It is truly depressing and pathetic that murder trials have become so heavily reliant on “motivation” as the single most important determinant for a verdict. Did he kill her on accident, or on purpose? Was it spontaneous, or planned? Was he mentally ill, or sane?
When motivation is a consideration in the courtroom, and even more so when it is the most crucial consideration, the courtroom is reduced to a competition of actors, with the prosecution team claiming the defendant is an evil, cruel, hateful criminal that willfully planned out the brutal murder, and the defense team insisting that the defendant was a poor victim of circumstance, wrong place at the wrong time, unable to adapt properly to a traumatic situation, and often some kind of appeal to mental illness or extenuating circumstances.
Both sides exaggerate and distort the facts, both sides are heavily biased towards their interpretation of the events, but most crucially, neither of them have any idea what the motivations of the defendant really were, nor does the defendant necessarily even understand his own motivations. It’s all an act, the theatrical portrayal of hypothetical scenarios masquerading as evidence-backed facts. This kind of nonsense distorts the justice system more than any other factor. Who can put on the most convincing performance becomes the deciding factor of a verdict, with the facts of the matter being relegated to a secondary concern.
But even setting aside the evidence and the theatre, there’s another, perhaps bigger problem that is not even recognized as a problem: that killing is killing, rape is rape, theft is theft, suffering is suffering, regardless of the motivations. The concern with the motivation of the one committing the crime, their character, condition, abilities/disabilities, etc., is considered a core determinant of any judgments on whether they were justified in committing the crimes they did.
If a man steals for his children (or claims to), all of a sudden we sympathize with him. If a neighborhood watchman kills a young man because he feels threatened by him, all of a sudden we defend him and say “he had a right to kill him because of a credible threat to his life”. We emotionally identify either with the victim or the perpetrator in this fashion, believing that somehow, justice is contingent on motivation. Forget that we don’t know their motivations, and are just speculating based on hypothetical scenarios. Forget that regardless of his motivation, The store manager still took losses, and Trayvon Martin is still dead. They had their hearts in the right place, right?
You know what, suppose I agree with you. That would mean that, in all probability, all the major genocides, the Holocaust, not to mention virtually all wars in the world, were justified. Hitler wanted to save the German nation from the Jews and communists, and build a homeland and future for the German people. Stalin wanted to give Russia a great legacy that the world would never forget. Mao wanted to transform China into the most productive and ideal civilization. Even serial killers had good intentions, with Charles Manson wanting to wake up the world to how evil it had become, and Bundy wanting to fully savor the experience of the anatomy of beautiful young women.
There isn’t a single evil or wretched person out there who didn’t have some kind of good intentions, or tried to do the right thing, or wasn’t somehow the victim of circumstances, mentally ill, maladaptive, “at the wrong place at the wrong time”, traumatized, etc. We can prescribe a motivation to vindicate any crime in the book, which really goes to show how absurd it is that courts still place so much value in such a speculative and unreliable criterion. Introspection hasn’t been considered a real science for over a century now, so why does the law continue to put it on a pedestal. We’re not mind readers, we’re not fortune tellers, and even if we were, it doesn’t make the raped any less traumatized, the burglarized any less poor, or the deceased any less dead.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/oscar-pistorius-murder-trial-recap-3802367
Never Enough Time
While there are many obstacles to success in life, never have I had to deal with one more challenging than time. There’s never enough time to do what I need, much less what I want to do in life. There’s got to be hundreds of things that I could be doing right now, yet I have to choose among that myriad of opportunities a select few, and I can never be satisfied with my choices regardless of what they are. No matter what, I need to sacrifice something, which is particularly frustrating because I don’t want to give up anything.
Time management helps, and establishing clear priorities and structure are good as well. But I know that such an approach has the bittersweet side-effect of limiting what I am able to do, in order to more effectively do a few things excellently. If I were to constrain myself to a few things, like say 5-10, and discipline myself to focus only on these tasks, I would likely get a lot more accomplished that I have so far. But at the same time, I know I’m going to feel twinges of regret as I realize just how much opportunities I gave up to fully realize a select few.
I know that to be successful, it is absolutely for me to give up the plethora of daily activities I indulge myself in to properly optimize my time to truly excel in everything I do. But, being unwilling to give up anything to excel in life, I have compromised on everything, becoming a “jack of all trades, master of none”. This is an even more unsavory situation, since for all my good intentions, my unwillingness to commit to anything in life has produced a well-rounded mediocrity.
Perhaps even a mediocre life by my standards is a life of excellence by the standards of many. But I know better than to judge the quality of my life by comparing it to others- we each have our own individual potential, and it is our responsibility to live life to the fullest. For me to settle for individual mediocrity merely because the rest of the world deems such a life to be “good enough” is not only a waste of potential, but a self-betrayal. I can be so much more than this, yet I am not. This is a tragedy, and cannot be justifiably tolerated.
This may well be just an empty promise, a sincere but unrealistic resolve to correct chronic flaws in my character, thereby finally living life to my potential. But even if such a commitment has no substance in my present state, I am confident that as I continue to mature and build character, it won’t be too long before I am the person I need to be to finally follow-through and realize the potential I have been blessed to be born with!
On The Merits of Responsible Living
As most people who know me realize, I have a strong distaste for responsibility. But it’s not as though I hate responsibility or don’t see any merit to it, it’s more an issue of freedom- you see, I’ve found that the more responsible I become with my life, the more limited I become with what I can do with it. I hate being limited, so I tend to avoid responsibility as if it were a great evil, because up until now, I’ve seen the “responsible life” as the death of my youth, vitality, and individual freedom. So long as I’m irresponsible, I’m not tied down to any particular direction, and I’m not limited to any given values or priorities. I can do what I want freely and without limitation or structure.
But while this might work well for one who has not found values to embrace, people to love, a future to build on, and indeed I met this criteria perfectly for most of my life, I have come to a point where I have found someone to love and live for, I must embrace the values necessary for her to be happy, and for us to be happy together- and for us to be together, it is necessary to forge a future for us, and build on that foundation until our happiness is complete.
The principle merits of responsible living deal with love, and with building relationships, families, futures, societies on. Whereas freedom is necessary for creativity to spring forth, responsibility is necessary for what is created to be appreciated. It’s one thing to create something wonderful, beautiful, amazing– but to make that something productive, appreciable, real— it requires some degree of responsibility, in order that mere expression can be honed and refined into art. Responsibility is the proactive structuring, standardizing, planning, and ritualizing of reality that makes self-actualization possible.
Normally, I tend to do and say everything without thinking, wishing to communicate my raw, unfiltered self without being biased by the real or perceived consequences or my words and actions. While this has worked well when I had nothing and no one to live for, It has become increasingly important (to my surprise) as I find my unfiltered expression threatening the health of my relationships, and particularly that of my love. To preserve the well-being of the values and people I care for, Carefully deciding what to say, how to say it, and who to say it to, must become an important consideration for me.
Prior to my engagement to be married, it didn’t matter how much money I made, or the stability of my income, because I knew I would always find a way to subsist regardless. I’ve been homeless, and lived off of food bank food and soup kitchens, and know how to survive regardless of the circumstances. But now that I have a future wife to support and care for, and ensure her happiness and well-being, things have become a lot more complicated. In the interests of our life together, I need to become financially responsible, get a stable job with enough income for us to live comfortably, learn to budget money reasonably and consistently, and invest my income conservatively and efficiently.
Whereas before I was content with a rather random lifestyle, only doing hygiene, cleaning my room, or caring about my dress when I felt like it, I have recently realized how vital it is for me to live my daily life structured, clean, and disciplined. In order to ensure a healthy equilibrium for our married life, and particularly for our future kids, it is necessary for me to live life more “civilized” and with more self-respect than I’m accustomed to.
Finally, responsibility has become essential for me because without it, I would take the people I love for granted, even the one I love most. When life is a chaotic mess of liberation, sure there’s a lot of options to choose from, and everything feels so much more colorful, open-ended and free, but it’s difficult to focus and appreciate any of it, or to realize the things and people you care about most. When you limit your range of focus through responsible living, it allows you to zero in on the things, people, and values that really matter to you- that’s the real beauty of responsibility!
Spirituality vs. Religion: The Difference is Bigger Than You Think
I criticize religion in general, because it is a system of servitude, either willful (conversion), through family upbringing (indoctrination), or cultural (brainwashing). Moral values and spiritual pathways/beliefs are a wonderful thing, religion is a hateful system that turns wonderful truths into terrible perversions of those truths, exploited by those in power to control the masses.
That being said, even though I might find religion to be an awful, disgusting thing, I respect the opinions of those that adhere to it, and seek to achieve an understanding with them despite any barriers of belief there might be between us.
I think it is good for one to be convicted in their spiritual beliefs/values/etc., what I am against (and thus criticize) is the forced consolidation of beliefs in the form of religion, which is at the core the statism of spirituality. Those who are supportive of libertarian values should understand my disgust of religious institutions on that basis alone.
I understand peoples’ choice to consolidate their beliefs into a larger body of like-minded individuals; so long as they don’t mind the dogma, doctrine, and patriarchy it comes with. But I believe that one should not have to conform to a religion to benefit from the spirituality/relationships/etc. it entails, not any more than one should have to go to college to gain the recognition of being well-educated.
However, such an idealistic way of thinking isn’t particularly practical in an institution-driven world, so I can understand why conformance to religion is natural for so many people.
Debating the motivations and moral justifications of war, and its relationship to society and human nature
(Extracted from a debate thread with Angel Suri)
My original post (for context):
I regularly post anti-war content on Facebook, Google+, twitter, and my blogs, I am always talking to my friends and family about how stupid and unjustified the wars American, Israel, and Palestinian countries are fighting are, and I sign petitions and support politicians committed to bring an end to America’s policing the world and building this unsustainable American empire.
I’m a diehard pacifist and debate with people all the time about the problems with war, and convince people all the time that after stripping away all the FUD and propaganda, all of these wars we’re fight are completely unjustifiable.
What have YOU done to oppose the warmongering in America and in the world?
Opening comments by Angel Suri:
LIKE DRUGS AND GAMBLING: War gives men a justifiable excuse to commit suicide or practice aggression… War is the seeking of pleasure or the justification of an ideal… War like all human experience has a value in that it seeks an end or adds meaning for it has both effect and value to those who engage in it and is seen as absurd by those who abstain… Why would you deny man his natural inclination to kill and die and seek pleasure or ideals in a pragmatic way? It is the way he seeks these things that you object to not that a man or a collection of men seek these things… Would you have us all play chess or some other form of competition and power satiating substitutes for pleasure in risk? Your ideals have no greater value than that of another man or collection of men. Your distaste is all you speak of, a contrary ideal, a different collection of men who share your proclivity for peace. Peace has value only insomuch that it allows another war to break out eventually. Peace is a respite for the men of war to show the men of peace that virility in life can still be had and that the will to power is not an effete thing to be hidden away through living a life of the mind alone. War is evil to the pacifist because it is foreign to their nature and cannot be understood as “just something else to do to pass the time.” Pass the time in judgement against or pick up a gun or a needle or a set of dice, but do not spend time in meaningless argumentation about human nature.
War is sanctioned through cooperation of the many (or the powerful few) who agree and not some random act by some lunatic without social value. The only similarity to what you propose is the component of violence and benefit. Otherwise several lunatics are required to start and enact a war. some semblance of sanity is needed to do this successfully. i speak of sane things that by a pacifist is seen as insane ideology. But then again i think a man taking vows of silence and renouncing all pleasure for a life of contemplation is equally insane as what you propose for they accomplish the same thing. You do not need to value war, only understand that there are those that do, and that you have no right or any moral justification to value peace over war where they are concerned. For there are many moralities but there is no Morality. in other words people are going to do whatever the hell they want because they can and there’s not a damned thing you can do to stop them from using their power.
That isn’t to say I think war is ever justified (it isn’t), but this is the best justification I have been able to come up with, as it is rational and universal. The problem of course, is that it involves slaughtering millions to satisfy one’s own Ego, which is by definition psychopathic. So yes, there is technically a rational motivation for war, but there is no *morally* justifiable reason for war, other than perhaps self-righteous causes, which are in reality perversions of religious values and moral virtues.
You also speak as if men are animals who are slaves to their cravings, that they cannot help but desire violence, death, conflict, and vice. While this is the case with many men, I believe most men have transcended these cravings, or at least learned to control them. Society would not function if we could not control our cravings and destructive desires, after all. So the fact that society continues to function, despite mankind’s destructive desires, is the biggest evidence that no, there is no need for such destructive activities; war is not justified anymore than violence or murder is justified in mainstream society.
The argument that there can only be peace if there is war is an interesting one, but about as rationally sound as saying “there is only more trees cut down if there is more trees standing. You can see the flaw clearly in that analogy- while peace may only be *appreciated* by man if there is *some* war by which to contrast it, there is no necessity for there to be a great deal of war, as there is now. As war is a destructive and savage activity, it should be avoided whenever possible, and treated only as a last resort to *save* lives (i.e. the Holocaust).
“Would you have us all play chess or some other form of competition and power satiating substitutes for pleasure in risk?”
If it meant the bloodshed would stop/be decreased, or that conflict and killing would be minimized? of course I would, and any decent person would agree with me. Incidentally, we have plenty of video games and nonlethal sports that permit people to vent their destructive desires, so there’s no real excuse for men to need to *actually* kill their fellow man just to satisfy their destructive drives.
“do not spend time in meaningless argumentation about human nature.” How it is meaningless? These are very important issues to address, and the amount of war in the world has decreased a great deal due to efforts by people like myself in informing the public, drawing attention to these issues, and providing solutions to neutralize the causes of war and its underlying drives.
“Otherwise several lunatics are required to start and enact a war. some semblance of sanity is needed to do this successfully. ” No actually, there are many mental disorders in which people are warlike and violent, and very intelligent and clever in their planning of things, even for very long term goals, and they are very rational in their motivations. The most common of these mental illnesses are psychopathy and sociopathy. So on the contrary, warmongering by lunatic elites is very possible, and actually the most plausible reason for why there is so much war in the world despite the level of technology and civilization the world has attained.
“you have no right or any moral justification to value peace over war where they are concerned. For there are many moralities but there is no Morality”
On the contrary, that there are many moralities is precisely why I have a right to my own moral justification to value peace over war. values are how we interpret reality- I interpret reality according to the desires of my heart.
Man is aggressive and needs an outlet for this tendency and so he sanctions war as the way because football, boxing, and mma just don’t do it for some. All the discussion in the world can’t stop a man from justifying whatever activity he thinks will benefit him. We are perverse by nature at times. War is a perverse pleasure. So men will justify perversity. It’s a societal thing as old as society itself. We are Sparta… It’s an ideology rich in history and tradition. It is a gruesome thing this humanity. Would we prefer it were otherwise if we could play God? Sure why not have world peace instead? But we are in fact doing as biology and society have urged… and we like the urge… not me per se… for of course we can resist our urges and go contrary to our tendencies… or we could allow some yahoos to get together and kill each other to satisfy their urges instead (i only blow things up with my mind and avoid physical combat, but I try to justify the human experience whenever possible so that life doesn’t seem so absurd)
I don’t know why you think war is a societal thing (especially considering that the more advanced a civilization is, the less war and conflict they tend to have), though even in advanced civilizations, an immature society has more difficulty resisting its perverse impulses, so war, conflict, and other perversions continue to run rampant. To eliminate these vices, we need to build a more mature and virtuous society.
“But we are in fact doing as biology and society have urged” other than this being the appeal to nature fallacy (seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature) society is inherently at odds with biology, as evidenced by the fact that despite the biological drive to do so, we are not raping, pillaging, killing, and taking whatever we want. We live civilized, despite our biologically animalistic nature.
We certainly can do as you suggest and become more civilized… but yet some choose war… and not because we are uneducated about it. and how is war not a societal thing? it is clear a societal function…
My Views About the Space-Time Continuum, and the Relationship Between Time and Existence
Time does exist, otherwise man could not have invented a means to measure time. But the measurement of time isn’t real- seconds, minutes, years, days– they might be based on the cycles of the earth, sun, moon, etc.– but they don’t have any real existence. When I use the word ‘time’, it is in the nonlinear sense. Time is basically a collection of data points that divide the patterns of the universe into different states of emanation.
Change can be appreciated through time, because when you “jump” to a different data point (a “moment”, what I refer to as a “ripple”), then you appreciate something has changed. Time exists outside of change; even if there was no change, there would still be time, but time guarantees there will be change, by providing the data points by which to emanate too. If you are water, and there are holes in the ground to flow through, do you think that there is anything stopping you from “changing” by flowing into that hole (data point).
Time doesn’t exist “in reality”, because existence came about as a byproduct of time and space synthesizing as creation. Time doesn’t choose what it exists for; rather, time is a bunch of holes in the void that matter flows through. When matter flows through time, creation manifests. In this way, time both exists and doesn’t exist.
Here is an example of non-linear time-space: the numbered-dots are “time” (data-points), and the empty pockets of space (represented by the yellow line grid) are “space”.
Dominance vs. Submission: What’s The Difference?
Confused about the difference between dominance and submission when it comes to kissing/sex? Here’s the breakdown:
Dominance is:
1. Initiating the expression (kissing/touching/sex)
2. Usually being on top/above the submissive
3. Doing most of the “work”
4. In charge of deciding what positions to do
5. Is their responsibility to use their power to pleasure the submissive
6. They require the most trust in sex, because they have power whereas the submissive is vulnerable, and having to rely on the dominant to do almost everything, and to not hurt them or displeasure them
Submissive is:
1. Receiving/appreciating the expression (kissing back/touching back/enjoying the sex)
2. Usually being on bottom/below the submissive
3. Is doing almost nothing, just relaxing and enjoying the experience
4. Doesn’t make any of the decisions, relies on the dominant to decide everything in the expression for them
5. Is their responsibility to be responsive in their bodies, and show and tell the dominant what they like and what is pleasurable to them, to communicate their sexual needs, and to suggest things
6. They must trust the dominant one completely, because they are giving all the power to the dominant, leaving them completely vulnerable, trusting them to pleasure them and do what they like, and not hurt them
Now you know!
Debunking the “Reality is Evil, Therefore God Doesn’t Exist” Claim
1. God is not bound to any moral code, rather, he is the moral code- meaning that because God is justice, everything he says, does, believes, and creates, is right, just, good and flawless.
2. God created us, and as we are created in the image of perfection, we inherit the goodness of God. So as the offspring of God, we cannot be evil in the eyes of God, and as he is the standard of good, we are good indeed.
3. Even if we were good or evil, it would be impossible for us to definitely determine was is good and what is evil, as we are not God, but merely his offspring. So any notions we have about what is right, wrong, good, evil, good, bad, just, wicked– these are human measures of morality, and do not hold and real moral value, cosmically speaking.
4. Human standards of morality, ethics, virtue, value, norms, etc….are constructs of society, culture, etc.– conditioned into our thinking in order to promote moral solidarity, and are based not on what is definitively known to by right or wrong, but on what the establishment determines, usually on a hierarchial basis (individual, family, workplace, boss; neighborhood, law enforcement, council, mayor, board; deacon, priest, pope; union leadership, special interests, Obama; grassroots coordinators, Tea Party, Sarah Palin….you get the point). This all has nothing to do with God, of course. For the most part, our moral conditioning is determined entirely by a complex bureaucracy of people using morality as a tool to exchange power.
5. As history is our witness, nearly every measure of right and wrong has changed through the evolutionary shifts of culture, and adaptations to accommodate certain core needs.
Throughout history, many things we consider “evil” today- blood feuds, human sacrifice, animal/child abuse, wife beating, slavery, prejudice, racism, intellectual property theft, trespassing, genocide, religious crusades, raping and pillaging, piracy, misogyny, persecution, gladiators cannibalism…..the list goes on and on– all of these things were throughout history considered either necessary or morally acceptable in major cultures, and all of them are considered morally acceptable in some cultures even to this day (even human sacrifice).
Conversely, many things we consider morally acceptable today (homosexuality, promiscuous sex, birth control, raising families outside marriage, female leaders, professional women, blacks in power, sexuality, violence, and illegal drugs in film and television, Christianity, monotheism, industrialization, hypnotism, dating, expatriatism, draft-dodging, writing (if you weren’t an authorized scribe), reading the Bible (if you’re not a church official), falling in love (with someone who wasn’t pre-chosen by your parents), a woman speaking (if she isn’t spoken first to), taking a different occupation than your family, talking to people from a different social class than you, etc. — as you know, none of these things are considered “evil” in mainstream cultures.
6. For the most part, morality is truly a luxury- In an impoverished city, being a good person is a good way to get robbed, bullied, and shot. In many parts of Africa, there is not any morality by any standard of right and wrong. People are regularly raped, abused, assaulted, and murdered, and it’s not considered wrong in many areas of Africa at all. It’s considered, in fact, a rite of marriage. The killings continue, but it is not in any way wrong, it only appears to be wrong to those that have the luxury of making such a distinction. You only believe it to be wrong because you don’t live in a country/region/city/neighborhood so impoverished that morality cannot be afforded.
8. Finally, and this point should be stressed the most: good and evil, right and wrong, just and wicked– these values are determined ultimately by one’s relative perception. Something is only appearing to be good or appearing to be evil, because of its relationship to your expectations of reality. If something happens that is different from your expectations of good, or fulfilling of your expectation of evil, then you apply those labels to it, and reinforce your perception of morality, in relationship to reality, through maintaining that contrast of values. In the end, right and wrong are not about interpreting reality, but about identifying with the perceived moral substance of reality via attaching values to it– the values of the individual, family, group, culture, society, government, religion, race, etc.
Ultimately, the underlying truth here is that morality as we know it is a human invention, so to try to discredit God’s existence by saying he does not conform to all our expectations of a moral God, and we as his creation are not projecting according to such expectations, is patently ludicrous.
The Exchange of Power and Its Effect on Relationships
In general, I prefer to ignore the exchange of power, seeing it mostly as a construct of the Ego, legitimate only in hierarchy-driven societies. But as I become more serious in my personal romance, I have come to see how undeniably essential the exchange of power is in relationships. There are so many decisions to be made, and so many responsibilities to be fulfilled, and there are many issues in which a compromise is neither practical nor optimal. In many of such cases, an exchange of power must be made to resolve conflicts in the decision-making process
For example, I plan to have at least two children, and I have very strong beliefs about their education, their health, their morality, and the structure present in their lives. There are many things (such as vaccination, working parenting, baby formula, pornography, abortion, public schooling, casual dating, promiscuity, materialist/consumerist behavior) that I am extremely against, and predictably enough, my own opinions about raising kids are often in conflict with that of my wife’s opinions.
While diversity of opinions can be a good thing, it proves to be a terrible obstacle when it comes to raising children, because compromised parenting is, at least in my firm belief, absolutely unacceptable. A consensus must be reached in all decisions regarding child-rearing, and if they cannot be, there are two options:
(1) We give up on raising the kids. It’s better to not raise kids at all, than to raise them in such a manner that compromises their future.
(2) One of us chooses to acquiesce to the other’s view(s) about parenting.
Option 2 is where the exchange of power comes in. One of us has to submit authority over the given matter to the other, so that consensus might be reached through one of the two opinions being determined as legitimate, at the expense of illegitimizing any conflicting opinions. In some cases, I submit to her opinion. I have relented on her desire to wear heels during pregnancy, on the condition that she stop wearing them if she is feeling nauseous, pained in her feet, off-balance, or otherwise stressed. I have also agreed our kids will be placed in traditional schools, so long as they are private schools, and we provide supplementary education at home. Conversely, I have compelled her to submit to my opinion on such issues as breastfeeding and not working during pregnancy. So we both have relatively equal power in decision-making, but nevertheless, the exchange of power is an integral part of everything important decision we make.
Not just in decision-making, but also in physical expression of love, the power exchange is more prevalent than I ever thought possible. Even in such simple actions as a hug, a kiss, or holding hands, the initiator has a clear degree of physical dominance, and this influences the dynamics of that expression. These dynamics are particularly pronounced in the act of making love, where a dominant/submissive relationship is necessary for the sex to be natural, creative, and elegant. Without the exchange of power, lovemaking of any kind becomes an awkward and unsatisfactory experience.
I’m only beginning to understand the importance of these things, as until now I preferred to deny power as a legitimate existence. The truth is, I really don’t understand power at all, so I have much to learn before I can achieve a true appreciation of the exchange of power and its effects on humanity, life, and all of reality.
Compromising Values
To one like myself, who is accustomed to a particular set of beliefs which guide my life, the notion of compromise isn’t something I’m used to; indeed, I hoped (a futile hope it seems) that I would never have to compromise on what I believe in to live my life happily and completely. But outside this fantastical dream of perfection lies reality, and in the real world compromises are necessary to cooperate, live with, or even interact with others.
I have forgotten this simple truth, because I am used to, at least in my own mind, being alone. I have taken solace in my solitude, and it has been a great virtue to me. I can sit, think, analyze, observe, and freely believe what I believe and draw my own conclusions of what I think is right. No one can tell me what I should do, who I should be, or what I should believe. Indeed, solace is necessary for true liberty, and herein lies the problem, a sort of expanded “hedgehog’s dilemma”: Should I wish for freedom, or happiness?
Alone, I am completely free, but I am also empty, melancholic, dissatisfied, incomplete. To quote the Bible, “It is not good that man should be alone”. So I must have a woman, right? But to have a woman who is completely in agreement with me, that is impossible, and even if it were possible, it would be unbearably boring. Disagreement is good then, as it makes life interesting, and challenges the opposing halves to grow, improve, and ultimately- synthesize their differences into new life, new creation. This is the meaning of life, to find the unity underlying all diversity.
I have found my one and only, so all that remains is for us to find that balance between agreement and disagreement. We have our own beliefs, interpretations, behaviors, values, and ideas about life. There is much we have in common, but much also that we disagree about. We have some difference of opinion about virtually every topic commonly discussed, and while when we agree the agreement is wholehearted, when we disagree it seems at times unresolvable. We are both very stubborn, passionate, and opinionated about what we believe in, and this sometimes creates a chasm between us.
Compromise is about building the bridge between worlds, between my world and hers, between my beliefs and her own, to cross the chasm of difference to synthesize a greater unity, thereby creating a new world entirely. These differences exist to be conquered, by conquering does not mean to agree or to disagree, but to be inspired by each other’s differences to forge newer, greater beliefs altogether. This is the challenge of all relationships, but particularly that of a man and his wife, the spiritual twins bound to be together for all eternity. This is our journey!
Evolution In My Perception
This post is a follow-up to my post “change in my perception”, written in 2007:
I’ve come to realize that how I perceive my reality is only wholly dependent upon my beliefs (rational state) and my mood (emotional state). When I am sad, reality seems dim and flat, and when I am happy, reality seems lively and meaningful. But it even goes beyond that, my reality is no longer changing with my emotions and thought patterns, it is now evolving!
As I solidify my beliefs in Oneness, and sublimate them from mere “ideas” to real convictions, I’ve seen my reality shift to an evolutionary state. As time goes on, my reality has become more crisp, more 3-dimensional, more real. Whereas with “change in my perception” everything looked so fake and meaningless, things look more real and meaningful than ever before, and with each day that passes, that reality continues to grow in its beauty, meaning, and love. As I continue to embrace the world as the manifestation of the Oneness of which I am part, my reality is evolving to match that belief.
In other words, as I evolve my reality within, my environment shifts to match that inner-evolution. This appears to contradict the solipsist view, which says that because I am not the thinker, I cannot modify the reality that is being thought. But if this reality we live in is actually created by all, and “God” is just a means of conveying the underlying unity of that diversity, then we are all creators, since we are all part of God. Furthermore, since (in my view) “reality” is not actually a “creation”, but an interpretation, then what my reality truly is, is ultimately decided by me, the creation, the arbiter, “the observer”. In other words, because this is my reality, and my perception, I am the one who interprets reality, and thus I am the decider of what reality “really” is.
When this idea is applied to Oneness, it becomes something truly magnificent! Because we are all One, we are all the interpreters of reality, all the arbiters, although our interpretations may differ and our values vary or even conflict, we are still one through our relationship to the “creator”. That is, while we may interpret the pattern of reality differently, We are all living in the same world, interpreting the same reality, communicating the same emotions, participating in the same struggle, living the same life, and there will always be more that unifies us than divides us.
Why should we be in conflict? The reason for this is pride, for it is in pride that differences are emphasized and the power struggle abounds, and it is in the power struggle that division overtakes unity, hatred overwhelms love, doubt infects trust, fear defeats faith. The problems in the world always start within, for it is within that the barrier separating us from the world, the barrier known as “Pride”, is born, growing like a great weed, taking root within until the pristine reality of selfless and unconditional love, trust, and faith….is lost.
As I kill this Ego of mine, this mess of pride that would prevent me from seeing reality through eyes untainted, the world becomes crisp, real, meaningful, connected. All of that “fakeness” and detachment is replaced by love and trust for humanity, until finally….eventually….I will understand wholly. “Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.” – 1 Corinthians 13:12
Solipsism: a dual-solipsist interpretation
If the solipsist’s reality only exists in his mind, then he should be able to easily change his reality when he wishes. So since we cannot change reality simply through conscious will for reality to change, that would appear to disprove solipsism. After all, if reality exists only in the mind, then whatever the solipsist should be easily modified through exercising their imagination.
Thus, if a solipsist wanted to be a woman, a dog, a tree, a car, a blade of grass, a ray of sunshine, he could easily transmute himself, because all of these things are part of his mind, and thus changeable by force of will, since the will is also part of the mind.
Additionally, if the solipsist wishes for world peace, lot’s of money, never to have to eat or breath again to survive, to have a perfect life completely free of suffering, then they could easily accomplish these things. So again, the fact that the solipsist did not accomplish these things despite having both the will and imagination to, seems to refute solipsism.
So, in order to show solipsism to be a valid conception of reality, there must be a modification to the theory. this is where the “two solipsists” dualism idea comes in:
There is the solipsist who is doing the thinking. This solipsist is the one who creates your reality, but that solipsist is not you. You are the creation of that thought, not the one thinking it. Thus, you are not actually real (according to solipsism), since you are not the “thinker”; that you are not the thinker is further evidenced by the fact that you did not create yourself.
Therefore, the material reality is not actually real, it is the “mirror reflection” of the thinker who is looking at himself. According to Berkeley’s conception of solipsism, “The Thinker” would be God, and we are the reflection he looks in the mirror to appreciate himself.
The thinker is the one who’s thoughts reality (creation) proceeds from. For this reason, this particular conception of solipsism would be classified as “idealism”, since it is based on the premise that reality (creation) originates from thought. We are that reality, and are not actually real in the sense that we are the mirror reflection of the thinker.
So although the reflection might consider itself real, that is only because the reflection does not realize that they are only an illusory image that the thinker (who is real) has created. In the Bible, this idea is supported when it says “And God said ‘Let there be light’, and there was light”. God’s (the Thinker’s) thoughts spoke reality (creation), into being. and like a mirror image, creation is made in the (finite) image of God. In reality though, God (The Thinker) is the only real aspect of reality, since it is from the thoughts of the thinker that this reality originated.
My Journey to Oneness, and other thoughts
I have spent the last 5-6 years self-analyzing and speculating on spirituality. I started with a question: “What is our purpose?”, and used that as the substance for my first philosophical entry (it’s listed on my blog as 3rd I believe, but back when I first started I published my work via a subdomain website, it was not until my 10th or so piece that I started publishing via blog format), “Our Purpose”.
http://th3g1vr.wordpress.com/2007/08/04/our-purpose/
From there, I made the decision to continue the thought wherever it would lead, with that original post providing the pattern upon which all future work would build. I continued writing for a long time after all, eventually adding more and more blogs to support my increasingly diverse repertoire.
While my initial goal was not spirituality, over time, especially after I turned 19 and my original Christian beliefs had deteriorated into nothing, I realized that I needed to develop a stronger, more meaningful belief system, and decided that the strongest beliefs to have would be ones that were not dependent on any external authority.
This seemed to be the most rational approach since unlike the logically fallacious beliefs of religious system, which are dependent on appeals to authority, emotion, consensus reality, and an intellectually-volatile exchange of power, originally-acquired beliefs are self-inherent, thus I can trust in such beliefs wholeheartedly– that is, because I sublimated all my beliefs from my very essence, my inner-being, I can have full confidence in what I believe in, because they are part of who I am.
As such, all my beliefs are almost wholly independent of any knowledge, ideas, or information I acquired from an external source; everything I believed in and believe in has its origin in an idea which, for all I consciously knew, was original and unique to me.
The conscious development of my entire belief system started with my blog “th3g1vr”, beginning just a few posts after my breakthrough post “Enlightenment”
http://th3g1vr.wordpress.com/2008/01/30/enlightenment
My first real post of th3g1vr was “Luck of the Draw”;it was here that I started consciously developing my philosophical speculations into concrete beliefs.
Since then, I’ve been continuing to build on that foundation, with one thought being a continuation of the next, letting my intuition guide with, and having full confidence in the resulting thoughts. One thought led to another, until finally, I serendipitously stumbled upon Oneness. I don’t actually know how I came to believe in Oneness, as like all other concepts it was one I genuinely thought up independently of any knowledge of it, I really thought it was unique to me when I first wrote about it here:
https://nspyraishn.wordpress.com/2010/06/27/one-for-all-and-all-for-one/
The funny thing is that I write about Oneness as if I already know about it, and had already written in depth about it before….but while I remember the mysterious feeling that led me to it (that mysterious feeling was the basis for the first chapter of “Essence of the Soul”, “The Mysterious Piano”), I don’t remember talking about Oneness before. The closest reference I know of prior to then, was in my post Agony:
http://th3g1vr.wordpress.com/2008/07/15/agony
In that post, I write about some of my theories regarding the soul, and the choice between the positive essence, the negative essence, and synthesis (denial). I did not understand exactly how this worked until recently:
Positive = Oneness
Negative = Separateness
Synthesis = Spiritual Zombies.
Humanity had adapted to create fake souls to deal with overpopulation and the increasing corruption of souls due to separateness corrupting both spiritual and physical integrity, and further worsening the synchronization process, requiring more tedious and extended soul/body purification between lives.
Because immense corruption + overpopulation = shortage of pure/compatible souls, our bodies have adapted by creating fake souls which simulate souls through referencing DNA structures (DNA is the physical manifestation of the soul), and used these “artificial souls” (what are known as “homunculae”) to animate the bodies. They are essentially the same thing as what we call “zombies” or “ghouls”, but sadly these poor creatures now account for a growing number of humans. I’m not sure if they are a majority yet, but they will be soon if this dilemma is not resolved.
___________________
The Spirit Science videos +Alyssa del Rosario recommended me to explains in amazing elegance, clarity and detail over 95% of all I’ve been writing about spirituality the past 5 years, so if you watch the whole series of videos you’ll not only be far more informed about Oneness, the history of the earth, and a lot of very useful meditation, OBE, and psychic enhancement knowledge and resources, but also will be on extremely solid footing with me regarding my knowledge and beliefs about everything that’s important to me. This series is so amazingly comprehensive, that I can honestly say it’s the rational expression of my spiritual beliefs in their entirety, all in just 6 or so hours of video.
http://www.youtube.com/user/TheSpiritScience
You should watch the entire series, it’s totally worth it!
What are your thoughts about my beliefs about “spiritual zombies”? I haven’t heard of their existence directly in the Spirit Science videos, although they do allude to a phenomenon in their “Lucifer Project” segments, where they talk about how Martians tried to create their own civilization based on a false pattern, and it became extremely unstable until they completely destroyed themselves. then they came to earth to consume our resources too. The videos also said that currently a similar thing is happening to earth as did on Mars in Project Lucifer.
Note: FTR, I thought of the “Spiritual Zombie” beliefs long before I started watching these videos, with my first expression of said beliefs being via conversations with my friend Cristina Chance.
Freedom vs Expression
(extracted from a conversation with my good friend Liza Persson): To me, freedom and expression are one and the same, I am free because I express, and I express because I am free.
So freedom not able to be expressed is not freedom? Thus those deprived of ability to express their freedom are not free? What about if they experience that they are free, because they have never experienced the limitations on their ability to express themselves?
That would depend on whether you consider perceptual freedom and the expression thereof as the legitimate metric of actual freedom. In the layer of material expression, one could say that constriction of freedom to express freedom materially would be synonymous with slavery. Conversely, if you believe freedom to be an idea that is independent of material expression, then freedom cannot be taken away, only the material (perceptual) expression thereof.
I was asking YOU whether YOU think it matters whether one is “Free” when
one is constrained in ones ability to enact it?
I have been severely limited in the expression of my freedom by financial, social, psychology, emotional, and spiritual constraints, but I never once felt constrained, or any less free. These are just conditions of the environment, they are not part of my character.
So having changed my environment dozens of times, I have confirmed beyond all doubt that when I am constrained in my expression of freedom by my environment, it is not myself that is constrained, but my environment. This is confirmed because when I shift to a less or my free environment, while my environment is altered, I am not. For this reason, I am not only of the opinion I am free, I know it through and through, because with the dozens of shifts of environment and the countless conditions of which such environments are comprised, none has altered my character, nor made me any more or less free than I already was, am, and will be.
So in other words, no, constraints on my expression have no bearing on my actual freedom, they are only a superficial means of expression. The human Ego seeks to prove itself through expression, and by expression validation, but this is a fallacy, as you should know– because I am already one with God, even though my consciousness cannot appreciate this oneness, I already am free. There is no need to validate freedom through expression, this is something I do not to prove I am free, but to appreciate that freedom.
But as you started out by saying that expression and freedom are one and the same, and that your environmental, social, financial and economic circumstances are constraining your ability to enact your freedom, then does that not logically produce the outcome that constrains upon your ability to express/act upon your freedom mean decrease of that freedom?
You misunderstand. when I say “expression” here, I am referring to material expression. But even as far as material expression goes, I already have. when I say “freedom and expression” are the same thing, it is not referring to expression now, but expression in general. I am free thus I express, I express thus I’m free. it’s not so hard to understand. the difference here is that there is no need to express what has already been expressed, or liberate what is already free. Now if you were to say “is the idea of freedom and the material expression the same thing, then I would say ‘of course not’,
But this is obvious I think. If we judge freedom based off material expression, there will always be constraints. I cannot die and still be alive. I cannot jump off a bridge and not get hurt. I cannot breath without inhaling oxygen or CO2, I cannot live in a city without having to deal with civilization. Even if there were no constraints placed on my freedom by humans, animals, or God, I would still be limited in the material sense, because I live in the material world. This is nothing to do with freedom though, these are the very constraints put in place to make material freedom appreciable. So to judge freedom based on material constraints is inherently self-defeating, wouldn’t you say?
I won’t judge my freedom based off material constraints, because if I did I would probably commit suicide, since my greatest virtue (freedom) would be impossible to fulfill by the very nature of life. But I don’t think there is any more material freedom in death, as then I would be limited from being alive, so in this sense everything has some sort of limits on them, even God has limits on what he cannot do directly, that’s why we’re here– to fill in the empty void that he could not fill in (directly) himself.
It would be absurd to expect the material world to be in any way free, instead, I see freedom not as a black-and-white objective, but an incremental ideal to work towards, like the pattern of a fractal. To me, life is a fractal to begin with, so building the fractal of my life towards the evolutionary ideal of freedom makes perfect sense. So suppose that I seek to add a bit more freedom to my life with each iteration. So I say 50+25+12.5+6.25+3.125….over time the idea gets closer and closer to freedom, until freedom and expression become virtually indistinguishable. Of course, this is all theoretical, but it is definitely a goal worth pursuing, yes? Even though I will never we entirely free, with each day I pursue it, I will become that much more free! (in material expression).
Subjective vs. Objective Reality
Through creative expression, literary, auditory, theatrical, painting, dancing, or any other form of multimedia or art, we can express ourselves best by creating a world of our own imagining, perhaps inspired by a perceptually confirmable reality, but at the same time independent of it, and interpreted differently just as everyone sees the world differently. Conversely, the use of an objective or factual reality is more useful for real world affairs, and so we accept as fact that which is necessary in order to achieve material progress.
The empirically-based sciences are based not on speculation or subjective interpretations, but on standardized systems which have been tested for accuracy and efficiency in producing measurably consistent results. The most universal form of objective truth, and thus the most productive and applicable form of knowledge, is knowledge that has proven itself to be the most useful and optimized for application in the real world.
I can express myself most fully in a world of my own making, and I’ve found that I can relate better to people through the use of fiction than i can with fact. So in general, I prefer a subjective reality over an objective one, because as a creative artist, I have found that for the purposes of communication and particularly self-expression, subjective truth is in fact the most utilitarian form of knowledge, since (paradoxically perhaps) it most efficiency and accurately accomplishes its intended purpose (to communicate).
On the other hand, if I were to want to produce reliable results in the material production of something, I would rely on a material, and thus objective, model of truth. For this I would rely on more universally utilized knowledge, such as is available via academia/etc. For example, if I want to know how to build a house, catch fish, study for a test, drive a car, or browse the web anonymously, I would want to rely on objectively proven resources, instead of my own imagination, as I would do with creative expression.
When it comes to consensus reality, things become more complicated, as to properly express yourself requires you to make use of both objective and subjective realities, often simultaneously. For example, if I am writing a book, I want to use my imagination and express myself according to my own reality, as independent as possible from my own objective reality or any universal/consensus reality. But in order for my audience to appreciate my words, I need write it in a language people will understand, to adopt a style and format that my target audience is conditioned to appreciate, to frame and filter my words so that my ideas will be taken seriously, to be eloquent so that my words are powerful, and my words must be optimized to appeal to the cultures, subcultures, religions, political affiliations, lifestyles, genders, and even ethnicities my audience(s) identify with. This makes the career of a creative expressionist of any kind extremely complicated, perhaps even the most complicated of all career choices IMO.
In my personal opinion, subjective reality is best suited for ideas, and objective reality for application thereof. The material reality is most useful for production, the ideal reality most useful for creative expression. For communication, striking a balance between these two is necessary.
The Dilemma of Perception
I’ve written about perception for a while now, but not until recently did I think of perception in terms of appreciation vs. unity. The conception of appreciation being the natural consequence of separateness is something I’ve only explored recently, with my initial realization of the relationship between the two first expressed in my post “Corrupted Truth”, and later developing a more refined understanding in “Functional Beauty”. What I came to realize over time is that beauty is communication being appreciated, and that appreciation itself is the byproduct of separateness; this essentially means that to appreciate is to sin.
So then, what should we choose? Sin to appreciate or abandon appreciation to realize Oneness? Or can we both appreciate and transcend our perception simultaneously? Is it possible to realize both the question (Oneness) and the Answer (Separateness) simultaneously? And can that consciousness be maintained for eternity, or is it something limited only to mystical experiences that we must meditate on fervently to even experience for a moment? There are questions I ask myself, and the answers are neither obvious nor easy. It would seem that the real journey in life lies in discovering the answer to this dilemma: The dilemma of perception.
Unconditional Freedom
In a philosophical exchange about freedom with my Facebook friend Kenneth G. Fulp, I explain my understanding of true freedom, and why my freedom can never be taken from me. I’ve preserved the discourse in its raw format with minimal editing, so as to preserve the original context:
Slavery exists only in perception, and change relevant only in perception. So slavery is both real and illusory, since the transitory nature of it is only relevant as a construct of the ego; We are slaves only perceptively. One of the greatest realizations as that ultimately, we are free, and slaves only to the extent that we rely on socio-economic constructs to express that freedom.
I don’t believe that anyone can have power over those that do not acknowledge the exchange of power. You can limit the expression of freedom, but you cannot limit freedom itself. One might *appear* to be enslaved (perceptively), and that appearance may be justified in viewing that person’s socio-economic status, but unless that person themselves relies on such metrics to express their freedom, the “slavery” is real only in perception; as a person, even if they might not express freedom to the fullest extent, they are nevertheless free. Freedom is not something that can be taken from us, they can take the expression but not the free will from which such expression derives.
If I put you in a room 6X6, feed you and allow you to bathe every other day. If I do that and I force you to pull a lever so many times per hour and you do not get fed, we’ll see how long your treatise on perception lasts.
If you put me in that position, I would still be free. you cannot take my freedom from me. My physical body, and even my mind are of no consequence, because the greatest freedom comes from transcending the identity. You cannot control me or enslave me, because I am not me, I am life, I am freedom, I am potential. Even if you limit my manifestation, I will not be any less free, and you will only fool yourself in thinking you can enslave me with material limitations.
Very cerebral, but entirely unrealistic. If I arrest manifest potential and subjugate it to my whim then I limit its potential. The 1 kg mass sitting a meter above ground has potential energy. If I push it off its mantle and arrest it before it touches the ground I have limited its kinetic energy. The mass cannot yield its manifest potential as a falling object, only to the extent that I allow it. That is slavery, of the mind, of the body. It is barbaric. If it were as you say then it would not be such. The fact that all of mankind sees it the same way is a overwhelming argument against your idealistic phenomenological argument. Slavery is an Aristotelian ‘cave’.
The physical world cannot compromise the transcendent ideal of freedom. Most of mankind sees it the same way, because they are like sheep falling off the same cliff because they feel they have no choice, or slaves because they lack the insight to transcend the matrix of a physical world despite it only manifesting as electrical signal interpreted by our brain. There is no slavery, only those that believe in it. There is no power, only those that let themselves be controlled by it.
