded by a string of fine decaying prism. 

Albeit evading over and over, 

The evasion of being under the aqua, 

Appealed to none’s observation, 

For billions of stations rest unfathomed by 

the alpha, 

Ergo no need to put at stake the bestowed deed of incomprehension towards omega. 

-Othello D. Gomes