Chapter 1: Freedom, sir? - ( Which prisoner would not prefer freedom? Which slave would not want rights? Are we in a position to decide?) Human instinct can be devised around the notion of the removal of free will. We have become so indoctrinated that we do not declare a person free even in our speech. A sociopath behaves a certain way, and a priest, and a politician as well. It's the ones who declare such a way of mind, and being specific, when their notions of regard, and belief has been found, around this, or that peculiar act, in a conceptualized framework within us, and our society. A politician will see a terrorist differently than the average sheep farmer, and even more specifically, a hostage negotiator will do the same. Who is correct? No one. They all predetermine response in the terrorist, and are therefor positively, or negatively biased. A person expected to behave a certain way, and therefor respond, has its own freedom removed from him or herself. Why? Bec...
The time has come for us to realize that life ought to not be the way we perceive and realize it to be. The lives that could've been. The existence in another dimension. The seeking for another version of the truth. The call for redemption after a life lived immorally. The perpetual focus on nothing of consequence, the expression of irrelevance. The finding of fulfillment within a system of conformity which has no bearing on the realism which befalls us all. Our senses are at war with logic and reason. The set principles laid out for the functioning of a human animal. We are not to be blamed, yet we are somehow to be found guilty, for not allowing our minds to realize its true nature, which is not limited through knowledge and power. It has no bounds, for the realm of existence knows none. Why do we find that which we do not need, why do we tolerate that which know not to be conducive to the well-being of sentience, and sanity? Why do we even allow ourselves to purs...
Comments
Post a Comment