But I do have a few friends who are able to transcend this limited and distorted mindset that has pervaded humanity, and come to realize the Oneness that through diversity unites us as One. Like a diamond we are all manifest the glory of God, many facets but ultimately one glorious existence. This is both the greatest unity and the greatest individuality, and it is my hope that someday everyone comes to realize it!
There is no slavery, only those that believe in it.” ????? Timothy, me thinks you need to rethink that. The rest of your holistic view is admirable, and honestly, very attractive, on many levels. But when the very air that you breath, the water and food you are allowed to partake, and every other facet of your life that we as a species take for granted are being controlled by another through indomitable force; that is enslavement. You may spiritually and intellectually rise above that and through force of will and spirit never allow yourself to be dominated. You do not see yourself as a slave, but you are enslaved. The semantics are important. Your metaphysical concept of the power of self resonates and is shared by me. Helplessness of the oppressed can shatter the minds of men through jack-booted brutality and domination. I will always fight against it because there is enslavement; whether you believe in it or not. This view in no way is antithetical to your belief in self and the “oneness” of self with God.
They can take away my food, they can take away my shelter, they can take away my air, they can take away my life. But they cannot take away my freedom. The aforementioned are necessities for manifesting freedom in the real world, But by no means freedom itself, not any more than money is the same as the labor from which it is derived. I am always free, I have always been free, and they cannot take that freedom from me, because freedom is not based in any substance, trait, value, or condition. Freedom is *by its very nature* unconditional, so any attempts to impose conditions to jeopardize my freedom are null and void; those who think they can enslave me only fool themselves, not realizing that attempts to take away my freedom do nothing more than project their own self-imposed slavery onto their false image of me, misconstruing entirely the source of my identity.
That is what unconditional freedom means to me, and why that no one, and nothing, can take my freedom away from me!
The way I make a clear distinction between the two, is that the Ego is responsible for personal perception/identification, and the SuperEgo is responsible for social/emotional perception/identification. Contrary to what I originally believed, I now feel that both the Ego and SuperEgo are capable of both rational and intuitive thought, although the Ego tends toward more empirical and logical thought (with the intuition being in the form of “axioms”, which are unprovable ideas which are intuitively known and assumed to true so that all other truth can be built off them), and the SuperEgo tends to be more emotional (its primary components being the “conscience”, emotions, and the emotional subcomponents of sympathy, compassion, responsibility, and empathy).
Acquiring Empathy
I wish I knew for certain how to acquire empathy, but I don’t even know for sure I can acquire it at my age. I think it could prove useful, although I don’t think it’s necessary for compassion (that’s sympathy) or for love (unconditional love (Oneness) is accomplished by letting go of identification, which is an integral part of empathy).
I do think that empathy is an essential part of communication at the human level though, so I am making it a priority to acquire it for this reason. I wish for my thoughts and feelings to be meaningful, and since emotions are the transmitters of meaning at the human level, the acquisition of empathy is necessary for such transmission, as well as the subsequent appreciation thereof.
If empathy is incremental in its acquisition, then I have most certainly acquired empathy, just not in levels high enough for me to appreciate. Since I do experience moments of empathy, and all studies on empathy show a noted difference in observable/statistical empathy between males and females, and (to an extent) between different age groups, political affiliations, etc.) I think that certain that I do have some empathy. However, since levels of empathy are not reliably measurable, it’s difficult to say how much empathy I do have, or how much empathy I have acquired.
In the making of the record of my psycho-social/spiritual progress (it will take a bit of time to finish writing it I think), I will also determine roughly how much empathy I had at various stages. This figure is of course rough, and will be measured using major paradigms shifts in my frame of thought, focus, writing style changes, etc. I believe it will prove most useful to you in your compassionate efforts helping me in my journey to acquire a reasonable amount of empathy.
The concept of acquiring empathy by simulating it: this is something that I have been wondering for a while. I think that one of the greatest means by which I have improved my empathy is by making use of it artificially (by simulation)…that is, by acting it out based on what i know of empathy. This is because by acting out empathy while at the same time trying my best to genuinely have it, I am tapping into my underdeveloped emotional intuition; I’m enlarging my SuperEgo through pumping my own empathetic chemicals through my brain, which tells me conscious and unconscious mind to produce its own chemicals….or something like that. Mind over matter, as they say.
I believe that with enough effort and perseverance, I can develop true empathy by acting it out to exercise my empathetic muscle (the SuperEgo). My emotional muscles are so unused that they have become underdeveloped, so to fix it I just need to use them more. The more I empathize artificially, the stronger and more real my genuine empathy will become over time. This will result in more meaningful relationships and more emotionally-charged communication, and help me to truly understand people, both individually and cosmically, on a far more meaningful level.
My understanding of the relationship of others’ to myself is complicated and multi-layered. From the energy perspective, everything is all energy, whether packaged as soul, body, or (as Plato referred to it as) “form”; the identity is irrelevant in this layer.
Another layer sees us all as one being, represented and appreciated in our diversity; for this layer I use the analogy of a diamond, which is a single, solid, tightly bonded object that is paradoxically appreciated more through its diversity: through the reflections of its countless facets which are similar in the most important ways, yet all distinctly unique in more subtle ways.
Yet another layer sees relationships with people as the means of communication, particularly through emotion, thereby exchanging energy to appreciate the unity of layer one and the diversity of layer two. This layer is where empathy is more essential.
There are many others layers to my reality, but the above three are the main ones.
In general, up until recently I “got to know” people through a combination of deductive reasoning and empirical observation, and saw the emotional intuition (empathy) that others’ possessed as both a blessing (which I envied for the convenience in which the blissfully ignorant used it) and a curse (because in general, empathy does more harm than good– empathy *usually* includes the component of identification, and as a result causes more harm than good for most people in the form of misunderstandings– causing broken hearts, misled hatred and mistrust, and all manner of meaningless suffering.
Because empathy is perceptually-based and dependent on the intuitive form of identification, it’s very easy to let oneself be manipulated by it, becoming emotionally controlled by ones feelings and limited in one’s emotional reality by the perceptions experienced through empathy.
But like the movie “The Matrix”, it’s possible to experience empathy without becoming a slave to it or letting it limit our reality. By using empathy, we can travel freely in and out of the reality of life, using empathy as necessary to meaningfully connect with people still trapped in the matrix of perception. When empathy is used properly and conscientious like this, it is no longer a curse that limits and distorts reality in exchange for socio-emotional convenience, but a useful and essential tool for connecting with the people still residing in perceptual reality on a meaningful level!
The Trouble With Identification
(Thanks @Alyssa Del Rosario and @tfor2and2fort for the inspiration) When “identifying” with peoples’ personality, their character, their spirits, that’s connecting with them, right? That’s the feeling that most of us have gotten when getting to know people, so it’s easy to get caught up in the trap of identification. Identification breeds a spirit of separateness. It feels like connecting, but the karmic price is prejudice. you appreciate their energy less, because you mistake it for characteristics you mistakenly associate with that energy. Identification is the origin of all misunderstandings.
@tfor2and2fort “Yes, I always identify with others. I thought thats what connecting was… However once I see that you say it separates us I can understand that because I feel Isolated when i do compare my self to those perceived characteristics of others. I need to realign my perceptions”
Here is an example of my own experience with the tragic misunderstandings that identifications cause:
I have a friend who despite reading a great deal (huge amounts) of my writing, completely misunderstood me in the worst ways possible. It was devastating to me, I felt like giving up writing, because I had hoped that by communicating my thoughts completely candidly and with utmost care, and comprehensively converting my entire being into literary form, they could understand me. So with all the reading they did about me, they seemed to misunderstand me more and more.
I became convinced that in many cases, complete honestly can be the greatest deception, because it creates all these misunderstandings. But now I realize the link between that and something else they’ve told me. they have said a few times that their biggest vulnerability is that they “identify” with people they care about a lot. I didn’t understand how if they could misunderstand me so much if they cared so much, but now I understand they misunderstood precisely because they identify too much 
When I believed in identification, I had a very negative opinion of myself, and always suffered from self-sabotage motivated by a deep-seated self-loathing and mistrust. The way I started valuing myself, ironic as it might seem, is to stop identifying with myself. Most people also smoke/get addicted because they identify, by the way. I cannot get addicted to *anything*, because I don’t identify. It’s the perfect solution to most problems, believe it or not.
My friend Alyssa Del Rosario helped me realize the importance of identification, by telling me how great it was I didn’t identify like most people do. I knew I didn’t identify, but for me it was a natural part of life and I saw it as a bad thing (antisocial and attached), when really it was the opposite. I will always be grateful to her for helping me to realize the most important things in life, and in my journey towards Oneness
Connecting with people, the world, reality, and God without the deception of identification, is the first stage to realizing Oneness and Selfless love; elimination of identification is so crucial that it’s prerequisite to Oneness. That’s how you transcend the paralyzing effects of your Ego, and realize Oneness with God, with the All, with You 🙂
The Nature and Merits of Platonic Love
A friend of mine asked me how should she enjoy the energy of this guy she met without being unfaithful to her true love, her husband. The answer, put simply, is Platonic love. That is, make your love spiritual, (to use the Freudian term) sublimate your desire for him into pure spiritual love. Soak up his spirit, but just don’t identify with it.
A lot of people don’t know what Platonic love really is, so I’ll tell you:
Plato believe that while carnal love and the appreciation of physical beauty was rewarding, that appreciation of the greater beauty of the energy itself was far more rewarding. He said that to truly appreciate someone, you must recognize that you are not appreciating the person , you are appreciating their energy. and furthermore, the energy you are appreciating is not that person’s energy, but the energy in all things. Finally, you are not *really* appreciating the energy in-and-of-itself, you are appreciating God as manifested through energy, and that energy is expressed through people you love.
So appreciate the energy of the people you love as an expression of God, without identifying with it, and you can never go wrong!
Understanding Me
It’s very difficult for me to accurately define myself, and this has been an ongoing problem that 7 years of practice has only shown marginal improvement, far short of what I should have expected at this point. For the more I see to understand myself and to express who I am, the more complicated this “self” becomes, and I’ve gotten to the point where the simplest way of understanding myself is that there was never any “real” self to begin with.
The problem with freedom is that it is inherently at odds with attachment, because to be attached is to be tied down to the relationships, beliefs, values, and reality that one identifies with. In my most natural state, I don’t identify with anything at all, except perhaps for the superficial need to pretend to identify in order to properly communicate with those that do. Identification is such an integral part of human nature, that failure to account for its prevalence, even if only as an illusory construct of the Ego, would almost certainly result in misunderstandings with all whom one might hope to communicate with.
Until recently I was by my very nature a narcissistic psychopath, not by choice or deliberation, but out of ignorance. No one had shown me love, and I was not familiar with what it was, and so I struggled to understand based off what little I knew, and to develop a comprehensive understanding through continual observation and analysis, albeit mostly the latter. My journey through this process is expressed through my writing, particularly th3g1vr.wordpress.com and nspyraishn.wordpress.com, with the former concerned with self-analysis (the outside looking in), and the latter concerned with world-analysis (the inside looking out).
After much analysis of all these things (i.e. love, trust, relationships, spiritual energy, reality-association, etc.) I came to the conclusion that the best-of-all-worlds philosophy is Oneness. This is because Oneness stands for:
Absolute freedom: (one is all),
Absolute sympathy: (all is one, and so we are benefit from caring for one other and helping each other)
Absolute love: (loving all equally, infinitely, and unconditionally)
Absolute trust (we are all part of the same thing)
Absolute intimacy (I am you, you are me, we are all, God is us, all as one)
Absolute perfection (the sum of all things is perfect)
Absolute beauty (each individual person, part, characteristic, molecule, atom, particle….is another facet in the diamond of Oneness, the diversity of which only enhances the beauty of the Universe, and which we all contribute to.
Absolute individuality: Just as each one of us is part of the all, so are we all One. While the counterfeit of Oneness “collectivism” may appear to destroy individuality, true Oneness is the epitome of the individual, because when we realize our Oneness, we are truly One person.
So this is my solution: Oneness. I now know the answer, it remains only for me to truly realize (appreciate).
This is the best I can do at the present time to explain to you who I am, what I want, and where I’m going. If you can’t understand even now the substance of my character, then I can only hope that in the future, when I truly realize Oneness, that I will be enlightened enough to not only clarify these things, but to alleviate all misunderstandings 🙂
Indecision: True Hell
A lot of people seem to think they have some idea of what true hell is. I don’t claim to know better (I don’t believe in hell to begin with, or in heaven for that matter), but when analyzing the graphically tortuous descriptions people give of hell, I laugh internally, thinking “what, that’s it?!” It seems to me that most of the people who believe in hell live in an incredibly sheltered reality, as their conception of hell is, quite frankly, boring! Come to think of it, all of the conceptions I have seen of heaven are even more bland, but I suppose that’s a story for another day.
To a great extent, I have experienced the so-called “horrors” of prison and the “hard knocks life”, and really I’ve found all of the “hardships” of this world to be only enough to temporarily cure my thirst for some meaningful difficulties. Perhaps I too am still sheltered yet, but as far as I can tell the only source by which I can attain what might be considered “true hell”, is myself; this abysmal suffering of which I speak also takes the most unlikely form, which (as the title suggests) is indecision.
I believe that true hell can only be accomplished through indecision: to be caught between irreconcilably polarized and terribly intense desires, and so be completely unable to manifest either of them; in such a situation your soul would be torn apart on a perpetual rack, unable to die, but neither to concede to one side or the other– to be tortured by one’s own desires and the punishment carried out by one’s own selfishly insatiably Ego, this would be something closer to what might be considered true hell.
Someday I will write an account of hell that will dwarf any other (the beginnings of which can be found in my novel-in-progress Essence of the Soul, should you wish to read it), but until then let me make clear that any foundation of what might be considered true hell, is based on indecision.
Living Without Purpose
There are many different paths to success, and no path is right for everyone; to begin with, even “success” is by definition highly subjective, the measurement of which accurate only within the scope of the one for whom the measurements were taken. This presents a paradox of merits: How do we how what “exemplary” is, when the measure of merit is only reliable within the scope of subjective utility?
The other issue that I’m more personally concerned with, deals with the potential/actual divide. I’ve found that as a matter of cosmic law, more potential translates to less actualized, and more actualized can only result from less potential. The conclusion I’ve come to in the resolution of this problem, is to work towards the achievement of a perfect balance between the potential and the actual. But even then, there are limits to how much potential can be actualized, and one would have to limit their potential significantly in order to ensure that the maximum amount of potential can be actualized.
A few weeks ago, it occurred to me that the resolution of this problem could very well be, as strange as it might seem, Living Without Purpose! This might sound counterintuitive from the surface, as it implies that one of the primary building blocks of translating potential into utility, “purpose”, is wrong. In a way that’s exactly what I’m saying, and we’ll get into that in a little bit. But first let us address the potential/actual divide:
If a person lives a life with purpose, they are limiting their potential to that purpose, and are thus able to self-actualize themselves through that purpose. To use the analogy of metal casting, people are able to make themselves useful (self-actualize) by taking all of their raw potential, and injecting it all into mold (purpose) so that they might be appreciated (useful) to the governing body that is measuring that usefulnesss; most of the time, that governing body is Society”, although often people will independently measure their own usefulness as well.
There are plenty of obvious merits to casting yourself into a role, as doing so makes yourself “useful”, with the philosophy of Utilitarianism being dedicated to the maximizing of one’s usefulness (or “utility). But it’s equally important that the role you are being cast into is one that is optimized for you as an individual, as supposed to the inefficient archetyping of Society. While living with purpose has prove to be essential to maximizing the utility of Society, maximizing your individual utility requires a level of optimization that transcends any identifiable purpose, as such transcendence is prerequisite to the epitome of self-utility, self-actualization.
The key to maximizing self-utility without being confined to an archetypical purpose, is to live without an identifiable purpose. That is, to have purpose, but to not identify with any given purpose. By having purpose (as an ideal) but not identifying with it, you are completely free to explorer and actualize all of your potential, as the molds to which you sculpt yourself become mere forms through which you express yourself, instead of the foundation upon which you build your life. This difference of self-architecture turns the previously finite you into an evolving you, with each form of representation being just one of any forms through which you represent yourself. I’m in the process of developing a scientific field dedicated the the development of a system for fostering such a self-optimized and self-evolving character, which I call “Ego Engineering”.
You are likely a bit confused by these things, so let me elaborate: Normally when a person lives according to the archetypes assigned to them by society, they go to school, get a job, go to college (if they’re smart enough), get into a few relationships, find a girl they love enough to settle down with, have kids, rear their kids to adulthood, and grow old with their loved one. At least, that’s ideally how it works. But even with that ideal life, doesn’t that sound a bit limited? The same person could have had affairs with other people, chased far-fetched dreams, started their own business, explore their creativity, write a book, learn to paint, tap dance, get a black belt in karate— so many things that they could have done but didn’t because it didn’t fit into the mold.
So to maximize your self-actualization, you need to develop a mold (self) that will evolve to assimilate possibilities, instead of only integrating everything that is compatible with “the plan”. By living without a defining purpose, and thinking of a purpose as a means to one of many potential ends, instead of a self-defining ultimatum, you are about unlimiting yourself, becoming free to explore and actualize all of your hidden potential, and learn much about yourself in the process!
Why I’m Argumentative
If there’s one type of verbal discourse I enjoy most, it’s probably a good heated argument. I love to present my views, backed by evidence and rational thought, and see how the opposition responds to my arguments, and if they can provide a solid and convincing counter-argument. There are few ways I learn more than the emotionally intense, highly interactive environment that a good long debate can provide. Arguing about an issue allows one to understand their own beliefs, and to contrast them against an opposing opinion. So we should see it as an opportunity to build strength in their own beliefs, and to better understand exactly what it is they think they believe in, why they believe in, and what supporting evidence and rational thought they have for such belief(s).
It’s difficult to find someone that you can have a heated debate with and not have to worry about them getting offended. I love to argue, but I always have to worry about whether my words are too intense or might offend someone. This difficulty is because if you do not give in to people’s opinions and act like you agree with at least half of what they say, they assume you are being arrogant or asinine, and that you don’t value their opinions on the issue enough. In addition, most people don’t like arguments because they take it personally and see your words as attacking their character or personal beliefs. It seems that a lot of people don’t know the difference between a debate, and argument, a shouting contest, and an emotional pissing contest.
I am open minded, I just have specific parameters to determine my shifts of opinion (i.e. No appeals to emotion, no authorities, no logical fallacies, no arguments of ethics or claims of absolute truth, etc). Many people misunderstand my tendency to question their opinions or turn every exchange of opinions into a heated argument, thinking that I’m “unteachable”, that I believe my opinions are more important than theirs, and that I’m more concerned with making myself look knowledgeable and being “right”, than about genuine learning.
This misunderstanding is compounded by the fact that I do have a genuine issue with humility, something I have only recently begun to work on. But I wish the people I debate with could better understand that I really don’t care about “being right”, and I actually much prefer to be wrong. Just being told I’m wrong isn’t good enough though, it needs to be demonstrated through a comprehensive discourse between my views, and theirs, such as in the debate process.
Channeling Your Creative Energy
Everyone has a bit of creative energy, but when that energy begins to overwhelm us, properly channeling it can prove to be a rather complicated and challenging task, especially if one lacks the knowledge to properly facilitate that transfer. But in order to maximize the energy efficiency of the channeled creativity, and to ensure that you control your genius (rather than genius controlling you), you must learn to know the difference between the two different types of energy (creative and logical), so as to ensure that you can control and channel them effectively.
In Taoism, there are two different types of creative – or, more accurately, spiritual – energy, both of which form two equal but opposite parts of a whole: Yin and Yang. Taoist philosophy can be considered a mystical take on Newton’s 3rd law of motion: “To every action there is always an equal and opposite reaction: or the forces of two bodies on each other are always equal and are directed in opposite directions.” Yin and Yang, much akin to the principle of Homeostasis, separates the world not into good and evil, but into positive and negative forces, asserting that the world is in a perpetual struggle for Balance. This “Balance” of which Taoism relates is the union of opposites, the presence of which will instill a sense of deep peace.
When your mind lacks the proper judgment centers to evaluate the relative homeostatic worth of the variables that make up our environment, Even the little things get off kilter, and the mind starts overcompensating to a dangerous level. To correct these imbalances, finding and maintaining a state of Homeostasis (or “Balance”) is crucial to your creative success. Finding such a balance not only improves your emotional well-being, but also helps you to make the most effective use of all that reserve creative energy you have. By learning to properly sublimate your creativity, you can turn the vice of this creative excess into virtue.
You’ve probably heard about how there are two different sides of the brain– one creative, and the other logical. Depending on which side of your brain you use most, you might be an artist, a scientist, or (if you’re really lucky!) sometimes both. When a person is in a depressed state, they are more creativity (fiction)-oriented; in other words, they want to escape from the oppression of reality, By contrast, when a person is in a manic state, they are more reality-oriented, and want to live life in the real world more. Creativity is very much optimized for both the creation of fiction and fact, so this kind of creative bipolarity is the perfect mix for the artist, if only they can learn to optimize each of these creative states to be appropriate for the type of creative expression done:
IDEALISM (ESCAPING REALITY)
When a person is depressed, they want to escape from the real world. It might be because their world is unforgiving, superficial, cold-hearted, autonomous, or just plain boring. But whatever the reason, there is a feeling of the world not being good enough, and so to escape the vices of the world, creative artists escape reality by creating a world of their own imagination. This kind of creative escapism creates the realm of fiction, a new reality which, although parallel with and somewhat similar to reality, is an idealized alternative to reality forged by the artist to fill the emptiness of a world that, at least for the time being, has proven itself to be not good enough. So when the real world isn’t good enough for whatever reason, instead of getting depressed, create your own world that will be good enough!
AESTHETICISM (EMBRACING REALITY)
This type of creativity is one that embraces the real world and all of its invigorating meaning and beauty. Rather than wanting to forge a new reality, the manic artist seeks to compliment the existing one, by acquiring the knowledge and skills necessary to build upon the existing world, and make an already-beautiful world better.
People with an excess of mania seek to explore the whole world in its entirety, and to have all kinds of life experiences, but often such experiences are not compatible with the real world. To cope with this unchanneled excess, make your manic focus an educational one. Read, write, and research all that is the world, to your heart’s content. There’s a whole stack of books at the library just dying to be read, and the Internet is calling to you to explore it. Rather than wasting your mania on prodigal adventures, wasteful expenditures, and pseudo-legal endeavors (like people with bipolar disorder often do!), channel it into exploration and education.
MAKE THE MOST OF YOUR CREATIVITY
Summing up, idealistic (negative) energy is best channeled into fiction, whereas aesthetic (positive) energy is best channeled into real life. Furthermore, depression incites the creation of new worlds, and mania beckons the exploration of the real world. By catering to these polarized, but equally necessary creative needs, you will not only achieve a sense of creative balance, but will maximize your creative potential in the process!
Writing and Mental Illness
Every writer has their own motivations for writing, and it’s crucial that their motivations be genuine in nature, and emotionally-grounded, if a writer is to write passionately. For psychotherapist Laurie Nadel, that motivation was mental illness. Through the process of writing and keeping a journal of her issues, Laurie was able to work through her mental and emotional issues, face her fears, and eventually make a full recovery from mental illness, going on to get a PhD in psychotherapy and help other people with the same problems she once had. Writing is an effective, time-proven treatment for mental illness, and a good way to release all that energy in a productive manner.
Writing, or any kind of creative expression for that matter, allows a person with excess positive or negative energy to channel (sublimate) that energy into a safe, controlled form. For me, writing was particularly effective to that end, as I could effectively and efficiently express anything I wanted or needed to via writing; this would never work as well with painting or music, as these channels proved to be a bit too chaotic and abstract for me to properly communicate my thoughts. By getting all that excess unexpressed creative energy out of my system via writing, I was able to restore myself to a state of psychological homeostasis, thus offsetting, or often completely eliminating the stress that would otherwise result in mental illness, and the symptoms thereof. Homeostasis, a state of biological balance, is an ongoing struggle between positive feedback (the need to progress) and negative feedback (the need to regress). The biological cycle of homeostasis occurs with the waking (positive) and sleeping (negative) cycles. In psychology, there are few better specimens of homeostasis than in the bipolar patient, who is constantly struggling between the manic and depressive moods, and unable to find and maintain a balance (homeostasis) between the two.
When a person is manic, they’re driven to progress in life (positive feedback), but they have no negative feedback (known in electronics as “Ohms”) to properly control that drive; as a result, the excess positive feedback of people with bipolar is wasted. The negative feedback of the depressive cycle takes the inverse approach, by overcompensating for the “progress” that the mind has perceived to have been made. Because no actual progress has been made, homeostasis cannot be accomplished, and the mood plummets as the negative feedback forces the person through a hollow sense of accomplishment, and they are unwittingly sent to an abyss-like state, because of a lack of proper mental judgment. This cycle continues on again, the mind being filled with the positive feedback again, and because the conditions that brought that person to a depressive state in the first place were as hollow as the sense of accomplishment that had brought them up, the person’s mood is trampolined right through that hollow barrier once again, and sent spiraling high into the air, once again repeating the vicious cycle that is bipolar.
It is here that we finally realize the paradox that is bipolar: To be plummeted to such a sense of false accomplishment requires that the sense of abysmal depression be validated, and to become so abysmally depressed requires that the falseness of the sense of a accomplishment be validated. To resolve this paradox, it’s understood that the poor judgment and the tendency to overcompensate moods are what caused the hyperbolized bipolar mood cycles to begin with. Herein this paradox is also the solution to curing bipolar: to correct the imbalances before they occur, by preemptively forcing a state of homeostasis.
This where is writing comes in, for me and for anyone who has mental illness. By using writing to channel that excess negative or positive energy into an acceptable form, one can force a state of homeostasis at the conscious level, which the mind could not do at an unconscious level. While this isn’t a cure in the “normal” sense, as most people maintain homeostasis unconsciously, it is a cure in that it allows people with bipolar to eliminate all of the symptoms in a healthy manner, and eventually lead what would be considered a normal life.
I’ve found that the positive and negative feedback are better channeled into different types of reading and writing: positive feedback should be channeled into academic reading and writing, and negative feedback should be channeled into creative reading and writing. The details and reasons for this are covered in my post “Channeling Your Creative Energy”.
The Paradox Of Love
When it comes to selfless love, everything’s pretty much “as advertised”. The best recipe for selfless love I’ve ever seen is probably 1 Corinthians 13:4-7 —
4 Love suffers long and is kind; love does not envy; love does not parade itself, is not puffed up; 5 does not behave rudely, does not seek its own, is not provoked, thinks no evil; 6 does not rejoice in iniquity, but rejoices in the truth; 7 bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.
But love of the conventional variety, selfish love, is rather paradoxical in nature, and if you really think about it, self-defeating. Let me give you some examples of this:
Hatred: Love is attached.
Discrimination: Love is specific.
Jealousy: Love is insecure.
Adultery: Love is greedy.
Anger: Love is disappointed
Loneliness: Love is out-of-touch
Anxiety: Love is conflicted
Sadness: Love is unrequited
So interestingly enough, when love is selfishly motivated, it often produces something that is quite the opposite of love. In fact, if the history of humans were to be my witness, I will argue that love of the selfish variety will inevitably produce some, if not all of the above emotions at some point. Is there anyone who has had a selfish love who can deny experiencing any of the above negative emotions as a result of their love? If so, that person must surely be a national treasure, and they are most likely not even human.
I believe that suffering is an inevitable part of selfish love, and it is there as a warning, to teach us that nothing selfish, not even something as pure as love itself, can be free of suffering. If you are selfish, you will suffer accordingly, and even in love you will suffer so long as your love is selfish.
Let’s break free of this paradox of love, and learn to love selflessly, so that our love might be free, pure, and complete. Only then will we experience the untainted pleasure that only comes from love of the selfless variety!
I Hate Being Misunderstood
(copied from an email to a friend)
and I cannot believe that you read so much of my material, and yet still do not understand me. I am staggeringly confounded by it. it makes no sense. I would have thought you would have understood me by now. you’ve had all the resources in the world. you had an amount of data that no one, ever in the history of the world, has ever had access to. I have been more forthcoming about who I am and what I’m about, than anyone else in the history of the world, and you, who took a personal interest in getting to know me and actually reading my writing, had read a great amount of that material. Much of the more important writing was communicated via email as well, so there is no way you could have missed who I am.
It just does not make any sense. Nothing makes any sense. I made no mistakes, I was transparent, I was honest, and I was pure. How you could have misunderstood anything is something I cannot understand. Yet you more than misunderstood, after all of that, you failed to understand some of the most basic, fundamental things about me.
Most of what you “understood” about me are facts that I communicated in the very beginning when we first met, and haven’t reflected any part of who I am for more than 5 years, and this lack of relevance was clearly reflected in my lack of interest in it in my writing. I have written maybe 1, 2 posts at most about my aunt, and yet you focused on her, even though she had nothing to do with anything at all, hasn’t since 2005, perhaps not even since 2004.
I don’t get it, don’t understand how you could have so terribly misunderstand me. this is probably the biggest mystery I’ve ever encountered, and there is nothing I hate more than being misunderstood. I was going to say “I hate you at first”, but not only would that be wrong, it would be inaccurate. but to me, everything about you upsets me, because as the one who has misunderstood me the most when I did everything I could to ensure that you understood me well, you still, defying all logic, misunderstood me completely.
Transcending Ego Depletion
In “Psychological Resource Management”, I targeted the problem of Ego Depletion, and proposed a solution that human beings have already to a great extent applied: habits. This is for me a major break-through in understanding how to live a life free of any constraints of what I am able to do– after all, if I am able to efficiently leverage the power of habits, I will have plenty of reserve willpower leftover to channel as I see fit. Ego Engineering is a project I envisioned to provide a framework of habits that will accomplish perfection using these very means.
But of course, even with habits there are distinctive limits to what can be accomplished, and I hoped that I could find a means to also overcome these limitations. In my blog Epiphany Project, I have been preoccupied with the spiritually enlightening concept of Oneness, and one of the important insights that I gained from Oneness, is the incredibly transcendent properties of living life without the limits of the Ego– living, in fact, without any limits at all. This approach to life is the key to truly transcending Ego Depletion!
When you have a self, you are limited by what you would do, what you believe yourself to be capable of, what amount of effort you can forgo, the strain and stress that you can handle to accomplish something. If you have a self, then you need food, rest, friendship, sex, support– and there are limits and everything you can do, simply because you’re you. When a person transcends their Ego, they also become immune to the depletion of will that their Ego suffers from.
Once you realize that your Ego is an illusion, that you do not actually exist as an individual person, you are then free to do whatever you desire, and accomplish whatever you see fit, because the “you” that was limiting you before has now been taken completely out of the equation. You can survive all manner of hardship and accomplish anything, and your potential becomes limitless, once you live free of the limitations of your Ego. Limitless potential– this is the true beauty of living without purpose!
Blank Slate
In philosophy and psychology, the “blank slate” (tabula rasa) refers to the concept that everything that we know, do, and are– is the product of conditioning that comes from perception and experience; there is no truly “built-in” knowledge, only conditioning. the term “blank slate” comes from the analogy of a tablet that has not yet been written or imprinted on; when we are born, the theory holds, we are devoid of knowledge, discrimination, opinions, values, habits, behaviors, and lifestyle choices– all of these things are accumulated over time, mostly through conditioning.
If this theory of the accumulation of knowledge and conditioning is accurate (as I believe it to be, for the most part), then the concept of freewill is being undermined; or more accurately, our “freedom” of choice is being undermined by the “will” that makes choice a legitimate concern to begin with to begin with. This is what I call ‘The Paradox of Freewill”.
Basically, if we are conditioned to want what we do, so even though we might have a “will” per se, that will is not truly free, as it is the product of the conditioning forced upon us by an environment that, being a “blank slate” we lacked the knowledge or will to have any control over, or even the identity to care. By the time you develop individuality, you will have already become a product of your conditioning, making all sense of freedom a petty illusion, a construct of a reality created by your environment. As to what “will” you are conditioned to possess, that ends up being more of a geographical, cultural, social, political, and religious “luck of the draw” more than anything.
So how do we escape this conditioning– how do we become truly “free”? In the prologue to the draft of my novel “Essence of the Soul”, I wrote the following:
By what method can one determine reality? We have guides all around us, things like the senses, logic, and the perceptions of those around us, but does it not vary from person to person, even if only the slightest? In addition, with all honesty we can only accept that this reality we are bound by is wholly attributed to the past. What if reality was something to be discovered, is something to be explored?
Most choose to leave those questions unanswered, and accept the reality created by the past. Some indulge in determining their own fate, but “in reality” are still bound by the same legacy; many of these would not realize this even if they were told, because the vast majority of the rules bestowed upon us are painfully unsaid.
It would seem that this would sum up all those that are governed by this antiquity in one way or another, But let us not forget the select few that make the choice to abandon these limitations and create their own reality- although some do not yet know they have made the choice…
At first, I thought that the only way to becoming free of one’s conditioning was to find out all those things that had been conditioned, and change them as I saw fit. But now I realize there are two problems with this:
(1) To “change as I saw fit” would only be a continuation of the conditioning, abeit biased with a more reactionary tone. In effect, I wouldn’t actually be changing anything, only changing the form in which the conditioning was presented.
(2) It’s impossible to find all of the things that are conditioned, and for good reason: everything is conditioned. You might not be aware of it, but even those things that you consider to be trademarked parts of your identity, were conditioned by external influences. If you think of certain aspects of yourself to be original or self-initiated, that’s even worse, because it means that you are being strongly influenced by forces who’s power over your will you are not even aware of.
Realizing the seeming impossibility of my ambitions, I became depressed for a while, until in the course of my research discovered that true freewill could be accomplished through Ego Death, which is the experience of realizing that the Ego is an illusory construct of the mind. But of course, this is only the first step– Ego Death allows you to change your mindset to accommodate not just real change in your perception, behavior and values, but the complete overthrow of the existing government of your mind.
Ego Death is a lot like being able to see all of the corruption and propaganda of your government and society, free of the lies and deceit of mainstream media. Suppose you realize that something is very wrong with the world, and that it is not just corrupt at the surface, but rotten to the core. If everyone realized this, of course that existing society and government would be overthrown– the mass media exists to help thwart this.
Similarly, after realizing your “self” isn’t real, you can becoming free of all your conditioning, effectively reduced to a childlike state, knowing only to eat, breath, live. Basically, your mind goes into a state of anarchy, until you establish a new set of rules, values, and foundational knowledge to build a new reality on. The purpose of Ego Engineering (which is a work in progress, and there is still a lot of work to be done!) is to provide a framework for this stage of things– so that when I actually undergo suicide of my Ego, I will already know where to begin.
Life: Plot Holes
Up until now my ideas about life have been pretty streamlined, but I have now discovered a critical flaw: To prevent against me doing anything stupid, I had endeavored to never live my life according to what I believed in. The problem with this is simple: motivation, belief, and action have a definitive causal relationship, in which one can only act according to their motivations, and can only be motivated by what they believe in. To prevent this paradox, I have ended up doing nothing at all, and merely recording my ideas, beliefs, and perspectives in the form of blog posts.
So it seems that in order for a person to truly be successful in life (where success is measured according to the amount of productive activity), it is absolutely necessary for them to act according to what they believe in. This being the case, the priority should then be to know, understand, and apply the principles of success from the ground up– this is the purpose of Ego Engineering, not-so-incidentally. To be successful, I must know, I must understand, I must be, and I must follow-through. Success is both a lifelong ideal, and a continually glorious accomplishment that is built on the back of hard work, dedication, solid priorities, and discipline. It is not something that can be achieved just by writing about it. For the truly successful minds, writing about their success is more of an afterthought.
I am at a critical stage in my life, where I need to start producing results, and my life is wreaked to hell with plot holes. I have the setting, some good character development, and a glorious storyline. But the plot, the foundational element that brings everything together, is makeshift and full of holes so big, that the story cannot even progress until they are patched up. Unless I can resolve this myriad of disparities between my beliefs and the life that is failing to project them, not even a Deus Ex Machina can salvage my life, not even to maintain the status quo.
All or Nothing
The past several days, I have been contemplating whether I am willing to make the sacrifices necessary to achieve a relationship with God, to achieve Oneness. One such sacrifice I must make, is the giving up of a physical family– of having my own children; admittedly, this is likely the most difficult thing to give up for me.
But when it comes to such ideals as Oneness, it really is “all or nothing”; there are no “priorities” when it comes to Oneness– I must do far more than “put God first”– everything in my life must be done for God. Having a physical family translates into desire for attachment to the physical world, and thus separateness; as such, not only would a physical family interfere with my relationship with God, but my continued desire for one is preventing me from achieving enlightenment– from experiencing Oneness with God.
The concept of surrendering it all to God is not foreign to me, and I have thought a lot about it, particularly in this post. I am indeed of the character optimized for sacrificing everything else– the all-or-nothing mindset has always been integral to my successful. But by the same token, this is also why I have never been truly successful– I’ve never gone “all or nothing” on anything– never had the gut to, or was ever willing to make the sacrifices necessary to live my life with such a line of thinking.
This reason why I’ve never “gone all out”, is quite simple: fear. I have been afraid of failing to reach my potential, in doubt of my ability to live up to my own expectations, insecure about all that I am, and will be. All or Nothing is an integral part of who I am, and the only thing that is stopping me from manifesting everything I am, is Fear.
But as Marianne Williamson put it:
“Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness, that most frightens us. We ask ourselves, who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous, talented, and fabulous? Actually, who are you not to be? You are a child of God. Your playing small doesn’t serve the world. There’s nothing enlightened about shrinking so that other people won’t feel insecure around you. We are all meant to shine, as children do. We are born to make manifest the glory of God that is within us. It’s not just in some of us, it’s in everyone. And as we let our own light shine, we unconsciously give other people permission to do the same. As we are liberated from our own fear, our presence automatically liberates others.”
Simulating Reality
For the majority of my life, reality has been no different than a series of dreams. I wake up, experience whatever dream awaits me, go back to bed, and dream a new dream the next day. The people I meet with, interact with, talk to– everyone who affects my life each day, are different, even if they’re the same– they might have the same name, same occupation, same character– from their perspective, I am the same person they knew me as before– but to me, they are not the same person; putting it bluntly, they are not a person at all, but just another piece of another dream.
This mindset, which I developed at some point as a coping mechanism by which to deal with my mental illness, has the side-effects of detachment, independence, infinite-adaptability, and the complete annihilation of all identifiable phenomena, including real emotions. The world as I know it is not real, but an illusion– just like “The Matrix”, no different than a computer-generated dream world. When I look around me I don’t see nostalgia, affinity, or familiarity– I see data. Everyone around me, and everything– just another bit in the data that is my dream. The next day I will have a different dream, and although the people might appear to be the same, and I could even “identify” them as such, I don’t really see them as a the same person. I just “pretend” to, so as to make myself more compatible with their reality.
Sounds crazy, right? Well of course it is, but there is only very little I can do about it at this point, because old habits die hard, and lifelong reality paradigms– so much harder. For now, I’ve been doing the only thing I can to maintain “status quo”: simulating reality. I simulate emotions, opinions. perspectives, beliefs, attachments, identification– anything that anyone considers to be real in this world (well almost anything) I can simulate with remarkable acuity. Because the vast majority of the world are “in reality” fake the begin with, it makes it all that much easier to project my own imposter phenomena into this dream that is life. The only difference between my simulated reality and the fake realities of so many people, I might argue, is that I am conscious of how fake my world is, whereas everyone else eats up their own bullshit.
The only person– or should I say “concept” that I can’t simulate, is God. Well actually I don’t know that, because I haven’t tried. I’ve created basic constructs of the nature of God, developed philosophical ideas about who God is, what he’s about, and even an abstract idea of what his relationship is to me. But I never believed in these ideas or put them to the test by simulating, like I had everything else. Simulating Christianity, yes– that’s easy. But simulating God, I could probably do it, but not going to– it’s off limits.
I don’t know why I’ve never tried to simulate God, but I’m glad I didn’t, because at this point, an unsimulated God is my only hope for a return to the real world, to “The Land of the Living“. As I said earlier, “there is only very little I can do about it at this point,” Yes, my options are limited– to return to a non-simulated, genuine reality, God is really all I’ve got to work with, as the only being left that I haven’t simulated. So while I prefer to “walk before running” by having real relationships and real love with people, I’m going to have to “cut to the chase” proverbially speaking, and genuinely experience God.
Simulation and Love
[The following post incorporates excerpts from emails to my soul mate]
I’ve been an “experimental” stage for quite some time now. The whole “living-in-a-dream” mindset was very intriguing for me, and I saw it as a reliable means to cure myself of mental illness. Problem is, now I’m having trouble finding my way back– in many ways similar to what was experienced by the “First/Second waves” as depicted in “The Children of the Law of One, and the Lost Teachings of Atlantis”. I have had the knowledge of what to do for quite some time, but if knowledge was enough to find my way, I would have become enlightened several years ago.
It is the feeling that I have lost– or as I call it, “The Essence”. this is really what the book “The Essence of the Soul” is about, and the reason why I am far from finishing that novel, is because it is a spiritual autobiography. I can’t finish the novel, because just like the main characters, I am still lost. I have become out of touch with “The Essence”, and am having quite a bit of trouble finding it again.
I am a big believer in habits, and are you said once- “you must prepare yourself for meditation to truly benefit from it” –though you didn’t put it in those exact words. I think while habits will not do anything to actually help me find the essence, I can use habits to get rid of all the negativity and distractions that are preventing me from find it. When one is freed of all deceptions, the truth will become self-evident, in other words.
“You say you have never felt love? Was it not loving that we shared that ice cream? You are being too strict with your definition of love, for love isn’t found just in relationships.. but is present in everything, in every life form.”
There is no doubt in my mind that this was love. As to whether or not I was receptive enough to appreciate the love, this is something I do not know. You say I put high standards on love, and perhaps you are right. But deep down, I know that love is something far more amazing than this, and I feel that perhaps you feel that “something more amazing” when we shared the ice cream– something that, because I am lost and do not know how to break down my walls, I was not able to appreciate as you did.
I do not know what love is, but can only judge it based on what is is not, the characteristics that it demonstrably constitutes– and– ultimately, this feeling deep inside that I know is the true expression of love. this feeling– this “Essence”– is something that I have long thought about, sensed within. The Essence is my name for God. I have never called God by this name though, because for me, God is not personal, as I have never had a relationship with him, and I believe that my name “The Essence” reflects this impersonality.
I wish to be free of this simulation of love, and to love freely and truly. I want to experience God, instead of just pretending to. I want to really feel, and truly be, me, instead of this anomaly. It’s difficult to know what real love is– what real feelings are– when I’ve lived a life of simulation, but I will find a way to gain these experiences, if only because it is my destiny. I don’t know how, or when, or by what means I will finally escape this simulation and enter, as Milk Inc. called it, “The Land of the Living”, but I look forward to that day. The day when I will finally be free to live, to love, to feel, to be, Me.
The Necessity of Escapism
I am a firm believer in the axiom that everything in life happens for a reason, so I know that there must be reason why “Escapism” is a trait so engrained in life– a certain necessity to it. In my post “The Escapism of Life”, I explained how escapism is not just a trait associated with the detrimental consequences of misusing certain venues to escape one’s problems (as is the case with drugs, alcohol, TV, video games, etc.), but that life itself can be considered a journey of escaping from reality.
I have not discounted the possibility that I am biased by my own dissatisfaction with my life (after all, dissatisfaction has been a integral part of my nature from as far back as I can remember), but I do know that, at least spiritually, we are all escapists. The soul inhabits the physical body to escape the boredom of its own perfection; at the same time, the soul seeks to escape from its body to return to its original perfect form. So while indeed I am predisposed to embrace a philosophy of escapism, I believe that we all are part of that same predisposition, as the physical manifestation of an escapist God.
In the book “The Children of the Law of One, and the Lost Teachings of Atlantis”, the author claims that creation of the material world started when part of God defected, and that the concept of “Jesus” emerged from some of those remaining facets of God (those who had a separate persona from God, but still were one with God in their consciousness) sought to save those who had fallen. This is actually a very old story, and one that I had first created my own conception of, and found in more elaborate detail via Gnostic and Kabbalic mythos. But I believe this story is incomplete, as it assumes a point of view that is not only paradoxical, but heavily biased towards the Idealism (as supposed to Materialism) point-of-review. The biggest problems with this story are as follows:
1. It assumes that part of God (the defectors) were vulnerable to temptation (and thus imperfect), whereas other parts of God were either immune to, or disinterested in the temptation, and by extension the desires that such temptations originated from.
2. It presents the “fall” (where parts of God became disconnected from the Universal Consciousness of God) as if it were mistake. While God can manifest as a person, in his most pure of form he is a Consciousness, and can only manifest himself through a pattern. This pattern, which the Gnostics called the “Logos” (meaning “order” / “word”), is the foundation for the manifestation of God, including but not limited to physical creation.
