Beautiful observation on how gratitude can bypass belief systems entirely. That moment with the couple searching for the battery shows something dunno if its divine or just deeply human, but either way it matters. What caught me was the part about swear words being first learned in any language while blessings go unsaid. I've seen this exact pattern in my own experiences abroad, always kinda defaulting to what repels rather than what connects. The idea that expressing a blessing requires no theology to be meaningful is something worth sitting with tbh.
Thank you. I'm grateful for your comment, for all comments, because they give me pause for thought, and that is why I blog. I blog to think, and to invite others to think, not to invite them to agree with me, but to think for themselves. So, again, thank you, for thinking.
The common thread that links this and those two other articles is this: do I engage in an act of generosity towards another person (a) for their benefit? (b) for mine? or (c) for that of some third party/ies?
And, by the same token, *should* I engage in it for (a), (b) or (c)?
I shan't expound on the two referenced articles, they are there if you'd like to see how I think about these things, and I invite you to contribute to my thinking, which I should value. But as regards this one, I hope I can conclude that the answer is (a). And that is the reason why I say that I can't explain what I meant with the words 'God bless you'; the reason is that, absent the act of generosity that the old couple, and only the old couple, bestowed on me, the words take on a false tone. They ring hollow and pretentious and "acted". And yet they were spontaneous and sincerely intended. Now there's a thing.
Aside from the serious questions being asked as to the very ratione materiae of foundations (qua tax loopholes, qua machinations by the rich to corral the poor, qua soft power, &c.), what the present article starts to question is the rationale for benevolence, such as is articulated around an individual standing before an invited audience at a microphone and saying, "I am benevolent." It is in the same order of things as proclaiming "We are glorious", and I have written about that elsewhere as well:
"Glory cannot be willed. Nor can it be self-proclaimed: it is a virtue and attribute that is accorded by others, as it has been accorded to the heroes of Ukraine. Each of them individually. But, for the nation itself, Glory waits eagerly in the wings of this theatre of war, and has its ears cocked for the cue to make its entrance." (https://endlesschain.substack.com/p/national-anthems-as-propaganda).
I am a shameless pedlar of my own works, I'm sorry.
There is an irony to using the phrase "God bless you". At least whenever it's used at my address. I feel ashamed. I feel abashed, regretful that I didn't do more. The story of the good Samaritan is fiction, even in terms of the Bible. It's a parable. But, if this Samaritan had really existed, if he had really succoured to the poor devil by the roadside on his way to Jericho, if he had really dipped into his pocket to leave money with the host to look after the poor man until he was fit again, would the Samaritan have then continued on his way with a sense of (a) regret at the outlays he'd incurred? (b) self-satisfaction, that he was better than those who'd ignored the Samaritan, or (c) shame that he'd had to hurry on to Jericho and had not stayed to nurse the man himself?
Beautiful observation on how gratitude can bypass belief systems entirely. That moment with the couple searching for the battery shows something dunno if its divine or just deeply human, but either way it matters. What caught me was the part about swear words being first learned in any language while blessings go unsaid. I've seen this exact pattern in my own experiences abroad, always kinda defaulting to what repels rather than what connects. The idea that expressing a blessing requires no theology to be meaningful is something worth sitting with tbh.
Thank you. I'm grateful for your comment, for all comments, because they give me pause for thought, and that is why I blog. I blog to think, and to invite others to think, not to invite them to agree with me, but to think for themselves. So, again, thank you, for thinking.
Elsewhere, I have written on what I call "transactional forgiveness", and the present topic dovetails with, or crosses the hairs of, that previous essay (here, if you care: https://endlesschain.substack.com/p/on-conscientious-objection). It also sits in the same manner of thinking as my essay on Peter Singer (which is here: https://endlesschain.substack.com/p/peter-singer-luxury-is-immoral).
The common thread that links this and those two other articles is this: do I engage in an act of generosity towards another person (a) for their benefit? (b) for mine? or (c) for that of some third party/ies?
And, by the same token, *should* I engage in it for (a), (b) or (c)?
I shan't expound on the two referenced articles, they are there if you'd like to see how I think about these things, and I invite you to contribute to my thinking, which I should value. But as regards this one, I hope I can conclude that the answer is (a). And that is the reason why I say that I can't explain what I meant with the words 'God bless you'; the reason is that, absent the act of generosity that the old couple, and only the old couple, bestowed on me, the words take on a false tone. They ring hollow and pretentious and "acted". And yet they were spontaneous and sincerely intended. Now there's a thing.
Aside from the serious questions being asked as to the very ratione materiae of foundations (qua tax loopholes, qua machinations by the rich to corral the poor, qua soft power, &c.), what the present article starts to question is the rationale for benevolence, such as is articulated around an individual standing before an invited audience at a microphone and saying, "I am benevolent." It is in the same order of things as proclaiming "We are glorious", and I have written about that elsewhere as well:
"Glory cannot be willed. Nor can it be self-proclaimed: it is a virtue and attribute that is accorded by others, as it has been accorded to the heroes of Ukraine. Each of them individually. But, for the nation itself, Glory waits eagerly in the wings of this theatre of war, and has its ears cocked for the cue to make its entrance." (https://endlesschain.substack.com/p/national-anthems-as-propaganda).
I am a shameless pedlar of my own works, I'm sorry.
There is an irony to using the phrase "God bless you". At least whenever it's used at my address. I feel ashamed. I feel abashed, regretful that I didn't do more. The story of the good Samaritan is fiction, even in terms of the Bible. It's a parable. But, if this Samaritan had really existed, if he had really succoured to the poor devil by the roadside on his way to Jericho, if he had really dipped into his pocket to leave money with the host to look after the poor man until he was fit again, would the Samaritan have then continued on his way with a sense of (a) regret at the outlays he'd incurred? (b) self-satisfaction, that he was better than those who'd ignored the Samaritan, or (c) shame that he'd had to hurry on to Jericho and had not stayed to nurse the man himself?