“How does a person understand meaning? By remembering it. If we remember death, we are recalling an absence. At the same time, we are recalling the pain that defines the absence. We remember love, though become deluded at the thought that it, too, has died. Love does not die, though life does. Love does not have a heartbeat to stop, because it is always moving without such limitations. The proper comprehension of meaning is in knowing what still exists, to ourselves. A meaning that cannot die is one being loved, without the limitation of life. What meaning does life have? None, if no life is ever loved. Death cannot hold meaning when we could never love what never lived, to begin with.”– Modern Romanticism
Philosophy – “Why Both Atheism and Christianity should Agree to the Non-Existence of God” – 4/6/2021
“Non-existence has only a place for everything trustworthy. Therefore, wouldn’t we hold trust for what is certain, being of the past, being of what is both dead and not?”– Modern Romanticism
If God is said to be of love, then He’d have a relation only to the past, not the future. We stride forth to uncertainty. While the future is full of fear, the past is full of love. While the future is full of doubt, the past is full of wisdom.
We’ll hear the Atheist speak of the “obsolete” nature of religion. We’ll hear the same from their mouths on the “deadness” of God. However, has that not always been the case? Among what is dead, though is also not, of the past where we comprehend everything as certain, this is how we understand eternity. If God is said to be of love, then He’ll be in direct relation to the past, being of what is said to no longer exist. If Atheism wishes to bury religion and its teachings under the dust of cathedrals, it will remain alive.
God cannot die, nor can love. The past cannot die, because even if religion, itself, is deemed as obsolete, our comprehension for what is non-existent is what remains alive. As the Atheist will deny the existence of God, it becomes the appropriate thing for what the Christian can also understand. Denial of the past is only half of the equation. It is both denial and acceptance that makes faith.
We doubt what we cannot see, or of what others have said to be alive. When Christ died, people believed it. When Christ rose, people denied it.
The past, of what we remember, being of all we love, shows us purpose. It is always because we recall that we have one. If God is said to show all their own purpose, then He is of the past. He would be the sun that warms our backs, though we’ll cast a shadow forward which is the fear within the future.
What makes up the meaning of each individual life, if not what is dead, though is not? Among all those who have sacrificed, such as of Christ upon the cross, the dead are remembered for their lives that we might find meaning to keep moving. We gather strength from the past, learn lessons from our previous errors, all in the recollection of what is determined as dead and also not. That makes up the faith, that the future is bettered away from fear.
Philosophy – “Why Money does not Bring Happiness” – 4/4/2021
“Those who deceive themselves into believing that wealth can bring about happiness, are always those who do not have it.”– Modern Romanticism
In comprehension of the two types of wealth, being that of the monetary sort and that of the heart, can allow us to recognize what indeed fills the void of absence. Among all things present, being either in relation to what is meant to be consumed to then disappear, or in what is remembered because of our continued awareness to it, is to the differences between life and love. Within life, being temporary, though meant to be protected from the dominators, will indeed be viewed either through a lens of protection or control.
Those who wish to dominate or destroy the viewed life, do not protect. These are the sorts who find it in themselves to believe the life, viewed by them as lesser, must be dominated over in its consumption by the supposed greater force. Among what is always temporary makes to its potential to disappear, as always a sight of vulnerability. Presence is the filled void, made of what is protected close to our hearts. To treat what is meant to be dominated over, never to allow such to control the self, such as monetary wealth, is in the understanding that permanence resides only in what is protected. No person protects their monetary wealth, anymore than a slave-owner would protect their captives as though they loved them.
To protect the loved one, is then not to dominate them. Happiness is to the protector in what fulfills them by being the shield to what is protected. If dominance is ever the supposed loved one’s character over who they claim to cherish, then they believe more in their desire to control.
Among power or wealth, being that of the monetary sort, will not ever fulfill if it controls the one who possesses it. This is to say that any person who wishes to control those they claim to love, must be discarded of. They are then the ones dominated over, because that which uses, becomes used. The person who devours, becomes devoured, themselves.
For the sake of happiness, fulfillment belongs in what will not die due to the protection granted. In what cannot burn, being not of the metaphysical relationship, makes such presence in our lives last an eternity. If love is ever believed to be a madness, it is then through the idea of what haunts. We remember for what we cannot forget, because in love’s purpose to make all things possible, we are still yearning for the return of what had not been a consumable possession so easily discarded. Of its genuine nature, we belonged to it, and then likewise for the same of the other.
