International Dinner 2013 Completion – Passport to Pangea

Had a good turn out this year at the annual International Dinner at California State University Bakersfield. Around 200 people attended, it was a full house. I was a performer, doing two different dances. Take look at the videos! After the videos you can take a look at the flier and the information of the event. Maybe you can attend next year!

Facebook Event Page

“Check off your Bucket list with our menu 🙂

The International Students Club invites CSUB community, as well as the people of Bakersfield, to come join us on April 12th 2013 at 6:00 pm, for the annual International Dinner. The event will be held at the Runner Café located on the CSUB campus. The dinner will include: live music, dance from different cultures, medieval European delicious, exotic cuisine, and much more. Join the celebration and allow us to show our gratitude for the kindness and support bestowed upon us by the community and our fellow classmates.”

_________________________

Theory of Moral Neutrality

One day after one of my Philosophy classes, bored, I sat down at my computer and typed this out. It had nothing to do with any class assignment. Call it an exercise of the mind if you will. Enjoy!

Theory of Moral Neutrality

In this day and age there are many theories of morality out there that try to dictate what is right and what is wrong, how we should live our lives, all of which try to place themselves on a pedestal as the highest form of what is good. All of which make the judgment as to what is good and what is bad. It will be my attempt to show that trying to label what is good and what is bad is in itself without any true basis as there is no true morality.

There is no “Good” or “Bad”
Only the “Favorable, Unfavorable, and the Status Quo”

As human beings who can think and reason, we have the propensity to place ourselves above everything else as if we are better, and that everything else is a lesser entity to ourselves, that ours is a higher evolution. We must admit that we are in fact animals, living things, nothing makes our existence any “better” than anything else. Our evolutionary path does not make us better than anything else; all it really did is make us more successful, the initial success being surviving at all with failing to succeed leading to extinction. Our thinking and reasoning was developed and maintained because it has been successful, it does not impart any imperative prerogative for morality. We only think that there “should” be morality, which is in itself a judgment.

So what of there being “Good” and “Bad”; “Right” and “Wrong”? These are the wrong labels for which to describe something. Allow me to illustrate with a few examples. Let us take the act of killing, generally we all agree that killing another human is “Bad” and “Wrong”, but what of killing an animal for consumption, for food. Can we say that killing a cow is Good or Right? If killing is indeed “Wrong” and that we are indeed a living thing just like a cow, what makes killing a cow any less wrong than killing a human? What if someone was attempting to take your life and there are only two outcomes, your death or the death of the one attacking you, is it wrong for you to defend your life if it means committing the wrongful act of killing? So what of stealing, we generally agree that stealing itself is wrong, that stealing is bad. However, what if one is stealing because they are starving and they require the food to survive, is the stealing then bad or wrong? It is these contradictions that we often make and for these reasons that I say labeling things as “Good” or “Bad”, “Right” or “Wrong” is faulty. For a situation we might decide is wrong, we could possibly think of another situation where that distinction is not so clear.

In response to this I put forth the labels of “Favorable” and “Unfavorable”. Let me replace the previous labels in the examples I put forth and replace them with these. We would say that killing a cow is favorable, and that killing a human is unfavorable, but in the situation of someone attempting to take the life of another, we would consider it favorable for the person being attacked to kill the other. Stealing in general is unfavorable, but stealing food to stave off starvation would be favorable.

Then what makes something favorable or unfavorable? This is perceived through the “Status Quo”. Certainly the environment would be unfavorable if everyone was going around killing each other. It would be much more favorable if we didn’t kill each other. It is from this that begins a Status Quo. Certainly it would be unfavorable if we didn’t kill for food, thus we kill and starts another Status Quo. Through these Status Quos is generally how we develop what our morals are. If one were to be attacked, one would strive to maintain the Status Quo of ones own life. Certainly some Status Quos are more important than others, but that is in a way dependent on how strictly they are enforced.

Lawful Neutrality and Chaotic Neutrality
The Balance In-between

So what kind of acts are there? As established previously there are favorable and unfavorable acts. How do acts relate to the Status Quo? Those acts which tend to follow the Status Quo are Lawful in nature, while those acts which go against the Status Quo are Chaotic in nature. Certainly while stealing to stave off starvation might be considered Chaotic, it is also considered favorable and could be considered Lawful to the Status Quo of survival.

