It's an ever-growing trend to go one of two ways in today's society: we either embrace our emotions and become seen as weak-willed and wishy-washy (or in a positive light, nurturing and empathetic -- though the extremes taken are seldom so positive), or we become so hardened and callous to the world around us that we lose the capacity for true empathy. This is particularly visible in the current trends in high-emotive/increasingly permissive parenting and low-empathy/increasingly self-centered teenagers -- one is most certainly partly responsible for the other, and the whole thing is certainly cyclical to previous generations. This pattern of personal growth reminds me greatly of working with raw metals. If steel is left too soft, it becomes unable to perform the task; if it becomes too hard and rigid, it snaps under the pressure far too easily.
I can say that I've seen both extremes from a very personal perspective. As a child, I was very sensitive and the rigors of bullying and general frustrations left me little more than a weak and pitiable mess, both physically and emotionally. I was very much the unrefined ore: soft, malleable, easily impressed upon by my surroundings, and easily broken for that weakness. I knew what it felt like to be powerless in that environment; to feel as though there was no hope and no way out of the emotional quagmire that I had found myself residing in. I would hardly call what I had in that period of my existence a "life". I had a miserable time at school, and had grown to loathe most of my peers, but most of all I had grown to loathe and despise myself for my weakness.
When I removed myself from the situation (at the end of 8th grade, I insisted upon home schooling to complete my basic education), the first refinements were able to begin. Those weaknesses that I had come to detest in myself were gradually worn away through a combination of simply removing myself from the triggers that made me so miserable, using humor to lash out at things which angered me, and beginning the steps to lose the morbid-obesity label that I had earned myself up until that point. This path continued until very recently, in all honesty, when I began to realize just how little concern I had left for those who I don't know personally, and how readily I could simply switch off even that distinction. It could be said that I had become so hardened to the world around me that I was on the verge of shattering.
In keeping with the metaphor, I had reached the point where a proper smith must decide whether to cease at the too-hardened point that has been reached, or to scrap the piece and start anew. Of course, it's not really that simple to just discard part of yourself, it's more a question of softening that hardened outer-layer that's been tempered into place -- undoing the process, in a sense -- that matters. You have to strive for that balance where you'll neither bend -- as the soft metal will do -- nor break -- as the hardened steel would. Much as swordsmithing, this is a fine art that takes a lifetime to perfect, and I am by no means a master in finding that balance.
I still consider myself to be too hardened in many ways. I lock any sort of outward show of emotions inside myself until I reach a breaking point, and even then that "break" is very controlled and carefully measured (always in solitude, mind you -- I think I'd be far too self-conscious to express it in front of someone else). Much like tempered steel, I use the fueled fire of anger and frustration to hold my hardened exterior together. Not the healthiest methods, but they have certainly proven efficient over the years. Further exploration of the spiritual part of me in the last few years has made it much easier to comprehend a lot of the reasons that I react and handle things the way that I do, not to mention the aid in developing better coping mechanisms than turning myself into my own whipping post all the time. I've been experimenting with the concept of resonant meditation (emotional resonance, not auditory) to remedy that, with some success of late.
The ultimate point of the process is this: Without being properly forged one cannot become fulfilled in their true purpose, and if one gives in to the forging too readily they can become far too rigid to sustain their integrity. One must become as the sword to reach that fine balance of flexibility and strength in order to know their true potential. It is a process that never truly ends.
Monday, June 27, 2011
Monday, June 6, 2011
An Anachronism of Thought
Anachronisms are defined as something out of place in the present; a throwback (or occasionally something futuristic) that doesn't quite belong. This can be aesthetic in nature -- someone wearing old fashioned clothing that is no longer considered stylish or comfortable -- or it can be functional -- training with a sword or other large close-combat weapon that is long-since outdated in practical use.
