Meditations

Anthony J Downey

San Diego California

8/19/24

Meditations of the Contemporary Misanthrope: A Take on 21st-Century Morality, Philosophy, and Science

"Every religion is true one way or another. It is true when understood metaphorically. But when it gets stuck in its own metaphors, interpreting them as facts, then you are in trouble."
- Joseph Campbell

The name of God though relevant is merely a placeholder for a concept, which is beyond comprehension. It is an attempt to grasp and conceptualize things, which are immaterial. This is indicative of language in general. The words themselves are tools to transmit ideas, which dwell within our mind. Conflict arises when these words cannot fully communicate the idea we are trying to represent. They are simply symbols, which agitate the mind into manifesting images, and emotions, which innately reside within us. This coincides with Carl Gustav Jung's archetypes as symbols that transcend time and space. These archetypes are universal patterns of human experience that manifest in various forms across cultures and epochs, serving as a bridge between the conscious and unconscious mind. They help us navigate complex concepts that are difficult to articulate, yet they do so in a way that speaks directly to our shared human experience. Jung, giving shape and form, coined this with the term collective consciousness. This is connected to the idea of the monad, which philosophers suggest as the totality of all things. All these things are interwoven and connected to a source of consciousness, which no being is separate from. With no beginning or end, it is the foundation for all things. Some may use the analogy of a web while others may refer to it as like an ocean. If we look at an individual being, as a droplet that enters the ocean it is hard to differentiate where one droplet begins and another ends, we come to identify its fullness as the collective whole. Modern philosophers and scientists also come to refer to this as the singularity. The archetypes are symbols for concepts, which transcend time and space revolving around the human condition. They are embodied in these personas but they could easily be represented in various forms. In ancient times, words were born out of direct experience and were deeply connected to the realities they described. In contrast, modern language often feels disconnected from the lived experience it seeks to convey, relying on archetypes or symbolic representations to evoke states of being that may be less tangible or more elusive. This disconnection might be why many people feel that modern language lacks the vitality or authenticity of more ancient expressions of human experience. The words "love," "justice," "virtue," etc., may evoke certain ideas, but without the lived experience behind them, they can feel hollow or incomplete. The challenge lies in bridging that gap--finding ways to infuse these words and symbols with the depth and richness of lived experience, so they once again resonate with the fullness of their original meaning. The modern man seems to find no use for myth and legend. It is often seen as illogical, archaic, and a roadblock to the betterment of men. Others may argue that these tales dwell within us. It shows us how we all play a role in the narrative of life. It helps to inspire something innately true about the self. Is it hard to conceive that myths were used as instruments of understanding? They were developed out of a type of necessity of trying to grasp the human psyche. Therefore, we can point the finger at something ethereal and obscure. To say "aha! There it is". It is essential to our understanding of ourselves and our place in the world. By holding up a mirror to society, myths allow us to confront the illusions and truths that shape our lives, ultimately guiding us towards a deeper, more meaningful existence. How can this be archaic?