Embrace the Fire

There is an eternal fire that fuels everything in existence, the first light that shone upon the primal chaos from which our world was formed, the source of the essential spark of life blazing within the core of our existence.  From this fire comes the raging passions and the burning desires we experience, and it is what sets our soul alight when all seems lost in darkness.  This fire is love.

The fire is hot and often painful to the touch as it purges our impurities, but if we embrace the fire and let it consume everything in us that is not of light and love, we will find ourselves better for enduring that cleansing embrace.  And when the time comes when we must begin our existence anew, we can join the fire and blaze gloriously amidst the night eternal.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Poetic Prose, Religion. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Embrace the Fire

  1. vwxya says:

    Many thanks for your thought-provoking response and making me re-look up untenable. Your prose and poems are quite beautiful. As an atheist, I regard your writings about your spiritual beliefs in the same way I regard beautiful art depicting Biblical scenes. I can’t agree, but I can enjoy.I don’t think I understand something, though. You talk about Aristotle and his accompanying classical philosophers with a dissociated sort of respect (or so it seemed to me). I’m most likely misinterpreting things you’ve written, but you don’t seem to embrace their set of premises, or think they’re fundamentally wrong. What set of fundamental premises do you find to be better, and how can you be so tolerant?I’ve never encountered anyone who had beliefs or comments even resembling yours. Sorry if I come off as too blunt – ’tis the internet, after all.

  2. Nous_Apeiron says:

    @vwxya – Hehe.  Don’t worry about being blunt.  I’m so often rightly accused of it myself.You’re right that I have a sort of disassociated respect for Aristotle and various other progenitors of Western thought.  After all, if it weren’t for them, I would have never been able to get the rich philosophical training I did and many of our society’s logico-mathematical disciplines (i.e. aerospace engineering, computer science) would not exist.  They contributed much to our world and I think we ought to be respectful of that.You’re also right that I think some of their premises, particularly regarding logic, are fundamentally wrong (for various reasons involving my studies of linguistics, cognition, and the physical sciences).I tend to prefer multi-value logics over the purely bivalent classical logic of Aristotle, though of course no logical system is perfect.  Perhaps that’s why I’m so “tolerant”.  I acknowledge that my opinions, while I might think they’re better than most, still are not perfect.  In essence, I’m ‘tolerant” because I’m keenly aware that perfection exists in God and that I am not God.I still have very little patience for people who seem intentionally unwilling to deal honestly and fairly with evidence or objective facts, mostly because I believe that honesty and fairness are virtues that apply regardless of differing metaphysical or epistemic concerns, but I hope that eventually I can overcome that lack of patience as well.

  3. vwxya says:

    @Nous_Apeiron – I actually busted out a logic book after reading your first reply. It makes perfect sense now that you espouse the ideas of multi-value logic, and I should have done that before I asked. Once again, I appreciate your thoughtful reply. Every time I feel my understanding of the world has been challenged, I take it as a gift. This is what makes us grow as humans. I also don’t appreciate those who are beligerantly unwilling to learn anything. In fact, truth be told, you’re better than I am – I haven’t entirely convinced myself one way or the other if they deserve respect at all. Anyway, this may not come as a surprise to you, but I’ve heard even classical based logic systems aren’t the end all of computer science and engineering anymore. I read an article a year or so ago about neo-classical types of logic (I don’t remember any specifics) trying to be incorporated into computer software and programming languages. It may be in the future of computer science.

  4. Nous_Apeiron says:

    @vwxya – Cool.  That wouldn’t be surprising to me.  I’ve often thought that some of the developments in logic would prove useful in computer science because some of the newer systems of logic are also stronger in the sense that they allow us to do more with them.  I suspect that they will play a strong role in the future of artificial intelligence too, because for a machine to be like us it’s going to need to be able to process information in ways that a classical system would not allow.  I would lay odds that it will require a complex multi-value logic (perhaps even an infinite-value logic) that’s also distinctly multi-modal.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s