Because God manifests himself through a pattern, we have three possibilities:
(a) God is perfect, and the “fall” and the subsequent creation of the physical realm / etc. was deliberate– a part of the “plan”. We will all eventually become One with God again, and our passage into the material would is just a cosmically-drawn-out “character-building” exercise.
(b) God is imperfect, and the physical world is the offspring of the defects in his pattern. Because defects of a pattern only become more pronounced over time (see Chaos Theory), there will be no return to Oneness, and any attempts to do so will only bring us farther and farther from Universal Consciousness. We are defective, and as such we have a defective character, biased perspectives, and fundamentally finite perception of things. If God is imperfect, any attempts to try to become One again with God will only further complicate things– our “good intentions” will only serve to further corrupt us, because we were corrupt to begin with.
(c) Because God is perfect and not lacking in anything, he is bored. God wants to do something, but in order to prevent permanent corruption in the pattern of his emanation, God instills in the pattern the following motivation: “God Loses Himself That He May Find Himself.” As such, the pattern of God cycles between perfection and imperfection, where God is either losing himself (becoming less perfect, and more material), or finding himself (becoming less material, and more spiritual.
I really don’t understand where this is all going, but I do know that this material world was not a mistake. I am here for a reason, and if that reason is a neverending journey between perfection and imperfection, then so be it. At least then, God (and myself, by extension) will always have something new to explore, to create, to manifest.
The Escapism of Life
The vast majority of psychology experts would refer to an activity as a form of escapism only when its considered (by societal standards, for example) to be detrimental to that person’s well-being. For example: drugs and alcohol are escapism because they lead to addiction, DUIs, and irrational thinking; video games are escapism because they obliterate the incentive to interact in the “real world”, and workaholics are escapists in that they use work to escape from family problems, which ultimately leads to self-destructive ends.
But my understanding of escapism is a bit different; let me suggest the more broad and all-encompassing definition: Escapism is the human tendency to escape from reality, because reality isn’t good enough. That’s a simple way of putting it, but it seems that simplicity has done little more than further confuse the readers, so I will give a few examples:
When you go for a walk to clear your head, you are ‘escaping’ from a chaotic (either internally or externally) environment. When you have sex, you use that good feeling to escape the emptiness inside, or the otherwise meaninglessness of the relationship. When you go shopping, it’s to escape the lack of control over your life. Hmmmm, still not getting it? Let’s step back a little then–
The reason you have a religion (even if that religion is Atheism, or something more philosophical like Agnosticism or Buddhism) is because you are escaping from a lack of purpose; the reason you vote and participate in the political process, is to escape from powerlessness; the reason you have friends, or a girlfriend, is to escape from loneliness.
Put simply, Life itself is escapism. It is human nature to live life motivated by a need to escape the now, because for whatever reason, what one already has, isn’t good enough. We want more, and so we escape from the present state of things, to a new life. We are the caterpillar that transformed into a butterfly, and soon after decided that being the butterfly wasn’t good enough either. Life as we know it is a struggle of escapism driven by selfish greed, and that struggle will only end when we let go of our Ego and its selfish desires.
But of course, there is another way of looking at it: embracing reality. One could say that “I’m not escaping the old way of doing things, I’m just embracing the new.” In the same way, a person could justify escaping an old relationship because the new girl is more entertaining, more intelligent, more inspirational, gives better sex….every form of escapism could, simply by changing the perspective we look at things, convert escaping, into embracing.
Nevertheless, they are really just two different ways of looking at the same thing, and no matter what way you frame it– this malcontent and subsequent need for more, better, new– it’s selfish, there really is no end to it. If you want peace, you’re going to have to learn to be satisfied with what you already have, and settle for what you’ve already been given. The desire for more only leads to a lack of content, to greed, to unhappiness.
But nevertheless, Escapism is a necessity.
Trust Issues
As I noted in my post “I Can’t Imagine“, there are some things that are so beyond my ability to experience, that I can’t even imagine beyond a simulation of the emotions associated with them. The concepts of feeling connected with someone, of being loved, of the serenity of knowing the place I truly belong in life– these are things I simply can’t imagine, and have had to be content with simulating. As a result, I have lived a largely counterfeit life, pretending to be connected with people, to love and be loved, to have this strong sense of purpose in life where in reality, there was none.
My difficulties in my receptiveness to others was best expressed in an email response I wrote to a friend on the issue:
Q: “Has anyone ever shown love towards you?”
A: That question depends on your perception of reality. For example, if a tree falls and no one heard it, does it make a sound. I know my [soulmate] loves me, because she is a very pure being and cannot lie, but have I actually felt her love? No, I haven’t. I don’t know what love is beyond a spiritual ideal or logical concept. I am aware of love, and that people love me, but I have never felt their love. I cannot know what I have never experienced. That is a fundamental of all life”
Simply put, love is a concept that I am so completely out of touch with, that despite countless blog posts analyzing love, a great deal of thought put into trying to understand it, and a genuine desire to experience love, I have never been able to get beyond the simulation of love. There was a point where I would have been content with the simulation of love, but now more than ever, I find the concept of settling for a counterfeit love– quite unsettling.
So why is it that I can’t feel true love: trust issues. I haven’t genuinely trusted a person in my life; I’ve simulated trust– which is one of the easiest emotions to simulate as it turns out– but never really trusted someone, not genuinely at least. I’ve gotten close to it, with my first girlfriend especially, and since then there have been a couple individuals that I have put a significant amount of trust in– but not even close to what I would consider true trust.
Just like with love, it’s difficult to trust people, especially since I have been simulating trust my entire life. When a person spends their entire life thinking that their counterfeit emotions are real, and never once experiences the real thing, it’s terribly difficult to know the difference. It’s like living in the Matrix– because I’ve been living my entire life in a dream world, I’m unable to “tell the difference between the dream world, and the real world.”
When life feels like a dream, and nothing feels real, it’s difficult to take anything seriously, or to actually trust anything or anyone. Everything and everyone feels surreal, like a freaking Hollywood movie, making genuine trust or love somehow feel completely irrelevant. Next day I’ll wake up to a modified reality that is trying too hard to think it’s the same, and a dream that is struggling to make itself feel more real than it really is or could ever be. So it’s quite difficult at a fundamental level for me to really trust anything in life.
If I am to truly experience the full spectrum of human emotion, I need to open up to the world, and take some serious risks in life. It can’t be anything most people consider “extreme”, like becoming homeless, or going to prison– I’ve already experienced my fair share of extremities such as these, and they’ve done nothing at all for me– if anything– they have made me even more jaded of reality.
What I need is a massive wake-up call– a circumstance that compels me to sell my soul to the devil– a situation where there is no logical rationalization, no creative work-around, no means of adapting my mindset. I don’t know what it will take, but I need to find a way to open myself up quick, or I’ll wake up 20 years from now miserable, even more emotionally damaged, and still just as cut off from reality as I am now.
I Can’t Imagine
As a creative expressionist, it is my greatest ideal to present the full spectrum of emotion in my writing, and thus far, I have failed in this pursuit. If you read my poetry on Etherlust, you’ll find it to be mostly negative, and even the Love Poetry contains the emotions of love and excitement, but not what one would consider true happiness. When it comes to emotional expression, I am amazing in my ability to express negative emotions, and especially when it comes to pain, suffering, and self-loathing. But when it comes to good things, happy things, I fall far short of the pure expression I strive for, simply because I can’t even imagine being truly happy, truly loved, truly connected with everything.
I strive for Oneness, for Love, for unity with everything, but I really am lost when it comes to these things. The other day, I asked a friend who had become enlightened how to reach the path, and they admonished me, and for good reason: with all that I know about enlightenment, and all the amazing things I’ve written about Oneness and Selfless Love, I really should “get” it by now. But unlike her (and a lot of other people), I’ve never actually felt loved, never felt connected with my reality.
To me, enlightenment is a big dream that I want to have but I write about because I have very little hope of actually attaining it. I can mimic love, humility, and selfless love, but I can never have it, because I honestly have never felt it. I don’t know how to feel it, because no matter how many people may love me, no matter how many people care for me, I can only hope that, based on the evidence they’ve given me, that they genuinely do.
This friend of mine is a wonderful girl– probably the most amazing girl I’ve met or will never meet. I know she loves me unconditionally, and wishes for my greatest happiness. She is a pure soul, and so I know that when she says she loves me, or communicates through her actions, that she means it. But I would be a liar if I said I felt her love, because I have never felt love.
I logically know what love is, and can analyze, interpret, and even reproduce and simulate what love is, but my understanding of the “feeling” of love is limited to the rough hybrid of endorphins, adrenaline, dopamine, and the representative mix of happiness, excitement, and serenity these chemicals generate. I have never actually felt connected to anyone or anything, never known what it was like to actually care, to have a place where I belong, to feel one with my environment. These kinds of things are something I can’t imagine.
Yet I long with undying intensity to experience these things– at least to sample them, so that I would at least know how genuinely create these experiences for others. If I can’t have true happiness, love, or connectedness for myself, if I could at least have a small taste of what it’s like, so I might truly pass on these blessings to others, instead of sharing counterfeits, like I have been doing. I want to feel…real…and I don’t want to have to experience only negative emotions in that reality.
I believe there is a world of good that I can share with the world, and with my creative gifts and insights, all that’s missing is the genuine good– the unsimulated, pure good feelings which up until I can only write about, only dream of experiencing myself. If only so I might pass on the blessings of the full spectrum of human emotion in its glory, I want to at the very least know what it’s like to be One with God.
Coping With Bipolar
So far as I have observed, there are three different means of coping with Bipolar disorder: mania, depression, and sublimation. “But wait!”, you interject. Mania and Depression aren’t coping mechanisms, they’re mood swings. I’m not disagreeing with the latter– yes they are mood swings– believe me, I know. But they are indeed mood swings intended to cope with real conflicts.
The reason why you think there are no conflicts, and that the “mood swings” are in fact irrational phases caused by chemical imbalances, is that you misunderstand the nature of Bipolar, and do so by misunderstanding the nature of the chemical imbalance. The mind does not randomly manipulate endorphin levels because of some incurable mental disease infecting your neuro-system; to begin with, bipolar is not a disease at all, it is a condition.
In reality, bipolar is actually a deficiency– that is, a lacking in the mental capacity to protect against over-compensation. Because of a lack of proper emotional inhibitory system in the brain, people with bipolar are vulnerable to “melodramatization”– that is, we take even the smallest of environmental changes, whether positive or negative, and blow them completely out of proportion. So when good stuff happens, it’s really good, and when bad stuff happens, it’s really bad.
As a result, even the most trivial of positive circumstances cause a person with bipolar to become irrationally ecstatic, the smallest bit of exciting news will make a them manic, the tiniest paranoia will give them a panic attack, and the more trivial of let-downs will thrust them into depression. Basically, people with bipolar actually deal with emotions much the same way that mentally healthy people do, only without all the mental shock absorbers and failsafes, resulting in melodrama.
So then, how does a person with Bipolar disorder deal with these unreasonably intense emotions? As stated in the first paragraph, there are three main types of defense mechanisms they use to deal with such overwhelming emotions: Positive projection “Mania” (symptoms include excitement, ecstasy, anger, anxiety), Negative projection “Depression” (symptoms include sadness, antisocial behavior, lethargy, escapism, procrastination), and Sublimation (the productive release of positive or negative energy). This final response, which manifests through the successful conversion of excess energy into a productive means (such as reading writing, art, self-improvement, physical/mental exercise, and innovation), is the key to conquering Bipolar.
I remember when I discovered how to conquer my bipolar through sublimation, and I was so excited and optimistic about the future, and all of the amazing things that I could do by leveraging these new-found insights. I endeavored to eliminate all of my other mental illnesses in the same manner, thus freeing myself of these life-stunting issues. But then I found out there was a catch: Just like with normal people’s emotions, there is a breaking point where the emotions become so intense that we can no longer control them. The reason why Bipolar disorder manifests is after all because that breaking point occurs far more often with overly-intense emotions, resulting in a life literally controlled by one’s fleeting emotional mind-state. Once emotions have become too intense, there is nothing you can do to stop your actions– the emotions are just too overwhelming for any amount of willpower to stop.
I have developed a number of way to cope with this problem, the most interesting of which is the artificial creation of multiple personalities (i.e. if I lose control of my emotions, I can regain control by changing to another, more emotionally-withdrawn personality). I have also developed mindsets that eliminate emotional relevance, become detached so as to prevent destabilizing social feedback, and made a habit of analyzing any emotionally-charged phenomena so as to isolate any detrimental emotional energy from my environment.
But while such methods have proved quite interesting and entertaining, and provide satisfactory temporary fixes to these vulnerabilities of mine, there is a means of more completely solving all emotional woes, and it’s not something you need to have mental illness or an eccentric nature to apply: in a word, Habits. As I will go on to explain in further detail in my post “Building Discipline“, habits are the means by which we are able to live for the future, instead of merely living in the moment or building upon the past. Habits, an ability unique to humans, is (together with planning) is the foundation upon which self-improvement is built, and also the only means by which emotions can be reliably controlled
Trying to control emotions through sheer willpower, which effective in mild circumstance, will almost certainly fail in circumstances that cross your emotional threshold. Everyone has a different threshold, which is equivalent to one’s individual willpower, so you could say that one’s “breaking point” is equivalent to the limits of an individual’s willpower; if this mental limit is exceeded, there is nothing you can do to control anything you do, simply because you lack the willpower to. In addition, due to a phenomena known as “Ego Depletion“, excessive use of willpower will eventually drain your ability to control your emotions, even if the circumstances you encounter are mild in nature.
So if lack of self-control results in emotional instability, and controlling one’s emotions results in the depletion of one’s willpower, how can I, or anyone for that matter, successfully control my emotions over long periods of time? This is where habits come in: whereas willpower is conscious, habits are for the most part unconscious. This is the human mind’s most powerful ability: When you register in your mind that a particular activity, thought pattern, perspective, or routine as essential to life, you can consciously forget it (what is colloquially known as “taking for granted”), and automatically do and think these things without so much as thinking about it.
As a result, you don’t have to worry about making any decisions, because you already have– in forming that habit, you tell your mind, “if this idea/situation/phenomena comes up, automatically do ‘this’ in response”. Because emotions can only control your life to the extent they are involved in the decision-making process, any decisions that you make through habits are immune to emotional feedback.
Now when I have developed habits to deal with my bipolar, I will never cross that emotional threshold again. I have developed habits to ensure my emotional and mental stability, fail-safes to ensure I never get out of control, and lifestyle choices that promote optimum mental health. The most of the fundamental of these habits are found in my blog Ego Engineering, with the emotional and mental habits proving to be the most fundamental. Because the majority of the decisions I make in my life are made through habits, I never have to worry about running out of willpower, because living life no longer requires much. Finally, habits free up the necessary mental energy to continue to improve my life.
Him Who Knows To Do Good
James 4:17 “Therefore, to him who knows to do good and does not do it, to him it is sin.” This Bible verse has long served to be an inspiration in my life, and I aspire to live by it; I know what is right, and what I can do to better this world and all who are in it, but each day I do not do it; thus, each day, I sin.
To sin is the act of falling short of one’s potential, and of one’s purpose in life. It is human nature to be sinful, because we are all imperfect by nature, and our potential is suppressed and corrupted by our sinful desires and pride. But this path is not good– it’s not right. I struggle each day to free myself of that sin.
Of course, it’s not easy to become free of sin, and some days it feels downright impossible, and at times I feel so weak, vulnerable, and incompetent, that I just give up on my day, and wallow in a depressed state of nihilistic and hateful existential angst; I decide that this day is too difficult, and I’ll never be able to do anything worthwhile, so I might as well just give up and pretend that I don’t really exist, that everything is fake, and that nothing even matters. These are my darkest of days– times where it’s not that I don’t care, it’s that caring is too difficult, and I run away from my problems.
I know what is right, and I know what I need to do to manifest my purpose, but it often feels too hard, too miserable, too stressful to follow-through with, and so I end up falling short of my potential, thereby bringing insult to my purpose and to my very existence. It’s a really wretched feeling, and I sometimes wish that I could just end it all, so that I didn’t have to deal with this weighted burden of having to live up to such a lofty potential, and so follow-through which such great responsibilities as I am destined to have.
What I really need to do is stop thinking like a pessimist, and start living like an optimist. As one wise man (Winston Churchill) once said, “A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.” I need to stop seeing all these hardships as obstacles in my life, and start seeing each new “problem” instead as an opportunity to persevere. Once every hardship becomes an opportunity, nothing will discourage me; to the contrary, “wht does not kill me, makes me stronger” (Friedrich Nietzsche).
My Compromise of Candidness
As people continue to rant and rave about how Facebook is taking away our privacy, I am not in the least worried, because I have everything set to public to begin with. I have nothing to hide, and as a journalist it is to my advantage to get as much exposure as possible. Facebook is a great opportunity to share information, and I make the most of that opportunity by sharing everything with everyone, even people who aren’t even friend’s of my friend’s friends. So the reason why I am trying to move to Google+ as my primary social network, is not because I think Google+ has better privacy features, which although true, is not something I make use of. Even on Google+, I set everything to Public anyway, for the same reasons I did so on Facebook: exposure and transparency.
But what I don’t want, is to be misunderstood. It is for this reason (and many other reasons, which are explained here) that I chose to go by the alias “Timothy Matias” online. Almost all of my activity, work, and thoughts are credited to this alias, not to me. This is because I don’t want anyone to think that The thoughts of Timothy Matias represent who I am as a person. At one point it did, because I was satisfied with who I was, and who I would be as a person. I liked my egoism, my philosophical jargon, my existential angst, my superficial passions, and my fake thirst for knowledge. They were part of who I was as an individual, and made me unique as a person.
At that point in my life, the writings of Justin Benjamin, aka jbcandid and later th3g1vr, were the true me, and I wanted to share myself with the world through that writing. But at some point, I realized that I wanted to change, and change radically, and so I needed to create an alias to represent who I was, so as to prevent people from misunderstand who I will be. For now I am Timothy Matias, but that is not my true character, as I am continually evolving into a new person, with whom which Timothy would have only a little in common with, by comparison.
Justin Benjamin is a different person, and he is not yet in existence yet, but a work-in-progress, the identity of which is yet to be comprehended, let alone manifested. This is not a case of multiple personalities, but of the evolution of character. Most people understand a person as they are, not as they will be, so it’s only natural that if I were to try to get to know them as my true self, they would misunderstand, because their perception of me could not traverse beyond the present state of things. For most people, it would be more natural for them to know me as Timothy Matias, than the ever-changing Justin Benjamin.
I like transparency, but I hate misunderstandings. While I want you to know who I truly am, I have yet to understand that myself, so I will have to leave you hanging; in the meantime, you have Timothy to entertain you. This is my compromise.
When It’s Good To Be Stubborn
One of my defining characteristics as a person, is that I’m stubborn. This can be a very troublesome quality, but it is also one of my greatest attributes. So then, how can I use my stubbornness to my advantage, so as to be successful in life?
First of all, my stubbornness translates into persistence, which in turn produces perseverance. So a stubborn nature is necessary for accomplishing the greater things in life; to put it poetically: If one wishes to do the impossible, then one must be impossible. (if you get my pun!) Stubbornness allows me to relentlessly work to fulfill my goals, and never give up no matter what people say, what obstacles in my way, or how long it takes or what it costs. That kind of unrelenting nature, when channeled correctly, will prove a crucial quality in the manifestation of all my objectives.
Then we have the more passionate for of stubbornness: Obsession. I cover the importance obsession, and the means of properly channeling it, in this post.
Finally, stubbornness is good because it helps me to stay grounded in what I believe in, and what I know to be right. While there are many ways of living life, and much potential activities, lifestyles, perspectives, and means of living satisfactorily, It’s only when a person sticks to a single path, which is optimized for their particular attributes, that one can follow-through with the excellence of living life to one’s potential.
Knowledge Optimization
For the vast majority of my life, I have been ever-interested in the pursuit of knowledge, and especially knowledge that leads to understanding the nature of things, and the causal relationship between objects and concepts, and the identification and perception thereof. But all of the knowledge that I have acquired has so far proved to be mostly useless to me at the most fundamental level. The reason for this is remarkably simple: I lack in-depth knowledge of just about everything, and have ended up knowing just a little bit of everything.
So then, if my greatest pursuit up until now has been the acquisition and utilization of knowledge, then why has my knowledge become so consistently superficial? The reasons for this are of an equally base quality: it’s because up until now, superficial knowledge is all I needed to convince just about anyone of my expertise. I found it was easier to pretend to know what I was talking about, and bullshit my way through life, than to actually acquire a comprehensive knowledge of these topics so as to justify my opinions on the respective matters.
To further justify my actions, I reasoned that my “superficial” knowledge of things was still significantly greater than people who have gotten a bachelor’s degree in such areas; indeed, if the present generation of college students is to be our judge, a Bachelor’s degree is a comparably petty accomplishment, and roughly equates to a “certificate of common sense” in the field(s) to which such the degree applies.
If one were to compare an Economics BA graduate to Adam Smith, the founder of Economics, it would become abundantly clear that the graduate was, by comparison, still “wet behind the ears” in regards to economic theory. This is despite the fact that Adam Smith had no real resources by which to study economics (it did not even exist at the time), had no technology, no Internet, no advanced calculators– in 1776 (the year his first treatise on economics, “An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations”, was published), there really wasn’t much of anything to work off, save for philosophy, and his own mind.
The same comparisons can be drawn between Plato and modern philosophy, Archimedes and mathematics, Newton and calculus, St. Augustine and theology. Why is it that students in the modern day, despite having so much more resources at their disposal, are comparably so inferior to our educational predecessors, who had little else to work with except for their eyes to observe and their minds to think? I blame it on two things: laziness, and the immense amount of distraction that comes from an unmanageably enormous amount of data at our disposal, and a lack of proper academically-minded means to filter it all. But alas, I must digress.
The central point, as it applies to my own life, is that I need to stop being distracted by all these tidbits of superficial knowledge, and optimize my academic repertoire so as to have an in-depth knowledge of what I am already familiar with, so that I will know enough so that I can do more with my knowledge besides bullshit people. I already know that I can hold my own in conversations with Bachelor’s graduates, and keep Master’s graduates on their toes in the very field(s) that they majored in, but life isn’t a pissing contest or a ego-bashing party, and in the long run, this bullshitting is getting me nowhere.
I need to optimize my knowledge, by targeting what topics I want or need to know about most, and develop as in-depth of a knowledge of these topics as I reasonably can. I’ve learned far enough about the superficial aspects of things– it’s time to finally take the plunge and take what I know (and what I don’t know, but should!) seriously. No more will I be a jack-of-all-trades (master of none), it’s time to take on the full Monty of these topics: Mathematics, Computer Science, Communication Studies, Creative Writing, and Linguistics. A comprehensive and in-depth knowledge of each of these topics is, after all, prerequisite to the achievement of my long-term goals.
Self-efficacy
For some people, happiness is perhaps a pursuit in itself; the notion that everyone has a “right” to be happy has so permeated modern society, that many even go so far as to consider the prioritization of happiness as common sense. But as for me, I cannot be happy unless my life is meaningful, productive, and above all self-efficacious.
I need to know that I have made a definitively positive influence on the world, and that the contributions I’ve made are unique to my character and have made full use of my merits as an individual; it is a daily struggle I must hold myself accountable to each day, as I ask myself “have I made effective use of my gifts, passions, skills, knowledge, and personal character to make lasting contributions to the world?”
Almost every day since I have been alive, the answer to this question is “No, I have not done enough”; after all, there has not been even one day since I’ve been alive that I have done as much as I could to live life to my fullest, and I have continually short-changed everyone (and especially myself!) in regards to the use of all that I am towards the important things in life. I have these amazing gifts, and priceless insights, and my life has been wasted in comparison with all that I could be, do, and inspire in the world.
With each day, every minute, and with every breath that I am alive, it should be to manifest all that I am, and all that I was created to be. So that I do not insult the God from which I emanate, the people by which I am influenced, the soul from which I originate, it is crucial that I live life to the fullest, and make contributions proportionate to what I am capable of.
Jesus said in one of his parables, “For everyone to whom much is given, from him much will be required; and to whom much has been committed, of him they will ask the more.” I have been given so very much in this life I have been given, so it is my responsibility, my duty, and my honor to produce a life worthy of these merits, and to pass on these blessings to the world which has made everything that I have done, and will do, possible in the first place.
The Corruption of Perfection
Perfection, which is most simply defined as “the state of completion”, is considered by most to be an unreachable ideal to be striven after, but never reached; depending on the way you look at it, this is very true, as true perfection cannot be borne of a single individual, but is the natural product of the sum of all the Universe– that is, perfection is the state all “all” being One with itself. Of course, while perfection may be capable of existing (and does indeed exist) on the spiritual plane (that is, perfection is very real as a “thought” attached to the very DNA [aura] of our soul), perfection cannot truly manifest in physical form, as very nature of the material world is one of chaos, diversity, and individualism.
To better understand the relationship between the natural world and the spiritual world, let us first attach names to this world that will cause them to seem more familiar:
Nature: the creator of the material world, emanator of our physical being and the blueprints thereof (DNA). Nature encourages individualism, possessiveness, identification, diversity, anarchy, and (ultimately) chaos.
Spirit: the creator of the spiritual world, emanator of our spiritual being, and the blueprints thereof (Aura). Spirit encourages unity, freedom, love, selflessness, and (ultimately) oneness.
These two seemingly opposed forces, which incidentally formed the basis for Plato’s dualism, are not quite the same as “good” and “evil”, but akin to “negative” and “positive” forces. Indeed, a life striving for either pure spirit (spirituality and asceticism) or pure nature (carnality and materialism)– both of these extremes cannot really be considered good, as the former accomplishes nothing at all, and the latter manifests much, but is self-destructive in nature. The one way to live a spiritually and materially positive life, is to live a life of Balance and moderation– the kind of life that Buddha himself recommended, in fact.
This is not to say that a life of compromise (between physical and material pursuits) is the proper course of action– such a life would only deprive a person of half the merits of both– why compromise when you live a complete, fulfilling, perfect life, being One with both the physical and spiritual life? As I said before, the spiritual and physical worlds, and their originators (Nature and Spirit) are seemingly opposed forces– in reality, however, they are really just different ways of looking at the same thing.
Now this is the really important part: Nature is not actually any less imperfect of a force than Spirit is! Just as Spirit is with the spiritual universe, perfection in Nature is only possible through the sum of all the physical parts of the physical universe. Now, this is what I mean by “different ways of looking at the same thing”: The physical world is not actually any more fragmented, or any more imperfect than the spiritual world. The only reason why that we see imperfection and “sin” in the world, is because we perceive these things to exist. By perceiving imperfection and sin in the world, we cause these qualities to manifest, as we interpret our reality according to these attributes.
So then, interpretation is where the real problem lies, and the cause of “evil” in the world can be traced back to our perception of things. We communicate in such a way that propagates imperfection, sin, violence, hatred, fear, doubt, and all manner of “evil” resulting from something as simple as a negative interpretation of the world.
However, note further that the majority of the attributes associated with “evil” in the world, would identify most with the qualities of “Nature”– of the physical world. This is not to say that Nature is “evil”– the true evil (if you would humor me so as to apply this label for the sake of argument) is imbalance! When there is more Spirit and less Nature, very little would be accomplished, and our creative potential would become suppressed; conversely, when there is more Nature and less Spirit (as is currently the case), we become creatively unbridled, but everything we accomplish becomes destructive, divisive, prejudiced, and filled with all manner of hatred and malice.
At some point I realized that finding this “Balance” was impossible without a compass, and so I have continued to search for a means of achieving balance between the two, so as to achieve Oneness (and thus perfection) with both the Natural and Spiritual realms. The answer, and quite an unexpected answer it was, can only be found in Selflessness.
On The Merits of Unfiltered Writing
On principle, writing that is well-polished, thoroughly-edited, and adequately sourced, is superior to unfiltered writing, which is written off-the-top-of-one’s head, based on conjecture and intuition; refined and authoritative writing will always win against raw inspiration in a contest of literary power. But then again, the purpose of refining and sourcing one’s writing is not so much to learn and to discover new things (that being accomplished in the creation of the original raw materials of the original draft), but to present that which one already knows to be true, in a form that the target audience(s) will be appreciative of.
So then, whereas the final product– that which will be presented as the fruit of one’s labor– the product of painstaking research, compilation, diction, sourcing, framing (of words), and optimization– is what is of most immediate merit to everyone else, The original state– the unfiltered writing- is of the greatest benefit to the writer, as it is the means by which the writer was able to begin to truly understand (or at least to understand in the literary medium) the material which he was to convey, and eventually he (or the editor, if the circumstances favor it) would present in the form to which we (everyone else) will appreciate as well (if not better) as he had already understood the original product.
In addition, if the writer were to, instead of editing to a refined state all of his material (as convention would suggest), but take the alternative route by leaving nearly all of his writing in the unpolished state, he would be permitted to advance significantly farther in his creative endeavors, than one who would be when creatively limited by the tedious editing process. In fact, I have done this very thing, in nearly all of my blog posts, emphasizing creative output over aesthetics; not so as to say that I am prioritizing quantity over quality (which is not necessarily the case), but rather, I have decided that the aesthetic preoccupations of the editing process are rather irrelevant to the goal of my writing: creative expression.
Creative expressionism, as an art form, draws a very hard-to-see line between aestheticism and art, and especially when concerning the type of art that is considered to be “creative” (as supposed to arts that are more of crafts –i.e. artisan-work). If, for example, my medium of creative expressionism would be a a forum-based roleplay-inspired story, then the elimination of the editing process as a creative priority would surely enhance the creative equilibrium and (in the long run) produce a greater masterpiece than a carefully-edited story could ever manage.
In the same way, massive information-sharing projects such as “Wikipedia” could never have become as massive as they have, if the site editors censored and peer-reviewed every article in Wikipedia, reverting all commits made without sources already deemed “authoritative” by the site moderators, Wikipedia would have suffered a fate even worse than Citizendium (a project started as a fork of Wikipedia by one of the founders!) Point being, unfiltered writing isn’t just an essential part of the writing development process– for some writing environments (and many creatively inclusive ones) the deliberate publishing of unfiltered writing becomes a necessity.
The Way, The Truth, and The Life
One of the most famous verses in the Bible, is John 14:6 — “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” But what does this Bible verse mean? Most Christian authorities interpret this Bible verse as meaning that Jesus is the inter-mediator between us and God; after all, is known throughout the New Testament as the Son of God, who incarnated himself as a mere human, so as to be close with us and teach of his ways as a friend, and ultimately to be the scapegoat of our sin, living a life of perfection and taking on himself the sins of the world, that the debt of our sins might be repaid in his sacrifice. Even if you don’t believe in the Christian account, many cultures (including some that precede the Christian account of Jesus) have some form of the telling of the story of the ultimate sacrifice, of a virtuous man sacrificing himself to cleanse the world of its wickedness.
But if Jesus was the Son of God, and humans are, as creations of God, made in the image of God, then “I am the way, the truth, and the life” is more than just a description of Jesus’s relationship to God– it’s a description of the godliness found in all of us. So if these three aspects of life, our “way of life”, the “truth” by which which we live, and the “life” by which our existence is made meaningful, are the triadic manifestation of God’s character, then what are the aspects of God’s character which in living are so manifested?
First we have “The Way”, which is our direction in life. as a part of God’s character, our way of living is derived from “Knowledge”. In fact, the eating of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil” provided the knowledge for, among many other things, the choice between a life of good, and a life of evil, and the consequences that each of these lives entail. The more we know, the more possible directions we have to choose from, and consequently, the more aware of “choice” we become. This can be considered our “Mind”
Secondly, we have “The Truth”, which serves as our Conscience in life, determining what is right and wrong, true and false, pleasurable and painful, and the causal relationship between our actions, and how they effect others. This aspect of our character can be considered our “Heart”
Finally, we have the “Life”, that which drives us to do something with what Knowledge we have attained, and also to acquire more knowledge with which to further manifest our potential. This aspect is what drives us also to communicate, both with the world and with ourselves, and to live as meaningful of a life as possible. “This aspect can be considered our “Spirit”
Together, all of these aspects form the manifestation of God, the source of which is the human soul, triadized as mind, heart, and spirit. As the extension of God’s consciousness, they serve as agents of God, providing us the way, truth, and life by which to live as meaningful, fulfilling, and happy of lives as possible. So even if you don’t believe in the Jesus story, you can be sure that, even if only metaphorical, Jesus resides in all of us.
Theocracy
In my post “Popularity“, I explained the power-exchange relationship people have with each other, and how this relationship impacts who is popular, and who is not. What’s even more interesting, though, is that the same power-exchange metrics that influence social dynamics, have heavily influenced the creation and the nature of religion, and even of God himself. To demonstrate this, let’s first reiterate the two basic social needs we have as humans, as I illustrated in “Popularity”:
1. People need somewhere to belong (someone or something to be controlled by)
2. People need to know (appreciate) that the power they exchange (give up their free will to) gives a good return.
Of course, in the “Popularity” post, I didn’t word these needs in such a fashion, but the re-wording of these axioms is necessary to understand our relationship to God, and ultimately to appreciate the human creation of God, and the nature thereof.
We created God because we needed a higher power to relinquish control of our lives to, so that we might have somewhere we belong (which is not reliably possible without the existence of God, or a god-like being. Furthermore, we have created God(s) throughout history as a glorified image of the human character, and as a projection of the human Ego. Creating God gives us somewhere to belong, and created a human-like God with Ego-elating traits being applied so as the satisfy the human Ego in its self-validation.
It’s no coincidence that God has imperfect traits that so uncannily mirror the human Ego– just like us, God is jealous, angry, saddened, possessive, and spiritually insecure, and needs people to worship and to need him. These traits, which would logically be considered imperfections, are key parts of God’s character, which man deliberated attached to God to justify all that which we consider to be “human” traits. Similarly, God’s need for right and wrong, sinners vs. saints, and the mindset of God being vengeful to the wicked and rewarding the good— this kind of self-righteous moral polarity is the mere projection of human nature.
So why did man create God? Some people call out to God in need, and God has been incredibly useful as someone to rely on, to talk to and pray for help, especially when life is hard and things don’t go as planned. But the real reason why man created God, if we are to back in time to the first emanations of God (the city-states of Mesopotamia, for example) We’ll find that from the very beginning, man created God to gain control over other men. God, as the ultimate symbol of power, security, and belonging, was from the very beginning a powerful means for men to gain phenomenal amounts of power over their people; by citing that they were the gateway to the most amazing entity(s) in the world, the gods, men subsumed power over the people; in turn, the unity of the people controlled by these gods produced, and to this day continues to produce remarkable levels of social solidarity and predictability. This is the real beauty of the Theocratic government, and the reason why the most successful of governments are Theocracy-driven grovernments: God, from the inception of his creation and to this present day, remains the ultimate form of control.
Nearly every dictator, terrorist, and powerful leader throughout history, has in some way used God as his medium to garner his authority. There is no figure in history more important than God, and he remains the single most powerful form of social control. Originally, God was only moderately powerful, as in Mesopotamian, Asian, and African civilizations there was no “One True God”, but a myriad of gods and demigods continually vying for power, in this never-ending ethereal conflict– this image of God is more true to human nature, as just like the gods they worship do, humans have been in this never-ending struggle for power and possession of the world and its people.
However, at some point certain groups of people realized that “One True God” is several times more powerful of an image than a fragmented alliance of gods and demi-gods, and they propagated this image to gain the political advantage and military morale to conquer the other polytheistic (and thus theistically weaker) civilizations in their region. These people’s, the most historically famous of which were the Jews, started a Theocratic revolution that eventually ensured that the most powerful civilizations in the world, were nations that believed in “One True God”, it is for this reason that most religiously-motivated countries have a strong monotheistic bias.
Nearly every industrialized country in the world has theocratic elements, and these elements give great powers to the leaders of these nations, as well as ensure social solidarity and security for the people. From a utilitarian standpoint, this would make belief in God (or the very least, a belief in a higher power) a sociological necessity.
Humans, as social creatures, are strongest when united under a common cause, and what greater common cause is there than God? There is one common cause through which people might become united, that is a purer and more worthy cause that God, and that Selfless Love. But for people to be united in their love for each other is an ideal not easily accomplished, even in smaller societies, because people are by their very nature selfish. As such, one would not be wrong to say that unison in God is an acceptable substitute for unison in Love, especially since ultimately, God is Love.
But therein human nature lies the flaw in a theocratic society: For most men God is not Love, but power. Because there are none more powerful than God, men leverage the image of God for their own purpose; As God is Absolute by nature, and men use God as a means to elevate their own power, they become corrupted by their very belief in God; as the saying goes, “Absolute Power corrupts absolutely.” If people saw God as the manifestation of Love, and life as the image of God’s beauty, then they would become united in selfless love, which is the ideal path to social solidarity. But because the men who control the world’s governments are those that desired power, and because those that desire power are inherently self-serving, our governments will continually be saturated not with Selfless Love, but with a selfish need for power. This is the ultimate price for theocracy, at least in a world where selfishness and power over others go hand in hand.
Force of Habit
As expressed in the last few posts of the Epiphany Project, I have made a resolution to be wholly altruistic in my life, dedicating myself to the pursuit, consummation, and manifestation of Oneness through Selfless Love for the world and all that is in it. But anyone who has observed me, be they stranger, friend, or family member, would know that I have not been living selflessly, much less have I been unconditionally loving in my behavior or character. So if I am so dedicated to selfless love, why has it not manifested? The answer to this, is the same as the answer to why the world hasn’t ended yet: the world already has, and I already am, but the manifestation of that existence has yet to pass in the tangible (real) world.
The reason why I am not yet tangibly selfless or loving, is because the realization of what needs to done is only the beginning of the journey; as exciting as finally realizing the path I must take, and the necessary mindset I need to live a happy and meaningful life, deciding on and sticking to a direction is only the very beginning. Up until now, I have been a spiritual nomad, wandering aimlessly in search of the right direction to take– the path to the holy water by which to quench my thirst. Now that I know where that path lies, and have committed to taking that path wherever it may leave, I can begin my journey– but that’s just it– the change that has begun in me is only beginning.
The first thing I need to do in this spiritual journey to a life of complete Oneness through Selfless Love, is to correct my selfish habits. I have built up a massive collection of selfishness, and more selfish habits than is even possible for me to list off the top of my head– perhaps even more habits than I could possibly know. To proceed to the next stage of my journey requires cleaning my slate of all that I know– or more accurately, all I thought I knew– as this knowledge has become heavily biased my selfishness and unstable levels of individuality; as such, most of the knowledge (and especially spiritual knowledge) has become useless to me, as it is corrupted with selfishness, and motivated by greed, pride, and extreme arrogance.
My spiritual path must contain none of these qualities; I must lay my spiritual foundation anew, building up within myself habits appropriate to my new spiritual path. Of the habits I must build up in myself, the most essential habits are those impacting the core of my spiritual mind: my thoughts. In the Bible, Paul set up a beautiful template for what kind of thoughts that one in pursuit of spiritual godliness should think of, in Philippians 4:8 —
“…Whatever things are true, whatever things are noble, whatever things are just, whatever things are pure, whatever things are lovely, whatever things are of good report, if there is any virtue and if there is anything praiseworthy—meditate on these things.”
Starting with modifying my accustomed way of thinking, the mindset with which I perceive things, and the thought patterns according to which I live my life, I must reshape all that is me, to be in alignment with an altruistic character, which is my true self. Only then can I build up the foundations of spiritual purity and love which are necessary for the manifestation of Oneness Through Selfless Love in my own life, just as I have already resolved myself to be.
Knowing Versus Doing
In this post, I explained the relationship between philosophy, mathematics, and science, and elaborated on their individual merits, as well as their utility (role) in the grand scheme of things. Put in layman’s terms, philosophy is knowing, mathematics is understanding, and science is doing. It should be obvious then that all three elements are equally important aspects of knowledge, each dedicated to utilizing knowledge in different ways (to accumulate, interpret, and apply knowledge). But of these, the ones that most directly concern us, are the knowing and doing of things, not just for knowledge itself (as was the topic concerned in the last post), but for the living of life in general.
Knowledge is power, in that what you know determines the limits of what you can do, but for the same reason, you are limited in the magnitude of your doing, by the scope of the knowledge you choose to acquire and make use of (apply).
If you know a little bit of everything, and wish to acquire knowledge for the very sake of acquisition– even in the more piously academic sense– you will accomplish very little for precisely the same reason. Just as butter spread over too much bread will make very little impact upon the taste buds of those unfortunate enough to taste it, one who knows a little bit about everything will end up doing little to nothing for the world, and have no more positive influence on the world that that of an ‘insufferable know-it-all’, at best a ‘jack of all trades, master of none’. To acquire knowledge merely for the sake of knowing is of little use to anyone, and especially wasteful to the individual who chooses to lead such a lifestyle. This is why scientists are so disparaging of philosophers– they see amazing men, with brilliant minds, who do nothing with their thoughts, save perhaps for the recording of wandering thoughts. Philosophers have by virtue of their commitment to thought an infinite potential, but nothing can come of philosophy alone, and so most of the offspring of a philosopher’s mind becomes little more than ‘aborted’ thoughts, and vaporware.
By contrast, those that pursue living an active life, without regard to the knowledge prerequisite to living a truly meaningful life, do indeed live life to the fullest, but the scope to which “full” is defined ends up being ‘short-changed’ by the lack of knowledge that would otherwise define and expand the limits of such people’s lives. The construction worker, the fast food employee, and the factory worker all spend their days actively contributing to society, and one would think that the effort they exert would accumulate into something meaningful. But although perhaps the level of meaning in such occupations might be meaningful enough for such individuals, the only objectively recognizable accomplishment of their work is money: a means to purchase what society might consider ‘happiness’, but nothing more. With the proper knowledge, planning, and enduring resolve of one who wishes to live a life greater than what such mundane occupations can provide, the construction worker is transformed into the architect, the fast food employee into a chef, and the factory worker into an engineer; such transformations allow a person to do what they love doing, but on a far more self-enriching and meaningful level, with the appropriate knowledge and planning for these positions being prerequisite to the manifestation in the given person’s life.
So then, a truly meaningful life is the balanced mixture of knowledge and application, with the knowledge determining the scope of one’s potential, and the application determining how much knowledge is manifested. But what is “meaningful”, in the context of the knowledge that is applied? This is where Communication, the conveyor of meaning, comes in. Communication, the middleman between knowledge and application, and also the inter-mediator between humans, animals, and all living things, is the sheet music through which inspiration (knowledge) is conveyed (applied). To ensure that your thoughts and actions are not only conveyed, but appreciated by those that experience them, proper communication to your target audience is an absolute necessity. Just as the proper conveyance of mathematical principles is necessary for the sciences to make proper use of the philosophies they derive ideas from, All knowledge cannot properly translate into action without communication to interpret it.
This triadic system– knowing (philosophy), communication (understanding), and doing (application)– is the key to living a balanced and utilitarian existence. All three aspects of knowledge are vital to living a truly meaningful life.
The contributions to philosophy are immense, and in some cases immeasurable, yet scientists and academic researchers of nearly every field of study more often than not discount philosophy as a comparably meritless subject, being variously characterized as “the prototype to science”, “an obsolete field”, or even “mere speculation”. Indeed, if philosophy were compared to science in the terms only of scientific merits, science has done more for academia than philosophy ever has. However, as Albert Einstein (who was both a philosopher and a scientist) put it, “Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.” Philosophy may appear to scientists as being mere speculation, but it is speculation that laid the foundation of science, and continues to expand to boundaries of what we know and can know, both philosophically and scientifically.
The first scientists were philosophers; indeed, there was originally no such thing as science originally, nor was there a means to empirically produce evidence using the scientific method, save for the limits afforded by observation of the physical world. Mankind observed, thought, deduced, and built upon previous thought in such a manner as this, and so it is that the first scientists were observers and thinkers, and they became as philosophers, from sophia, meaning “wise”.
The terms “science” and “scientist”, as it so happens, did not come into being until fairly recently, even after the foundations of classical physics had been consolidated by Sir Issac Newton, in his treatise “The Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy”; even when the term science came into common use in the modern context (in the 20th century, three centuries later), it was used not to separate philosophy from science, but to separate empirical philosophies from non-empirical ones.
But what determines what is modernly considered philosophy, and what is considered science? To simplify this inquiry: in philosophical terms, if “philosophy” is the discovery of the “potential” (the possibilities) of an academic field (via speculation, for example), science is the “actuality” of such possibilities– that is, the defining and validating of the given possibilities by providing concrete evidence and conformance to proven theory. In other words, if philosophy is the “why” (things work), science tells us how things work, and also proves that things work the way they appear to. Philosophy is observation, and science is the confirmation, categorization, and replication of philosophy. In this sense, a “theory” can be considered a philosophical axiom for the science(s) to which it applies.
Philosophy then, is observations, reasoning, and original thought directed towards the explanation of phenomena in the world, and also to explain non-phenomena. Science, by contrast, aims to validate, standardize, and replicate phenomena, usually obtaining results via the scientific method, and the rigorous testing of the results acquired; while philosophy tells us what to know, science tells us if we really know it, how we know it, and– most importantly– how to apply this knowledge to the real world. It is this latter purpose that most dramatically separates philosophy from science, and the reason why philosophy is often under-appreciated or even taken for granted: Philosophers don’t actually do anything– they observe, think, and convey, but none of their thought actually does anything in the real world– this is after all the task of scientists. Philosophy thinks, but Science acts on thought.
