MY THOUGHTS
Costel Marius Fodor

Where to begin? So many things, so little time. I suppose to attempt and begin at some specific point in a philosophical context is really undoable. For life itself is nothing more than a jumble of actions, perceptions and reactions. True indeed that what I write will have significant consequences, revelations and relations to some, while little of anything to others, but it is for these that I write the most and not the others. If anything, I hope to deliver my readers from their usual, mundane and limited ways in which they perceive and think, and to instill a desire to be reckless simply to see what will be, and to reinstate the primal need to wonder.
When an animal sees the world, it explores simply by instinct, thus is set by small capacity of thought, thus is all to say of these such creatures. When a human sees the world, it explores at first by instinct then desire, thus is set by large capacity of thought, thus my will to write of these such creatures...
To have a true understanding of life we must remember the Origin. No one can possibly deny the importance and benefit that science has had on our world, as such I will draw on science to reference this discussion simply because a certain degree of proof has been established on the matter, where as theology has none. Approximately 15 to 20 billion years ago there was the Big Bang, simply put a finite amount of substance in a finite volume decided to expand. The universe is currently still expanding, in expansion the universe is built. Certain scientists believe that approximately 70 billion years from now the universe will seize expansion and start to contract, in contraction the universe is destroyed, they also believe that the universe will once again expand into something very similar to what it is now. So then it seems like all things, the universe is no exception, it has a cycle, about a 180 billion year cycle. The universe is believed to be composed of only two substances, energy and matter, which has been found to simply be two forms of the same substance, mass-energy. Scientists now state the conservation law this way: Mass-energy may not be created or destroyed, but each may be converted into the other. So then humans, in all their beauty and uniqueness and complexity, are really not special in any regard, because everything is shared and related and recycled. So even long after we die, we still exist somewhere, somehow as mass-energy, always and forever. So therefore, we really have nothing to fear, only to open up and to allow and understand.
It is very important to understand that in order to fully understand life you must be willing to say yes to, approve of and experience anything and everything, without prejudice, without reservation, without hesitation. This may very well be very hard to do in part of our everyday lifestyles, but you've got to believe more than anything else, that our consciousness, feelings, values, ideals, desires and beliefs are but meaningless in the grand scheme of things, and that to have as thorough an understanding of the universe as possible is by far the most worthwhile goal you can aspire to achieve as a curious entity. If you are starting to get the feeling that I am in some way trying to comfort any anxiety and trepidation you may have about your existence and your future, I am, more than anything I hope to put you at ease about willing to learn and to explore and of course, to experience. You really do owe it to yourself to consider what I have to say.
I write this mainly to inspire and persuade you to try new things, since the best way to convince someone of something is by as thorough as possible a discussion and explanation. I hope to discuss the human in my view, I hope to be unbiased and nonjudgemental, I hope to be descriptive and controversial, I hope to be provocative and daring, but most of all, I hope to be helpful. I do not aim to provide answers, but rather to contemplate and reason. I would rather prefer to leave myself personally out of the discussion so as to avoid being biased. As I write this, I am only 20 years old and have not lead a relatively eventful or interesting life, so I cannot make any guarantees about the quality of this material. But I like to think of myself as an intelligent, curious, daring individual, and as such would like to give it a try. So please bear with me and please consider the possibilities. And as always: Subject to change without notice.
It is quite obvious that humans poses a mental quality that is not present in any other creature on Earth, but what exactly is that quality? At first consideration one could easily say that it's intelligence, but not only is that oversimple, it is just downright incorrect. All animals have a certain degree of intelligence, but somehow humans seem to have more so than any other creature. So then for the moment let's simply go with this notion, that humans are simply the most intelligent creatures on Earth. Then that should bring up another important question, what exactly is intelligence? Is it how much knowledge you poses, or how much knowledge you're capable of acquiring? Since there doesn't seem to be a limit on how much humans can learn, let's say that intelligence is how much knowledge you poses. Now it's true that some people know more than others, but does that make the smarter person more potential and more cunning than the less smarter person, surely no, but yet that is exactly what's most different about humans compared to all other animals, we have more potential and we are more cunning. And still, how do you measure intelligence? How many times more intelligent are humans compared to even the second most intelligent animal on Earth? Is it 2 times, 3 times, 4 times, is it much much higher, is it even measurable? For that matter, does it even matter? We know that every other animal pales mentally in comparison to humans. But in what sense mentaly? Surely every creature on Earth knows something all it's own, and since we can't communicate with other animals, we can't know for sure what they know or even what they're aware of, and because of that we can't even say with certainty that we are indeed the most intelligent creatures on Earth. But still, there is something significantly different. Perhaps there is something significantly different between all species, and not just between humans and every other animal, and not just physically but mentally as well. But still, by far, the biggest difference in mental capacity is between humans and the next closest specie to us.