To many, reverting to a pagan belief set is an anachronism in its own right, and to an extent, they're right. The cultures that originally held these beliefs are long-gone, and the monotheistic (in theory) faiths have won the day and led the world to its eventual scientific enlightenment. We have a lot of the knowledge now that we once used stories to theorize; we have no urgent need for a god of the storms, since we understand that what causes lightning and thunder is far from supernatural in nature. In many ways, religion as a whole is becoming obsolete, with the emphasis on science taking on the same role that early Christianity once occupied -- spreading rapidly and changing the collective conscious away from the remnants of mysticism and superstition. Atheism is becoming more and more prominent as a religion (and it is a religion to some -- the conviction found in many atheists is downright inspirational as it relates to unerring devotion), and will likely become the dominant system of belief within the next hundred years or so (and no, I'm not one of those that buys into the 2012 nonsense).
While the fate of the Atheism versus Christianity conflict is up for debate, and my opinion is by no means intended as an endorsement or condemnation of either side, it is clear to me that the times are indeed changing. We are not the same culturally as we were when the Roman Empire spread Catholicism throughout Europe. We have a wealth of knowledge at our fingertips now that we lacked then, and there is a noticeable drift away from Christianity going on worldwide. Atheism is on the rise and our secular society is responsible for it. For good or ill, the first-world nations are moving further and further away from mysticism each year. This, to me, appears to be a sign of the inevitable decline of religion and dominance of science -- provable knowledge overcoming faith.
So with the religion that drove my ways under the boot heels in the same position now that the ancients were once in, it is hard to say who the true anachronism is. Not only are the children of religious families abandoning religion for atheism, but a significant number are turning back to the pagan traditions that thrived before the spread of Rome, much as I have. It's something that I've personally observed, even at the small-town community college that I currently attend, somewhere that you would least expect to find any dissent from the predominantly Catholic surroundings, let alone to find as significant of a number as I have. This spread of paganism does truly seem to be a youth-driven movement, and one that intrigues me on many levels.
While many of my friends hold strongly atheist beliefs and are certainly science-minded individuals, a good number are also pagans or out and out non-religious. That in and of itself is far from surprising. Youth groups are often expected to deviate from their parents, particularly if the culture is excessively domineering (and with the sheer number of active churches in this town, that could certainly be argued to be the case). Youth is expected to be more progressive in their ideology, with more liberal values and ideas, and both atheism and paganism can certainly be considered more progressive and liberal than Christianity on a generalized level. That's not the part that I find fascinating.
What I do find fascinating comes mostly down to these aspects: the variety of the people turning pagan, the diversity of those beliefs, the extent to which they believe, and -- in unfortunate cases -- the delusions that seem to accompany the pagan beliefs in some (but by no means a significant number of the sample, especially as compared to the delusions of many Christians in the area). The people really do seem to come from all backgrounds, economically, family-structure, professions, etc. For the most part, the common thread is that we come from Christian families, though a few are fortunate enough to have pagan parents to offer some guidance (and some are unfortunate enough to have delusional pagan parents to cloud their judgment). I've met devotees of the Celts, of the Norse, Wiccans (this is, sadly, where most of the delusional types fall), and a solitary follower of the Summerian gods (whom I didn't get to talk to much, mind you). I've met those who believe in the power of prayer to the gods as a form of spiritual healing, those who believe in the power of ritual to perform very subtle magics, and -- sadly -- those who believe they have "mojo" and can influence the world with their minds (that last one makes me ask a chicken and the egg question of which came first, the pagan beliefs or the delusions of grandeur, but I presume it's the latter).
Time is cyclical. What was once dominant may waver, but it may just as easily recover and return to its former glory. You see it all the time in popular culture; we are a very fickle species. I myself value the antiquated and anachronistic ways of the Celts. In the cyclical shifts of time, we are eternally fluctuating from the present to the past. In holding on to such antiquated beliefs, are we becoming the anachronism, or forming the future?
