I've been thinking a lot lately, as I usually do. But I've been passively thinking without a need for any particular explanation on any particular subject or event. The aggressive analysis that usually accompanies my thinking has started to become a detriment to my state. Its created this constant insatiable need to act, to change, to alter or accommodate.

I like some drugs, really there are only two that appeal to me. I feel as though sometimes they open up new doors of perception, and when used occasionally, this can be very beneficial to a persons perspective on reality. I've been thinking about two separate experiences on two separate drugs, though they may seem silly I have remembered them because I find them to be important.

The first experience in reference I felt suddenly overwhelmed by basic choices. We were driving, and my friend asks me, which way should we go? I say, go right, as though it were obvious. Then I thought about it and I said, well or you could go straight. Then I said actually you can go left to. We can get there either way. We can go a shorter more convenient route, we can take a longer way or we can take a completely ridiculous way- either way we can get there, eventually. And then I started to get anxious, and I started to wonder how I manage to make simple basic choices every moment of everyday. I thought about how a basic choice can effect everything, outlying a pattern for the future. Then I thought about creation, I looked at stop signs and wondered who decided to make them red. They could have chosen any color. Then I thought about art, and how there are endless options in a simple creation. There is really no more relevance to this than the overwhelming anxiety I felt by something that I mindlessly and passively do every single day.

I write aimlessly in my Psychology class to avoid taking mundane notes. Today I wrote a great deal of what has been on my mind lately:

How many paths are available to any single individual? Only the paths all ready cleared? Perhaps sometimes we are limited to one solitary path? Or can we create a path wherever we choose? Because we are innately free, and possess free will, our choices then would be unlimited, infinite- and this, when acknowledged can create a fatal distress and distress. An anxiety which can and must be overcome. When that anxiety is inflicted upon us, infecting the spirit like a plague- there are a variety of questions and conclusions which arise. The first question being- Is life worth living? If one answers "no", then this anxiety is increased. There is a search for a solution, as the answer is essentially a 'problem', a sickness of the spirit. Even in the face of futility we are still presented with choices, the first of which being that we choose to live. But under what pretenses do we choose to live? We can live by embracing this futility, by continuing to adhere to values and ideas that are the certain status quo- Or we can live by trying to escape this futility, this hopelessness with a denial of much that makes us human- emotion, conflict, material wealth, et cetera. Or, we can choose to willingly die, determining that there would be more authenticity in death than in the decision to keep living. So again we come to the question of Camus: Do we die voluntarily, or hope in spite of everything? At this point after hopelessness has inflicted the spirit, there are two options, but one solution. The two options to live, that I mentioned before, I see both as a kind of nihilism. But the question I ask is are there two separate kinds of nihilism? Can there be an authentic nihilism, rather than merely a nihilism based upon bad faith? If we address again the potential 'solutions' the sickness of the spirit- is there a difference between choosing to live accordingly, realizing the absurd nature while all the while engaging in it regardless, manifesting it- versus realizing it and choosing not to engage in it, not to propel it or feed it, to value life but recognize it as a sort of...prison. Essentially either way we come to the conclusion that we choose to live, simply because we are alive. We take action through inaction. But if we choose to 'hope' in spite of everything- do we not find ourselves playing a role? The role of the conceptualized human being? And if we 'hope' in spite of everything, what exactly is it that we are hoping for? Some value to be affirmed- that love, or happiness, or the ideas that we value most highly can still be achieved, even though we have all ready determined they cannot? Even though subjectivity and freedom and absurdity have proven otherwise? And what about the other solution, where is the hope then in absolving ourselves of the collective human essence that history has created- would there still be some element of hope that we are struggling to achieve? Is it peace perhaps? Do we have hope for peace when we remove ourselves from the fundamental human condition? Is peace any greater of a value than say love, or happiness, or success? I think that there may be a difference. Is peace greater than the spectrum of human emotion? Does it exceed it? If the opposite of love is hate, and the opposite of happiness is sadness, and the opposite of success is failure- what then, is the opposite of peace? The entire range of human emotion is at the core intertwined- all of which cause us to 'feel', no matter what the feeling. But is peace on the other hand, the absence of all human emotion? If so, can this indifference exist without apathy? Can one truly exist, and be at peace while others suffer around them? Is this condition not contagious? Can we make ourselves immune? Can we effectively embrace an inner peace- and if we do so, is this truly accepting the absurdity of life?

I will no longer analyze my state in order to determine a specific emotion, an explanation, a vindication. Instead I will select none, accepting them all as a collective static. They all come together as something to form nothing recognizable, each canceling the other out. A combination of all expression with no particular domination. A peace through chaos. Can there be peace in chaos? Can we simultaneously feel the entire spectrum of human emotion- solving the problem of apathy, while all the while concentrating on no specific one- thus feeling none of the anxiety that propels us into preemptive action- to alleviate, vindicate, and affirm- but to simply accept it in its entirety?

The other experience I wanted to mention, was sort of the opposite of this first. I think I was lying outside on the ground, and my senses were so heightened I could hear and feel everything- I just lie there and could feel everything pulsating, all the energy of the universe, it was like one collective heartbeat, a breathing, this profound rhythm that I was a part of. I felt so small, and yet like I was a part of something bigger. It was really calming, really peaceful. And that is the feeling I always want to remember.




If one determines "yes", I have to ask why?