In the Unending Dichotomy Between Comedy and Tragedy...

I rather be smiling...

So, yesterday was perhaps one of the best selections of seminar readings I've experienced all semester. That being said, it's important to note that I didn't read them until today.

In an attempt to dismiss a truly rare academic shortcoming, I'd like to note we'd fallen a bit behind in the readings. It's genuinely both no one and everyone's fault. An odd combination of pseudo-holidays (I'm sorry to the Irish of the world... I don't hold St. Patty's Day in the highest regard) and extreme and extraordinary harsh winter weather.

That being said, we were assigned (I don't know how I missed this, considering I was present and taking notes and all) to read two days of the syllabus to catch up. The great irony in this is that the room fell silent in discussion. Unfortunately, this isn't all that vast a contrast to the average class period, but at an absolute minimum there are (including me) about 3-4 people who actively participate in the discussion. They're not historic discussion, we don't unearth some timeless truth, but they're of great merit and value in attempting to discern the validity and value of the readings.

So, back to where we started, I read them today.

The first selection was from Kevin MacDonald, who I'm not all that personally fond of at the moment. For reference it was; The Culture of Critique Ch. 2, The Boasian School of Anthropology and the Decline of Darwinism in the Social Sciences. I'd include a link to Amazon, but again I'm not particularly happy with Mr. MacDonald at the moment.

I'll be the first to admit that this is the most basic example of cognitive dissonance. Initially, I had trouble with MacDonald because he's rallying against Boas and his disciples in their work towards the basic equity of all humans. Or, for that matter, their advancement of an academic contrast to eugenics. Because I disagreed with his premise, that natural psychological road block constructed itself in an attempt to disapprove of his tactics... in turn easing the process of disagreeing with his arguments.

So, instead of attempting to rally against his arguments or disprove his assertions (because I don't possess the adequate proficiency or mastery of subject) I instead attacked his line of attack. Falling victim to the same shortcomings I accuse him of doing. It seems he spends all his time castigating his perceived nemesis, accusing them of more scholarship than science while doing the exact same thing himself.

So, you know, bugger him. And, not just for disagreeing with a concept I hold dearly, but for doing so in a process that can best be described as "Academic Assassination." (I'm going to pretend I coined that phrase... scratch that, just google'd it... 398,000 hits on the massive interwebs)

Either way, onto the point of this post... (fuggin finally, i'm not known for my concise style -- for obvious reasons)

The second reading (there's actually three, but i'm distracting myself with this post at the moment) was an article from the Atlantic Monthly (April, 1998) named "The Biological Basis of Morality" by Edward O. Wilson (Short Bio from the Atlantic Monthly: Edward O. Wilson is the Pellegrino University Research Professor and Honorary Curator in Entomology at Harvard University).

This is the link (you really should read it, it's relatively short) -- http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/98apr/biomoral.htm

It's an incredible article and in reading it I felt a lot like I did when I first read Nietzsche's Genealogy of Morality. It seemed to draw together various loose conceptions i'd held/invented/absorbed overtime, tying them together masterfully into a straightforward argument. I'll not rob you of the cathartic experience of reading it for yourself (not to mention I doubt I'd be able to really do it justice, and most likely just shade or taint your expectations) nor in any way enable you to skip the genuine experience for the false idol I'd inevitably put forward.

Wow, through a bit of lofty rhetoric I elevated that article quite a bit... These things happen.

Either way, it was the conclusion that left me in a sort of introspective tailspin. Dr. Wilson concludes as follows; "The eventual result of the competition between the two world views, I believe, will be the secularization of the human epic and of religion itself. However the process plays out, it demands open discussion and unwavering intellectual rigor in an atmosphere of mutual respect."

If ever there were three things lacking from the discussion of religion and moral principles/precepts they'd be: Open Discussion, Unwavering Intellectual Rigor and an Atmosphere of Mutual Respect. This of course, got me thinking. The inevitability of conflict born out of absolute and unwavering beliefs troubles me.

Of course I began to think of the disdain I hold personally for the "pathologically religious" (which I was about to attribute to Keith Olbermann, until I google'd it, and it tied back to Freud -- the unexpected irony of which is striking considering the MacDonald piece). Basically, think Evangelical Christians or Islamic Extremists (that equivocation there will haunt me professionally if later discovered -- in humorous contrast to the other 60,000 words covering my personal deviance in regards to drinking and drugs and what not expounded upon here).

Then my thoughts turned to existence itself (as we conceive of it). I remember back when I was 12 or so, I began to consider what happened after death. I can remember the countless restless hours lost to thoughts of non-existence. It's a disturbing and frightful concept, even thinking of it now sends the slightest of shivers down my spine. As a thought exercise, take everything you know and love of your existence currently, and invert it... It always frightened me much more than any concept of hell, at least hell was something, somewhere, no matter how unpleasant... it was at least something.

Then somehow (really, if you could climb in my mind with me... its a bit scatter shot at times) my thoughts turned to Jed Bartlett, yes... the fictional President presiding over the liberal utopia known as "The West Wing" (best show ever, "forever ever, forever ever ever", by the way). In my mind he embodies some how the compromise of tolerance I could be content with. I'm going to flub this quote here (not even the ever powerful googles can track it down) but, its something along the lines of this paraphrase... "My christianity works for me Tobias." A little context is required to make that meaningful, to set the scene: Toby (communications director and part time antagonist of President Bartlett) was worried about telling the president that his ex-wife was pregnant with their twins, because he thought his christian morals would be disapproving of such an occurance (two things, yes, I intentionally didn't capitalize that twice over -- to the dismay of the spell checker built into Firefox -- and, I believe occurance is a word).

Basically, I think of the religious in the same way a good deal of the religious think of homosexuals. They're content to allow it to happen if they don't have to be inconvenienced by the public display of it. Giving birth to such lines as "what two consenting adults do in their own home is no business of mine," (which is a bit crap by the way considering how they'd equally be happy to allow spousal/child abuse by the same logic).

Either way, I was pacing about anxious and unsure... disturbed by the uncertainty and seemingly irrevocable nature of the topic (it might have been exacerbated by the level of caffeine flowing through my veins, matched only by the lack of food, and the length of time since my last cigarette). But, I was unsettled and worried for a moment that this concept might consume my mind for well too long today.

But I found refuge in timeless irreverence.

Monty Python Sings.

Which is both a declarative statement and the name of an album from the early nineties, containing what could charitably be described as the greatest hits of the Monty Python troop. If you don't know who / what I'm talking about, please leave (seriously, yesterday I came to discover not nearly as many people as I'd previously assumed had seen Reservoir Dogs -- and I can't bare your insolence/ignorance any further). (Wow, that was an elitist aside, no?)

But, as the title/sub-title contends... In the Unending Dichotomy Between Comedy and Tragedy... I'd rather be smiling...

So, I qued up the timeless classics "Always Look on the Bright Side of Life" / "Galaxy Song" / "Lumberjack Song" / "Penis Song" / "Money Song" / "Accountancy Shanty" / "Every Sperm is Sacred" / "Eric the Half a Bee" / "Meaning of Life" / "Henry Kissinger" worked out a bit... then put this together.

Cheers and good luck to you all,
-Rys

p.s. - I'm using post to bury my last post. If you haven't read it yet, feel free to skip over it.