Of all human experiences sex is both the most important and least important.


an isostatic life?

At a much simpler time I was introduced to the geographical concept of isostasy , a sort of self-check system that maintains gravitational equilibrium between the lithosphere and asthenosphere basically just the earth’s crust and mantle despite varied horizontal and vertical movements if my memory serves me right that is.

This concept explained much of the peculiar formations on the earth’s surface and as it turns may very well help at the very least enlighten us on the current world situation.

In the wake of the terrific Belgium attacks that devastated many to say the very least, today is the beginning of holi ,a most beloved hindu festival which depending on what Wikipedia origin story you rely on is either about Prahlada’s triumph over his evil aunt or a celebration of Radha and Krishna’s love which in many ways however you slice it is reminiscent of the popular concept of the eventual triumph of evil over good.

Such a beautiful festival filled with color and love falling immediately after the dreary bloody wake of one of the most horrific terror attacks, don’t forget the up and coming Easter weekend, ironically so.

However, if you were to splice these events they appear to be cancelling each other out, don’t they? A sort of isostatic adjustment so as to mitigate any superfluous happiness or tragedy.

Which from an empiricist’s standpoint evokes the question, if neutrality is the universal law because this has happened countless times before, a perfect example that I am versed with being the age of the industrial revolution all while many persons Africans notably languished in abject poverty and slavery.

Why then must we strive for the so called ‘triumph of evil over good’ if it isn’t at all possible?

For as long as the earth’s core is much closer to me in relation to other bodies why should I ever dream of falling upwards(without  external manipulation of course)?

love at first sight….unconditional love huh….

Recently  I was  bombarded with the most ridiculous irony of all ……to acquire the unconditional love we all seek you must live the precept of ‘love at first sight,’ and with all the bad wrap love at first sight has gotten over the years it seemed ludicrous but so did the jester in every medieval tale i have come across, the roaring laughter didn’t ever graze the eternal truths, passive truth is not truth.

But really if we are to truly define ‘unconditional love’ you will realize that all the rational assertions of how to achieve love such as getting to know each other, fulfilling a requisite term of interaction before accessing the love are all  conditions and thus fall short of being deemed unconditional. Whether it’s the necessity of a period of time to have passed, or an amount of information you must know before you proceed on, however you slice it if you follow the tenets of building a foundation for love’s survival you are logically tending to be farther off from the prize . Not to transport anyone to my personal hell, a fairy tale, but even I can agree that to love truly unconditionally and to use the actuarial jargon from a past life ,the love mustn’t even be a function of markovian property but rather it must be completely memoryless devoid of any kind of reason, it must have as its fulcrum irrationality. Ergo, ‘love at first sight’ which was the only concept that I can conjure up from memory that could possibly fulfill this most peculiar pre-requisite.

And thus the empirical question that I most certainly expect, where does such a love so alternative to our nature of selfishness and requirement of reason exist?

And though I never claim empiricism because I personally believe eyes are folly and subject to bias I yet have an example to table .An example so common I hope each one should be able to relate to it on some level.

A mother’s love, is the quintessential incidence of ‘love at first sight’ especially if ever you have witnessed the miracle of birth. It is always quite remarkable and shocking just how many times it happens when on the eve of a woman’s body having been wrecked and in many ways destroyed she instantaneously bears the purest form of love for the very creature that did all the damage.

And most can concur that for sure our mothers are the source of the eternal spring of love. For sure many others, scientists and skeptics alike have all tried to explain away the phenomenon with a series of documentation about hormones or whatever else there is but this example has definitely stood the test of time as it is not a momentary affair but rather a lifelong sensation.

Question is, can such be replicated in other avenues for love in life?

Its’ no secret that romantic love being the most popularized  yet fractal idea of love could  certainly benefit a whole lot from the application of the aforementioned, possibly without the hilarity of meeting someone and instantly commencing the journey of a lifetime.

Maybe unconditional love is merely the unreachable goal of romantic love whilst being the norm of filial love, but who’s to say after all stranger things have happened.

And then again the great big paradox also makes an appearance because some may claim that following the earlier rational approach seems to at later stages induce that very same ‘unconditional love’,the more you know and invest in someone the more unconditional the love gets because the referral memories slowly seep into your body and eventually become an instinct to you, to just love the other, unconditionally.

Obviously filial love and romantic love are different entities but love is love, and how two separate and opposed approaches can lead to the same summit that i will never know, it as though when pulling at a cloth from opposite ends you will realize in the end that you have managed to purl even more of the material onto the cloth with your destructive efforts.

Maybe the reasoning love follows is much greater than my own because as with any conversation on the matter you always end up questioning the significance on the conversation to begin with.

I’m Golden

They say that silence is golden but she knows it can be blue


Words by one of my favorite songstresses,Somi, and I use that particular term deliberately because I feel like she’s music’s mistress.

I have always wondered why the saying is as is and I am yet to understand why the precious metal was symbolic of silence.

I found out a bit about gold and the other things it’s symbolized many at times items of such gravitas. Right from the start the stuff of the golden ratio, which has been obsessed by all manner of persons from the likes of Euclid, Pythagoras, artists, physicists, musicians and architects alike have all devoted a significant time to study of this simply put not so simple ratio whose occurrence is become very much like a game with a magician because though many have tried to ascribe this simple measurement to their work it still appears many at times without provocation, a kind of game within the game.