It it appropriate to compare the monetary world to the human form. Able to burn, for the cremation of it. Possessions can be burned, and then forgotten. It is in the understanding of what is immoral about necrophilia, that to remember a deceased person by their usable flesh, is not in the representation of love. By what can disappear, especially among what is able to become decay, is always lost, unlike love. In remembrance, we comprehend that is not love that died, though the trust for the utility of flesh. As it is, to remember a deceased person for their utility is not to love. We remember a face, as the sheer formation of all to be recognized. As an arm can appear as any other arm, or as a leg can be similar to another’s leg, we recognize the face through eye contact. For what cannot die, being love, makes a human in fullest knowledge that we cannot control it. We cannot control who we love, because the human form is the symbol for what can easily disappear and decay.
Placing dominance upon the form is the sign of control. Were that same form to control us, then it is lust. Love would not control, nor can be utilized by what it represents. Its representation can only be established through meaning. By what never did die, nor did truly disappear, makes everything defined of happiness the glimpses of what reminded us of ourselves as we recall it.
Philosophy – “Why Death is Meaningless, though Life is not” – 3/6/2021
“All lives are built upon Earth, or the place where others fell, or the place where others bled, or the place where others died.”– Modern Romanticism
As death should be understood, it is what gives life meaning.
People look to life, on its own, as though there can be meaning of each beating heart, or among the movement to each person.
Though, familiar life, being of recognizable signs as the beating heart or the moving limbs, has no meaning without understanding stillness. Of death, being understood of what stillness represents, holds us to find appreciation for the opposite.
Do the dead cry? Do the dead remember? They do not. Therefore, it is up to life to remembering the living. Or, among the dead, it is up to life to remember a deceased individual for how they lived, not by how they died.
We do not remember failure. The living forgives failure, soon when the life has died. As in, we could only ever view the dead monster, for how much we despised them in life, with compassionate eyes. We are compassionate toward the vulnerability either of what could easily die, or of what is already dead.
It is therefore not love that dies, though life. And, it is love that is opposite from death, not life. That is because love protects life, from death. Though, upon death, life remembers the moments spent, and then cries over the sheer memory towards what is now absent.
We cannot relive those moments for their absence. Though, we can indeed remember. We can remember what cannot be relived through anyone else.
As death gives meaning to life, we are alive out of those who loved us, who were willing to die for our sake. Those who died, among each person no longer alive, are of a sameness. Though, in how we are alive, that is what represents meaning. It is the meaning that represents our gratitude for the necessity of death. That is, we are only ever grateful to be alive, because of our ability to stand. And, it is always that we stand through the support of those who died. That support, of course, represents the earth we stand upon.
Philosophy – “Why an Artist should not Explain their Work” – 12/1/2020
“Meaning. As a word, it should explain itself.”– Modern Romanticism
Art has meaning. It has meaning within meaning. It has layers of its own meaning. Each layer descends atop the previous one, just as clothing for a woman might be removed to reveal the beautiful and vulnerable sculpture beneath.
Peel back the layers, and one sees truth. Yet, it should be done, immediately. Why must an artist need to explain meaning? Upon when a viewer becomes confused to the “message” behind a work, why should someone else, even the artist, explain it, to remedy the confusion? If such becomes the case, then the artist has failed is their attempt to make meaning universal. They’ve become among the arrogant of this world, believing their meaning to be “specific” to them, rather than creating art that can connect. For it is only the narcissist who sees their reflection in its specific shape, not ever daring to see another’s.
Art is never narcissistic, never egotistical, never selective upon who is considered to matter, when it connects through what has depth. Of depth, there is meaning. Among everything meaningful, we are each meant to see ourselves, as humans, as all vulnerable, as all bared to the reflection that might be the painted canvas, before us.
Though, if the artist too much sought to make specifics, and did not implement enough meaning so universal, they will indeed attempt to explain their work. Though, such an explanation will only arrive upon a viewer’s noticeable confusion, to the art.
It can only be that this confusion results, or originates, from the innate function of a human brain that is actually questioning the art for why it is not universal. For it must be that, in their confusion, to see the art as not being “universal”, is the same to say the work is not human. As in, to connect, for connection could only ever be artistic and universal.
Why else would a viewer to art question it, if the very act of being confused is not for segregation’s sake? One can easily imagine the artist pulling the confused viewer to a quiet room, to privately explain the work, in greater detail. Though, why couldn’t the art, itself, do the explaining?
