Credo!

Tertullian is widely regarded as having originated the expression “Credo quia absurdum” (est) (I believe because it is absurd) and the phrase often appears in contemporary polemics about the rationality of religious belief. Patristic scholars have long pointed out that Tertullian never said this or meant anything like it. (although as I have explained many times in Harmonia Philosophica, there is nothing wrong with the irrational – it is the logical which is unfounded and full of fallacies) However, little scholarly attention has been paid to the circumstances in which this specific phrase came into existence and why, in spite of its dubious provenance, it continues to be regarded by many as a legitimate characterization of religious faith. A new paper shows how Tertullian’s original expression – “It is certain, because impossible” – was first misrepresented and modified in the early modern period. In seventeenth century England a “credo” version – I believe because it is impossible – became the common form of Tertullian’s maxim. A further modification, building on the first, was effected by the Enlightenment philosophe Voltaire, who added the “absurdity condition” and gave us the modern version of the paradox: I believe because it is absurd. These modifications played a significant role in Enlightenment representations of religion as irrational, and signal the beginning of a new understanding of faith as an epistemic vice. This doubtful maxim continues to play a role in debates about the cognitive status of religious faith, and its failure to succumb to the historical evidence against it is owing to its ongoing rhetorical usefulness in such debates. (1)

People once understood the irrationality of existence.

Then they invented Logic.

And they tried to formulate logical ways to believe in God. Let’s not forget that the founder of Logic believed in the Unmoved Mover. And the second greatest logician of all times (Gödel) formulated a renowned proof for the existence of God.

Then came “Enlightenment”.

And tried to convince people that logic has nothing to do with irrational things like religion. That rational people cannot believe in absurd things like the soul, the spirit, Jesus or God.

They were both wrong.

Logic itself is absurd and irrational. Based on axioms selected arbitrarily, without any solid foundation whatsoever. The only thing we know for sure about any set of axiomatic theories – logic included – is that it cannot prove everything.

Life IS absurd and irrational. We exist without reason, we die without reason, we love and hate with no reason, we just Are. Any attempt to rationalize life will hit the wall of reality and collapse as soon as it started.

So believe what you want.

No you are not irrational.

Because there is no such thing as “rational”…

The real meaning of Tao: Everything possible. Illogical. Thus true.

People see patterns and rules everywhere.

But these patterns and rules are elusive. A pattern could be there and you could “see” it, but if you interpret the data in a different way or if you examine the context of your observations, you could “know” that there is no pattern and you could stop “seeing” it.

In the same way, one could say something “mystical” and prove it to be “correct”, in some specific way under very specific circumstances.

In a way, everything goes. Perhaps that is the whole meaning of Tao itself…

If you think about it, Logic is a human construct. The cosmos we experience is a phenomenal world. Reality (if a universal reality exists – because many things imply that every person actually formulates his own reality – see quantum mechanics) is the common denominator of all the phenomena. And the only common denominator is Consciousness. Tao by definition is illogical in its sayings. And perhaps this is what it is trying to do: Guide us to the beginning, to what now seems “illogical”…

Clap with one hand.

You could do it.

Raw chicken. Τime-reversal mirror. Living to your birth.

Light that strikes a new and improved mirror is always returned to sender.

South Korean physicists have created a composite mirror, made up of about a thousand tiny reflectors, that coaxes light waves to retrace, in reverse, the paths taken by the original waves that struck it. As a result, the researchers were able to reproduce an image at the same spot where it originated, even though the initial light waves had been severely scattered on their way to the mirror. This phase-conjugation mirror, reported in a paper to appear in Physical Review Letters, is not the first of its kind but requires less equipment and preparation time than its predecessors. “It’s very simple and elegant,” says Allard Mosk, a physicist at the University of Twente in Enschede, the Netherlands. (1)

Turning light back. Turning time back. Seems perfectly reasonable. And easy. Perhaps because it is perfectly reasonable. And easy. So are we going forward? Are we turning back? Not even this simple question can we answer. We see things and we “know” we move forward. But are we?

Look at the spinning wheel. Make it move forward. Make it move backward. In a world of possibilities, we have chosen that there is none. Maybe that is the case.

Drifted away, powerless. Are we?

Imagine the world is going backwards. Imagine what you know is wrong. Imagine that wrong is right. Imagine you are moving towards your birth.

Irrational…

Imagine the world is going forward. Imagine what you know is wrong. Imagine that wrong is right. Imagine you are moving towards your death.

Irrational…

You are not moving. You are just thinking.

And thinking makes you move.

Perhaps that is why it seems true. And so wrong…

Nietzsche and irrationality as the only possible religion!

Nietzsche believed in the irrationality of life. Something which has led many people against religion. But on the same time many of these people accuse religion of being… irrational.

But can the meaning of life be rational?

Can the purpose of the cosmos be logical?

If we have to accept life as it is, like Nietzsche tells us, then we should embrace the illogical. Only then will we discover the deep darkness of the abyss. Where the only thing that makes things Be exists.

Faith…

Without explanations. Without foundations.

Pure. Irrational.

True.

DNA. On the edge… Breath in…. Breath out!

For a skin cell to do its job, it must turn on a completely different set of genes than a liver cell — and keep genes it doesn’t need switched off. One way of turning off large groups of genes at once is to send them to “time-out” at the edge of the nucleus, where they are kept quiet. New research from Johns Hopkins sheds light on how DNA gets sent to the nucleus’ far edge, a process critical to controlling genes and determining cell fate.
A report on the work appeared in the Jan. 5 issue of the Journal of Cell Biology.
“We discovered a DNA sequence and a specific set of protein tags that send DNA to the edge of the nucleus, where its genes get turned off,” says Karen Reddy, Ph.D., an assistant professor of biological chemistry at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine.

Picture the nucleus as a round room filled with double strands of DNA hanging in suspension as they are opened, closed, clipped, patched and read by proteins that come and go. At the edge of the nucleus, just inside its flexible walls, the lamina meshwork provides shape and support. But accumulating evidence from the past few years suggests that this meshwork is not just a structure, but is crucial to the cell’s ability to turn large segments of genes off in one fell swoop. It’s as though certain stretches of DNA feel a magnetic pull that keeps them clinging to the lamina in a state of “time-out,” inaccessible to the proteins that could be working on them. (1)

Great! Just great!
A great mechanism.
Doing things in order to achieve things.
Or are the things which that mechanism achieves the things we a posteriory believe it was designed to achieve?

What is a plan?
What is a result?
What is a cause?

We are confused.
We do not have an objective criterion to set the mark.
We do not know what “normal” is.

So let’s accept there is not.
Let’s accept that there is no plan. And that there is.
Let’s accept that these is no cause. And that everything have one.
Let’s accept that there are no results. And that everything is one.
Let’s go craaaaazy ese!
Let’s pound our heads to the wall. (not hard enough, you know)
Let’s just accept there is nothing.
Let’s understand that everything comes from our mind.
Let’s open our selves to the nothingness of the world.

Let’s inhale the cosmos.

One deep breath.
And we will be One…
Inhale…

Exit mobile version
%%footer%%