 |
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
||
 |
 |
|
||
|
||||
 |
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
My Cosmic PrinciplesOctober 02, 2005 I just finished two overlapping horse-sitting gigs, the first Tuesday morning through Thursday night, the second Thursday afternoon through last night. The second was live-in; the first drive-by, involving breakfast, lunch, and supper visits to look after two horses, two large and rambunctious dogs, and one low-maintenance cat. Figure in one or two trips a day to look after Allie and her barnmates and one pass by my apartment, usually around noon, to feed Rhodry and check e-mail and phone messages, and it all adds up to more time on the roads than usual. Oh yeah, I also rode Allie an hour and a half to the Ag Hall yesterday morning for a horse show, and back an hour and a half in the late afternoon. More about that in a later blog. Martha's Vineyard being an island of 100 square miles, the options for long drives are limited, especially so given that my usual range probably covers no more than 50 square miles, most of which has no roads on it so I'm out there on horseback or on foot. Since bargain-basement gas is currently going for $3.42 a gallon, this is a blessing. Short hauls over very familiar terrain (many years ago a long-timer told me that the biggest danger of island roads was boredom) aren't all that conducive to deep philosophical ponderings, but over the last few days I have been playing a little mind-game: If I had to boil down all my values, ethics, and experiences into two cosmic principles that guide my day-to-day life, what would they be? (Why two? One was clearly impossible, and three and up opened the gate to principles that, while significant, were obviously less than cosmic.) Here they are. For the moment. Until I come up with something better, or spend more time on the road. #1: As soon as human beings gain a little freedom, they start looking for ways to get rid of it. #2: Polls and academic studies can provide useful information about very large groups of people, but they don't tell you much about particular persons. (The seed of this took root in my head many years ago, when I was voraciously reading books like The Dancing Wu Li Masters, The Tao of Physics, and Physics for Poets. I love those quantum particles that don't do what the general rules predict they're going to do.) #1 and #2 should be taken together: #1 is one of those generalizations that #2 advises you to be suspicious of. As is often the case, the generalization is much less interesting than the exceptions to it. The particular humans who don't hide behind gods, genes, screwed-up parents, "human nature," and spirit-killing dependence on alcohol, drugs, public opinion, and Stuff (among other things -- this list is not exhaustive) are the ones worth watching. They may be few, but they really are everywhere. Keep an eye out. Aha, you say; in deciding, quite arbitrarily, to choose only two cosmic principles, you have fallen prey to #1: you had the freedom to choose one or three or ten, but you chickened out. Aha back atcha. Some secular humanist types are probably looking at #1 and thinking, Aha! Look at all those people giving up their freedom to God and convincing themselves that "intelligent design" is a valid hypothesis, despite total lack of empirical support for it. Well, yeah, it's pretty clear that for many people "God" is a handy receptacle to dump their free will in, and it has the advantage of giving them a brickbat to whack others over the head with: "Because I said so" just doesn't have the force of "Because GOD said so." But for many other people, "God" expands their freedom and their courage and their connection to others. Which makes me suspect that maybe God, or belief in God, in itself isn't the problem.
|
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
 |
|
|||
 |
|
|||
Home - Writing - Editing - About Susanna - Bloggery - Articles - Poems - Contact Copyright ©
Susanna J. Sturgis. All rights reserved. |
||||