Mathematics, by comparison, is right smack dab in the middle of these two, trying to reconcile philosophy and science, and providing a means by which these two opposing approaches to study can coexist on common ground. Mathematics is purely Philosophical in nature, but it is also purely Scientific. Yet at the same time, it also exist as neither of these, but as its own entity, forging alliances where otherwise there would be no cohesion, and more often than not, Mathematics ends up being the one to steal the show, where the end-product is not expressed in philosophical or scientific terms, but in mathematical language.
The reason for Mathematic’s uncanny role in these matters, lies in the most basic of function of Mathematics: communication! Mathematics is, in both purpose and substance, the platform, protocol, and procedures that define and structure how science, philosophy, and mathematics communicate! By facilitating communication between philosophy and science, mathematics ensures that the balance and cohesion between these two approaches is maintained; when mathematics is properly harnessed in this manner, it allows for the maximum amount of potential (philosophy) to be actualized (scientifically validated and applied to real life). In this sense, mathematics can be considered the most important philosophy, the most important language, and (in a more broad sense of the word) the most important language, to nearly every field of academia.
Most interestingly, Philosophy, Science, and Mathematics correspond, with an astounding level of affinity, to the Freudian Id, Ego, and SuperEgo:
Philosophy (Id): Provides the desire (potential) of the given field of study.
Science (SuperEgo): Converts the desires provided by philosophy into universally validated and replicable evidence, and provides a means for such thought to be applied to the real world (i.e. Society).
Mathematics (Ego): Is the intermediary between Philosophy and Science, and ensures that philosophy is accurately and efficiently converted into an scientifically acceptable form, and that science can be converted back into a philosophically appreciable form.
Of course, the complexities of each of these fields extend well beyond my analysis, and their relationship is by extension more complex, with many more relation-defining variables at play, but let it be recognized that philosophy, mathematics, and science are heavily interdependent and inter-operable in their relationship to each other, with a proper appreciation of the merits of each (and particularly of mathematics, the “stain” by which philosophy and science can be appreciated) proving fundamental to academic advancement.
Feeling The Love
There was a point in my life where I thought myself incapable of empathy. For most of my life, I could not empathize with anyone– there was no love, no trust, no hatred, no fear, no loathing, no joy, no sadness. There was only data. Even now, my receptiveness to people’s feelings is very limited, and I rely mostly on words, intonation, and superficial gestures to understand people, and to understand myself. Truth be told, I cannot feel people’s love, as much as I so long to.
My parents, my friends, and my family may love me, or they might not love me. I feel no love from them, but neither do I feel uncertainty about what they feel– this is because I have become jaded to these things, and used to not knowing what others feel about me, or if they feel anything at all. But there is one feeling that I will never get used to, and that is loneliness.
Because I do not know their true feelings, but merely the feelings they choose to express (via words, gestures, etc.), I feel cut off, alone, uncared for, unloved. The latter I can deal with, but the former– the feelings of desertion, and loneliness– these feelings I cannot adapt to, and am continually hurt by. I can only hope that someday I find a way to get past the limitations of superficial communication, and achieve the means to truly communicate with everyone, so that they might know my true self, and also so I might know their’s.
So long as I cannot feel the love, I can never truly love another, because I am bound to my own experiences. My love is an incomplete love, because it is one born of loneliness and isolation, and one which is only expressed through the superficiality of the spoken word, and of body language. This is not communication, and neither it is love– such expression is the mere transfer of data, and there is no meaning in that data. I cannot extract love, joy, hatred, fear, or any other kind of meaning from such data, because emotions are not data; rather, data is merely the catalyst through which emotions are expressed. So because I can’t feel people’s love through their words or actions, there must be another means through which love can be felt, and it’s crucially important that I find it– this “true communication” through which emotions can truly be felt.
I cannot love until I first know how to love, and love is an emotion which, just like hatred, fear, and jealousy, is largely foreign to me. I know what it is, and how to define it, but I cannot felt it, and as such cannot truly express it. What I express as love is an incomplete, makeshift product of data, and can at best be considered “reconstituted love”– the recreation of love based upon analysis of its independent components. This is a fragmented love, and by no means true love. They say that to love others, you must first love yourself, but I now realize that to truly love myself, I must first know what love truly is, and for that, I must find a way to feel true love. Only then will I know what love really is, which is prerequisite to my own expression of it.
True Strength
As I search for the resolve with which to follow my heart, I am reminded of what true strength is: knowing exactly what you want, and going after your greatest desire wholeheartedly. To be truly strong is to be lacking indecision, and to be free of doubt, fear, mistrust or any other negative forces that would hamper your ability to live life freely and true to yourself. True strength comes from the resolve that overwhelms all of these things, facing straight ahead towards the goal, so that nothing else matters except that which your care about most. True strength comes from knowing what you want, and going after it without hesitation, not being held back by “what ifs” or “but what abouts” or any of the distractions that are thrown our way.
To have such a resolve as this, is the key to truly living life. Instead of being trapped in the uncertainties and indecision that so many people become entrapped in, and give up on or put off their dreams as a result, it’s vital that I know what I want, and look only towards that goal. Financial uncertainties, emotional and moral misgivings, and all the FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt) in the world should not distract me from what I really want in this world, nor should it cause me to be despondent of the reasons for which I am on this earth.
What do I want, and what is my destiny in this world? In a word: communication. To find a way to get people to understand each other, that we are all human, that we all want the same things, that we believe in the same God, that we are all on the same path towards to same destiny. That in the end, it’s all just different ways of looking at the same thing. Prejudice, possessiveness, self-righteousness, and pride of every kind is preventing people from truly understanding each other, and I want to find a way to make such an understanding possible.
There are many things that I want to do in this life, and most of them are trivial, “just to say I did it” type things. These are the kind of worldly distractions that detract from my ability to completely follow my heart, and prevent me from actualizing all that is my potential. I want to have all sorts of crazy sex, experience the criminal lifestyle, go one epic journeys to far off places, engage in all sorts of dangerous, “jackass” activities and lifestyle choices, and continue to experiment with my psyche, tweaking here and there just to see how fucked up I can make myself in the exploration of all I am, and can be.
But I will never amount to anything until I follow my heart, and be true not to the “what if I could”s– all the myriad of possibilities which are in truth outside the grasp of, and utterly irrelevant to my true destiny. If I am to live a truly fulfilling life, I must lay waste to these weaknesses–these flaws of character. I must let go of my latent tendency to procrastinate on life, and live for who I truly am: a role-model, a leader, a revolutionary, a visionary, a seer…..all in all, a beacon of the light of God. In living my life for this cause and this cause only– only in that wholehearted pursuit can my true strength, as a child of God, truly manifest.
I Have Found The One!
The following is an email written to my soul mate, in response to a book I had started reading upon her suggestion, “The Children of The Law of One & The Lost Teachings of Atlantis”; this post is a reflection of my feelings of her, myself, and of God as manifested through our lives
________________________________________________
I am starting to see what you mean when you said “you’re the one I’ve been looking for”. There are certain beliefs that you and I hold in common, beliefs that we both derived intuitively, but which are expressed most eloquently within the pages of this book– beliefs that very few people could understand, much less identify with. I too have been searching for you, but I don’t think I had quite understood that I had found you, until I read this book and realized just how deep the affinity of our beliefs really are!
I am just as blessed to have found you, as you are blessed to have found me. Our belief in true Oneness, and of selfless, unpossessive love– that kind of unity of thought is a rare thing, especially for me; I’m sure that you also thought at one point that it was near impossible to find a like-minded individual, one that didn’t just agree with or go along with your beliefs, but one who held fast to and lived out those beliefs just as passionately and purely as you sought to in your own life. Someone who shared that same conviction, that same purity of spirit, who you could together with them channel your creative and spiritual energies to wrought positive change in the world, and bring out the beauty, love, and unity that the world, deep down in its core, already possesses. I feel truly blessed to have found you– someone who shares these same convictions as I do.
I feel that I have not been more forthcoming in my convictions, nor following through with what I know is right, primarily because, as we both know, I have a predisposition to shun responsibility and shirk the manifestation of my beliefs; regardless of how strongly or purely I might believe in something, I have invariably stopped short of the application of my beliefs, and stuck in a half-satisfied state of perfecting the theory but skipping the application thereof. There was a point in my life where was was near-wholly satisfied with such a half-assed life– it was indeed before my spiritual awakening had begun at the age of 20, but no longer!
I feel even more than ever the conviction of applying what I know, and to completely apply myself to furthering my knowledge in every aspect relevant to the task to which I am destined to be: a beacon of light through which the world might see its own beauty, camouflaged by prejudice, fear, doubt, and hatred, all of which are caused by the same selfishness which through most of my life I was bound to, but now I strive to be free of!
I don’t know where this destiny of ours will take us, but I am sure now more than ever before that our destiny is shared, and that we will be to the world beacons of light, manifesting the beauty, love, compassion, and selflessness that is God to the world, as long as we have breath!
Following My Heart pt3: Knowing Myself
I’ve been fairly productive lately, but one thing I haven’t been doing enough of, now or throughout the rest of my life, is following my heart. I’ve analyzed myself, sought to determine the best course of living, and experimented to no end what I could do, should do, and what I can expect to accomplish within this life I’ve been given. I decided “I don’t know what I want, so what’s the point in doing what I want?” So with that mindset driving me, I searched not for a life of happiness, but of accomplishment. I thought that, if I can’t enjoy life, I should at least do something meaningful.
But now I realize that a life of meaning and fulfillment, and a life of happiness, that these are really just two different ways of looking at the same thing; more importantly, I now realize that my life can be neither meaningful nor happy unless my heart’s in the right place, and my motivations are pure. For this reason, it’s essential that as I go through each day, that my actions be that of one who is following his heart.
The meaning of life can be subdivided into three main components of the self, each of which are the products of three questions, and correspond to the three elements that comprise the Freudian self:
Motivation (why?) [present]; The Id.
Direction (where?) [past]; The Ego.
Resolve (how?) [future]; The Super Ego.
The first of components, and the one most essential to finding happiness, is the Id; the question, “is my heart in the right place?” To ensure happiness, I must live my life according to the true desires of my heart, and the motivations of my heart must be untainted to ensure that my actions reflect who I am as a person, and what I believe in, and not just the mere projections of my environment.
Secondly, to ensure the happiness I have achieved from being true to my heart’s desires is maintained, I must direct that energy towards a clear direction- this is the purpose of my Ego. By keeping a clear direction, and by sticking to it at all costs, I can optimize my life so as to fulfill as much of my potential as possible, thereby ensuring the spiritual and psychological continuity necessary for my happiness to continue, and even to intensify over time.
Thirdly, so that I will only expect that which can be reasonably achieved, that I can consummate my successes in such a way that will compliment rather than depreciate from the the happiness of others, and– most importantly– so that my actions will follow through to the end, not in any way stopping short of the intended objectives, I need to muster the resolve necessary to satisfy the ends to which my heart means to accomplish today, this year, and over the course of the rest of my life. This duty is the responsibility of my Super Ego
To live a happy and satisfying life, it is essential that I know myself– to know my motivations, my direction in life, and to have a resolve fitting of the life I intend to lead, and of the accomplishments I want to consummate. Without this complete knowledge of myself, and the conviction thereof, I will only be cheating myself of the happiness and fulfillment that I deserve, and that it is both my duty and honor to live out, as one made in the image of God.
Figure.09
As I’ve attempted to find my direction in life, I find myself caught between various contradictory motivations, and am forced to either choose one over the other, or stagnate in a pool of existential indecision. There are many different directions for my life, but only a few of them can manifest in reality, and for those that conflict with these chosen few, they are limited in their expression to that of creative sublimation, and I must content myself with this compromise that is my life.
To choose what aspects must be compromised, and what qualities I can remain true to, I must first understand which layers are truly me, and which are merely the aberrations of a troubled past. For when I candidly look at my character, I know which aspects are truly me, and I know which parts are not. I also know, as I gaze upon my own reflection, that in truth I am not me, but the forced container of one who has been crippled from living life by a wretched, fearful past. Such substance is like a cancer eating at me.
I am not me, but I know what I must be- it is through the analysis of the layers of my identity that I can appreciate who I really am. For example, my true self is not cold-hearted, not invulnerable, not perfect. But neither is my soul possessive, jealous, or loathing or anyone or anything in this world. If I am angry at someone, I know I am not me, for there is not a reason for me to be angry. When I cut people off to protect them or to protect myself, that is not me, but merely the fear of change– and the subsequently inevitably alienation– acting on my behalf to protect me. Such elements of my character are not me, nor do they represent me, but they have (to quote from Linkin Park’s song “Figure 09”) become a part of me, as layers of my identity.
If I am truly live my life, it’s important that I understand who I am, who I was, who I am not, and who I want to be. I know that my true self wishes to fall in love, start a family, and enjoy the blessings of watching my kids growing up, and living a life happier than I did. But I also know that this first requires finding someone to love who will also love me, and the education, life skills, stability, and strength of character to properly rear my children properly.
This is where the fear begins, and the aberration begins to form a cancerous layer within me. I seek to overcompensate for my perceived shortcomings, becoming educated to the max in all areas relevant (and many irrelevant) to what might possibly prove a necessity when I have children. This layer, while presently beneficial, will (if left unchecked) cripple my ability to live a happy life, much less raise children who will be happier and more successful than I am, or can be.
Yet another layer is formed of my fear of not finding the perfect match, and I struggle to create a perfect image of my ideal mate. I feel that I cannot commit myself wholly to making her my wife, unless she is intellectually on my level, and able to understand my thoughts, beliefs, and desires. I want her to share similar interests, have a healthy body, and have the courage to go the distance with me, to the ends of the earth, and to trust me with her life, as I would also trust mine with hers. This is even a greater layer to rid myself of, as it appears to be justified– after all, are such expectations really too much to ask? But alas, they probably are.
There are many layers of my identity, creating this twisted and overly-complex “Figure.09” that is my life, but it is in this convoluted mess that I will find my potential, and will unlock the key to my own life, liberty, and happiness, and the means to pass on these essential merits to my family, my friends, and my future wife and children. It is the consummation of this fulfilling end, that I strive for.
Following My Heart pt2: Communication
For a while I was content with just writing, and I wrote on a variety of topics: philosophy, psychology, self-analysis, social dynamics, self-awareness, epistemology, religion, controversy, and existentialism. Everything that I wrote had an incredible amount of meaning, and I felt privileged to be gifted with the ability to convey such beautiful things. When I write, I am not the originator, but the interpreter. Creativity is (for me) the art of taking chaos, and forging it into creativity. Chaos, that perennial Taoic force, is nothing original; however, it is not the raw data (the source material) that makes something creative, but the means and interpretation through which one chooses to convey it.
I am a believer that nothing is original, and that what people consider to be “novel” (new) material, is merely a different way of looking at the same thing. Perhaps everything that was ever thought of, and that will ever be thought of, is really just a more sophisticated way of conveying that which has in reality been in existence for eternity. If life is a fractal, as I believe it to be, then surely everything has its origins in the pattern of the fractal; furthermore, the whole of the universe isn’t just born of God, it is God manifested.
By writing, I am thus able to manifest, and thereby understand, the mind of God. However, in recognizing this, I also became aware that writing was only one medium through which I can understand God; to truly experience God through my creativity, I must journey beyond the trek of a mere writer, and learn to truly communicate. To become one with my creator, I must first become one with the world, and reach a true understanding and appreciation of the world and and all that is in it. To accomplish this goal, I created NspyraishN, created that that I might inspire the world, and that the world might inspire me; after all, inspiration is the key to achieving the appreciation of God necessary to become one with him.
Communication is not limited to words of human language, as writing is; its potential to share God with others is infinite. Through a tender embrace, a simple hand gesture, or the elegance of a piercing gaze– even in such simplicity, we can experience God. Telepathy, witchcraft, and divination– these are also things born of a faith in God, and in oneself. I love writing, because of the power it holds, but why should I limit myself to literary expression, or even to the English language? There are infinite channels through which to interact with and share the bountiful energy that is the world, and I have but one lifetime to explore, and master all of them.
But to truly master communication, I must learn to once again have the heart of a child– to possess the brilliant, curious, adventurous qualities I once had. I must become sophisticated in mindset, but at the same time I must become simple in the motivations of my heart– after all, it is my heart from which all beauty originated. It is only through the balance of mind and heart that one can truly experience and appreciate God.
To master communication to experience God, and to share that experience with others, these are my greatest heart’s desires.
Following My Heart pt1: Beginnings of a Writer
So it’s high time that I started living my dreams, but to do so, I must first follow my heart, and live my direction.
There was a point in my life where I had no direction– I didn’t know what I wanted, what I needed, or even what I was supposed to do. I had a pretty good idea of what was good enough to be ordinary: a job, a routine, a girlfriend, and some relatively productive hobbies. So I started working, got into anime, Japanese, information technology, philosophy, and a host of other lifestyle choices that could define me as a person, while still allowing the necessary social solidarity and integration for me to fit in with other people.
There was a point in my life– not too long ago– where “ordinary” was good enough for me. I spent my entire adolescence thinking I was destined to be the scum of the earth, and that I would have to push myself hard to achieve a level of normality just for people to leave me alone. At that point in my life, to be accepted by anyone– genuinely accepted for who I am– that was just too much to ask for.
I tried to be accepted for who I was, but I soon found that I couldn’t even accept myself. I loathed myself for being vulnerable, antisocial, different. So over time I decided to change myself. First I did so but imitating others, but I found that imitation didn’t play well to my strengths; my inability to proficiently adapt to social cues is likely what caused me to become so different from everyone else in the first place. Once I realized that I couldn’t fit in by following other’s behavior, I started to create my own. I created something bold, aggressive, daring, controversial, and dangerous. That something– my own mutation I created in a sea of evolution-like desperation– the intelligent creature. I became something that I knew no one could hurt or upset, and over time I build up this inner strength to the point where I became intellectually invincible.
Channeling my intellectual abilities to become the master of my own psychology, I overcame a multitude of severe mental illnesses, and was at that point able to, at the very least, maintain the pretense of normality. By the time I had started th3g1vr (the successor to jbcandid), I was in complete control of myself, and could become anything I wanted to be. But it was around this time, that I realized that an even more challenging issue was at hand: I didn’t know what I wanted in life. To search for what I wanted in life, I did a great deal of experimentation and self-analysis, and challenged everything that I thought I knew about my beliefs, my personality, my fate– even my sexuality. I went through a series of identity crisises as I sought to, if only by brute force and sheer determination, discover my heart’s desires.
Eventually I gave up on finding out what I wanted out of life, and decided that my own self-loathing had already corrupted my existence to the point that I had no desires or heart, and that nothing I did would ever have any meaning. Everything felt fake, and I was unable to truly follow-through with anything that I did in life– except perhaps for writing.
While my writing was never perfect, and seldom aesthetically pleasing, everything I’ve written can be considered “complete” in its own way, as all my blog posts completely accomplish their objectives. Over time, I slowly realized that writing was perhaps the only thing that I genuinely wanted out of life, and that everything else was really just building off of the creative desire that writing had given me. Writing had given me something to live for. It was my first true love, the first thing I seriously committed myself to, and the only thing that I had ever done in my life that it didn’t matter whether people liked what I wrote, or even if people read what I wrote at all. They could love it, hate it, or completely ignore it. I might have acted like it mattered to me, but deep down it really didn’t matter if my writing was read by anyone– so long as I could get it out there.
I didn’t love writing because it made me feel happy, or because it made my life more meaningful. I loved it because it was the only means that I knew of that I could express myself as I really am. Every blog post I write– every word, detail, and expression in what I write, is a flawless expression of who I am; the only “flaws” in my writing, in fact, are the flaws that make up my own character in the first place. Even if I were to edit my writing, it would only be to check for typos; everything else, from the grammatical consistencies to the literary idiosyncrasies– these are not a problem with the writing, but an accurate depiction of my literary character– who I am, on e-paper.
That’s really where it all started from: writing. I wrote not to impress or even to inspire: I wrote to understand myself, and to accurately convey who I was– my real self– in candid, raw, and completely unfiltered form. At least then, I thought…
Even if I could not forge a place for myself
Even if I could not discover a place where I truly belonged
Even if I never found out what I really wanted out of life.
I might not have a future, but I would at least have a memory– a record of who I was. Th3g1vr is better than an autobiography or a historical record, because it’s the truth and nothing but the truth. Nothing is spiced up, whitewashed, or glamorized. Everything that I write is exactly as it is.
Writing is not what I wanted out of life, though. Sure I’m good at it, owing to having done a lot of it, but I don’t aspire to be a writer, only to communicate my thoughts as accurately as possible. I write not because I enjoy writing itself, but because I enjoy the merits that it brings. By writing I can get to know myself and the reality I live in, by writing I can share my own dreams with others, and by writing I can strike that middle ground where insanity become creative, the bizarre becomes innovative, and abnormality becomes extraordinary. I write to forge who I am, to remind myself of who I was, and to discover who I really, truly want to be.
Writing is my sanctuary, my temple, the sustenance by which I can get through each day- my daily bread.
You Inspire Me!
The following is an email I wrote to author Lois Lowry, when I decided to fashion the screen name, blog , and persona “th3g1vr“. Although this was written a while ago and is more part of th3g1vr than here, It’s also a crucial piece of who I am, so I’ll also post it here:
Since It’s important to me that my screen name is self descriptive, I’ve spent the last couple days pondering what name I would choose to better feel this need. After the internet having been made public all these years, it’s very difficult to find a screen name that hasn’t been used already, but finally I thought of your book and- with the creative use of Leetspeak, I manage to find the perfect one not yet in any search results. After thinking about it, I realized that my life, especially the past couple years, parallels with the life of “The Giver”- or should I say “The Receiver Of Memory” in several subtle but profound ways. Not too long ago I valued that same type of utopia, but fairly recently I realized that it was actually a dystopia, and for the same reasons you expressed in the book- that is- emotions are irreplaceable necessities to make life meaningful, and pain and suffering are vital components for ensuring love, joy, and all the true pleasures of life. I recognized this after considering that we cannot truly appreciate anything until we have lived without it, and/or after having experienced its opposite. If we lived in perpetual “Sameness” we would never get any joy out of life- after all, what’s so exciting about “normal”?
Until recently I have also lived life on the basis that truth can only be found in that which is logical. Although I have gained insights that I probably could not have acquired otherwise, it has become clear to me that “logic” is just one of many different types of truths. To truly understand the nature of things, the other types of truth much be taken into account- including emotions. Due to a lean towards emphasizing an exclusively logical approach to life, I have little emotion left- but I look forward to using this newfound knowledge for ensuring a balance between the variables of logic and emotion, and instilling those virtues I have attained in the lives of others.
I myself have been doing a lot of writing, and- given the overall focus of my content (journalistic, autobiographical, inspirational, controversial, and saturated with opinions loosely written in essay format) I have had much difficulty organizing what I have written (and am writing) into a book. I’d say if I included that which I have written and what I plan to write, it would be surplus of 350 pages (in book format, size 10)- but, despite it clearly falling under the same general plot (which I believe there to be- it would best fall under the category of a Nonfiction Novel) I still am having difficulty getting around to editing it.
The problem is that, any time I tell myself to wrap up all the loose ends so that I can finally get to the editing, I think of several new ideas to incorporate, and end up working out these new details that add 10 or so new pages to it. I get so excited at the new ideas that I cannot bear to ignore them- I just have to write them down and add them to the already overwhelming mass. Although perhaps it would be easier for you (since most of your [published] works are fiction, and thus organized around a relatively predefined plot) Could you relate to this dilemma (?) as well?
Due to a series of extraordinary events (which some might consider traumatic, although I beg to differ) I have failed to enjoy the luxury of engrossing myself in your literature in a few years, having only gotten a glimpse of it reading “The Giver” while in school. You may flatter yourself, however, with the fact that despite having only read your novel in the form of installments, and collectively only once for a brief time- and some years ago, the book has engraved itself in my heart as one of my favorites. You have indeed succeeded in having a clear influence in my life, even if only indirectly.
Her response:
Dear Justin, It sounds as if you are one of those people for whom writing is a very important tool of self-discovery. It will serve you well throughout your life. My very best wishes to you.
The Choice
Here it comes again, the dreaded choice:
1. Live a life of freedom, disconnected from the world but creatively free to express myself and live a million lifetimes through the exploration of my imagination.
2. Live a life of success, suppressing my creativity to ensure social integration and solidarity, putting on a face of pretense, manipulating everyone around me to achieve my own goals, and be loved and accepted by everyone under the guise of pretending to care / sympathize with everyone else’s completely bullshit needs.
3. Compromise between these two, finding a way to express myself creatively in such a way that can be appreciated (or rather, that can be appreciated from the perspective of everyone else!), being true to myself, but only expressing the real me to those who I can trust with who I am, and even then only express the self in such a way as I know my friends can appreciate– not the real me in its entirety, as this just leads to misunderstandings, leading to the isolation of #1.
There is no correct option, and I have been struggling to choose between these three lifepaths for quite some time now. I know that if I do not choose, that I will not have a future. But if I do choose, I will have sealed my fate, and all the possibilities of #1, the success of #2, or the balanced combination of these two (#3), will have been taken from me as the karmic price for achieving the other.
No matter, which option I choose, I will lose something, and I have been in agony from my inability to choose. My indecisiveness has borne desperation, and that desperation is manifested in the personalities that account for these three choices: Kurutio (complete chaos), Matthias (complete control), NspyraishN (complete inspiration).
You would think that NspyraishN would be the obvious choice, but for me it isn’t so clear-cut. NspyraishN may be the most logical choice from a decision-making perspective, but he is also the most difficult choice, and the most self-compromised choice. And I don’t like compromise.
This post is imbalanced, incomplete, and ill-ended, and for good reason: I cannot see past the choice I have not yet made….lol I love Matrix quotes– so useful.
I must make the choice– I must…if I am to have a future. But I cannot, perhaps because I am unwilling to deal with the responsibility of having made the choice, and perpetuated the consequences thereof. Perhaps this whole thing– this agonizing mind-melting dilemma, could have been avoided altogether if I could learn to be more responsible.
Multiverse
When I think about my life, and all the various possibilities– who I was, who I could have been, who I am, who I’m not, and everything I could be, but will not be in the future– I am overwhelmed with potential, and emotionally disheartened as I realize that I will never be all I can be. I want to be everything and everyone, I want to explorer and know and experience and manifest all that is the world, and all that is me, but I can’t, because I’m only mortal, and only human. I am limited by this physical existence, even though it is this physical existence that (paradoxically) makes my ability to experience anything, possible.
There’s probably another me in all of the infinite planes of existence, and they are all fulfilling the potential I could not, but I still feel it– I sense it all, and in my greed I want those experiences for myself. I want to be the greatest of Me. I’m selfish and ambitious, and I want to do it all, just because I know I can. I thrive off of experiencing new things, and off the evolution of who I am. I am happiest when I am new, and when I am doing novel things. So I must experience all that I can at all costs, if only so that I can achieve a happiness and joy that only comes from the fulfillment of being true to one’s purpose.
I want to be evil, want to be good, I want to be male, female, dead, alive, desperate and serene. I want to be and do many things, but most of what I really want are impossible to accomplish in a single lifetime. This is why I turn to fiction. With the power of the imagination and the freedom of fiction, anything is possible, if only in literary form. I can do anything I want if I write about it, and I have all the resources I need to write. I don’t need money, social skills, or even literary coherency to write.
No one ever understood me anyway, so writing to be appreciated is meaningless. They might appreciate my writing (or the writing as they perceive it), but they will never appreciate me. I don’t need to appreciated to begin with– that’s just an illusive need constructed by the Ego to create a false sense of belonging, and a sense of social integration and solidarity. No one will ever know or understand me, so I wonder why I still keep hoping and believing that if I open up enough, they will understand me. No words can properly convey the complexity that is Me, and no perceptions can break through the prejudice inherent in everyone that prevents them from understanding me– and prevents them from understanding anyone.
So, since I cannot write to be understood, I will write to experience all of Me. The person I was, could have been, am, could be instead, and all the potential Me’s of the future. The world is at my feet waiting for me to experience, devour, and regurgitate in literary form, still hungry for me. I have all the ideas right here, right now, everywhere around me. Everything’s here, in this Multiverse of Life, and I just need to eat it, take it in, digest it, interpret it, and convey it creatively, thereby experiencing it. This is my epitome of my life. To experience reality through fiction, and to experience fiction by conveying it to reality.
The outside looking in.
The inside looking out.
Reconciliation
As I spent my time on the bus, waiting to get to my destination, I had a long, somewhat heated argument– with myself. I questioned my motivations for the projects that I was involved in, pressured myself to do even more with these projects, and told myself to just calm down, stick with what I have, and just see what happens.
Part of me argued to run away from what could potentially risk my future on half-assed endeavors, another told me to push these risk endeavors to the limit, going all in on things and hope for the best, and the other part told me that running away was a violation of my values and personal pride, and that although “playing it safe” was a good course of action, I should hold on to what I’ve got, and preserve status quo.
One part tells me to fight (Id) to fulfill my greatest passions, another to flee (Ego) to preserve myself and remain in control of my future, and the final told my stand firm, rooted where I am (SuperEgo), to protect what I already have, and ensure that status quo (my comfort zone) is maintained.
My fate in life is dependent of the reconciliation and resolution of these conflicting layers of the persona that is Me (Id), Myself (Ego) and I (SuperEgo). I must resolve this inner battle of mine, if I am to genuinely have a future at all.
Hypocrite By Nature
A while back, when I only had one blog (th3g1vr), I compiled a list of qualities about myself that I found to be unique, and often contradictory. That list, entitled “Living Contradiction“, still very much holds true today, but since then, for me to call myself a living contradiction would be an understatement; I am after all a Hypocrite by nature!
I’m an Atheist, Christian, Hindu, Buddhist, Taoist, Agnostic, and a Unitarian.
I’m a loner, socialite, idealist, cynic, candid, a faker, healer, killer.
I’m sympathetic, cold-hearted, believing, doubting, and I believe that that truth and lies are just different ways of looking at the same thing.
I’m everything and nothing all at once, because I need to be. I must be to reach my creative potential; I am, because my insatiability demands it!
I have two main living philosophies:
1. I am what I believe in
2. I never let my beliefs determine my actions, words, or behavior.
These two guidelines form the basis for the epistemological viability of manifesting the persona of what might be considered a true “living contradiction.” The primary side-effect of such a lifestyle is, of course, that I am a hypocrite by my very nature.
Being a hypocrite by nature does not work well in real life (as I have observed, and expressed in various posts), and so to prevent compromising myself in order to integrate with the world, I have created “Timothy Matias” as my creative persona. He is the ultimate hypocrite, so I don’t have to be!
The Paradox of Trust
The other way while at church, the pastor did a sermon emphasizing the importance of having a relationship with God, and how because God was infinite and perfect, that we are able to trust God even more than we can trust ourselves. Due to the very nature of infinite (uncontrollable, unknowable) and perfection (noncommittal, due to inherent independence), I find these assertions to be fundamentally absurd, but they do shed light on the most important issue of trust in relationships– namely, the paradox of trust.
The paradox of trust, stated simply, is that “you can’t trust someone you don’t know, and you can’t begin to know someone without first trusting them; it’s a sort of chicken-egg type paradox; There is only one way to resolve this paradox, and even that way is an inherently fallacious one: faith. In other words, you give them the benefit of the doubt– that a person is who they present themselves to be.
This isn’t so unnatural of a means of getting to know someone– in fact, it is the only method of knowing anything. Even the most basic building blocks of truth– “truth” at the epistemological level– are something that we can neither prove or disprove, and so we must take it on good faith that these “truths”, which we call “axioms”, are in fact true. There is no evidence, for example, that 1+1=2, other than the inherent, intuitive knowledge that adding a single item to another single item, will create two items. There is no evidence that this is the case, and yet we build the entire science of arithmetic on this “fact” that we can neither prove or disprove– we just “know.” Thus, even when comes to the most simple of knowledge– even with the most fundamental and mundane truths that reality itself is built on, we must take on good faith, and put our trust in what we neither know nor understand; without such blind faith, after all, the whole of reality would be unable to sustain itself, and chaos would become an inevitability.
Applying the same necessity of “good faith” in relationships, these axioms– basic premises of “getting to know someone”– become even more complex, and people have a tendency to misrepresent themselves for fear of being rejected. Very few people will represent themselves as they truly are– but as people want them to be, or as they themselves want to be. These lies and deceptions cause misunderstandings, and give us every reason not to trust each other; after all, if even the unbiased, fair, and heart-on-its-sleeve universe can only be trusted through a show of good faith, how much more it is to trust the myriad majority of people who deliberately misrepresent themselves in pursuit of their own selfish and cutthroat ends?
But nevertheless, we all have to start somewhere. For life to be meaningful requires communication, and communication trust. So if we are to enjoy all the meaning in life, we need to learn to trust each other. Perhaps if we could trust each other more not to reject each other, and stop living lives in fear of such a rejection, we wouldn’t need to lie to be accepted, and all the lies and deceptions that cause the mistrust in the first place would cease to exist. We are going to have to learn to trust each other, before talking about having a relationship with God; after all, if you can’t even completely trust your friends and family, how can you expect to be able to have even the most basic relationship with the unseeable, unknowable, incomprehensible and perfect God? To have a good relationship with God, first have a good relationship with people– walk before you run, as they say.
The paradox of trust, like all paradoxes, is not a pessimistic claim that trust is not possible, but merely that trust requires something that knowledge cannot provide faith. To resolve the paradox of trust requires going outside what one knows, and giving the benefit of the doubt, so as to lay the groundwork for getting to know someone, or something, in the first place. Once faith establishes the foundation necessary to begin to truly understand each other, the knowledge built upon that faith is itself what validates that faith, ironically. To trust requires a bit of guesswork at first, but once you got the basics down, it all starts to make sense, and that’s when you can begin to really get to know something, someone, or (if you believe in him!), to get to know God himself.
Being Extraordinary
As a person, quite frankly, I am abnormal; I don’t know if I like this quality about myself, but I do know that I’ve come to identify and appreciate this trait, and make use of it to achieve personal success, or at least to determine of such a success as I wish to attain is indeed obtainable through a life as abnormal as my own. But I know that in order for abnormality to produce success, one must be more than abnormality, and far more than normal; to be truly successful, at least according to my definition of success, one must be extraordinary.
When I look to my mentors of success– the celebrities, creative artists, geniuses, and prodigies of this world, I know that they are far from normal. If their abilities were not utilized successfully, they would be insane; it is only because these figures of success were able to sublimate their creative energies– to control and manifest them as art– that they are not considered insane, but as gods. The difference then, between a lunatic and a god, is that lunatics only bother and upset people, whereas gods people look up to and worship.
There is a thin line between insanity and genius, and that line is drawn at such a plane of existence that normal, “laymen” can appreciate. Knowing where that line is drawn, and having the skill to dumb one’s art down so “normal” people can appreciate it without taking away from the original pristine beauty– that is the key to being truly extraordinary!
But to be extraordinary, one must first know what it means to be normal; after all, it’s impossible to properly convey art to an audience if you do not understand and identify with what “art” is to that audience. As the awesome but somewhat misguided dude Jesus once said, “Whoever wants to be a leader among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first among you must be the slave of everyone else.” What this verse is talking about is the importance of empathy in leadership– to please and meet the needs of normal people, you must first be normal yourself, or at the very least understand the merits of normality.
By knowing what it means to be normal, you will be able to understand how to properly convey the extraordinary– to the ordinary. Only then will you be able to surpass the insanity and abnormalities native to the minds of all creative geniuses, and become a god. To be extraordinary requires that one see reality from both sides of the proverbial coin, so that when one’s creativity is expressed, it is appreciated, and the one from which it emanates is worshiped.
Merits of Singledom
For the past couple years, I’ve been more heavily involved in relationships, experimenting with girls, becoming vulnerable to love, and experiencing all sorts of exciting and invigorating things. Sure I’ve learned a lot as a result, particularly about girls, but I haven’t been particularly productive. So, as I am single again, I plan to celebrate my singledom by taking advantage of the resulting influx of negative emotions and subsequent depression, channeling it into my writing, and sublimating it into being more productive and progressive with my life.
Relationships make me happy, and make my life feel more worthwhile, but in the end they are also a drug, feeling me with a sense of well-being that ends up actually preventing me from actually living life, as I end up being satisfied with the preexisting happiness I experience by being “in love”, and having someone to give my life meaning, purpose, direction, and personal fulfillment. This happiness, like all things, has a price, and that is that in the end, relationships, love, and sex are merely chemical on their own, having no lasting merits or anything productive about them.
For this reason, as ironic as it might seem, healthy relationships are actually built upon singledom; the emotional, physical, spiritual, and financial independence that singledom is built upon, is prerequisite to balanced and healthy relationships– it is only through independence even in loving relationships can a balanced consummate love be achieved and maintained– this is the principle merit of singledom.
It’s quite obvious to me at this point that all relationships should be built upon stability in every sense of the word; love is by its very nature unstable (being built upon destabilizing passion and lust), and should be the reward of a successful life, not the substitute. I already learned this in my last relationship, but being weak-willed and pleasure-craving as I was, fell into the same wretched cycle of using love as a drug, rather than waiting until I deserved and was ready for a relationship.
I’m so desiring of finding someone and settling down, that I’ve continually forgotten that there are prerequisites for love, that settling down first requires the ability to do so; without even so much as a job or more own place, much less the social network and psychological development for a relationship, I have time and time again gone way over my head in my pursuit of finding a suitable (or at least “palatable”) mate to get into a relationship, invest myself in, to love and be loved, and settle down and start a family with. But as much as I wish I could just jump into it all, take the plunge and force myself into this bright new future, things aren’t so easy– there are prerequisites to be fulfilled, whether I like it or not.
To be ready to settle down, love a person, and start a family with them, I must first develop independence and stability on my own; after all, if I can’t survive on my own, how can I expect to be able to support a whole family– to attempt to makeshift such a codependent existence would be imbalanced at best, and severely dysfunctional at worst. To acquire the maturity, independence, and personal stability necessary to develop and maintain love relationships and, by extension, to properly rear families, that one do so while already single; this prevents any false perceptions and confidence that can and will inevitably result from trying to develop these traits after being in a relationship.
So for now, I plan to remain single and establish proper relationships with friends, and build up my own self-confidence, independence, maturity, stability, and life skills on my own, that when I do get into my next relationship with a person, that it will be a fruitful and balanced one, and so that with the proper amount of mutual intimacy, dedication, and love, that my next relationship will truly be my last.
Elegance
What is the difference between creativity and art? Put simply, the difference is that creativity is expression, and art is appreciation. To create something novel or amazing requires creativity, but art takes things a step further by ensuring that this “something” can be appreciated, be understood, or be applied. If creativity requires imagination, and elegance requires skill, then art is where these two elements (creativity and elegance) meet.
It’s painfully obvious to me that I have creativity– painful, because despite my best creative efforts, I have done nothing useful with it. My writing does indeed express amazing, novel, and revolutionary ideas, and there is nothing wrong with the logic behind my thinking; however, the means by which I convey these ideas is extremely unelegant, and can be most optimistically described as “raw” as far as content goes. This is a major problem, because ideas can only be great if they are influential, and people can only be inspired by ideas they can understand and appreciate. For my ideas to achieve such a refinement, requires an elegance which I quite simply lack.
As an art critic, I measure not by the caliber of the work or by the originality of the theme, but by the strength of the focus. In every art piece, be it a painting, book, film, photograph, song, or comic, there should always be a central focus; the majority of the given piece should exist not to divert away from this focus, but to illuminate it. The successful use of illumination to bring focus to a piece is elegance, and it is this aspect of art that allows it to be appreciated by people, both laymen and critics alike.
To properly convey my ideas to the world in such a way that they will be well-received as art, instead of condemned to the status of philosophical blabbering, I must frame my words in such a way that is simple and effective enough to be understood; so that my words might be understood to my readers as well as I who wrote them understand them, my words must be eloquent, using only as much words as possible to communicate; only then will all who read my writing be on the same proverbial page as I am, which is prerequisite to anyone, even myself, being able to see my writing not just as mere creativity, but as art.
The Root of Motivation
If one were to simplify the source of all motivation into a single word, it would be “Pride”. But I’ve come to realize that once we take everything into account, the word ‘pride’ becomes little more important than semantics; after all, pride is a paradox in itself, dead-ending into a chicken-egg type paradox in which we are left to wonder where “pride” came from. Pride is the inherent human drive to validate one’s existence– emotionally (love), physically (sex), socially (belonging), spiritually (God), and rationally (knowledge); there are many other different types of motivation.
It’s important that we understand that “pride” refers to the need to validate one’s existence, but (as admitted at the end of the post above) this still does not answer the question of “Why?”– why do we need to validate our own existence? It might be an evolutionarily-inherent trait, and from a “survival of the fittest” outlook this certainly does make sense– for this reason, I tend to personally adhere to the adaptation/evolution-based explanations. The Christian explanations appeal to the very pride that we are trying to understand in the first place (which is in itself a logical fallacy, but appeals to emotion never needed to be logical to begin with); by asserting that God (our spiritual pride) has endowed us with a purpose as part of his cosmic plan to spend eternity with us. Emotional pride is the most irrational of all though, as it maintains that we should live for love, even though the very definition of ‘love’ becomes a paradox for even being used as the validation for emotional pride.
But no matter what kind of pride that we are searching for the answer to “Why?” in, we will never find the answer; because every answer we give is itself rooted in and heavily biased by pride, the answer to why we need to validate our existence becomes nothing more than a rationalization to justify the existence of that pride– it is more this reason that pride is the greatest of all paradoxes. The concept of “God” is by comparison far less of a paradox, as it is justified by spiritual pride, which itself is justified by the concept of “Pride” itself.
As the root of all motivation, Pride is both the greatest of all evils and the greatest of all goods. The counterparts of racism and unity stem from social pride, love and hatred from emotional pride, good and evil from spiritual pride, life and death from physical pride, and prejudice and wisdom from rational pride. These pairs of polar opposites all come from pride, their polarity making pride just as good as evil. One could argue that as evidenced by the union of opposites so prominent in pride, that pride itself is what keeps humanity in a state of cosmic balance. But because even this argument is stemmed in pride, we will never know, as such knowledge is biased by rational pride; pride is what allows us to know, and yet that same pride keeps us from truly knowing. I guess this is the price of pride.
Irresponsible By Nature
If there’s one thing I know about myself, it’s that I’m irresponsible. Irresponsible with money, irresponsible with possessions, irresponsible with relationships and friends, and irresponsible with myself. It’s not as if I don’t care– I do– it’s just I lack the responsibility to follow-through with anything. I suppose that’s what responsibility really comes down to– consistently following-through when it comes to what you care about most.
I lack follow-through, and so I end up being a hypocrite; this hypocrisy of mine is what alienates me from everyone around me, and especially those I care for most. I don’t know how to prioritize my own life with the live of others, lack the discipline to balance between relationships and other shit that gets thrown my way, and end up just going with the flow, even if that flow is a life-threatening hurricane, ravaging everything and everyone else around me. I care, and yet this lack of follow-through makes me helpless. I can’t do anything about it, because I lack the motivation to. This kind of care-but-still-not-doing-anything-about-it drives my friend and family insane, and isolates me. But still lacking the motivation, I do nothing. I do nothing, because I’m irresponsible by nature.
Is that a cop-out? Most definitely. Being the irresponsible person I am, copping-out is the most natural response for me, the easiest way out, the most logical escape. I never liked responsibility to begin with– it complicates everything, and comes with this annoying thing called “obligation”. I’ve never been obligated to do or even think for anyone, not even for myself– to be honest, I enjoy living a life devoid of obligation and responsibility– both of these qualities just muck everything up– make everything all icky and ugly. Going with the flow is far easier and stress free, and if other people don’t like it, why don’t they just go with the flow too. Irresponsibility is still my preferred way of living life.
But there’s still one big problem, and that has to do with this fun thing called “Balance”. Yes, I’m still somewhat clinging to the Karma paradigm, with all the useful inspiration it brings. But Balance is a bit different from Karma, albeit the precise difference I have yet to understand. But nevertheless, it’s clear that a wholly irresponsible lifestyle is just as bad as the wholly obligated lifestyle the rest of the world leads.
The ideal life should thus be somewhere in the middle– the “compromise” between Obligation and Freedom. I want to be free, but I also want to be responsible, so I’ll put a little freedom into my responsibility, and a little responsibility into my freedom. Like the Taoism YIng/Yang mentality, I’ll find that common ground. Even if, as Wikipedia note, that common ground is by its very nature hypocritical and fallacious, that compromised ground is the closest I, or anyone else will ever get to an ideal lifestyle.
Brute Force
When it comes to doing anything at life, I use only one tactic: brute force! If I can’t get something done at first, I keep on trying until I get it to work, and get things to work well. Of course, this way of living life is not for everyone, and tends to be pretty makeshift, sloppy, maybe even savage (thus, “brute”). But it’s guaranteed to get the job done, and get it done well. It’s just a matter of time.
