A Prayer to Promethius

[equality72521]

O'ye bringer of the flame,

you lighter of fires,

spark now the mind of man,

pray you, pray you,

pray you come.

You above all other gods came,

you above all other gods loved,

you above all other gods gave,

fire, fire, fire, to man.

O' that I do beseech thee,

you god of the fire hear me.

Darkness now consumes the world,

bring fire to man once more.

[Ellen Stuttle]

That sends a bit of a shiver down my spine -- the good sort of shiver.

I dare venture the bet that Rand would have responded to it too. She used the image of Prometheus again and again in her work. I think that the Prometheus image might even be the central image of her work.

My husband -- a university professor of physics -- and I were recently talking about the horrible loss of intellectual ideals in the academic world. (I'm using mild language.)

I said to him that a poem to which both he and I respond with all our being -- Tennyson's Ulysses -- would no longer awake the echoes of sympathetic resonance in the current academic world which it reverberatingly aroused in the era when it was written.

See the link for the full poem.

Prominent among the lines my husband and I have recited time and again:

To follow knowledge like a sinking star,

Beyond the utmost bound of human thought.

[....]

To sail beyond the sunset, and the baths

Of all the western stars, until I die.

The spark of the fire of human intellect is being lost, dying in ashes.

May it reignite.

Ellen

[Brant Gaede]

O'ye bringer of the flame,

you lighter of fires,

spark now the mind of man,

pray you, pray you,

pray you come.

You above all other gods came,

you above all other gods loved,

you above all other gods gave,

fire, fire, fire, to man.

O' that I do beseech thee,

you god of the fire hear me.

Darkness now consumes the world,

bring fire to man once more.

You wrote this? Your strongest suit does seems to be literary.

I generally don't like or read much poetry, even Kipling. This is good (to me). Part of my problem with poetry is I'm too impatient to sit down with it and give it a chance.

--Brant

[equality72521]

Yes this is mine. it took me about 2 minutes to write and was a complete ejaculation(look up the word) I spent a good deal of my youth in the study of different theologies. and have a very different view of gods and religions. To quote a friend "We are the gods reborn... If we choose to be.". The gods are fictionalized men who represent perfectly the ideal, and we should strive to embody the gods.

I myself am an objectivist, however I despise the narrow-mindedness of objectivists, the dogmatic doctrinal Objectivists who cannot see past their own nose. These would be objectivists have no influence in the culture because "there is no such thing as objectivist art." they fail to see that as a logical consequence of a comprehensive philosophical system. A person who posses a comprehensive philosophical system and applies it consistently internalizing it does all things through the lines of that system. They say "there is no such thing as an objectivist lawyer, or cook, or etc.", these same people would of course be wrong. There are Christian lawyers, cooks, teachers, dancers, artists, there are Jewish lawyers, cooks, teachers dancers, artists, the same with every other philosophical system. To internalize a system fully grants to that individual the title of "Kantian, Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, Socratic, etc." lawyer, teacher, cook, etc. The reason for this is simple, every individual posses either by cognitive choice, or subconscious indoctrination a philosophical system. All things are done by threw and for that system. When I say "I am an Objectivist." I am not simply stating my philosophical belief as do most who say "I am an objectivist" or "I am a Kantian" or "I am a Christian", I am describing a part, what could be argued to be the most important part of my essence, that thing which is essentially me. When a cook makes a dish, or an architect builds a house, or an artist paints, they pour forth into their work their very soul brining it to life, bestowing in it a life of its own. This is why so many who have passion for their work compare it to brining forth a child. Eat the food of a person who half heartedly makes a dish, than eat the food of a person who pours their soul into a dish, yes ingredients must be mixed, and measured, however you can taste the soul poured into the food.

When an individual pours their essence into something that thing must also take on a part of that essence. (Returning to the Prayer of Prometheus) When I speak of Prometheus brining fire to man I do not mean that he literally brought fire on a stick to man, fire becomes an allegory or synonym (take your pick) for reason, sanity, the rational mind. We are all in essence Homo Sapien, however this can be broken down still further because the essence of each man is not limited to physical descriptions, or genetic code. This is why in another post i refer to "Romantic Objectivist Art", in biological terms we could describe this example as Family: Romantic, Genus: Objectivist, Species: Art. Depending on the topic of conversation and context the Family, Genus, and Species can all change places or if it can be understood properly the definitions of these terms can be better defined which will grant them narrower movement from one field into another. As a reminder of the limitations of this type of example Taxonomy is an art and has (that I know of) not been objectively defined.

[Reidy]

Like the poem. The way you use repetition instead of meter or rhyme to make it rhythmical is intriguing.

I see a variety of problems in your last post. To pick one, you break down "romantic Objectivist art" into "Family: Romantic, Genus: Objectivist, Species: Art." This gets it exactly backward.

If you can pull off a complete ejaculation in two minutes you must still be pretty young.

[equality72521]

Like the poem. The way you use repetition instead of meter or rhyme to make it rhythmical is intriguing.

I see a variety of problems in your last post. To pick one, you break down "romantic Objectivist art" into "Family: Romantic, Genus: Objectivist, Species: Art." This gets it exactly backward.

If you can pull off a complete ejaculation in two minutes you must still be pretty young.

Reidy,

Thanks for the laugh but that definition of ejaculation is why i said look it up. I was kind of hoping (i guess beyond hope) that someone would not go there. An Ejaculation is also a type of Prayer (Like many words in the English language it has been too narrowly defined.) Spitting is orally ejaculating, so is speaking in some contexts, you have penile ejaculation, vaginal ejaculation, wounds can also ejaculate. I say this (in hopes) so that no one will make another comment like that.

As to my age... I am Older than I look and younger than I sound. When I was 21 I looked like I was 18, I had a girl in the class ask me how old I was and was standing near the college professor, I asked her "how old do you think I am?". She said "18" out of curiosity I asked the professor to take a guess and he said Early to mid thirties. He told me that he knew some people that age that looked rather young. As a joke i said i was not rich enough for plastic surgery. I think he was rather surpassed to find out I was only 21.

As to my taxonomy as I said taxonomy is as of yet a non objective matter. I would have to think on it much more to really define the terms and order in the most precise manner. It was an ejaculatory(in keeping with my word of the day) example. This is the first time I have ever tried to concretize the example so much, I usually go through 4 or 5 examples before i find one i like and that people can understand.

Edited August 4, 2010 by equality72521

[Reidy]

When a class A contains all the members of a class B plus other members that are not members of B, A stands to B as genus to species, not species to genus. That is an objective fact that no amount of loosey-goosey agnosticism can change.

Edited August 4, 2010 by Reidy