Mad Hatter: “Why is a raven like a writing-desk?”
“Have you guessed the riddle yet?” the Hatter said, turning to Alice again.
“No, I give it up,” Alice replied: “What’s the answer?”
“I haven’t the slightest idea,” said the Hatter.
I realize that I still owe you a page on existentialism (rather than a mere post), for it is the most warped concept at Haven. The way that capitalism has hijacked philanthropy, Haven has hijacked existentialism. You can have your grande latte and save the children while you do it. You can have your meaningful existence without ever going out without the safeguards of dissection–without the safeguards of knowing–only we know how to play the master game, only we know how to be aware–only we know how to speak. We have solved the riddle.
The existentialism riddle is unsolvable–that is the whole point.
Today, however, I only leave you with Irvin D. Yalom, and in the future I will put all of the existentialism thoughts together.
The search for meaning, much like the search for pleasure, must be conducted obliquely. Meaning ensues from meaningful activity: the more we deliberately peruse it, the less likely we are to find it.
And Alan Watts:
If the universe is meaningless, so is the statement that it is so. If this world is a vicious trap, so is its accuser, and the pot is calling the kettle black.
Perhaps I write my life as if I were living it and live my life as if I were writing it because I, too, fall prey to this. You can merely ask someone at Haven if they want to go for coffee and they will turn it into a psychodrama where your intentions are put on trial. Dissection is not meaning, nor is it living. And–quite frankly–it is boring.
You cannot have your cake and dissect it too.
The more interesting question is… why would you want to?