Using brute-force tactics, anyone can accomplish anything they want or need to– it’s just a matter of time and the willingness to commit to the end, regardless of what obstacles may stand in one’s path. If you don’t know something, learn it– if you lack the skills, gain them, if you need connections, build that social equilibrium. If it doesn’t work, you can make it work, forging a new reality along the way if necessary. That kind of can-do-no-matter-what mindset is what drives me, and will continue to bring greater improvement (and eventually perfection) to my life.
Brute force is not necessary a planning-free strategy; rather, it’s just not the aspect of living responsible for planning. If one were to cover all three aspects of living a successful life, it would be a total of three primary triads: Brute Force, Engineered Perfection (planning), and Unshakable Resolve; these three I have in previous posts referred to as “Desire”, “Control”, and “Commitment”, respectively; the same message holds true, except that more emphasis is placed on the equal amount of necessity of each of these three.
But it all starts with Brute Force: we move before we crawl, crawl before we walk, and walk before we run. It all starts with the desire to succeed– at that point we can direct that energy towards a particular mold (plan) through which that energy to manifest, and finally the resolve (perseverance) to follow-through with that plan, until its eventual culmination, makes all things possible, and possibilities a reality.
Poetic Justice
Sometimes I honestly think that that Lord Almighty is fucking with me. Okay truth be told, I tend to think that most of the time. Although I like it when most people fuck with me, I hate it when God does it, because it just goes to show how even the most powerful being in the world is just as pathetic as I am, as you are. Yet at the same time, even God is bound under the same karmic guidelines, same ethereal principles, and same cosmic bullshit as everyone else. Now that’s poetic justice! In fact, that I am even alive to write this post is poetic justice. Not because I deserve to be alive (I don’t) or because I deserve to die (I’m still alive, so apparently not), but because I’m right here, right now, doing whatever I do. The very fact that I am writing this blog post means, in fact, that I deserved to write it. That criminals go on rampages, raping and pillaging and killing everyone around them– that they continue to do so is the most obvious proof that they, in fact, deserve to. Later on, they might deserve to die. But until they do die, they must not deserve it. Perhaps, as Sweeny Todd said, “we all deserve to die!” But not yet, else we would have already been dead.
Humanity will always have their morals, and they will continually change their morals according to their environmental needs, all without the slightest twinge of residual guilt. Our religions will change, our morals will shift, our paradigms will evolve, and our ethics will undergo continual plastic surgery, surgery “paid” for under the most ridiculously fallacious of pretensions. But karma has no morality, no bias, no prejudice, and no humanity. The reason why so many “evil” people are still alive today, still wreaking havoc instead of being “brought to justice”, is that the very “justice” that such sentimentality is motivated by in the first place, was never a valid standard to begin with.
Human morality is probably one of the most pretentious and volatile aspects of the human psyche, and yet despite that we blindly cling to it, hoping that it will give us a reason to live– that “God” will give us a reason to live. Even though this “God” to which we are referring changes nearly every day to suite the vain requirements of an ever-hypocritical SuperEgo, we ignore the blatantly obvious and continue living on in ignorant bliss, blaming “criminals” (those who behave in a manner you strongly disagree with) for all the woes in the world. These kind of close-minded people, which apparently account for the majority of all people, are just as evil as the criminals they condemn, but they’re just too blind to see it. But fortunately, karma doesn’t care about that either.
We all get exactly what we deserve, whether we know it or not, and whether we are willing to accept it or not. Karma doesn’t exist to make us happy, to agree with us, or to justify our actions, it’s just there to keep the balance, with the maximum efficiency possible. If you think something is “evil” or “never should have happened” or that someone “should be brought to justice”, then you will probably be disappointed most of the time. Not because they don’t deserve to be brought to justice, but because that’s not your call– that’s not the law enforcement’s call, that’s not your country’s call– heck, it’s not even God’s call. If even God himself has no right to determine what is right and what is wrong, what makes you think you can?
That we all get exactly what we deserve– that’s poetic justice. Throughout living life, experiencing life, and (God forbid) raping and pillaging life, I will have gotten exactly what I deserved, as will have you. This entire time I have only done exactly what I was supposed to do, said what I was intended to say, lived as I was intended to live. The reason why I know this is more powerful than any religious dogma: Because I’m still alive. That I am still alive, after everything is said and done– that too is poetic justice!
World Domination
World domination is actually quite simple– the hard part is not so much knowing how, but following through with it. Simply put, anyone can take over the whole world if they have enough reason to– it’s just that until now, a powerful enough reason has yet to be found. Why? Because everyone, and even the terrorists and revolutionaries who are most able to take over the world, are still too happy with the way things are. To dominate the world, you have to be so unhappy with the way things are, that you would without hesitation sacrifice everything and everyone to achieve that goal. Unfortunately, there is one big problem, which complicates the plans of those few who do have this resolve: People who are willing to sacrifice everything and everyone to preserve the existing order– to conserve status quo.
So we then have a battle between the liberals (who want big changes at all cost), and the conservatives (who want things to stay the way they are, at all costs. The battle between these two motivationally-opposed groups is the real reason why no one has ever successfully taken over the world, and also the reason why despite the needs of so many people to keep things the way they are, things keep changing, if only little by little. The efforts these two groups of people to achieve their respective goals largely cancel each other out, keeping the world in a state of make-shift equilibrium. Karma wins! :p
So then, how can we facilitate world domination, with all these conservatives in the way? The only way to accomplish such an arduous task as this, is either to (a) make people want to be controlled, or (b) control everything from the shadows, making everyone else think they are calling the shots, while subliminally manipulating from the shadows. This second option, while infinitely more arduous than the first, is probably the most sure bet for true world domination. There can be no revolts where there is no overlord, and what they don’t know really won’t hurt them. Manipulating from the shadows, that’s how it’s really done. In fact, for all we know we’re all being manipulated from the shadows– even me! Trippy, isn’t it?
Catharsis
The primary reason why that I am unable to be truly happy with my life, and why I’m not nearly productive enough despite my enormous amount of talent and genius, is because my multiple personalities have conflicting motivations that cancel out each other at the worst of times, and interfere with each other at best. But of course, I also know that these personalities are only place-holder scapegoats that I myself had created to make my motivations more manageable. I created these personalities over time because I realized that my motivations were so much at odds and so ambitious that they could never be completely fulfilled. Unwilling to compromise with the fulfillment of just some of these dreams (knowing it would be at the expense of the other, equally important ones), I opted to create multiple personalities, hoping that someday by making peace between these demons within me, I might finally be able to truly live life. This epic battle within me will decide everything; regardless of the outcome, I know that at the least I can be satisfied, knowing I did everything I would.
Into these personalities of mine, many of which are still nameless, I inject my negative energy, my chaotic emotions, my unfulfilled dreams, and my greatest of longings. This is my moksha, and my catharsis; this is my self-imposed fate.
I cannot be satisfied even if I surpassed the world, for by accomplishing the profound I would have missed out on the mundane, and by unlocking the complex, simplicity will have been lost to me. No matter what I do, nothing will ever be good enough, and my greatest of ambitions and deepest of longings cannot, and should not ever manifest. I am the forbidden incarnate, a cursed existence alive only to play out a sadomasochistic practical joke. But the sad part about all this, is that I like it better that way. I guess that deep down, I really am a sadomasochist, one who can only truly feel complete when he is suffering. Perhaps after all I really would be happier in Hell than I ever could be in Heaven. That a God created me knowing this is the most intriguing part of all this– well, at least to the blissfully ignorant Christians who are only permitted their fantasies because they have yet to face themselves– to face the bitter truth.
I will never truly be satisfied until I live all that is life, but this is the greatest of all paradoxes. There is always more to live in life, and even if I were to become immortal, this dream of mine could never manifest; even if it could, the only reason why I have imposed this requirement on myself in the first place, is so that I could die in peace, knowing that I had already lived all that there was to live for. So then, what is there to live for, if not only for the sake of living. If God is not good enough for me, enlightenment is too mundane, and if even becoming God myself is mere child’s play in comparison to my deepest of ambitions, what will satisfy me? Surely nothing can, for if God is no more than child’s play, then I have already resigned myself to disappointment! I am disappointed, because even if I were to become God, and everyone were to worship me, admire me, and love me will all their heart…even that will only have scratched the surface of my potential, because I could always have done more. I am concerned with what I have not done, what I could do, and what I will never do even though I could have; consumed by this existential angst of mine, I end up doing nothing at all, becoming naught but mere vaporware, a waste of potential.
So that I can overcome these terrible shortcomings of mine, I have created these personalities. Kurutio, who is concerned only with self-gratification and the carnal experience of the physical world; th3g1vr, the observer, committed to the acquisition of all knowledge, and with understanding and communicating with the world and his environment; Matthias, who seeks to control the world and make it in his own image, and to manipulate everything and everyone to serve his will; NspyraishN, a hybrid of Kurutio and th3g1vr, is concerned with inspiring himself and being inspired by others– his primary objective is to truly communicate with the world, with inspiration becoming the catalyst for this communication (kinda like inception, as depicted in the movie “Inception”). Airielu, the woman and “Mona Lisa” in me, is a mysterious, shy, but surprisingly intense and complex figure– she represents my idea of a perfect woman, and is also the catharsis of my narcissistic tendencies. Timothy Matias, the role model and leader in me, is the personality that longs most to make peace between the aforementioned personas, that I might mature into a person worthy of leading the world into an era of true peace and spiritual fulfillment– he is the enlightened one, but has yet to be truly awakened. The other nameless personalities, with all of their excess energy and unfulfilled dreams, are buried deep within me, to be unlocked or left in the dust.
My fate can only be determined by the personalities I permit to possess me, and to be me.
Purity
I can honestly say that I love children and I fear them even more. Why? Because of their purity. There is an amazing level of spiritual purity in children that reminds me of the simple truths in life that I’ve forgotten (the part I love); that same purity forces me to face myself for the corrupt, pathetic, hateful existence that I am (which I fear). My extreme impurity compared to children scares me, and causes me to loath myself, and it also causes me great suffering because I so want to change; I want to be like a child again, so as to revert to the state of purity I too once possessed. But alas I cannot, and so suffer hopelessly instead. I of impure lips, of impure mind, of impure eyes and ears. I am not worthy to shepherd such a pure generation as this. Yet still, I know I must.
All that remains then, this terrible responsibility thrust upon me, is to at least understand this new generation, and the sources of their purity. If I can understand, I can at least guide. As the maxim goes, “those who can do, and those who cannot, teach.” I cannot be pure, but at least I can teach those who are. Understanding, one of the central tenants of communication, can however only be accomplished through purity; to teach the pure then, one must be pure themselves, at least to the extent required.
What a paradox this is then, that I must teach who by my very nature I cannot! Is this the curse thrust upon us by God, to remind us of our imperfections? That we cannot both be pure and appreciate that purity, that goodness can only be accomplished through purity, and purity only through naive ignorance? Am I destined to be corrupted by my own curiosity, my knowledge my sin?
While in my corruption I am unfit to guide this pure generation, and through my sin they too will become cursed someday, still I must guide; this is the power of destiny; be it a blessing or a curse still yet remains to be seen. Perhaps it is both of these, with the ultimatum only to be decided by how I choose to view it. This destiny a reminder that I cannot change fate, but only alter the way that I look at it, or the form that it takes.
The Pretender
A lot of people I know agree that I should be doing more with my life; as a person full of talent, creativity, and intellect, I could easily get any job, place, or girlfriend I wanted to. If I so wished, I could revolutionize the world, get rid of world hunger, create a masterpiece, engineer perfection, or even become God myself. So why haven’t I done any of these things? Because none of it is good enough! I could become God himself, and still not be satisfied; to do everything there is to do in this world is to miss out on everything else, and my need to say and do and consume and experience, and to be everything– these overwhelmingly unfulfillable needs are in fact preventing me from doing anything with my life; because I know just how great my potential is, I cannot actualize it, being too concerned with nothing I do being good enough!
I am the pretender, because I am afraid of being real. Afraid, because I know my reality will never be good enough. Reality is too limited, and so I pretend so that I might be spared the dissatisfaction that comes with actually living life. I know that, regardless of what path I take, it will never be good enough. I also know that, by taking a path, I can no longer pretend; that I no longer pretend means I can no longer glaze over life’s risks as if they were mere data; while the pretender can see all of life’s wonders (good and bad) as mere data, one who takes life seriously must develop attachments to reality, and especially to the priorities relevant to his agenda; while the pretender has no attachments and can easily let go of anything and everything, the responsible adult must become dependent and integrated with his reality, and thus (unfortunately) vulnerable to it.
You can say that I am emotionally immature– that my refusal to integrate with, become attached and dependent on my reality– that this level of emotional irresponsibility is downright childish. You would be right, for emotionally I am a child. But I am also emotionally mature in other ways, in that I am able to control my emotions completely; that I can control and manipulate and make use of my emotions without limit is itself the product of profound emotional maturity. This is a paradox to which few but I have been exposed, and it has created much suffering for me; I am immature in that I am unwilling to live, but mature in that my stagnancy has made me emotionally invulnerable. This is of the curse and the karmic price that comes with being the pretender.
I could, if I wished, live a successful life, full of dreams and ambitious and love and passion and beauty. But because I already know that this would never be good enough, forever (or for now at least) I will remain the pretender.
Defining Peace
In my entire life, I don’t think I’ve ever felt something even remotely resembling peace; to be honest, I don’t think I want to; it seems so mundane and unproductive and boring. But nevertheless, peace is something I’m curious about, because of its spiritual benefits; I am after all quite interested in anything spiritual; that being the case, I must somehow at least define peace– what is peace? Is it a state of mind, a spiritual consummation, the positive counterpart of despair, or perhaps the unexcited form of happiness? Or is peace something far more instinctive, like the principle of homeostasis so influential in Freudian psychoanalysis? Out of every explanation, homeostasis seemed to me to make the most sense; after all, I have always identified to some extent with the necessity of status quo.
If peace is to return to the original state of things (homeostasis), then it can be best understood as the psychological manifestation of a basic instinct, likely evolved to help ensure self-preservation. This especially helps in making sense of despair, peace’s counter part; whereas despair is tranquility achieved through giving up (Thanatos), peace is tranquility achieved through fulfilling one’s needs / desires (Eros); in both cases, the principle of homeostasis holds true– with Eros, gratification restores the balance leading to peace, while with Thanatos, giving up on one’s desires brings an anti-balance leading to comparable tranquility. In both cases, homeostasis becomes the standard for the given ends, and so also serves to better define peace.
Because I refuse to give up (despair), but also refuse to lower my expectations (which is prerequisite to the gratification of desires), I cannot be at peace; I have designated things as such because I don’t want to be at peace, as I see it as a meaningless instinct suitable only for one bound by their fate (which I am not); in other words, for one who is “master of their own destiny”, there can be no peace. I deliberately strike against the flow, because I know that in the flow I as an individual will end, becoming absorbed in it; ironically, I am in the end still bound to the principle of homeostasis, in that I am adhering to an anti-homeostasis with the interest of self-preservation; I know this, and yet I continue in this direction, because I know that only through such an opposition (futile or not) will I be me. I guess you could say I define myself through anti-peace.
For most people, it would seem that peace is a necessity, or at least something to be desired; the vast majority of religions, both major and minor, advocate values that encourage peace and harmony, and oppose all which causes discord and strife. There is one religion that supports disharmony and discord: Discordianism. I myself am a discordian.
I see no value in peace or harmony, and would for this reason alone choose hell over heaven as my dwelling any day; heaven is too boring and pure for me– hell is by contrast the only dwelling with enough pain, corruption, and strife to satisfy me. All of the qualities Christians use to describe how terrible of a place “Hell” is are qualities I prefer. I want to be alone, want to suffer, want to fight, be f*cked with, and to be completely corrupted. I want that raw brutality, and people just don’t seem to understand that. They think I just don’t know what I’m talking about, that if I *really* knew what hell was like, I would take back those words. I guess most people can’t even imagine why anyone would, if they had the choice, choose an eternity of torment over immortal peace. They’ll probably never figure it out, because very few people can accept the raw truth, as I have. The bitter truth that in the end, we’re all alone!
Self versus Existence
There is a very distinct difference between the self and existence, although it’s very difficult to define, let alone communicate that difference; nevertheless, I will try. For the purpose of metaphysical clarification, I’ll start with existence– what is existence? Descartes famously answered this question in his proof of existence, cogito ergo sum “I think, therefore I am”; basically, to exist is to think, and to be conscious; one’s consciousness both validates and defines one’s existence. In other words, existence is determined by and defined by conscious awareness of the given entity, and the perception thereof. To relate this concept to the self (as I would put it), “Existence is the ‘self’ being discriminated (perceptually separated) from the ‘all’.”
So then, what is the “self”, from which existence is (via discrimination) derived? This is actually the harder question. With “existence”, I have been able to break down and elaborate upon a network of supporting constructs; beginning with the Id, Ego, and SuperEgo– progressing to their subservient emanations of Instinct, Nature, and Character– and so on. But with the self, the majority of which is unwittingly hinted at via the Id (which itself is the parent of the Ego and SuperEgo), it’s all mostly a mystery. What is the self, what form does it exist in, and what is its function? These are questions I still cannot truly answer, but merely speculate upon.
To understand the “self”, I turn to its symbiotic counterpart, of which I know a great deal more: the soul. By comparing my soul with my conscious existence, I can understand the self; the reason for this is likely because the “self” is essentially a hybrid of the soul and the environment. Think of it like this: The soul is the “one”, and the environment (conscious existence) is the “all”; the self can then be best understand in these two ways: The one within the all, and the all within the one. The best analogy I can think of that parallels to these abstract concepts is the symbol for Taoism:
The one within the all, the all within the one-- everything is connected
Reality is, according to both Taoism philosophy and my own beliefs, composed of different ways of looking at the same thing. Perception, the process of discriminating reality, allows people to appreciate different parts of a whole; that is, we are all ultimately the same, but perceive differences so we can appreciate the otherwise mundane and undifferentiated whole. To apply this to the nature of the soul (and the self derived from it), the self is composed of both negative and positive energy, with the nature (Ego) of that energy being determined by the discrimination (perception) process; if “the one is within the all” (as is prominent among collectivists– or as I like to call them, “borg”), then the predominating “flow” of the self is negative, and utility-oriented. If “the all is within the one” (as is prominent among individualists (“leaders”) like myself, the predominating “flow” of the self is positive, and creativity-oriented. These different ways of looking at the same thing manifest as the struggle between the “personal consciousness” and the “collective consciousness”, as exemplified by Jungian philosophy.
In my post Idealism, I tried (and failed) to understand the relationship between reality, the soul, and consciousness (existence), although I gained many important insights in the process. This post should serve to better clarify these things, and (I feel) has been largely a success in the accomplishing of its aims. The soul and the nature of the self will be a mystery to me for quite some time, but at least I can better understand these things, if only by drawing comparisons.
If the soul is the essence of the self, and the self is the container for the soul, then “existence” is the self being appreciated; by extension, I can conclude that by appreciating oneself (and the “all” within “one” exists), one is also by extension appreciating the soul from which that self is derived, as well as the “all” through which that appreciation is made possible. One in All, or All in One, experience life (either through the self or the environment) is the only means of understanding oneself, and the world.
Divergence
I am quite able to see the difference between my personalities– you’re just not able to accept *all* of my personalities. you expect me to be someone that I’m not– you think that I want to me nice, and you are wrong. None of my personalities want to be nice, although th3g1vr appears to be nice; the only reason why th3g1vr appears to be nice is because he is the observer and wants to avoid interference; essentially, that part of me appears nice because he wants to maintain status quo, to ensure the integrity of communication and other experimental data.
I don’t care about you, remember? I only pretend to be– th3g1vr to observe, Kurutio (who I am now) to experience and be inspired, and Matthias to control. No matter what personality you’re dealing with, all of them couldn’t care less about you as a person. you have only been used from the very beginning, and you fail to understand that. you relate me according to yourself, and assume that we share common beliefs, interests, and values; in reality, we have nothing in common and you are merely biasing my words and actions to fit into your idea of reasonable normality. I am too abnormal for you, but you were never able to truly accept that.
I do see things from your point of view– I always have. But I have already analyzed your point of view greatly, and its simplicity and naivety is sickening to me. Regardless of your point of view, I’m not going to modify my behavior in consideration (as you might expect of me), because you are you, and I am me. We do not agree, and I see no merits whatsoever to your point of view; I consider it for a bit, but after realizing how bullshit it is, I disregard it as negligible data.
My point of view is most acceptable and correct not because it is actually “the truth” or even factual (neither of these are possible to truly know in the first place IMO), but because as the selfish narcissist I am at heart, my point of view takes prominence by default, quite simply because it’s my view. I don’t want to believe what you believe, because then I would not be me, I would be you. I don’t see any merits (as you might) of depreciating my own dreams just to take part in someone else’s. Any so-called “selflessness” that you might ‘benefit’ from as a result is merely an illusionary construct of the superego; you are unable to see why I am unwilling to live according to your beliefs, because you have decided that the ignorance of bliss is preferable over the bitter truth– that in the end, we are all alone, that our lives have no lasting meaning, that everything we ever do will be forgotten, and that there is no real truth. These things I have accepted, because I needed to to truly begin living instead of just dreaming, as you and most other people continue to. Because I have accepted these things to be truth and you have not, we have a strong divergence of values, and that divergence has precipitated this present conflict.
Functional Beauty
What is beauty? The opinions are varied, and to reap a useful understanding, one most start with the function; that is, what is the purpose of beauty? Beauty is to appreciate, and appreciation comes through perception; from what I can tell, if there is any function to beauty, it surely must be to be inspired, and to inspire others. Let us then draw the line between beauty and art: Art is created, through skill and creativity; beauty, by contrast, is that which already exists in the world, but can only be experienced through the perception and appreciation of the world, both man-made and preexisting. Thus, beauty is appreciation manifested, and art is the creation of objects through which beauty might manifest.
What then is prerequisite to beauty? What criteria must be fulfilled for beauty to exist? To be beautiful is must be appreciated, and as appreciation comes only through perception (and it must be perceived as intended, else it is not art, but merely raw), we understand beauty by understanding its parent perception. What determines how something is perceived? Several factors influence the quality of a novel, for example: how the author creates it, how it is presented, how both the author and the reader interpret it. All of these factors, and the predispositions and biases involved, can be summed up in a single word: Communication! That being the case, it would be most accurate to say that “beauty is communication being appreciated”, and that “art is beauty communicated as intended.” Functional beauty can be defined as such.
But there is far more to true beauty than this; because the magnitude of something (or someone’s) beauty is determined by appreciation, and appreciation is subservient to perception, we can only appreciate to the extent to which we perceive. Because one’s propensity for perception is determined by the number and quality of standards placed on the given object, beauty is ultimately determined by the complexity of that object; something cannot be both simple and beautiful, because in simplicity there are no standards by which to either negatively or positively appreciate it. On the contrary, something can only be beautiful to the extent to which it is complex. The reason why emotions make everything so much more beautiful, for example, is because emotions can be some of the most complex known phenomena in the world.
The problem with complexity is inherent in its nature: by putting limits on something’s nature (thereby making it more complex), you also reduce it to a finite, and thus imperfect state. A little analysis should tell you how this relates to beauty: beauty can only exist in imperfection! The only true beauty can only manifest through a mind of sin; either the person or the object itself must be imperfect or order for that object to be beautiful.
The function of beauty is to appreciate, and so by extension, the function of beauty is to sin. I will go into more detail about the mystical importance of this, but now let it suffice to say that beauty and sin go hand-in-hand; we are only beautiful because we are mortal, life is only beautiful because it ends, and love is only beautiful because it cannot truly last. These bitter truths you must accept, if you are to truly understand the function of beauty.
Moving On
I’m not very good at prioritizing (never have been), and I’m a reactive person by nature. As a result, the people nearest me, and those most enthusiastic in their dealings with me, get higher priority; it’s not because they are more important to be, it’s because they pay more attention to me. Your conception of friendship and mine are completely different, and my behavior reflects that. Yes, it’s true that I’m not giving you as much attention because now I am more popular (and by popularity I am referring to friendship), but it isn’t because you’re any less important to me, it’s because you’re not as relevant to me.
This is not reminiscent of my aunt, because she abandoned me, cut me off, and refused to respond to my communications with her. The reason why I am not communicating with you is not in any way decision or even priority based; it is merely a reaction to your own actions, or in this case, the lack thereof. You (for one reason for another) have been communicating with me less and less, and while this might have been fine in the past (where most people were not enthusiastic in their dealings with me), now I have options, and there are people who (in their actions) care more about me than you do. You might think I am ignoring you or deliberately not talking to you, but this is completely wrong. If you feel I am not communicating with you enough, it is only because you are not communicating with me nearly enough, especially compared with people who communicate with me on a daily basis.
Most of my communication takes place in-person, or on facebook. you do not use facebook (for reasons that I think are fundamentally B.S. and delusional), and thus cannot communicate with me there. I could email, but email is more fun to respond to than to send, and since you and I have very little in-common, there is almost nothing for us to *spontaneously* talk about. I hate talking on the phone, because I feel that it’s a poor substitute for talking in-person, and also (for other reasons I have not quite put my finger on) very disconcerting to me. That only leaves the option of meeting in-person.
Even though I am busy, I would not mind meeting in-person. However, I do not have the money for travel, and I hate asking people for things, preferring to be invited instead. You have not invited me, and so I have not come. Summing it all up, if you wanted attention, you should have asked for it; I would have given it to you.
When I said my idea of friendship is was different from yours, this is what I meant: you see friendship as respect, mutual passion, commitment, knowing someone better than anyone else, and willing to do anything for that person (should the need arise).
I think such sentiments to be illusionary and idealistic, and so cannot be part of my definition of friendship. My definition, although not nearly as sentimental, does cover the conditional fulfillment of your own sentiments, albeit in a more logical fashion: Priorities.
You could say that based upon my own definition, we are no longer friends, because you are no longer a priority in my life; accordingly, you have broken up your friendship with me, having made me a lesser priority by not communicating me either.
But you should also realize that there is one big difference between your definition and mine: control. Your definition believes in ownership: that I can statically say you are *my* friend, and conversely, anyone who upsets either of us because “the enemy”. I cannot understand or condone any kind of jealously, as I find them to be no more than byproducts of human instinct. I am not your friend, and you were not mine– these are merely illusions of human instinct. We may have friendship, but that friendship is not an object that should be controlled or held on to, but an aspect of life that should be enjoyed freely.
You see friendship as an object, whereas I see it as an ideal; this disagreement alone means we will never truly see eye to eye on anything. But nevertheless, I will not abandon, betray, or ignore you– not just because it’s not in my character to, but because I fervently believe that such notions are delusional at best, and detrimental at worst.
In order for me to abandon, betray, or ignore, you should have *objectively* been important to me in the first place, but you never were; I cared not for you, but for the inspiration which I found in you, the world, and in God. Yes I have moved on, but only because the rest of the world has proven far more inspirational than you. There was a point where you were the inspiration in my life, but things have changed; I have changed.
First and foremost, I do not think what my aunt did was wrong– I never thought that. for a while I was angry towards her, because her actions had contributed significantly to the degradation of my own life, but never did I think of her actions as wrong. On the contrary, I think her actions were very in-character, and retrospectively very predictable; I think she did the right thing, even though an unfortunate byproduct of that was the delay in my own development as a person. I do not blame her for anything though, because I recognize she acted according to what she thought it was best, and I am glad for it. It’s better to be yourself and the world hate you, than to be someone you’re not and be loved by all, in my opinion.
These miscommunications between us are the same as they have always been, in that they are caused by a great divergence in personal views and values: you treasure interdependence while I value independence, you find sympathy as essential while I see it as a hindrance, what you consider neglect I think of as moving on. Because of these differences, you misunderstand my actions, thinking of me as failing to understanding the importance of sympathy, commitment, and “caring”; in reality, I do understand these things, I just don’t consider them as importance *to me*; I see sympathy as residual instinct, commitment the supporting pillar of a corrupt society, and “caring” as an illusionary construct of the superego, along with the so-called “conscience”.
Most people I know share and agree with your views, and I am not saying you are wrong, or even that your belief in these things is detrimental; rather, I have not found any *personal* merits to my own adherence to these values. like homosexuality, it might be a good thing for some people, just not for me.
It is my opinion that you should do what you think is right, regardless of what I think, say, or do. If you wished to continue to contact me, you would despite my claims of being busy or preoccupied. You instead valued my own wishes above your own. I am not saying this is wrong, but I am saying that your decision to stop emailing me based upon your perceptions of my wishes (which you should know only expressed my wishes at that particular time, and did not in any way reflect the opinions of who I am as a whole) ultimately resulted in the resulting mutual lack of communication. I have more controversial opinions on this matter, but I’ll digress.
You seem to think that I care how much you “care” about me. While I appreciate your sentiment, it will not in any way influence my judgement, because I’m not the sentimental type. Yes I am cold-hearted, and find both your feelings and my own to be largely irrelevant. I only care about inspiration, and no matter how much you might care for me, your caring heart is no more inspirational to me than a vintage broken record. This is the sad, bare, raw, harsh, and bitter truth. You are no longer of use to me, and thus no longer a priority. If you wish to be friends, you will find a way to be useful.
However, as you are the sentimental type who prizes “caring” above all else, I doubt you should want to have anything to do with me. I hope this letter will help you to understand that however much you thought you knew me, you really didn’t know anything about me at all, because you were too busy admiring me or wanting to help me. If you really wanted to know me, you should have hated me. Remember, admiration is the farthest thing from the truth!
The Faculty of Compatibility
While it’s possible to love anyone, regardless of race, background, upbringing, or personal character, it’s vitally important for the ambitious of heart to have a mate of comparable drive; for one driven to accomplish great things, they must either have a partner who can keep up with them, or have no one at all. With greatness comes responsibility, and one burdened by the disparities of inferiority cannot live a life that matches their potential, as one such person would be held back by an unworthy partner.
In my case, I have a girlfriend, which although she completely adores me, and I love her, all of the passion in the world could not ensure a future for our relationship, because we are fundamentally incompatible in our values and share almost no common interests. The very reason why this relationship even got started in the first place is because I wanted a relationship, and she was lonely. You could say that I have been exploiting her from the very beginning.
If I had known that we had very little in-common, I would have likely not gotten into the relationship, if only for her sake. But being the selfish shameless person I am, I didn’t think about all that, because I didn’t expect nor wish for the relationship to last; I merely wanted to be inspired, and to inspire her, through the experiences we would share as a couple. It was a short-term relationship from the very beginning, and I liked it that way. What I didn’t expect, is that she would be ready for the long-hall. I didn’t expect commitment.
Once commitment factors in, I have to start thinking about the future, and that’s where things get complicated; as a match made in hell, we have no future, realistically. There are only two characteristics of her that I find attractive: that she is a girl, and that she was attracted to me. Other than that, if I am to be honest with myself, she is no different from any other human, animal, plant, rock, or speck of dust on this planet. There is nothing about her as an individual that I find attractive, and these shortcomings are my daily concerns. Even though I might not have a conscience, I do have standards, and she is far beneath them.
As a result of my lack of compatibility with my girlfriend, I am being held back in life, unable to truly live as freely as I need to thrive, because I have on my shoulders the burden of inferiority and psychological disparity; until I let go of her, I cannot truly live again, because my very existence will have been limited to this level so base that I cannot tolerate, let alone be happy with. Once again I am reminded that there is a price for everything; this is why discretion is so essential for ensuring that one’s means accord to the desired ends. Resolving the motivational paradoxes so inherent in relationships will prove to be one of the most profound struggles for one seeking a balanced life.
Conditional Love
There are many types of love in this world, but one kind of love that does not exist is unconditional love. No, I’m not saying that God doesn’t exist or that a truly virtuous love is implausible; unconditional love is by its very nature implausible, owning to its paradoxical existence. That is, for a person to love, there must be an object (or person) for whom that love is reserved; because even true love can exist only as manifested in in the person(s) chosen by the one who emanates it, even the most pure of love is conditional.
So then, what are the conditions of love, and how do these conditions affect how that love is manifested, projected, and received? As expressed in my post Love Dynamics, there are three main kinds of love, all of which originate from the self: Passion, Intimacy, and Commitment; the influence of these three factors determine how one’s love develops. I say that they originate from the self, because they are motivated by the self: Passion is motivated by the Id (Inner Desire), Intimacy is motivated by the Ego (Control), and Commitment is motivated by the SuperEgo (Expectations). The ratio of these three factors will determine the nature of one’s love, as well as the compatibility of one who may or may not share similar priorities.
There is no such thing as a selfless love; those who claim a lifestyle of altruism and so-called “agape” love are not truly selfless; rather, they are merely projecting their love for the self into a love for others; another way of putting it is that agape love is the expression of love for oneself through the love for others. I have a love that is a variation of agape, which I refer to as “Oneness”; by recognizing that my love for others is merely the projected form of love for myself, I become free to love for the sake of loving, without any need for a specific object through which to express my love. Although my love is not truly unconditional, requiring at least one object as a medium by which to express that love, it is as unconditional as a love can get, because I am not actually loving the object, but merely using the object as a medium by which to express my love for myself.
Conversely, some people cannot find any value in themselves, and so cannot love themselves (non-existent self-esteem, in other words); admittedly, I am in a relationship with a girl with such circumstances. For her, she takes the reverse approach of my own Narcissism; rather than loving herself through me, she loves me through herself. Unfortunately, this type of love (which is just as confusing as it sounds), is non-sustainable, because it will eventually collapse on itself. Because she uses her love for me to sustain her own existence, but there is no object from which that love to be expressed beside’s herself, it’s impossible for her to actually love me, because since I am the target of her love, I end up becoming her existence; essentially, without her love for me she could not truly exist. This paradoxically self-depreciating phenomenon is known in layman’s terms as “Co-dependence.”
With every love there are three priorities to consider, each of which correspond to the three motivations discussed earlier: Passion invokes the priority of Resolve, Intimacy invokes the priority of Direction, and Commitment the priority of Expectations. The emphasis of these three priorities determine the “personality” of one’s love, and the image such a love will reflect. When it comes to my own love, I consider these three priorities, and which of them is most important to me determines my own love; for example, I have never had much interest in Resolve (being the philosopher I am, I suppose this is to be expected), and my sense of Expectations is pretty nonexistent outside what other people expect; as for my own love, I expect nothing except perhaps that through love I might be inspired, and inspire others. The priority that I value most highly is thus founded in the Direction of my love; I need to know what kind of love I am developing, and what form that love will take.
I am a narcissist by nature, and so can only love myself; anyone who I claim to love, it should be noted, is not the one I truly love, for I am only loving myself through them. For this reason, I find it of great importance that the object of my love match my own character, as only then can I truly love that person; a person with character comparable to my own is necessary for my selfish love for myself to simultaneously be a love for another, as only then can I identify that person as being truly “my other half”, and accordingly love them as I love myself. If I can trust a person as I trust myself, being so essential to my existence that we are truly inseparable, then we will have become one person, thus fulfilling the ultimate goal of Love: Oneness. To love a person so much that their existence equates to your own, that is true love.
In my girlfriend’s case, I am her existence (as explained earlier), and so from her perspective, she has technically achieved Oneness. However, true Oneness must be mutual, and I cannot reciprocate, because we are mentally, spiritually, and emotionally incompatible; strictly speaking, our differences are irreconcilable; so much so that I have many times considered breaking up with her to save us bigger trouble later on. While she can be satisfied with my dream, I refuse to partake in hers; more accurately, even if I wanted to partake in her dream, she has no dream (and by dream I mean “existence”) for me to partake in. I can’t become One with her even if I wanted to, because there is no “her” to become One with; this is likely to most frustrating part of our relationship (for me mind you, not for her!)
So, since my girlfriend does not “exist” apart from me anyway, I thought, I might as well modify (or “create”) her to meet my criteria for a “dream” compatible with my own. I have initially only considered the most basic of criteria: individuality, goals/dreams, independence, self-esteem, a self-actuated personality, and personal passion. Unfortunately, even these goals will take years for her to actualize, and I would have to be extremely patient with her; she herself might suffer a great deal to accomplish these things. But without them, she is nothing more than a doll; at least for me, a doll is not suitable as a medium by which to sublimate my love. Call it manipulation if you will, but I don’t think it appropriate to say I’m trying to change her, as there never was any “her” to begin with. Rather, I am creating her existence, and that alone should justify my actions.
Inner Peace
In a talk with my dad, we discussed the difference between mere peace (the absence of mental stress or anxiety) and “inner peace” (the state of being mentally and spiritually at peace), and I came to some interesting conclusions: whereas ordinary peace refers to the absence of environmental factors that would cause stress or anxiety, inner peace refers to the ability to be at peace despite such factors existing.
One of the greatest biblical examples of this was given by Paul the Apostle, while he was in prison: “I am…in labors more abundant, in stripes above measure, in prisons more frequently, in deaths often…I have learned in whatever state I am, to be content: I know how to be abased, and I know how to abound. Everywhere and in all things I have learned both to be full and to be hungry, both to abound and to suffer need.” So then, what was Paul’s secret to inner-peace despite these hardships? He explains in Philippians 4:4-9: “Rejoice in the Lord always. Again I will say, rejoice! Let your gentleness be known to all men. The Lord is at hand. Be anxious for nothing, but in everything by prayer and supplication, with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known to God; and the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus. Finally, brethren, whatever things are true, whatever things are noble, whatever things are just, whatever things are pure, whatever things are lovely, whatever things are of good report, if there is any virtue and if there is anything praiseworthy—meditate on these things. The things which you learned and received and heard and saw in me, these do, and the God of peace will be with you.”
So then, if inner-peace is the ability to clear one’s mind and be free of anxiety or stress, even in the face of hardship, torture, or death itself, such a peace must surely be a lifelong pursuit, and a worthy one at that. To even face yourself and be at peace, such an achievement would be Buddha-status to say the least, for achieving nirvana would be far easier to accomplish than such a feat.
When I explained to my dad what inner-peace really was (as supported by the Bible, which he adheres to), he agreed that he was far from achieving such a peace, and likely never world. It’s not simply feeling completely at-peace– anyone could do that with the right environment, and if you think about it, the environment is what caused such a peace, not you. To truly be at peace, you must possess the ability to force peace upon your environment– the maturity to be at peace even when your environment says you should be anxious, upset, scared, angry, and desperate. Inner peace is the ability to emanate peace from your inner being, and of your own volition irregardless of your environment; it is to become peace yourself.
Argument for Expectations
Obviously expectations alone aren’t enough to be successful. but when I say expectations, I’m referring to self-efficacy– that is, it’s assumed that the person to which the expectations are applied has the wisdom to seek out the knowledge they need to be successful, and apply it.if you want to be anal-retentive about it, the all encompassing version would be: the formula for success can be simplified to three basic factors: desire, control, and expectations.
Desire is the basis of all success, because you cannot truly be successful unless you wish to be successful. Note that people who have success thrust upon them are not themselves successful, but are merely the vessel through which people project their success (i.e. celebrities)
Control is the ability to channel and optimize the energy generated by desire into the given form; by applying characteristics and criteria, and utilizing the given qualities to accomplish the prerequisites (goals) of success, one can actualize (control) one’s potential (desire).
Finally, in order to be truly successful, one must have expectations, as without great expectations, following through with one’s goals (the prerequisites to success) is impossible, because it is through expectations that one is able to extend the success of the present into the distant future; for example, the difference between a revolutionary and a visionary is that a revolutionary merely has the desire for change, and the plans by which to bring such change about; a visionary is first and foremost a revolutionary, but they have the vision (expectations) to not only bring about change, but be able to continue that momentum into the future, and is able to account for what happens next.
If the formula for success were to parallel with time, it would go like this:desire = the present (in the moment), control = the past (using knowledge/skills/etc. learned in the past to channel desire), and expectations = the future (follow-through)
Basically, if you don’t have expectations, you don’t have a future.
My Direction
My problem isn’t with incompetence; I can do anything I set my mind to: writing, reading, physics, math, linguistics, the arts, sports, or management– everything you can think of that a person could be talented at, I am. I have put this to the test many times, and I know this with a certainty, so why does my life not show it? There’s nothing in this world that I am truly passionate about, and it is this lack of passion that causes my otherwise fruitful life to stagnate. There is nothing that I am truly happy about, and so there is no motivation through which passion to channel. I have all the desire in the world, but no direction through which I can sublimate, and so I am lost– a waste of potential.
It’s been this way for quite some time, and even now there is nothing I can do about it, paradoxically because I have no reason to do anything about it. You cannot tell a person without motivation how to live their life, because there is no reason for them to listen to you; such advice would indeed fall on spiritually dead ears; as is the case with me. I know exactly what I need to do to be successful, and I have all the ability in the world to actualize that success, but I lack the motivation to, and herein lies the ultimate paradox of my existence: how can I find anything to live for, if I lack even the motivation to find that reason in the first place?
What is my direction? This is a question to which I fear there might never be an answer, as no direction seems good enough for me. For a person who’s life will never bear any lasting meaning, and who’s legacy will be forgotten, it’s no wonder that I lack the motivation to do anything amazing with my life, despite the inherent ability to– after all, why bother revolutionizing the world, if the world will forget me eventually, and even forget there had ever been a revolution. People move on, and forget the past; what remains is a distorted memory of a foreign truth– a truth which no one will have ever truly understood to begin with, but merely went along; the whole of the world is filled with zombies who helplessly cling to the dreams of another, being unwilling and unable to think for themselves.
No direction will ever be good enough, because in the end, I will be dead and life will go on without me. This phenomenon is known as the Absurd, and is likely the only thing in this world that should be feared; after all, only through fearing the Absurd can the reality of life truly be understood, sad as though such as reality may be.
What is my direction? What is the meaning of my life? What is my purpose? I have asked this question many, many times, but without success, for this meaning of which I speak cannot even be bestowed upon me by God himself; the question of my existence can only be truly answered by me, for this is My dream and Mine alone.
I escape from myself by becoming part of other’s dreams, and this is a penance as it allows for the fruitation of social interaction and lasting friendships. But I always eventually wake up, and I realize that feeding on the dreams of others is no better than stealing, that to truly have meaning in life I must of my own volition create my own meaning, my own reality, my own dream.
What does my dream look like? Even now I do not know, and can only wonder. Sometimes I fear my dream, not because my dream will bring harm, but because it will not be good enough. To stand in candidness stark, and gaze into my own reflection, to see myself for who I truly am, this is what I am truly afraid. To know where my limits stand, and to see where my good starts and my evil begins, to see where my perfections to become imperfections, of this I cannot know. I see who I am, but see not who I can be. For although I can be great, I also know that such greatness would not suffice; I would expect myself to become even greater, and be disappointed in that expectation. This is the greatest horror of life, at least for me.
Love Dynamics
For thousands of years, love has proven to be one of the most mysterious aspects of life; even though much of the human existence is driven by love, none of us truly know what it is, nor where it comes from. Some people think it’s a trick of evolution, some a construct of the Ego, while religious folk claim it to be the manifestation of God himself. But regardless of what love is or where it comes from, we can only viably determine the nature of love through the consequence of its being; namely, love is what it does (causality).
If we are to understand love by means of analyzing its causal relationship, there are many different types of love; most of what love is has been derived by Robert Sternberg, as exemplified in his Triangular Theory of Love. There is love of passion (infatuation), which I believe to be the most common form of love in relationships, an intimate love (the most pure form of which can be found in friendships), and empty love (common in the obligations of marriage, especially in societies with high standards such as Japan). All loves that people experience are a mix of these three, although a healthy love can only be consummated with a balance of passion, intimacy, and commitment in a relationship; this kind of love, Consummate Love, is what I am aiming for.
While most people associate infatuation as being a “crush”, I find it interesting to note that the same people would not think of it as infatuation if mutually expressed; this kind of naive thinking is in my opinion why relationships fail. On the other hand, fatuous love, which is composed of both intense passion and stabilizing commitment, is even harder for the person feeling it to detect, and they might go their entire life thinking of their love as complete. For example, my girlfriend’s current love is a fatuous love, as she does not know me; in fact, it is because she is so passionate that she cannot know me, being blinded by her passion. As a result, our love cannot consummate, because the imbalance caused by that passion prevents the relationship from progressing to a more mature state. All love requires balance to be complete, and balance can only be achieved with the maturity of the relationship, through which (to borrow from Freud) a more pure love can be sublimated.
In my case, I have the commitment and the intimacy, but I have no passion for our relationship; the primacy reason why I lack passion is because the relationship itself is of no value to me– I seek that which can be found in the relationship, but is not part of the relationship itself: communication, my greatest value. Through communication I can understand, inspire, appreciate, connect, become one with, and known, through and through. I already know that my love with a person will never be complete, and it is not because she is not good enough; rather, no one is good enough, because my love is not for a person, but for Love itself, and ultimately for the Oneness, which itself is expressed most magnificently through Love.
There are many different types of Love, and although I believe the love that I am seeking to the more pure form, I can recognize that because infatuate love is all that most people are truly capable of, that a love of innocent passion will indeed suffice. I am endowed with the insight to see beyond such trivialities, but so it is that I also have a greater burden to carry, in accordance with the karmic law. My love is great, but only because I was born to greatness.
