'Works & Essays'

By Benjamin Alan Villars

The 'Works & Essays" by Benjamin Alan Villars is the collection, so far, of all of his serious works & a poem at the end dedicated to James Joyce's "Finnegan's Wake". Approximately 200 pages.

Includes :
“æffection,”
“Left Right Wrong,”
“A Wilde Nietzsche,”
“Nietzsche As Antichrist,”
“NDE’s, Swedenborg & DMT”
& “Bennigan’s Wake”

• Language: English
• Publisher: Lulu.com
• Release date: Oct 22, 2011
• ISBN: 9781105175299

Book preview

‘Works & Essays’

Benjamin Alan Villars

Includes :

æffection,

Left Right Wrong,

A Wilde Nietzsche,

Nietzsche As Antichrist,

NDE’s, Swedenborg & DMT

& Bennigan’s Wake

© 2011 Benjamin Villars. All rights reserved.

ISBN 978-1-105-17522-0

‘æffection’

By:

Benjamin Alan Villars

Anything you can imagine is real.

Pablo Picasso

Prologue

The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources. Einstein. Half of this book is not me but other philosophers and artists who I have agreed with and elaborated on. Some men's words I remember so well that I must often use them to express my thought because I perceive that we have heard the same truth, but they have heard it better. Ralph Waldo Emerson. Being a quote fanatic, I wanted a new way to present this wisdom in an entertaining and hopefully, non-strenuous way. I don’t feel I am mirroring other authors’ thoughts so much as enlightening them for our own current time like Shakespeare could.

Our generation has lost interest in interest so I wanted to reinvite fun knowledge back to the fore by reminding people of the important and exuberant power of thought. There is much pleasure to be gained from useless knowledge. Bertrand Russell. This could and couldn’t be a new kind of collaborative philosophy; whether or not people learn something is up to them. I can only present a surface value while it is only the readers’ responsibility to see how deep the words really go. Oscar Wilde. Victor Cousin says that true philosophy invents nothing; it merely establishes and describes what already is.

If you don’t know a name or philosophical text I happen to refer to than don’t worry; it’s a hobby of mine that one can’t, and maybe even shouldn’t, grasp in a first sitting. Google the darn thing when you’re bored later that day. I wanted to make philosophy seem more modern so I use brevity to help with everyone’s A.D.D. A summary is a more independent form of art than elaboration because it enforces self-reflection. I don’t want to seem too vague though with my radical ideas because then you wouldn’t think that I really understood them myself. One of Nietzsche’s greatest quotes was Those who are profound strive for clarity while those would like to seem profound strive for obscurity. For if the crowd can’t see to the bottom of something than it must be profound. Like him, I want to plant a root instead of showing you the tree.

One more thing before you go on your quest of questions: whenever I don’t name the quote, it is Friedrich Nietzsche- my favorite precursor. I need not say more concerning him now lest one becomes snowed under too soon. He isn’t for everyone by himself but if other authors are there to ‘back him up’ maybe we can better recognize where was coming from and especially, where he was going. My intention with this book is to shed a new light on the broad influence he has had now in the intellectual spheres and also to connect the dots of the past by restating some of his roots.

I wrote this out of boredom and inspiration simultaneously. My thoughts needed organizing. One must have chaos in one’s self in order to give birth to a dancing star. This is one of those stars. Thank God for boredom lest we wouldn’t feel the need to create! (Oh yeah, I’m not an atheist but I am an agnostic since no one can truly prove God’s existence. What we can’t prove tends to have more value anyways.)

1

Nature under Nurtured. Haven’t instincts been proven to be quite far, the most intelligent? When questioning the topic of truth one cannot but help to have only minimal satisfaction with the proof of a theory since all facts are but the agreed opinions that we have learned to accept through history. Though our instincts are a vital portion of reality our intellect has grown accustomed to not accept everything we have been raised to believe. Though in the present people are beginning to use logic more then emotion; nurture over nature. This attitude has now taken the lead in the power struggle against environment and instincts. We have reversed our means to better trust the ends by sacrificing our feelings in spite of our reason.

Now, in the 21st century, people do not know their instincts as well anymore and the worst of part it is that by not knowing where to look for them we have truly disgraced our creator by overlooking ourselves with our own questions. We’re rummaging for answers in the pages as the singer Regina Spektor puts it. Some have argued that the mind has dominance by its power of analysis while feelings are uncontrollable and chaotic. To a point. The world is about balancing these opposing characteristics by letting go of questions and reacting purely naturally but at the same time not going full plunge into the passions.

I don’t imply that we all should act by our natural passions only (for that would lead to chaos because of our innate differences). But sometimes, when thinking leads to too much contemplation and we can never figure anything out, our emotions know us better than our reason can ever begin to comprehend. By letting go of ourselves we have actually fully embraced ourselves in Nature. But this is one of the great contradictions of reality- nature (our instincts) or nurture (our intellect). How much of each should we use or not use so as to express ourselves fully and not come into a complete struggle with our aeffect on ourselves and on our environment? Immanuel Kant’s greatest contribution to philosophy was when he recognized that synthetic a prior judgments were possible by virtue of a faculty. In other words, nature and nurture are learning from each other in unison by way of our brains and feelings. We are us and our environment.

Over the course of our lives, though, some believe that our instincts change because of our intellects’ dominance in our actions and that we can, in fact, teach ourselves our own instincts’ instincts. Can we then say that instincts are innate though interchangeable? But what does that mean when people have contradicting judgments because they received new information? How can we overcome our unconscious instincts while still learning through our conscious intellect? At what point do the two agree? A contradiction of knowledge: does validity count in the head or in the heart?

2

On the difference between artificial intelligence and organic intelligence. 1st difference: Whenever we, as people, learn something new it means that by our own conscious decisions we choose to remember what is told to us. When a computer learns something new it is programmed by another sentient being, a person, who gives the computer no choice. 2nd difference: When we learn our head expands. The more you input into a computer the reverse happens- it gets stuffed up with information and stores it into a finite space which can only be enlarged by being given more memory. We don’t need an enlarger.

3rd difference: Knowledge for a computer is a combination of 0’s and 1’s. Nothing else. It only has quantitative senses whereas humans have a qualitative sense of the world. They are only programmed to know facts while we have opinions which could never be programmed. We feel while they only touch. Few people live. Most exist and that is all. Oscar Wilde. But more on differences later.

3

Nietzsche as Superman. The wisest man would be one richest in contradiction who had, as it were, an antenna for all types of men. Friedrich seems to be the king of ambiguity only because he mentions other points of view, not because he believes them. He wants to show you every side of everything to show you your own potential perspectives. In fact, the only way to realize the right is to first understand the wrong. It is always easier to comprehend insults first. The real challenge lies in finding the comebacks for yourself.

Wilde said my words have never changed, but my interpretation always must. If this statement is true than a genius can technically write about the same topic his whole life and as long as his interpretations go deeper, so too will his writing still be entertaining and intriguing.

4

Pi as Unlimited Perfection. 3.14…Pi is what makes the circle perfect in that every point is covered from the radius to create the one-and-all sided figure that we call a circle. That pi is never-ending makes the idea of perfection infinitely possible. Endless types of perfection and not merely one ideal to strive for. The ‘ultimate way’ should not and cannot be defined with a mere formula. Truth lies in its’ abstraction, i.e. its unlimited interpretations. Harmony in physical shapes make men believe in an equally perfect psychological world. The moral world, too, is round.

If perfection were definable than it wouldn’t be valuable since perfection itself is an imperfection (anonymous) and to describe happiness is to diminish it. Stendhal. The definition of pi would have to be that song or painting that all art strives for which is beyond description. When man toys with the instruments of light and sound he is essentially playing God. Wouldn’t our perfect creator want us to also create? Is appreciation from us through Him or from Him through us?

How can infinity be so mind-boggling while still maintaining a firm sense of structure? I speak specifically about the spiral. I can’t count how many places this form shows up. Fingerprints, the Milky Way, DNA, eardrums- which keeps our ‘balance’, even the yin yang all need this universal shape in order to come into manifestation. How is what is most efficient indefinable and never-ending? Kind of like God.

The film Pi opens up with a metaphor for the irony of knowledge. He compares insight to staring at the sun for too long and eventually going blind. Sure, it’s pretty to dwell at upon a first glance but too much exposure leads to a literal loss of sight. When you look into the void, the void also looks back into you. Is there a way to wear sunglasses while looking for the ultimate knowledge?

5

Music as the right words. What we can’t define we sing instead. If words attempted to describe what the soul was feeling 24/7 then we lose the significance of sound and silence in general. With musical improvising the soul is free to say what words shouldn’t have the right to say. A sort of true communication unequivocal with concrete language. Corruption of ideas begins with too many definitions and too many explanations. Instead of elaborating, summarize! Whether it be a tune or a poem, communication should always express what is beyond the tool used to communicate it. The lines are there to color outside of them.

Schiller said that architecture is music frozen. I love this type of logic so I’ll reverse this insight: listening to music is synonymous with observing every pixel of a picture at the same time. Seeing with 360 degrees vision during dreams, like the film Waking Life suggests, would be another cool example of the multidimensional world of aesthetic experience.

6

Beyond God and Devil. Nietzsche’s ‘relative morality’ could be made clearer with a quote from Blaise Pascal, The heart has reasons that reason cannot know. I’ll follow this with Stendhal’s reasoning, Reason is neither an art nor a science but a dodge. Logic only criticizes the understanding of quantities- never qualities. Morality, therefore, is out of the picture. Theoretically, all conscience is a con of science since it must defy explanation in order to truly mean anything at all lest we feel the need to classify every emotion with a degree of value. Since we cannot prove love then we cannot justify a morality based off of the love of thy neighbor.

Though there are levels of rank in the states of the soul no one man can really feel the same way as any other man unless we lost our own unique understanding of the world. Goethe once said that when we feel that we alone have loved and no one else can ever love like us is when we have truly loved. This principle applies to all experience. How can my conscience claims its’ universal application to all others as valid if it is only my conscience? In other words, how could Kant’s ‘categorical imperative’ guide all of our actions if the same action could have different outcomes only if considered in different contexts?

Action depends only on who performs it. If I kill a man out of revenge it is more often than not seen as justifiable. If I kill a man out of cold blood it is seen as an act of pure evil that cannot be accounted for. Though it is the same physical act behind the events, the psychology behind it, or intent, is what justifies everything. Is a tiger immoral for killing to get food? Then criminals won’t feel evil either when they kill for want of food. What they haven’t asked themselves yet is what could I have done to not have put myself in an immoral situation? I already knew that my previous actions would amount to this.

7

Effortless Mastery. You cannot own a truth until you can re-word it.

8

I’ll be there for you. A friend is one before whom I may think aloud. Emerson. It is also someone you feel comfortable enough with that you don’t even have to saying anything when you’re hanging out.

9

"Dead" is dead. Our generations: Hippies, disco, industrial, grunge, rap, then the emotionless emo. What if there was one artist who could bring all of these labels back yet in a new perspective? To combine them all at once and make a billboard hit through sheer versatile talent? Take the White Album- each song was of a different genre; it wasn’t just rock n’ roll anymore. It was a great compilation, a great reminder of the timelessness of all music while being delivered by the best of the best of that time. The Beatles’ brilliance lie more in their melody than in their technique and what they proved to the world was that all that makes a good song is not what you play but how you play it. Give John a rubber band and he’d have a hit faster than you can say rubber soul. What is lacking nowadays is not the recognition of past works so much as an inspiration to apply what was expressed into something newer and better without fame as the primary intent. We must echo, and not only praise in order to really progress.

10

Unlearning. We educate ourselves not out of the want to be smarter, but, conversely, to recognize our complete ignorance to the world such as a kid feels. When we watch babies we are interested in their unlimited interest. We know that whatever aeffects them now will create their over-all being later. The knowledge they gain will help them formulate the knowledge they aren’t aware of yet. Freud’s unconscious (which I call undiscovered instincts) becomes more conscious every second with sheer interest as the fuel for your fire.

11

My Truths. Know your audience. These words sound almost as ridiculous as Know thyself. How can one know all the various levels of knowledge that the general public has given themselves on their own initiative when everyone, by necessity, must be different? The only thing that everyone has in common is that we have nothing in common. Anonymous. Sure, we can say that everyone isn’t a rocket scientist but can we truly believe that everyone isn’t in some way a philosopher? One who hasn’t truly questioned is one who hasn’t truly lived. Socrates. Some say it’s too hard or just plain pointless to be skeptical about questions that aren’t supposed to be answered. But that is half the fun! Questioning what can’t logically be answered cures my A.D.D.! No great discovery was ever made without first making a wild guess. Isaac Newton. (Of all people the man who started the mechanistic world view that says that the world is like a giant predictable clock, says that knowledge comes from chaos!) In theory then, when philosophers chase their own tail they are really just trying to prove themselves wrong in order to at least get closer. Though leisure is the mother of philosophy, as Thomas Hobbes put it, necessity is the goal.

12

Church and State of Mind. What we find immoral we also find nauseating because psychological insights spawn physiological reactions. Whenever an American girl hears of clitoris circumcisions in Africa she can’t fathom why on earth people would do that since she has not grown accustom to that custom. She gets sick to her stomach and then immediately finds that act immoral. Whenever an Afghan man sees an American man in a whorehouse he feels sick to his stomach and consequently sees that as an immoral act. Was it there parents, their religion, the books they’ve read, their bodies, or all of the above that made the judgment that is wrong?

Being a Nietzschean (if there even is such a label considering his hate of labels) I’m a perspectivist when it comes to any belief or truth that runs purely through emotion. He once said that "[when dealing with morals] we must not only learn to think differently but feel differently." This quote sums up all of the problems dealing with any kind of established custom that other customs believe are wrong and not necessary. We teach our instincts its’ instincts. Since everyone has there own conscience than there can never be an established world-law conscience with which all can agree entirely. Does Nietzsche’s relative morality oppose Bob Marley’s One love?

13

Last Action Hero. The movies’ idea was brilliant. The delivery was sour. Arnold had the writers go through about 10 drafts until he was satisfied. Then what happened? It bombed miserably. Well, so did Fight Club but only because it was previewed as a purely brawl over brains flick. It is still on my top 3 list of greatest films.

Last Action Hero was an intriguing film because it defied the magic of film. Here’s a sum up. Whenever you