[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
American Literature Honors Block 2
2014.04.09
Infinity
First
there is the point; infinitely many points are a line; another line to create
an axis creates a plane; a fold across these planes creates space; multiple
states of these spaces create time; branches of these sequences are thus
possible; these branches can, as a line can, be represented as yet another
plane; infinitely adding these planes results in one infinity; different
origins of all that is described above results in many infinities – then there
is another plane – then another stack of planes, until, finally, we have
notated all possibilities due to probability, and thus, all dimensions. It is
so that a solid concept of “everything is possible” arises; thus it is also that
if nothing requires an absence of something, then the existence of something
while simultaneously being absent means that nothing, which requires all of
something, is infinite. Therefore, as probability dictates that all outcomes
are possible, no matter the chance, the human being cannot truly rely on
anything – anything is far too variable.
There
are many religions, and also many religious people; most major religions, as
they are with the exception of perhaps a few, features either a figure or
figures that are defined under the term “God”. In generalized mainstream
Christianity, although there are many interpretations of this supposed being,
“God” is often described as all powerful and always just in whatever his
purpose may be, and so it is that one of religion may turn to his or her god
for assistance, or, if in a dire situation, as a crutch.
But
what, or who, created this “God”? Some may say that he simply is, or that he
existed simply by beginning to exist, or that they don’t know but believe in his
purpose, whatever they may define it to be. Regardless, a “God” retains it’s
status as having absolute power over a certain realm, even if it’s origins are
unknown.
And
so it is as a result of this that the atheists, the ones who refuse to believe
in the existence of a god, arise. The atheist usually believes in science, and
so the scientific method is used as a basis of thought, or the theorem of
logic. An atheist may say, “How can there possibly be a god? Prove it to me
scientifically – I see no reason for such a high power to exist. Moreover, if
your god is supposed to be good, then why do so many people die? Why does he
let wars happen?” And a theist, a believer, may reply in a multitude of ways,
including ones such as “You don’t understand god’s purpose”, or “Death is
simply going to god a bit sooner than perhaps was planned.”
Thus
are the two extremes of belief.
While
there are many in-betweens, there is one that is known for what may be a
rejection of both, while also being an acceptance of both. But how can this be
possible? Surely, as logic dictates, one cannot be equal to two? The answer for
the fully submerged agnostic is that the analogy is incorrect – the statement
requires logic to exist in the first place! And even if it does, as explained,
nothing is something! And so if 1 = 2
were to become 0 = 1 (which it can, by algebra,) then 0 would be infinity, and
one equal to infinity plus one, which in turn is still infinity, which means
that since there is everything, there is no clear result.
Similarly,
the agnostic will therefore not be religious, since the concept of god simply
can’t make sense to them, due to the existence of the possibilities of
everything. But the agnostic is not an atheist – should the concept of god ever
somehow make sense, they will gladly join the party of religion, and the
agnostic does not truly rely on the logic of science, instead choosing to
reject it due to it not fitting into the belief system of the infinity. Logic
is therefore wielded only as necessary.
I
am so.
I am an agnostic.
I see all, yet I see nothing – but as contradictory as it seems, each
contradiction may make sense in yet another possibility. Even the possibility
that I am wrong in my conviction of all possibilities exists, and so I wander.
I drift.
But were I to
drift forever, I would be nowhere, would I? And it wouldn’t matter. Nothing
matters, since anything is possible, even the idea that something does matter.
This would mean,
however, that I would be useless. And though useless I may be even if I try, I
might as well exist under assumptions. To pretend that something is absolute,
to pretend that there are fewer possibilities than I truly believe in. To wield
logic or religion if need be. Assumption meshes with my agnosticism, as it allows
me to exist in this world.
Anything is
possible, and so action is useless – but action might as well be taken, for
what does it matter to assume?
