Rules, Rationalising and the Scoundrel in its System.

in response to the themes in:

https://off-guardian.org/2020/05/30/covid19-the-denial-of-veridical-reality/#comment-182152

(Quoting Bertrand Russell as an authority by which to give weight to a blanket judgement of my writing and therefore my voice -  while feigning interest).



I do not suggest you need change your rules - or your chosen master.
But I knowingly choose not to obey them - or him.
In my own freedom I choose the words and phrases that offer a good fit.

In any specific relationship, I feel for shared willingness as the capacity for exchange. If we were to exchange in a mutual willingness to develop a relationship - then some kind of vessica-pisces of our commonality would open an arena from which mutual appreciations and challenges might arise. But if you demand I fit your specs?  No.

Bertrand Russell desired to rationalise, simplify and shorten the human population. But as he is a master of clarity - he presumably does not count for a scoundrel but by the god of his own luck gets to proscribe everyone else's condition. (It takes one to know one).

Every thought system or body of thought expounds or is derived from its premise. Look therefore at what ideas or where as acceptance, you are coming from - because you will arrive at your starting place no matter how you travel. You presume to judge under pretext of feigning interest. What is it you want? For something behind the mask moved to come out and prod me.

If you are convinced my prose can be condensed and still convey the meanings - surprise me! Felt meanings - like an un-carved block of qualities and potentials - are given form. The 'open secret' is - ask in love and be answered in like measure. I don't see that you have asked me anything, but I mark your judgements and share on the themes they express.

If you do not share in the movement of curiosity of the question, then an answer is not for you, at this timing. Nor do I suggest it should be. You can ask your own question from your own heart and listen for the revealing of your own answer which may come in unexpected ways and expand the questioner from the lockdown of their own mask of conditioned beliefs.

This could be called 'thinking' - as the willingness to serve the heart rather than presume to lead in its name. But not everyone is willing to look upon their own thought or indeed the  'scoundrel' within, but until we do, we are driven to find fault in others and use it to signal our own relative virtue. This is very different than engaging in moral judgement of blame and shame. It is a willingness to look, listen and learn of a different Master. To align in the heart free-willingly is to recognise the deceit that had masked over truth. (Or the 'truth' that rationalised in place of a felt and shared living).

Rationalising life, usurps and masks as Reason.
Such is the 'luck' of the scoundrels who have set the trap of rules and regulations for others to be locked into masking for conformity.

I write for no pay or institutional requirement, but you can 'sack' me by no longer choosing to use me to serve as a foil for your rationalisations, set as rules for life.

But freedom to be myself is a gift to your own freedom to be yourself.
Who am I writing for?
For an active willingness, instead of a template substitution for heart and mind.
Questioning everything means nothing is put out of thought or censored from being brought into awareness. Anything else indicates a template of conditioned and identified beliefs running as a masking identity. No blame, But let curiosity move.

Attempts to rule out the scoundrel hide the scoundrel in the system itself.