by Gary 'Z' McGee
October
19, 2019
from
TheMindUnleashed Website
Spanish version
Gary Z McGee,
a former Navy Intelligence
Specialist turned philosopher,
is the author of
Birthday Suit of
God
and The Looking Glass Man.
His works are inspired by
the great philosophers of the ages and his wide-awake
view of the modern world. |
Image source:
'Soul Forged by Lobotomy' by Morgan Sorensen
"Philosophical thinking that
doesn't do
violence to one's settled mind
is no
philosophical thinking at all."
Rebecca
Goldstein
Comfort zones are a curious thing...
So warm and secure.
So safe and
reassuring.
So satisfying and
certain.
Beliefs have a similar
effect on us.
Especially the core
beliefs that we take for granted.
But beliefs are comfort
zones with reinforced invulnerability; or, at least, the illusion of
it. Such reinforcements are like prison bars that most of us are not
even aware of.
We're so completely
indoctrinated, so utterly pre-programmed, that we don't even know
that we don't know that we've been conditioned to blindly believe in
something simply because enough people convinced us it was true.
The problem with reinforced comfort zones is that there is no
growth...
A regular comfort
zone, you can stretch.
A reinforced comfort
zone, you're usually not even aware it needs to be stretched.
A regular comfort
zone allows for trial and error, it allows for questioning, and
so there is at least potential for self-improvement and
self-overcoming.
But a reinforced
comfort zone does not allow for trial and error.
It doesn't allow for
"blasphemous" questioning, because it is taken for granted as
already perfect or "simply the way it is."
Regular comfort zones
can be healthy, giving us a safe haven, a place where we can
heal and lick our wounds.
But reinforced
comfort zones are unnecessary safety nets based upon fear
(of God, the Unknown, Death) placation, and self-pity.
It's a place where
cognitive dissonance rules and any notion of attempting to think
outside the box is met with:
You simply need to
have faith in the "box"...
The Battle
Against Bewitchment
Philosophy
is a battle
against the bewitchment
of our
intelligence
by means of
language."
Ludwig
Wittgenstein
Self-Inflicted Philosophy is at the forefront of the battle against
bewitchment.
Self-inflicted
Philosophy,
is about upsetting
settled minds.
It's about toppling
the reinforced comfort zones of blind belief.
It's about flattening
the "box" that everyone talks a big game about thinking outside
of but when it really comes down to it, they cling to the "box"
out of fear of the unknown or out of faith in what they believe
they know.
Foremost,
self-inflicted philosophy is about questioning the self to the
nth degree through self-interrogation.
But you can only get so
far in such questioning before you are met with the reinforced
comfort zone of a blind belief.
So, self-inflicted
philosophy is also about questioning the layer-upon-layer of
cultural, political, and religious indoctrination that led to that
reinforced comfort zone to begin with.
When you don the cloak of a self-inflicted philosopher, no belief,
no matter how true it may seem, is off the hook for being questioned
with ruthless skepticism and unwavering circumspection.
In the battle against
bewitchment, the destruction of a belief, no matter how powerful, is
mere collateral damage to the Occam's razor of universal truth.
Hell... even
"universal truth" is not beyond questioning.
When you don the cloak of
a self-inflicted philosopher, the concept of belief is nixed from
your interpretation of the universe.
There is no place for
belief here, only thought, only deep inquiry, only imaginative
curiosity.
You replace all usage
of "belief" or "believe" with "thought" or "think".
You don't believe
that you certainly exist:
you "think" that
you "probably" exist...
But you could be
wrong.
So you remain
circumspect, for even your interpretation of your own existence
could be an illusion, no matter how "true" it may feel.
There will be those who will say,
"You are merely
believing that you don't believe."
But that is patently
false, because you are not "believing" in non-belief, you are
"thinking/inquiring/imagining" through non-belief, with the
understanding, the flexibility that your thinking "could" be wrong.
And that's the rub:
It is much easier to
alter a thought than a belief.
It is almost
impossible to alter a belief...
You are more likely to
question a thought than you are a belief.
And so, rather than get
trapped in a reinforced comfort zone, you stay ahead of the curve by
thinking rather than believing, and then by questioning what you
think so that you don't accidentally begin to believe it.
In the spirit of upsetting settled minds, you don't "believe" in
having an unsettled mind, you "think" that having an unsettled mind
is more productive, more progressive, and more open-minded than
having a settled mind (an unquestioning belief).
You realize that belief
in general is counterproductive, because you understand that the
human mind is a delusion-generator rather than a truth-generator.
It pumps out
delusions like a spider pumps out webs...
But, unlike the spider it
tends to get caught in them.
Thereby, you understand
that,
the only window to
truth is through a questioning, circumspect, and a skeptical
mindset, not through an unquestioning, dogmatic, and certain
mindset...
The only solution to a
delusion-generator is a question-generator.
Luckily, the human
brain is both.
As a self-inflicted
philosopher, you don't believe that this is certainly true.
Rather, you think
that this is probably true.
And you're willing to
question everything to "prove" it.
Indeed, you've
transformed Descartes' "I think therefore I am", into I
think, therefore I question...
Tapping into
the question-generator
"It is
far better to
grasp the
universe as it really is
than to persist
in delusion,
however
satisfying and reassuring."
Carl Sagan
The problem with the human brain is that is never knows when it has
been duped by a delusion, so it is almost always better to not
believe anything just in case it's a delusion.
A kind of reverse
Pascal's Wager.
It's almost always better
to, as Aristotle suggested,
"entertain a thought
without accepting it."
Just take it all into
consideration and let it pass through the sieve of probability.
Then, whatever doesn't
insult your soul,
think about it,
dissect it, inquire about it. Be curious about it. Just don't
make the mistake of believing it...
You are more likely to
grasp the universe "as it really is" by questioning it than by
believing it.
You don't believe the
universe is certainly a certain way:
rather, you think the
universe may be a certain way, but you're willing to question
further so as to get you closer to the way the universe "really
is"...
If you cling to a
particular belief of how the universe is, then you block yourself
from ever getting closer to the universe "as it really is."
Better to simply not
have a belief in the first place.
Better to simply
think and keep the motor running on the question-generator so as
to keep the delusion-generator in check.
The opposite of belief is
neither disbelief nor doubt, but clarity of a thought. Without
beliefs reinforcing the comfort zone, you are liberated to stretch
it.
You are clear enough to
think outside it, you are courageous enough to question it...
When the
reinforcements fall away, the comfort zone becomes a sacred
rather than stagnant place.
It is free to grow
through self-improvement rather than remain stuck in
self-reassurance.
Indeed, without
beliefs cluttering the mindset, you're finally able to drop the
"set" and move into "mind."
Free of the "mindset" of
a settled mind, you move into the mindfulness of a questioning mind.
You become a walking,
talking, question-generator, able to consistently
counter-balance the delusion-generator of the human condition.
You're ahead of the
curve, surfing
Aslam's Infinite Circle on the
surfboard of
Occam's razor.
In absolute awe over the
beautiful unfolding of an ultimately unknowable universe.
On the edge of your own
curiosity, questioning all "answers" countering all beliefs, elusive
of all delusions.
You're a
self-inflicted philosopher, and not even God is safe from your
ruthless inquiry...
|