been watching a lot of docs with wife, who is, nobly, limited in energy due to being with child. watched one about marriage recently where a guy just interviewed people about the concept of marriage. this was a fascinating case study in what marriage "is" without religion. [..]
in this documentary, they ask all these different people what marriage is. and they're giving all these weird but slightly wholesome answers. but no one mentions anything supraphysical. its all very pleasant, but you can feel there is something missing, and it never comes.
it occurred to me that without any knowledge of God's existence woven into the situation, marriage really is just a piece of paper. i suppose thats obvious, its kind of a cultural talking point i guess, but theres "the idea" and then there is seeing it actually played out, right.
so you see all these people talking about why they got married and there is this weird subtext of, "well i guess thats just what you do" or, they're appealing to the legal aspect, or, it seemed like some of them didn't even know why they did it, despite enjoying it.
most, if forced to define marriage, appealed to the legal aspect. i think this is demonstrably not what it is, right. we can do a thought experiment and imagine, if the state somehow made marriage illegal tomorrow, i would still marry my wife. so its not conditional on the state.
one theological term i picked up in my studies which is known and used but i think is not really understood in an intuitive sense by most people is the term sacrament. marriage is a sacrament. literally, its on most lists of sacraments, for example, the catholic 7 sacraments:
if you look up what a sacrament is you'll often get a kind of technical definition, naturally, as those defining it want to be very specific and not accidentally mislead people. that makes sense. usually its something like, a sign of inward grace instituted for our sanctification
but theres a lot of terms in there that most people operating on the folk religion (ie the not huge book academic theological) level probably couldnt just define off the cuff, like what specifically is inward grace, and you could write a whole book on what sanctification is.
one casual definition i picked up from someone that i like (im just some random guy research this stuff yourself) is that sacraments are things God gives us to be close to him. speaking totally casually and without worrying about technical language or cutting things too finely...
theres stuff going in the direction from us to God, like prayers, but theres also stuff going in the other direction, from God to us. God gives us some "official things" that are kind of like tools for us to be closer to him. marriage is one of those things. in my view.
so thats a very man on the ground non technical understanding of it, but that perfectly clarifies the whole thing. it answers all the questions, why get married, what marriage is, what it does, what its for, it makes everything perfectly clear so even a child could understand.
it just struck me as interesting watching all these people who when pressed, actually fully appealed to and defined marriage as something totally mundane and secular. it reminded me of that critique teenagers often seem to spontaneously generate about marriage.
that being, why do i need a piece of paper forcing someone to be with me? if i want to be with someone, we can just be together. interestingly, i had just seen that some cultural celebrity had said that exact thing in a magazine and it was making the rounds before watching this.
and it formed this whole cohesive picture in my mind because i realized that without appealing to anything divine or within the sphere of divinity, you actually cant really answer that question. its a valid critique in that worldview. i guess there are a few legal or tax reasons.
i dont often dig into the nuts + bolts of totally normal peoples worldviews anymore (actually i do, a lot, but i only do it at a distance now), so it was interesting accidentally getting a window into people who never really thought about it trying to explain why they got married
theres a jump here into the fact that most people, i think, intuitively partake of the theological framework of the universe because that [is] how things are and its encoded into them. "why are you doing that?". "uh idk, its just what im supposed to do i guess". well, thats true.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with owen cyclops

owen cyclops Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @owenbroadcast

5 Jul
idk what to do with this information but i need u to know that at the first ecumenical council, at nicea, first big christian meeting, ever, this is it, deciding what christianity is + what it will be, the first canon, the first thing they wrote down, says: dont cut your dick off
as we have an interest in being pedantic and galaxy brained, yes, im aware that you could technically say that the first council was the council of jerusalem in the book of acts but [guess what] that was also about cutting your dick. im not even being disrespectful. this is real.
once again a simple foray into history has pressed our face against the glass that conceals “the mysteries”
Read 5 tweets
5 Jul
the term 'firemen' is the best example of everyone intuitively understanding symbolism. they arent "fire men": they oppose fire. theyre antifiremen or really, "water men". yet "anti" sounds negative and fire has a more fitting set of signifiers than water, so we call them firemen
"fire" has the set of symbolic signifiers that we associate with the so called fire man. it is powerful, moves swiftly, has a connotation of imminent danger, its masculine, whereas water has a set of signifiers that would be totally inappropriate - its calm, cool, and nourishing.
in a sense this is all abstract and supraphysical, yet we all intuitively understand this because thats how we're hardwired (semiotic universe), so even though they bring water and deal in water we named them after the thing they actually oppose, theyre obviously "fire men".
Read 4 tweets
4 Jul
i refuse to believe that any straight man has ever complained about this

i legit feel like im looking into an alternate reality when i see intrafemale beauty standards
do women know how straight men see the women theyre paired with

shirt: looks great
dress: looks great
tunic thing: looks great
pajamas: looks great
intermediary clothing items like shirt-dress that we dont know what its called: looks great

we’re just excited to be here
i am both respecting and uplifting women, on the fourth of july
Read 4 tweets
4 Jul
theres an unintuitive inverse relationship between art vibe that the society wants + general social vibe. when things are the worst people want to see something positive. if you just lived through ww2 and saw a thousand dead bodies you dont want to see a drawing of a dead body.
it polarizes within individual artists, some naturally make stuff about their situation, like kathe kollowitz for example, while some take on this inverse effect i described above. but i do feel that in general, socially, for the masses, what i described is the case.
if i was locked in prison for life with my friend and i could show him one picture would i draw a bleak dark picture of the prison we were stuck in? personally i would not, probably.
Read 6 tweets
3 Jul
lets look at a tibetan buddhist embryology chart

i dont know a ton about it but have been looking into (normal non esoteric) fetal development stuff recently and its pretty interesting.
this is a newer painting but im going to bump up the contrast here a little so we can see it more clearly. tibetan medical teachings are supposedly derived from this buddha called the medicine buddha, who is blue. fittingly, he's the first thing in the picture. go figure.
theres a text called the blue beryl that is attributed to him that is basically one of or the foundation for tibetan medical teachings. this is a cool little node of information because while i am obviously not buddhist the medical aspect of this world is very interesting.
Read 25 tweets
3 Jul
lots of people posting regarding realizations about other peoples cognitive differences and things like that. obviously it opens you up to accusations of thinking youre a galaxy brain urself or something but its something i have thought a lot about and i have one or two anecdotes
all of this dovetails with a certain theory of spirituality and esoterica that i have outlined at the start of one of the painting shows i did about egyptian stuff. ill pull it up later but for me its not innately negative, people are just different. i mean obviously, right.
my first real experience with hitting “a wall” that i couldnt get over with someone was in highschool. i think a hidden aspect of the larger discussion here is that a lot of people are completely insulated from spending extended periods of time with non-filtered groups of people.
Read 21 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(