This world is made up of the clash between the Law and Chaos of Status Quos. Generally speaking we adapt Status Quos that advance our natural success, but at the same time we are also reluctant to adapt new Status Quos too quickly even if they would be greatly favorable. What reason would we have for this? A “New Status Quo” would be Chaotic to the “Current Status Quo”, for we have a Status Quo to, well, Maintain the Status Quo. A “New Status Quo” must overcome two separate things, it must be more favorable than the old Status Quo, but also overcome the Maintenance of the Status Quo. This comes back again to the how strictly Status Quos are enforced. Having a Status Quo enforced against oneself is unfavorable. However, if the favorability of the “New Status Quo” is not only more favorable than the old status quo, but also offsets the unfavorabilty of the enforcement of the old status Quo, then the “New Status Quo” will be adopted. Once Chaos has overrun Law, a new Law is born.

The Inconsequence of Moral Theories

There is nothing actually good or bad about killing, there is nothing actually good or bad about stealing, there is nothing actually good or bad about lying, there is nothing good or bad about helping others, and there is nothing good or bad in this world. There are no universal laws, happiness is not always favorable, there are no true moral duties. These are all things we assign to ourselves and choose to follow. Moral Theories are most often used at one’s convenience which is favorable to oneself. They tell us what we should do but they don’t really give a sufficient reason for why we should do them, or to do one over another one. The reason is that in the end they all rely on judgments, and to justify a judgment, you must ultimately make another judgment.

It might sound as if judgments are unfavorable. Certainly judgments can be favorable as well as unfavorable. Judgments are one of the reasons we are successful, as they seem to have been more favorable than unfavorable. However, there is nothing about judgments that in of themselves justify an absolute moral code.

One might say that saying something is favorable or unfavorable is in itself a judgment, to an extent they would be correct, but only to the extent of where to apply the labels of favorable and unfavorable. Surely there would be no dispute that in something favorable things can happen and unfavorable things can happen (One cannot say there is absolutely no favorability or unfavorablity), judgment only comes into play when actually trying to apply those labels to something. One cannot say the same of good and bad, right and wrong, which are in of themselves judgments. To say they are within something is to be making a judgment about that thing, to say they happen as a result of something is to again make a judgment. True morality is merely an illusion, and there are no reasons to prefer one moral theory over another, since there is nothing that does not end up relying on judgments within these theories.

Cabaret of Parallel Planes

The timeless and those time has forgotten. There will always be both, for there are people destined to be the timeless and those destined to be forgotten with time. Then there are those who assume the aspects of both being timeless and forgotten. I am one of these people time has forgotten. I have resided upon this mortal plane for times long passed. Though forgotten, I have been timeless in age and features. In relation to this, I am known as Chrono. It is not the name I was originally given, but that name has long since been forgotten by the ages.

Though I have been forgotten, there is much that I have remembered, much that I have learned and maintained. I presume you have come to glean some of what I have learned from my time on this plane. First I must know your name, after all you must have something to offer as far as the exchange of information goes. Whisper to me your name, though you may be forgotten, you will at least be remembered by this timeless one.

…Your name has an interesting ring to it. Perhaps I’ll hear more of it in the future. But I digress, you have come for information, some of what I have seen, heard, and experienced. You have paid the toll, you have parted with your name, something you should not do foolishly in this world. One’s true name holds great power, the power to see its fate and perhaps alter it. You are lucky this time, however, I am but a mere observer.

I bet you wish to know more of the inner workings of this world. This world is not as most people perceive it. Few know its true nature, I am now bringing you under that chosen few. It is up to you on how you interpret what I am to tell you. This world is more than the physical aspects you see around you. There are many other worlds connected to this one. You could call them shadow worlds, but I believe our world is merely a faint shadow of those worlds. They have been known as “Hell”, “Heaven”, “Netherworld”, “Parallel Universes”, “Asgard”, “The Spirit World”, and many more. These places are not the mere work of fiction. Though our notions of them are for the most part falsely rooted, these places very much do exist. The nature of each is different.

Demons very much do exist as well. Though the meaning of the word “demon” has been skewed over time to the point where its original intent is no longer recognizable. Demons are not inherently evil, as they have been represented. They are merely denizens of another world, the gods fall under this category, however, their true motivations are shrouded in mystery. They are merely demons who have achieved power and position much like that of kings and tyrants.

____________________________________________________________________
Have you heard all that you wish? Are there any other questions you wish to ask of me? If you do have something you wish to know, ask now, for we shall most likely never meet again. Though I will, however, observe your exploits, or lack thereof, for I feel it is my duty as one who has been forgotten, to remember those who may become forgotten. Use this information as you will, go now into this world with a new perspective…

Who Am I?

What am I?
Am I a monster?
Perhaps…
I am not a beast.
Nor am I a god.
I seek the knowledge of the light.
Yet I walk the path of the dark.
What is it I seek?
In this paradox of an existence.
Do I seek power?
Do I seek knowledge?
Do I seek secrets unknown?
It matters not.
For I will find what I seek.
And I will fulfill what is to come.
Although my true name is forgotten.
I am known as Triface…
And I am myself…