At this point I’m writing don’t know how to act music
Intelligent drama for those that want to act stupid
- Illa Ghee
I use the system, you cowards use euphemisms
- Method Man
I don’t know what Aristotle meant by eudemonia exactly. It’s supposed to be a geometrical analogy for our psychology and physical being. There’s a “place” where peace resides and it’s found by balancing. Once the balance is found, peace is also found. Balance, peace, eudemonia (good spirits) are inherited from movement and we’re raw movement. Our raw movement should measure itself and find itself and search itself using balance, peace, and eudemonia as “clues” towards where we should be headed. “Clues” because life is a mystery and we can’t be too sure of our beliefs.
Since we’re doing philosophy, we’re enacting some beliefs that encourage us to think critically. While we can’t believe the philosophical beliefs, we can test them and use them as tools.
In everyday terms, for example, a therapist or a friend may suggest another to put up boundaries and learn to respect those boundaries to maintain control of their decision making. Boundaries and respect in this case are abstract. In different circumstances, these words mean different things. The changing circumstances requires us to think critically to keep up with changing definitions. (note: you can make boundaries and respect dogmatic but this is stifling and ends up discouraging critical thinking).
How do we think critically? However it is you do, you should do so balanced. If you think too little and too fast, your solution (which has far reaching consequences) may bring forth consequences that could have been prevented with more thinking. Too much thinking, however, may render the solution we eventually arrive at irrelevant. Since our thinking needs to “keep up” to what started it or we get left behind thinking. Sometimes these incident are related to “analysis paralysis” and other times they’re something else.
We live biologically with a constant met-expectation we didn’t know we were expecting to meet. Evolution perpetually leaves us at the front steps of the aesthetic gazing at the aesthetic beyond; perhaps the third eye’s gaze.
Using our third eye to gaze, look around us. The context that determined Aristotle’s eudemonia was at one point relatable/stable/foundational and therefore attainable. But our world is dying. Dogma caught up to us and we must change our way of thinking.
Where’s the center of gravity of chaos? Because that’s where it seems we are. How can we find the balance between our psychological ego expecting to meet balance and peace with the physical structures around us decaying?
What framework allows for these questions to be approached with any sense of sincerity? Part of the new game field is that everyone is exposed and raw. Everyone’s a target and can get hit. The only thing keeping us safe is our faith in whatever it is we have faith in. The goal is the same as always, peaceful balance.
Before we could get away with peaceful balancing between clans. But we must think outside just “our clan” if we want to survive and create a stronger-still ideology/vocabulary/grammar. It was the old world that provided extra space for hiding from those that made us uncomfortable.
Re-framed. The issue is that we don’t have enough buffer space to allow other to exist in ignorance. As we do now. For others we are the ignorant. But we live in peace ignorant of each other. Eventually, very soon, we won’t be able to ignore each other. On top of that, if we unite willingly, we’ll be stronger. The moment will force us against each other eventually. Just because that’s how it seems to be unfolding. When we turn our back to each other this time around, we’ll only be safe if our turn is met face to face with faith and reason; for a chance to find eudemonia.