Psychological Resource Management
One of the phenomena I have been concerned with as of late is the concept of Ego depletion; that is, every Ego has its limit, and thus a person’s amount of self-control (maturity level) is limited; this limit plays a major role in determining personality traits, and strengths and weaknesses. That is, even if one were to exert self-control all of the time, and pursue given ideals by force, the would eventually run out of self-control, as evidenced by Ego depletion. It is for this reason that even social perfection is seen to be an unreachable fictitious ideal; after all, the harder you try, the quicker and harder you will fall.
However, I disagree, and my proof of concept has been around since antiquity: habits. Through habits, one is able to easily behave in a certain way without a need for psychological efforts or even having to think about it; habits begets routine, routine begets a lifestyle, and the lifestyle will eventually be taken for granted. In other words, with the application of solid habits over time, anyone can become perfect, without even knowing it!
The ability to make conscious decisions is what separates animals from humans, and by building within ourselves perfection in the form of habits integrated into daily life, we can if we wish to become perfect, eventually without any effort at all. The day that humans can take perfection for granted, that will be the day that a utopia will become a reality. While trying too hard can only bring pain and suffering in the end, skillfully building one’s life upon a platform of perfection will make perfection seem like common sense; perfection is not only a possibility, it is a opportunity accessible to anyone with the desire to obtain it.
There are three reasons why we are not already perfect: (1) Most have accepted that perfection is not possible, and thus have given up our desire to obtain it, (2) Most of us lack the knowledge of how to become perfect, and (3) Most lack the need or ability to organize, manage, and apply perfect habits to their own life, or to effectively convey these principles to other people.
Interestingly enough, the reasons why we cannot be perfect are also the reasons why we cannot be a multitude of other things; they are rooted in the Id (desire), Ego (control), and SuperEgo (resolve for perfection), respectively. To perfect these three elements of the human nature is to make humanity perfect; the answer has been within ourselves from the very beginning.
If we are able to effectively conceptualize, organize, and apply solid habits to our lives, we can improve ourselves to the point of perceptual perfection, all with minimal depletion of the Ego. By utilizing habits to minimize the resources of our Ego, we can live amazing lives without the least bit of stress to the Ego; habit exist after all for that very purpose. Humanity is built from the ground up to be perfection– our biology and psychology has given us everything we need to make that happen. We just need to learn to effectively use the biological and psychological resources we have been given to make it happen. It’s all there, we just need to muster the knowledge, desire, and resolve to make it happen!
Functionality
I’m not really used to the whole “functional” definition thing. In most of my writing, I use the definitions that make most sense at the time, or are most convenient for my writing; call me a semantic liberalist, but I think that words are not meant to be accurate, so much as they are to convey meaning. But much writing must be functional, so that a proper context might be established by which to understand the content of the words; this is especially true in technical, legal, and academic writing. In addition, I’ve found that perhaps if I were more functional, not only with my writing, but with my life as well, I could truly be successful (in the eyes of others); this is after all a central principle of the philosophy of Utilitarianism.
When determining something’s function, it also allows for greater understanding; while knowing what something is useful for will not tell you what it is, this kind of concrete way of looking at things provides a greater opportunity for effectively using one’s knowledge of an object/idea to meet objectives. In other words, by knowing something’s purpose, that ‘thing’ can become profoundly more useful, both in-and-of-itself, and in conjunction with related objects.
Functionality is particularly useful for establishing causal relationships, and thus for understanding motivations. If a person’s function is to kill, for example, we can presume that they were conditioned to kill, perhaps even bred to kill (as if the case with certain criminal/religious organizations. By understanding the function of Beauty, we can better understand such concepts as appreciation and aesthetics, and the qualities that cause people to perceive something as beautiful. Everything has a purpose, and knowing that purpose allows for a greater understanding of everything; by understanding the causal relationship between people, objects, and ideas, one can predict, correlate, analyze, and evaluate those entities, often leading to priceless insights.
Killer Instinct
What is the difference between a kiss-ass male secretary and dictator of the world? While there may be a lot of differences, there is only one clear one: killer instinct! The male secretary is too nice, and doesn’t have the resolve to do whatever it takes to achieve his goals– a quality that the dictator clearly possesses. The Native Americans, who never believed in possessions to begin with, got killed off, raped (both proverbially and literally), and subsidized by the U.S. government because they were too nice, too easier-going, too Type B. While it’s all good to be nice, it’s not good is your niceness prevents you from moving up in the world, or even worse, to get tramped on, molested, and exploited by a cruel, greedy, and unyielding world. For this reason, everyone needs to have a little killer instinct in this world.
(From Wikipedia) “The killer instinct is the human propensity to do whatever it takes to survive or achieve a goal, even killing another human being.” Does that put things into perspective? Whatever it takes! If you need money, acquire it by the most effective means possible. If you need power, extort and manipulate anyone you can make use of. If someone gets in the way of your objectives, get rid of them by any means necessary. That’s the killer instinct.
Of course, most of the time you’re not going to need to do anything dramatic like in some James Bond flick, but if you expect to achieve any serious goals in your life, it’s can and will mean trampling on the dreams of other people, like it or not. If you’re not able to face of to these facts, you’re going to end up a kiss-ass secretary or comparably base-level social status for the rest of your life. If you’re fine with that, great! You would make a fine Buddhist. But if you have any ambition in your life, you’d best be mustering that killer instinct, or prepare to be gravely disappointed.
Do I have the killer instinct? No! Why? Because I haven’t found anything in this world that I care about that much. There’s nothing in life that I need to accomplish, and so I just float along nonchalantly, going with the flow and flying wherever the winds may take me. Don’t get me wrong– I want that killer instinct– but as of now it’s pretty useless until I have goals worth applying it to. So I guess right about now I’m preoccupying myself mainly with looking for that reasons– that impetus, to pursue with that kind of fervor in the first place.
When my time comes, and I finally realize what specifically my purpose is in life (instead of the vague philosophical concepts that I have conjured up in my writing!), then I’ll be able to go after it with the whole of my being, and put everything and everyone on the line to achieve those goals. That kind of feelings– to be able to pursue any goal with that level of passion and dedication, is after all nothing short of beautiful.
The Essence Of Things Hoped For
There are many things in this world that can be rationalized as evolutionary constructs: societal norms, religion, even God; these things promote social solidarity, thus ensure the continual survival and evolutionary development of the human race. But although most of what we know or believe can fall under such a category, there are a few things that cannot, and among such things the most profound of which is the soul. I know through and through that the soul exists, and it’s not because I was conditioned to believe it, but because it is self inherent– one might even call it instinct.
Yet the existence of the soul responsible for the breakdown of the social equilibrium, and interferes with a person’s sense of well-being. It gives us a sense of false-hope, inducing conflict, discord, and hatred. The soul is one of the most powerful means of destruction, being exceeded in its greatness only by God himself. Yet at the same time, it does not promote unity, but division; the soul, although in essence is but one, can only be appreciated when in a corrupted and divided state. What use is such an existence to evolution?
The soul’s only real purpose from what I can tell is to remind us that we are merely human. But what good is that? To truly know what it is to be human, is to break down the constructs of the Ego that uphold the illusions necessary for survival in the first place. If evolution created the soul, then surely the soul must be the greatest of all paradoxes, as the Soul’s only true purpose would be our undoing. The soul, which reminds us of what what wretched creatures human beings are, is the most cruel of all entities; such a being is so cruel that I do not think evolution could have created it even with the most spontaneous of mutations. The soul is too much of a mistake to have evolved; rather, is had to have existed from the very beginning.
The soul, being a mistake that has existed from the very beginning, must be what the Greeks called Pandora. The mistake was then not the creation of the soul, but that such a wretched being was let of of its box in the first place. Having left behind hope, it is then only natural that souls would so desperately cling to us humans, that through the fragile beauty of our existence they might continue on after having lost hope. In this sense, we don’t need souls nearly as much as souls need us.
Why do I insist that souls exist? How do I know that they are not merely a fiction that I, or someone else made up to escape from their reality? How can I believe in something for which there is no proof, and something which clearly I am better off not believing in anyway. What rationale is there in such a belief? It’s actually quite simple: because everything has to come from something. There is no such thing as truly original thought, because everything is based upon experiences, emotions, thoughts, and interacting with these. In other words, if I believe souls exist, there has to be something in reality that supports such an existence, because otherwise I could not have thought of them in the first place.
But this isn’t about logic or rationalizing what I believe in, it’s about faith: “the essence of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” Although I can rationalize my faith, I have no need to, and merely do so for the benefit of others, and that I might clarify what I believe to those who do not possess such a faith. Even though I may not believe in God, I do believe in the Soul; to be, the purity and power of the Soul is far greater than God could ever be. I recognize that even though there might be a source to what I believe, it is the Origin that makes me believe– I believe because I want to. In this sense, Faith permits us a bit of self-confirmation of freewill– that we believe not because we are conditioned to, or because we have to, but because we want to.
Simpleminded
Although everyone I know would accuse me of overcomplicating everything, I’m actually pretty simpleminded when it comes to my motivations. Just like everyone else, I am conditioned to do what I do, and even though I might not know where all this conditioning came from, I do know that most of what I do in life I do only because someone encouraged it. I started writing because people had an interest in what I had to say, and for the most part I only continue writing because it’s the only thing that I’ve done that has had almost universally positive feedback; that is, regardless of what I have to say, most people would agree that I’m a good writer. In this respect, I am simpleminded. I am attracted to girls that appreciate me or “need” me, I thrive in environments where my feedback is encouraged, and I am happiest when the center of attention.
Even though I know this much about myself, I don’t do things that would get myself more acceptance. I know what I need to do for people to like me, and although such acceptance would make me happier, I just continue stubbornly living the lifestyle of an outcast and loner, self-righteous in my search for “truth” that I know better than anyone doesn’t exist in the first place. Perhaps it is this mysterious yet profoundly annoying stubbornness that makes me seem more complicated that I actually am.
Considering how much happier I am when I embrace my simplemindedness, it would seem wrong for me not to live such a life. Why do I struggle against the inevitable, despite knowing that it will make me so unhappy. Actually, I really don’t know. In fact, that’s what I’m trying to figure out. Paradoxical though it might seem, I’m stubborn precisely because I want to find out why I’m being stubborn. Really quite silly, isn’t it? I’ve put myself in this lose-lose situation in pursuit of ultimately worthless ideals, even though I would be so much happier if I just played along with everyone else. Of course, this part of me was conditioned also, and I’m going to kick the shit out of whoever influenced this part of me, because they have made my life a living hell! :p
Ultimately, this is my responsibility, conditioning or not. I need to choose between my own sadomasochistic existential indulgences, and the bliss of ignorance. There’s no point in letting things continue as they are, as I’m just hurting myself and everyone around me with this stubborn indecisiveness. Am I’m going to accept the Absurd for what it is, reject the absurd and feign ignorance like everyone else, or off myself “like a real man”? Either way, I’m going to die anyway, so I might as well decide what my fate is going to be. If there is any freewill in this world, it is in the freedom to live or to die. Beyond that, it’s all a toss of the coin, but then again, “it’s just cornflakes” anyway. Or something like that.
The Paradox of Values
Even though I never did writing to be praised or even to be understood, this has served to be my primary motivation for writing. For example, Because my page views have recently been stagnating, I have been writing less; in response to writing less, I get even less page views– it’s a vicious cycle. Thus, we have a paradox of values. I write to understand myself, but I cannot write without another motivation, which is for my writing to be appreciated by other people. Why is this a paradox? Because in order for others to appreciate my writing, I must write about things I couldn’t care less about; after all, my values conflict with what most people care about. If people do appreciate something I care about, it is coincidental and will be inevitably be the refreshing break from long periods of people not giving a rat’s ass what I think.
The paradox isn’t anything as simple as this, however– it’s far more menacingly complex! Take for example, the concept of communication: I know very well that true communication is impossible, and that the more people try to understand each other, the more ignorant they become, being inevitably blinded by the very prejudices they created to understand in the first place. In this sense, not just I, but everyone in this world has become trapped in a paradox of values. However, it only has a visibly negative affect on those like myself– those who have become aware of this terrible knowledge and are no longer able to return to the blissful ignorance.
For me, this paradox is a curse, whereas for others it is a blessing. after all, only a paradox can uphold the absurd construct of the Ego that permits people to continue living in such happiness, despite the lack of reason for them to be happy. Happiness is an illusion created (or more accurately, evolved) to support the human condition, and the strongest of all illusions are paradoxes– such as paradox is the human Ego. That I am able to see this paradox in its candid wretchedness is perhaps only because my own Ego has become contorted, that my very existence has already begun rotting.
Then again, we are all already dead. The only difference between life and death is acceptance and rejection. Living life is, in the most fatalistically pessimistic sense, the process of rejecting death, until Death forces you to accept its existence. Those who accept death of their own volition either commit suicide, or self-sabotage. Those who reject it are only postponing the inevitable. You have already died, and the only reason your body does not match that reality, is because your soul has not accepted this truth. To live is to lie; for a dead person to try to live is nothing short of absurd. Human beings are, after all, absurd creatures.
There is even more to this wretched paradox: you are not the same person you were a day, an hour, or even an infinitesimal moment ago. The person you were then has already died, and you were just born in the last moment. That you even believe yourself to exist is absurd, because the “self” to which you are referring to can only exist because you are conditioned to believe it as such. the self is itself an illusion, as is the reality that you claim to reside in. “you cannot walk in the same river twice”; the world you are so desperately attached to never existed in the first place– it was merely an illusion you created because you could not cope with the bitter truth.
The truth is that nothing you do will matter, because the whole of reality never existed to begin with. It was only a dream. This is the true paradox of values: that motivation can only be found in values, and yet there is nothing of value to be motivated by. Human beings are such wretched creatures, motivated by values that don’t even exist! To survive, we have to create meaning where there is none, imagine a reality that has long died off, pretend to understand each other, to communicate where this is no such cohesion. It’s no wonder I can’t be happy, when I let my mind indulge such bitterness! And yet without such indulgence, my own motivation to write would not exist! This is my paradox of values!
The Merits of Despair
From what I know about people’s perception of despair, despair seems to be predominantly perceived as a bad thing; I would even go so far as to say we are conditioned to believe it to be a bad thing, both biologically and socio-culturally. I believe this perception be the result of a lot of misunderstandings about what despair is; ultimately, these misconception stem from misunderstandings about the very nature of humanity, but that’s a topic for another post. The purpose of this post is the clear up these misunderstandings and provide a clearer and more accurate understanding of the nature and essence of despair, its function, and potential merits.
First, to define despair: “To give up as beyond hope or expectation”
So what is hope, then? “The belief or expectation that something wished for can or will happen.”
So then, I could then define despair as “To give up the belief or expectation of something wished for manifesting. From this perspective, I could further surmise that despair and hope are antithetical; that is, to have the belief or expectation of something existing is to have a lack of despair in that regard, and vice-versa.
I have addressed this issue in previous post, most notably Hope Versus Despair; this post however is focused specifically on the merits of despair. Before we address these merits, I have an example of something that happened quite recently in which despair proved quite beneficial to me:
As some of my long-time readers may know, I have had something of an obsession with mystical and esoteric phenomena, and the philosophies and mythologies that surround them. I myself believe in psychic abilities, having deliberately manifested such abilities on a consistent basis, many times manifesting feats that would be quite literally impossible to achieve otherwise.
I have focused my psychic energy to read minds, fix game systems, repair internet connections, augment my reflexes, dexterity, and athletic ability, accurately predict the future, and tell people about their past present, and future selves; my most amazing feat was opening lockers that I didn’t know the combination to (for skeptics, you should know that modern Masterlocks no longer “click”; update: apparently sometimes the last number will click, which can reduce the possible combinations to 100. However, I got the locks open each time without ever looking at the numbers I turned to, turning it until it opened; I have witnesses that will attest to this fact).
While don’t expect anyone to believe me, I never used psychic ability to prove anything, I used these abilities because they were useful; this “usefulness” brings me to my next point: the “usefulness” of despair. See, although the psychic abilities are useful, the obsession with spiritual energy was mostly self-destructive; there is a price for delving into the “forbidden mysteries”, you could say. In particular, It caused me to have “beliefs and expectations” (hopes) that were not only idealistic, but detrimental to my progress in the real world. Hope holds people back, in other words.
For example, I have long had the belief that there was some deep esoteric (hidden) meaning in this world, that human beings were ignorant creatures that can only save themselves (or be saved) by waking up from the bullshit we’re living in, and achieving (for example) enlightenment, or as the Gnostics call it, “gnosis“. I developed my own religion in pursuit of the “wake-up call”, and fervently believed that the whole world was ignorant, and that if everyone achieved gnosis it would be like heaven on earth. While I still believe this to be true, I have let go of (despaired) the more esoteric and spiritual elements, clinging to (hope) the more pragmatic, humanistic aspects. It was crucial to my progress in this example that I despair, because my hope of a cosmic awareness, and the knowledge thereof, preventing me from the benefits of pragmaticism (that is, working with what I’ve got).
To consummate my hope of one thing, I had to despair of another- this is the principle of Balance. In fact, the whole world, whether they realize it or not (most don’t!), perceives reality through a discriminatory kaleidescope that can only be possible through the contrasting of the thesis hope and its antithesis despair. To understand this, evaluate what we have learned about hope and despair: As hope is to cling to, and despair is to let go of, Hope and Despair are manifested as the perceptual elements of “Accept” and “Reject”; that is, to hope for is to “accept” (to expect to exist, and thus it does), and the despair is to “reject”, thus relinquishing any expectation of something existing (as expectation is necessary for something to continue to perceptually exist, despair [rejection] results in that “something” ceasing to exist).
In this way, hope and despair contrast that which exists from that which is not. Furthermore, the discrimination of distinguishing one person, place, thing, or idea from other requires establishing what qualities each given entity has (hope –> acceptance of given qualities), and what qualities it does not have (despair –> rejection of given qualities). The perception of everything is thus built upon the contrasting forces of hope and despair, making both equally necessary to appreciate anything, good or bad. This important notion is exemplified profoundly in the Taoism concept of Yin and Yang.
More recently, I experienced a more practical application of why despair is useful: Up until now, I have tried to avoid “playing that game”; that is, pretending to agree with people, conforming to norms I disagree with, acting like I care, etc.– some people call it “social skills”, but I know better than anyone that it’s just the aptitude and willingness to “bullshit” people; honestly, I don’t like it. However, the value of my rebelling against “the game” is only relevant if I assume the genuine communication is possible. I have hoped against hope that it is possible for people to communicate with each other (instead of pretending to, like everyone does), but I have finally accepted that it’s not possible, and decided the “play the game”, since it’s now apparent that due to the universal tendency to misunderstand, I can be more truthful through deception than I can through candidness, as ironic as it might seem.
Notice something interesting in the last paragraph? Yes, I despaired by *accepting* something. This isn’t a deliberate play on words, but it illustrates a very important point: To accept one thing is to reject another! In accordance with Balance (as I pointed out earlier) Acceptance of one thing requires rejection of another. To accept the future is to reject the past, to accept love is to reject hate, to love God is to loath Satan; everything has a thesis and an antithesis, and to side with one is to abandon another; the price of perception is discrimination. Not only is despair often a good thing, it’s also inescapable and inevitable, just as hope is. The discrimination between what to “hope” (accept) and what to “despair” (reject) are after all what makes perception possible.
The biggest merit of despair is inherent in the wording: to let go of. By letting go of a dead loved one, you can end the grieving and move on with life. By letting go of a failing relationship, you can stop the futile suffering and find someone you can be happier with. By giving up on a useless hobby, you can do something more useless with your life. And in my case, by accepting the bitter truth that real communication is not possible, I can let go of this futile search to gnosis and just be happy with what pretence of communication that I have been given.
Despair may be a terrifying concept for those who have not experienced it, by for those who have gone through it, and accepted the bitterness without averting our eyes, the sacrifice is repaid in the form of opportunity. Just as accepting one thing requires you to reject another, willing rejecting (letting go of) one prospect opens you up to new horizons– new opportunities to live and grow and experience.
Despair is a curse for those who already have their heart’s desires, but for those among us discontent with our lives, it proves to be a wonderful blessing. By letting go, you are free to move on, to experience, to live. Think of it as a “wake-up call”, tough love– that is after all what despair is- the other side of the coin.
Speaking of the other side of the coin, it should be noted that too much despair is just as much of a bad thing as too much hope. While excessive hope will cause suffering (due to unfulfilled expectations), excessive despair will take all of the value out of life (nihilism); as a result, you will have all the opportunity in the world, but no reason (impetus) to make use of it. In the case of too much despair, you will have so much potential, but life will at that point become so worthless, that you will have no reason to do anything with it; you are better off dead than having to deal with that much despair.
So then, if despair and hope are both necessities for life, but too much of either will destroy a person, where should we place the marker– how much hope and how much despair is optimum? At this point the answer is obvious: right in the middle. In the end, despair and hope are just different ways of looking at the same thing (like optimism versus pessimism– it’s the same glass), and the key to happiness is not in either of these extremes, but in Balance. If despair fosters potential and hope determines how much that potential will be actualized, then the maximum amount of potential being actualized will surely lie in a perfect Balance between the two.
Only by having a good measure of despair and hope in a person’s life can that person truly live and experience life, and only through Balance can one truly be free. If there is a reality where people can be both happy and free, that reality can only exist with Balance.
With Respect To Moderation
I have recently noticed a disturbing trend in which “extreme bias” is considered synonymous with a good review. Perhaps my own views on this have been skewed by a lingering fatalism, and perhaps of expecting too much of people, but nevertheless I believe moderation to be a virtue that all decent reviews should possess.
Although I have not become acquainted with your reviewing style, or of your personal film interests, I found your review of “The 41-Year-Old Virgin Who Knocked Up Sarah Marshall and Felt Superbad About It” to be (to borrow from your own vocabulary) atrocious.
The reason why I found it atrocious was not because I found your opinions to be invalid, or because your supporting evidence and opinions were not accurate (they were); rather, I found your one-sided conclusions to be overbearing, presumptuous, and of an overtly zealous quality.
The main assumption that your review seems to make is that Moss intended to make a “kosher” (industry quality) film; in the realm of comedy, I believe quality to be highly subjective– I’ve know different people to view the same film with a profound polarity. When I watch a comedy, I make a habit of never critiquing it, because that would take all the fun out of any comedy, or at the very least severely stifle it. I think Moss couldn’t care less about the quality– he just wanted to make a film that made fun of Apatow’s work, and make other people laugh in the process.
While this is merely my own perception, I found this movie to be (in stark contrast to your promise) “It lasts only 74 minutes, but I promise these will be the longest, most aggressively acrid 74 minutes of your life”, one of the funniest movies I have ever watched. I think my opinion counts for a lot, not because I consider myself to be a casual film critic (I do), or because I did any serious critical evaluation of this movie (I did not, for reasons stated in the last paragraph), but because my nervous system did the critiquing for me.
My review of the movie is then as a unbiased as it gets, because I have no film knowledge or industry expectations to cause me to be prejudiced against an otherwise entertaining film (as you appear to have). I find this film to be a good one, because I laughed the entire time; I found everything in the movie to be funny, not because I was supposed to, but because I laughed. That I could laugh so heartily is the proof in the pudding.
I am not saying your review was bad. For one reason or another, the film invoked negative emotions for you, and that alone is enough reason to feel so strongly. But when reviewing films, as a critic it’s vitally important to take everything and everyone into account when conducting your analysis and conveying your results; this is after all the foundation of any accurate criticism. For this reason, I implore you to exercise moderation in future reviews of movies; perhaps by suppressing your own impressions, you might be able to see why other people think differently about the given film(s), and that open-mindedness will translate into a higher quality of reviews.
In The World But Not Of It
For some time now this phrase, a paraphrase of Jesus’ prayer in John 17, has been my primary creed. I more comprehensively explained what “In the World But Not Of It” meant in my opening lines to “Essence of the Soul”:
By what method can one determine reality? We have guides all around us, things like the senses, logic, and the perceptions of those around us, but does it not vary from person to person, even if only the slightest? In addition, with all honesty we can only accept that this reality we are bound by is wholly attributed to the past. What if reality was something to be discovered, is something to be explored? Most choose to leave those questions unanswered, and accept the reality created by the past. Some indulge in determining their own fate, but “in reality” are still bound by the same legacy; many of these would not realize this even if they were told, because the vast majority of the rules bestowed upon us are painfully unsaid. It would seem that this would sum up all those that are governed by this antiquity in one way or another, But let us not forget the select few that make the choice to abandon these limitations and create their own reality- although some do not yet know they have made the choice.
In other words, we are all conditioned to believe what we believe, to do what we do, to desire what we desire. Freewill is for most people an illusion, with people either consciously or unknowingly being slaves to society.
There is a way out (besides death!), and that is to be “in the world but not of it”. But like everything there is a price, and in this case, the price is the obliteration of the SuperEgo.
For those among you who do not know, the SuperEgo is most simply put as a person’s conscience. Aiming for perfection, it is our obligation to live life only in an acceptable, “safe” manner, to be considerate of other people’s feelings and thoughts, and to confine one’s actions to accepted social norms. Interestingly enough, the SuperEgo can be split into two separate parts: The personal SuperEgo (which is the individual conscience), and the social SuperEgo (which is the collective conscience). Now tell me, what sounds familiar about this? As you may or may not have noticed, the social SuperEgo is more familiarly known as “Society”!
Society is the collective version of the conscience, and so where one’s own personal conscience merely feels the obligations of the self (which serves to fulfill ideals, protecting one’s long-term interests, achieve perfection, and keep one’s actions within acceptably “safe” bounds, Society does the same thing, but takes everyone into account. Thus, what is considered “safe” by Society has nothing to do with the interests of the individual, but the best interests of the collective, as perceived by the collective.
This is where I come in: I recently realized that I had successfully rid myself of both personal and social conscience; this is an amazing achievement because it means that I am completely free of my social conditioning, and am not constricted by such things as “guilt”, “regret”, “shame”, and “fear”. All of these things no longer exist for me; in fact, when someone recently asked me if I had any of these things, I temporarily forgot that for some people, such things are necessities. In my freed state, I find these concepts so delimiting that, when a person questions my having them, I can only think “Why would anyone want such useless traits in the first place! Then I suddenly realize that, for most people, conditioning is so ingrained in their existence that they can’t even imagine what it would be like to be without it; for the majority of the world, a person without a conscience must inevitably be evil- thus, if I do not have a conscience, I must undoubtedly be evil!
I think I am starting to understand why Jesus told his followers that the world would hate them– to be a Christian originally meant to be evil in the eyes of the world, to be enemies of the world. Christianity has nowadays however become synonymous with Society; while Christians were originally supposed to oppose the world, they know have become the world; or more accurately, they have merged with it.
I am however truly in the world but not of it. I truly have freewill, because there is nothing about me that can be conditioned; I was originally conditioned (by nature), but now all that I might have been conditioned by originally I have now discarded as irrelevant and trivial. I no longer have a past or a future constricting me, but live only in the present; I live not as people wish me to or as I am compelled to, but as I see fit in the moment, taking in the experience of living my life to the fullest extent possible.
Because I live my life without shame, without regret, without obligation, and without fear, I am truly free.
Unreasonable
Note: The following is a rant.
As I listen to female music artists (such as Avril Lavigne and Cascada), I realize that most music catering to females expresses the truth of what it means to be female, emotion-wise anyway. At first I thought that it was a coincidence that these albums seem to contradict each other in the message expressed, that surely the people singing must be talking about different people, or the person the singer is expressing is different. But the more female music I listen to, the more obvious it becomes to me that they are all feelings coming from the same person, and about the same guy(s). As it turns out, listening to female music is one of the best ways to understand the female heart, because it expresses with profound honesty their longings, desires, conflicts, and character.
In my past relationships, I became intimately familiar with the irrationalities of the female character. She feels in love, and then inexplicably decides to change her mind, and believes that feeling to be equally valid. She strives for the ideal of loyalty, and yet is the most fickle of all creatures. Females ask for honesty, yet are the biggest of liars, They emphasize commitment as paramount even as they adulterate, and they request independence in their most vulnerable of moments. Females are the most unreasonable creatures I have ever encountered.
When I was at Clearfield Job Corps Center, where I had my first long-term relationship, I found out first-hand how unreasonable females can be. I was told by my friends that girls aren’t that bad in the real world, but having now experienced both sides of the coin, I only half agree. Job Corps is a place of honesty, where the true self of everyone becomes exposed, exaggerated, and forced to the surface. While females in the real world might not appear to be that bad, they are in truth really that bad– they just hide it from us most of the time.
Now although this is a rant, I’m not attacking female character– if I could be a female for a year, I would be one. It’s more like I’m thinking that females have it hard. I mean, I can see why they can be so escapist about everything– how else are they going to handle all those emotions? They can’t just handle it logically like us males can, they don’t have the ability to just calmly break down, organize, and disperse emotions like guys do– they have to either resolve them, or escape from them, then and there. They are living contradictions, most than any guy– even I could ever be. They appear to be sane, even more sane that most guys when they have to be, but that’s just a ruse, truth be told. They bear it out though pure willpower, because they they have to. It really can be quite a torture, being female.
But nevertheless, if you think that suffering alone is going to make you more attractive, you’re going to end up with one hell of a superficial guy, certainly not with me. If you expect virtue from me, I will expect the same of you, even if it means exposing the wretchedness that you hide so well. Yeah you might not like having to reciprocate honesty– heck, most females probably aren’t even honest with themselves. That was the case with my last relationship after all– things didn’t work out with us because to the very end she couldn’t be honest with her true feelings. If you can’t expose your true feelings both to me and yourself, than you’re no better than my ex.
I know it might be unreasonable for me to ask females to be reasonable, but just try it out a little bit. Maybe with time you can learn to mature on the inside, instead of just pretending to be mature on the outside!
Essence of Life
If there is anything about me that I would consider to be my greatest imperfection, it would be my lack of a SuperEgo. I realized a while ago that I did not have one, although back then it was merely a hunch, whereas now it is a tortuous certainty. I have no Conscience, no Attachments, no Nexus, no Fidelity, and no Humanity. There is thus no reason for me to live, no reason to die, no reason to love or care for others, and yet no reason to hurt them either. Why is there no reason? Because all reasons to live are not found in the individual, but in the collective. Alone my life is meaningless and nihilistic, and it does not matter whether I exist or not. When I am with other people, I am even more alone, because I recognize with the greatest of clarity what it is that I lack, and that which those around me possess: reasons to live. Whereas I can only wander aimlessly as a cursed nomad akin to Cain, other people have an Essence of life, and it is for this reason that I envy them.
I hate my father, who will not give me that Essence, I hate myself, whom I am unable also to give purpose, and I hate the world, which cruelly lives on in their naive happiness, unacquainted with the deep melancholic emptiness forced upon those who have no purpose, despite wishing more than anything to have one. In my wretched suffering, I long to be a slave to another, that in carrying their burdens I might receive purpose in return. I do not care for what purpose I receive, just so long that I have one. But I cannot give myself this purpose, try as I might, and even I do not know why; perhaps this futile stubbornness of mine is to blame for my suffering.
To not have a conscience means that I do not feel pity nor sympathy, and I would not mind giving into the carnal criminals pleasures, to kill, steal, rape, rampage, burn, torture, and destroy the happiness of all. It means nothing to me, and presents itself as the opportunity to escape from my suffering, if only for a while. But knowing that I will not obtain a purpose in such a course, but only a desperate and ultimately futile escape, I resolve to hold back, reckoning that perhaps someday I will receive the answers that I so desire, and finally be free. I figure, this is what life is about after all.
To not have the ability to bond with and feel attachment to others is sickening; my fate would appear to be a perpetual melancholy, and the occasional escape from it. I try to understand and relate to other people, to befriend them in hopes that perhaps I just have walls that need to be broken down, that if I pretend to be friends with them long enough, eventually that friendship will become real. But in the end I realize the truth: If the foundation is superficial, then only a superficial friendship will it be; no matter how many layers of forged happiness I might cover it will, it’s in the end no more than a deception, and I will only hurt people in the process, as unlike my own pretense, for them it was quite real. To try to produce pretend friendships can only hurt people in the long run, because I will have shattered their dreams with my own illusions; if it’s not equivalent exchange, someone has to pay for my sins, and it will always be those people who I have selfishly befriended.
Because I do not even have a SuperEgo, I cannot even know God, because God is understood not through ethereal transference, but through the sharing of his followers. God is ultimately found not in the Self, nor in the All, but in the World; if I am unable to communicate with the World, then I am even cut off from God himself; as such, my life is a living Hell. As I live out Hell itself, it’s really no surprise that I could be so desperate, wanting a purpose more than anything. Without a purpose my existence is meaningless, without a purpose I am cut off from all else; without a purpose I have nothing, and I am nothing.
What I need right now, is the Essence of Life. I need a SuperEgo; without it, I am incomplete and worthless. All that is of meaning and worth in life is found not in the Self, but in the World; it is the World that will decide what my value, my worth, my character, my life, my purpose will be. Without the World I am nothing, because it is through the World that Life itself manifests. I must learn to connect without the World, for unless I do so, everything that I do, and everything that my life will become will have been for naught.
Radicality
I am one of the smartest, most talented, and blessed people on the face of this earth. For one reason or another, I have against the odds emerged from a troubling past and crippling environment more alive than ever before, as even Death itself can only make me stronger. I have the potential to become God, or the very least a powerful leader; one of those few geniuses that only come once thousand years. Perhaps most of those statements are shitting hubris, but one thing is certain: I can be a lot more than I am making myself to be at this very moment. Why am I not out there performing miracles right now, making use of my incredible insights and breathtaking wit to revolutionize the world, like I know very well I have the potential to do? It’s because I’ve been overly concerned with “playing it safe”; afraid that I will somehow take things too far and screw myself over, I opt to settle with “good enough”. What I need right now though, if I am to accomplish the greatness I am more than capable of, is a little bit more radicality. What I need is to take life a bit more seriously, and start taking care of business!
Being radical has always been a bit difficult for me, as my entire life I’ve been the sort of laid-back, go with the flow type guy. People act, and I react. I am who people think I am, and how others perceive my actions determines how I perceive myself. This isn’t so different from how most people perceive reality, but it is different from how I see things now. Because my sense of reality has changed (I no longer associate consensus reality as being my reality), I have unwittingly become at odds with myself. While my personality remains “I don’t care either way”, a go-with-the-flow type demeanor, my beliefs have become radical, idealistic, and revolutionary in nature. This is not a good thing, and a conflicted personality and beliefs will only send mixed messages and cause misunderstandings. To correct this, I’m going to have to step outside of my comfort zone, and take some risks in life!
Risk is not something I enjoy having. I have made the effort to ensure that my life remains risk-free, so that I don’t have to worry about taking risks, but admittedly utilizing defense mechanisms of this nature can only breed denial, deception, and a life wrought of illusion and detachment. While it’s quite interesting to think of myself as “in the world but not of it”, such a mindset does not reflect the real world, nor even a delusionary one; it is nothing but wishful thinking, and no good can come from it. To project such a level of detachment reflects not love, but fear, and it is this fear that isolates me from the world. I fear being corrupted, and so it is that the risk of being corrupted prevents me form truly living and experiencing life.
If I am to live up to my potential, achieve greatness, and in doing so experience the magnificence and beauty that is life, I must tread upon the corruption, and through my faith in myself and in the innate Beauty of this world, rise above it. Because I know what Beauty is, and what Love is, I cannot be spoiled by mere corruption. My Love for the world will itself protect me from it, for where some may see wickedness, I will have the privilege of witnessing Beauty; where others might only see naivety, I will see an innocent love. Just as Jesus was able to dine and converse with sinners without being corrupted, so should I have faith in my inner purity, and welcome the corruption of the world as a challenge rather than as a risk; a challenge which I am more than equipped to surpass with flying colors.
Coping Strategies
One heuristic that I’ve found to be profoundly true is the principle of three; that is, every aspect of reality can be reduced to three triadic foundational substances. Materialism, Idealism, Monism. Real, Unreal, Surreal. Past Present Future. Id, Ego, SuperEgo, Not-Being, Being, and Becoming. Red, Blue, Yellow/Green. Light, Darkness, Shadow. Everything in this world can be reduced to a triad, and by analyzing these triadic relationships, we are able to understand reality. This was Hegel’s belief when he created his triadic system. With this knowledge in mind, I have determined that when a person is confronted with conflict, he has three triadic options for dealing with the conflict. Plan A, Plan B, and Plan C. These plans are, respectively, “fight”, “flight”, and “join”.
I say respectively, because the human biology ensures that most people approach conflict in this order. If you can’t beat them, the next most natural course of action is to run away (escapism). If you can’t run away (as has been the case in many historical conflicts), there’s always Plan C: you join them (either passively or actively). Most civilizations throughout history have come to an end not because of civil war or genocide, but because of cultural assimilation. They decided to give up who they were, and embrace the status quo, which essentially meant changing their identity to that of the conquering nation (i.e. Rome).
One psychologist concerned with these different options is German psychoanalyst Karen Horney; her coping strategies agree with the thoughts of this post, except she adds another one: “Moving With”. This new option she introduces is interesting in that she presents it as separate from the triadic “Moving Against” (fight), “Moving Away” (flight), and “Moving Toward” (join); claiming that these three are neurotic, whereas “Moving With” is healthy. While I do agree that the three by themselves are neurotic (as they are by themselves imbalanced), I feel that her introduction of a fourth option is completely missing the point; namely, “Moving With” is simply the product of a Balance between the three aforementioned neurotic responses.
If “Moving With” were its own response, it too would be neurotic, as the weight of the human psyche cannot balance upon one leg. Therefore, I find her conclusions to be idealistic, but inaccurate. Rather than saying “Moving With” is the only healthy coping strategy (which is dangerously dogmatic), it’s better to think of it in terms of Balance; that is, when coping, a person is best served by using discretion to choose when to fight, flee, or join in response to a situation. By using discretion in choosing between Plan A, Plan B, and Plan C, the resulting Balance will ensure that healthy relationships are formed and maintained.
To quote a famous and profoundly true proverb:
The Serenity Prayer
Different Ways of Looking at the Same Thing
I am at the point where I must decide between servitude to my Ego (Individualism) and discarding my Ego (Oneness). This is actually quite the difficult decision for me, as there are many things that I want to do with my life, and I have a lingering fear that by letting go of my Ego, I might not live up to my potential. This is an irrational fear of course (Oneness is the only means by which I can live up to my potential, after all), but nevertheless a powerful motivator. You see, Oneness lets me live up to my potential in the grand scheme of things, whereas my Ego will permit me to achieve perfection in my own eyes. It’s like playing a game you know you can win, versus excelling in a game where winning is irrelevant. While I prefer excellence, somehow I still desperately want to play a game I can win, and without an Ego that’s just not possible. As a result, I hold onto to my Ego, as I fear by discovering my true nature that the game will become irrelevant, at which point it won’t even matter whether I’m alive or not.
Put simply, I’m afraid of letting go, and even more afraid of losing myself in the process. I want not only to be perfect, but also to appreciate that perfection, and to soak in and benefit from the praises of others. With both the Ego and the SuperEgo this is possible; by discarding the Ego (and by extension, the SuperEgo), I fear will not be able to appreciate myself anymore, as immersion with the World will deem the Self irrelevant and meaningless.
There’s a price for everything- this much I know. The price of oneness is selflessness, and I have to admit I like who I am. I like how unique my character is, how I can say with confidence that there is no one in this world even remotely like me. I like to come up with original ideas, and to retrospect over how far I’ve come, and how bright of a future I have. I like being me.
But even more than this, I intensely look forward to the ambitious projects that await me: the perfect social character, a utopic civilization, and everlasting creative accomplishments– these are some of the goals that I have in mind. I know that I can accomplish the impossible, and so I seek to do so to open the eyes of the world, that they might too seek to see the world through eyes unclouded, as I do. Yet ironic as it might seem, I will have to continue to see the world through distorted lenses to get to that point in the first place. To get the world to see life as it truly is, I must continue to live my life in corruption, that I might ensure that I am not cut off from the world. The world is not yet prepared for the purity of mind that I wish for it to have, and so by living a life of such a pristine quality, I would only cause misunderstandings.
How do I resolve this dilemma of mine? Which direction should I take? It’s a bit simpler than it sounds, really. I just need to step outside myself, that I might see things in utmost clarity. After all, in reality it’s just different ways of looking at the same thing!
Remember now, that just as material energy and spiritual energy are just two different conceptions of reality interacting with each other, Individualism, Collectivism, and Oneness (antithesis, thesis, and synthesis, respectively) are just different perspectives of the same ultimatum. Regardless of what perspective I choose, the end result will be the same; the perspective does not change who I am, or what I do; it only determines the nature and magnitude of the appreciation of those actions, both by myself and others. As such, I can maintain my individuality, incorporate collectivists values, and be driven by Oneness– all simultaneously. By keeping my eyes on the bigger picture, I can recognize that because it’s all ultimately just different ways of looking at the same thing, all that’s left is for me to appreciate that thing.
So what is that thing? By now you should know what it is: Oneness!
To become One with the World, and the World with Me.
To appreciate all that is the World, that in appreciation I might know Beauty
Through Beauty, that I might know Love
For only through pure Love can God truly be known.
Epistemologism
I’ve been looking into the differences between materialism and idealism, but no matter what arguments are presented for both sides of this metaphysical argument, I can’t help but wonder if it’s all just semantics. After all, if everything is ultimately reducible to matter, then what would be the point of distinguishing matter from idea? Or alternatively, if everything is ultimately reducible to idea, then why even talk about matter, as it is from that perspective merely the manifestation of idea in corrupted form. The idealist contend that matter is the product of idea, while the materialist asserts that idea is the result of chemical reactions within matter, but to support either view, we must also consider that by changing the role of either matter or idea (even in relation to each other), we must also change the definition of them (as the definition of something is dependent upon its corresponding purpose). As both of these conflicting views are both possible, to assert either one as being subservient to the other will turn this dilemma into a meaninglessly sophistic battle of semantics.
For these reasons, I must assert my belief that both matter and idea of equally complex manifestations of energy, with matter taking the form of physical energy, and idea taking the form of spiritual energy. Both spiritual and physical energy are reducible to pure energy; while pure energy has no form in-and-of-itself (being infinite in nature), it can take on form by interacting with the physical and / or spiritual world (both of which are different ways of looking at the same thing), and depending on the nature of those interactions, produces either material, idea, or a blend of the two. This belief, although I originated the specific details of it, can best be classified as a Neutral Monism, or more specifically, the Double-aspect theory.
Interestingly enough, I also believe the soul to be the most powerful example of a form of energy that is simultaneously composed of both physical energy and spiritual energy.
As you should know, both idealism and materialism are philosophies that deal with the nature of reality; the question of the nature of the source from which this complex world emanates has occupied the minds of philosophers for several thousand years. What I take issue with is the distinction between metaphysics and epistemology: Most philosophers consider metaphysics a waste of time, as epistemology is more immediately “useful.” It’s a solid argument, except for one big problem: Epistemology is dependent upon the predominating metaphysical perspectives, as the truth can only be interpreted according to the reality in which it resides. As such, there is no truth in this world other than what “truth” the decided metaphysical reality permits; this makes any conception of “truth” an inherently fragile and biased one.
I’m not saying we should prioritize metaphysics over epistemology; rather, I’m saying that we need to understand and account for the bias caused by the metaphysical alignment (that is, the axioms) upon which our epistemologically-derived “knowledge” is based. By accounting for the influence that metaphysics has on the interpretation of knowledge (and thus of epistemology, we can better understand what knowledge we have acquired, how to make use of it, and perhaps even avoid being “deceived” by it!
Oneness
The other day I was talking to my dad about “Oneness”, this mystical feeling that I’ve been having, and he asked me if what I meant by “oneness” was “unity”, to which I responded that it was not. I didn’t understand quite why at the time, but I was certain that there was a big difference between oneness and unity. That difference, as I know realize, lies in necessity; specifically, whereas unity implies a bond between entities (with “loyalty” being one of the side-effects of that bond), oneness transcends everything, making the very concept of bonding irrelevant, as such a thing is unnecessary with oneness.
Oneness transcends all bonds in both intimacy and strength, not because it is better, but because of the deep humility (and by “humility” I refer to the discarding of pride) that oneness encompasses. With the all the psychological walls out of the way (which would block or stifle Oneness), the world will be free to become One with itself, body and soul. Oneness means that I am the World, and the World is Me; when the pride has been discarded and all of the walls rendered irrelevant, there is no difference between myself and the world, there are only two different ways of looking at the same thing.
I’m not talking about Collectivism, the failed attempt to turn the Ego into the SuperEgo. In Collectivism there is not selflessness as there is is Oneness; in Collectivism one is merely transposing the World’s ideas onto one’s own. You are still selfish even with Collectivism; the only difference is that in making Societal ideals more important than your own, you have traded your ideas for that of the Collective. With Collectivism, not only are you lying to yourself (by saying that Society’s interests are in alignment with your own), but you are still selfish. The only difference is that now your selfishness is a common interest.
