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