Sometimes and Sometimes by Russ Otter

I wrote this long-lost essay, some 24 years ago, for which I just found. I thought it reflected and supported my book, “Swimming in Cosmic Soup”, that I wrote approximately a decade later, and I thought its prose would fit well into my collection of essays in my ” http://www.otterthink.com ” blog of sorts. “What is interesting as well; I considered that I would title my future proposed book initially: “Sometimes and Sometimes”, as that ethereal concept portends both my surreal and pragmatic view of this life…

March 2002

I begin this manuscript, as a plain and simple, unadorned riddle, an exposed picture of my life through endless perspectives, that if not for this – or that event in my life; would I be altogether different, and yet perhaps not – perhaps just a variation on themes…

As I once wrote for a writing course in college some 30 plus years past: “Is it this? – or Is it that?”  (As to what we should know, do, reveal, engage, surrender to, thus the endless options of reasoned decisions – or not?). And that is the mantra, the symphony, in perennial melody that persuades me to see life as an endless equation.  Relativism to some, but even that is wrought with finite edges, that reason, and ethical thought as I see it – would dilute.

Infinite is ethics.  Infinite is reason.  And therefore unexplainable – undeniable, and unexcused is my behavior, outside convention, as long as I “do no harm”, or as little as would be possible – given the big picture, the full context of a situation.  This is not a run-away train of “do your own thing” acts, lest it be a self-indulgent prescription for the selfish, who edify only selfishness and its clear path of despair.  No! The path is for Freedom – as with freedom comes the infinite shackles of virgin and honest responsibility – to do no harm; to diminish pain to its smallest element for yourself and others. 

I would like to say that it is to eliminate pain, and that is sometimes possible, but not always.  We must choose who suffers, and who will not, as an ethical judgment, which will ultimately be that hardest thing for an individual to do in a world of cultural norms that crosses swords with our internal conscience and conventional breeding.

For instance:  To assist a family member in death, through medicating them to unconsciousness’.  Is this a selfish act that you do, to rid the inevitable pain away from your life sooner, or do you do it as an act of good sense and good will to the departing family member or friend?  These are for many very anguished questions, that require unbiased perspectives, and yet the parties involved cannot help but be subjective at some level.  This is where cultural (religious or secular) principles, can aid in decisions; But are not those religious and secular principles predicated on cultural norms, born out of moments of fashion?  Think of the Victorian period, the span of time of  the Salem Witch Trials , the Inquisition?  Principles of fashion are either (This or That!), bred of conservative or liberal generational bents?  What is the ebb and flow of the culture?  Culture (religious or secular thought) neither is not empirically sacrosanct in my view – it is based on “faith”, which is the purest form of subjective thought.  It is therefore partial and wrought with good and bad intentions, depending on the times…

It is only through reason and judgment, whereby we can find an ethical life and or a spiritual life.  Pragmatic thought is an abyss of decisions composed of reason and compassion, as opposed to ideological absolutes that comfort very easily both logic and illogic, the wrong and the right – dependant on the times or culture.   But to choose an ideology, (such one-dimensional absolutes) – is intellectually to illogical for reason to abide, and I am left with Sometimes and Sometimes as I evaluate a situation for which I need to act…

My guideposts are not devoid of religious and secular teachings, since they are the offspring of rich empirical depth, be it of good or bad, or correct….  Religious and secular history are the combined teachings of life’s own endemic sweat from tears, of past human hardships and joy’s, of failures, and success, of selfishness, and of selflessness, all filtered into language of every discipline…;  for us to interpret.  But I am not bound by conventional pasts or presents, by this or that, republican or democrat, conservative or liberal patronage.  All such labels I dispose of with certainty.  Ah’ yes!  For that I am ideological – to be sure.  If I were to solely choose one side’s fixed dogmas over the other’s I would forget about the goal, the purpose, the point and fundamental responsibility of ethics. 

That fundamental responsibility is to think, and measure by situation and merit, not by label, or convention.  It seems that only in the act of individuality (Integrity), can we be moral.  Conventionalism lacks integrity, and therefore cannot be trusted, as to the motives behind one’s actions.  Motives, not actions – are the core, the root, the truth of who we are.  For example, if I believed in heaven and hell, and then chose to be a Christian  in order to avoid hell.  My motives are clearly selfishly driven, as I only am doing good selfless and decent actions, to avoid punishment.  My heart has not changed, I am but a sounding cymbal, as Jesus might say… Ironically even the person Jesus, who is so firmly documented in history said, that even though I do… etcetera.  And have not love, it means nothing. He understood. Do we?  Even many Christians do not get the message.  Jesus was to also have said “Why call thou me good, as there is only one who is good and that is god (Infinity in my view, which is not definable).  In other words, he was clearly saying what “I do” is good, the transaction of helping someone is good, and that is God.  Do not praise me – but praise what is good – I am only the messenger, or the device by which good things occur.  The process – the action – is what is good or bad, not the individual).  In this truth – he dismisses the self-righteous in thought or behavior, hence the Pharisees of his time…  And our self-righteous leaders of this time… Yet predominate conventions teach that you should repent so that you do not go to hell.  Such motivations are self-centered, self-indulgent, and fundamentally hypocritical by religious definition.  This is not what Christian, or other great religions teach, at the essence.  They teach the discipline of understanding, of perspective, hence loving thy enemies, as thyself, do not harm.   However, leadership in these organized predominately religious bodies of yesterday and today often uses these religions as tools of control and persecution.  Pandering and breeding the worst in us.  As instruments to justify the killing of others who have done them wrong, of vengeance and of hate, which is the clear antithesis of a religion’s pure intent.  This is all thanks to conventional cultural leadership herding the sheep (the masses of humanity), to think little, and reveille in self-righteous thoughts for how much better they are than someone else.  Perverse, selfish, unethical sheep, we the masses are…  I sadly, and factually state with all humility… 

Humility, now there is a word…  For what does it really mean, but to understand humanity as humanity.  Not as good or bad, but to understand both the good and bad in all of us.  To understand.  How great a gift if people would only embrace this concept of understanding, rather than joining sides.  We do this with friends, when we may not always respect their behaviors or actions – at all times; but we still perhaps love them and consider them friends.  We are not perfect.  Humanity is not perfect.  To have humanity is to know love, is to love.  Not just for some, but for all feeling species…