Personal Demon Hunting Styles
It is inevitable that we acquire personal styles and habits through our forays into open table discourse. Besides differences in our innate essences, whether from nature or involuntary relationships like family, we also go on different adventures, which habituates us to different stimuli. In the process of our journey, we'll develop vastly different homeostatic equilibria and skills as compared to people who share our personality, and who share our socio-biological origins. Nonetheless, the comforts to which we become accustomed, the ways we become so set in, and the opinions we become so certain of are all but crude shadows of Natural Law in all its glory. We all possess glimmers of the shining light of truth, and some possess far more than others, but all humans are possessed of comforts, ways, and opinions that are little more than the mirage of an oasis for them before the beating sun of the uncompromising Natural Law desert. It's no surprise that we are so different, and in spite of that, we have to find a way to get along and work together for the greater good of productive harmony. Being somewhat aware of the limits of their knowledge and abilities, few are so arrogant as to unremittingly attempt to hound and convert others to their every way. The wise only extend themselves to sway others when their fortune is judged to be favorable, or when they are without recourse. Nonetheless, no matter how much love and positive regard we may hold for our fellow travelers, their silly imperfections and foibles as judged by us are at least subtly irritating, if not outright exasperating at times!
My friends spoke about differences in their personal style of discourse at a hangout of which I was a part. It seemed as though one favors a more vague approach, though still firm, to the subjects under discussion, whereas the other liked to use more specific examples. Without judging either way as entirely superior, I can see potential merit to both ways. It is not my intention to single out any of my friends, however. Their conversation touched on a number of things, but it provided a springboard for me to speculate on the merits of differentially vague and specific open table discourse methodologies. My postulations really can't truly single them out, because as I already explained, vagueness and specificity exist on a continuum without being discrete choices. So, without further ado, what are the benefits and dangers associated with greater specificity and greater vagueness (including firm vagueness)? This hearkens back to increases in reference-centrism and sense-centrism respectively:
The greater your reference-centrism, the more focused you are on solving particular problems, keeping particular entities which you deem to be demons out, and keeping particular versions of the Good in. This leads to the principle of Truth-Value Preservation. That doesn't mean that the utterances remain more true across time, merely that whether they are true or false, and in what ways they are true or false, hold their integrity before the ravages of time. It is from this property that their precariousness stems. Reference-centrism inspires keenness of mind, vigilance, uncompromising intensity, and due diligence. On account of our smallness, this same reference-centrism can cause the Chosen One to lose perspective on the worth of solving particular problems with what we know right now, and cause the Chosen One to emphasize specific positions over ways of thinking, which can become myopic. Because of the rigidity and brittleness inherent in the Principle of Truth-Value Preservation, the Chosen One in a more reference-centric state is less pliable, which can have its uses, but also can shear off shards of abrasiveness that lace discourse with a pain akin to paper cuts, which is to say, pain that is not ultimately destructive but which nonetheless raises ire and opens holes through which real demons can climb. If you aim to pen a line in the fact book of Natural Law, steady your utensil, for the slightest smear can set forth ripples in the Force that smear far more than your ink.
The greater your sense-centrism, the more you devote yourself to the process of the program itself, making the best work of art and genius for seekers of all stripes, and backing off from attempting to solve more particular problems. This leads to the principle of Parable Preservation. Because we are being given a translation program which will be used by each of us in subtly different ways, it's like being given a bardic myth or a story. You can say what you please about the specifics, and the details fade in and out with the passage of time, but the fundamental soul of the parable remains, like a candle in the night. You can't see the demons that hide in the darkness from the light that would scourge them, but in turn demons are powerless to touch you without substantial support. As the flame burns brighter, demons may be burned to a crisp on the spot without you even having attempted to destroy them. Mythic living lessons grant a corresponding mystical ability to sway people without even having to touch them, like moths drawn to flame they could neither explain nor procure. The flames burn away all impurities and petty frivolities until only the legend remains, shifting and flickering in the shadows. Tales and myths that enchant you rather than make straightforward assertions are what they sound like: magic. Magic is dangerous, because it draws from a realm that is not of this world.
No matter how transcendental you may regard your program or parable to be, you are providing a nexion within causal space and time by which a transcendental form can inhere in reality, so you and your circumstances are still always a part of the equation. You must be careful when you play with this kind of magic, and direct it with mastery and the knowledge of how it could influence people, because it will draw people's attention if it has magnetism. Even though you aren't making assertions, you are weaving a story into and through minds, and it could lead to assertions, feelings, positions, etc. Spirit creatures that embody these stories can even be tricksters that love to toy with human minds, and though ultimately they teach, they introduce a certain chaos, instability and danger if you don't know what to expect, and this kind of danger is such that it will almost invariably creep up on you. Additionally, there is a danger of becoming addicted to and overly attached to the nexion you have opened, which you cannot ultimately merge with unless you seek to sacrifice your life. This form of self-hypnosis can make you lose connection with how you are affecting and relating to the world around you, even as the story that you are immersed in feels powerful and comfortable. In other words, both of these hazards are various ways to lose control of the quivering, scintillating energy that you have summoned. Whatever harms come about from that are largely your responsibility, and they will probably be tricky to uncover, so when people do, you can be assured that they will be quite cross.
I hope this wisdom on the benefits and insecurities associated with specificity and vagueness is of value to you.
Comments
Post a Comment