Stuff is Deadly.
People always get very confused when I call something 'interesting,' in such a way that it seems like 'interesting' is a superlative quality.
Well, it is. Determinism, atheism, relativism (ontological/moral/aesthetic/etc.), epistemological and (hence?) moral uncertainty, Schoenberg, and so on, are often horrible and confusing and cause immense stress - but they are so damn interesting! Does that not trump all negative qualities? Why can't there be passion and love and pain in ideas? And just like in love, you don't distinguish between pain and pleasure beyond a certain point, and all you know is that you want more.
I feel it acutely now; I'm working on a philosophy dissertation on aesthetic relativism/objectivism, and have been told by my supervisor the conclusion I want to make is original - and though I've no doubt he's just not well-read enough, it's nonetheless quite a compliment - to be told I'm original at 19! To be sure, it gives me an ego trip, and that great feeling, like you're surfing the edge of human knowledge; you feel that if you think about it just right, and distinguish your terms just right, you can say something truly worth saying!
And not only that, but I've been thinking about determinism: tied with consequentialism (or, rather, agent-predicted-consequentialism), it seems to make the world make sense. Needs lots more thought, of course - years and years - but because so few people are willing to face up to the plausibility of either, the territory is relatively uncharted, and still fertile.
And not only that, but I'm beginning to (having to) fundamentally rethink music (due to further thought on the
musicphilosophy post I made some time ago). My thoughts on this are in constant flux, and this level of intellectual change - ooh, the potential of these ideas I feel in the tips of my fingers.
It's all embryonic, still, but - isn't it just so absolutely incredibly interesting?
Well, it is. Determinism, atheism, relativism (ontological/moral/aesthetic/etc.), epistemological and (hence?) moral uncertainty, Schoenberg, and so on, are often horrible and confusing and cause immense stress - but they are so damn interesting! Does that not trump all negative qualities? Why can't there be passion and love and pain in ideas? And just like in love, you don't distinguish between pain and pleasure beyond a certain point, and all you know is that you want more.
I feel it acutely now; I'm working on a philosophy dissertation on aesthetic relativism/objectivism, and have been told by my supervisor the conclusion I want to make is original - and though I've no doubt he's just not well-read enough, it's nonetheless quite a compliment - to be told I'm original at 19! To be sure, it gives me an ego trip, and that great feeling, like you're surfing the edge of human knowledge; you feel that if you think about it just right, and distinguish your terms just right, you can say something truly worth saying!
And not only that, but I've been thinking about determinism: tied with consequentialism (or, rather, agent-predicted-consequentialism), it seems to make the world make sense. Needs lots more thought, of course - years and years - but because so few people are willing to face up to the plausibility of either, the territory is relatively uncharted, and still fertile.
And not only that, but I'm beginning to (having to) fundamentally rethink music (due to further thought on the
musicphilosophy post I made some time ago). My thoughts on this are in constant flux, and this level of intellectual change - ooh, the potential of these ideas I feel in the tips of my fingers.It's all embryonic, still, but - isn't it just so absolutely incredibly interesting?