The Manifesto of a Gnat

---

Preface by the author:

I set out to write a piece about irresponsible thought leadership/philosophers/orators etc. and behold… a manifesto. In a world so confused that up might as well be down and right might as well be left, I do not wish to confuse any reader. This “manifesto” is hot garbage. Think of it as an “ode to self” that is purposefully filled with trite and egotistical exaggerations. The most irritating gnat is a lovely genus that produ77ces a cacophony of self righteous “philosophizing” that brings about more confusion than clarity. That is the voice of this “manifesto.”

Responsible, Accidental/Foolish, & Irresponsible “Philosophers”

Allow me the privilege of breaking this down a bit further before diving right in (as I don’t find every irresponsible philosophical rabbit hole completely useless). This manifesto is satire and is meant to be taken lightly. It is written in jest and is meant to expose a lie. This lie is an egotistical lie that shows up in human communication. In exposing it, I hope it helps readers to identify it within all human communication, including their own... but there is no reason to throw poorly expressed philosophy into a blazing dumpster fire. The ego is a tricky thing. It gets in the way of Truth and brilliance by claiming victory with obnoxiously elaborate and dense hot air. Alas, all can be used for good and I quite appreciate a labyrinth. Perhaps Wisdom can be found on the other side. Perhaps in the mess of confusion, one can find humility.

Personally, I like to break down different “philosophical" approaches into three types.

1. Responsible Philosophers, 2. Accidental/Foolish Philosophers, and 3. Irresponsible Philosophers.

Responsible Philosophers:

The responsible philosopher reminds me a lot of an abstract artist who never reveals the intention/meaning behind their work. This artist is inviting those who consume their work to find the meaning within themselves. Just as this kind of artist evokes thought without forcing a defined perception, so does a responsible philosopher. The responsible philosopher brings forth thought while doing his or her best to not ignite bias or cause an imbalance. This type of philosopher invites you to the table, regardless of your understanding. Their writings don’t imply condescension. In fact, this kind of philosopher would blame themself if confusion was the sum of their life's work. They know that the Truth is simple... it’s getting to it that is difficult.

Accidental/Foolish Philosopher:

This type of philosopher usually isn’t even trying to be a philosopher. This type of philosopher is merely being totally transparent with their human experience and allowing others in on the journey. They will not be trying to convince their audience of the merit behind their limited understanding. No, instead, this type of philosopher will just invite you to walk around their circle of hell with them. The reason I still consider this as philosophy at all is because much can be learned from their transparency.

Irresponsible Philosopher:

Ah yes, what we’ve been waiting for. The irresponsible philosopher. You can tell this type because they spend a majority of their time being condescending, snarky, and egotistical. No wise man wants to hoard his wisdom. Wouldn’t the world be more tranquil with more wisdom? Well, that doesn’t seem to be the objective of the irresponsible philosopher. Most irresponsible philosophers are only irresponsible because they are not willing to show their weaknesses. In their philosophizing they tend to divert away from their lack of understanding, not by posing a question or expressing their shortsightedness (which helps the audience to grow by posing the same questions to themselves), but by trying to A. convince their audience of how their way of thinking, and the turmoil that comes with it, is correct and/or superior or B. by confusing their audience with dense academic language and/or by using circular speech patterns that are difficult to navigate.

But what makes these philosophers irresponsible instead of just being “foolish philosophers?” Well, the irresponsible philosopher shows their hand by trying to cram down their own confusion on you and then convince you that you’re the one who is confused. An irresponsible philosopher will drag you into their pit of hell and then ask you, “Gee, how did we get here?" An irresponsible philosopher knows what they’re doing, a foolish one does not. Foolish philosophers genuinely seek understanding while navigating the particular conundrums that torment them, and invite you as a copilot on their journey. An irresponsible philosopher will drag you into their torment and then blame your confusion on your lack of understanding, intelligence, wisdom, etc... and then proceed to give you an answer to a question that you didn't even ask in the first place. It’s a bait and switch method that is more easily spotted when you know what to look for.

A responsible philosopher will stir the mind in a way that may or may not create internal dissonance, but the aim is to facilitate growth within oneself. An irresponsible philosopher purposely triggers emotions to get a rise out of their audience, draws them in, then uses that position to refocus their audience on an idea they want to propose (and possibly purpose) instead of leaving the space for an individual to grow within themself. Luckily, you can still find wisdom by exploring this kind of agitating communication, but it is a dangerous labyrinth. Irresponsible philosophizing is an ode to self more than an attempt to help. Their "philosophy" is more like The Manifesto of a Gnat.

---

"The Manifesto of a Gnat"

What is real and what is not real?

Is not perception reality?

Oh yes, I am but a wee gnat but I can be as loud as a train engine in your ear.

Do you hear me?

I’m basically in your head already!

Humming in the symphony of every thought that comes across your mind.

Now you see the world as I see it.

I have infiltrated your lens and we now share a reality.

Isn’t that what reality is?

An agreed upon perception of the world?

That must be Truth. Right?

Our agreement makes it so.

Ughhh! Stop asking about Truth…

Pick a less annoying question and I will take you deep into the abyss!

How much louder do I have to buzz in your ear to make you realize that I am here and I am your reality!?

Hey! Stop swatting at me!

Don’t you realize how silly you are being? Ignoring reality?

I am here. I am reality...

And I have a hundred more questions you must find the answers to before you can even consider yourself wise, intelligent, or worthy.

It is obvious that you are weak and need my guidance.

Look how often you allow me to change your mind!

What would you be without me?

I bring you to deep places you've never gone before.

I help you think thoughts you'd never think without me.

You need me.

This world is an endless abyss of mystery.

How can you see that without me revealing it to you?

Confusion is the way in which you can measure clarity, is it not?

Stop trying to ignore that fact!

Can you understand clarity if you have not first been lost in the clouds of confusion?

Let me show you the way.

Let me take you into the fog.

Ugh, stop swatting at me!

Perhaps I'll just come back in a form of something more threatening next time.

Something that grabs your attention!

Something that you’ll take more seriously!

Yes! Yes! That’s what I’ll do since you don’t recognize the gravity of this situation, the superiority of this knowledge, or the unworthiness of your status.

Yes! Fear always demands focus! A threatening foe commands immediate respect!

Yes! I'll return as something that will make you realize the mistake you make by ignoring me!

Yes! Perhaps I'll return as a snake.

BZZZZzzzz---sssssSSSSS

---

~fin~

---

Was this article helpful? Ridiculous? Help us out:) Leave a comment, click the heart, follow us @RunningInHighHeelsPodcast, find us on iHeartRadio, and share with your friends. xo ~RHH