|
revanisthesith
|
read my profile
sign my guestbook
Name: David Gender: Male
Interests: Music (Punk/Alternative/Modern Rock/Indie), Computer/Video Games, Politics, History, Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, Legos, Board Games, Academic Competitions Expertise: Being lucky and talented Occupation: Student
Message: message me Website: visit my website AIM: revanisthesith
Member Since:
12/1/2005
|
|
| Love: A Denouncement
Love: A Denouncement
A post-Valentine’s Day wake-up call to the selfish superficiality of the modern relationship. By Stewart Lundy
In the wake of a holiday with one of the highest suicide rates, I offer an alternative to self-harm: realism.
Dozens
of individuals have succumbed to the irrational impulse to integrate.
The urge to merge has driven countless singles to couple with the most
peculiar creatures. God made man and woman to complement (not simply
compliment) each other. But perhaps under the guise of petty, pathetic,
and pretentious relationships, the neuroses of these pairs have
actually canceled those of the other’s sublimely; or perhaps they are,
as we have so often suspected, utterly insane.
What are the
chances that you will satisfy your spouse simultaneously, sensually,
sentimentally, and sexually? You are at your sexual prime biologically,
though hardly experientially, and are therefore practically impotent.
You are eighteen and only one of this spring’s eighteen statistically
doomed college relationships. But take heart, heartache will do you a
world of good. Like heartburn, it is unpleasant, but will teach you not
to swallow things whole.
She is nothing special. Yes, you
two have everything in common. You came to the same school, you were
both educated the same way, you were both raised under the same
religion, you both aspire to the same careers, and you both think this
is unique. The fact that you believe that you have something special
places you directly in the middle of the deluded throng under the big
sign with the single word: “Average.”
Love overlooks a
multitude of sins, sighs, and stupidity. The one thing love overlooks
best is its own idiocy. In the attempt to love wholly, the couple loves
blindly. They have found their chivalrous counterpart and now their
souls shall be wed. Blind to the fact that his armor is rusted, her
dress is torn, his character is less than faithful, and her disposition
only makes enemies, they both pretend they have found the form of love.
Neither of them has careers in mind. Neither of them wants
careers in mind: they, like good romantics, only have each other in
mind. This is how they hover on the sidewalk as they pass you with
their sickening infatuation, aggravating inconsideration, and
self-indulgent flirtation.
If you are Christian, maybe you have found Jesus in this time. He is so worthy of worship now that you have someone to worship you,
isn’t he? Or maybe you’re Buddhist, in which case you are more grounded
in reality. You know what your spouse worships is unworthy. You already
worship an ugly, old, fat man.
You cannot protect her. You
cannot help her. You cannot even love her. If you cared rightly, it
would be to improve her. It would be to admit her faults and let her
improve. But the couple is so deceived that the very possibility of
improvement is banished from their minds. To criticize is to blaspheme
the name of “True” Love.
Thus begins the self-perpetuated
stagnancy: this love cannot progress, for it has already arrived. The
discovery of the Ideal means there is no further to go, no further to
reach, no further to struggle. Your relationship is not perfect, nor is
your love perfect, nor is the object of your love perfect. Pretending
that it is will kill whatever might have been there. Pretending denies
the predicament of all things human: all things are ill. Denying cancer
does not make it go away. Denying cancer will not kill you immediately.
In fact, you may both just die of old age.
You are now
inseparable. All the time in the world will not make you more than
routine, and routine easily becomes as old to your significant other as
it already has to us. There is no world revolving around you. This
bestial obsession is obscene.
Romantic love is perhaps the
best argument for evolution. It does not improve anyone except
superficially and even then only subjectively. The better you know and
comply with your spouse, the better the response—the better the sex.
Love that seeks to improve the other goes against these symbiotic
relationships. Romantic love is narcissistic. It produces children, not
virtue. As long as both are happy, it will continue.
When
either decides that the other is not the ideal, they will leave with
all of that “love.” They will give it all to the next person they
mistake for their romantic ideal. They will not fall out of love with
you. They were never in love with you. Her love is as eternal as her
obsession with herself.
