So, we have a thread on Nonman Society, but this thread looks to investigate more of Nonman philosophy. That is, what they seemed to have believed and worshiped and why.
First some relevant quotes on these things:
"Before they began forgetting, the Nonmen had been obsessed with the mysteries of time, particularly with the way the present seemed to bear the past and the future within it.
Long-lived, they had worshipped Becoming... the bane of Men."
"You think Nil'giccas is something I have lost!" the Nonman King called down. "And therefore something that I can recover!"
"You forget," Cleric shouted, "that before the Nonman King's passing, I did not exist!"
"I can no more recover him than you can recover your mother's virgin womb."
"We are Many!" the Erratic roared. "We are legion! What you call your soul is nothing but a confusion, an inability! A plurality that cannot count the moments that divide it and so calls itself One."
"Only when memory is stripped away!" Cleric cried out, the glow fading from his eyes. "Only then is Being revealed as pure Becoming! Only when the past dies can we shrug aside the burden that is our Soul!"
"Only then does the Darkness sing untrammelled!" Cleric cried. "Only then!"
"And yet you seek memories!" the Wizard cried, at last delivered to tears.
"To be! Being is not a choice!"
"But you claim Being is deception!"
"Yes!"
"But that is nonsense! Madness!"
Again the Nonman King laughed.
"That is Becoming."
So, what are the key concepts here? First, these all seem to be related on the level of
identity. Not only that, but then how does the plurality of time relate? And the plurality of the soul?
Being, presented as the forbearer of Becoming, is implied to be contingent, or at least somewhat dependent upon memory. So, what does that mean? And what does memory have to do with distinction?
I would venture to speculate (since we have so little information) that Being is something of the narrative view we tend to have of our lives. That is, we take experience, each moment, as a sort of story, unfolding, to some conclusion. In this way, each moment has meaning, since the construct of I or The Self is composed of all these pieces of time. So, in this way, we have our connection, why th Nonmen were so interested in what FB correctly identified, in a conversation we had, something of superpositions and what Akka describes in the depiction of the wolf sculptures of Cil-Aujas as well. Time, divided into moments, nonetheless encapsulate each other and so, in a way, exist with each other. The present, enfolding the past within in, yet yielding to the future, another moment's present, and so on. Consider then, in this way, your present Self as a sponge, constantly absorbing what comes and holding it as the past. So, you (now) are the culmination of all the (past) you-who-was-but-now-is-more. In other words, your Self is generated by the layering, or encapsuling of you in past moments into the you in the present moment. So, in this way, I would guess that Being is the state of existing
within that narrative structure, the Self constructed to be of and with the story it tells. But Being is a deception though, right? In a way, yes, our stories are just that, stories. Based on fact, sure, but stories nonetheless, but importantly they are memory-driven stories. What is the story of things no one can remember? Nothing.
This recursively generated, past-driven Self, what happens to it when memory fails though? Who are you then, if you can't remember? This is where the transition happens from a past-driven attempt to Being (what you were) to Becoming (what you are). Becoming, the existence in the
present moving to the
future. Not what was I in the past and so where does that place me now as I move to the future, but rather, what am I now and what do I become from here? This is not so easy though. The mind seeks to fill the gap, where memory was. So, it endlessly seeks memory, even fleetingly, because Being is the Self's natural state, Becoming is simply it's broken down attempt to still function with failed ability. The Self wants to make a story, even if none is available.
Consider:
"He means that he's not a... a self... in the way you and I are selves. Now go to sleep."
"But how is that possible?"
"Because of memory. Memory is what binds us to what we are. Go to sleep."
So in summary, what is the difference between Being and Becoming? Being is the story that tells of who one
was and so is and will be. Becoming is the story that tells only who one is now, shorn from the past, and so is new again in every moment. A story written only in the present about the future. Simply, a story with only a present.
No surprise here, the Nonmen lost their past with their memories and lost the future with their women. So, the present is thier only recourse, the only place they can be sure they exist.
“There comes a point where all the old ways of making sense just slough away. You persist in your daily ablutions, your ritual discourse and habitual labour, but an irritation claims you, the suspicion that others conspire to mock and confuse. This is all that you feel …”
Massacres lined their passage, the toil of making dead.
“The Dolour itself is invisible … all you ever see are cracks of fear and incomprehension where before all was seamless … thoughtless … certain. Soon you dwell in perpetual outrage, but are too fearful to voice it, because even though you know everything is the same, you no longer trust those you have loved to agree, so spiteful they have become! Their concern becomes condescension. Their wariness becomes conspiracy.
“And so the Weal becomes the Dolour, so the Intact become the Erratic. Think on it, mortal King, the way melancholy is prone to make you cruel, impatient of weaknesses. Your soul slowly disassembles, fragments into disconnected traumas, losses, pains. A cowardly word. A lover’s betrayal. An infant’s last, laboured breath. And for the heroes among us, the heartbreak commensurate with their breathtaking glory …”
“And so the Weal becomes the Dolour, so the Intact become the Erratic. Think on it, mortal King, the way melancholy is prone to make you cruel, impatient of weaknesses. Your soul slowly disassembles, fragments into disconnected traumas, losses, pains. A cowardly word. A lover’s betrayal. An infant’s last, laboured breath. And for the heroes among us, the heartbreak commensurate with their breathtaking glory …”
Oinaral lowered his head as if at last conceding to some relentless weight.
“This is how you know that you stand before the least of my Race,” he voice raw. “The fact that I stand lucid and Intact before you.”
“Depravity, Son of Harweel. Only depravity retrieves the Wayward soul. No one knows why, but only horrors can render it whole, the commission of atrocities. You recover yourself for a slender interval, and you despair, crack for shame at the dishevelled beast you have become, and you rejoice. You live! The hunger for life burns far stronger in us than in Men, Son of Harweel. The suicides among us are miraculous, rare names in the Great Pit of Years …
Here we are presented with something different. Perhaps this isn't really even philosophy, but I present it here anyway because I believe it does dovetail in a way with what Nil'giccas relates to us about the plurality of time and the soul.
The idea of Nonman states of being seem to be presented as the following:
The Weal: This seems to be the "natural state" of Nonmen, before they were forgetting, weal meaning "that which is best for someone or something." So, the Nonmen, pre-immortatlity, had found ways, seemingly through ritual and such, to keep themselves in a well-being state. When memory failed though, as Oinaral says, the daily routines failed to keep their these practices intact (because thier meaning was lost in the past).
The Dolour: The state of having lost one's Self. Shorn of memory, the lost past speaks to a lost future. Everything has no meaning. Cruelty seeps in, since there is nothing but irritation in a meaningless existance.
So, The Weal begets the Intact and the Dolour begets the Erratics. But the question is, why does depavity seem to mend?
I think it goes back to how the soul, plural, as Nil'giccas likens it, is composed. I had an idea that the soul must, in some way, be like a ledger, since it can tell of your sin. So, in this way, perhaps new entries, new atrocities written into it spark a "reverse flow" where past entries come back. Of course, these are fleeting for Nonmen, since memories are simply unable to be held for long.
Thought anyone on this crack-pottery?