The golden rose , the golden rule  and the golden law all with their strong connotation for altruism, the golden rule having been uncovered in countless religious texts explicitly or implicitly with the most popular version being the Christian ‘treat others as you would like to be treated’ then comes lei aurea (the golden law) that was set up by Brazilian princess Isabel when holding down the throne for her father (Pedro II)who was away in Europe stating that all children of slaves were born free, a great big leap in the Abolitionist movement at the time, despite the fact that Brazil was still one of the last countries to formally abolish slavery.

Incidentally while on the very same topic, said princess also received the golden rose that is an accolade awarded by the pope to either the military or royalty and many other kinds of personage generally for demonstrating a higher level of humanism, she received it in 1888 from Pope Leo XIII.

Even the alchemists of the dark ages valued gold so much that they scurried around trying fruitlessly to find a way in which every other metal can be transformed into the precious lei. A practice that continues on today just in less farcical ways, after all after every security loses value gold’s value only soars; ask Zimbabwe they know,theirs was definitely a tale to tell.

And the bible can’t be left behind although it bashes gold at times claiming gold and silver to not be up to par with the treasures of heaven notably, at least for me the most gold speckled verse and no I have not read the whole bible is

Job 23:10

But he knows the way that I take, when he has tried me, I shall come out as gold

I actually like Job quite a bit his story with a few amendments whether it’s the devil or some other struggle resemble a lot of many people’s stories

So just what is the obsession with gold and the grandiose?

I have lived quite golden a life up till now, at least as far as silence goes, I have lived the existence of a mouse but after reading Timothy Cornigrave’s Holding the man I almost want to live my life out loud, as though I was screaming my very actions.

Because credence to the first line I do know that silence is golden but it can be blue but then again I do love a silent giant even those that we know not of, say for example those who have saved us from the horrors we will never know, sometimes they having done it unknowingly themselves.

I guess I will keep practicing my own alchemy of quietening or will i?

Stay Golden!

“Weary of this fight,

This long and lonesome fight,

Every step I take I feel further away,

Can’t get it right.”

Words to live by, given they are also the words of one of the best songs I ever had the pleasure of listening to. Hannah Miller’s lyrics reflect to me more than I think she even intended.

For a long time I to have believed in human nature, the apparent existence of the essence of humanity without ever stopping to really wonder what it entails. And this not just being what I have been told by the great rationalists, the philosophers, the clergy, the mystics but rather from my own experience in my own laboratory of life.

My conclusions shocked me and bear in mind that in themselves they are in fat quite inconclusive. Sartre, a man with whom I have no relation, no admiration whatsoever seemed to be my only ally, and you know what they say about allies like those but what choice did I have.

I feel in his doctrine he was quite right, about this nature of humanity although he would not agree that it even existed; he according to me not only discovered it and like Grey also dissected away at its morsel and painstakingly understood its own mysterious mechanisms of working.

He talked of the ‘being for itself’ that which is constantly at odds with itself and never complete in its own definition of self. This was his absurd claim, a claim he used to obliterate the thought of the existence of a human nature because as I have explained a human never really is anything it is always inching towards something it wants to be but never quite achieving that actualization. So then how could any essence underlie such a creature? The next logical assumption would be to disqualify any possible ‘underlying essence.’

To me that was where he made his terrible mistake for essences can be tricky things; maybe the very essence of this being is to never truly achieve any form despite its longing for it. An essence to want to be but never truly become doesn’t equate to nothingness but rather to an impossible everythingness.

Never in the history of the world has there ever been a creature such as a human, with all the modifications of nature to suit us, engineering of medicine to serve us and yet we are still not satisfied. Not that there is more to be done but rather that we will never be satisfied with what we have done. And for those who do attain satisfaction we throw terms such as obsolete and traditional onto them because it is simply a violation to our commonality to satisfice.

Our destiny is to forever remain destined, never actually reaching this ‘apparent destiny’ because there is always a newer machine, a greater idea, an even more potent pill yet to be attained.

We create these road maps for ourselves only to burn both the maps and cartographers once it no longer suits us claiming that the map was a poor description of the landscape ahead  while it is in fact  we who changed the destination yet again. A constant battle with what we are and what we can be.

Although whether or not this is a curse or a blessing I can’t tell because what joy there is in knowing you can chase whatever you like without it ever catching you, what sorrow there is in knowing you can never capture whatever it is you chose to chase after.


Philosophy, the web that is.

Of all the disciplines I exalt ,philosophy has offered me the most misery because though it is quite apparent to me that it is in fact a life-long enterprise and rightly so it is quite futile in its aim. For the arguments never progress it is still those questions that troubled Socrates, Plato, Descartes, Augustine and any number of ancient philosophers that continue to haunt the human race to this date.

This problem Descartes once tried to solve with his ‘method’ that would end all disagreements and differences of opinion at least so that we may worry about the next thing. I believe that was indeed a hopeful time at least for the true philosopher, if only he hadn’t made a mess of it entirely and do the very thing he sought to undo, the creation of even more disagreement.

And the thing with philosophy is never the questions in fact I revel in the questions but rather the answers or lack thereof. There never seems to be a set of maxims adequate enough, answer complete in itself without a dubitable alternative. Which begs the question why entrap yourself in the web that time and experience has proven that you will never truly escape?

In this I can only answer for myself because for sure there are fewer forms of literature that have clearer rhetoric, impeccable analogies and subtle poetry. That is my reason what’s yours?