Dec 19, 2006 14:07
It might be okay to hold contradicting thoughts all the time. I used to think that I wanted singular focus, one goal or purpose to pursue with all else just being distractions. Now that I've been lost among distractions for several years, I think that there might be no better way to live.
Is it better to pursue one goal endlessly and never achieve it or to achieve greatness, and in doing so lose purpose? Who wants to be the former quarterback that keeps bragging about the old glory days? Or who wants to be the painter that dies in poverty, only to be recognized fifty years after death? None of this seems very desireable. It seems to me that having multiple little goals is a much better plan.
And what are goals other than to make a mark, to show evidence of existence? Why do anything if not to mold the world to some extent in our own image? And if we pass over this question as irrelevent, we deny any difference between thought and instinct, giving ourselves away to animal psychology. But if ultimate validation is impossible, then little validations are the best option. Why search for the source of the river when there are puddles all around? If you eliminate the ultimate, then it is possible to choose from many singular foci.
Jesus fucking Christ, I have no idea if I even just said anything.