Responses.

Thoughts on the matter? Feel free to contribute to the debate.


Subject:
         Sinistar philosophy
   From:
         NFalstein@aol.com

I greatly enjoyed your analysis!  It was my own search for inner truth that inspired my quest to bring Sinistar's philosophy to the public.

Noah Falstein
(project leader on Sinistar)

All I can say about that is "Yowza!" Like talking to Aristotle himself.


"Run, coward!"
   - Sinistar

"Conscience doth make cowards of us all."
   - Shakespeare

I'd like to call into question your interpretation of the fourth fragment of Sinistar's philosophical writings: "Run, run, run!"  At first glance, it does indeed appear to be a restatement of the third fragment, but on closer inspection it seems to be a refinement or extension of it.  While Fragment 3 is addressed specifically to the "coward", Fragment 4 had no specific addressee, and indeed the threefold repetition of the command suggests a general address to multiple parties.  The number three is significant here, representing (as is often the case) the cosmos at large as a generalized "third person".

We already know from Fragment 3 that Sinistar considers running to be the proper role of the coward.  In fragment 4, he suggests that it is the proper role for everyone.  We are imperfect and weak of spirit.  In our approach to the absolute, there comes a point for each of us where we must adopt the role of coward.  Call this pessimistic if you must, but it is consistent with the insistent realism of Sinistar's world view, especially as expressed in the seventh fragment.  The implications for the corpus of Sinistar's writings as a whole are enormous: although fragments 1, 2, and 6 express the worthiness and even the inevitability of our search for truth, fragments 4 and 7 suggest that this endeavor is doomed to failure. Or, to put it another way, the unattainability of the absolute does not alter our destiny to pursue it. This is, of course, identical to the condition of mortality: we are bound to die, but this in no way invalidates our desire to live.

(By the way, I realize that I'm making Sinistar sound like a determinist by using words like "destiny", but I believe his intent is closer to theHindu notion of "dharma": the proper course of things, which we may reject at our peril.  This fits with the frequent use of the imperative: Sinistar is trying to tell us what our dharma is, so we may fulfill it. Whatever Sinistar's feeling on the free will debate, it doesn't seem to be the the primary issue addressed in his writings.)

--
Carl Muckenhoupt
carl@earthweb.com


go back to Sinistar?
or
return to more of the same...?