Always look on the illuminated side of life (you won't be able to see otherwise)

In recent times, I've been dwelling on the famous Socratic statement,

"The unexamined life is not worth living."


I wondered to what extent this is true. John Stuart Mill appeared to concur with the ancient Greek philosopher when he stated,

"It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied."

I saw an alternative view aired - "The unlived life is not worth examining." There is merit in this statement also, but given it was entered in the realm of an on-line forum, to what extent was the author 'living' their life at that point? Surely all in life is subjective. Is there a God? Is there an after-life? Is there any inherent meaning in 'this' life? If so, what is that meaning? Does life have a specific purpose? If so, what is that purpose? And so on, ad infinitum. Which then, for me at least, raises the question to what extent should we examine our lives and life in general.

I've been reading a book ('What's It All About?' by Julian Baggini) which attempts to tackle this subject, and on the definition of success (and the subsequent pursuit), there was a quote from Jean-Paul Sartre,

"Man is nothing else but the sum of his actions, nothing else but what his life is."

Interestingly (to my mind at least), I interpret this as meaning everything I have done/achieved in my life is simply that. It has no other significance. It is not success or failure - it is what it is. In a similar vein to Eckhart Tolle in 'A New Earth' suggesting, "Who I AM, is who I am" - the view here being that I'm not defined by anything, whether it be actions I take (or don't), what functions/roles I fulfil (or don't) or what possessions I own (or don't) - to do so gravitates away from who I REALLY am. Ergo, to define my life as a success or failure based on what I have done or possess, shifts the focus. Baggini goes on to further quote Sartre,

"The genius of Racine is the series of his tragedies, outside of which there is nothing. Why should we attribute to Racine the capacity to write yet another tragedy when that is precisely what he did not write?"

and then,

"No doubt this thought may seem comfortless to one who has not made a success of life."

With this last quote, Sartre appears to contradict what he has previously stated. To my understanding, there is a suggestion that success is nothing but a subjective interpretation and therefore is conceptual rather than being based in reality. But that could get me started on the question of, 'What is reality?'! Surely 'success' and 'failure' only exist where measures are created. Even when the lion is stalking prey, a kill may be interpreted as 'success'. But the absence of a kill could also be deemed a 'success' if the lion learns something from the 'failed' attempt. Indeed, from the lion's perspective, there may be no such thing as 'success' or 'failure'. I believe it is simply a human creation, rather than having an innate existence. In his book, Baggini cites further examples of the interpretation of success (in relative and absolute terms) using Frank Capra's film 'It's A Wonderful Life' and Chekhov's play 'The Seagull'.

So I could claim my life has been an unmitigated success. Or failure. Or a mixture of the two. Maybe I'll just stick with, 'It is what it is.'

But to lighten things a little, have a 'butcher's' at this:

http://www.opendemocracy.net/arts/article_1780.jsp

Irrelevant of my views on the subject, it made me chuckle.

Who? Where? Why?

Though the answers may not always be obvious, or indeed indisputable, surely we have to ask questions?

I put it to a colleague recently, that in essence, the way in which we learn anything is to ask questions. Whether that is to ask out loud or of oneself, to query what we perceive or ponder what we have heard, we cannot learn unless we ask questions.

I am often criticised for asking too many questions, or of asking questions when an answer is required. Some accuse me of avoiding their question, but invariably it is in order to better understand, to seek clarification. Admittedly, there are times when I am avoiding the question.

My wife has suggested that I missed my calling and should have been a barrister given my dexterity in avoiding many of her enquiries. It is true that I was impressed (on one level) with the abilities of the Aaron Eckhart character in 'Thank You For Smoking' (albeit he was a lobbyist rather than lawyer), but I don't think I could really cope with the machinations of the legal profession. I would ultimately want to be achieving something and all too often we seem to get 'bogged down' in the legal quagmire. Not that I seem to achieve all that much now.

Oh, what to do? I am at something of a crossroads, and whereas in the past I have been aware of lacking certainty in taking the right road, currently I'm not sure whether I even want to continue the journey. Or what the journeys purpose is. Maybe I want to stop at the service station at the crossroads for a while.

The only indisputable fact seems to be that I'll continue to ask questions.

To begin or not to begin?

As is typical for me, when faced with any situation, a myriad of questions come at me. So deciding on starting my blogging journey was no different.

Should I? Well, why not but then again, why?
If so, then what would I write of? That which I know or that which I want to know?
And why a blog? Why not just write in a diary or personal notebook? Why post it into the ether?

As I mentioned, my life is seemingly one long interrogation- of my self, the world I live in and the people I share it with. Yet those questions are so rarely followed through with any great dedication to finding an answer, soI am invariably left unfulfilled.

The phenoma that is blogging is curious to me. The motivations to blog are obviously many and varied, and I find them all fascinating, given my own interest in how our behaviours are influenced by the many factors in our lives.

What do I know? Well, I know that the things I do know amount to a tiny fraction of that which could be known. Which is in turn both encouraging and depressing.

I have come to the conclusion that blogging is one way in which I can allow my thoughts, however creative or destructive, to be written down and that very action may provide some sort of cathartic solution.

Deep down, whether we acknowledge it or not, we all want to be firstly accepted, and secondly loved, for who and what we are.