So the other day I had been thinking about the meaning of life and how life exists and why some species go into extinction. What I am about to say may seem very controversial and seem harsh and its not meant to be it is just my thought on life.
My theory on why life sustains itself and why we as human beings exist still is based entirely behind balance. Life sustains itself by keeping a balance in everything. Anything in life in fact can be brought back to balance. We reproduce because we have a balance of males and females and when you conceive a child there is a balance of genes from each parent (in most cases). And because of this balance a new life is created. I believe that life sustains around this theory of balance. With balance anything is possible as long as a balance is there. And this brings me to politics and ideas people have around situations.
Life is life because of balance of ideas. Many people think that if everyone thought the way they thought life would be so much simpler. It might be simpler but I think that it wouldn't last too long. What would republicans be without a democratic party to be their opposite? Would there even be Pro-Life if there was no Pro-Choice or vice versa? No, you need the opposite side of the argument to realize what you have as a person and, even more importantly, as a person with free will. It is similar to the theory of if the Devil did not exist, then would God still exist? Because even though one represents evil or sinning and the other represents being good, they still compliment each other.(Please do not attack me for that statement as I am not fully knowledgeable in religion at all, this is what I sort of know at the moment and I am planning on learning more before the next parts of this section). Or if nothing bad happened in the world, how would you know if what we have is good? We need this balance between the two to recognize that the other still exists.
But balance does not mean that if everything was the same that we would be happier because it would be the "Ultimately Perfect Balance". No because if everything was the same then life would stop evolving and adapting to new situations in life. If everything was the same we would not have great inventors like Albert Einstein with different ideas to challenge our knowledge of how things work. If everyone in the world was the exact same on all ideals, we would have one massive cult and evolution of the human race would cease to exist because everyone would have the exact same types of thoughts and there would be no creativity because there wouldn't be anything to be creative between.
Now yes this "Balance" theory is kind of common knowledge, but I think it is more than that. I feel like everyone on the planet is working towards their own balance and a balance in the world. An example I have been using for this is World War 2. This is because Hitler and the Axis powers tried to conquer a lot of europe. This was throwing off the balance of the entire world leading into a World War. I believe that even though we say we were fighting for freedom and things along that line, I believe we fought to restore the balance in the world. I say the balance in the world because after the war ended we occupied germany for a short while and now it is run by their own government. And we are also doing the same in Iraq and Iran and Afghanistan, we occupied and tried to restore their balance and slowly withdraw ourselves out so that they can run themselves and keep balance to the world.
And that is it for Part 1 of my theory behind how Balance is the key to existence and the human race. I'm not sure when I will post Part 2 at the current time because it is very hard to word this topic just because of how sensitive some topics are nowadays.
Thanks for reading,
Dan
If you liked this post increase my readers by linking my blog to your Facebook page or twitter it.
I think to a point, everything is based on balance, yes. However, in regards to World War II, I think there was a lot more going on than balance. It wasn't that the allies though, "hey, the scales are tipping too much one way, lets set that right," it was that they saw their own liberties at risk, and also saw a lot of evil and devastation for an unnecessary and incorrect purpose. While you may argue that Nazi ideals as opposed to those of England and the US is exactly balance, I think that there is an inherent moral standing in most people, but this did not exist in Hitler. He was able to garner support through a combination of intelligence and strategy, though once he became chancellor, her could abandon all of that and use the power he was legally given at his own discretion, which as we all know, did not turn out well.
ReplyDeleteThe idea of balance is correct to a point, though any evolutionist or anthropologist can tell you that. I think that certain events aren't about restoring the balance simply to restore it, its about doing the right thing. Churchill and Roosevelt didn't say, stop it because we want to share the power, they said stop it, because what you are doing is wrong, it is affecting us negatively, and it is affecting others for no reason.
You must read Kenneth Burke and his idea of the "negative." You will love it. Kenneth Burke is one of those people whose ideas you can apply to roughly 98% of situations (some people describe themselves as BURKEIAN and never look back!), so he's great to read and have in your back pocket.
ReplyDeleteHe also said "man [sic] is the symbol using, making, and mis-using animal, inventor of the negative, separated from his natural condition by instruments of his own making, goaded by the spirit of hierarchy, and rotten with perfection." When I read that and thought about that when I was in college, it knocked me out and I never looked back.