Thursday, 12 July 2007 - 4:45 AM KDT

Are you advocating Manichaeism?

“Mani, an Apostle of Jesus Christ” as he liked to be called, founded the Manichaeism religion.  But this “apostle of Jesus Christ wasn’t exactly embraced by the church; let me likewise start with a quote about Manichaeism from heavyweight theologian (and former Mani-devotee) St. Augustine:  "I still thought that it is not we who sin but some other nature that sins within us. It flattered my pride to think that I incurred no guilt and, when I did wrong, not to confess it... I preferred to excuse myself and blame this unknown thing which was in me but was not part of me. The truth, of course, was that it was all my own self, and my own impiety had divided me against myself. My sin was all the more incurable because I did not think myself a sinner" (Confessions, Book V, Section 10).  But, then again, maybe Mani was more in the vain of Islam…  Then again, I guess the tenth century Muslims didn’t feel that way when they drove the Manichaeists out and to (present-day) Uzbekistan.

I like my philosophy the same way I like my cookie dough—consistent.  The instructions say to stir until smooth and consistent for a reason; no one wants to be enjoying a delicious peanut butter cookie and then take a bite of nasty flour.  And, Mani, unfortunately for him, he’s ripe with inconsistencies.  Here’s possibly the most basic one. 

1.  Take two equal and opposite gods—aka dualism.  Which one is right?  Which one is good?  Evil?  How do you know?  The point is simply this:  neither is right, neither is wrong.  How can they be; there is no one or thing or code or order greater than them to decide which is write.  (If there were, then that superior thing, force, or whatever could be called “god.”)  By this philosophy, Hitler wasn’t wrong and Mother T wasn’t right.  They were merely working for opposite sides.  Like white and black, neither can be considered better; they are only perfectly different. 

2.  Speaking of perfect, that brings me to reason number two.  Reason number one states that dualism does can never bring about morality.  Reason number two is that dualism flat out can’t happen.  Dualism presupposes that TWO EQUAL AND OPPOSITE BEINGS exist and are in constant conflict with one another.  Makes sense, right?  Like magnets right?  Or 5 and -5.  Or light and dark…that’s the poster boy of dualistic thinking.  But let’s take this analogy a step further and avoid all of the false comparisons that so dutifully jump into our heads.  What is the opposite of light?  Not darkness!  That is the absence of light.  The opposite of light is not light.  Han Solo doesn’t engage the hyperdrive and accelerate to dark speed.  How about 5 and –5?  When they are added together they give you nothing; then again so does matter and antimatter.  ZERO gods.  And magnets, I guess when you line up their magnet fields they stick anyway and become ONE, so maybe that’s not such a good example.  So you can have zero gods or one god, but you sure can’t have two.  Still not convinced?  Two equal and opposite entities?  What’s the opposite of existence?  Oh, crap.

And as for Hobbes, he understood the repercussions of his unconventional Christianity:  "But whatsoever is the object of any man's appetite or desire, that is it which he for his part calleth good; and the object of his hate and aversion, evil…there being nothing simply and absolutely so.”  (Leviathan:  Part 1, Of Man)

Hitler’s brain was very awake to every decision that he made; he almost took over all of Europe and maybe eventually the world.  His heart almost led him to more power than could be dreamed of.  But for Hitler to be evil, evil must exist. 

So I ask, “Are you advocating Manichaeism?”