sunday morning ontology

There are only 3 categories to this world really, ontologically speaking. There’s the good, separate, pure in and of itself, and then there is the stupid and then the perverse.  Often these latter two combine over a long spectrum of ratios, the midpoint being 50/50 stupid/perverse, varying degrees one way or the other, until each sits at its endpoint, not pure in and of itself like the good but not mixed like the rest of the spectrum either.  Let me present some exemplars of each to illustrate my thinking here.

For the good I think of an old marriage long ruled by love, fidelity, and caring.  No regrets, practical matters jointly tended with alacrity, vitality still felt in each caress.  This is one of the more complex examples of the good.  Simpler ones include the first sip of a fine whisky while standing cooly at the entrance to a scene usually of some wonder or whimsy, awakening from a nap feeling quite refreshed, tired muscles mildly straining as the day’s work is completed, and of course, a dog.

For the stupid end of the spectrum I think of deep fried pickles and such like, much if not most of academia’s bureaucracy (except librarians, librarians are good), yelling at employees (construction foremen and chefs come to mind), misuse of the word ‘literally’, almost any TV commentary especially on Fox news, trite sayings purporting to convey wisdom, the terminator gene, and politicians who think they are all of a sudden intelligent about so many things because they were elected.

On the perverse bandwidth where do I begin and end?  Consider people who confuse knowledge and belief or dispute data driven thinking with ignorant opinionated rantings, bread pudding made with glazed donuts by a diabetic cleverly concealing her illness, serving a lamb shank without the bone or a heavily salted meal with precious few vegetables especially when expensive and highly touted, and every sort of violent (physical or financial) enforcement by thugs, religious or secular, legal or illegal, according to what they hold true.  I am thinking here of ISIS, certain big businesses, and the Ukrainian rebels, although these do suggest yet a fourth category, the truly ugly, but I will hold to 3 as I began.

So there you have it, the 3 categories of ontology this Sunday am wrapped up in a nutshell, maybe good, perhaps stupid, but not perverse by any stretch of the imagination.

chimpanzee-personality

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