We could simply take another approach, and try to compare animals physically rather than mentally, but anyway that is pretty much the same thing, for the psyche of all animals is contained entirely in the brain, which is after all physical. So then I guess the only definitive explanation for the significant difference between humans and all other animals is that our brains are larger and more complex, and this is in fact the truth and not just a theory. But then is that the end of the discussion? Are animals, including humans, simply machines assembled with parts? To me it seems that we are indeed just machines, and certainly machines cannot be more than the sum of their parts, or can they? Inexplicably, our bodies are made up entirely of matter and energy, or just of mass-energy, and inexplicably it is of a particular amount. But still, the particular combination and form of that mass-energy, whether be it by chance or by design, that makes up our bodies and our brains, gives us something totally unmeasurable and undefinable, it gives us awareness, of ourselves and our environs. Where as an inanimate object, such as a star for example, which is composed of much much more mass-energy, has no awareness, it simply does what it can and nothing else, it can neither choose to do it or to not do it. So then is awareness special, for that matter is anything special? We know that everything in the universe is made up of mass-energy, and mass-energy is by all means measurable and definable, so then is awareness measurable and definable as well? But how? How do you grasp it? And as it now turns out, the physical properties of our brains my not be what sets us apart from other animals, I recently watched a program on television where a 14 year old girl had a rare form of epilepsy, the left side of her brain was diseased and badly damaged and was slowly degenerating her entire brain, the doctors decided that the only way to keep her from dying was to simply remove the left side of her brain, which they did exactly. After the operation the girl couldn't do much of anything, not even express herself, and since the left side of the brain controls the right side of the body, her right side was paralyzed as well, needless to say the removal of half her brain had definite effects on her, but then something started to happen that can only be described as amazing, the right side of her brain was starting to compensate for the missing left half. In only about a year she was able to not only express herself, but to also talk, process questions, and even to walk, and she is even expected to make a full recovery. Now obviously, her brain isn't as big or as complex as a normal human anymore, but it doesn't seem to show any signs of it. So then it seems as if the size and complexity of the brain is unimportant, and it seems that we are indeed more than the sum of our parts, perhaps a whole lot more.
So back again, what makes a specie different from one another? Is it understandable? Is it even comprehensible at all? Perhaps we can never know, perhaps the best we can ever do is make guesses, educated guesses. True, it's fully comprehensible that everything in the universe is explainable. But then why isn't this? Some species can understand and explain more so than others, humans the most, so maybe this is easily understandable but just not by humans, or at least not by present day humans. Or maybe it's just a paradox? But then what about the theory that everything can be explained? Is it false? Why shouldn't it be true? It's quite simply feasible, that everything in the universe has unique properties and qualities that interact with one another to create a phenomena. And so if only those interactions can be analyzed and studied, then it can be explained. True enough that is valid logic, as all logic is, but perhaps the tricky part is this: can something analyze itself? Can awareness analyze itself? If no, then certainly it cannot be explained, for how can something be explained if it cannot even be analyzed? And yet, scientists say that humans only use about 10 percent of their brains. Is that wasteful? What lies in that other 90 percent? What is keeping us from utilizing that other 90 percent? Is it insufficient evolvement? But our brains have grown in size as we've evolved over the years. What for, if we only need 10 percent of it? Have we always used only 10 percent of our brains, even when they were much smaller? We can't know how much of their brains prehistoric humans used, because there are none alive that we can analyze. But we do know that humans were more so like other animals in their infancy. So then it's the passing of time, in the form of evolution that has set us apart from animals. Is it? Humans are roughly 2 million years old, by no means the oldest animal on Earth, in fact almost the youngest. So then it's not age nor experience. But what is more important in development if not experience? Perhaps humans just got lucky, if so we haven't earned anything.
