Strange Overtones

Commonplace Morality

Vs.

Morality for the Conservation and Accumulation of Power

This morning I witnessed a tiny battle.  I was walking back into my house after feeding my chickens, and I spotted a little commotion in the grass.  My first thought was snake, but it turned out to be a green long-legged grasshopper, locked in mortal combat with a hornet.  

I picked the grasshopper up by his wings and tossed him up onto my picnic table.  The hornet still clung along, appearing to sting the grasshopper behind its head.  I watched the fight, moralizing that it was incorrect for me to interfere with an “act of nature.” 

Then, out of “pity for the grasshopper,” I acted.  I grabbed a nearby tool, a sharp crowbar type instrument which I use for beekeeping, I pinned the grasshopper, jabbing the hive tool between the hornet's middle, splitting it in two.  Then I observed the grasshopper.  He was taking this opportunity to drag himself away; clearly he had several legs which were irreparably damaged.  So I thought, “waste not, want not,” grabbed the grasshopper and fed it to my chickens.  

Now I just “did what I did.”  But could my actions be justified, morally? 

Morality is subjective.

I acted in a way which helped me.  Happy chickens help me.  Less hornets in the world, helps me.  And I acted, which is so much more interesting, more satisfying, than inaction.

And I'm not gonna lose any sleep over it, which is actually more significant a concept than it may seem.

I have heard so many people rationalize their religion by the fact that they were born into it.  As if all religions are equal, and out of pride and blind nationalism, we must all stick to the religion of our fathers.  Religion, in turn, claims a higher morality; a blessing from God.

But here we are, then, connecting subjective perspective to objectified idealizations; meaningless words. 

Words allow us to paint pretty pictures, keeping the audience focused on the hat, instead of the rabbit.  George Orwell realized that propaganda's true purpose is to create the phenomenon of cognitive dissonance, as well as misplaced word associations and blind hatred.  This “double think” concept is inherent in Orwell's fictional slogan “War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength.”

Philip K. Dick, translating his Bodhi-wisdom into colloquial English, puts the moral problem as this:

“You will be required to do wrong no matter where you go.  It is the basic condition of life, to be required to violate your own identity.  At some time, every creature which lives must do so.  It is the ultimate shadow, the defeat of creation; it is the curse at work, the curse that feeds on all life.  Everywhere in the universe.”

Carlos Castaneda's Morality:

Castaneda's writings are truly a blessing, because like Arthur Machen, he realizes there is a higher morality.  This morality allows man to see truth, to experience the folly of existence on one's own terms. 

The sorcery of Castaneda divulges the theoretical and practical aspects of the conservation and accumulation of power.  How often our minds are filled with thoughts not-our-own.  Castaneda's recipe, if I had to sum it up:  stalk silence, with the mind of a warrior.

Aleister Crowley's Morality:

Crowley believed that one of the main problems with introducing Buddhism to the Western world was separating cultural advice from the deeper teachings.  No living master has ever taught enlightenment in a vacuum.  Ask yourself:  What about our culture is preventing us from achieving unity?

Compare the teachings of any of these masters with the alternative.

Modern religion and sociology interpret morality as an issue of scale and enforceability. 

In Player Piano, Kurt Vonnegut begs the question; what [do we] do with too much efficiency?  Buckminster Fuller answers: “Pay people to learn.”  Or, as Foucault speculated, you can just “jail everyone.”

Let’s go all the way back to my bug battle.  There is a futility to moralizing in a way which internalizes guilt.  The Greeks knew this, which is why they blamed acts of passion on being possessed by a God.  My personal act is ultimately a universal null-equation, or, it has as much meaning as I imbue it with.  But in the long run, I believe, we need to differentiate between the act, and the conceptualization of the act; they are not the same thing.