Subject: Re: suicide
From: jason varsoke (jjv@caesun.msd.ray.com)
Date: Tue Feb 29 2000 - 08:40:28 EST
On Mon, 28 Feb 2000 AntiUtopia@aol.com wrote:
> You Fucking Morons.
>
> "To generalize is to be an idiot"
>
> --William Blake.
I love when people don't understand Blake, or 'get' him. The statement
is self countering, self-anihlating (never could spell that word). It's
supposed to be preposerously funny, like most of Scottie's posts.
Anyway, I have the unfortunately luck of not having weekend list
access. So, I didn't get to respond to a couple of things that trucked on
by the conversation. Wading through the posts I gathered ideas, reponses,
and had a running list. Fleshed out it would have been about 20 pages.
But my ego isn't big enough to imagine that any of you care that much
about my opinion. So I'll give you the short verson.
Existentialism & the Path of Least Resistance: same thing . . . at
least according to Sartre's _Emotions and Existentialism_. In that text
he basically muddles his own theory of "bad faith" and says that people
always act exactly how they want to act (barring a few obvious
exceptions.) If you get up and go to work in the morning it is because,
beleive it or not, that was the most important thing to you. Of course,
this theory is supported mostly by rationalization and is about as
satisfying as deconstruction.
Existentialism summed up: there is no inherint value system in the
world, you need to forge your own. Seymour's included his death. That
was important to him. The bad faith Jim mentioned on Friday is basically
when people tell you to do things and you do them because they wanted you
to (you adopted their value system). I don't see how Seymour applies.
Weltschmertz is not bad faith either.
The above are part of my response to Jim saying that no western
religion or philosophy condones suicide.
Another great example of a philosophy that condones suicide is that
promoted by Hemingway. The machismo creed "living life on your own
terms" certainly supports suicide. It could be thought of as an extension
of existentialism, or american transcendentalism, or maybe bar-room
brawls, but it's still a philosophy (though not a system). The idea is
that you have control over your life and your death. And you can take
your ball and go home anytime. You can die on your own terms. "Check
Please!" and pull the trigger. Hemingway wasn't a coward either.
Cowards are people that believe in something, that want something and
don't have the gonads to do something about it. That is a coward. I
don't think that applies to Seymour. I don't think all the Vietnam Vets
who had done the same, plagued by untreatable post-traumatic stress
disorder, or as my friend calls them "the night shakes," are cowards
either. And Seymour can certainly be plopped in this group (a
bananafish).
> I talk Seymour, you hear group. Unplug thine ears.
Jim, considering there are about 7 other people participating in this
discussion, and they all want to talk about group, not particularly
Seymour . . . well you get the rest.
Jim, you have to realize, that when you use a word like coward to
discribe so many people (as Seymour represents so many people
ultra-sensitive, desensitized by war, then back to ultra-sensitive land
again) you are going to get a backdraft.
-jason
-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Thu Mar 02 2000 - 19:30:24 EST