Happiness versus Fate/Results versus Duty.
I will conclude as prosaically as possible, for your relief.
This might be a bit aphoristic.
I am channeling Wittgenstein.
[You should read the Tractatus by the way. It is (un)utter(ab)ly ingenious. I even recommended it to Hunter. You remember Hunter? INTP kid from Debate.]
2. If your “love” makes me suffer, and I do not deserve to suffer, and I am justified in this undeserving and condemned to suffering by that same name of “love”, then your love is not justified, for it conflicts with my love in the same way as your happiness would conflict with my happiness.
3. If your “love” makes you happy, but I suffer, then by virtue of both 1 and 2 your love is unjustified.
3.a. [Ouch. Your ego.]
4. The means justify the ends. How you treat people justifies the results that you get. You will only know that you are justified if you feel justified in your means.5. My means justify my ends. What ever results I get from you have no bearing upon whether or not my actions (means) were justified, for your karma is not my karma.
6. I trusted you. We discussed the distinction betwixt Eros and Agape. You led me on to believe that you were not a selfish person. This would accord with dictates 1 through 3. All so, in so far as Agape is akin to nish kama karma (which I had intuited prior to your betrayal [#9], and which I had out-spokenly STRIVED to live up to) then this proclamation of Agape would be consistent with 4 and 5, because if one acts with out anticipation of a result, then the means justify the ends, for no ends are plotted for.
7. It was inevitable that I would presume, based upon what you had said about Eros and Agape, that you would hold me to the standard out-lined in dictate 6.
8. It was because I trusted you, as I was compelled to morally, that I invited you to meet Kresten. I knew that Andrew was unjustified in his suspicions of Kresten’s charisma with women. I knew that you would not be selfish, by virtue of 6, which of course implies 1-5 as well, as explained.
9. Kresten’s charisma with women was the probable factor for your not behaving in accord with 1-6, as expected. This you could not be blamed for, for it could be argued that I should have warned you, knowing this in advance. Yet I was morally unjustified in expecting such behavior on Kresten’s part, violating the principle of Generosity which all so pervades dictate #6.
10. This was why I never blamed you.
11. You demanded that I blame you, so I had to act against the implications of dictate #10.
12. That night I was dis-illusioned with Eros and Agape. I was tempted to seek vengeance by dissolving in to Eros my self, but to no avail. I never had a woman beside you. I gave you a second chance when you apologized whole-heartedly. I made a vow not to so much as fantasise about other women, except in passing or to serve my love for you. I suffered GUILT at my temptations. But I was redeemed by my decisions. I never danced with any one else. I barely even flirted.
13. Despite my dis-illusion I maintained my dignity. I under stood that you had affirmed the value of Eros. As Kierkegaard pro-claimed: God is a paradox. As Schopenhauer stated: The philosopher loves the paradox.
14. Had you been patient with our first meeting we could have worked out openly our feelings towards one an other. Any pain that would follow would have to be swallowed, because we would be morally unjustified in using it as a pre-text for any sort of behavior. (This would have been a Naturalist Fallacy.) Yet when the pain that ensued was its self unjustified (as explained in the prior dictates, but especially 1-6, 14), then it was not used as a justification in its self but rather as evidence for the moral infraction.
15. You were pardoned for this moral infraction, again, by virtue of #9.
16. Had Kresten been patient, all of the benefits of #14 would have followed through.
17. He cannot be pardoned for this moral infraction, by virtue of #9. He is still bound to 1-3/5. He is bound to the other dictates as well, for had he had patience he would have learned them.
18. Because #14 did not come to fruition, I was left to my own devices. All I had to go by from you was that you felt Eros to be justified. I all so had to feel that my pain was justified.
19. I was a victim because I did not dis-obey any of the dictates and still suffered pain with little immediate benefit.
20. If I was a victim, and if Eros was justified, and if my pain was justified, then it followed logically that not only did I love you erotically, for which reason I suffered pain as a victim, but all so that this love was justified.
21. I could not be held morally reprehensible for my pain if I was a victim. So it had to have been justified on my part.
22. I could not be held to the virtue of Agape any more, which might other wise have offered me release (but only in dim and naive theory) from my pain.
23. I served you and adhered to the remaining dictates.
24. I gained your approval to be sentimental.
25. I gained your approval to be honest.
26. This vindicated my love. [20-26. (esp. 20, 23-25.)]
27. Kresten’s guilt corroborated my intuitions.
28. Your unwarranted attacks corroborated my intuitions.
29. The attacks were unwarranted because I violated no moral principle.
30. My intuitions were that he had wronged me. I refused to believe that you had wronged me. (#10.)
31. You demanded that I blame you. (#11.)
32. Your attacks were symptoms of a Guilty Conscience. This corroborated my intuitions about Kresten without my having to suspect you of guilt a priori to these attacks. So I never violated principle #10; it was logically super-ceded by #11 and #28.
33. The attacks consisted of denying Kresten’s guilt and compelling me into a destructive friendship.
34. It was hypocritical of you to accuse me of trying to compel YOU into a destructive relationship with me, or to claim that OUR friendship had been in any way destructive towards you in a similarly unjustified way.
35. I could not deny Kresten’s guilt. Not only had it been self-evident and revelatory, but it was all so corroborated by his stated feelings of guilt. (#27.)
36. If an other man or woman entered in to your life and asked why you were my lover, you would be able to list 23-25. The pain on the part of this other would be unjustified because I had actually worked to deserve your love.
37. #36 re-inforces #26 against threats of Leveling.
38. If I made you suffer it was for your benefit.
39. I suffered for you all this time because the means would justify the ends (4 and 5). I did not love you because you made me happy. I loved you because it made me a better person.
40. If I make you suffer it is because I make you a better person.
41. Again, Kresten could not have made you happy because that happiness would be unjustified from the very beginning (Fact #1.).
42. Because you are a good person and not a selfish person, it is impossible that he made you happy. Some thing else must have.
43. This other force was a product of my relationship with you, most probably.
44. I am not crazy. As indicated by #39, I have operated in a logical, emotionally stable, and ethically justified manner.
45. If I am not crazy, I deserve your respect.
46. If I deserve your respect, I do not deserve your scorn.
47. If I made you happy, I solve for both Pragmatism and Deontology.
48. This is as logical as I can make it.
49. I thought that you would appreciate it. As an INTP.
50. I love you.
Dmitry.
Dm.A.A.
Post-scriptum/Addendum:
51. You cannot condemn me to madness on account of working against my own happiness. If I had hurt you and that had made me happy, then I would have violated the first dictate and all that follows would have been a waste of breath.52. You cannot condemn me to hypocrisy because I suffered for you and only derived happiness as an occasional by-product of this.
53. You cannot condemn me to cruelty because this will only benefit you (#38) and only ever has.
54. Because the means justify the ends, I have no way of knowing what will hurt you. I only know what it is my duty pro-claim.
55. Even if logic is swayed by affect, it does not mask it.
56. My conscience is clean. (#5.)
57. You cannot condemn me to malice or sadism on account of #38 because you have hurt me too.
58. This pain was involuntary and logical.
59. You cannot condemn me to stupidity because I was unjustified in questioning your intentions. (#’s 6 and 7.)
60. Games have rules Alanna.
Dm.
No comments:
Post a Comment