If madness is the brother of genius...
- Thread starter Erana
- Start date
Recommended Videos
It is both, it just depends on what is the frame of reference, if the you part of the object going at the speed, then obviously everything seems faster when you slow down because you have experienced a time dilation effect, but if you a not part of the object and are not experiencing the speed then, no, time does not change.Erana said:
To become enlightened, you need to become technically insane, because your view of the former, is everyone else's view of latter.
It's late out my way but as far as I can tell (correct me if I'm wrong) your asking whether enlightenment would be worth attaining even if you knew attaining it would drive you insane.
That's going to be a different answer for everyone and I really doubt we can come to a single universal solution. Enlightenment has no material value and more likely than not ain't fun. The vast majority of the populace, whether they consider themselves intellectuals or philosophers or anything of that nature, would not trade their sanity for something that serves them no material use and brings no joy. You need your sanity if you want to operate in society. Enlightenment is a luxury.
As far as I personally go ... its difficult to say. I'm reminded of an old wrap. Something called 'The Chapel Perilous'. The Chapel Perilous was a place a person stumbled into where their basic view of reality was challenged and they were taught the true nature of life. You could never tell if you were in The Chapel Perilous, because it looked just like everywhere else. And, as such, you could never know if you'd left.
The story went that if you stayed put in one room and never tried to leave for fear of being lost, you went insane. If you stormed through all the rooms hoping to force your way out, you got lost and were never allowed to leave. If you accepted that you were trapped, didn't search for an exit and tried to learn the lessons, The Chapel released you. You could never tell if you were out though, so by the time you'd left Chapel Perilous you were either dangerously paranoid or dangerously apathetic.
That metaphor always pops into my mind when people discuss learning important truths. Enlightenment changes who you are. I'd like to think I'd come out of Chapel Perilous as the apathetic man. But you never know until you've been. And in most cases, it's not worth the risk to find out.
My two cents anyway.
That's going to be a different answer for everyone and I really doubt we can come to a single universal solution. Enlightenment has no material value and more likely than not ain't fun. The vast majority of the populace, whether they consider themselves intellectuals or philosophers or anything of that nature, would not trade their sanity for something that serves them no material use and brings no joy. You need your sanity if you want to operate in society. Enlightenment is a luxury.
As far as I personally go ... its difficult to say. I'm reminded of an old wrap. Something called 'The Chapel Perilous'. The Chapel Perilous was a place a person stumbled into where their basic view of reality was challenged and they were taught the true nature of life. You could never tell if you were in The Chapel Perilous, because it looked just like everywhere else. And, as such, you could never know if you'd left.
The story went that if you stayed put in one room and never tried to leave for fear of being lost, you went insane. If you stormed through all the rooms hoping to force your way out, you got lost and were never allowed to leave. If you accepted that you were trapped, didn't search for an exit and tried to learn the lessons, The Chapel released you. You could never tell if you were out though, so by the time you'd left Chapel Perilous you were either dangerously paranoid or dangerously apathetic.
That metaphor always pops into my mind when people discuss learning important truths. Enlightenment changes who you are. I'd like to think I'd come out of Chapel Perilous as the apathetic man. But you never know until you've been. And in most cases, it's not worth the risk to find out.
My two cents anyway.
Are you trying to say that one method of leaving Chapel Perilous would be equivalent to the next? Certainly. That's kind of the point of the story. Even the people who are allowed to physically leave will never know for certain that they've escaped. And the people who are trapped can convince themselves they're out in spite of the evidence.Erana said:
One isn't really better than the other. But they all are distinctly different. My personal preference is for the apathetic man. He's accepted that he may never get out, and thus lives according to his preference. He can be in one day and out the other. He won't forget what he's learned, but he also won't be bound to it.
Sounds nice. Well, to me anyway.
To go beyond all human vices to live in pure detication of God...
To release oneself from the endless cycle of reincarnation, becoming nothingness...
To release oneself from the endless cycle of reincarnation, becoming omnipotent...
To burn away all that is impure and earthly with the fire of Ahura Mazda...
To bear true comprehension...
They're all the same.
Enlightenment, religion, all madness in the most beautiful way.
To release oneself from the endless cycle of reincarnation, becoming nothingness...
To release oneself from the endless cycle of reincarnation, becoming omnipotent...
To burn away all that is impure and earthly with the fire of Ahura Mazda...
To bear true comprehension...
They're all the same.
Enlightenment, religion, all madness in the most beautiful way.
... Do you know what you're talking about? You'll forgive me but this is why I avoid philosophy classes.Erana said:
There are interesting questions to discuss in the world but not everything is a revelation. Sure, 98% percent of religions are describing the same thing, achieving a state of transcendance/inner peace/enlightenment/one-ness with the universe/whatever you like really. Sure, its an open question whether such a state even exists and thus persuing it can be argued a kind of madness. Similarly, attaining such a state would inevitably render you mad in the eyes of those who hadn't already attained such a state; because humans create societies and cultures around intincts which are essentially primitive and attaining a state of enlightenment would presumably allow you to see the flaws inherent in culture (that no one else would recognize, leaving you babbling madly about nonsense no one else gets.)
Then, the argument can be made that society is actually the crazy ones and the process of enlightenment is a process of gaining sanity. But then the moral relativists come back that what's considered 'sane' is decided by majority rule, so enlightenment is by defenition insanity. The Nihilists respond that there's no such thing as universal enlightenment because all truths are relative which means no ones sane or insane, just different. The good christian girl notes that if you accept the existence of a higher power (whether God, Fate, Charma or Luck) you also have to accept that theres an obective measure of moral rectitude, because otherwise how (and why) could any of these powers be guiding you.
The lunch bell rings and everybody gets lost. The topic for disscussion was never actually adressed though. "Is enlightenment worth it if it makes you insane?"
We've talked about everything between time distortions from traveling at the speed of light to tautology. Is it too much to ask for an orderly philosophical disscussion about the topic at hand?
... eh. It never works that way with philosophy though. You'll forgive the ... gee. I guess its a rant. Like I said earlier, its late enough to be early out my way and I really need to get some sleep. So, without further adieu, I'm going to bed.
You posed an interesting question and I thank you for that.