Philosophy on a Friday

Revolving Round The Sun (A Time Has Come)

Seasons of cycles. Cycles of seasons
Networks of connections, rhymes, rhythms, reasons
Pattern, co-incidence, symbols, cues, meanings
Is serendipity osmosis or a process of symbiosis?
Wherefore part plays timing? Wherefore dreaming?
Random acts of kindness
Senseless acts of wickedness
Disturbing and restoring, disturbing and restoring
The knock-on pendulum to zero balance
Revolution, evolution, extinction…
A butterfly flaps its thunderous wings
China quakes on the world's web
A piece of luck lands in your lap.
A snowflake falls. Or is it an angel's joke?
Is it Year of the Spider? Is it written in the stars?
What action behind the reaction? What cause behind the consequence?
Instinct or intellect? fate or fatalism? motive or grace?
Like age and change and death and taxes and night and day,
Luck if you're lucky, statistically more often, if willing to meet luck halfway.
Explain the bad things that happen to nice people and innocents
The 'necessary evil'…
Is there a God? Does He love a trier?
Is the devil in the detail or the big G?
Do the doors of perception lead to the gates of paradise?
Is superstition the road to perdition, one magpie short?
Can you re-negotiate your part if unhappy with the script?
How any homsap can live or die (or kill) by any creed
When 'belief' means a chance we could be wrong.
Beyond admiring the neat graphics, daubing our own tribute freestyle
And wondering at the power that links the human electro-magnetic field

© LS King 2007

The Origin of Dawkins...?

Was going to post a poem today (before they get me under the Trades Descriptions Act), never expecting for one moment that Richard Dawkins would break into my thoughtlife and hijack the posting. However a strange juxtaposition manifested as I watched him in last night's episode of his Channel 4 soapbox two-parter 'The Enemies of Reason' (who died and made him God/Reason, eh?), as Professor Dawkins gamely tried a few alternative therapies in order to roundly debunk them in a kindly way, as he's not without compassion for the 'delusional'. It slowly dawned on me that he is not facially dissimilar to a portrait of Charles Darwin I once saw. His hero, no less.

In addition, their surnames are very similar and their 'mission' in life seems to be that Dawkins is here to take up where 'monkey boy' Darwin left off and has even written extensively about him. Perhaps influenced by the fact I have read a number of books about reincarnation theory (research for a story I'm writing) recently, I idly found myself wondering how much more interesting the programme might have been if Dawkins had tried 'Regression' therapy with one of the nations' foremost practitioners as well.

Supposing (and this is a big suppose, admittedly!) his dredged-up subconscious informed Dawkins he had indeed been Charles Darwin in a previous life, and furnished him with evidence enough to convince him. Which raises the even more interesting question; would flattery/vanity have got the better of Dawkins, causing him to revise his whole outlook and theories on everything to accommodate this prospective two-for-one celeb status? Or would his anti-spiritual principles hold true and would he remain dogged about his dogma and all-round dog-in-a-manger about everyone else's?

After all, the majority of us have the humility to admit, we simply 'don't know' when it comes to life's big questions, let alone insisting on our views unless we are some kind of fundamentalist (apparently they explore their fundaments!)

An interesting programme idea for the future methinks, except I have now possibly spoiled the grande denouement! And I'm not a wholesale believer in reincarnation myself admittedly. I just find it a fascinating concept (not to mention darn good, and largely unexploited, 'yarn material' as a writer!). To quote Voltaire; 'It is not more surprising to be born twice than once; everything in nature is resurrection.'
Regrettably I could not locate the portrait I remembered but I found a photograph of Darwin beneath, where the head, eyes and jowls have definite parallels to Dawkins' photo on the right. Perhaps I will dig out an online poll in due course so that readers can vote on the matter.

But plenty of great writers and thinkers have had serious thoughts about reincarnation over the years as you can see from this link.
Reincarnation: Quotes from Famous People