The flow of thoughts as would be poured out herein on this thread would be exclusive to I, the creator and are products of my perception and purview of topical issues as they center upon the totality of human life and struggle. The topics discussed will be be carefully selected and analyzed. Opinions, criticisms and comments are welcome.

As a disclaimer; the write ups here are first published on my blog; www.itsdavidleo..com and are copyrighted to me. I am a Philosopher by interest and training. My school of thought is Existentialism and I'm mentored through the works and thoughts of great thinkers like Friedrich Nietzsche, Arthur Schopenhauer, David Hume, Francis Bacon and St. Thomas Aquinas. I view things beyond face value and enjoy posing analytic debates on the problematics that becloud the confines of human thinking. My style is both descriptive and expressive. And lastly, I was born into a Christian-Catholic home, grew as one and currently practice utilitarianism with a little dose of Christocentrisicm (life of Christ and not Christianity as a religion)and Scienticism. There is knowledge in all things!

Enjoy!


[Vol I: Chapter I: Subsection A]

Beyond This Keyboard.

There comes a time when events in life cover an immeasurable circumference, one so large to see and mark. The test to holding on at such times appears fruity and desolate, albeit preponderant and tasking. Life gets better at every tide, and the human struggles in the face of so many hostilities suffer an excruciating torment that leaves a lot to be desired. Life is ignoble to say the least. And much of man’s accomplishments speak little volume of what is potentials
actually are. Man is simply insurmountable!

In the time of the earliest men, much of what people had to do was fend for themselves and their immediate environment. Several institutions in man’s filial digest were yet to see the light of day at the time. In that time, Man had but one task; survive. He was faced with challenges that beclouded his thoughts, hopes and aspirations. He had very little to count on, and so had little cause to worry about the next day. He lives each day as they come. Surviving the problematic associated with nature was the next order in line. The earliest man was awed by the wonders of nature; the phases of geographical order and the polemics of ecological constraints. He simply had to seek a way out. There then came the first moment of cognition.

At the first level of awareness, man acknowledged there were differences in time, space and knowledge. He discovered a change in time as day gradually gives way for the night, and the position he occupies at certain points or moments of the day/night was ever changing and things don’t appear to be the same even though they are still what they are and were in some times past. The obviousness in this led to him first accepting that he knows something and can be sure he does know what he thinks he knows. That is knowledge! But then, knowledge as he would later discover, is limited in time and space. There is a limit to what he can know at a certain time and position. And of course, he is aware that, in laying claim to a certain knowledge about the marvels of his world, he encounters a constant factor; change. Everything seems to change. Even what he seems to have known at a certain point falls victim to change. The knowledge he acquired at certain points become a matter of the past and a possibility for the future, and even though the knowledge still has some level of validity to it, the fact that, the time difference to which/when the said knowledge came upon his grasp remains a subject of reference and mere conjecture. What he knows in about an hour ago has changed in time; he has had other thoughts and activities that are capable of altering what he has held as “known” in that time. This is a philosophical problem!

The human person is a product of design and quasi-purpose. His existence was designed by an intelligent cause. He functions as a single unit forged to a common course with other units that share a common and exclusively distinct feature. The human person is pronged by design to act curiously. His mind is a prototype of markedly fine-tuned modules which have socially amicable structures that act not strictly to a design, but uniquely of a design. Man is not mechanical and does not live to fulfil any special goal. He lives for himself in union with the other units he shares same features with. He and other units have a common course and each goes about his own course based on subjective cognition and recognition. Each person lives for himself in view of pursuing a common course with others who live for themselves as well. Man is not determined to an action. He acts upon his own judgement and cognition.

Every single man acts on his own accord. He is the maker of what he thinks and sees. He sees the world by his own eyes, and make meaning of everything he wants according to how he wants them. He is the architect of his own path. His mind is a single component that informs his actions and movement. He thinks alone because he is alone. He acts because he thinks, and he lives because he is aware of the fact that he has a thinking ability that revolves around him and him alone. His world is uniquely single and objectively evolving. The human person is a thinking thing according to Rene Descartes. That he thinks is a reason why an individual can only read his own mind and know what he alone is thinking at a particular time. No one can know what goes on in the mind of another.

Upon conception at birth, the human mind is blank like a clean sheet of paper. This is what the earliest Greek thinkers called the “Nous tabula rasa”- blank sheet. The mind is plain and is only written upon as the human person starts to engage in his own self-activities. The mind thus records the activities from previous time and space into cognitive awareness for rumination on a later time and space. This is the thinking faculty of man; his person and his world.

The Abiding Measures In Pain

Knowing too much is a feature of the super-human in a covert world of socio-scientism. The capriciousness of the common mind-set sets up a sort of conformist ideology about how the art of thinking and experience should follow. Knowledge of experience is indubitable albeit unverifiable.

Pain is to man, what love is to the supreme. An ideal quotient of sort makes understanding the weight and feels of pain a basic attribute of man. Man feels pain more than he does of love. It is easier to describe pain than love or any other abstract form of emotional display that the human instinct can interpret and relate to. Pain is a dose measure of the prime faculties of the human person. It is associable with the worthlessness or otherwise of cultural values and social stigmas. Pain is above value. It is incomparable to any other. It is constant of its own!

In comparing the magnificence of pain, the value of good and joy is primordial. There is no denying the fact that, in seeking terms with what pain proffers to the human intuition, the acknowledgement of joy and goodness is indispensable, but the latter is baseless in seeking grounds with what pain by itself comprises. Pain may not be sorrowful, as against what common knowledge thinks it to be. Pain may be glorifying and edifying when suitably looked at. Pain is an aspect of man’s life. Pain is limitless and doesn’t cut across limits of human life. It is a vital part of man and his struggles. It helps man understand the value of what he is living for, and what he hopes to make out from living the life he lives. Pain explains life better than any other element. Pain is cognition!

