This is how Michael Novak encapsulated it in The Experience of Nothingness.
I recognize that I put structure into my world…There is no ‘real’ world out there, given, intact, full of significance. Consciousnes is constituted by randon, virtually infinite barrages of experience; these experiences are indistinguishably ‘inner’ and ‘outer’…Structure is put into experience by culture and self, and may also be pulled out again…The expereince of nothingness is an experience beyond the linits of reason…it is terrifying. It makes all attempts at speaking of purpose, goals, aims, meaning, importance, conformity, harmnony, unity----it makes all such attempts seem doubtful and spurious.
A bit hyperbolic perhaps but it is still in or around the bullseye in my view.
But Novak, of course, ultimately has God to fall back on. He blinks, in other words. What intrigues me, however, is the survival strategies of those who don’t blink.
It is more a complex, subjunctive frame of mind than a philosophical assessment perhaps but it revolves around an understanding that meaning in life is merely an existential contraption ever subject to change without notice—until we die and become nothing at all for eternity.
As opposed to fonts like religion or realism or ideology…or any one of hundreds of spiritual or New Age creeds.
Something there determines that all is not right. That’s why there’s the desire to bring about a change. And who is responsible for that demand to change? That’s what I’m asking. Culture, society has placed the demand before you, namely, that you should be like that, you aught to be like that. So you have accepted that as a model for yourself.
One’s naturalness is something that doesn’t have to be know. It just has to be allowed to function in its own way. Wanting to know that demands some know-how, which is requested from somebody. The functioning of the heart is a natural thing; the functioning of all the organs in your body is very natural. They are not for one moment asking themselves the question “How am I functioning?” The whole living organism has this tremendous intelligence which makes it function in a very natural way. What is called life has been separated from that. Life is living, which is in no way related to the functioning of this living organism.
So the question arises, “How to live?” It is the “How to live” that has really destroyed the natural way the whole thing is going on. That’s where the culture steps in and says, “This is the way you should act and live. This is the one and the only thing that is good for you and good for the society.” When one wants to change that state of affairs, the falsification of the natural state is felt. But what is there to change? That’s all I’m asking.
Are you suggesting there is a natural way to live? A way that transcends culture? Unless you live alone on an island you always have to engage in give and take with others in deciding what “the rules” will be. Rules are absolutely necessary given how our drives and our points of view ever come into conflict.
The experience of nothingness merely suggest the rules can never be ground in the Whole Truth. Instead, they are grounded in how each of us views this from within a particular culture and a particular historical age—and the particular set of circumstances we have have to confront existentially day in and day out.
But we can think of new ways to change this. But in so doing they will still come into conflict with how others think and feel. Then the rules have to be constantly revised.
Sure, I’m on board with the understanding of accepting that there is nothing that can be done to experience the reality of anything, except the reality that is imposed on us by the society. We have to accept the reality as it is imposed on us by the society because it is very essential for us to function in this world intelligently and sanely. If we don’t accept that reality, we are lost. We’ll end up in the psychiatric ward, or worse incarcerated. So we have to accept the reality as it is imposed on us by the culture, by society or whatever you want to call it, and at the same time understand that there is nothing that we can do to experience the reality of anything. Then you will not be in conflict with the society, and the demand to be something other than what you are will also come to an end.
When the movement in the direction of becoming something other than what you are isn’t there any more, you are not in conflict with yourself. If you are not in conflict with yourself, you cannot be in conflict with the society around you. As long as you are not at peace with yourself, it is not possible for you to be at peace with others. Even then there is no guarantee that your neighbors will be peaceful. But, there’s no need to be concerned with that. When you are at peace with yourself, then you are a threat to the society as it functions today. You will be a threat to your neighbors because they have accepted the reality of the world as real, and because they are also pursuing some funny thing called “peace”. You will become a threat to their existence as they know it and as they experience it. So you are all alone.
We don’t have to accept it as long as we are able to expose it. And we can come up with new ways of changing the realities imposed on us as children. But it is always a complex [and thus problematic] give and take between the past, the present and the future.
The experience of nothingness merely suggest that any meaning we assign to our points of view is existential. There is no right or wrong way to think, feel and behave if our thoughts, feelings and behaviors are being judged morally or politically by others.
I don’t think we become something we are not so much as encounter new expereinces, new relationships and new sources of information that force us over and over and over again to integrate the present into past.
But the tension between the past, present and future never goes away unless you settle for being something and objectify your Self. In other words, in my view, a self not in conflict with itself and the world around it is settling for being instead.
