Tuesday, March 07, 2006

Thoughts at One o' Clock in the Morning

Humans are really strange creatures. We are so full of contradictions and opposing theories that it’s just not even funny. We will take a moral stand against, or for one thing one week, and then we will take a completely different moral standpoint the next, yet back it with an equal amount of conviction. But we say it’s okay, because it all depends on ‘the circumstances’ or ‘the situation’. So how can we take ourselves as seriously as we do?

Take the phrase – ‘An eye for an eye’ and put it next to ‘To forgive is devine.’ Both true and valid and meaningful theories. They may have biblical origins, which means that consequentially they must be ridiculed and metaphorically burned for being the unwelcome joke that they are, but let’s overlook my religious hatred for the sake of staying on topic. The point is, both these theories are taken seriously, despite the fact that they are completely the opposite of each other.

To add to the perpetual confusion that is the existing as a human being, not only do our most well known and frequently uttered phrases completely oppose each other, they also oppose themselves internally.

For example, the phrase ‘two wrongs don’t make a right’ which I hear uttered frequently. This phrase may have origins in the pseudo karmical idea, that for every action, there is an opposing reaction, or something…it’s probably more like to have come about by the idea that, if someone gets you, you shouldn’t just get them back, because “two wrongs don’t make a right.” It’s exactly what teachers and parents say to their children, in the playground. “It’s against the rules for you to hit that boy back, little Jimmy, Two wrongs don’t make a right!”

Right?

Wrong.

Just ignore the fact that the little boy sounds like he is named after a penis, and think about this.

By this logic, sending people to prison is not amenable. Because, if someone kills someone, and you send them to prison, that is two wrongs, right there. The murder of a person, and the (consequential) confiscation of the freedom and liberty of the other person. Two wrongs? Yes. Do they make a right? Yes.

Durr durr. Confused?

I am not. Think about it mathematically. Think about negatives and positives. If you add two negatives together, you get a more positive number. What happens, if you add, -3 to -5. You get two. Two minuses, create a positive number. Do these two negatives (wrongs) create a right (positive)? I think they do. The maths, the only language that is so indisputable, that it is universal, hath spoken.

I just want to take this moment to say, that I, the supporter of literature and arts, have never advocated maths so strongly, and I never will again. Down with maths! Ad infinitum, et all, etc, blah blah blah…Anyway.

So why on earth, does the phrase “Two wrongs don’t make a right.” Get uttered so seriously, and more importantly, get taken so seriously? When you actually sit and think about it, the phrase is just one big flaw, nonsensical both mathematically, and in practice. But is it sensible in theory, if not in practice?

Perhaps. Take the other saying; “There’s an exception to every rule.” It’s possibly the most interesting phrase invented by humans. It’s the only one that is true. Because, there is an exception to every rule. That phrase, is a rule itself. Which in turn, logically, means that there is a rule, out there somewhere, that has no exception. Once we find this, we will prove the rule ‘There’s an exception to every rule’ even more. Damn I like that rule, it’s powerful. It’s sheer existence enforces itself. Like cheese.

Except, this reinforces itself on a constant loop, whereas cheese just reinforces itself until the mice come. But enough about cheese.

So this means, that there is an exception somewhere, in the rule ‘Two wrongs don’t make a right.’ I wonder what it is? Where is this exception?

Does it refer to when more than one individual is involved with the conflicting party? Such as War? That must be it. When one country bombs or otherwise attacks another, that is most distinctly, a wrong. And the worst thing that a country can so, in terms of wronging the country when all it’s people are taken into account, is bomb or attack the aggressor right back.

So does the existing exception to the rule that is ‘two wrongs don’t make a right’ exist, only when there are people involved, not a person? It looks like it.

I don’t know. For one it’s quarter past one in the morning. It looks like I am a philosophical biatch when I am supposed to be sleeping. My next question to ponder over, is whether white girls should ever be allowed to use the word ‘biatch’ in a serious sentence. Or indeed, white people as a whole. To some, this is a serious issue. For another time. I’m going to bed, bitches.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home