Indeed the question of what reality is and what it means to be real is an elusive one. What is mass-energy? Where did it come from? How much of it is there? Why not more, or less? What lies beyond the reaches of the universe? Surely everything that exists must have had a creation at some point, surely even the universe. And if the universe was created by God, then what about God? How was God created? To even begin to contemplate these questions is downright mind-boggling and impossible, but what if the answers are really quite simple? True that modern humans understand a whole lot more than their ancestors did, so maybe all will become clear to humans after sufficient evolvement. Who knows, maybe towards the end of the universe we will understand everything, but what good will it be then? Perhaps the nature of our sensory perceptions prevents us from truly understanding the universe due to its dynamic nature. Perhaps the only things that can be truly understood are static things, such as emotions and ideas. But then what are things such as emotions and ideas without awareness, would they still exist? What if all awareness was removed from the universe, would that make it any different? It seems as if the more you think about the nature of reality, that nothing can be certain, that we are mentally ill or retarded. But it also seems that true bliss lies in the contemplative use of our minds and in learning new truths.
The present state of our world and lives cannot be ignored nor even trivialized. For in it lies the true nature of humans. An accurate or thorough philosophical discussion of humans may not be possible, since we have gotten where we are over time and did not simply start out as such, and since our values and understandings are constantly changing and evolving. However, a philosophical deduction can be made about how humans got to where we are, and where we're likely to be headed, and why.
It is quite meaningless to discuss the things humans do by instinct, since those things are fixed and cannot change, or at least not by will, and perhaps only through evolution. So instead I will focus on things humans do through choosing. I suppose humans, or more specifically present day humans, and perhaps animals as well, more than anything like to feel rested and are willing to do anything to be so. That is in fact the ultimate goal of humans from the very beginning, to achieve complete rest. But in order to achieve rest one must be in control, so as to be left alone by others. And in order to be in control one must understand their surroundings and learn how to manipulate them. The best way to explore the world is to be free to do so, which is why all people and even animals desire freedom above all else, to explore and learn. However, for one entity to be free among others introduces uncertainty and speculation, and those reduce one's abilities to feel rested. Obviously the only way to be completely rested is to be alone, but it seems as if that's not an option, and as such humans are constantly thinking and maneuvering to compensate for others, that is in fact the true meaning of life. But the unknown threatens one's well-being and even one's existance, and as such is feared the most, that is why uncertainty is the most dreaded emotion. But for one to understand, the unknown must be explored. That is why our lives are filled mostly with fear and suffering, for in order to achieve complete rest we must understand the unknown, and as such one cannot achieve complete rest while alive. And that is why death is the ultimate dread, for it's the ultimate unknown, and that is why death is indeed complete rest, for the ultimate unknown has been unraveled. So then it seems that humans from the day they're born seek death the most, which is precisely why I urge that people open up to new experiences and allow new styles, for we have nothing to fear, for we all get what we desire most, death, and as such it seems that nature is quite generous, and not cruel as some other philosophers have suggested. But can that even be possible? Can nature be generous or cruel? Perhaps it's human nature that has simply adjusted to the inevitable, that we all must die, and that we might as well desire it the most.
But what other reasons are there to desire death the most? I suppose partly it's because humans have a curiosity to know as many things as possible, but the things that are to be learned about are limitless, this creates an insatiable appetite for knowledge, another reason might be because life is filled mostly with conflicts and oppositions, which seem to far outweigh the good and enjoyable aspects of life, as is evident in the way the media focuses on bad stories and ignores good stories, these aspects of life are very exhaustive and painful. But why do people, in general, condemn bad deeds and praise good ones? As is quite well known in physics, every action has an equal and opposite reaction, so when someone commits a bad deed somewhere down the road it must have a good influence of equal magnitude, and vice versa. For example, when one human kills another, the bad deed is the destructive affect of the murderer on the victim, but there is indeed a good deed in this act as well, for by killing that person the resources that would have been consumed by that person, such as food, will be available for others. This is well known and freely practiced among animals, for it's simply logical, but humans are most often illogical. But still, humans do condemn bad deeds and praise good ones, perhaps it's because humans have a weak ability to see the big picture and tend to focus on the here and now. And so humans would rather punish criminals and discourage murder, but in doing so we create other hardships, such as world hunger due to overpopulation, which is much more devastating than a murder.
