lirik lagu nathanology - this and that (a song of contraditory arguments)
there’s a lot to argue about in this world, and sometimes it seems like the most important arguments are the least likely to end anytime soon — god or no god? capitalism, socialism? /dʒɪf/ or /ɡɪf/…?
usually when you’re arguing with someone about one of these things, you do assume that one or the other of you is right. usually you assume that’s you. and maybe you are, and maybe you aren’t
but there is also a third possibility:
this is the possibility that you’re right, and wrong, and they’re wrong, and right, and also neither of you are either right or wrong, and at the same time, you’re both right and wrong and neither, about the same thing
[this would be a violation of the principle of noncontradiction, which states that the same thing can’t be both true and untrue of the same thing at the same time in the same way. this come from aristotle. but, aristotle also thought that sh~llfish were spontaneously produced from deposits of wet sand. turns out they do reproduce, they’re just hermaphrodites. but i don’t blame him for that, i’ve never seen an oyster having s~x with itself. although they are supposed to be an aphrodisiac.]
for in the case of some arguments, you may find that the principles from which you proceed can lead both to your own conclusion, and at the same time to the exact opposite of what you were each trying to argue in the first place, and the same is true for whomever you’re arguing with
[this is not to say that there is no truth —
but there may be more truth than you supposed there to be
and so if even if you think that you know what you mean
don’t be mean.]
take for instance the old argument between whether the world is ultimately spiritual or physical in nature. — idealism vs. materialism, as they call it in philosophy class
say there’s no soul or spirit, and it’s all mere matter
and all our thoughts and feelings are a part that follows after —
a product of neurons automatonic transfer
a stimulus responding but not a conscious answer
and consciousness at its n0blest is just the total synthesis
of ultimately physical infinitesimal little bits
which eventually fl!cker and switch off in impotence
and so the consciousness they constitute is without all significance. —
…that would be the materialist viewpoint
— and yet your feelings are real, and it’s real you’re hearing this
and such self~reflection is just what soul and spirit is —
and so those physical processes that cause us our fear and bliss
produce non~physical phenomena that clearly exist:
and so matter is inclusive of the principle it’s thought to miss —
that is, it has a capacity for conscious intelligence
and if you’re willing to admit that matter can be conscious, you
admit that it includes that which it’s defined in contrast to
…or:
say there’s no matter and it’s all spirit and soul
and objects that have mass, that your hand appears to hold
are in fact a vast interplay of images that really are no
more real than mere dreams, and we’re what makes the dreams go —
and we too may be dreams of a singular super~soul
and all these dreams’ purpose is to see through to it’s truth and goal —
and that which appears to be an inanimate wad
of mere stuff is, weird enough, actually god
…like when you’re on drugs
but all dreams aside, what happens a lot
is i freeze when i’m cold and i burn when i’m hot
and if i right now i ate sh~t and dropped here on this spot
the floor would make it clear that an illusion it’s not
and if i must define even the clearest sensations as an illusion
then who even am i? and what am i doing?
and whom could i ask that, if i, as the asker
were not separated from you by our matter?
…here’s a possible answer:
it’s this and that and both and neither —
and it’s a fact, so don’t believe it
it’s not sense or nonsense
so all that leaves
is a process through contrasting possibilities
wherever that leads
whatever that means
whomever that includes
and that includes you and me —
it is what it isn’t
and is and isn’t what it seems
so don’t be sure, and don’t be mean
…here’s another example, from the domain of political discourse:
say you’re a radical progressive, generally defined —
you think the preexisting structures should be left behind:
we must tear down these systems and then free the mind
from the old~guard’s traditions that hold it in line
there’s no truth to teach, one seeks but there isn’t tho;
therefore we should teach to be creative and critical
and in the absence of any other overarching purpose
in the universe, there’s just the individual freedom of persons
— but isn’t even this relativistic reassessment
itself but an expression of a biased entrenchment?
aren’t the very critiques that lead in a better direction
themselves all subjective and subject to convention?
and if all absolutes are inducements of oppression
is anti~absolutism itself exempt from its own objection?
doesn’t centering ourselves around our self~invention
subject us to yet another centralized conception ?
…it’s a good question. or:
you’re a radical conservative, economically and socially —
you assert there’s a way things are and are not supposed to be
which means what’s yours is yours and what’s mine is only owned by me
and you oppose those whose ideas oppose this openly
and the reason we find ourselves in weird situations
is we’re drawing new lines that aren’t clear in their placement
as people try to veer from the way nature made them
and this leads to society’s deterioration
yet if you find yourself saying there’s such a thing as nature
that has a fixed form as defined by its creator
wouldn’t every strange form he’s made lately, or still hasn’t yet
still be an expression of his will, and that naturalness?
and if god is absolute, omniscient and omnipotent
then he also made revolutions, even if you’re not into it —
and it follows from his omnipotence, omniscience and absoluteness
that his nature would include both the old school and the new sh~t
…but the truth of it is:
it’s this and that and both and neither —
you don’t know sh~t; you’re not wrong either
don’t be a believer
but also don’t assert
that there’s nothing to believe in
and don’t be a jerk
however that works
whatever that means
whomever that includes
and that includes you and me —
it is what it isn’t
and is and isn’t what it seems
so don’t be sure, and don’t be mean
i don’t know what i’m doing, i’m just rhyming while doing it
wise in my foolishness, blind in my foolish wit
i’ve been trying to find the truth and i’m behind in pursuit of it
yet i might yet find it precisely in losing it
but what good does that do? and isn’t what i’m muttering
just an abstract distraction from the actual suffering
of the persons and facts in the passion of utter being?
— yes, perhaps. that and this other thing…
Lirik lagu lainnya:
- lirik lagu dead cross - animal espionage
- lirik lagu my little cheap dictaphone - upside down
- lirik lagu anna tivel - the bell
- lirik lagu meat computer - missed flights missed calls
- lirik lagu amy ray - cowboys and pirates
- lirik lagu fame hax - małolaty (wieśki-hax)
- lirik lagu zaryadark - важность (importance)
- lirik lagu lisa mitchell - let your body
- lirik lagu scary pockets - got your back
- lirik lagu ellison - strawberry rain