To many, reverting to a pagan belief set is an anachronism in its own right, and to an extent, they're right. The cultures that originally held these beliefs are long-gone, and the monotheistic (in theory) faiths have won the day and led the world to its eventual scientific enlightenment. We have a lot of the knowledge now that we once used stories to theorize; we have no urgent need for a god of the storms, since we understand that what causes lightning and thunder is far from supernatural in nature. In many ways, religion as a whole is becoming obsolete, with the emphasis on science taking on the same role that early Christianity once occupied -- spreading rapidly and changing the collective conscious away from the remnants of mysticism and superstition. Atheism is becoming more and more prominent as a religion (and it is a religion to some -- the conviction found in many atheists is downright inspirational as it relates to unerring devotion), and will likely become the dominant system of belief within the next hundred years or so (and no, I'm not one of those that buys into the 2012 nonsense).
While the fate of the Atheism versus Christianity conflict is up for debate, and my opinion is by no means intended as an endorsement or condemnation of either side, it is clear to me that the times are indeed changing. We are not the same culturally as we were when the Roman Empire spread Catholicism throughout Europe. We have a wealth of knowledge at our fingertips now that we lacked then, and there is a noticeable drift away from Christianity going on worldwide. Atheism is on the rise and our secular society is responsible for it. For good or ill, the first-world nations are moving further and further away from mysticism each year. This, to me, appears to be a sign of the inevitable decline of religion and dominance of science -- provable knowledge overcoming faith.
So with the religion that drove my ways under the boot heels in the same position now that the ancients were once in, it is hard to say who the true anachronism is. Not only are the children of religious families abandoning religion for atheism, but a significant number are turning back to the pagan traditions that thrived before the spread of Rome, much as I have. It's something that I've personally observed, even at the small-town community college that I currently attend, somewhere that you would least expect to find any dissent from the predominantly Catholic surroundings, let alone to find as significant of a number as I have. This spread of paganism does truly seem to be a youth-driven movement, and one that intrigues me on many levels.
While many of my friends hold strongly atheist beliefs and are certainly science-minded individuals, a good number are also pagans or out and out non-religious. That in and of itself is far from surprising. Youth groups are often expected to deviate from their parents, particularly if the culture is excessively domineering (and with the sheer number of active churches in this town, that could certainly be argued to be the case). Youth is expected to be more progressive in their ideology, with more liberal values and ideas, and both atheism and paganism can certainly be considered more progressive and liberal than Christianity on a generalized level. That's not the part that I find fascinating.
What I do find fascinating comes mostly down to these aspects: the variety of the people turning pagan, the diversity of those beliefs, the extent to which they believe, and -- in unfortunate cases -- the delusions that seem to accompany the pagan beliefs in some (but by no means a significant number of the sample, especially as compared to the delusions of many Christians in the area). The people really do seem to come from all backgrounds, economically, family-structure, professions, etc. For the most part, the common thread is that we come from Christian families, though a few are fortunate enough to have pagan parents to offer some guidance (and some are unfortunate enough to have delusional pagan parents to cloud their judgment). I've met devotees of the Celts, of the Norse, Wiccans (this is, sadly, where most of the delusional types fall), and a solitary follower of the Summerian gods (whom I didn't get to talk to much, mind you). I've met those who believe in the power of prayer to the gods as a form of spiritual healing, those who believe in the power of ritual to perform very subtle magics, and -- sadly -- those who believe they have "mojo" and can influence the world with their minds (that last one makes me ask a chicken and the egg question of which came first, the pagan beliefs or the delusions of grandeur, but I presume it's the latter).
Time is cyclical. What was once dominant may waver, but it may just as easily recover and return to its former glory. You see it all the time in popular culture; we are a very fickle species. I myself value the antiquated and anachronistic ways of the Celts. In the cyclical shifts of time, we are eternally fluctuating from the present to the past. In holding on to such antiquated beliefs, are we becoming the anachronism, or forming the future?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)