The science that I ‘proved’ made my time with her more dear, the time away from her more tragic. She, of course, would never see this; despite her superior intellect and even her longer understanding of the ramifications of historical context. Perhaps it was the engineer in her, but as a group their creative solutions to problems shows they are as creative as the playrights and poets who make fun of them.
“What is
the relevance of all this to the self help book? Isn’t self help meaningless to your
philosophy?”
“Ah,
there is the rub. For the illusion of
self determination is as powerful to the players as actual self-determination
would be to someone living in a truly random universe.”
“But
doesn’t that provide some evidence that there is real self determination, that
we do have true randomness in the universe?”
“Hardly. In a true random universe, nothing could
exist linearly. It would be Vonnegut’s
universe of being unstuck in time, but worse.
For chemical reactions would happen differently at different times, the
apple would not fall on newton’s head.
This was one of the problems with physics before mine. The scientists clung to the idea of
randomness and thereby had to come up with all manner of excuses for where it
was hidden; multiple universes, a different one for each outcome, mind
you. How absurd is that one. A universe of averages. Any excuse is merely that. An excuse to allow them to cling to their
precious sense of purpose, the brilliance they could lord over the lesser
people, their “prizes and awards” that they knew could not have value without
randomness.”
“So you
saw no value in what you did from that point on?”
“No. Not at all.
The power inherent in pre-determination is greater than the value of a
random universe. In a random universe,
you preserve nothing from moment to moment.
In the Non-linear universe everything exists forever. We carve each moment in stone. As long as the predetermination gives us
feelings, the feelings we have last much longer than the etchings in stone that
we treasure, or correctly put, they last just as long.
“With my
instincts for analysis, I began to look for what was missing in my life, where
my relationships were going wrong and, for those limited moments when they were
not, where they were going right.
Companionship,
I believe is the foundation for any relationship. This varies depending
on the depth of the relationship. The degree of the relationship,
however, is not totally dependent on the companionship. The version of
companionship, in such a judgement, that given by physical presence and that
given by emotional fantasy, the idea of being together, of being joined in a
common undertaking, in the most committed of relationships, an exclusive
undertaking. The best friend, the mate.
Consistency
is a large part of the commonality portion of companionship. What is an
inconsistent relationship other than a habitat for doubt and mistrust? If
you cannot trust the underpinnings of a relationship, it is hardly well
grounded for the future.
Such a relationship provides no solace, no increase in the sense
of security or self-worth. If you're constantly threatened with being cut
off, put in an attic, or merely out to pasture, you cannot let yourself go.
What did we need from the relationship? We needed someone
who gives advice and doesn't judge too harshly. We needed someone who would be
there. Each of these things requires
some discussion.***
“How can you judge?”
“Ahh, you ask, judge not lest you be judged. We all have our own time, Einstein said. We all have our perspective. I have already judged myself as wanting, I
have done the same of god. Having judged
those, the validity of my perspective may vary with the circumstances, but no
one is better suited to render judgement. Someone involved in a betrayal
should not expect to be judged lightly, but in the best of relationships, there
is the ability to think independent of the relationship and ours was hardly the
best.
Everyone needs someone they can talk to, and someone who they
respect enough to judge their actions.
It is about listening in part, but it is also about judgment.
I had my attorneys, who I could talk to, but only about matters of
law. We discussed the remedies which
were being sought, but they tell me it may not come ever. They point out that the law is not to provide
a remedy, but merely to remain consistent to itself, to allow both sides some
certainty as to what to expect. In other
words, the law is to maintain the status quo.
Those in power must know what it takes to remain in power and must be
able to insure against their violations of the rules they pay for. It makes sense in a way. It is unfair, but it is necessary to a well
ordered society. Just as the universe
has rules, so d those who live in it.
The problem is that the rules are made by people who are fallible, they
have their sets of values and they think they have all the information they
need to make decisions, but at the same time they do not.
These men seek to provide some sort of judgement far in advance of
the events that give rise to the need and their rules left much to be desired
in terms of what those of us who had been injured. Their rules were based on prejudice and
graft. My life, like countless others
hung in the balance while those in a position to make decisions, argued amongst
themselves, in no hurry to do anything other than deal with their own self
interests and protect their own positions of power. It was helpful that in order to do so, some
had to protect each of the two side.
Even an attorney needs someone who they can talk to without being
judged except for their own merit.
There was little comfort for me in between these judgements. Some were personal and they were not at all
positive. Some were business and they
seemed to be going very poorly considering my financial fortress was at stake.
This was little different between these measured judgements.
I could be considered in either case as someone who is blameworthy
or merely unfortunate. For my part,
being near the state of virtue, I did my best to provide those who felt they
were worse off than me a gentle ear and in some cases physical contact without
expectation of any return.
“Some of what you were doing was reprehensible! You must have taken judgement in those cases.”
“Really? Each of us has our own special circumstances where we
find ourselves. Society sets down rules,
but societies change. So why shouldn’t
we have made our own rules where we could?
Reason stays the same, but the justifications for actions may vary. The rules were set down by those who ruled in
the past and would rule in the present on the issues related to my damages and
my morality. Everyone, to some extent or
another, in court or in bed was gas lighting.
The attorneys were gas lighting the judge. The judge was part of a government that was
gas lighting the people. The people had
lovers as a part of it and the lovers were gas lighting each other. And I was gas lighting myself.
No comments:
Post a Comment