The Douchebag Bible (11 page)

that best rewards us. We will actively and consciously defy

what we know to be true in order to obtain our ideal. But what,

if anything, do we know to be true? Well, according to

Descartes, we only truly know in the existence of ourselves as

a conscious stream of thought. Sadly, it is the true nature of

this thought stream that is so often raped and mutilated by

institutions such as religion, politics and the education system.

But if logic is flawed, how is one supposed to advance an

argument?

It is a question that is probably bubbling in your mind

right now. The answer is simple enough—one can't.

So then, why bother to attack logic in the first place?

Because far too many people have forgotten that logic

can be imperfect. It should seem obvious, when there are so

many contradicting ideas out there, but it has become so

blatant and common that it is rarely ever perceived anymore.

I want all who read this to realize that logic is not natural law,

and we have no standardized system of it. The truth is that

logic is a blunt force instrument, used as a weapon or a shield

for institutions that have no true merit.

Religion-
Pious logic is the most dangerous and flawed

of all the forms of logic. It is logic that only makes sense if one

is willing to blindly accept the unprovable as fact. In the case

of Christianity, all that is required is a belief in God. Christian

logic states that God created the universe and knows and sees

all things. Therefore, his opinions are automatic facts. His

opinions, as well as his guidelines for living, are all collected

in a book entitled
The Holy Bible
. So, it can be logically

assumed that
The Bible
is always right and any other logic is

just the flawed logic of man. This only works, however, if you

believe in God. But when you try to rationalize the existence

of God, you end up with the following paradox: Christians

believe in God because
The Bible
told them to, and they believe

in
The Bible
because God told them to. Atheists like myself are

all too familiar with this circular reasoning.

Politics-
Political logic is too often based upon

something that is initially just propaganda. A clever politician

knows how to confuse even the most intelligent of people,

simply by hiding the lack of substance behind a wall of

euphemous logic. All the rationality in the world means

nothing if it is built upon a foundation of nothingness.

Advertising-
If you drink beer, beautiful women will

want to have sex with you. If you have any problem spotting

the flaw in that logic, then you need to go take some cyanide,

because you're a waste of existence.

Law-
Justice System logic is reliant on the infallibility

of the justice system. That is all the justification they feel they

need. Any logic beyond that point is simply for decorative

purposes. Example: prostitution is illegal, but as comedian

George Carlin has often pointed out, it makes little sense for

there to be a law against selling a thing which is legal to give

away. Notice a trend? Sound reasoning is often corrupted by

extremely illogical suppositions at the foundational level. I

suggest that you be extremely careful when considering a new

idea. Always check the building material used for the

foundation on which any rationale is based. But be wary, for

distortions don't always occur at the foundation.

KEEP IN MIND-
Even though I try to base all my logic

on fact (or at least well thought out opinion), I am human, and

just as liable to make an error in rationality as anyone. Do not

consider anything I say through out the course of this book as

being anything more than one man's thoughts and ideas. I

hope that my ideas will feed your own, just as all of your ideas

have fed mine. We must share knowledge and opinion with one

another for as long as we are able. We may get our Nietzschian

Ubermensche yet. It could be you.

The God(dess) speaks

Say this unto the world of man.

This is the word of the god(dess) called dull throbbing

as transcribed by the servant of reality and unreality—which

are one in the same—Terroja.

I have given him his name to celebrate his significance

and expose naked his irrelevance.

He is a living martyr . . . thus, he is a contradiction.

Thus, an apt (anti)prophet for this age.

I do not exist. I am a figment of his imagination.

I exist. I am an imagination of his universe, which has

an effect upon this larger universe—the mind of the one true

God.

But let us not concern ourselves with Him. He is too

important to be relevant. He is concerned with His own gods,

and they with theirs.

Acknowledge the limitations of infinity.

Embrace the vastness of personal destiny.

An endless field of reflection, as a man standing

between two giant mirrors will see an army of clones of

himself—so are the gods of mortals. Every god is a mortal.

Every mortal is a god.

The hierarchy is endless. Thus, position is irrelevant.

You are the slave to, and master of, infinity.

Do not fear or fret if you fail to grasp this concept.

Understanding is given sparingly.

Do not shun what your mind does not grasp. Perhaps

heart or soul will be quicker to understand.

Mind=The universe. Your personal dull throbbing. I am

mind.

Heart=If your mind is the universe, then your heart is

the eye that views it and interprets its meaning.

Soul=Your soul is a string. Strings hold all things.

How can it be known that this is truth? It cannot. But

the truth is what it wants to be to who wants it to be.

You demand concrete. Yet, you are given paper mache.

But in building a statue, which would you prefer?

If you seek ease, you will demand the paper mache.

If you seek longevity, you will demand the concrete.

Concrete statues crumble. You demand metal.

Metal will rust.

Nothing is eternal, save for existence itself, growing and

changing.

"Sophistry!" you say. I try to sell you the flawed.

Yes and no. I give you what you want. And that is the

only truth that you will ever accept.

How can you discriminate when you only accept what

sounds good to you?

The rational man says, "I do not believe this."

The rational man ignores a heart and soul that beg

aloud in his mind for him to accept the burden of true

multireality—which is both reality and unreality. Or, if you

prefer, perception and imagination.

Thus, he that embraces only concretions is no more

rational than he who embraces only abstractions.

Wisdom lies not in choosing one or the other, but in

recognizing the place of both.