The 2004 movie “Punisher” uses a Machiavellian device- Castle aligns himself with the weak Mickey to ruin the powerful Mr. Saint.
Socrates wonders why death is considered an evil and not a good. We understand that death can be traumatic for those left behind, however, at what point in our history did we consider something natural and inevitable as death to be bad for the deceased? An example of the transvalution of values?
I finished the second season of the “DaredEvil” and enjoyed the series. Matt is a practicing lawyer and practicing Roman Catholicism who refuses to kill. We suggest that Matt's personal issues are a result of his blind acceptance of slave morality and “social justice” as promoted by the Roman Church. As Fred wrote, one has to be sick to remain a Christian. When comparing the success of Matt, Castle and Fisk, it is clear that the later individuals refuse to accept, or have overcome, the majority's opinion on the subject of murder as a means to an end.
I suggest that humanity is divided into two distinct mindsets. This realization become apparent after viewing “Bones”, although this duality is prominent in “Atlas Shrugged”. For a male, this duality has a stronger impact by being seen, rather than by reading. Needless to say, “Rational Minds” are a minority not only in fiction.
The reasoning mind does not know how to categorize faith. We find faith an ambiguous term, for the same reasons we are confused by truth, virtue and justice. Perhaps we avoid words that we feel unconformable using. Either some words are not pleasant sounding or they create more confusion to the listener than we are willing to impose. We recognize that the idea of “strange sounding” words is subjective, so we will use the less subjective term “taste” to validate our prejudice.
In our Modern Age, we often hear opinions thoughtlessly repeated, such as “Don't judge”. While we are confident of the origin of this catchphrase, we note that it becomes meaningless when it is taken out of context- “Don't judge, lest ye be judged”. The majority do not want others to “judge” their behavior, no doubt because they can not justify their more questionable behavior. This “lack of judgment” has thoroughly infected morality and has spread, as it now cripples reasoning. Through ignorance, we suggest that “judgment” has been confused with “criticize”, while “prejudice” has morphed into “nonacceptance”. As a great philologist noted: words have meanings.
Through my long and pleasant study of astrology, I can quickly recognize the Leo/Virgo characteristics in a subject. However, I cannot discern if the influence is due to the sun sign, the rising sign or multiple planets in the sign. The lack of certainty is also valid for those I refer to as Cancer/Geminis. It is obvious to me that I see that influence and recognize it [and in my weaker subjective moments, I feel the influence], and again, there are possible solutions: sun sign, rising sign or multiple planets in the sign. It seems that with more data [natal charts], the correct solution would be discovered. However, this possibility is not a certainty.
We are told that opposites attract. We acknowledge that we can both be drawn to and repelled by the Cancer/Geminis. The soul would seem to be confused-wanting and not wanting. We seek their company, yet unless they are worthy, that is, have virtues or traits that we value, we find their humor to be insipid and their “insights” to be dull. When we reject them, we hold them in contempt to a higher degree than any of the non Cancer/ Geminis. Why? The soul, is she confused? Hell has no fury like the scorned soul...
“Your parents have lied to you, your friends have lied to you, your teachers have lied to you, but I won't lie to you.” was a phrase that was not unknown among certain youths during my tenure in food service. It seem like a political slogan, yet it is true. The esteem of honesty is a hallmark of Sagittarius and this quality may explain why we are drawn to philosophy, religion and the Occult. It is a quirk of Astrology that we are attracted to subjects that we are skeptical of their assertions or cannot have faith in their revelations or cannot believe their claims. Even before I was aware of the openness of Modernity, certain inquiries where met by a denial to answer questions, not by an avoidance of facts, but through painful experiences I understood that subjective truth and objective facts are not necessary nor beneficial for everyone. Not everyone can appreciate reality, hence certain lesser minds see falsehoods and believe in deceptions where none exist. “But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth...” I have no reason to lie to anyone, yet I am under no obligation to declare everything that I know.
Socrates smiled; Jesus wept.
The Orthodox and Roman Churches have a tradition of addressing their priests as “Father”. In the New Testament, Jesus clearly states to call no one father but the heavenly father. How is that these two ancient churches were either ignorant of Christ's instruction or have ignored the Master's injunction to the present? Perhaps a better question is: Who edited Scripture to discredit this practice?
How did induced abortion become murder? Not from the Old Testament, as only those beings that breath have life. No breath, no life, no murder. Not from the atheistic writings of the alleged Church Fathers, as they offer no clarity on this subject [the soul is infused on the fortieth day for males and the eightieth day for females], although Tertullian details the procedure [“On the Soul”, chapter 25]. Abortion can only be murder if the soul is infused at conception, and this was not Roman Catholic dogma until 1854. Since it has been revealed to the Holy Father that Mary's soul was infused at conception, then it is reasonable that everyone's soul is present at conception and the killing of a soul is murder. Although this is a a reasonable conclusion, it may not be true for those who are not immaculately conceived, that is, all of humanity but Mary. I offer my apologies for my error: the killing of an individual is called murder; souls have been declared to be immortal and, by definition, cannot be killed. How did abortion become murder? We have no explanation.
“Just one more thing.” Crime dramas can be typically described as resolving the unknown by persistence and discovery. Similar to science and similar to the Occult. If Astrology offers explanations for our attraction to religion and philosophy, can it offer insights into our enjoyment of crime? In our youth, we may have held to the opinion that justice must prevail, and the criminal, without exception, was always discovered and we were not disappointed at the resolution. Once we leave the world of fiction, we find that life is not an either/or proposition. Although the totality of reality can be understood in terms of duality [is/is not], opinions are declared to be truth and ambiguous terms are employed to validate opinions and feelings. The distinctions clearly seen and understood in Nature are dissolved and the only individuals who are injured by this blurring are those who prefer facts to feelings. Perhaps as we matured, we longed for onscreen villains to succeed and we must inquire how this change of attitude transpired. We answer: Our experience led us to conclude that the race is not always won by the swiftest, the highest virtues are not consistently rewarded and it rains on the good and evil alike. As a free society we openly state that world domination is a terrible goal, yet in our individual hearts we lust for the free exercise of such power.
“If you could imagine any one obtaining this power ... and never doing any wrong … he would be thought ... to be a most wretched idiot...”