Pretending to be selfless, romance
is the most brazen display of selfishness. It subverts substantial love
by calling itself “true” love. The very fact that it must call itself
true is a strong indication that it is not. At best, it is the need to
be needed. At worst, it is desire disguised as charity.
“True” love is complacent. Real love is proactive.
Real
love puts its foot down. “True” love knows no limits. You are not in
love with her. You are in love with an abstract idea. Love her. Improve her.
And I’m a romantic. -Stewart Lundy http://www.kritikmagazine.com/culture/love | | |
| Kierkegaard - The Greater LoveThe Greater Love
By Søren Kierkegaard
Worldly wisdom would
have us believe that love is a relationship between one person and another.
Christ’s life teaches that love is a relationship between three:
person-Godperson. However beautiful a love-relationship is between two or more
people – however complete all their enjoyment and all their bliss in mutual
devotion and affection are for them, and even if all people praise this
relationship – if God and the relationship to God is left out, then this is not
love but a mutual and enchanting illusion. For only in love for God can one
love in truth. To help another human being to love God is to love another person.
And to be helped by another human being to love God is to be loved.
Love is by no means merely a human bond,
no matter how faithful and tender it is. As soon as you leave God out, the
power of human judgment becomes highest. Such judgment loses sight of love
altogether. As soon as a love-relationship does not lead me to God, and as soon
as I do not lead another person to God, this love – even if it were the most
blissful and joyous attachment, even if it were the highest good in the lover’s
earthly life – nevertheless is not true love.
Not only should the celibate belong solely
to God, so should the person who in love is bound to a woman or a man. He shall
not first seek to please his wife, but shall strive first that his love may
please God. Consequently, it is not the wife who shall teach the husband how he
should love her, or the husband his wife, or a friend his friend, or associates
their associates, but it is God who shall teach each individual how he or she
should love. Only when the God-relationship determines what constitutes love is
love prevented from being some illusion or self-deception.
Love that does not lead to God, love that
does not have the single goal of leading us to love God, such love eventually comes
to a standstill. Moreover, it escapes the ultimate and most terrible collision:
in the love-relationship there is an infinite difference between God’s
conception of love and ours. A purely human conception of love can never
comprehend that anyone, through being loved as completely as possible by
another person, would be able to stand in the other person’s way. And yet,
Christianly understood, this very thing is possible, for to be loved thus can
be a hindrance to one’s God-relationship.
So what is to be done? Christ knows how to
remove the collision without removing love. It demands only this sacrifice (in many
cases it is the greatest sacrifice possible): being willing to accept that the
reward for your love is to be hated. Wherever someone is loved in such a way as
to endanger another’s Godrelationship, there is a collision. And wherever this
collision occurs, there is the requirement of a sacrifice that cannot be humanly
grasped. For the Christian view means this: to truly love oneself is to love
God; to truly love another person is, though it mean being hated, to help the
other person love God.
The world cannot seem to get it through
its head that apart from God love is a chimera. For God alone is
love. Where love is, God not only becomes the third party but
essentially becomes the only loved object, so that it is not the husband who is
the wife’s beloved, but it is God, and it is the wife who is helped by the
husband to love God, and conversely. The love-relationship is a triangular
relationship of the lover, the beloved, and love – not love by itself but love in
God. For ultimately it is God who has placed love in us humans,
and it is God who shall finally decide what is love.
In matters of love it takes no time at all
to become deceived. It is so easy to get a quick, fanciful picture of what love
is and then be satisfied with the fancy. It is still easier to get a few people
to associate together in self-love, to be sought after and admired by them till
the end. But if your ultimate and highest purpose is to have an easy and sociable
life, then don’t have anything to do with Christ or his love. Flee from him,
for he will do the very opposite. He will make your life difficult and do this precisely
by making you stand alone before God.
Thus when a friend, a beloved, or other
lovers and associates notice that you want to learn from Christ what it is to
love instead of learning from them, don’t be surprised when they say to you, “Spare
yourself. Give up this eccentricity. Why take life so seriously? Cut out the straining,
and let us all live a beautiful, rich, and meaningful life in friendship and
joy.” And if you give in to the suggestions of this false friendship, you will
surely be loved and praised for it. But if you don’t, if in loving you will be a
traitor neither to God nor to yourself nor to the others, you must expect your
love to be refused and to be called selfish. Even if you say nothing, the
others will notice that your life contains, if it is truly related to God’s
demand, an admonition, a demand on them. It is this they want to do away with.