This is also a problem with friendship; people think they are selfless in their friendships, but in reality they are simply finding common interests onto which they can project their selfish desires. Friendship as we know it is simply a mutually selfish arrangement, shrouded in the illusion of actually “caring” about someone else, when really you only care about yourself. When we explode this phenomenon to the level of Society, we see what “caring” (as found in friendships) really causes: corruption and deceit. Just as with the Collective, friends only think they care because they have projected their desires onto common interests, thus creating and supporting the illusion of selflessness, while at the same time sustaining one’s pride, albeit the pride has become social instead of merely personal.
On the other hand, we have individualism, where personal pride is paramount, and other’s interests irrelevant. Individualism is in some respects more virtuous than Collectivism, because Individualists do not lie to themselves and others by projecting the illusion of common interest, but pursue goals unabashedly regardless of the consequences of others. It is somewhat more selfish than Collectivism, but only because the selfishness is personal instead of social, with the clash between personal selfishness and societal interests making the selfishness of Individualism all the more obvious. But unlike Collectivists, Individualists are true to themselves, and thus more likely to be able to achieve Oneness.
There is something that both Individualists and Collectivists have in common, and it is that they are both selfish; specifically, they both have Pride, and it is this pride that prevents them both from achieving Oneness. With Individualists, their pride is personal pride, and is manifested as the Ego. With Collectivists on the other hand, their pride is social pride, and is manifested as the SuperEgo. In both cases, it is pride that gets in the way.
It’s important to note that Pride is the root of all evil (although prejudice is the greatest of all evils, prejudice is subservient to Pride, which is ultimately the root of all evil). Everything that has caused suffering, loss, death, or corruption has been caused by Pride; be it personal pride (individualism) or social pride (collectivism). Because of this, the only way to rid the world of evil is selflessness, and the only means (so far as I know) of accomplishing selflessness is Oneness.
To achieve Oneness requires the discarding of one’s pride in the pursuit of virtue. Oneness is the continual realization (perpetual epiphany) that You and the World are One. Oneness is not the destruction of the wall between the Self and the World, nor can one create Oneness; rather, it is the realization of the true nature of the self, of the world, of reality. Oneness is the epiphany that in truth there is no distinction between the Self and the World; if a distinction must be made by which to appreciate Oneness, let it be that the Self and the World are merely “two different ways of looking at the same thing”.
This feeling, this epiphany of mine must have been what Gautama Buddha felt when he became enlightened. For in understanding the true nature of things, that in truth I am One with the World, it remains only for me to appreciate it, to live it, the be it. To be as One, just as I already am. To live my life according to the nature that I already have. My purpose is One with the fate of the world, and so it is that I must love the World, and in doing so I will have loved myself also, for we are One and the Same.
The Lesser of Two Evils
This world is wrought with two forces, which themselves manifest in two opposing, yet profoundly dependent realities. These forces, while they have been known by many names, are known by myself as “Materiality” and “Ideality”, and although they are both considered as evil in their raw form, with Ideality inspiring Chaos and Materiality inciting fear, we must choose from this epic dualism the lesser of two evils, for the benefit of mankind.
Before I go on, I should note that although this may reference the respective philosophies of Materialism and Idealism, the use of such words in this post do not necessarily define the words the same, as I employ a more versatile and transitive understanding of the underlying roots of these philosophies; in some senses my reference to these philosophies is made with a more mystical and / or abstract context.
Materiality and Ideality have their respective proponents and detractors; the metaphysical embodiment of these two forces being best understood through the philosophical movements of Materialism and Idealism. But to study either of these philosophies will only serve to confuse a person about the importance of these two forces, both at cosmic and pragmatic levels; after all, an in-depth analysis of materialism and idealism will eventually lead the knowledge-seeker to suggest that perhaps the difference between “body” and “mind” are mere semantics.
This is where dualism comes on: In recognition that there must be a body for the mind to be appreciated, and a mind to appreciate the body, Dualism recognizes that appreciation itself requires the recognition of opposing forces; that is, it is meaningless to say that all is mind or that all is body, because without the existence of one of these the other could not be appreciated, and thus (perceptively) could not exist. To cite the proverbial metaphysical thought-experiment, “If a trees falls and no one is around, does it make a sound”, the dualistic answer would be “maybe”. Furthermore, for it to make a sound would depend equally on both mind and body; thus, for it to make a sound there must be both a body to hear it, and a mind by which to distinguish sound from not-sound. Dualism is in this respect more rational than either Materialism (which is overly-dogmatic) and Idealism (which is overly-abstract). Dualism in its perfect form would permit the union of these opposites, and is thus both idea and material simultaneously; it is the coin upon which the material side and the idea side can both coexist peacefully.
In deciding that inspiration should be the standard for absolute truth, I noted that the truth of a cause should be decided by its effect. For example, Christianity can be considered an important truth for humanity, having survived for thousands of years and still ever-prominent among people from different cultures, nations, ethnicities, and castes. However, it is not necessarily a good truth, as more people have been killed in the name of the Christian god than of any other deity. So Christianity is true, it is a truth that people are better off not applying to their life.
In the same way, I have evaluated modern society, and determined that although the prospering societal trends such as nationalism, prejudice, ethnic pride, and capitalism are true (being pervasive and prominent in their presence), they are not good truths, as they have historically caused more good than harm.
So let us evaluate: what do Christianity and Society have in common that makes the true, yet harmful?
The simple answer: both are largely adhere to the forces of Materiality.
Note that it used to not be that way. Society was always a Materialist, but Christianity was originally Idealist, rampant with mythology, mysticism, and abstract philosophy. As Christianity matured, they latter developed a more Dualistic philosophy, while still retaining their Idealist roots. But with the merging of Christianity with Society, Constantine I transformed Christianity into a Materialist abomination, known later on as “The Catholic Church”.
The Roman Empire was likely the most Materialistic Society of the time, evidence I will explain later on in this post. Saint Paul was a Roman citizen and a tacit proponent of Roman law, culture, and societal norms; it is for this reason he is most passionate in his letters to the Romans, and for this reason that he is so dogmatic in all of his letters. While Constantine merged Christianity with the Materialist Roman Society, Paul is the one who planted the initial seeds and thus made the transformation so successful and the effects of which so pervasive.
Materiality favors the tangible and controlled; for this reason that Society can be considered the epitome of Materialism. Society, which is itself the controlled form of an otherwise chaotic humanity, values Solidarity; that is, a world where every aspect of human nature is static, predictable, measurable, and reliably manipulatable. This is why Science is supportive of Materialism: what good is the abstract, unpredictable, ethereal, cosmic Ideality? Unlike Idealism, Materialism is practical, useful, and measurable; it can be built upon, evolved, and manipulated to produce a reliable result.
The Roman Culture thrived on what might be considered the first true materialism: while they still relied on gods (a somewhat ideal concept, being transcendental), they had a myriad of them– gods for nearly every essential function of Society. In this respect, the Roman subserviated God himself to Materialism, making use of his idealistic qualities to support the needs of a material Society. Constantine passed this materialism onto Christianity, which in the unity of church and state quickly became indistinguishable from Society.
It should be noted, however, that Ideality was never quite rooted in humanity; not because it was any less true, but perhaps because of the nature of its truth. Ideality advocates freedom, uninhibition, honest, untapped desire, and in its raw form, chaos and anarchy. However, pure Ideality does not result in fear, suffering, crime, and death– although these things are usually associated with Chaos by conventional societal adherents. Ideality lacks the impetus for such evils; it has no pride, prejudice, lust, greed, desperation, or hate. In an “ideal” world, there is after all no need for such things.
It would appear the Materialism is to blame for the evil in the world, but this is not the case. For we only scapegoat Materialism because that is controllable is easier to project blame onto.
To clarify:
While Materialism and Idealism are often viewed as alternate perspectives on the nature of reality, they are ‘in reality’ as mutually inclusive as the Yin and Yang of Taoism. As a I said before, there must be a body for there to be a mind, and a mind for there to be a body. Thus, as I first realized a few years ago and conveyed in “Philosophical Scrapbook”, Materiality and Ideality are both required to produce either evil or good!
For there to be murder, there must be murderous intent (Ideality) and someone to murder (Materiality).
For there to be a religion, there must both be God (ideality) and worshippers (Materiality).
And so on…
So you might say, surely all evil originates from Dualism!
But you should also keep in mind:
All good also originates from Dualism!
The other important thing to consider is that neither absolute Ideality or absolute Materiality are plausible, because an absolutely infinite world is not appreciable, and reality is far too vast and diverse for every factor to be reliably controlled. No matter what we try, we will always be stuck somewhere in the middle, making some form of dualism an inevitability.
So then, since Dualism is a metaphysical inevitability anyway, we should examine the virtues of Dualism, and in doing so determine what might be the dualistic “lesser of two evils”:
Dualism can be considered the bastard son of Yin and Yang (with Ideality being the driving “plus” factor, and Materiality being the resistant “negative” factor); history shows that trying to control chaos has the inevitable side effect of corruption, and so it is that Dualism produces evil. But note also that “corruption” is not necessarily a bad thing; in fact, both good and evil are born from the corruption that Dualism produces. What might be seen as beauty by some might be considered disparity by others; in the same way, what is corrupt and what is beautiful is all in the eye of the beholder.
As I first realized in my Popularity post, what is evil and what is good is determined by who is in control; the person(s) in control might consider something a good thing, or even believe themselves to be righteous, while those people who’s control has perceptively been taken away by those person(s) would view such things, or such person(s) as evil.
For something to be considered good by both those in control and those not, one of two things must occur:
(1) The mindset must allow for the distinction between control and chaos to be lifted.
(2) An actual perfect Balance between Chaos and control must be applied.
You should notice that #1 is a solution from the perspective of Ideality, wheras #2 is a solution from the perspective of Materiality. While both perspectives might be equally valid, I personally feel that #1 is more plausible, which is probably part of the reason why I tend to lean more towards the Idealist end of the Ideality-Materiality spectrum.
My rationale for this, is although #2 is more practical, being a goal that can be engineering, evaluated, and systematically set into motion, it requires uncontrollable variables to be treated as if they were nonexistent, and requires that all interference and “noise” be treated as evil. For example, from the Materialist perspective, ghosts, demons, psychics, and other supernatural anomalies cannot be accurately controlled, measured, reproduced, or proven; thus, they do not exist. Ideality (#1), on the other hand, asserts that it’s impossible to truly control anything, and as so is a proponent of everything in existence, regardless of the universal validity of its existence. Thus, Ideality is IMO a more pure solution to this problem.
To understand what I mean by “more pure” requires an understanding of Ideality and Materiality in regards to Potentiality versus Actuality: Ideality, if it were treated as manifest, would be Absolute Potentiality. Materiality on the other hand would be Absolute Actuality. As you should know, neither of these can exist without the other, because without potential there would be nothing to actualize, and with Actuality there would be no way to tap potential, and thus appreciate its manifested form.
If God is Potentiality (passion), and Satan is Actuality (resistance), then surely God cannot be appreciated without Satan, nor Satan without God. They are just like Yin and Yang, mutually inclusive forced cursed to depend on each other to manifest. Of their cooperation is born corruption, whether for evil or good, the more worth of which is determined by who is in control (justice), and who is out of control (crime). Referencing my philosophical scrapbook once more, is it any wonder that criminals are always on the run and the law is always “fighting crime”? Just some food for thought 😉
So then, what is the lesser of Two evils?
Even within the confines of Duality, there is no lesser evil, except perhaps a perfect Balance. But as perfection cannot exist in Duality (duality itself being wrought in corruption, which is by its nature imperfect), there is no perfect Balance, but only the opportunity to strive towards it. Perhaps this futile, yet somehow meaningful strive for a Balance in life is really what a virtuous life should be about!
Virtue
If humanity has value, then surely that value would be manifested as virtue. Virtue is the epitome of maturity, and through virtue one can achieve success, and their success become meaningful. If evil is manifested as weakness, then surely virtue is the proof of strength. From this perspective, virtue is the ability to both fit in with and inspire society and its members; an ability which presently, I am striving to attain.
Take for example, the nature of independence: If a person is passionate about what they believe in, they will have become weak, because they are not dependent upon their beliefs to live; without their beliefs they are nothing, and are thus fragile and vulnerable to attack. By attacking a person’s beliefs directly, their response will not only determine the importance they place on personal values, but also whether they are of virtue, or a slave to their faith. A person of virtue indeed does have faith, but they do not let their beliefs determine their lifestyle, for therein such a route lies weakness and vulnerability, the hazard of which can procreate all kinds of evil; after all, this is the nature of prejudice, which itself is derived from faith.
A virtuous person does not require friendship or even social interaction to survive; rather, he uses social institutions and norms as a facility by which to inspire and improve the world. A virtuous person does not rely upon a means by which to validate his end (faith), but instead lets his end validate the whole of his life (his essence); in other words, a virtuous person “lets his work speak for himself”, rather than fallaciously trying to justify his life with faith or reason.
If virtue is the greatest ideal that one could seek, then surely perceived perfection would be a great leap towards the attainment of a virtuous life. For if one appears to be perfect, this indeed reflects the inner virtue of that person; after all, one can only fake perfection if one knows what perfection is, and such revelation can only be known to the virtuous.
If I let my beliefs determine how I live my life, how I communicate with others, and how I present myself as a person, I am not virtuous. To attain virtue, I must discard my pride that prevents me from being virtuous; the need to project my own beliefs onto others, and onto reality, only serves to reflect my own insecurities and personal lack of virtue. To become a man of virtuous character, I must abstain from the selfish and insecure need to project, express, and display my beliefs, for in the passionate exposure of the nature of my faith I merely make evident my own lack of virtue, and the abundance of inner-corruption.
The path towards virtue requires the abandonment of pride, for Pride is the cause of the greatest of all weaknesses, and is both historically and intrinsically the greatest of all evils. So that I might be at peace with the world, and at peace with myself, I must discard this delimiting and self-corrupting Ego of mine, so that I might transverse the perversions of my own reality and achieve the purity of mind necessary to not only be virtuous, but become virtue itself. Only then will I be able to achieve Oneness, which is the greatest of all virtues.
Antisocial
It has been my own tradition (for without personal tradition one is dependent upon the traditions of a corrupt society) to act according to my beliefs *except* when those beliefs cause me to be antisocial. Because much of what is considered to be “antisocial” is subjectively decided, I can be very stubborn when it comes to my behavior, but when multiple cases of such interference come to my attention, I decide to modify which beliefs I will manifest, and which beliefs will reside in the ethereal plane.
Unfortunately, most people tend to be very hypocritical, and so it is that the greatest challenge for me in regards to maintaining good social relations lies not in what is said, but in what is not said. The unsaid rules of social interaction. For example, in social interactions it’s important to be honest by not candid, constructive but not critical, caring but not confrontational.
The social norms, not only of America but of the whole world, demand that everything we do be conditional; absolute character is unacceptable. I cannot be absolutely honest, for then my candidness will hurt other people. I cannot be absolutely loving, for if I do I will be perceived as “creepy” at best, and a murderous stalker at worst. I cannot be absolutely caring, for if I was my actions would be seen as interference, and my character as an asshole, snitch, teacher’s pet, prick, etc. The social norms of most societies put limits on how much one can express any given personality trait, and to ignore such limits is perceived by everyone (except those who have antisocial beliefs themselves) as being antisocial.
My beliefs are idealistic and unconditional. I believe in absolute everything, and the expression thereof, and so I am at odds with society. My absolute honesty hurts others, my absolute caring heart (when I choose to express it) causes people to hate me, and even for them to think that I hate them, and my love (which I seldom ever truly express), when I have expressed it, causes people to fear for their own safety, because the weight of my passion overwhelms them.
Apparently most people cannot handle raw expression, needing a filter (society) to dumb it down for them. It’s no wonder that most people can’t appreciate true art, be it in paintings, film, animation, poetry, fiction, or music. They can’t appreciate it because they are unable to handle it. Most people have so been isolated from raw beauty by the society they live in, that they perceive beauty as barbaric, and art as chaos. The people of this world, so dependent on society to dilute the world we live in, cannot even appreciate true beauty anymore, because it is too intense for them.
Yes, I am saying that my true self is antisocial because I am closer in character to what might be considered true beauty. The light of my life, which I so long to shine before the world in all its magnificence, is too bright for the world to appreciate, and so it is that my true self is seen not as a light, but as a torch that threatens to burn the world to ash. So it is, that I am by my own nature antisocial.
But of course, I am not antisocial, because I do not express those parts of myself, but merely hint at them as a sort of inside joke. I satirize, that even my bad parts might be deemed acceptable. I love, am candid, and care, but only to the extent that I can get away with. The conditions bestowed upon all members of society, I do not follow, but neither do I disregard. I recognize that although I do not agree with these unsaid rules, the majority of the world does, and so I need to take into account social dynamics if I am to be at peace with the world. I use do not follow these rules, but instead exploit and manipulate them into such a compromise that I can be somewhat content with.
Although I cannot change the norms of society, as unfair and hypocritical as they might be, I will continue to pretend, that I might gradually interpret these laws into a more virtuous form. Hopefully the world will follow my example (and the example of others like me) and do the same. After all, there is no reason why I should have to be antisocial to be virtuous.
Methodological Skepticism
When I studied Rene Descartes’ Methodological Skepticism, I was impressed by his use of skepticism to rigorously determine that there was only one thing could not be doubted: one’s own existence. That is, by doubting existence, one would end up confirming it, because to doubt is to think. Cogito Ergo Sum.
But then Descartes makes me really hate his guts by making the fallacious inference that God would not deceive him because he is infinite and thus has no reason to. This statement is so logically full of holes it’s ridiculous, so let me just go with the most obvious problem: Why would God need a motivation to deceive in the first place? (If he is indeed God, everything he did would be justified de facto, because it’s God who did it. God doesn’t need a reason.
However, Rene Descartes did inspire an important insight for me, in regards to how I can know and understand truth: I cannot know the truth with certainty, but I can know what the truth isn’t. By knowing what isn’t, I can better understand what is, thus using my own equivalent of methodological skepticism to understand God, reality, and the truth.
For example, because God is infinite, he is beyond my comprehension and thus unknowable. However, I can at the very least know what God isn’t. God isn’t finite, he isn’t insecure (nothing is lacking), he isn’t arrogant (as this is an imperfection), and he isn’t fearful (what is there to be afraid of). By knowing what God isn’t, I can then understand who God is. If God is not cruel, he must be kind. If God is not weak, he must be powerful…and so on.
According to my methodology, to understand all that is, we must not focus on knowing the truth (which is unknowable), but on what is not the truth (which is knowable). By using what is not true to isolate what is true, we can better understand the truth even without knowing it. Divide and Conquer, using a logical skepticism to isolate the truth.
Polarity
While at Job Corps, I spent a lot of time thinking about the polar nature of good and evil, right and wrong, God and Satan, and even of reality itself. I realized how fragile that morality was, how just by changing one’s mindset everything about life, morality, and even reality itself will flip-flop.
By just polarizing one’s mindset, evil will become good, wrong will become right, Satan will become God, and blasphemy will become piety. With just a little imagination, a criminal’s perversions become beauty, a murderer’s killings become a skill, and a necrophilia’s cravings become an acquired taste. By polarizing the way you look at life, everything changes to the reverse, and everything you once thought was “right” becomes “wrong”.
With so fragile of a moral base, and a faith so easily manipulated, how can people continue holding fast to their beliefs? In seeing how a simple change of mindset can change everything, surely people should realize that they are not in control of their beliefs, that they are merely being conditioned to believe what they do!
The common-sense fundamentalist response is quite predictable: “I can believe what I believe because morality cannot be changed! Those who can be changed in their morality by changing their mindset are crazy! A person in their right mind would know what true morals are, what God’s morals are, and live accordingly!”
Rather than confronting the close-minded fundamentalist, I instead let history speak for me. If you cannot be convinced by Dark Ages, the crusades, and the Salem witch trials, then surely you are so blind to the truth that you will never know. For in these profound historical events, the truth was wrought with corruption, disease, blood, and suffering. If your morals are so right, then why is it that people with the same piety to which you hold have brought so much evil to this world?
Morality is not absolute, but a dynamic phenomenon that changes to adapt to society. The separation of church and state has become as a blurred aberration, with religion and society becoming one. The polarity present in morality is so real that it’s scary; we cannot any longer avoid it, but only accept it. Fundamentalists reject it, and thus are manipulated by it. I seek to know it through and through, that I might be in the world, but not of it.
By just changing my mindset, I can see rape as beauty, and paedophilia as an acquired taste. While I do not believe these statements to be true, the mere possibility of their truth, and the ability to consider them as possibilities makes this human gift (or should I say, “curse”) a frightening one. To consider all possible realities as equally valid can drive a man mad, and to live according to realities that deviate from that of society will make that appear as mad in accordance with societal standards.
With just a “binary switch”, good will become evil, and evil will become good. With such a fragile standard of morality in place, a person’s life can indeed be naught but a temporal existence, living not only on borrowed time, but on the whim of a precocious and ever-dissatisfied society. The fundamentalist is in this respect and idealist, because he wishes for a static morality that simply cannot and will not exist.
Morality is dynamic, just as we are dynamic. If keeping up with society’s moral “trends” is a necessity for social survival, then surely “open-mindedness” is a crucial necessity for any of us who wish to survive. I feel sorry for fundamentalists, who, being close-minded, are doomed to deteriorate back into “the dust from whence they came”, from the evolutionary standpoint they are now nothing but a dying breed.
Everyone’s Addicted To Each Other
A couple years ago, I discovered a very important insight: that addiction isn’t just limited to drugs, sex, and multimedia. We can get addicted to just about anything. One such addiction that goes unnoticed, because it’s considered a good thing, is social addiction. We are chronically addicted to each other!
I actually have wanted to write about this for a while, but I wanted to inspect the situation to make sure I wasn’t mistaken. Maybe addiction isn’t as simple dependency issues. But as I strive towards the lofty goal of perfection, I realize ever so much that the only difference between what is considered “addiction” and what is considered “necessity” is that necessity is deemed by society to be socially acceptable, and therefore not an addiction. In other words, addictions are needs considered to be unnecessary for daily life, and the dependence of which is detrimental to a person’s well being.
There is a key word in the last paragraph: socially. Notice the connection between “social” and “society”. Did you realize something, as I did? The key point here, is that because society itself decides what addiction is, society itself cannot be addicting, as that would be an ad hominem attack on society, one that would render society invalid as a standard for judging what addictiveness is in the first place. As a result, if society is the standard, we cannot be addicted to each other, as that would make society (institutions that rely on social dependence and solidarity) an addiction.
In truth, however, we are addicted to each other. Why? Because we don’t actually need each other to survive. Perhaps in the caveman days, and even perhaps in the early 20th century. But not anymore. I’m not saying that social dependence is holding us back. I’m saying that too much social dependence is a bad thing. The level of social integration and dependence in the world is dangerously high, and threatens to render the very concept of identity obsolete.
Perhaps it depends on the way you look at it. From a collectivist perspective, social solidarity is a good thing. It eliminates war, crime, and social corruption. Serial killers, for example, are loners. If we are all conditioned to be socially involved, the travesties of individual crime (which accounts for the majority of all crime nowadays) would dissipate, and eventually cease altogether. But in a socialist culture, there is also more suicide. Take Japan for example– one of the lowest, crime, divorce, and corruption rates in the world, and the greatest level of cultural unity and loyalty of any nation, and yet it has the highest suicide rate in the civilized world; arguably it has the highest suicide rate because of the aforementioned attributes. Apparently everything has a price, with the price of Japan’s peace a deadly melancholy, suppressed by a socialist culture.
Because there is a price for everything, there can always be too much of a good thing; in a world where karma holds the world captive, Balance will bring the greatest happiness to the world; this is my belief. Addiction, in my opinion, occurs whenever a person needs more of something then they can provide of its opposite. By needing more than you can pay the price for, you will end up paying the price in some other form, and ultimately in the form of suffering. In other words, to love each other, we must hate each other equally; being unable to do so, we end up projecting that price onto others, or else suffering some paradoxical end-product of the Hedgehog’s dilemma. Because our dependence on each other cannot be logically sustained, we pay the price with denial, projection, misunderstandings, confusion, deception, enmity, malice, and a host of other social corruptions. Though we might fight against it, there is a price for everything, a price that we will pay one way or another.
Our addiction to each other is likely the most deadly addiction at all, because it is a price which we are conditioned by society to live in denial of, and yet the addiction which produces the most severe consequences of all. From our social cravings we have even created God, in who’s name we have killed countless of our own kind; while many have been killed or tortured by loners and social rejects, the vast majority of murder, suffering, corruption, and torture has been done by the socially dependent. While individualism might pose a threat to society, is it society that, as an addictive force, should be truly feared.
Now that I’ve said all that, time for a little diffusing:
First and foremost, I don’t believe in addiction! Yes, I acknowledge that addiction exists, and that many (I would say most) people are addicted, and almost everyone is addicted to each other. But I also believe that addiction only exists for those who believe in it. I may acknowledge addiction as a psychological force, and accept its effect on people, but I also recognize that addiction is ultimately just an illusion. An illusion that is made real by the people who believe in it. An illusion that hurts people because they believe, and an illusion that holds the world captive because they are so (ironically) dependent on its existence. An illusion that I don’t believe in.
I don’t believe in addiction, and am not affected by it. I cannot be addicted to anything, nor can I do anyone. An unfortunate byproduct of this is that I cannot develop a psychological bond, the biological evidence of a strong relationship. I’m pretty good at pretending to have one though, and even without one I am highly capable of healthy relationships. It’s probably this anomaly in my own life that has helped me to realize how unnecessary and ultimately detrimental that social addiction is. By not believing in addiction, and in doing so making myself immune to its negative effects, I have been permitted a profoundly insightful understanding of just how much freer, how so more more pure and perfect that a life without social dependence really is.
Blameless
Likely one of my most controversial beliefs is my denial of evil.
I do not believe in the existence of evil.
I don’t think anyone is evil, nor commits evil.
Finally, I fervently believe that everyone makes the best possible decisions that (from their perspective) they possibly can.
Unfortunately, my belief in the universal goodwill of everyone has caused many grave misunderstandings, particularly when I apply to other aspects of reality, such as friendship. For example, if I say “people are only friends with each other to fulfill their own selfish needs, making any friendship no more than a mutually beneficial agreement to “use” each other. Without exemption, everyone I have told this to has been extremely offended, and completely missed the whole point.
The misunderstandings like these occur because most people do believe in evil, and that there are good people and bad people. They feel that in their friendships they are selfless, and that by emphasizing the needs of others over their own, that they are somehow “better” than those “criminals” and “assholes” that emphasize their own needs. Even my friends and I cannot see eye to eye when it comes to our friendships, because their belief in evil prevents them from seeing their own selfishness, and my denial of evil prevents me from being able to appreciate their self-righteousness.
I blame no one and judge no one, but in doing so I have isolated myself from a judgemental society that seeks to scapegoat anything and everything that interferes with the illusion of justification. By contending that no one is wrong or right, and that everyone is just doing the best that they can, I exile myself from society by indirectly supporting what they believe to be “evil”.
I call upon figures, such as Charles Manson, Stalin, Hitler, and Ted Bundy; I say that I can understand them, and so society groups me with them. They say, “whoever can understand a criminal must be a criminal”, and so it is that I who believes not in evil has been branded evil because I will not justify “good”. If only evil is indiscriminate, then surely I must be evil, because I bear no prejudice or justification.
I do not believe in good either, because what good can there be in selfishness? Everyone has their own reasons for their actions, but whoever tries to justify their lives as being “righteous” are merely revealing their own selfishness, insecurities, and inner-corruption. If you are good, then what need do you have to justify it? If you are righteous, then why do you corrupt your piety selfishly making it known. If you are doing God’s will, is that not already sufficient? I do not claim to be righteous or evil, but only hope that the world will understand as I do that both good and evil are irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.
I believe in Balance and a cosmic karma. I believe that regardless of what you and I do, say, or think, that God’s will, Nature’s will, the Cosmic Consciousness’s Will *will* be done. I believe that regardless of whether our actions are good or evil, or what actions we do at all– it doesn’t matter. Those decisions do no determine God’s plan, they merely determine how much that we appreciate the life we have been given, and what kind of appreciation we have.
There is no good or evil, only inevitability and the opportunity to experience it. If you worry about justifying your own actions, or waste your energy attacking people that don’t conform to your own standards of morality, you are just missing the point, and missing out on appreciating the world you have been born into, and given to experience. Remember, your standards for morality are yours and yours alone, they are far from finite or objective; if they were absolute, what would be the fun in that kind of life anyway? The reason freewill is so meaningful is because neither right or wrong are set in stone. What you believe to be right or wrong is not what God believes– you are only human and your views only represent a distorted fragment of the truth.
As Jesus once said, “judge not lest you be judged”. I may be judged by other people, but I am blameless before God.
I am blameless, not because I have lived a perfect life without sin, or because I went to church every week or piously kept in my studies of His word; not because other people see me as without fault, or because I live a life or charity and altruism;
I am blameless because I do not judge, nor seek to justify myself. I merely live the life that I have been given, and seek to understand and experience this world as much as possible.
Virtue of The Game
In the last month I noticed that I have had significantly higher performance in everything that I do, and it’s quite refreshing of a development; I’m better at playing games, have better reflected, am more observant of social cues, am more insightful in my writing, and even read people’s minds to an uncannily accurate degree. What is the cause of this change? I didn’t learn something I didn’t know before; I’m merely applying what I already knew. My greater performance is merely the evidence of the Virtue of The Game, and I finally decided to start playing.
What is the game? It’s a mindset for living life. There are many different ways of looking at life, and one that seems to be most beneficial in my case is that life is a game. The reason why this perspective most appeals to me is because if life is a game, I can dismiss any existential misgivings or epistemological uncertainties as irrelevant. In other words, because life is a game, it doesn’t matter what my true purpose is, whether or not people truly understand me (or I understand them), or even if God exists. All that matters in the game of life is that you win. And with the rules so clearly laid out by society, all it takes is a bit of attention to detail, strategic planning, and personal dedication (in other words, taking the game seriously!).
If life is a game, the only way to lose is to die, and as I happen to know that I’m not going to die any time soon (call it a really strong hunch!), the only thing left for me to do is to win! The information is all there– I know how I need to dress, behave, know, communicate, react, and present myself in order to win this game called life. I just need to formulate my thoughts into an effective plan, and put it all into action.
I’ve already put in place some habits, but this is only the beginning. Project Mathias, the brainchild of Ego Engineering, is a plan for perfection that starts with habits, and builds up from there into a comprehensive lifelong outline to ensure that the maximum amount of potential is actualized, thus producing what might be considered perfection. All the resources I need to ensure personal success and eventual perfection are right here in front of me; I just need to start taking The Game seriously, that I might instill the virtues of life within myself, thus ensuring epic win.
I’ve had many difficulties in finding for myself a motivation worthy of living for, some deep transcendent cause that I might somehow be justified in striving for. But I’ve got it all backwards: an imperfect person cannot achieve perfect faith, because his perception of life is faulty, thus inadvertently corrupting whatever perfect faith might otherwise coexist. If I wish to achieve perfect faith, I must first become perfect, and in doing so develop the personal maturity prerequisite to a perfect faith by which I might transcend even myself.
Knowing this, I recognize that if I am to begin truly living, I must discard my pride and just play the game. As my own existential reasoning is by nature corrupt, it would be foolish to be held back in living my life by thoughts that have no validity outside my own Ego. By playing the game I can better understand my place in the world, and by understanding my place as decided by the world, I will have enabled myself to see with clarity the place I have within myself as well. This is the Virtue of the Game.
Standards For Identity
For the past several years now, I have been obsessed with the identity, and driven mad by the simple yet intriguing and utterly impossible to definitively answer existentialists’ question “Who Am I?”
But while I cannot know who I am, I at the very least know the foundational standards for the identity, which so very conveniently correspond to the Freudian Id, Ego, and SuperEgo. For your convenience, I have laid it out as such:
But first, I will ask a question, to put this all into context:
“For what purpose should a man live for, that his life might be justified?
…Should he live for a worthy cause, that his ends might be justified?
…Should he work towards a worthy end, that his means might be justified?
Or should he live for life itself, that his experiences might render both ends and means irrelevant?”
1. Motivated by the Id (motivation is self-inherent); purpose for living is to experience life to the fullest.
One who’s life serves the Id is one who’s experience render both ends and means irrelevant.
2. Motivated by the Ego (motivation is justified by a worthy cause); purpose for living is to fulfill a worthy cause.
One who’s life serves the Ego is one who seeks to live for a worthy cause, that his end might be justified. Examples of worthy causes include God, humanism, knowledge, love, spirituality, self-understanding, and self-actualization.
3. Motivated by the SuperEgo (motivation is justified by a worthy end); purpose for living is to fulfill or contribute to a worthy end.
One who’s life serves the SuperEgo is one who seeks to live a life where the product justifies the measures taken. Examples of targets for a worthy “end” include Society, government, friendship, the law, religion, and other social institutions.
….
It’s a bit more complicated than this, obviously, but these are the three primary standards for identity.
The above analysis might be a bit confusing though, so let me put it in a way you might better understand:
1. Freedom: Your experiences decide who you are; as a result, your character is extremely dynamic and requires no justification.
2. Individuality: Your identity is decided by who you think you are. You don’t care too much for what people think, and recognize that they don’t know who you are, nor can they ever. You also recognize that you will never truly know or understand other people. You let your work speak for itself; essentially, you are what you believe in.
3. Borg: Your identity is decided by everyone else; thus, you are who you project yourself to be, but ultimately by how other people interpret your projections. Because your identity can only be decided by other people, you try to find out how people perceive certain behaviors, words, and thought patterns. You then decide to project that which is more appropriate for your role in that society, be it for better or worse.
Most people have a little bit of all three of these identities merged into one singular identity, although the mixture can and will change depending on their environment. Using these different standards for identity, we can develop a unique but unstable character that we call “human”.
However, those with more obsessive personalities who are overly concerned with their identity (people like myself!) cannot easily mix and match these different standards, and often either live an indecisive and existentialistic lifestyle, or (even worse!) develop multiple personalities (or “alter-egos”) as a coping mechanism.
While I still have learned very little useful information about who I am, at least I better understand the structure of who I am, even if I still have not even scratched the surface of the contents therein ;-(
Let’s Be Honest
Perhaps partly because it is one of the core themes of a novel I’m writing, but lately I’ve been concerned over the inherent lack of honesty in the world. It’s gone way past people willfully being dishonest– at this point most people don’t even realize that they are deceiving both themselves and others. Our culture is so completely immersed in deception that we’ve all become pathological liars, as we have all become slaves to our own lies. It’s like the Matrix all over again, only this time we’re the one’s that created the matrix to deceive ourselves, that matrix being known more colloquially as “Society”.
I’ve always hated Society for its propensity of deceiving people; most people who know a bit about sociology would argue that as much as a loath Society, everyone (to some extent) needs Society in order to survive in this world. That’s the real problem here: We need each other too much. By creating Society, we have shielded ourselves from the bitterly inevitably truth that in the end, we are all alone; with this escape ticket, just like anything else, comes a price: the price for a global escape being a global deception. We are all part of a conspiracy theory that we ourselves participated in, propagating lies to defend ourselves from the unbearable truth.
That’s all well and good; after all, if the truth is really that much torture, we’ve better off know. Ignorance can be bliss! But unfortunately for us, humans are complicated creatures, and to ignore the truth behind the nature of this billions-strong force is just asking for trouble. You want to know why that war, crime, violence, rape, and corruption are still so prevalent after thousands of years of law, and the evolution thereof? It’s because we’ve all made ourselves too ignorant to do anything about it! The answers are all there, but we’re so afraid of the implications, that we just ignore the truth, replacing it with rationalizations, prejudice and surface preconceptions. We’ve brought this all upon ourselves, because we can’t handle the truth!
Take love for example: Everyone actually loves in the same way, for the same reasons: a means to and end. The only different between a love that doesn’t work out and a love that does, is whether or not both partners have common interests. In the end, all love is selfish, and to say otherwise is just kidding yourself. You can put a label on it, justify it with illusions like “bonding” or “trust”, but that’s all bullshit. You don’t know them, you only think they do. You believe they do, because you need trust. Bonding is more of a biological react, so although it’s a bit more reliable than the neurotic conception of trust, to go with what your hormones and DNA tell you is just resigning yourself to fate. But at least with the latter (if you admit that your motivations are founded on your genetics) you are being honest with yourself. If you really believe that you love them, then you need a wake-up call:
You don’t love them! You just love yourself! They are just an Object!
Brutal, isn’t it? You don’t believe me. You say I’m a cold-hearted person, and that most people don’t think like that. You think that I am merely projecting my own anxieties and fears about my attachment disorder onto you, and that I’m the one who has issues.
Okay, I’ll be honest: I couldn’t care less about that. I don’t have an attachment disorder, and I would be fine with it either way. I’ve gone through far too much shit to care whether or not love exists– for me it’s just a curiosity that you do– or more accurately, that the conception of love that you so cling to is so blatantly fallacious, and you are too obstinately blind to notice!
Until people realize how they’ve deceived themselves, they’ll never be able to discover the truth, and unlock their true potential. Until we are all honest with ourselves, we won’t be able to move forward and progress as a species, having limited ourselves to this eternal ruse, a limbo in which we can neither deal with the lies or the truth.
What I’m looking forward to is the day when the whole world gets thrust into a civil war of epic proportions, and things will have gone so far that we’ll all have no choice but to be honest with ourselves. I look forward to that day because I realize that some things, like people being truly honest with each other, can only occur when the people of this world have no other choice but to accept the bitter truth.
Recycling Can Be Wasteful!
The majority of my writing has been focused on me conveying my thoughts to the best of my ability, about issues that I feel are not addressed fervently enough, and / or of a unique and outre’ nature. That is, I write to draw attention to my own idiosynchronicities, and express why that I think that my eccentric thought patterns on the given subject matter are not only logically valid, but should be obvious. In doing so, I hope to inspire myself (and as a byproduct, others) and be enabled to understand that which most people do not– or for that matter, wouldn’t want to understand in the first place.
But even if my concepts are idiosyncratic, the basic ideas are far from original– I am merely taking ideas that have been around for thousands of years, and applying my own unique interpretation to them, effectively making age old concepts look like originality. No matter how much thought I put into my subject matter– what I write, nothing I say will ever be original, so to attempt such a feat is futile and meaningless. All that I am doing by generating so-called original ideas is recycling and remastering old concepts; I am rehashing ancient philosophy by giving it a “new spin”, taking as my own concepts that have been around forever– in truth, my “wisdom” can’t reasonably belong to anyone at this point, if there be a living being that can take credit for such knowledge, it must surely be none other than Gaia herself!
So then, it seems that I should take a new approach– rather than trying to think up new thought (which will only further corrupt the once-pristine wisdom of old), I should take what knowledge that already exists, and seek to clarify, expound upon, and (ultimately) apply that knowledge– and also to share (and aggregate) that knowledge with the whole of the world.
I have the unique ability to experience and convey anything I want to– I can if I wish be a female, a criminal, a killer, a spy, a parent…not just to empathize with or understand– but I can actually experience what it means to be all of these people, and convey in vivid detail and comprehensive expression what it means to be such. I’m not just blowing hot air here– I have felt a female orgasm, and the pains of giving birth, and the anxiety and intense emotions of being a woman; I have experienced the cravings to kill, the enthusiasm and criminal pleasure of torture, and the desperation of needing to steal to survive. I have felt the paranoia, adrenaline rush, and emotional barrier of being a spy, and I know well the sacrifices that even President Obama had to make to become president. I can feel and experience it all, even without actually being it.
So then, I should express these things, right? I can if I am pressed to write a novel in a day, and I could probably write 100 novels in a year if I set my mind to it. Writing isn’t that hard for me, and imagination comes naturally for me– there is nothing that I can’t write about with such depth that you could have sworn that I had been there– that I had done that.
The reason I can write so convincingly– is because I have been there– I have done that. Maybe not physically, but I have in spirit. I have opened my mind to the world, and realized that I am the world, and the world is me. The more that I realize this, the more freely my thoughts flow, because through the spirit of the world, there is nothing in life that I cannot experience– I just take it all in, the memories of the world. I take it all in, because like Jonas I am the receiver of the world’s memories, and steward to the world’s heart.
It is then my responsibility to do what I can, and what I do best is generate thought, and express it creatively– amongst other methods, via writing. These thoughts that I generate however, must not be that which I myself have thought (being only a reflection of The Knowledge as reflected off my own soul)– that interpretation is only a dim light that distorts the pristine truth. Rather, so that I might fully grasp the light of the world, it’s vitally important that I open up to the world, and experience the world as it is through the eyes of everyone in the world– only then might I be able to truly express the world as it truly is: Beautiful!
Impetus
What drives person to succeed? This question has been the focal point of much of my writing, although I have yet to find any clear answers– only splinters of the truth. Human motivation is indeed complicated, as we are just as likely to be motivated by denial, by vengeance, by hatred, by love, by fear, by distrust…so many different possible motivations for a person.
So what am I motivated by? Honestly, I don’t know…but I think it has something to do with self-preservation. The problem my motivation is simple, yet complex: I don’t know what I want.
Some people have tried to rationalize this issue for me, saying (for example), “you write, think, and delve into the human psyche; these must be the things that you want”– but that’s far from the truth. For me, what I think and write about are a means to an end, and that end is trying to figure out what I want. This is why I study other’s motivations, I hoped that by understanding other people, I might be able to better understand myself. But in the end, I have nothing; only a lot of interesting and inspirational writing that may help other people, but does nothing for myself.
Sure the writing might help my eventually, but it won’t until I’m able to find something that it seems that I’m unable to find through mere thinking and writing– if I could, I would have by now: motivation.
Maybe it really is as simple as human biology. I could follow my chemical drives, and find a person that I deem suitable as a mate; preserving my relationship with them, and having a healthy family with them would become my reason for living, and for thriving. That would probably be a quite reliable drive, since it’s encoded in my DNA. But sure enough, for me that’s not good enough, because I could never be content with resigning myself to fate.
I need something a bit more complex…
All impetus for living (as far as I know) can be simplified into three main categories: Desire, Trust, and Control.
Then there’s Balance: To Love (desire) one thing, you must Hate its opposite; to Trust (be intimate with) one thing, you must Fear its opposite; to Control anything you must get rid of Chaos. This simplistic model still has room for improvement, but it does illustrate one important point: There is a price for everything!
That’s probably what it comes down to: I’m not willing to pay the price– not when it comes to Me. I will run away from the problem, even hurt myself and sabotage myself to escape from this issue– I can’t make the final decision, because I fear the responsibility.
What’s my impetus for living? I don’t know…but maybe I just don’t want to know. I suppose when to comes down to it– my reason for living is to escape from my purpose; if I knew my purpose, I would also know that I could not fulfill my purpose.
Why can’t I fulfill my purpose? Because I’m not ME!
Dead Serious
One of the biggest obstacles to my personal success is that I don’t take myself seriously…ever. I try to, but then I either get bored, distracted, or depressed– it’s kinda pathetic. Because if I actually took myself seriously– like, dead seriously, I would get a lot more done. If I lived my life as if success was life or death, I would actually be able to live life to my potential.
But it seems that’s not in my nature, and that’s why that I’m working to change that, with Ego Engineering. I’m also going to college right now, so that I will always be at least a little bit productive. That’s right, IMO college is only a little bit productive, even if it’s fulltime– I have high expectations of myself like that. I’m also thinking of getting a fulltime job, so that I will make some more money to boost my Ego and give me more to live for; while I’m at it, get a girlfriend as well. Either way, I’m going to have to take my life seriously; after all, what meaning is there for someone (like myself) who doesn’t?
Taking yourself seriously (this isn’t just for me you know!) is the key to success. You can’t win a game you don’t genuinely want to, and you cannot help a friend you don’t genuinely care for. If I want to be useful in this world– and more importantly (perhaps!)– if I want to be taken seriously by others, taking myself seriously is prerequisite.
It’s all the little things that I normally take for granted that are holding me back: The body language, the sound of my voice and choice of words, the promises I make or even imply, the consistency of my actions– people notice sh*t like that. I’m not the type to be considerate about what other’s think, but I should at the very least be considerate of what my friends think– otherwise they won’t be friends for long; and, as I expressed most eloquently in my post “Social Vitality”, I won’t be very successful in life without good strong friends that I can count on when in need.
Hopefully this time I will be dead serious, instead of just writing a post about it. I need to start taking myself seriously, and taking others seriously– otherwise, my own life won’t be. To live a life worth living, it should be meaningful, and it seems that taking life “dead serious” is prerequisite to that meaning.
Run Away
In my post “Agony”, I explained in depth the three most primal options to any situation: fight, give up, flight; it is this third option that is most often taken for granted; in reality, this is the option that most people take! To quote from Agony, “We run away from our true selves, gaining ignorance through bliss, and pleasure through Denial. This is, unfortunately, the choice of the vast majority of the world.” Most of the choices in life that we have are either made by other people (Displacement), or ignored altogether (Denial).
In “Agony”, I approached this issue from a spiritual perspective, noting that “Although it is clearly the best choice for us, it is the greatest sin one can possibly commit, as we are gaining pleasure as the direct consequence of God’s suffering. That is because by ignoring God we are doing that which makes him suffer most, and thus gain the greatest pleasure from it.” But you should know that because the human Ego is a reflection of the divine (ergo we are made in God’s image), by running away from decisions we are not just ignoring God, but also ignoring ourselves. There is a price for everything, and the cost of running away from the issues in life is probably the most fundamentally costly of all: nonexistence!
