But, that's neither here nor there as today is today and that was another day past.
I've embarked on what seems to be a similar project to last year when I wrote about Saw, the Sith and power philosophies, however this time rather than solely focusing on the intersections between the Sith as portrayed in the Star Wars video game Knights Of The Old Republic II and pitfalls within certain philosophical positions relating to excessive egoism, with more a focus in line with this idea of suffering as part of the human experience and how the Saw franchise serves as an example to these things. So it would seem then that this posit regarding suffering as an innate part of the human experience would be true; however I have to question then if that is symptomatic as a whole as Efilism would claim— and I do substantially disagree with the conclusions of— to all conscious lifeforms, or is it specific to the cognitive capacity and environment that can be comprehended to said species? And with that where does the capacity for empathy within and beyond one's own species come about, as Nick Cave details? Do loved house pets suffer or are they content?
Nonetheless then with a similar strand of thought I also have been wondering if it could it be so possible that while mental health is far more of a recognized concern, that concern simultaneously causes more issues as diagnosis becomes self defining? Sort of how Emil Cioran observed solipsism in suffering, constantly searching for better verbiage. In the same vein then: I wonder how much certain issues are— or can be— contagiously acquired by proxy rather than innate or naturally developed. To steal an analogy from Smiles, who runs Satanism Central on discord— spend enough time sifting through needles, you’ll probably get pricked and catch something icky. With that then, how much of it becomes an excuse for certain actions as opposed to an explanation?
I think then it might pair with something I’ve been considering that seems a trend with neurodivergent people; being that, there's something suspicious about the whole neurodivergent trend and self-perpetuated infantalization. Monkey see monkey do? Which isn’t to say certain things aren’t there prior to diagnosis (self or professional), but after it would seem things get more intense and things not visible or there prior pop up...
But anyway, I've since finished the first of the original two out of the ten movies in the Saw franchise— and I do include Spiral even though many seem to shy away from it as it is technically from the book of Saw, as the title proclaims— with its torture-porn-gore-galore intertwined with what is an interesting philosophical posit as reasoning for these games and traps made in order for the unwitting and often unwilling participants to begin valuing life, in spite of its suffering states. This project as a whole, I'm ultimately unsure where it will actually go though it is primarily asking what the effects of suffering are on a social conditions for a fundamentally social animal.
In conjunction and stemming from that and my last full writing on the topic of Suffering, Sympathy, Solipsism & Cornflakes is my fascination with the artist Nick Cave. I've heard a lot of his music this year, primarily in driving about Chicago his music was common-played on the car stereo; and obviously with my viewing of the British-gangster based series Peaky Blinders during the first four seasons and the heavy inclusion of Cave as the main theme with Red Right Hand. I finished Peaky Blinders on Sunday with watching it's capping off movie Immortal Man; and with that have some routes to take with that too. In regards to Nick Cave though, I heard him speaking on Bella Freud's podcast Fashion Neurosis on the Enneagram personality model, which ironically is the book I'm using to hold up my notebook as I jot this down, and haven't ever read but a few pages— but given that it regards personality I'm curious how it could intertwine with the social effects that suffering produces in affect. I find then that Peaky Blinders itself is similar in many ways to the blowfish metaphor which characterises Breaking Bad and Better Call Saul in its intersection with Might Is Right, and that being and as mentioned in the Cillian Murphy leading series various times this idea of those living by the sword and dying by it; and in relation not necessarily to the Biblical position in regards to this as that book is way to contradictory to take seriously on most of its philosophical posits, but to what seems the origin in the Greek tragedy of Agamemnon by Aeschylus. As much as it would then seem true too by these depictions, I also question that given this whole ethos of 'an eye for an eye making the world blind' is by my view a logical inconsistency in of itself, would the real issue be envy as Machiavelli prescribed it?
Now I sit here with an intermission to Saw and from what seems major philosophical and psychological inquiries to watch the Bob Odenkirk movie Nobody 2. I remember watching the first installment at the table in the basement in Chicago. I can see why it's likened to John Wick, though in my opinion has more of a similarity to the Bruce Willis RED duology...
No comments:
Post a Comment