Years ago, my mother told me that she thought I had a very black and white way of looking at the world. To my adolescent mind this seemed almost an insult, I thought I was liberal, a free-thinker, an introspective testament to open-mindedness. I didn’t realise until a long time later that the capacity to decide what I think didn’t invalidate any of these descriptions. I am a cynic, and I am an idealist. I am the former as a result of the latter. I see how the world should work, and I know it will never be achieved. I see what people could be, and what they aren’t.
Someone asked me last week what my definition of right and wrong was, and laughed when I replied “What you should do, and what you shouldn’t do.� But in its simplest and most basic form, that is the answer. Why complicate it? Most of the time you either know it already, or you call it a grey area. The truth is that there are no grey areas. Just things you haven’t thought about in the right way.
I wrote as a comment somewhere recently that grey areas are perceived because people do not like extremes, and do not like to use them when they form opinions. But extremes are the only test of logic. If an opinion does not hold up in its most extreme context, then that opinion is wrong. And yes, an opinion can be wrong. Deal with it. My opinions are extreme because they are obliged to be, because they would be worthless if they were not.
Do I ignore other points of view? No, that would be foolish, they are valuable in determining the correct answer to questions I cannot answer myself, or have answered incorrectly. If I thought that I knew everything then opinions would unnecessary, because I would know.
It has been suggested to me that there are no stupid questions. I would be inclined to agree with this statement, except for the existence of what I can only call smartass questions. Questions which in this age of existentialist wank we are meant to be confused by, they are meant to convey some deep and profound meaning which we are just a few steps away from grasping. Except that they are in fact a pile of utter horse poo. I will now answer a couple of these questions in an attempt to clarify.
Stupid question - If a tree falls in the forest and there is no-one there to hear it, does it make a sound?
Obvious Reply – Define sound. If its something you hear, then the structure of the question implies that the answer is no. If it is something that exists independent of measure then clearly the answer is yes. If you’re a budding quantum physicist, fuck off. I have no time for people who reject the concept of reality.
Stupid question – What is the sound of one hand clapping?
Obvious Reply – Since the definition of clapping is the act of bringing both hands together, this question is what I like to call nonsense. One might as well ask what it looks like when you do a handstand with your feet.
These stupid questions are apparently called Koans, and are meant to be Zen riddles. But I could generate a thousand of them simply by constructing sentences which are almost logical, but are in fact complete nonsense. They are not profound, they are not clever. They are a trick to give the impression of profundity and cleverness. If these actually originated in Buddhism, then I need no more proof than that to think it is a crock of shit. Something worth listening to would not want to attract the kind of spiritual up-your-own-arse-ness of people who ask these questions in company. I’ve got a better question.
If you don’t believe anything really exists, then why do you behave as if it does? Why conform to laws that you don’t believe in? Why do anything? Comments here you fucking hippies, I’d be genuinely interested to know.