In response to my Friens Keith Garret regarding religion/philosophy

The Case for Cynicism

Life is full of balances or opposites. There is light and there is dark. There is love and there is hate; ad nauseum. Therefore, for those that are hopeful or in most cases, idealistic, cynicism is practiced willingly or otherwise, by those who are, like Machiavelli, pragmatists.
Pragmatists are those who see mankind throughout history and from this form their life philosophy. Religion would claim that goodness is the means to happiness where the cynic would say that man is not and cannot attain happiness for if one man is unhappy, then happiness is not universal but rather it is individually subjective. Therefore, universal happiness is unattainable.
Life should be about consistency but life is not consistent. For religion to erode cynicism, it must work for all. There can be none who are unable to adopt religion and practice it accordingly. Certainly the corollary does apply. Therefore, for cynicism to be universal, it must apply to every individual.
At this time in my life, no one is wrong and no one is right. (This of course setting aside such obvious matters as murder and so on). Kant it is who posited that an action has no value be it good or bad. What gives an action a value is the motive and not the result. So, if your seeking of religion results in good or bad, it is your motivation that provides value.
Everything is subjective therefore value is subjective. I cannot say your religion is wrong nor may I say it is not. Again, apply the corollary to cynicism. I had embraced religion strongly for many years. Now I embrace cynicism for my experience has me at that point where the subjectivity, and non-universal nature of religion, has not provided the answers that human life not only requests, but demands.
There is no religious figure that can produce any supernatural actions or promises. Life is about physicality and logic. Religion to one degree or another requires us, by one degree or another, to deny reality and appeal to the metaphysical that cannot be proven and in most cases is not logical. Even if one appeals to the fact that we cannot compare, nor can we marry the physical with the metaphysical, this still does not provide proof for the need for, and the practice of religion.
Certainly there exists the need in each person to pursue something, however defined, that provides a means and a method to live life or to deal with life as it presents itself. Anyone who expects perfection is delusional and foolish. Anyone who does not pursue the best path for her or him is foolish and delusional.
Cynicism will always be no matter how anyone feels about it. Lambaste the cynic but she will not disappear. Persecute the religious but he will not disappear. On a spiritually cosmic scale, these two balance one another. The religionist will reinforce belief by the lack of belief of the cynic, and the cynic will reinforce his philosophy by the beliefs of the religious. The two can and must co-exist lest the balance of humanity be disturbed.
Another value the cynic contributes is the purpose of causing those that are gung ho to stop for a moment and think things through just one more time. So, religionists must think one more time and dispense with emotion. (If it is in fact present).

Truth and ‘Evil’.

Do you remember the night at Molly McGee’s? We had a glorious evening and a wonderful conversation. We spoke of the relative nature of good and ‘evil’ as it exists between cultures. You stated that there is no right or wrong and I posited the opposite. Well, on that matter I am still quite undecided. What it has done for me is provide fodder for my cynicism. If there can be no universal agreement on the matter, then cynicism is rightfully adopted as it relates to spirituality or religion, universally.
By no means am I suggesting there is a universal truth, for there is none. Truth is an individual undertaking which must never be forced upon another. Of all things in life, choice is paramount and, to quote the constitution, an inalienable right. Your enlightenment is no more valuable than my cynicism. Am I happy for your enlightenment, absolutely? That happiness does not let you off the hook though. Our conversation must continue so we may both grow. Will I or you change in the future? Yes, we both will for that is one of life’s wonderful gifts.
I know one of the mistakes I made when I was religiously inclined was to be inflexible. I am no longer so and I must lay at your feet and at the feet of Shivani, the right to claim the cause for the change that I have experienced. Never was it an easy change but it certainly has been a wise one.
I know that you understand that I am not suggesting that you are forcing upon me your enlightenment. You are not capable of being that naïve and selfish.
Religious Neutrality

As an immediate response to this statement, I am inclined to think of it as an oxymoron. There is much in other religions that you would not agree with. There are philosophies and theologies that I suspect you would not be able to view as neutral. It seems to me that in religion there can be no neutrality. Think only of how many wars have been fought in this name.

The Search for Happiness

Happiness is within rather than without. So much energy is expended attempting to find something that does not exist externally. No matter where I go in an effort to change my circumstance and thus hopefully discover happiness, I still remain who I am and nothing within changes. I may temporarily change how I feel, but soon enough, once the novelty of new surroundings wear off, I will discover that happiness is not at the new place I took myself to. Happiness is something within so that wherever I go, happiness accompanies me.
At this point, or any other point. One must define happiness. This is somewhat of a problem because individuals will have, even if similar, differing definitions of happiness. I do not seek happiness at all. It is not something to be found in any system or philosophy. The only constant about happiness is that it is elusive, not because it does not exist but rather because it is not recognized as something that resides within and is erroneously applied to whatever circumstance we find ourselves. As a cynic, I find this pursuit of an external sources for happiness to be foolishly misunderstood.
For example, I am happy when my child is happy. I am happy when my friend is happy. It is a horizontal recognition between two persons of the happiness that is within. I am happy when I see a beautiful work of art. I am happy when I listen to your music and I am happy at the beauty and success of Shivani’s works of art.

Change Is the Only Universal Truth

I agree with this statement for the most part. That is to say, as much as we are able to comprehend it. I cannot however accept the statement as an absolute simply because we have no way of knowing. Absolutes within your philosophy as I understand it, cannot exist. (Whoops, I just committed an absolute myself).

Love Alone is not enough (Though it’s a Good Place to start):

Agreed!
Now that is quite enough from me for now. Travel well my friend. May your meditations be to you an exciting door to a growing life. May they also be to others, the encouragement to be who they are and to recognize that they have a universal contribution no matter how they feel about themselves.
Blessings and love to you my friend. (And also to you Shivani. I truly miss you both very, very much).
G