Gratuitous Dread Presence

Sophistication

We live in an era of increasing sophistication. Humans, like all other living creatures on this planet have the same requirement for basic needs. Prehistoric humans banded together to meet their needs of food, clothing and shelter. When agriculture was introduced, it represented the first advancement on the basic struggles for existence—and made the process of food more complicated by following the nuances of managing crops. As agricultural techniques grew, they became more sophisticated. And, for the first time, man was faced with the management of knowledge that was abstract.

As society grew, the burden of abstract knowledge each human needed to exist also grew. As societies developed into serfdoms, the knowledge needed to function was far greater then the basic needs of survival. The written word began to be used as a way of extending oral knowledge. It would take years before technology advanced enough to mass produce books and other written material.

Once this great expansion of information became widely available, the amount of abstract knowledge required to function in society began to increase. Europeans spread their sophistication in their desires for trade and conquest, and the less sophisticated people in their way suffered. The industrial revolution brought on a greater wave of knowledge, complex with the workings of machinery and marketplaces. Literature began to take hold in people's minds, and the concept of mass media began to spread. The amount of knowledge that was abstract to the common man began to increase significantly.

Mass media brought on the next big wave of abstract knowledge. With this, the intensity of sophistication required for daily existence increased dramatically. With the introduction of radio, television and motion pictures the average human was exposed to abstract knowledge that was completely outside of their physical realm. People were exposed to concepts, international news and art at unprecedented levels.

After the war, the information age brought the next wave of sophistication. An individual person's ability to communicate expanded greatly, and the wealth of knowledge available increased dramatically. The telephone, an abstract means of communicating great distances began to build extended communities that had less traditional boundaries. The gemeinschaft relationships that predominated in preindustrial times began to reassert themselves through this personal medium.

It appears that this level of sophistication continues to grow. It's interesting to note that older feats of sophistication, such as fire building or hunting are no longer even considered useful skills.

Temping Tonight on the Old ...

When I graduated from college, I was able to easily get a job in just about anything I wanted. As a result, I worked a variety of positions, in several industries. Certain common themes did exist within my career path, but overall, my resume has a lot of diversity.

In the past few years, however, finding a suitable full time position proved to be very difficult. I would occasionally find advertisements for compelling positions, and would seem to interview well, but somehow, never made it to the point of a job offer.

So I started temping. I kept applying to temp agencies, and once completing an induction interview process, pressed them for work. I'm pretty prolific in my efforts at finding work, so it stands to reason that I have interviewed at a lot of different temp agencies. I discovered that some of the problems that plagued me in my full time job search extended into the temp world.

The induction interviews are often 2-3 hours long, and always include tests, both on paper and computer. The actual interview process is somewhat muted, as it's more of the interviewer getting an idea of the kind and scope of work that you want to do. Most temp agencies accept a business casual dress for these interviews; the ones that don't tend to be a lot more brash with their perspective temps, but don't necessarily have better work.

One such temporary service, which seemed to have a lot of positions available, was one that I worked pretty hard securing an interview. My testing went fine, and during the talking phase of the interview, I explained some of the problems associated with my arrest for domestic battery that had occurred over ten years ago. The interview ended well.

My efforts at getting an assignment were unsuccessful. I called several times per week for about two weeks. I finally asked why I wasn't getting assignments, and was told that it was 'difficult to get work for convicted felons.' I tried to explain that I wasn't a convicted felon, and in fact didn't even have a conviction, but I could tell by the tone of her voice that she didn't believe me.

Once, while working at the reception desk, I discovered that the company had a tradition of buying lunch for all employees once per month. I asked my contact if that included me, and she told me she didn't know, and that I should approach the company's chief accountant and ask them.

Another office I worked in was a phone bank. I was one of eight or so employees and temps in a bank of cubicles that was closely watched by two supervisors at desks facing our workstations. They constantly told us to keep calling, and would occasionally walk over and examine our tally sheets. Breaks were rigidly enforced at set times—and employees weren't allowed to leave their desks while not on break.

I worked at one assignment for two days doing some data manipulation on a spreadsheet. Several weeks later, another assignment came up—and the temp agency asked me if I wanted it. It was a longer term assignment, and close to my home. Unfortunately, when the client heard that it was me, they requested someone with less experience.

My current assignment isn't too bad. It's a medium sized call center, with about 150 employees, of which about 35 percent are temps. The office has no HR department, and they take on about 6-10 new temps per month. The training is pretty complex—they have multiple systems with different requirements, and training takes about a month. Once temps 'get the picture' they leave the training department and are assigned accounts. It's not uncommon to talk to a temp that's been there for over a year—there are at least ten of them. This company contracts with several temp agencies, so not all temps work for the same agency. The fact that I was the inaugural employee of my temp agency worked to my advantage.