Indeed, by passing and enforcing legislature we imply that humans have free will to do as they please, so if someone does a destructive deed they should be punished, or rewarded for a good deed, for it would make little sense to punish or reward someone for actions beyond their control, as we make exceptions for the mentally ill. But in passing and enforcing legislature we also take away people's free will, for we tell them what they are allowed to do and not to do, and as such we go against the nature of humans, and to do so is quite futile, for nature is beyond control and always perseveres. But then it seems that there is no such thing as free will after all, for if every action has an equal and opposite reaction then everything we do will not be by free choosing, but rather by actions and conditions that have gone before, which in turn influence our reasoning and judgements. So then it seems quite proper and logical to do away with laws, but humans are most often illogical. Again, it comes down to the fact that humans want to be at rest, and that requires to be in control.
While some would argue that democracy is the best way to go, where everyone is ruled by the views of the majority, I would rather argue for anarchy. I think that we as humans are but individuals, similarly as animals, and not to be combined into a unit. For how can the beliefs and tolerances of others, even those of the majority, befit all? Again, it's fighting the inevitable, that every person has an unsuppressible need to express one's self based on actions and experiences in their pasts, which are quite different than those of any others, and to reward them for their actions is but foolish, and to punish them is an injustice of the greatest kind, for it's an injustice upon nature its very self. So any deed that a person may commit can never be as malicious as it would be for someone to punish them for it in return, of course, this is but meaningful if humans do indeed poses free will, as does not seem to be the case, in which case it is pointless to pass blame and judgement on anyone, but just forget and allow. As such, I hold law makers and enforcers, and all supporters of law to be the ultimate and only evildoers in the world, for they fight nature.
I do not pity nor would I wish to help any person that is certain of what they're doing, regardless of what that may be. I do, however, feel most pitiful and would gladly wish to help any person that is uncertain of what to do, for all I would need to offer is a meaningful discussion to help makeup one's mind. That is in fact the only thing in life to feel bad about, uncertainty. And as becomes apparent to anyone who puts a lot of thought in their ambitions, the only goal that is truly worth reaching for is perfection, for anything less is bound to fade away. But things and people, as separate and distinguished from one another can never attain perfection, for there will always be qualities elsewhere to assimilate, as such, the only way to gain perfection is to be by yourself, whole and indivisible, and so it seems that there is something after all that is perfect, the universe of course. And since everything is bound forever to be part of the universe, we all are perfect, but only when together, as such all goals are meaningless and a waste of time. And so a logical life is but a paradox, for there is nothing to be done with it.
But still, I don't believe that we should simply sit around in devastation wasting our lives. I do believe that it's important to make up one's own mind through exploration and discovery. And I do believe that the only thing truly wrongful is intentional conflict, it's perfectly alright to do anything you want, as long as that doesn't limit other people's freedom. It's wrong to try and control others simply because you don't agree with their beliefs, whatever they may be. We're all here in this life for a limited and brief time, we shouldn't use that as an attempt to change the world in our views. We should explore it and redeem it. I also believe it's dangerous to believe in anything that has not been examined, such as God, for faith in a deity is supposed to be based on an undefined, unexamined, gut feeling. But since a deity cannot be queried, it is inevitable that people will attach their own values and qualities to that deity as they see fit. And such personal fealty in an absolute, yet unexamined force most often leads to disputes of grave proportions. How many wars have there been out of religious motivations? True, all law stems from God. Believe in yourself, believe in the things you see around you everyday. We all have our own views and opinions about life, our own perceptions, of things that ought to be increased and things that ought to be decreased, but in the end they are only perceptions, our own personal interpretations. Hold on to them internally, enrich them in your heart, and let others do the same.
Perhaps in the end Jim Morrison said it best, "our pale reason hides the infinite from us."