If you're not working at doing nothing, then you are so not understanding the flow of Nature. In fact, you become the antithesis of that flow. The more we spin from the center of natural flow, the tighter our tether stretches, and we will be drawn back to nothingness by living rightly, or it will snap and we will extinguish ourselves. There is no “solution;” it’s a myth.

Thursday, March 12, 2009

Forgiveness and Revenge

To err is human, but to forgive . . . well, is also human. It’s interesting because forgiveness and revenge are human concepts, as are good and bad. They do not exist in the natural, real world. I find it extremely difficult to believe that there are humans that would willingly “forgive” anyone who shot their child in the head, kicked their dog, raped their sister, or any number of despicable things that humans do based upon way out of balance emotions. If we were a forgiving species, we wouldn’t have created prisons, guillotines, law-suits, weapons, and tactics of destruction. What right do we have to forgive anyone anything anyway? Consider this: a person bulldozes twenty acres of land, wiping out entire ecosystems and killing thousands of creatures. Or a group terrorizes and murders villages of families with infants notwithstanding. Do we forgive? Well, in a sense, yes, but not the way secular society believes, particularly not with the “turn the other cheek” mentality. Turning the other cheek was not a way of saying, “You slapped me, but I am going to turn away, forgive what you’ve done, and let it all go.” That would be ludicrous. It would make us indifferent doormats to be used and abused by those with no honor, respect, pride, and integrity. The message was, “You have slapped me, and this is disgraceful, but I am going to give you an opportunity to rethink this action, and we can either come to a resolution peacefully, or you can slap me again, and I will take you down, because I’m not to be disrespected and abused.”

Forgiveness and Revenge: Part 2

Human forgiveness means that we've qualified something with a value relative to our perspective in order to make its being compromised forgivable. We must decide, therefore, whether we can allow ourselves to move beyond a point of anger and retribution or revenge toward another, based upon the loss we’ve incurred via the actions of another, relative upon this concept. This is one of the reasons that any retribution based upon morals and ethics or values—whether cultural or personal—that are subjective cannot work globally or universally. Ethics, morals, and justice cannot be subjective.

What’s interesting, too, is that loss incurred means