How many have been corrupted – divinely
understood – by such friendship, or by a woman’s love, simply because,
defrauded out of his God-relationship, he became far too attached to her while
she in turn was inexhaustible in her praise of his love? How many have
relatives and friends corrupted by their love because they got him to forget
his God-relationship and changed it to something people could shout about,
admire, without being sensitive to any admonition about higher things?
Do not appeal, therefore, to the judgment
of others in order to prove your love. Human judgment has validity only as far
as it agrees with God’s demand. No love between one person and another can, in
and of itself, ever be perfectly happy, ever perfectly secure. Even the
happiest love between two people has still one danger, the danger that earthly
love can become too intense, too important, so that the God-relationship is
hindered. You must always watch apprehensively, lest this danger overtake you,
lest you too should forget God, or that the beloved might do so. Such
apprehension may mean being hated by the beloved. But only God, who is the one
true source of love, is the continuously happy, the continuously blessed object
of love. You should thus not watch too apprehensively; watch only in adoration.
[This essay is in Kierkegaard's Provocations, which can be found here: http://ldolphin.org/Provocations.pdf ]
| | |
| Kierkegaard - Neighbor LoveNeighbor Love
By Søren Kierkegaard
If anyone asks, “Who is my
neighbor?” then Christ’s reply to the Pharisee, who asked this same question,
contains the only answer, for in answer to this question Christ turned everything
around. Christ says: “Which of these three, do you think, proved neighbor to
the man who fell among the robbers?” The Pharisee answers correctly, “The one
who showed mercy to him” (Lk. 10:36). This means that by doing your duty you
easily discover who your neighbor is. The Pharisee’s answer is contained in
Christ’s question. He towards whom I have a duty is my neighbor, and when I
fulfill my duty, I prove that I am a neighbor. Christ does not speak about recognizing
our neighbor but about being a neighbor yourself, about proving yourself to be
a neighbor, something the Samaritan showed by his compassion. Choosing a lover,
finding a friend, yes that is a long, hard job, but your neighbor is easy to
recognize, easy to find – if you yourself will only recognize your duty and be
a neighbor.
In this way, Christ has thrust romantic
love and friendship from the throne, the love rooted in mood and inclination,
preferential love. He does so in order to establish a spiritual love in its
place, love to our neighbor, a love which in all earnestness and truth is
inwardly more tender in the union of two persons than romantic love is and more
faithful in the sincerity of close relationship than the most famous
friendship. Let us not confuse the matter. Christ does not ask for a higher
love in addition to praising friendship and romantic love. No, Christian love teaches
love for all people, unconditionally all.
The poet and Christ explain things in
opposite ways. The poet idolizes feelings and since he has only romantic love
in mind, believes that to command love is the greatest foolishness and the most
preposterous kind of talk: Love and friendship contain no ethical task. Love
and friendship are good fortune, the highest good fortune. To find the one and
only beloved is good fortune, almost as great as to find the one and only
friend. For the poet, the highest task in life is to be properly grateful for one’s
good fortune. But one’s task can never be an obligation to find the beloved or
to find this friend. This is out of the question.
Christianity, however, dethrones feeling
and good fortune and replaces them with the shall.
The point at issue between the poet and Christ may be stated precisely in this
way: romantic love and friendship are preferential, the passion of preference;
Christian love, however, is self-renunciation’s love and therefore trusts in
the you shall. According
to Christ, our neighbor is our equal. Our neighbor is not the beloved, for whom
you have passionate preference, nor your friend, whom you prefer. Nor is your
neighbor, if you are well educated, the learned person with whom you have
cultural affinity – for with your neighbor you have before God the equality of humanity.
Nor is your neighbor one who is of higher social status than you, and you love
him because he has higher social status. This is mere preference and to that
extent self-love. Nor is your neighbor one who is inferior to you, and you love
him because he is inferior to you, because such love can easily be partiality’s
condescension and to that extent self-love.