The environment is rather dreary, so the perm staff try to liven things up. They constantly have events where they provide lunch or some kind of treat, as well as have various trivia and puzzle contests. Staff takes care to not remind temps that they are temps. But it's not all like that—when I open my web browser, the corporate page displays link teasers that I can't view because I need to log in as an employee. When I fill out my corporate time card, my name is listed as 'Christopher Temp Buxton'.

Andy Warhol's

So I was thinking today about Andy Warhol's comment about how everyone would be famous for fifteen minutes, and how he actually turned out to be right. The actual argument of weather or not we have actually achieved this point with the internet is still worthy of discussion, but I am personally convinced that this prediction has come true.

My thoughts, however, focused on why he would make such a statement. The prediction itself was a damn good guess, but not totally unexpected. After all, he grew up in a time that saw a significant amount of growth and change in the nature of mass media--so his experience could have easily led him to that conclusion.

But why sum it up in such a simple phrase? In many ways, it's a philosophical statement. The main point of contention hinges on the definition of the fame, but the rest of the concept is pretty simple. As a philosophical mantra, it's an easy concept to explore in depth.

The point I saw today, though, is this: Andy Warhol is an artist. Most of his works focused on more traditional media, like canvas, wood, film, etc. However, this one phrase was a creation of art within a much rarer medium: Philosophy. Mr. Warhol created a deceptively simple statement that ultimately leads itself to an exposition of thought.

And the beauty of this art is the fact that it still goes on today. 

In the distance

As I pulled up to a stoplight the other day, I noticed something in the distance. At first, I thought it was smoke, but it seemed to disappear before my eyes. Then it reappeared, a strange, pliable brown cloud. It was a flock of birds, and they were flying in unison. As I watched, they would turn, and disappear from my sight, as I was too far to see them. A moment later, they turned again, and I could see their wings. I watched them shimmer in the distance until the person behind me honked their horn. The stoplight had turned green.

So maybe it was a really long drive ...

and it should be 'Thoughts When Driving My (Spouse's) Car:

Somewhere in Kurt Vonnegut’s novels, he talks about the Tralfamadorian view of the nature of people. He pretty much explains that a person isn’t simply as he appears to us, but rather a composite of those who came before and after the existence of that person.

Because I’m human, I do not understand nor subscribe to the concept of the Tralfamadorian concept of time, that is I do not accept the influence of future beings upon my existence. However, I do acknowledge the concept that we are composites of those who came before us, tempered by the ongoing wave of sophistication of society. In this way, we are not just ourselves; but both our current incarnation of consciousness, as well as psychological and sociological essence of those before us.

And to go further: It’s not just our ancestors that make up a part of us: Our friends also are an important to this metaphysical being, as well as our peer relatives. Hence, I do not exist only as myself, but also as a part of my siblings, parents and children. It’s almost the same concept as something like a tree: a collection of cells, mutual life, that choose to exist in harmony. The individual cells do not make up the tree; only their collection via cooperation.

This is not just a casual agreement of existence. The real force that ties our ‘individual’ self with our ‘extended metaphysical self’ is but a simple component: Love. We are not just physical representations of our flesh, but rather a composite of those which we have bonded in love.

So if you happen to meet me in a party on the coast, you wouldn’t just be meeting me: you would be meeting my entire being, made up of myself, and those who love me. It is not necessarily a romantic love, but also a brotherly love, and a friendship love. I am not just the flesh and simple psyche before you--I am but a component in a larger social organism.

It gets even more complex then this … imagine, for example, if I also try to explain that the emotion of hate is simply another shade of love … but I will leave that argument for a later time. The gist of this argument is thus: we are not simple individuals standing alone in time; we are components in a much larger organism.

Lessons for Walking

Walking long distances is an art form. There are various things one can do to complete the walk, and make it fulfilling as possible.

1--Don’t stare at your final destination. Nothing can be more depressing then to see your objective in the distance. Each step doesn’t make it appear any closer—it simply seems to remain in the intangible distant. Your footsteps then seem to be a futile gesture in conquering your ultimate goal.

You should allow your eyes to wander. In this way, you’ll find a good place to take a rest, as well as absorb those things around you, as opposed to the goal in the distance. After all, what’s around us now affects us more then a lofty goal in the distance. Looking at your immediate surroundings allows you to appreciate what you currently have.