To imagine if a Comedian told a terrible joke, to the reacted confusion of their viewers for what was said, might result in further explanation for clarity’s sake. By then, the humor has dried up, and the Comedian has met failure.
“Connection” would be the implement of a Comedian to make their entire audience laugh. If there are those who did not find the Comedian’s jokes to be humorous, to then begin scorning them, it could only be that such listeners are searching for specifics by way of humor. The “specifics” aspect of this, is all to know the difference between a representation of something certain, to a representation of something universal.
Quote – “The Third Reason to Cry: Out of Love” – 8/18/2020
“It is out of love that we weep not solely for misery, not solely for joy. These are tears that do not stain us, nor are they ones that we can easily forget. They are tears to merely remind us. Of what? Of what we are, truly at the center of ourselves. Loving ones. We build a shelter full of memories, constructing a heart out of gold. We say we are weak, that we are strong, in that residence of a heart. For as we stand like bronze, our tears come as silver, while our hearts are resplendent in gold that never wilts so long as we are structured, so long as we can break.”– Modern Romanticism
A Quote of Wisdom – “The Reason why Meaning Fades” – 3/16/2020
“Meaning holds light. Meaning has no residence in darkness. This would mean that meaning holds its definition in purpose. When relating purpose to the word ‘should’, meaning would state that we ‘should find purpose in the future’. However, most people will comprehend their future as dark and uncertain, and thus, they turn to their past.
Why is it that myths are merely the spread seeds of truth? It is because like all things misunderstood about truth, each ‘myth’ is related to an interpretation of the truth. Though, they are mere lies, and as it is, such lies are just fragments of the whole, of the absolute, of the entirety.
The multiplication of humans results in the multiplication of lies, the multiplication of interpretations, or the multiplication of viewpoints. Thus, we describe this to be ‘freedom’. Just as a dandelion’s own seeds are blown by the wind, all this describes is the essence of change, and never improvement.
While each life heads into the future, one should expect improvement. However, our meaning fades when all we are holding from our origin is a fragment of a whole. That whole, being a togetherness of humans.
When we find meaning in our past, we find meaning in pain. It is the same as pushing time backwards, and as such does not naturally occur, we create pain. More uncertainty and fear, creates the pain we dislike to feel.
A fragment is what we hold, and we will soon come to comprehend that truth, or flesh, is not meant to be free. It is, however, meant to be filled with purpose, moving towards the future, feeling no fear.
To fragment ourselves, our species, means to multiply. For we will divide others or divide ourselves from others, while we will multiply our ideas into a many.
The point being, that meaning fades under the circumstances when an origin, a creation, or truth, multiplies into myths and lies, from where it began.”
A Quote – “What does it mean to Protect a Loved One?” – 2/16/2020
“To protect those who are hurting; no, to protect those who have once experienced hurt; no, to protect those who have yet to be hurt further, and that is what is meant to be done, being the final way. See the suffering? See it clear, with your own eyes? Do you cry for it? Do not bully it. More than all else, have you done enough to burden yourself, and to place the pain on its source, being the wrong one? Is it that simple to see within yourself? It is not, and you will suffer yourself, should your pain be placed at the wrong spot. You will suffer more, due to that. Protect those, and only those, who won’t experience further hurt, due to your commitment to never allow their suffering to worsen itself. Everyone experiences hurt, and everyone looks over their shoulder to see who cares.”
Poem – “I Cast Thee in Marble” – Romance
With fewest steps to climb,
In an amorous avalanche of emotion,
Wandering upwards, to where a face
Glistens, and has been frozen.
I, with marble, in hand,
Smear its molten material upon thee,
And make thee a face of beauty and frailty,
Because, I have come from the realm of love.
Eyes gilded as sapphires,
And lips swiped upon, with ruby
Paint; and listless, is thy worn face,
Because, thou art continually raped.
A face of so much shame, for what was lost,
A virgin to the sword, and a blameless sleep.
A state of grief to the most pitied sheep,
I am for thee, and must build ye, on high.
Death makes unique phosphorous,
Of deadened things, so that thy breasts
Will glisten, and make a sight to behold.
When I love, I love with a stricken self,
I love with all the sadness of the earth,
Because, it has all been placed in the greenest
Marble, and has been frozen by me.
Love at my feet, and sympathy in my arms.
I toss all thy kind messages to the skies,
Safety and gratuity, all hurled into the sharp winds.
Love is a blessing when found through comfort,
I know, for I have made the finest delicacy.
