The Dudeism Forum

Quote from: Rev. R Lewis on August 25, 2011, 11:34:50 AM
I think the revolution is happening all the time. It never begins or ends, the whole cycle of the universe or whatever is the revolution. everybody on every "side" does what they think or believe they should be doing. I just want a world where its OK to do nothing and relax and learn things that i find interesting and have a rug that ties the room together and do a j. So by doing this I am already actively engaged in said revolution. If any dudes, or even non- dudes see my example and wish to join, even if only for a short period, then I know my work as a dudeist is being done.

That's the theory. Not sure where it leads but I also would like to think that it would lead us all to a nice beach community.

Quote from: revgms on August 25, 2011, 12:00:52 PM
My thinking on this is to just go where some dudely attitude can make a small relaxed difference, not for other dudes, but for those out there suffering from their own or other peoples undudeness.

Like I always wanted to go to disaster scenes and hand out coffee and provide chairs and blankets to the first responders. If anybody needs a place to chill and a warm beverage it is fireman or others dealing with some seriously undude shit. Stuff along those lines. Soup kitchens for the soul. Where people are stressed, that's where I think we should go, not with sermons or prayers or any of that bullshit, just some rugs hammocks and a quiet place to chill, we know how important that is, and it is what we have to share.

But I am just thinking aloud here, no where like trying to make a declaration or any such thing. I just loe this world and everybody in it, if I can help them find a little peace, then great.

That is Dude on the highest order.
Revgms if we had a pope my chimney would be spewing white smoke.
You are the Dude incarnate!

Yeah you say that now, you should see me before my morning coffee.

Revgms: I reckon it all comes down to empathy.
If you can see a little of yourself in other people then the giving is in some sense giving to yourself.

It's important, because I think altruism is at its core a very selfish act. I don't mean it's a bad thing, far from it, humans are essentially social animals & we need to interact with others of our species in a variety of ways. Just like I'm doing now. However, our giving outside the family/friend circle could be for a lot of people the sense of guilt for what you have & what others don't. Also your professional do-gooder tends to be a right smug bastard too & do it for the wrong reasons.

That's why I think if you can see something of yourself in others, then the guilt & hypocrisy disappears.

& that is truly the hardest part. A pure act of giving. Giving to give for no reward.

Alternatively, if I have one oat soda too many I can quite happily pass a twenty shilling note to some homeless bum lying in his own piss ...

Altruism is indeed a selfish act if one does it for a selfish reason. Its like you can't accumulate good karma through altruism if your goal is to accumulate good karma.

One of the key aspects I see thanks likes all Dudes?

We're all nice people.  We're all good, honest, friendly folks who like to get along and don't like to ruffle feathers.  But, surely, we don't mind smoothing them for those in need.

Kiva.com is a great example, the pooling of good will and community spirit for a worthy cause.  There's nothing undude about helping others, even if it involves a little effort.  But help comes from something small, like a smile, or a kind word, or a bit of pocket change you can spare someone who needs it more than you.  Providing a more proactive aid isn't against Dudeism either, surely.  We're not working and stressing and feeding the machine, we're easing and flowing and feeding the hungry (metaphorically or otherwise).

We're not into revolution with guns and shouting, but surely we're into a more intellectual revolution.  The concept of the "rebel shrug" is surely that.  Our most basic revolution is one of rebelling against conformity with independence and individualism and against the uptight ways of modern society by taking it easy and saying "sorry, I'm not interested" to stress.  Dudeism is, by its very ethos, a revolution against the mainstream.  It doesn't mean we couldn't take thing futher in a peaceful, laidback sense if we wanted to help something we believed in move forwards, like signing e-petitons and the like.

Great topic GMS, thanks for the bump (as I missed it in my long hiatus it seems).

Quote from: Reverend Dog on August 25, 2011, 12:26:08 PM
Revgms: I reckon it all comes down to empathy.
If you can see a little of yourself in other people then the giving is in some sense giving to yourself.

It's important, because I think altruism is at its core a very selfish act. I don't mean it's a bad thing, far from it, humans are essentially social animals & we need to interact with others of our species in a variety of ways. Just like I'm doing now. However, our giving outside the family/friend circle could be for a lot of people the sense of guilt for what you have & what others don't. Also your professional do-gooder tends to be a right smug bastard too & do it for the wrong reasons.

That's why I think if you can see something of yourself in others, then the guilt & hypocrisy disappears.

& that is truly the hardest part. A pure act of giving. Giving to give for no reward.

Alternatively, if I have one oat soda too many I can quite happily pass a twenty shilling note to some homeless bum lying in his own piss ...

A very Nietchean way of looking at things.(Friedrich Nietzsche.)  He believed that all human actions no matter how seeming altruistic are actually motivated by a "will to power".

Edited with a more related link
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/travis_denneson/power.html

Quote
Every action toward another individual stems from a deep-down desire to bring that person under one's power in one way or another. Whether a person is giving gifts, claiming to be in love with someone, giving someone praise, or physically harming someone, the psychological motive is the same: to exert one's will over others. This presupposition entails that all human beings are ultimately and exclusively egoistic by nature. Therefore, according to Nietzsche, there are no truly altruistic actions.

Of course I don't believe it and find it's a philosophical rabbit hole. Self annihilating.
Hence the term Nihilism.

Hi BikerDude: Now here's a funny thing ...

Freddy Nietszche was actually considered to be a gentle wandering human by all those who came across him.
He, in fact, earned the name The Little Saint.