2—Take breaks. Walking isn't very tiring, and it can be easy to forget to stop and rest. Resting is important because it allows us time to enjoy those things that are immediately at hand. Walking can be a dull, plodding chore. Including breaks into a walk allows for time to dwell on the simple, insignificant things that might be found on the way. Often, these things prove to be the better part of the journey.

3—Keep up a dialogue with yourself, or with someone who is significant to you. We all walk alone on these kinds of journeys, but if we constantly allow our minds to wander where they will, it proves to be fuel for the soul. Some people may choose some kind of deity to focus upon; others may have arguments with lost friends or deceased parents. This will serve to keep your spirits up.

4—Look behind you. This may sound kind of foolish at first, but it isn't. Things don’t look the same backwards. If, by chance, you have to return by the same route, then you will have a basis for remembering what you will see on the way back. But most important, however, is that looking back allows one to sum up their progress by admiring the distance already traveled.

Truth, Incorporated

It must be very comforting to believe in a supreme being that is all powerful.

I’ve been attending an evangelical church (link updated 6/14/2004)over the past few weeks. At first, I was kind of annoyed with their over the top spreading of their personal love of God. They have a whole separate part of the service—not part of the typical order of worship—that focuses on offering praise to God.

At first, I thought of Andy Partridge--I once read had complained that he felt that God was insecure to be demanding us humans to constantly bestow Him with praise. Then I began to wonder: perhaps they are so eager to express their praise because they feel their hold on God to be a fragile one; they have to constantly remind themselves that they love God, lest they forget.

In contrast, the wife turned me on to some pretty good Christian techno. I can’t fully explain it—ok maybe I’ll offer a theory in a moment—but these all out Christian artists put together some damn good techno. The piece my wife bought was pretty good—and only had a few lyrics. That’s partly why it’s so good—it doesn’t clutter up the sound with words.

The initial piece has some spoken word from Revelations: “I am the alpha and the omega. The beginning and the end. I am what was, what is, and what is to be. The almighty.”
After jamming this tune a few times at high volume, I began to look upon the total idolization of God to be pure—similar to the state of nirvana offered to Buddhists.

And there goes my point: If we concentrate on the pure image of God as being this all powerful, all knowing deity, then our meditations on the nature of God can prove to be our own fuel for understanding Him. This understanding wouldn’t come from some words in a sermon, or perhaps the bible itself, but rather our own understanding from within.

To make my point another way: Douglas Adam’s series ‘The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy’ refers to this device that is used for torture. The point of this device is to illustrate one’s own insignificance in the universe. The intended victim would have to view the box, which would then show the extent of their own insignificance.

Think for a minute about your own insignificance in the face of the universe: How do you compare with such monuments of Jupiter and Saturn? Planets that have their own lives that will span billions of years—yet are still only a small piece of the universe. If you actually viewed this box of Adams’, then you would truly see yourself as a simple insignificant speck in the universe.

A person who properly believes in God would look into that box and see God. Their belief in God would shield them from the wave of insecurity that would come from the lack of significance. Someone who doesn’t believe in God would be overwhelmed by the vastness before them … if they didn’t already know it was there.

So I now get to my point: Why does Christian techno seem to be so good? Perhaps because they have this vision of God as a supreme being, and they simply try to express this in the language of random sound. If they have achieved this purity of vision, and then passed it on through their art, then I am a willing listener.

finally ... a new post

If we accept, for a moment, the concept that man truly became a creature of distinction when he achieved sentiency, then we can accept the concept that all lower animals continue to live in God’s grace. We have, however, chosen to cast off that fate, and strived to become masters of our own destiny. Though it was appealing at first, we quickly became tired of the mundane awareness of our struggle to achieve the grace that is inherently bestowed upon those not aware of the presence of God. We struggle with this loss, trying to desperately recapture the moment of ignorant bliss, but our efforts usually fail.

Our nostalgia for our previous nirvana of grace left us with an empty feeling inside. We then chose to fill this void by recognizing God, begging his forgiveness, and worshipping him. As our level of sophistication increased, we were able to use our new-found reason to more succinctly define God, from a series of shadowy deities to the monotheist concept popular today. In this way, we have prepared a way for us to take God into the future.

I suppose that if we continue to do so, we are simply allowing God to evolve along with us. As man continues to grow and become more sophisticated, then the God we have brought along for the ride needs to grow with us. If we look into the distant future, the lines between man and God begin to blur: perhaps our destiny is to become more intertwined with God, and at a distant point in the future, we become God.

But this phenomenon lies in the distant future. We are nowhere near that point.

