The Great Gig in the Sky

June 9, 2009

“I think its time we compiled a list of places that we shouldn’t go.” – Maximo Park.

So here I sit, listening to Pink Floyd and Jazz music. I mindlessly go from thought to thought, and occasionally write. Yet as each thought rises from my mind it becomes too vague to exist outside me, and it dissipates. To grasp at it, is to destroy it outright, to let it go, is to let it drift away into the abyss of the physical world. I am here again, at the point I always come to, the point of reflecting on the mirror’s surface, the knowledge of knowledge, the knowledge of self.

In the name of unquenchable desire for knowledge many realms of thought have been explored and perhaps invented using this vague ancient defense as validation. Yet, as we focus our telescopes on the sky and trail our microscopes across strange alien fungi, we forget where knowledge comes from, to where it goes, and why we desire it to begin with.

We desire knowledge because we desire things like us – we desire ourselves. This is why we cherish such qualities as freedom and equality – the ability to make one’s self and to make others be like you. The greatest scientific discoveries in the world have always been immediately followed with questions that escape the realm of science. Until recently, this was a shame to even scientists.

Yet, this post is not an attack on science (like most of my others), it is instead an attack on everything – perhaps out of some metaphysical angst that must manifest itself as anger in order to make my feeble flawed soul feel empowered like some ancient Greek warrior. But none the less, I lash out violently at the entirety of my generation, in the process scourging myself.

How oft I failed to stop and understand my own argumentation. How oft have I walked the tight-rope between logic and emotion claiming clemency from either attack on the basis of its counter point. I am, after all, a lingual illusionist. The David Blaine of philosophers. The Criss Angel of poetics. Have I garnered anything but applause from my audience, who seeing the trick are convinced of magic, yet go home knowing that it can’t be true – despite any emotional response.

Just like everyone else when I finally settle back upon myself I cannot put a finger on where I am. (Anyone who tells you differently is one of two things. A liar, or an idiot). Yet, like most people I still claim a ‘selfhood’ to which I am obligated to be ‘genuine’. The tension between these two ideas gives the birth of such beautiful concepts as freedom, free will, and choice. I am concrete that changes. The result is the amazing ability to stroke the passions regardless of logic, and then collapse back into a world of 1+1 justifications. Proof. Poof.

The greatest pleasures arise from this tension and furthermore by this tension is magnified like an echo chamber. This equality of opposites within our souls allows the passions to win just often enough to make us miss it when its gone. Then in its victorious return it is all the more glorious. Furthermore, I am not entirely sure that this is a necessarily bad thing, but rather a misdirected good. Part of me wants to embrace this passionate side and perfect its music – while another part, the equality of reason, demands I embrace something “higher” – an emotion that is not without its own pleasure.

The result of continued friction and tension is, of course, orgasm. The release of the self in favor of one or the other. In the release there is always simultaneous guilt and pleasure, immortality and death, love and hate. The person is either truest or most false in the midst of this orgasm wherein the ‘pure’ form of the two sides is most dominant. But in so doing, in so stepping into purity, we have betrayed the things that got us there – the tension of two opposites. So have we become more pure by dissolving one side in favor of the other – or have we become less human because we have too much clarity. Perhaps we add this to the list of places we shouldn’t go. Perhaps we draw a map and mark it with an x. Perhaps we just sit here and listen to The Great Gig in the Sky.



  1. orgasm… or consuming fire… maybe they’re the same…

    • erosophia… the erotic creation and destruction of the world.

  2. is that a non-dualistic proposal? or a dualistic contradiction?

    • Perhaps both. A thought which, in and of itself, shows to be both a proposal and a contradiction about a proposal and a contradiction.

  3. Ain’t it a bitch when the head gets in the way of enjoying whatever is the “Is-nes” of your place here? I think so, at least for me it does…

    I think it would be justifiable to persecute yourself for failing at one thing or another if you were only one thing or another…but you are not one thing or another, but instead you are both.

    And of course you know this.

    1+1 is two somewhere, and it isn’t as well…after all what is Newtonian about the imagination? What is Quantum about the need to eat now? We exist in both of these places.

    Cut yourself some slack, try writing about something funny…I am serious about this – laughter is the only thing that I can think of that exist in both of these realms…


    • hahaha thanks poetman. Your advice, as always will be taken to heart. Possibly disregarded, depending mostly on mood, but definetly taken to heart. Hopefully it won’t be disregarded. We’ll see.

  4. “We desire knowledge because we desire things like us – we desire ourselves.”
    I differ here. R. Davenport (biologist) states, I think rightly, that we can only perceive when and where there are differences. That is, our perceptual nature is geared, hard-wired, to accept only a difference in the environment that we are scanning. Therefore knowledge (given from the senses)is the “desire” of differences.

    • I disagree with Mr. Davenport entirely – for what is difference if nothing is in common? By saying something is different we imply that it has something in common with the thing we are saying is different. We don’t usually say “Justice and a sandwich are different because of the following reasons” – mostly because it is obvious. Frankly, I believe your ‘perceptual nature’ (whatever this means to Davenport, I am sure it means something different to me) accepts whatever you tell it to accept. This is why people can ignore obvious physical facts, why they can be fooled by illusion, and why perception fails us constantly.

      Even so. We are not only different, we ARE difference. So by seeing “differences” we see ourselves too. Who does not look within only to find differences? Either a crazy man or a simpleton. If they do not see that they are different, then they are simply choosing not to see the truth. The truth being that we are both like, and unlike, the same and different. Such is what we seek from other things, and such is why we will never be satisfied on this earth with anything but other humans (and even then, most find faults with them as well).

      Thank you for posting. Your response has given me a spark of inspiration. I need all I can get really. Please continue to come and to post.

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 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: