>>3979234No, friend. Life must occupy the highest ideal, for without life, no idea is meaningful. And without life as the highest inherent "rule," all else degrades. It is such a dangerous confabulation, I think it could usher a modern dark age(as you reference w/ the zeitgeist), hopefully with another enlightenment following. Hopefully. All of the other problems noted in your posts can be addressed in terms relative to their scope. But the overarching concept is that ideas serve life, they cannot do otherwise. To do so is to further the cause of destruction. -An organism whose primary instinct is not self preservation for example. Long after the last fungi have taken the last energy out of every work of mine, yours, davinci's, and the sun threatens to consume the earth, one of two truths will be the case. Either man's blood will still pump in a far greater capacity than it does now, or it will fail by product of it's own nature, and it will not.
You're thinking about your lineage all wrong, and dare I say very shortsightedly. The physiological capacity of people can change- via evolution, and at this point even by our very own hands. And the sociological state can change within those confines, endlessly for the better. But only in not allowing malignancy within the organism to prosper. Your ideas could carry some weight through the march of time, or they could be stricken from the record as misaligned like those of the nazis, american indians, pagans in medieval europe, etc. Or they could survive by trial of fire, even through being relatively disparate, like virgil survived medieval mores, by weight of ideas.
If you take the ideal of life out of your ideas, they will not outlive your children by long. Unable to adapt, and anchored to this time, and forgotten as so much discarded waste from the organism. But strive to better the very complaints you offer, the deeper the better, and it gives your work life, far beyond the expected- as davinci's.
