Subjective Objective

When the same message is repeated across separate cultures, religions, and other groups, a confidence ought to increase or precipitate. Ultimately, new sources of the message become little surprise.

In today's homily, our vicar talked about some of the difficult questions of Christianity. Clearly, the nature of God, the Trinity, how the world was built in a week, and the divinity of Christ, etc., etc. At the same time, in this morning's Sunday school, the children were given problems with no possible solutions. So that was the basic theme. You can't objectively answer questions like how can God, Jesus and the Holy spirit be the same entity. In Christianity, we or they say, "it's a mystery." In other words it is not in the realm of objective truths. Words do not help. It's about subjectivity.

Personally, I think all of us should head increasingly towards the subjective. The more important aspects of life are patently not objective. Why? Because if that was the case the books at schools and colleges for example, would accurately tell us everything, unequivocally. Zen buddhists ponder koans which appear to have no answers. A good example is, "what is the sound of one hand clapping?" With endless consideration, perhaps the objective mind becomes so confounded, it achieved the subjective?

I've added this blog today for another reason, even though it's complete at this point, going back to the top of this post, I suggested the importance of messages being repeated (independently in fact). I don't see love being the answer because we'll always have groups. A classic example is Jesus' parable of the Good Samaritan.

I think respect and individualism makes more sense than love are humility, despite the overlap, but even then, we will never have a world of individuals alone without groups. And after all, with the unfair distribution of natural resources and vastly differing weather systems, it's probably never going to be likely.

Page 795 of my 800 paged "Everything" book, concludes with these thoughts, specifically, "I beg there is a more useful concept of the human nucleus, perhaps with a different subjective and nebulous centre, overlapping readily with objective externals, with relevance and virtues?" I filled the final and following five pages, by combining a line of one poem, with a different one from another, all sourced from the first part of the book, and leading to varying degrees of nonsense.

This is currently my best effort to help my readers, and life remains a work in progress for all of us, of course.

Michael