hence love

one of the worst tortures you can inflict on a man is complete sensory isolation...the only thing he tastes, his own tongue; the only thing he feels, his own body; the only thing he smells, his own fear, the only thing he hears, his own heartbeat; the only thing he sees, his doom. at this point it matters not that outside of this dark room there exists a nature to experience or animals to watch or other people to talk to--these things, though real--but because they cannot be interacted with--are as good as figments to the isolated man. this is the true meaning of being alone.

a man who is completely alive and cognitively viable, but has no control over his paralysed body is as good as a dead man because though his free will exists, he has no manner of option to convey that will into the realm of reality. even the blink of an eye can transmit a message, but what if even the eyelid is no longer connected to the thought of moving it? is not this man lost to the world forever though he is still in it?

what is the meaning of sentient existence if we cannot exert that sentience unto objective reality? the usefulness of descartes' words--knowing you exist simply because you think so--is useless at and beyond the point of knowing what you are capable of, be it the ability to pick up a rock, or the ability to scare a bird, or the highest form of existence validation, the ability to elicit a response from another sentient being. these are abilities that cannot be proven to exist simply by the thought alone but by the connection from thought to objective reality through the interface of perception and reality.

i cannot imagine being in the position of a trapped mind in a useless body, that is the worst fate. but i can imagine being thrown into isolation, where the only thing that can validate the existence of my thoughts is my thoughts--a curse in its own right. i can also imagine being the only human being on this earth, but at least i have the animals to prove to myself that i exist. i can also imagine being the only multicell organism on this earth--there, at least i have rocks to throw and validate my existence. i can imagine being the only object on earth, at least i can see that i can make my hands move--i know i exist. but take away my body, all i have left is my own thoughts, and i am equivalent to a will that has no manner of exerting itself--no meaning for existence.

the very fact that we are a sentient race underscores the primal need to self-validate at a level fit for our intelligence and we do so by bouncing impulses and receiving responses from other sentient beings. but to think such socialisation is merely primal would be a huge mistake. interaction with another human being is not only a necessary but sufficient criterion for meaningful existence.

what is more meaningful than knowing your own existence? the way i see it, its also knowing that there exists another individual sentience whom you identify with more than any other, whom you know is not part of your own existence--a separate one which of its own separate free will also chose to identify with you more than any other. the higher form of existence--not only proving to yourself you exist, but also being proven to exist by somebody else. the credibility of such proofs increases as the level of identification increases, just as the phyiscal, mental, and emotional proximity increases, just as the relationship grows closer...

hence, love.

bittersweet heaven

its hard when people dont happen the way we would prefer. that one extra free will in our life that we allow in our inner circle--knowing that when at odds with our own free will--could make for very hard times. no, not even family nor friend comes that close, but a special one that because we invite into our castle, can make us feel the kind of happiness and the kind of sadness that no one outside the castle can ever possibly achieve. yet deep down, there is no greater honor to a house than to have its room--its purpose for existence--filled.

and when i think about what God did, when he created man and gave all of them free will, i cant help but wonder--though i dare not claim much more than assuming i know what was His intention--was He seeking the same kind of happiness of free wills in His castle, knowing full well He could be disappointed countless times before the final day?

an impossible feat for a mere mortal who struggles to attain this happiness even though he only lets in one free will at a time. yet when it works, he enjoys bittersweet heaven deserving of God Himself.

doctor you are wrong

when deadly affliction arrives, its easy to turn away from the doctor and his good recommendation, hoping he is wrong, while praying to God that He will do something instead. yet when we get a flu, or headache or chickenpox, we take both medication and instruction from the same doctor, knowing we will get better from it and we simply thank God that it was only chickenpox. it is a habit that the religious, the superstitious and the uneducated alike suffer with. which of them can deny that in difficult times, they only place all hope in their God because there is no one else to put it in?

a woman with certain religious values would be most conflicted in a time of ectopic pregnancy, where she would struggle to choose abortion, as opposed to carrying the foetus to term but risk her own life instead. it would be reasonable for this woman and her husband to see another doctor for a second opinion if they didnt like to the first one, but no doctor will ever forget to remind her that the final decision is hers to make. because the gravity of her situation exceeds her faith in not only her doctor, but also in her own ability to make a good decision, it is only at this point where she truly puts her faith in God. and because her faith was placed in the wrong order, no decision is made.

if the situation was simpler: dengue fever perhaps. does even the most religious man with dengue fever reject a doctor and say "I will pray instead. God will heal me."? even if one man were to do this, how far would his fever have to go before he finally says "Doctor, help me. I will pray after."?

a third scenario puts a man at the window of a burning building. he has to jump into the firemen's safety net 10 floors below. does not his faith in the ability of fire to burn and kill him compel him to jump? or does he ask God which choice to take, stay and wait or jump now. it is precisely because of his faith in real fire and ability to estimate his own chances of survival by jumping that helps him decide his course of action. God only comes into the picture after the decision is made, when the man leaps off the building and says in his heart, "God, help me."

in one scene similar to the first, where expert advice is available, suppose a boy is stuck at the edge of a cliff, both hands hanging to a vine for dear life. a helicopter arrives with a rescue worker suspended below it. the rescuer says "give me your hand." the boy is unwilling because his faith in his own two hands tells him he cannot release the vine even from one hand. the rescuer says "i am your rescuer. release your hand or i cannot save you." it is a combination of the immediate fear of death, and the present trust in this rescuer who speaks with confidence that motivates the boy to release the vine.

thus many times in life, at a tough point we refuse to make a decision because we cannot comprehend the urgency of it, and that we do not fully appreciate the value of advice coming from someone whom we should admit, knows alot more about the situation. it is the failure of understanding of both these concepts which causes us, in the time we need the most help, to reject it from the people who are most able to provide it, while telling ourselves it is all okay, because God will do something about it. at the end of the day, we dont make any decision with the false belief that we can do no wrong if we do nothing.

yet with our knowledge of today, is religion in the name of ignorance truly acceptable?