What God Hates

Once, quite a few years ago, I spent some time doing work as a political volunteer. It was something that my mother set up for me, and I was assisting a candidate for a local office. My days would usually consist of me driving to his house, parking my car, and taking the train downtown to his office. From there, I would drive him around the county in his car, while he campaigned at various political events. I wasn’t particularly committed to him, or his cause, but I enjoyed the work.

Once, we attended an event in a golf club in the southern suburbs. As the candidate worked the event, I took a few minutes to attack the buffet of appetizers. It was a well-heeled event—after all, my mother was a republican—and it contained quite a spread of cheeses, meats, and exotic looking food.

As I was heaping food upon my plate, an older gentleman behind me pointed to something that looked kind of brown and smelled fishy. “What’s that?” he asked me, as he pointed to it. I had no idea, and told him so. “Oh well,” he said, and grabbed a couple. He smiled at me and said “God hates a coward.”

I found a place to sit and chewed on his comment. This man, who appeared to be well off, had an incredibly liberal attitude about his life. I remember being startled by the fact that he didn’t already know what that food was, since it was a tony golf club, and he appeared to be a member. I tasted the food … it was fishy and salty, and I didn’t like it because of the hair sized fish bones.

I suppose, however, that the real nutrition was in what the man said. Cowardice is certainly a function of self-preservation; often the fear that drives it is right in the sense that flight from a situation allows us safety. But the man wasn’t referring to food—he was talking about a willingness to try something new. And he implied the opposite: God loves those that take chances.

Maybe that’s what Eve said to Adam, as she handed him the fruit of knowledge: “God hates a coward.” How presumptive of her to assume she knew what God hated or loved. Yet the fruit was, in itself, a gift from God. If God is all knowing and all seeing, He should have easily been able to see that his creation of the fruit of knowledge was going to be a strong lure for his budding human creations. After all, as I raise a puppy, I carefully watch over things for him to find that he shouldn’t have—chocolate, pens to chew on, and cat food—and take them out of his reach. But I don’t take other things away—the water bowl, the books and the cat. Sooner or later, the puppy will discover the cat, and find that the cat isn’t what it appears to be. There is a chance that the puppy will be hurt, but within that pain there is a lesson to be learned.

In this way, I am acting as God must have. True, the cat is no fruit of knowledge, but it must have pained God to know he had to create this fruit, forbid us from eating it, and yet know we were going to anyway. After we ate this fruit, and our eyes opened, we began to realize that the ideal life we had up until then was going to end, and that there was no going back. But God knew we had the courage to face the trial of life with knowledge. Had Eve not tasted the fruit, and Adam not taken it from Eve, we would be nothing but a race of cowards. We would still be secure within the paradise of Eden, but we would have never been able to fully appreciate the gifts that God has given us.

Today, I found myself confronted with a difficult decision. I realized that I had made a mistake, and that I had two options: One that was a simple, yet brutal way out, and one that meant a lot of heartbreak and pain, but also honorable. I chose the latter.

I am going out to dinner tonight. The restaurant we’re going to will have an expansive and exotic salad bar. I will choose something there that I have never had before, and delight as it’s knowledge of flavor washes over me. After all, God hates a coward.

Faith

As much as I would like to embrace atheism, I can’t. That is because monotheists have a single philosophical weapon their arsenal: faith.

The single most important quality in a monotheist is their devotion to their belief. If they maintain their belief in their god, then that god is true to them. It doesn’t really matter what kind of promise they have chosen to follow—that of eternal life and reward, or perhaps a helping hand in their mortal lives.

I can mock their lifestyle, and point out the absurdity of their belief—but I cannot shake their faith in what they believe. If I had that power, then their faith isn’t strong enough for them to consider themselves believers. And their faith is what carries them through modern society today.

This is one reason why I am amused at those monotheists who refuse to acknowledge the logic of science. The best example of this is the theory of evolution: There really isn’t anything in that theory that proves or disproves the existence of a god. In fact, I have heard many monotheists use this very concept as an example of the power of their respective god—after all, isn’t the process of evolution itself a miracle?

But other religious fundamentalists choose to accept the black and white of religious documents as science—and disregard the inquisitive mind that their god gave them. To me, this is a total affront to the god they supposedly have faith in. After all, if their faith is so strong, and their god is so awesome, why can’t it stand up to the puny logic of us mortals?

An excellent example of this kind of blind ignorance can be found here. The people behind this site are so fearful of the logic of science, that they have created a website dedicated to disregarding the advances of modern man. I cannot imagine their fear when they meet their god.