Around eight years ago, two other guys and I came up with our own religion. It's just the sort of thing that people did when they were in their early 20's during the early 2000s. We called it the Church of Nil. Nilism is divided into three ministries; Nihilism, Slack and Discord - combining what we felt were the most enlightened parts of those three groups. To contrast the lofty ideals of the three pillars, we devised three disciplines as well; Nil-Science, Propaganda and Inactivism. Though the Church of Nil began to disintegrate almost as quickly as it was formed, certain aspects of our philosophy have stuck with me. Last time I talked about my adoration for action and inaction. It seems only right that I expand on the latter with some background on inactivism.
The culture which spawned the Church of Nil was one of caution, fear and apathy. Bush had recently been elected. 9/11 was still in the near future, but the climate was already prepared for what would come after. We formed our "fake religion" as a way of expressing our distaste for the current state of the world. However, we wanted our opinions and thoughts to reach viral levels (long before the concept of viral advertising had become widespread). Most importantly, we wanted this kind of influence without ever leaving the counter at our favorite coffee house. Inactivism was devised as the discipline involved in spreading positive ideas without effort. The most basic tools of inactivism are the "aura of intrigue" and "subliminal hypnosis". The former is the simple act of gathering together and projecting the kind of mystery and confidence that attracts others. We determined that the best way to spread our ideas was not to stand on a mound and preach to the masses but rather to use charisma to bring the masses to us. The latter involves leaving subtle workings of the Church of Nil in places which will inspire others to create their own Nil-truth.
Although the Church of Nil failed as a body (our Minister of Slack having to flee the state along with our Propaganda director), the theories of implementation were sound. What was originally devised as a way of getting people to think about things the way we did without any effort on our part turned out to be one of the most stunning trends of the last half of this decade in the form of viral advertising. These days every conceivable product is advertised in this manner. Trails of breadcrumbs are put in place, and human curiosity supplies all the locomotion for the process.
It is, in a way, terrifying to observe the lemming-like behavior that humans are capable of. At the same time, it is absolutely empowering for those of us who wish to use it for important ends. While some may want to promote their new film using these methods, there are others who want to lead the world to a new enlightenment with them. Science fiction often tells fantastic stories about hive-minded societies that think together. The fatal flaw with these societies usually comes when some anomaly is introduced and the lack of individuality leads to a lack of creative problem solving. Humanity may be more like a hive mind than Sci-fi authors believe. Individuality may be more of a hindrance as the single-minded aspects of our species can be bent to the whims of a few charismatic individuals. If humanity does triumph however, it will not be as one great society of individuals but rather as many thinking as one. Whether it is a triumph or a disaster will depend primarily on who begins the thought process which follows its course to our end.
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Monday, March 23, 2009
Primer on Rationality
Welcome to my blog. First, let me thank you for taking the time to read what I have to say. There is not and has never been anything more important that the moments of our lives and how we choose to fill them. Since this is the first posting here, I'm going to expand on that concept and hope that it can give some insight into why I would choose to spend these moments of my life writing.
One of the big questions is "what is most important in life?". Like most of the other big questions, any answer given is pure speculation on anyone's part. To understand why this question doesn't need answering, you need to take a step back in the process. What we do with our lives is less meaningful than our ability to do anything at all. Every action of every person on Earth will inevitably come to affect the course of history. When you have a bagel for breakfast, you are choosing to eat a bagel rather than eat a waffle. You are also choosing to eat a bagel rather than take a knife from the kitchen, walk out onto the street and start stabbing people indiscriminately. When we think of important or history-making acts, we think of the stabbings more than the bagels. "Man decides not to stab stranger" is not going to make the evening news. In the greatest scheme of things however, that bagel is just as meaningful.
Every action we take (or choose not to take) is at the same time vitally important to the future of the world and also completely inconsequential. It is this paradox that is the foundation not just of modern thought but of thought itself. When humans first began to evolve from animals, consciousness could be much more easily discerned from actions not taken than those which were. When a prehistoric creature decided not to follow its instinctual path - as eons of evolution had set for it - that is when the first breakthrough of thought and reason was made. In the ages that followed, the great advancements in civilization were made from expansions on this concept. When we chose not to be cold, we made fire. When we chose not to kill each other and take each others property, we developed community as we know it. These practices are not wholly the domain of humans, of course. Wolf packs defend each other and respect the territory that others have claimed for themselves (for the most part). Humans, however, evolved to be able to make choices about each moment in our lives in the face of conflicting instincts. Humans became capable of leaps of clarity in thought. Some people argue that science began in Greece during the Bronze Age. Some place the origins of science even later than that. In my mind, science began the first time a human realized that something was possible despite all evidence to the contrary - and then made it happen.
We are left with a world where the choices we make can have enormous repercussions throughout the world. Some may lament that the acts of few can have such a great effect on the world when those few choose a course of action that society defines as "evil". I believe that we cannot be so limited in our willingness to celebrate humanity's greatest asset. Though some people do terrible things, some also do wondrous things. The human capacity to make these choices in the first place is the greatest strength in our species. It may be the source of our eventual extinction, but it is surely the only source of our eventual survival.
One of the big questions is "what is most important in life?". Like most of the other big questions, any answer given is pure speculation on anyone's part. To understand why this question doesn't need answering, you need to take a step back in the process. What we do with our lives is less meaningful than our ability to do anything at all. Every action of every person on Earth will inevitably come to affect the course of history. When you have a bagel for breakfast, you are choosing to eat a bagel rather than eat a waffle. You are also choosing to eat a bagel rather than take a knife from the kitchen, walk out onto the street and start stabbing people indiscriminately. When we think of important or history-making acts, we think of the stabbings more than the bagels. "Man decides not to stab stranger" is not going to make the evening news. In the greatest scheme of things however, that bagel is just as meaningful.
Every action we take (or choose not to take) is at the same time vitally important to the future of the world and also completely inconsequential. It is this paradox that is the foundation not just of modern thought but of thought itself. When humans first began to evolve from animals, consciousness could be much more easily discerned from actions not taken than those which were. When a prehistoric creature decided not to follow its instinctual path - as eons of evolution had set for it - that is when the first breakthrough of thought and reason was made. In the ages that followed, the great advancements in civilization were made from expansions on this concept. When we chose not to be cold, we made fire. When we chose not to kill each other and take each others property, we developed community as we know it. These practices are not wholly the domain of humans, of course. Wolf packs defend each other and respect the territory that others have claimed for themselves (for the most part). Humans, however, evolved to be able to make choices about each moment in our lives in the face of conflicting instincts. Humans became capable of leaps of clarity in thought. Some people argue that science began in Greece during the Bronze Age. Some place the origins of science even later than that. In my mind, science began the first time a human realized that something was possible despite all evidence to the contrary - and then made it happen.
We are left with a world where the choices we make can have enormous repercussions throughout the world. Some may lament that the acts of few can have such a great effect on the world when those few choose a course of action that society defines as "evil". I believe that we cannot be so limited in our willingness to celebrate humanity's greatest asset. Though some people do terrible things, some also do wondrous things. The human capacity to make these choices in the first place is the greatest strength in our species. It may be the source of our eventual extinction, but it is surely the only source of our eventual survival.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