His whole philosophy was not based on nihilism(which he saw as the legacy of Christianity) but on how to go BEYOND nihilism.
He rebelled, in his way, against what he saw as the hypocrisy of Christianity & the 2000 years of culture that entailed. He also spoke very highly of both the Buddha & Epicurus (two of our dudely predecessors). & he brought fatalism (or Fuck It, Let's Go Bowling) back into philosophy where it had been hidden since the ancient Greeks.

I have always found his books to be joyful & humourous with a good healthy splash of sarcasm & it has been a shame that FN influenced both good & misguided thinkers but that is the nature of controversial & free thought.

I 've been reading him for years & have never felt the urge to piss on anyone's rug out of spite.

Oh Yeah, the day before  he went completely doolally, Nietzsche witnessed the whipping of a horse at the other end of the Piazza Carlo Alberto in Turin, ran to the horse, threw his arms up around the horse?s neck to protect it & collapsed to the ground.

How's that for Dudliness!

Wow, I've learnt a little about olf Friedrich today, thanks guys

Of course, I'd say someone like St Francis of Assisi was a good dudely figure too, not that you mention the horse.  It must be a pretty calming thing to treat sick animals like that.  Much more calming and easy-going than treating humans, who mostly spend their time moaning and worrying, heh!

Everyone is altruistic because knowing you have done something good for someone else makes you feel good. Mother Teresa and St Francis did what they did because it made them feel good.

Nihilists do what they do for the same reasons, good people do good things and bad people do bad things because that's their nature and that's how they feel good.

As for the engaged Dudeism, well, if you exists you are engaged in something, and you minds something. Than what it is depends from you: some of us are engaged in themselves, some are engaged in themselves and others, some are engaged in themselves, others and the planet or whatever. We all think about ourselves, and that's natural, some think also about others and whatever.

I find cool those who lends a hand to those in need, because I know that when I've been in need those hands helped me a lot. Obviously you must be careful that your hand doesn't get bitten or that giving a hand you ends up giving an arm and a leg. There are assholes everywhere.

But I don't think that you can exist and not be engaged in something, especially when something good or bad arrives at your door, then you're forced to engage or leave if that's your answer, just my two cents dudes. 

Wow, some truly deep threads running through this...er...thread.  I'm sure I'm in over my head, but that never kept me out of the water before.

"Engaged Dudeism".  Interesting notion.  The first thing that came to my mind was the old saying, "Lead by example."  Easier said than done, since most people don't have the willingness to wrap their minds around Dudeism in the first place.  They're so busy trying to "keep up with the Joneses" that they can't understand why we're perfectly willing to let the Joneses win.

And then there are those who seek "enlightenment" by following that old-time religion in whatever form it takes.  I personally find most "organized" religions too limiting--they're about control rather than enlightenment, fear-based rather than love-based.  Keep your parishioners fearful and you'll keep 'em in line.  And, while you're at it, distract 'em with rituals and rules so they don't notice the lack of real spiritual guidance.  That might be okay for those younger souls who are looking for an entry point; me, I want the full experience in what the universe has to offer (or at least as much as my human brain can hold).

No, I believe the best way to "engage" is simply to "be".  You can't convince most people that their way of life is wrong and that your way of life is right any more than they could convince you the opposite is true (besides, that goes back to the control issues I wrote about above).  Be an influence.  Let them come to their own realizations in their own time.  Let them ask the questions before you tell them the answers.  Don't make it happen, let it happen.

just want to say i LOVE LOVE LOVE this whole thread, man! Awesome thoughts all around. abiding here in my own way,
hannah

Reverend Al you're certainly right. Nevertheless some kind of organization is needed if things have to go smoothly, especially as regards religion. Then, talking about ours, someone can decide if he wants to be inside the organization or go his own way. Everyone when alone can just reach a certain point, together with other like-minded compeers can go well beyond that point. And as you say leading by example is good if you have someone to lead, if you just stay on your own then you can just lead yourself. Which is cool, but affects positively only your life. That is, on a wider ground, little effective. But organization can have different levels, you can have a hourglass or a swiss fucking watch but you can't have any piece of the watch going its own way otherwise the plane sooner or later crashes into the mountain.

That is to say, do we want to go over being a bunch of movie fans and remain an internet club/religious joke/fake religion or we really want to have an effect on the real world? Because in the latter case we do need some kind of organization, some kind of tenets and so on. Well, we could also have the church to have two distinct trails so everyone would be happy. 

IMDO. 

True, and well written Andrea Da Fino.  To be honest, I hadn't considered any form of organized Dudeism other than what I've seen on this forum and the main Dudism site; as I stated, in over my head in the company of wiser and more learned compeers.

I must say, however, that in the brief time I've visited this forum there appears to be some dissention in the ranks, i.e. that Dudeism often means different things to different people and that sometimes even we who proclaim to lead a life of Dudism can't agree on what that means (admittedly, myself included).  Of course, that could be said of already established religions as well and they've existed for centuries, so perhaps true unity even among like-minded compeers is not possible.

Certainly we have the tenets handed down from Dudes Benjamin and Eutsey as a foundation, but are some Dudeists compromising that first draft?  Is The Abide Guide our manifesto, or merely a self-help book?  IMDO, any actual organization should come from the Dudes who started this or no rug will be able to tie the movement together.  Then again, I have faith that the universe will see to it that things unfold as they should, so Dudeism will happen if this is indeed the right time and place; whether or not it should be a religion...well, that's for a wiser feller than myself to decide.