The woman of marble, made in tidiness,
Made with grace, with arms extended, and legs
Placed together, in firmness, and modesty.
When I love, I make, and in the making, I undo myself.
Dialogue #1 – Darwinism & Creationism – “The Serpentine Inquiry” – On “Almighty and Foreign”
Q: For those you believe to be in question of the unknowns to life, who are such people?
A: They are such people, as both Christians and Scientists, who raise their heads in curiosity to see such unknowns. An unknown, being what is placed upon with a question. That question will receive an answer. What places a Christian at a disadvantage from a scientist, is a scientist’s love with the masculine. Masculinity is referred to as the straightforward, versus the feminine that seeks for intricacy or a spiderweb that is not so easy to embrace. One challenges their heart, not their mind, through an embrace of the feminine. What does modesty create for the human being? Lowness. Love does not raise, unless it is to be compassionate. In love, one raises others through that same emotion. One cannot raise themselves. Through love, one could raise the impoverished. One could raise the distraught and desperate, and from being hopeless comes the hope.
Q: It is the Christians and the Scientists who are seeking answers?
A: An answer, that is, to seek darkness; and such darkness is where a scientist refers himself. That which points to the masculine is rightfully so, the dark and handsome. Light is a metaphor for hope, while darkness is a metaphor for the deception. “Deception” is the place for the mysterious, and such limitless unknowns. A child will press its own face into its mother’s bosom after an embrace, and see such darkness. A Christian seeks answers perhaps during the waking day. A scientist will seek answers within darkness. Both realms, of light and dark, contain answers. And yet, what does reason or enlightenment do for the darkness? It adds light, and in this, Christians are the one to see an answer before the question. As Oppenheimer had said, “Genius sees the answer before the question.” Would a scientist, whose questions are numerous, seek answers in light? They would, though would find numerous answers, to the singular answer that a Christian will utilize. Genius is rare, and talent is rare, in the 21st century, and it should be evident for its reason, if the pun should be minded. If Christians are there to see light before darkness, then it should be true in today’s time to see darkness before light.
Q: And on the Christian’s side, where does the Christian seek answers? On the scientist’s side, where does he seek an answer?
A: A Christian already knows where to seek answers. A Christian, as has been said, knows to look at light. A scientist will look at darkness, and attempt to find a star. The astronomers of the past and today sought this method; and it should be assumed that were they to simply see darkness, and no stars to catch their attention, it may as well be a white sky, not a black one. Like a blank canvas, they’d be looking at white, to look for specks of darkness. See the painter and his sight in seeing color. It must fill white. Though, for the astronomer, it is the opposite.
Q: And for what reason do you think this to be the case?
A: To fill white with black, is to fill a canvas with a question, so that the viewer will question what is viewed. This is to say that emptiness or space is never questioned, while color or matter is continually questioned. A viewer to a painting will see the painting, and notice its color. That color, that filled void, will be questioned. And in the matter of the astronomer, there is the answer caught from the question, as stray and as small as they come. Though, unlike the prayer to pray, an astronomer or scientist seeks such answers in small fragments, whereas a Christian sees wholeness. A Christian sees fullness in light, that surrounds God and His glory, or Christ and the same.
Q: Is there anything for the Christian to question?
A Critique on the Content of Fair Share – “Anxiety as the Universal Trait of Territory”
Q: As for what is anxiety; can you point it out?
A: It links itself to the nervous system.
Q: As for what is discrimination; can you you point it out?
A: It links itself to the nervous system.
Q: Both anxiety and discrimination link themselves to the nervous system. Can you explain in detail?
A: The nervous system is the pain in which a body feels, and there comes the emotions and mental breakdowns based on the level of pain. Anxiety is universal, because all human beings possess a nervous system. All human beings possess a heart, as is obvious, and nothing worth pointing out. Discrimination is faceted by anxiety, due to such crimes of “hatred” actually being crimes of fear. Each human being desires change, but not every human being is willing to extend beyond patience to achieve that change. Radicalism is the essence of impatience, and impatience is what causes the greatest of devastation.
Q: And on the subject of territory, it is said by you that the “fight for equality” is what links itself to anxiety?
A: Anxiety and equality, in the fight for the latter, always feeds into the former. We live in a fearful society because of our fight for equality. Equality is the essence of fair share. Equal opportunity; equal rights; though what human being has ever been satisfied with such equal numbers? No deal in competition has ever been stable enough so that one does not rise above the other. If all were at the same height, no one would see the horizon. No one would see ambition. No one would see the future. This is never the case.