Althought it is difficult to decide on priorities as in if the body without inteligence or inteligenc without body should come forst or previal, there is no dpoubt in my mind that life must have a soul, at leats from this lowly perspective.
Life is undoubdetly the immortal, the everlasting. That which would be worthty of investment as it cannot fail. Yet life is beyond interference with and betting 'your life' on immortality is a waste of mind.
Yet life being so distant so vague and untouched I would create a soul that life may be witnessed, not just imagined as a vague concept of my frustrated thinking.
Life may not have any other human concevable properties other that being eternal but I image it is aware of itself.
By eternal I do not mean something that survives the time but outside of and unaffected by time, and my mind is so cast to the winds, the night, the toil of labour under the sun and the consistent activity of consumption, to ask, how do I imagine soul? It cannot be of me though I may strive to develop and feed the notion and in doing so create a fraction of my intellect to jar with all that is timely.
My person is well aware of this painful fracture painful, cutting and dire, though I'll not deny it and feed it whence I can, it is unfathomably hungry. Whatever scraps of wisdom or love I feed it it just disappears down a black hole with little understanding on my part. Now and then I see as if tantalising close a warmth that beckons rest and be with me, but then some other part of the vast intellect argues that the body corporeal needs to breath; but for what? To consume more and generate more labour.
Still I have convinced myself, for now, in this timed machine, that I have some understanding of what I am and I am preparing, once again to be not so much of that and yet I cannot see a way to hold onto the soul, no doubt as it is not mine.
Passing thoughts hearing someone has just taken a transport job. It seems fun to be travelling, especially in a high cab above the common traffic. Various new places and multitudes of people to meet and I imagine lucrative, especially if transporting arms, immigrants and drugs, more so if the commodity is illegal.
AID is a self serving business, as toxic as the consumer that receives it, yet who amongst us has not taken favour, friendship and food when offered. Yet that the day may come when AID is no longer sought or even offered.
There's an inherent danger in wanting to help someone. There's the assumption that the provider has something the needy wants. In that disparity the provider holds power over the other and will seem in a position to give or withdraw what to the other will undoubtedly seem nothing other than a power trip. It really is that, for in a world of equality each would be able to obtain their needs without recourse to the Havit's charity. The only reason the Havit's have anything to give at all it due to their acquisition of what Equality would argue, is a common source. That the Havit's have worked harder is not tenable.
Pages: 1· 2
Although the meaning of the words 'life' and 'death' are questionable, let alone the meaning of life, the colloquial term of being a conscious consumer may help in this case.
When does a foetus become a conscious consumer and is that really the beginning of life.
Although conscious consumer may seem a fit description it may still include relatively dumb beings, that is dumb to the more grown up human values.
Still it seems fair to consider aborting a human foetus the act of killing, though not statistically murder.
But the statistics are: that death by abortion
in the England and Wales account for 27% of deaths and
in the USA that figures rises to 37%
The Guardian . . . published a chart showing . . . death (in 2010) in England and Wales. They list 493,242 fatalities . . . they don’t include, . . 189,574 deaths by abortion . . . 27% . . .
. . . in the United States, . ~ . they account for more than 37% of deaths . . .
To put that percentage in perspective, 15.3% of that 10,677 die from heart disease (the leading cause of death according to the CDC) 14.5% from cancer, and so on.
DNA of Fear
I am the function of fear or should that be the body of fear and DNA is the programme as in the multidude of functions requieed to create this object of consumption.
There are those that would avoid me, given a choice, and an infinite numbers of competitors that I avoid. Some like the sun and heat that indicate not that they are out for my skin.
Gone are the days when I looked forward to being with others of like mind, vegans even, until I became all too aware of the self-serving desire to co-operate to justify a proposed sustainable consumerism. Oblivious to death and destruction that is the cornerstone of their existence by virtue of the illusion that if death does not come from their own hands then they are purer than those that feed them. What and somehow their consciousness is raised and they have a far better killing and sleep than the slaves that make their roads, shelter, clothes oh yes and food with money abundant. Oops! did I drop in a few pennies there, without which these sanctimonious vegans would have to turn their hand to the solid and scavenge, kill or be killed.
Nope I'm not aiming for a sustainable existence that relies on sustainable consumption even if it is fruit fallen and not picked from the trees. That's not for the calories sake that I eat easily digested fruit, though it is a great temptation one I will easily fall for if it were a available. But to grow the tree requires competing for a viable environment which other consumers already have their eye on, or their house, or their family.
Carrying on from Food Availability
The obvious, eat or die brings up the same polarization and both cannot be addressed for what eats must by definition kill in turn and so will either be killed or die as ability to kill diminishes.
So we survive to kill another day, we kill so we can kill more. Is this the basis of conscious choice? That we perform to the DNA programme or refuse Does a plant have choice, does the sun? What of the consciousness of either are they unaware that their existence depends upon the annihilation of other beings, sentient or otherwise. Some plan!
The choice to feel, not just the warm or chilling breezes, the sun and see, the salt and sweetness, but the acquisition of security of consumption the company of other killers afraid to die but not to kill. A partner to justify and proliferate the killing DNA. These feeling generated by the mind of success in achievement and company. So is it a sunny holiday with a friendly killer on the beach of alone in the hills.
Is there really any benefit in one experience over the other? I can't seem to weight them like a speck of sand or a mountain, let alone a planet or solar system. That these experiences can be instilled by electrical impulses to the brain directly, without the holiday implies that it can be done without the killing, but can it be done without consumption.
What is this killing consumption we fight so hard for and call it life when it is only an idea of keeping at bay the fear that each of us may die and loose the ability to choose what to kill and at almost every turn it is really who should die for us to continue to kill. We best not kill the seed of killing but only the fruit, but is that enough or more properly is there enough fruit to consume - obviously not. Back to food availability