Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!
A juicy talking point out of a new spin on the same old possible void… As early society expanded one could assume the question/crisis: “Will you be my ‘god?’” became more and more ambiguous with our species expansion - and I suppose the tale only got more gripping as it was becoming more and more ambiguous. More eyes and more mouths! “Where did my alpha male go?” Who shall fill this role as we overflow? “We should very much love anyone who could point us in the right direction.” Is it any wonder that rulers became deified?
Don’t you trouble shoot this, monkey. Existence itself has perhaps never needed such a renunciation or affirmation until some of its agents actually became self aware enough to realize their mortal plight via abstractions (which sit atop an assumed more sensational (more gravity) experience of oneself), and I suspect some of those first monkeys agreed that there was some problem at hand, some nausea of life, or at least death anxiety, and some sort of eagerness attempted to solve it because of our bewilderment; because we could at some point in our history. Maybe a nihilist archetype was formed out of this identification and needed to be transformed. For the first time on earth an organic body went beyond the axiom of expansion without looking back. Has this teleological question mark been trouble shot correctly? Not usually, well many times it is compartmentalized and drowned, and that’s artistry. But if it is to really be trouble shot it should be properly understood that the question asker needs to realize the absurdity of the pursuit of a solution, as if this problem is ordinary in the sense that our needs present themselves to us, in our daily pursuit to just be. This is that one item that is never to be grasped, that’s the first crucial aspect to learn; then maybe learn to not take yourself so seriously. So maybe there is at base a meddling confusion here.
"absurdity of the pursuit of a solution, as if this problem is ordinary in the sense that our needs present themselves to us, in our daily pursuit to just be. This is that one item that is never to be grasped, that’s the first crucial aspect to learn"
This also seems to be a recurrent theme.
Perhaps we can distill existence down to an essence, of susceptibility to a sales pitch.