Given the experience of nothingness there is no way to know how to live. And to be “at peace with yourself” is just a persuasive illusion in my opinion. All it takes is one circumstantial landslide to blow that peace of mind all to hell.
It still seems that the question is “how to live?” How do those who don’t “blink” survive without some moral anchor?
I seem to have some anchor without needing any philosophical system (a kind of nothingness, as in absence of…). In general, life is a pleasant compulsion for me. If I did have some system, I doubt I would find life so pleasant. I’d have to be seeking answers and doubting this or that, or trying to prove something… instead I can just relax my mind for the most part. That’s just me, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with others asking questions and such. I just think people have different characters…
I often recognize a conflict with society’s standards and my neighbors’ with me, but like me, they have their own character and it’s not my desire to interfere with their lives, nor is it my desire to be interfered with, so I simply apply “camouflage” and blend in while being very much different.
This will be spurious too but in my visions I experienced the void [lets take this as a mental experience], the process is probably like death where all the senses are turned off except pure experience. I liken the senses to a hand, usually it is open and the senses [fingers] continually reach out for information, the void is experienced when the hand closes and there is no distinct sensory input. The question in death then becomes; what happens when the hand opens again, indeed can it? [I use death so as to understand the experience of the void].
Let us take ‘second sight’ ~ there is no such thing, the same applies to all the senses I.e. that’s all there is [the same senses but different usage of]. Second sight is merely unsubstantiated ordinary sight, in other words it is sight without input from the physical world. We can experience this in dreams visions and hallucinations, where it is the mind itself which is a source for ones visual experience.
So there we are in the void with no physical input, firstly I would state that absolutely everything you experience in your mind is of the mind, your heart beats but the experience of that is purely mental, your heart and lungs etc are mental objects, in fact your entire body as you experience it is a mental object. So now we are here in the void and yet with everything we had in life as experienced by the mind, so the big question is; can we touch someone else? Can we experience anything bar the void?
Well reducing things to their simplest, what is there which divides one soul [mental body] from another? I think that in the physical world it is that very source of input which divides us from the true experience of each other and of the environment. The senses are very shy and will not even attempt to experience anything which is not substantiated from physical input, this is simply because harm will quickly come to it if it does. We can break that connection with hallucinogens because the soul can no longer be sure of those inputs and will attempt to ‘see’ via perception etc, or in dreams we are safe in our beds and can afford the luxury of imaginary visualisations.
My guess is that beyond the void is an eternal mental world [as it has no physical restrictions nor limits]
Ah I see you are trying to derive morality from this [nothingness?]…
Well there may be a morality similar to that of religion, except you don’t need that nor god [irrespective of weather he exists or not]. We arrived or at least I did, at a mental eternal world or oblivion. Some criminals may despise themselves and not wish for an afterlife and hold themselves to oblivion [like a dark nirvana perhaps] though I doubt anyone actually would do that. Some ‘saints’ or the self righteous may wish it upon them, however I feel the descent into evil is a terrible shame for both that perpetrator and the victim, moreover such things usually derive from cycles of evil, such that it is hard to hold accountancy of blame for any particular individual.
Principle; ‘Where there is evil in the world, it is of the world’ [quetz]
My guess is that evil for everyone is left in the world rather than brought into Elysium/eternity, yet I can only see one way in which this can be achieved; the evil doers would surely need to live a life without doing evil, and their desires would thusly bring them to reincarnation on earth.
All that aside, one would prefer to ‘qualify’ for eternity, giving us an innate desire to do good ~ which I presume we all have or have had.
hmm it all seams rather spurious when we get into morality, I prefer to stick to my principle and try to remove evil at its source. It may be so that there is no morality at all and that you simply cannot do harm to mental bodies such that morality is irrelevant.
Yes, there are any number of folks fully capable of functioning quite well inside the experience of nothingness. Or outside it. It always comes down to each individual dasein and the extent to which such philosophical quandaries either do or do not become a part of their lives. And, if you can afford it, there are any number of distractions to take you into another frame of mind altogether. And then there are the hundreds of millions who must concentrate all their attention on merely surviving from day to day.
Many people are to busy for questioning, but for those who aren’t, some don’t feel the need. I think it all depends on what kind of personality they have. Experience has something to do with it, but I also think that some people just aren’t compelled to deal with life in a philosophical fashion, even when facing very difficult, emotional situations such as the loss of a loved one or facing death themselves.
Then again I’m not too busy, nor am I just trying to survive, nor am I religious,… and although I am compelled to deal with life in a philosophical fashion… I don’t feel the need for a system of philosophy so to say… just I try to come closer to experience itself, to fully appreciate life and keep peace of mind… because… I prefer that way…
.