There comes glory in pain. Loving is an aspect of pain that most feelers fail to acknowledge. It is impossible to love without the initial or proto-experience of pain. You will appreciate love best with a hands-on experience of pain in whatever way it appears. Love is best enjoyed along pain. The measure in which it comes corresponds with the amount of commitment and effort made in showing and demonstrating love. Pain is love, and love is good. Good isn’t isolating of its own making. Good is good because there are factors that explain it. Without those constants; often times deeds that are not good in the sense of goodness, there cannot be chock-full understanding of what it is and what parameters it can reach.

Pain brings awareness faster than joy. It is an essential feature of man’s thinking faculty. It makes the rationality of man’s pursuits explainable in simple terms and language. The cognizance of pain is instrumental in understanding the values or otherwise of joy. Shorn of being aware of the primus of pain, joy and happiness become inconsequential and implausible, albeit unneeded. Joy is secondary to understanding the state of happiness. Pain explains it more and simpler. Pain is essential to human living and it is not evil as many assume it to be. It has not root in evil or all things that are not confirmed as good. Evil, vain-glory and pain do not share any similarity. Each element exists of its own, and even though, one or each one influence the other in a way, none is exclusively mutual to itself than it is to the others. Pain doesn’t explain evil any less than good would of it. Pain and joy as well as good are substances that go in line with the designs of nature. All things of nature share measures of goodness and evil.

Nothing is elementarily on the upside of full goodness or evil. No single product is essentially good, and none on the other hand is essentially evil. Knowledge of evil is primordial to understanding goodness. The same for goodness!

Why Do People Move From One Church To Another?

I still do not get it, and believe me, it takes more than rationality to fathom and answer to the "why" in the dilemma. When up about the question, sometimes I simply submit to let go, but my curiosity is ever constant on the subject matter. In all, I see the reasons below as substantive and likely to be the case:

1. Either religion is a scam or simply a social vice.

2. God is not really what people take him/it to be.

3. Man is insatiable. This fact cannot be contested.

4. The human mind is gullible and easily influenced by external factors.

5. Christianity is for confused people. Islam is slightly better (would discuss that in subsequent discourse). Tradiitonal African religion is more expressive and addressing of the peculiar problems of the black race.


6. Theoretically, the idea of salvation makes no sense. That, perhaps is among the reasons people even bother to go to church. Salvation is the sell-out factor, and the sedative that lures people to Church in the first place. Call it fear or facade. The whole story of Christ and other iconic characters in the Bible are fictional, unverifiable and less imperative. It is no less than the history of a people that was passed on from one generation to another via oral folklore, telling of myths and legends. Christ may not have even been. Isaiah and other 'great' prophets recorded in the scriptures are no different from the Oduduwa myth of the Yoruba people. No sane(rational being) person should take such stories seriously.

7. Society is adjudicative and forlorn. The collective goal of human pursuit has long been replaced with the pursuit and desire towards spiritualism, deism and justifications to believe in a fuse, an object of the mind, which most people term as 'God'. God, perhaps may have existed in time past. Tto me, he was the first of the human kind. The first human to live. The first human to experience living in the universe, and first human to die and know death. There is a first time for all things in the universe. God may have been misplaced in the course of history as Adam, the first man in Christian mythology.

8. Religion, and mostly Christianity is addictive. It is likened to an opium by the German thinker, Karl Marx. I agree with him.

9. Worship is vane and destructive. The art of worship presupposes total submission, dedicatedness and willful acceptance of defeat on the part of the one worshiping, and in favour of that, which is worshiped. In this case, that which is worshiped is less human and undeserving of the attentions he/it gets. Man ought to be the object/subject of attraction, but by his will, has submitted his right to the object of his mind. I call that, vain edification. Worship, like factual conjectures of love, care and affection makes one weak. It confines the thinking faculty and reduces it to a state of mechanism and zombiesm.

10. Christianity is a bane. Look through the history of mankind; struggles and collections and you will get my point here. Religion is man made and its time has trolled through human life and conditioned thinking in a crude way, drawing man's intellectual pursuits back to yester-years.

Science rules! Technology is the future! Religion belongs to the past!

Check out my blog for more about me and my thoughts. Remember, I am a predicate thinker so my views are ultra-subjective but aiming towards objective phenomena. Don't take my thoughts personal. They are mine, not yours. Any argument or clarifications should be directly maturely. I will tend to your questions.

www.itsdavidleo..com

Thoughts Of A Predicate Thinker [Vol I: Chapter I: Subsection F]

The God Question: There Was/Is God Vs God Existed/Exists.

God exists, yes I know. He doesn't exist in the form people take of him. If he ever existed, then he's dead but men carry his form and legacy through reproduction and being humans. This is so, as the human race reflects the design of a pre-existence that evolved over time and space. The physical, biological and chemical composition of the human person are pragmatic and in flux evolution.

God existed! He existed as the first human. He died as the first human to die, and he lives on as the first human to live on. The God question is a figment of the human mind; to answer to the questions he asks surrounding the marvels of his existence. How he came into being.

God was the first man, not Adam. He was a product of nature, not the other way round. He had an end, like every human. He had a beginning like every human. He existed in time like every other and lived within space. Time and space do no not exist. Were time to exist, it would do so in timelessness. There can only be a now. Now is endless and not bound by space. God existed! He was the first of our kind.

Contiinue: http://www.itsdavidleo.com/2013/05/thoughts-of-predicate-thinker-vol-i_9.html