Whitman on the soul, body, God

48

I have said that the soul is not more than the body,
And I have said that the body is not more than the soul,
And nothing, not God, is greater to one than one's self is,
And whoever walks a furlong without sympathy walks to his own
    funeral drest in his shroud,
And I or you pocketless of a dime may purchase the pick of the earth,
And to glance with an eye or show a bean in its pod confounds the
    learning of all times,
And there is no trade or employment but the young man following it
    may become a hero,
And there is no object so soft but it makes a hub for the wheel'd universe,
And I say to any man or woman, Let your soul stand cool and composed
    before a million universes.

And I say to mankind, Be not curious about God,
For I who am curious about each am not curious about God,
(No array of terms can say how much I am at peace about God and
    about death.)

I hear and behold God in every object, yet understand God not in the least,
Nor do I understand who there can be more wonderful than myself.

Why should I wish to see God better than this day?
I see something of God each hour of the twenty-four, and each moment then,
In the faces of men and women I see God, and in my own face in the glass,
I find letters from God dropt in the street, and every one is sign'd
    by God's name,
And I leave them where they are, for I know that wheresoe'er I go,
Others will punctually come for ever and ever.

"Song of Myself" Leaves of Grass (Project Gutenberg)

When I read this section to Sarah she got stuck on the "Nor do I understand who there can be more wonderful than myself." With the light of some of the other lines of his I've posted hopefully it comes across less egotistical because I really think, to Whitman, self and others are cojoined.

Whitman on metaphysics

The Base of All Metaphysics

And now gentlemen,
A word I give to remain in your memories and minds,
As base and finale too for all metaphysics.

(So to the students the old professor,
At the close of his crowded course.)

Having studied the new and antique, the Greek and Germanic systems,
Kant having studied and stated, Fichte and Schelling and Hegel,
Stated the lore of Plato, and Socrates greater than Plato,
And greater than Socrates sought and stated, Christ divine having
    studied long,
I see reminiscent to-day those Greek and Germanic systems,
See the philosophies all, Christian churches and tenets see,
Yet underneath Socrates clearly see, and underneath Christ the divine I
    see,
The dear love of man for his comrade, the attraction of friend to friend,
Of the well-married husband and wife, of children and parents,
Of city for city and land for land.

Walt Whitman's Leaves of Grass (Project Gutenberg)

on understanding and analysis (scribblings)

5/2/2008

"pearls before swine! pearls before swine!"

"quack! quack!"

I waddle around flustered like the ugly duckling with ruffled feathers.

---
Contrary to how many think of it, stupidity is not related to intelligence. I rarely meet a stupid moron (in the technical sense of moron). We expect a moron to behave a certain way because of diminished capacities. We love him for his deficiencies because it's a trait of birth, not a trait of character. I only recognize stupidity as it shows itself in character. If you examine the ordinary use of expletives related to intelligence you'll probably find others who express similar sentiments.

I'd like to get this phrase into more common usage, "That's the stupidest genius I have ever met."

We're all subject to our environment and genetics so someone might say that sort of statement is unfair. For the sake of humanity, the stupid geniuses deserve blame.

---
Analysis is not the same as understanding. Understanding is when you try to reach through the text to get at the meaning in the person. Analysis is when you examine the text to determine its logical structure, strengths and flaws. Understanding is much more difficult and useful than analysis and it requires a much more subtle mind. Analysis is for the man who wants to become only a better thinker in a particular way, understanding is for the man who wants to become a better person.

Understanding and analysis are thoroughly at odds with one another. Only a rare individual in an exceptional situation will willingly undergo external analysis. Everyone loves to be understood. Analysis is like behavioristic educational methods: It's a useful tool but it is best used (i.e. used morally) when practiced on oneself.

We fool ourselves when we think we've found accuracy in either of these methods. The best thing we can get from understanding is better relationships, the best thing we get from analysis is personal clarity.

Analysis can clarify what you've got but understanding embraces imagination in such a way that it can move you forward.


4/30/2008

The true myth says, "you must change your life." (Rilke)

Equally, the myth which fails to continually communicate that message ceases to be true.


4/22/2008

the value of metaphysics

I use metaphysical systems to moderate my arguments. What I mean by this is that I think an argument holds more water if it can be described within a variety of metaphysical contexts. I slap on a few that I find in some part compelling and see if, when I reframe, a version of the argument can still stick. If so, there's usually something to it, if not, I try to at least rethink a bit before I go forward. This also shows me strengths and weaknesses in various systems. That being the case, I hope that most of my arguments could be accepted by a reasonable individual with whom I have metaphysical disagreements (I do think such a person exists, maybe even two!).


4/18/2008

When forced to choose between
    "fatalistic bullshit" and "sentimentalist blather",

I'll take the foolishness over the falsity.

--
All men (I mean me) at times fall into the trap of speaking without thinking.

the mathematical universe

For those still interested in proving the existence of external reality, a programmer recently pointed me to this paper on the mathematical universe hypothesis (MUH). The programmer's very strong (unnecessarily harsh I think) recommendation...

Note that the MUH is not a theory or a position. It is the only formally definable option. Every other option is meaningless gibberish. Therefore, it is FACT.

And by no coincidence, I arrived at this exact conclusion (if a bit fuzzier then) almost a decade ago. My current thinking is much more sophisticated.

I can bootstrap myself starting from solipsism, I make no distinction between models and what they represent, and no distinction between models that all fit the same theory.
...
It gets to where physical reality is defined as whatever minimal theor(ies) will logically explain your subjective experience.

This lets you almost immediately step out from solipsisim by concluding that physical reality is independent from your will. And it resolves paradoxes left, right, front and center.

Like why the universe responds to a mathematical description: because it's made of mathematics. Or why the external reality responds to your will to command it into existence: you never command it!

It also realigns physical reality with major theorems in mathematics. Like the one that says you can't even in theory pick between two dual representations. Or the one where any infinitely expressible language can't be resolved by any finite axiomatic system.

It drives a stake right through the heart of filthy (neo-)Platonism. And it affirms the connection between physics, the study of one reality, and mathematics, the study of all realities.

From Max Tegmark's essay--

The idea that our universe is in some sense mathematical goes back at least to the Pythagoreans, and has been extensively discussed in the literature. Galileo Galilei stated that the Universe is a grand book written in the language of mathematics, and Wigner reflected on the “unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics in the natural sciences”. In this essay, I will push this idea to its extreme and argue that our universe is mathematics in a well-defined sense.