No, Christian love, this you
shall, means equality. In your relationship to
people of distinction you shall love your neighbor. In relation to those who are
inferior you are not to love in pity but shall love your neighbor. Your
neighbor is every person, for on the basis of distinctions he is not your
neighbor, nor on the basis of likeness to you as in contrast to others. He is
your neighbor on the basis of equality with you before God.
We must take care not to be led into
self-love. The more decisively and exclusively preference centers upon any one
single person, including husband and wife, the farther it is from loving the
neighbor. Husband, do not lead your wife into the temptation of forgetting your
neighbor because of love for you. Wife, do not lead your husband into this
temptation either! Lovers may think that in their love they have the highest
good, but it is not so. No, love your beloved faithfully and tenderly, but let
love to your neighbor be the sanctifier in your covenant of union with God.
Love your friend honestly and devotedly, but let love to your neighbor be what
you learn from each other in the intimacy of friendship with God!
Moreover, the person who does not see that
his wife is first his neighbor, and only then his wife, never comes to truly
love his neighbor, no matter how many people he loves, for he has made an
exception of his wife. To be sure, one’s wife or husband is to be loved
differently than the friend and the friend differently than the neighbor, but
this is not an essential difference. The fundamental equality in love lies in the
category neighbor. Whatever your fate in romance and friendship, whatever your privation,
whatever your loss, the highest still stands: love your neighbor! You can
easily find him; him you can never lose. No change can take your neighbor from
you, for it is not your neighbor who holds you fast – it is your love, this you
shall, which holds fast your neighbor.
In this sense love is blind. Perfection in
the object has nothing to do with perfection in love. Precisely because one’s
neighbor has none of the excellencies which the beloved, a friend, or an
admired one may have – for that very reason love to one’s neighbor has all the
perfections which none of these others have. Let people debate as much as they
want about which object of love is the most perfect – there can never be any
doubt that love to one’s neighbor is the most perfect love. Love to one’s
neighbor is determined by love. Since your neighbor is unconditionally every
person, all distinctions are indeed removed from the object. True love is recognizable
only by love.
Therefore he who in truth loves, loves his
neighbor. And he who in truth loves his neighbor loves also his enemy. This is
obvious; for the distinction of friend or enemy is a distinction in the object
of love, but the object of love to your neighbor is always without distinction.
Your neighbor is the absolutely unrecognizable distinction between one person
and another; it is eternal equality before God – enemies, too, have this equality.
Distinction, this or that quality – be it
a virtue or a vice – is selfishness’ confusing element that marks every person
as different. But neighbor is eternity’s mark, a mark found on every human
being. Take many sheets of paper and write something different on each one.
They do not, at first glance, resemble each other. Then take every single
sheet, do not let yourself be confused by the differentiating inscriptions, and
hold each one up to the light and you shall see the same water-mark on them all.
Thus is neighbor the common mark, but you can see it only by the help of the
light of the eternal when it shines through every such distinction.
To love one’s neighbor, therefore, means
essentially to will to exist equally for every human being without exception.
If then you really do meet the king, gladly and respectfully give him his due.
You should see in him his inner glory, the equality of glory, the neighbor that
his human magnificence only conceals. If you meet a beggar – perhaps suffering
in sorrow over him more than he himself – you should nevertheless also see in
him his inner glory, the equality of glory, the neighbor which his wretched
outer garments conceal. Yes, then you shall see, wherever you turn your eye,
your neighbor. In being king, beggar, scholar, rich man, poor man, friend,
enemy, we do not resemble each other – in these ways we are all different. But
in being a neighbor we are all unconditionally alike.
[This essay is in Kierkegaard's Provocations, which can be found here: http://ldolphin.org/Provocations.pdf ]
| | |
| And you thought CCM couldn't get any worse....It can. And it has.
http://www.patrolmag.com/index.php?id=436
(For those of you who aren't associated with PHC, that site was started by several friends in the DC area. It's good.)
| | |
| 1984 Revisited
WAR IS PEACE 
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY 
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH And this bumper sticker was just too good to not post:
Goodbye, Giuliani. I won't miss you. Also, goodbye Edwards. May Huckabee soon follow you both. | | |
|