Scary, isn’t it? But lest you be skeptical, let me clarify:
In accordance with Balance (and to a degree, with the Uncertainty principle) it’s impossible to fully appreciate every facet at life at once; to appreciate one idea more is to appreciate another less, and to prioritize one ideal more is to downplay another less relevant one. You cannot both love and hate the same entity at the same time, in other words. So to decide what aspects of life we should most appreciate, and what values should be the primary focus of our lives, we must prioritize.
We must decide what to accept and what to reject, and the extent to which values are accepted or rejected. It is for this reason that even if we run away from a decision, “by not deciding we have still made a choice”; that choice is to reject responsibility for that particular facet of our life. The problem with this is that even if you reject responsibility, someone has to take responsibility for that issue; by avoiding the issue, you are handing over control of your life because “you can’t handle it” yourself.
The prevailing trend in modern society is for people to shirk as much responsibilities as possible, handing most of the important duties in life over to society– let the public institutions deal with the mess. As a result, daycare centers, public schools, social services, public service agencies, the mass media, and the Internet will make most of the life-altering decisions in people’s lives, is raising people’s children, and is deciding who our leaders will be, and what the future holds. We are handing control of our lives over to Society, because we are unwilling to take responsibility for our own lives.
While I do believe that letting Society dictate our lives is not a good idea (to say the least!), there is an even graver issue here: by relinquishing control over one’s life to anyone can be a very bad idea; at least from the existential point of view, it’s almost as bad as not existing in the first place! My reasoning for this is (believe it or not!) quite sound in logic; it deals with the aforementioned causal accept/reject relationship, and in fact relates even to the very nature of reality itself.
To clarify:
When you accept something, you are acknowledging its existence; furthermore, the more emphasis that you put on your acceptance of something (the more that you believe in it), the more pronounced its existence becomes. On the other hand, the more that you reject something, the more you are denying its existence, and the more its nonexistence becomes pronounced. Notice one key word here: “Denial”. In my post “Denial”, I explained why that denial is a bad thing, and I would recommend reading it if you haven’t already, as it helps you better understand the contents of this post.
There is another (albeit less oft-used) definition of denial, which I will quote from Wiktionary: “A refusal to comply with a request.” What I am trying to illustrate here, is the primary cost of rejecting responsibility: by denying responsibility of your own life, you are denying yourself life itself! Not only is shirking life responsibilities putting too much trust in Society, but it is also a tacit denial of one’s very existence; perhaps even worse, you are relinquishing your right to an independent existence.
I’m not saying that independence is a good thing, or that dependence is a bad thing. Human being are their very nature social creatures, created (or evolved) to depend on each other to survive; evolution would say that complete social dependence (i.e. Socialism) is a logical inevitability. But I am certain that most people don’t realize what they are doing– don’t know what they are getting themselves into. They are so used to living in denial, that they have forgotten that they even have a choice in the first place.
Having seen the potential that every human being is capable of, and seeing what potential is not being tapped, I am certain that people so dependent on each other not because they want to, but because they don’t realize that they could do better; they don’t realize their own potential to make their own choices, because they don’t know any better.
Untapped
Although I tend to hold back most of the time, I have much to say in my criticism of females, much of which can be found in my post “Feminist Rant.” The reason why that I am so passionate in my misgivings of feminist culture is not because I have something against feminism, but because I so passionately support it.
I feel that the feminist movement is beneficial to humanity overall, but I also recognize that many of the strengths of feminism are being undercut by its lack of integrity, organization, and most importantly, a lack of control. In my rant on feminism, I made the mistake (“in the heat of the moment”) of contending that “What women don’t realize, is that they are not genetically equipped for this kind of control– they are far too emotional for it.” I have since omitted the word “genetic” as it is not relevant; I also added a premise to note that this isn’t about female genetics (I am an extremist nurture-over-nature proponent to begin with), but about the female culture (aka “feminism”).
But my mistake here also sheds light on a very important issue: feminist culture in its current state is so lacking in controlling mechanisms that most people (even most females) support the contention that “women can’t control their emotions” as ‘a given’; that women are incapable of controlling their emotions is even considered by many to be “common sense.” As an avid supporter of Positive Psychology and Responsibility Assumption, I beg to differ; it’s not that women are incapable of controlling their emotions– it’s just not in their nature to. In other words, everyone (man, woman, or “it”) is capable of being whatever they need to be, and do whatever they need to do– but only if they want to.
Females are incapable of emotional control not because of genetic limitations, but because of cultural constraints; they can’t control their emotions because the predominating feminist culture won’t let them. In other words, because females are expected to be unable to control their emotions, being unable to becomes only natural. The reason why females have this weakness is because they are expected to by the Society we live in– a society that expects women to be emotionally weak and socially sophisticated (“just look pretty”).
From my own experience, feminist culture is overall superior to masculine culture, especially in a world where social interaction has become the most influential judge of perceived superiority. Despite the fact that females are lacking in their ability to control, their ability to manage is far superior to males, and this is clearly demonstrated in the increased prominence of female managers, the widespread adoption of Socialist ideals (which are by their very nature feminist); democratic government is actually predominantly feminist in its structure. The world is being taken over by feminism, whether they are aware of it or not; for this reason, it is essential the before feminism gains any more ground, that its weaknesses be either eliminated, depreciated, or most favorably, sublimated.
Feminism has a lot of potential, but from what I can tell, most of that potential is untapped. If feminism is to be considered favorable not just as an alternative lifestyle (as it has been), but also as a norm, we must unlock its untapped potential; to do that, Feminism must compensate in the areas that it is most lacking: integrity, organization, and control.
Hope Versus Despair
There seems to be a lot of confusion and misunderstandings among people regarding what hope and despair are, and even about the relationship between them. When defining anything, I’ve found that it’s crucially important to prioritize causality in the analysis, as something is best defined by these three things: Its origins, its character (the characteristics it projects), and the consequences of its existence; more simply, something’s definition can be best determined by cause, effect, and character.
In the case of Hope and Despair, people seem to be content with defining these two ideas by the character that they project, and fail to understand the underlying causes of that character; even worse, they fail to understand the consequences that the existence of Hope and Despair result in. This post will thus focus on helping the reader understand these things.
Hope: Most people tend to see hope as a good thing. It gives people the strength to press forward in life, gives people a reason to live and to die for, and it provides meaning in life; in fact, it is usually the primary thing that makes life worth living.
This sounds very touching, but to understand why that hope is such a powerful source of positivism in this world, we must understand the source (cause) of hope, which (evolutionarily speaking) is the “fight” instinct. To better understand this, I’ll provide the most simplistic decision-making scenario: Live or Die!
If you fight, you will live!
If you do not fight, you will die!
In this scenario, Hope is the force that causes people to fight, and Despair is what causes people to not fight (Give up). Because hope is a means for survival, and despair is essentially passive suicide, hope has come to be associated with “Life”, whereas despair is associated with “Death”.
Despair: As stated above, despair is the feeling of “giving up”, and so is associated with Death. The instinctual basis for despair is best exemplified by the Freudian “Death Instinct”, should you wish to read about it in greater depth. Despair is usually only felt when one has decided that one cannot win (has no chance at winning); essentially Despair is a defense mechanism in which a person gives up, essentially to be “put out of one’s misery.”
Humanity has a built-in tendency to favor life over death, regardless of the consequences; it is for this reason that the relationship between hope and despair are misunderstood. To clear up these misunderstandings, one important factor needs to be accounted for:
There is a price for everything!
As I noted in my most “Sinful Nature”, the price of life is suffering; even God himself is not exempt from this law. In regards to the relationship between Sin, Suffering, and Existence: Sin is the product of the creation of the world and humanity; Suffering is the consequence of Sin; Existence is is the source of Sin, and by extension all suffering. Because our very existence is sinful, the inevitable consequence of existence is suffering. In summary, the price of life is suffering!
So then, it would seem that hope is not all that good; because hope compels us to live, hope compels us to suffer.
Most of the suffering in the world would in fact not exist if no one hoped, and everyone despaired:
Rapists would not fulfill their urgings, because he would have no hope of being pleasured, or of getting away with it.
There would be no war in the world, because there would be no hope of winning.
There would be no religious crusades or terrorists, because they would have no hope of their causes being justified, and no hope of going to heaven.
There would be no manipulation or greed in the world, because there would be no hope of being satisfied by riches.
There would be no rage or violence in the world, because nothing in the world would be important enough to get angry about, and any hope of ones actions being justified would be nonexistent.
Like this, all of the suffering in the world would cease to be without hope. Hope may not be the cause of all suffering, but as the primary perpetuator of what is the cause of suffering (life), hoping in anything can only increase suffering, and ironically, death.
“For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Jesus Christ our Lord”– what an ironic Bible verse this is! It would appear that even Paul himself did not know what hope and despair really are!
But it should be noted that there is a third option to the previously exemplified “life/death scenario”: running away.
Original Sin
My analysis of original sin first began in my post “Agony” (which btw is a ‘pain’ to read), which builds upon the premise that there is a price for everything, and even God himself is not exempt from this law; building upon this axiom (which I call “Balance”), I attempted to deduce what the price that God paid to create humanity, and the answer was clear: suffering. That is, in order for God to create us, he had to bring suffering into the world, in the form of Sin; Because Sin is the essence of Imperfection, and God is by his nature perfect, Sin has caused God to suffer greatly. Thus in creating us, God did not create Sin himself; rather, Sin is the inevitable byproduct of our creation. Sin is the consequence of our being created.
So it is that we have a sinful nature from birth; we are the child of both God and Sin, because for God to create us in the first place, we must also be sinful, as this is the price of our existence. Sin came into being as a direct result of our creation– and as a result of the creation of the world. Sin is also the cause of all suffering, and it is so that through suffering God might pay the price for creating us, and that we might pay the price for our own existence. The relationship between Sin, suffering, and existence is discussed more-depth in my post “Hope Versus Despair”.
When thinking about Original Sin, the Christian mind looks back to the Fall of Man, citing that man committed the Original Sin by disobeying God and eating from the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. But if you read those passages closely, you will notice that Sin existed long before Adam and Eve ate the fruit. In fact, never does that passage once say, or even infer that man sinned by eating the fruit. The first mention of man sinning does not occur until Cain and Abel; the first sin recorded in Genesis isn’t disobedience– the first recorded sin was murder.
So then, why does the Bible so intricately detail the consequences of man’s disobedience, as if it were a bad thing? Why must the ground, plants, animals, and people of the earth suffer, if there was nothing wrong with Adam or Eve’s actions? The answer cannot be found in the aftermath, because the consequences of their actions had already happened! They just were’t aware of it!
Notice that it is called the “Tree of The Knowledge of Good and Evil”? There’s one key word here: Knowledge. What is inferred by the Bible, but almost always overlooked by those who read it, is that Sin was already in the world! There was already suffering and corruption in the world– Mankind was just not yet aware of it! By eating the tree, Adam and Eve had in fact taken the proverbial Red pill, effectively waking up from the “God-generated dream world” that we call The Garden of Eden.
Sin has already been in the world from the moment of its creation, and the corruption and suffering that sin causes has always been part of the world’s nature. The world is by its very nature a world of agony– this is the price that the world must pay to exist, and the price that God must pay to sustain its existence. It’s not as if Adam and Eve brought sin into the world; rather, they suddenly became aware of the way the world had been all along. God tried to hide the truth from mankind by masking away the truth with a beautiful oasis, but mankind’s curiosity and thirst for knowledge God the best of him, making the overthrow of the original Matrix an inevitability.
So then, where did the Serpent come from, and what role did he play in this holy mutiny? To explain this we draw upon the initial premise, which is “there is a price for everything”.
If God created the world, the price for that creation is suffering– this we have already established. But if mankind is not aware of the suffering, he will not suffer; rather, he will be immune to suffering because knowledge of suffering is prerequisite to experiencing it. I would imagine that God attempted to “short-change” Balance in an effort to ensure his creation’s happiness, which would indirectly translate to God’s own heightened pleasure (via satisfaction). But in order for mankind to truly exist as an independent entity, he must have freewill, and there is a price that also; that is, if mankind is his own entity, he must share the same suffering as God.
As I will explain in greater detail in “Run Away”, the price of self-awareness is suffering; this is the reason why that God suffers from creating us: God’s creation is in fact the actualization of His character; we are the product of God achieving self-awareness through his creation. For this reason, the more self-aware we become (via Knowledge), the more suffering that we are subjected to. Self-awareness leads to individuality, and increases one’s freewill; as such, the price of freedom is suffering.
To quote Søren Kierkegaard, “If sin is ignorance, then sin does not really exist, for sin is precisely consciousness; if sin is ignorance of what is right, and one then does what is wrong because one does not know what is right, then no sin has occurred.” So as the price of consciousness is sin, the Serpent existed that mankind might obtain consciousness.
The Bible tends to confuse people on this matter, for one might think “weren’t Adam and Eve already sentient beings, being created with freewill by God?” But nowhere does it say that God created mankind with freewill– that is something that is inferred by the statement “Let Us make man in our own image.” If mankind does not know good from evil, he cannot have freewill, because to make any decision in the first place, there must be standard by which to decide, the most primal of which is “good versus evil.” Rather, it was by eating the fruit that man became self-aware, and gaining freewill as a consequence of that self-awareness. The other consequence, of course, was knowledge of Sin, which lead to suffering; thus the Fall of Man.
Getting back to the Serpent: In my opinion, the Serpent was an agent of Balance, seeking to restore the Balance in the cosmos by ensuring that mankind became self-aware, that the consequence of God’s creation (suffering) might be consistent with itself.
This implies an interesting proposition: It was not God that gave us freewill, but the Serpent. If we follow Jewish mythology (which sadly Christianity also blindly adheres to), this would mean that the Devil himself gave us freewill, and brought Sin into the world using the Tree as a medium. But certain Gnostic accounts of the creation story claim that Jesus was in fact the Serpent, and sought to give mankind their freedom from the “God-generated dream-world” created to blind us from the truth. Either way, to quote Cypher, “Ignorance is bliss.”
Displacement
(This post will be edited further later)
One thing that I’ve found is that for people to be offended is their choice…when I am offended at someone, I don’t blame them for offending me (that would be wrong IMO), I blame myself for getting offended, because there is no reason for anyone to be offended regardless of what is said. I expect the same, and if someone blames me for getting offended, they are only projecting their own insecurities onto me, and are immature as they lack the self-awareness to realize why that they are offended, which would otherwise result in accepting responsibility, knowing that such offense is only caused by ones own insecurities.
I feel very strongly about this, although I admit it can adversely effect how people see me, and causing them to misunderstand me, because they are unable to understand these things as I do.
I do not think that what I did was wrong…it just is considered “wrong” by those who don’t understand where I’m coming from…thus “social skills” is for me “the art of pretending to relate to other people”, or more broadly, “the art of bullshitting people”…this is an artform that is somewhat of a priority for me, but you should understand why that it’s not very high on the list (It’s not in my character to be fake).
But in either case, in regards to whether I am “hurting someone’s feelings” with my words, I must vehemently disagree, because the very notion of a person hurting someone’s feelings is against core principles of my moral code. You can’t hurt another person’s feelings, only cause someone to hurt their own feelings because their pride is incompatible with your words.
If a person believes that their feelings have been hurt by someone else, they are only lying to themselves (in denial), and are unable to face up to the truth: that they are only projecting their own insecurities onto someone else. This is wrong, and I will not encourage, condone, or acknowledge it.
Meaning Of Life
Sometime ago, I was able to isolate the meaning of life to one single factor: Control.
But how do I explain this to other people without getting their defenses up– without bringing out the self-righteous bullshit that seems to permeate everyone to the core? I can hear your responses already, explaining to me that only a cold-hearted person would think that the meaning of life is “control”, that there are more important things in life like family, friends, social bonding, love, trust, and self-actualization. Stop!…you’re not getting what I’m saying! Perhaps because you are programmed by the society we live in not to get it…What you’re not getting…is that all of those other things listed are all forms of Control too! Everything that gives us meaning in life is built on the need to control one’s reality– in fact, nothing that you find meaningful in life would have any meaning at all unless you exerted some level of control over it. Without Control, there would be no meaning in life.
There is no way that I can properly explain this in a way that you could understand– not unless you were already on the same proverbial page as me to begin with, in which case you should already understand anyway. But nevertheless, I will try my best to clarify these points– after all, the inability for people to understand the relevance of Control to all that they hold dear in life– this ignorance by the masses is the cause of most of the suffering in the world. As explained in “Human Nature”, nothing can be perceived or appreciated without possessing a nature, and it is humans who apply this nature to all that is. The key word here is “possess”; we cannot appreciate anything– that is, we cannot find any meaning in anything– unless we possess it, and force our own perceptions upon that reality. In other words, it’s impossible for anything in life to have any meaning unless we possess it.
By controlling and manipulating the various aspects of reality, we make our own meaning in life. Sound familiar? The last part does anyway– most people would agree to some extent that we make our own meaning in life. But you should also know that to create anything, you must first exert control over it– after all, trying to create anything without controlling it can only result in one thing: Chaos. Even if it were possible to “create” chaos, there is one problem with the end-product: It can’t be appreciated. Chaos has no standards by which to be appreciated, and so the distinguish one chaos from another would be impossible by its very nature. It’s all CHAOS. So even if chaos could be created, such a creation would have no meaning– or rather, any meaning that chaos might otherwise have would be lost in itself, as there is no way to appreciate something without standards being applied by which to appreciate its existence. So then, it is clear that no meaning is life can exist without control– in fact, control is prerequisite to all meaning in life; Control is the necessary foundation upon which all meaning in life is built.
This is not to say that all meaning in life is Control; that is what I thought at first, but then I realized that control is in and of itself a mere concept, and has meaning only in association with what it is controlling. So the sample arguments at the beginning of this post– that “family, friends, social bonding, love, trust, and self-actualization” are the meaning in life– these arguments are valid, as these things can be meaning in life– these are many different meanings in life, and what meaning is most prevalent must be decided by each person for themselves. But although the meanings may differ, it must be understood that all of the different meanings and life are appreciable because they are different ways of looking at the same thing: Control.
I once compared Control to the Ego, as I knew that they had a very close relationship; so close in fact that they could to some extent be considered interchangeable. The primary difference between Control and the Ego: the Ego is a very specific type of Control; whereas Control is possessing Reality, the Ego is possessing the Self. This is a very interesting relationship, particular since Reality and the Self also have the same fundamental limitation: they cannot exist without being controlled– without being possessed. Just as Control gives Reality meaning by possessing it, so does the Ego give the Self meaning by possessing it.
Perhaps even more curiously, both Control and the Ego have no inherent meaning; rather, they derive their meaning from what they are possessing, and become real only by taking on the form of what they are possessing. Neither the Ego nor Control could exist without a Reality and a Self to control, but at the same thing, neither the Self nor Reality could exist without an Ego and Control to possess them– at the very least, their existence would be irrelevant since it could not be appreciated. As such, Control has a symbiotic relationship with Reality, and in the same way, the Ego has a symbiotic relationship with the Self.
This is where prejudice comes in: In this symbiotic relationship, it is the exchange of power between the Ego and the Self, and between Control and Reality– this exchange is what gives life meaning. By acknowledging that an entity has been possessed, the exchange is finalized, and that object possesses meaning, thus indirectly giving life meaning. I lack the in-depth understanding of the exchange of power (I went into it in-depth in my post Idealism, but I have yet to properly comprehend that post to this day, even though I wrote it!), but hopefully you will have at least better understood just how relevant that control is to the meaning in life; I know I have 😉
Satisfaction
In one lifetime, this is much opportunity to accomplish great things, and for those of us who have ambitions, life is a constant struggle to be all you can be, and to proof yourself by rising above the masses no matter what sacrifices you must make. You must sacrifice yourself if you wish to gain the world, and give up the momentary pleasures in pursuit of the more permanent satisfaction. But when will you finally be satisfied? When is enough going to be enough? There has to be a point in life where do draw the line and say, “that’s enough! I have earned the right to my satisfaction, and so there is no need for me to struggle any longer!”
Will that point ever come for those of us with insatiable ambitions? Probably not…our Egos are too great for a single lifetime, or even several lifetimes to accommodate. We who know all too well the potential of humanity, and yet cannot fulfill it…We who set our goals so high that to achieve them would be impossible, just because we can!
No matter what you achieve, nothing will ever be good enough until you let it be good enough. There’s no divine barrier that will tell you when to stop; you have to decide that line for yourself. When will you draw the line? What good is it to conquer the world, if you are unable to appreciate the world’s magnificence? What meaning is there in saving the world, if you lose yourself in the process?
The best part of living isn’t the dissatisfaction of knowing you could be doing more with your life; the best part of living is when you finally realize that you were good enough to begin with! Until you realize this important truth, nothing will ever be good enough, because there will always be something “better”! Your life will never have any real meaning until you draw that line. Until you decide for yourself what kind of person you need to be to be satisfied– until you set that definitive expectation as to what you need to accomplish in your life to be good enough for yourself, nothing in life will ever have any meaning.
Until you decide what path you take, and are satisfied with that path, nothing in life will ever truly be meaningful.
Until you are satisfied with who you are as a person, you have no future.
You who like me let your ambitions prevent you from being truly satisfied: there will never be any meaning in your life until you break free of yourself– of your goddamn ego! Until you are free of your pride, you are just a lost soul. Until you let yourself be satisfied, nothing you do will ever have any real meaning, because you let your own ambitions prevent any meaning from ever being consummated!
Preserving My Sanity
In “Why I Write”, I gave most of the reasons why I write, but I failed to mention (or rather, deliberately left out) one fundamental reason why I write: to preserve my sanity!
I found out this a while ago, that unless I wrote at least a little bit each day, I would go insane. I have a constant excess of negative energy that I don’t know what to do with– a chaotic cancer that keeps growing everyday; one that I must prune regularly to keep it from spiraling out of control– going to hell and taking me with it. I prune this cancer by writing.
If I were to be honest with myself, there are many times that I hate writing– hate it because I feel that my inescapable need to write is controlling my life. I hate that I can’t stop writing– that I must continue writing in order to keep myself under control. I don’t write because I want to, I write because I have to.
Sure my writing is important, and talks about essential insights that could change the world for the better. I hope that someday my insanity will bear fruit, and that through my writing the world might become a better place. I delight whenever anyone tells me how profoundly that my writing has inspired them, although rare is the time where that blessing is bestowed to me. If I can make a living at writing, I will be satisfied; otherwise I don’t know what I’d do.
I don’t think I can survive without writing; it has become more than an addiction– it is an obsession. Writing has become more important to me than anything else, although perhaps this is in part because writing is one of the few things that was ever genuinely important to me to begin with.
I have no family or friends to rely on; even those that care for me cannot know me.
I am alone, and cannot trust anyone.
In this loneliness, there is only one thing that I must do, that I can do: I write. Because writing is all that I have. As I mentioned in “Why I Write”, yes, writing has become part of my being; I am a writer. But as you can see, while this may be a blessing, that blessing is overwhelmingly overshadowed by a graver curse: Melancholy.
Because I write I am alone, I am unreachable.
But I cannot stop writing, because it is the only means by which I can preserve my sanity.
Benefit Of The Doubt
This post is written as a follow-up to “Human Nature.”
*Note: I wish I could explain this post further, but due to its inherently integrated nature, more in-depth explanations would only serve to confuse (both others and myself) even more, and so hopefully you are able to derive more a in-depth understanding from your own intuitive abilities. I apologize if this post causes you to “think too much”.
There is a widespread misconception that although behavior modified by prejudice is wrong, that behavior that is determined by that which is known to be true is acceptable; the rationale being that because one’s actions are determined by factual evidence and truth, that ones actions would be justified by the truth upon which they are based.
This kind of thinking, regardless of whether it is valid or not, is detrimental to humanity, because it heavily relies on the subjective interpretation of the truth as a basis for living; furthermore, regardless of whether the interpretation of truth is applied correctly, the resulting bias in one’s actions would inevitably result in psychological displacement, as ones actions are then no longer the product of ones character, but of a subjective interpretation of facts. Such a manner of determining ones behavior is superficial to say the least; promoting all manner of superficial values.
Truth as a foundation for behavior can only result in corrupt behavior, because (as explained in Human Nature) the price of simplicity is corruption. To clarify: even if one knows something to be true, the interpretation of the truth is subjective, as the interpretation of the truth is only that which is relative to that person. The ramifications of any given truth can even extend to a cosmic level, and so to truth the correctly assess the meaning of a given truth is infeasible– because we aren’t God. As such, even if one know something to be true, it would be wrong to let one’s actions be biased by that truth, because we don’t actually know that such truth even means!
A classic example of the misapplication of truth can be found in the field of statistics. Statistics are raw data, meaningless before they are interpreted– but here’s the rub: statistics can be logically interpreted to support just about anything. Sure, there are some ways that statistics are more naturally interpreted, but even then our interpretation is limited to the bias of what we already know.
Statistics being inaccurately applied because of misinformation has been prevalent throughout history. Although I don’t have the time or patience to detail these accounts, statistics have been applied to justify witch trials, prove that the soul exists (and weighs 21 grams), that Match.com works, that global warming exists, and that the world is going to end in 2012. All of these claims are based upon very reliable statistics, which is why so many people believe in these things (even though all of them are bullshit, IMO).
If the statistics are accurate, why do they result in so much misconception in the world? Is it because they were interpreted wrong? No! That’s what most people might think, but it is that very mindset that has caused so much prejudice in the world. The misconceptions are there because they were interpreted at all.
By treating your own understanding of the truth as objective truth, regardless of whether that interpretation is considered to be the consensus, you are trying to simplify the infinitely complex (because every truth has infinite possible interpretations), and the end-product of this is corruption.
While truth is inherently pure, it becomes corrupt when people try to control it– to own it. So when you try to understand the truth as if it were your own knowledge, you have already become prejudiced, because you have valued your own understanding of the truth above all others. If absolute power corrupts absolutely, and knowledge is power, then surely all knowledge can be corrupted by those who seek to possess it.
It is human nature to believe that one must possess something in order to make use of that. This animal instinct, which in more sophisticated form is known as the Ego, is no longer relevant. Possession is no longer needed to do anything; rather, the need to possess has become a detriment to society, as it leads to misunderstanding. To truly appreciate something, one must let go of the need to possess, as such a need is the root of all bias, and therefore also of prejudice.
There is only one way out of this maze of corruption, and that is humility: Being willing to accept that you simply do not know. By accepting the limits of your own perception, you are able better understand and experience the world, because you mind will have become free of the prejudice that is such an integral part of human nature.
To accept that you do not know anything with certainty, and will never know anything with certainty– this is the key to freedom from prejudice, and by extension the key to achieving true free will. This is the true Benefit of the Doubt.
Human Nature
In “The Greatest Of All Evils“, I noted that Prejudice “is the one evil that is at the core of human nature, an evil that everyone is guilty of, and something so completely embedded in us that we might never be able to wholly rid ourselves of it!” But what does that mean? Why is prejudice so completely essential to humanity that it has become synonymous with being “human nature”? To answer these questions, we must first answer the question, “What Is Human Nature?”
I’ve given various answers to this question (albeit from a more spiritual standpoint) in several posts, most notably in my post “Idealism” (Don’t read it unless you want a headache!), but I must admit these answers are far from practical, often only serving to further confuse my readers. So I hope that the explanations provided in this post will provide more comprehensible explanations.
Human nature is not something that can be define with a single characteristic, as it is complex by it’s very nature. But there is a hint as what our nature is, in the word “nature”. No I’m not talking about Mother Nature; the nature I’m referring to is the framework that our very existence is built on. Defined as “the essential qualities or characteristics by which something is recognized”, the nature of something expounds well beyond attributes that determine a person’s behavior, and refers to the very nature of reality itself!
The reason why that prejudice is so difficult to rid ourselves of is because our entire conception of reality is built upon prejudice– it’s like being trapped in the matrix of humanity’s own creation!
To know where I am coming from on this issue, you must understand the nature of perception; that is, why do we see reality to way that we do? To appreciate anything as even existing in the first place, one has to (either consciously or subconsciously) apply a form and/or defining characteristics to those things first, so that one might be able to distinguish one [person, place, thing, idea, etc.] from another. Sound familiar? Yes, I am referring to the nature of something– the initial form that something must take (or more accurately, that humans give to it via perception) before it can be appreciated or made use of.
This is “only natural”, as something that does not exist is useless and irrelevant– after all, what’s the point of saying something exist if there is no characteristics applied to it? Such an object would be completely meaningless, and completely indistinguishable!
It might be difficult to follow that last paragraph, so here I will present an analogy, in the form of an extremely simple object: the letter “x”. We know a lot about “x”, such as its roots in various culture dating back to the first language (Cuneiform), that is symbolizes poison, and that it is the 24th letter of the English alphabet. So let’s see how many characteristics that can be taken away from “x” and while ‘keeping it in existence’:
Okay, so we are now left with one quality: “x” itself. At this point, “x” is little more than just a word with no definition (and a pretty useless word at that!). But there’s one problem: “x” still has a nature– even if “x” is the only thing that defines its nature– as long as something has qualities to define it, it still has a nature. Take away “x”, and you take away the nature”.
So what is “x” (or anything else for that matter) without it’s nature? Nothing! Everything in this world, including you and me, is nothing without a nature…or another way of putting it: Something that is not appreciated does not exist!
There is a famous philosophical riddle that deals with this problem: If a tree falls and no one is around, does it make a sound? My answer t0 this is “no!” Some might argue that even if we don’t perceive it, that perception is not required for something to exist. My counterargument for that is simple: Even if it does technically exist, what value does such an existence have? If something’s existence cannot even be acknowledged, its existence is completely meaningless, and as such might as well not exist!
So we’ve established what nature is, but what is human nature? It’s who we are.
There is one characteristic of Human Nature that is necessary for our existence, and that is perception— that is, the ability to appreciate reality. But here’s the rub: Everyone has a different perception of reality, because we all apply different characteristics to things to give them form. This problem has resulted in what I call Individualism, the propensity of humans to perceive reality differently from others.
Humans are social creatures in that we rely on the comfort of sharing and communicating with each other to exist. Furthermore, in order to exist that existence must be appreciated, preferably by someone else besides oneself. Sharing the same reality requires compromise, usually in the form of merging each other’s perception of reality into one (finding the LCD of communication, if you know math), and ignoring or rejecting any conflicting elements that would prevent proper communication, i.e. anomalies. But at this point we are getting into the more sociological part of human nature (norms and deviancy), and that is best suited for another post.
So how is human nature prejudiced? This problem is more fundamental than one might thing, and is best understand when applying a more base definition of “prejudice” to things: “An adverse judgement or opinion formed beforehand or without knowledge of the facts.” The key word here is “judgement”, which more broadly refers to a formed opinion– but if you really think about it, also extends to refer to applying the form from which opinions are derived in the first place! In other words, prejudice is attaching characteristics to a [person, place, thing, idea] that might not be accurately, and are derived solely from judging something based on what you already know.
Here’s why prejudice is so difficult to rid oneself of: Almost everything that make us what we know about reality is assumed! Most of what we “know” about reality is just what we’ve been told by society, parents, friends, and people we know, and being unable to confirm this information (everything is an awful lot of information to cover!), we just take their word for it, because we trust them. There is a reason for everything, and when assume something to be true without knowing WHY it’s true, the end-result is prejudice.
It’s human nature to assume, because just deciding something is true is far easier and convenient then going to the trouble of finding out why. I would know, because I have spent the last few years trying to understand humanity’s nature (particularly humanity’s motivation(s), and it’s complicated– perhaps needlessly so.
The problem with assumptions, is that they override the truth, thus preventing people from truly understanding each other. Prejudice is convenient– it allows us to have a semi-complete picture of what reality is without having to go to the trouble of verifying that reality is in fact what it appears to be, and without having to understand why. Prejudice is the easy way out– to make a quick judgement on what appears to be reality, and then call that judgment “fact”.
Everything comes with a price, and the price of convenience seems to be the worst one of all. From the convenience of prejudice springs all the worst kinds of evils: War, rape, thievery, deception, violence, murder– every evil that is known to have originated from human nature, has originated from prejudice.
I don’t know about you, but I don’t think “convenience” is worth its costs!
It’s human nature to be prejudiced, because assuming we know each other is easier than truly understanding each other. But because of this mass-reliance on prejudice, we barely know each other anymore– hell, we don’t even know ourselves anymore. Prejudice is destroying the very ability to communicate, because everything that we say has become warped by misunderstandings that are caused by bias– the bias created by the person who is already convinced that they know what you are talking about before you even say a word!
Now you can’t even meet a person without them putting their own labels on you within 10 seconds. That’s just going way too far, in my opinion. How can we expect to understand each other, or even communicate with each other, if we are too busy elevating our own preconceived notions of each other above the truth?
So what it comes down to, is that all the evils in the world are caused by the widespread propagation of false assumptions and forced-misunderstandings. We hurt each other because we don’t understand each other, and we misunderstand each other because we never try to understand each other.
It is human nature to misunderstand each other, because believing lies is far easier than seeking out the truth. But it seems that Jesus was onto something, at least according to what he said in this verse:
“Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it.”
It might be easy to follow human nature and be prejudice, but at this point it should be clear that living life in such a manner is purely destructive. Even though the path to the truth might be narrow and hard to find, it’s the only path by which we are able to truly understand each other, so I think it’s definitely worth the effort.
Possessed
I would imagine that not many people believe in demon possession, but as one who has experienced it first-hand, I cannot help but believe in it. I have been taken over by external forces (call them aliens, demons, archons, or ascended beings, the name attached to them really doesn’t matter) at least 3 times in the last 10 years, and the effects still linger to this day. As to whether or not these experiences were good or bad, I could not tell you; however, I have the distinct feeling that whether my possession were beneficial or detrimental– this will be for me to decide.
You might criticize my labeling of these experiences as being “possession”, and attach labels to them like “mental illness”, “post-trauma” or even “drugs” (which I don’t do, by the way). But this post in not trying to convince anyone of anything; it is merely an account of things as they were experienced by me– a spiritual autobiography of sorts. So although you might have your own interpretation of these events, that is neither here nor there; this is merely the truth as I perceived it, so when attempting to interpret these events, keep that in mind.
In the following paragraphs I will depict my possession experiences to the best of my ability, although most of them were quite vague and intensely emotional in nature:
The first possession occurred when I was 10 years old:
I was in my room trying to go to sleep, and as I looked at my hands upon my sheets, a mirrored image of my hands appeared, albeit only as a shadowed blur. Intrigued, I sought to replicate the phenomenon, and did so successfully twice; the third time I could not, and so prepared to go to sleep.
As I was about to fall asleep, I woke up to what felt like intense pressure to my soul, and I was terrified. I sat up rigidly, and looked around the room to see where the pressure had come from. At first I saw nothing, but then I looked upon the shelf, and upon it a dark figure to whom I could not perceive a form or color. Although at first fearful, I became mesmerized by the intensity of the figure, which I perceived to be evil, and yet a mystic curiosity. As a looked upon it, my heart became heavy with darkness, and I felt as though I had become numb with melancholy.
Then suddenly, as quick as it had come, it had gone. I thought that God had saved me from dark forces, that my soul had been rescued from evil by my Lord Jesus. But the fear still lingered within me, that perhaps the Devil had left his mark on me.
The second possession occurred when I was 12 years old, while enrolled in Los Gatos Christian School (LGCC), a private Jr. High school. This was the first possession in which dark forces physically controlled my body.
I don’t know when it started, but at some point during the second semester of 8th grade, I began to act strangely. I was flirting with and stalking other guys, and even expressing such attractions with innuendoes of a vulgar nature. The demons had possessed me to sexually harass other guys.
To this day I have not felt a possession so strong as this, for even my memory was held prisoner to this demon; I did not realize anything that I had done until after the demons had left me. At the time of this possession, I had no propensity for homosexuality– I was a strong Christian who believed such an orientation to be the work of the devil, and one of the more unnatural and unclean things a person could ever do. There was no reason for me to do such things ordinarily, but this was not ordinary– this was a possession.
After the matter was brought to my attention, I stood there rigid and in shock, for I “knew not what I was doing”. Until I was brought into the principle’s office for disciplinary action, I had no idea that anything at all had occurred– until these things were brought to my attention, I was completely oblivious to what I had done. After the demons left me, the memories returned, and it is these memories that most haunt me.
The third possession occurred when I was 15 years old, while going to school at Foothill ADT High school, a government-funded behavioral school.
I was being disciplined for “socially-inappropriate behavior”, and as I was sitting there, I was attacked by voices in my head. They berated my all at once, reminding me of all of my problems and faults in my life. That was the first time that I wanted to die…I couldn’t take it. This was probably also the first time that I “faced myself” for who I really faced myself as a person– which brings us to the potential benefits of possession: self-evaluation.
Because demons rely on a person’s vulnerabilities as a person to continue feeding on the energies of their host, they will look for a person’s flaws to create opportunities to grab hold of a person’s soul, and continue to exploit them in oder to maintain that hold. I’ve made use of this demonic opportunism to better understand myself: Because they make me face myself (so I can see my flaws), I am forced into better understanding the parts of myself which before I was too afraid to even look at. Now there is nothing in my life that I am afraid of, or that I can be afraid of.
Because of possession, there is now nothing in this world that I am afraid of.
Fountain of Youth
Is the Fountain of Youth an elixir that makes you eternally young?
Perhaps, but what does “young” mean?
For me, “young” is determined not by one’s physical appearance, but their inner vitality. To be truly young, one must be “young at heart”. The importance of having a youthful spirit was probably most famously conveyed by Jesus: “Truly I say to you, unless you are converted and become like children, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven.” (Matt 18:3). If we are to truly appreciate the world that has been given to us, it is clear that we must become like children, as only a child can see the world as it truly is, with eyes unclouded.
So then, what is it that a child possesses that adults lack? To list a few important traits:
1. Children do not have prejudice, the greatest of all evils.
2. Children do not give up on their dreams.
3. Children are open-minded, and will not reject something because of personal bias.
4. Children are not afraid to express their thoughts and feelings.
5. Children depend on other people to support and care for them.
It is these things that make children child-like, and the loss of these qualities is what causes a child to be transformed in the miserable and pathetic existence that is an adult. Is the independence and power that comes with being an adult really worth these sacrifices? Should power and independence ever be that important, when we consider the havoc that it has wrecked on Society as whole? I must strongly contend that it is not worth it– Far from it!
There are advantages to being a child and being an adult, that I acknowledge. I think that it’s good for all children to be a bit precocious even early on in life. But with both children and adults, I think we can learn from each other; there should be an adult in every child, and a child in every adult– the lesson here is moderation, and ultimately Balance. Finding a way to merge the qualities of a child and of an adult into one’s values as a person should be one of the most valued pursuit humanity should aspire to; for our world to lose the precociousness of adulthood and the innocence of childhood, both of these should be a grave loss indeed.
If only in leisure time, everyone should drink a little bit from the proverbial Fountain of Youth, so that we might not forget what it means to be a child, and through the vitality of youth learn to appreciate life more each day; to embrace the Beauty that is life everywhere, such an aspiration would indeed prove to be truly invaluable.
Life is a Game
If life is a game, what would your life look like?
Perhaps if everyone thought of life like a game, they would be better off. We’re already practically there, with society deciding everything for us, and predictability being considered “the greatest good”. If you play a life simulator (like “The Sims” Franchise or “Second Life”, you’ll find yourself thinking that these games are very similar to life– and if you’re an escapist like Generation 2.0 young people are nowadays, you might yourself thinking that simulation games are more real than real life. In either case, it’s become apparent that regardless of whether or not you “choose to play”, life is becoming a game more and more as time goes on, so if you don’t want to be life after, you have to learn the rules.
What are the rules of life? There are infinite rules (as thousands, if not millions of new rules are added every day) to this Game called Life, and it’s impossible to know them all. But you can’t cheat when it comes to life (which is why life is the m0st fair game ever “invented”)…rather, the better that you know the rules, and the more rules that you know, the more likely you are to succeed at life.
There’s rules determining what your mood is, how many friends (and how good of friends) you have, how good of a job you have, your global popularity and perceived value (net worth), and what your moral alignment and reputation are. Everything that you do in life, and whether you succeed at these things, is determined by your knowledge and application of life’s rules. It’s like an art form, but unlike art, this is reality.
Sounds fake, doesn’t it? Well it is, seeing as how life is fake– or rather, we have made it such. We like fake, because superficiality is predictable and understandable– the whole WYSIWYG mindset is very attractive to us control-hungry and insecure humans…To just be able to gauge who a person is and what they’re about in 15 seconds, that’s a lot more satisfying than the insecurity and doubt of having to face the honest truth: That we really can’t even begin to truly understand each other. Which would you have? Insecurity and Doubt, or Convenience and Superficiality.
If I were to be really honest– yeah, in all truth I don’t like the Game. Everything comes with a price, and I don’t think that Convenience and a false sense of Security is worth the Superficiality that my Reality– or should I say– the reality of the World– has become. But even if don’t want to play the Game, I have to know the rules if I want to succeed, because like it or not, things have already gotten to that point– the point of no return. The world has already launched itself into a Jumanji, and so we have no choice but to finish what we’ve started.
I like to think of myself as an “insider”- someone who pretends to be part of the syndicate, but is really just collecting dirt on the bad guys while biding his time for the inevitable “sting operation” to go down. I’m just going to go along with the Game, using it to get into people’s heads, understand what makes people tick. As much as I can, I’ll use the Game to my advantage, so that when the time comes (when the Game finally ends, AKA “TEOTWAWKI”) I won’t come out empty-handed. Might as well milk it work what it’s worth– that’s what I figure.
The mindset that life is game is nevertheless very intriguing: If life is truly a game, there are no consequences or fear; only the desire to win, and the opportunity to develop the aptitude necessary for winning. Perhaps living life as if it were a game can provide invaluable insight into what it means to truly appreciate life, by savoring every day like there is no tomorrow. Such a mindset would be quite liberating, and would free oneself up to stop worrying about failure (In a game, if you fail you can just continue from the save point), and “just do it”– to just play the Game. If life were a game, we would be freed up from meaningless worrying and psychological stagnation, and able to just live life, and to appreciate every aspect of life just as one would appreciate all the different aspects of a game.
Perhaps I will eventually “face reality” and live life with a bit more discretion about what my future holds, and what values that I should hold dear in life…but for now…I’ll just life is as if it were a game
After all, it practically already is anyway!
Copyright of Me
For the majority of my life, I have freely expressed my thoughts to everyone around me who seemed even remotely interested in what I had to say; fearing not what people thought of me, or how other’s might react to my words, I’ve unabashedly conveyed my “two-cents” to the world– so much in fact that my “two-cents” is probably worth less than two Somaliland shillings. That’s the very issue addressed by this post: by so uninhibitedly sharing my knowledge with the people around me, I am inadvertently making everything that I say meaningless. What I need to focus on now, is valuing my thoughts as original, creative, and inspiration; what I need is to treat my thoughts as if they were Intellectual Property— after all, that is precisely what they are anyway: Copyright of Me.
Deciding how to communicate with this mindset is actually quite interesting, and causes several valuable notions to surface:
1. What I think is very important.
2. When I share my knowledge with others, it is not merely “data”, but valuable insight.
3. Because my insights are valuable, I should only share it with those worthy of it.
4. “Information is not free”– whenever I share my knowledge with others, it comes at a price, and includes the social equivalents of “license agreements”, “usage rights”, and “royalities.”
5. Sharing information with others equates to trust, because by “offering my services”, I am offering invaluable insider information that could be abused by people for their own gain.
6. Because sharing my insight implies trust, I can utilize the act of sharing knowledge in order to facilitate the development of all kinds of different relationships, leveraging the dynamics of psychological bonding, intimacy, dependability/consistency, and “connections”.
Summing it all up, what I have to say is very valuable, but only if I treat it such. That’s the way that humans are: when something is given away for free, the perception is that it is not very valuable; when something comes at a price, and especially when something comes at a high price, people tend to think of that “something” as more valuable, because price is the direct reflection of value (at least in real life).
I don’t personally agree with the belief that something’s value should be judged by its value (I believe that the most valuable things in life are free), but this is the mindset of Society; if I wish to be appreciated by the World, I have to follow their rules— and one of these rules is the mindset of copyrighting. If I wish to be valuable, I should place a copyright on everything I say, and express myself accordingly.
Optimization
I have often considered the possibility of becoming a “Renaissance Man”— acquiring vast knowledge and life experience by indulging as much as possible in all creativity pursuits: journalism, poetry, fiction, novel writing, blogging, aesthetics, fashion, innovation, trend-setting, painting, drawing, scripting, film production, acting, lyricism, character development, reality simulation, singing, music production, graphic design, linguistic arts, economic development, city planning, entrepreneurship, social engineering, societal optimization– these are just some of the creative arts that I wish to become experienced in.
But obviously to become an expert in all of the aforementioned field would be nearly impossible, or at the very least highly impractical. If I were to seriously dedicate myself to all of these pursuits, it would lead to me becoming a “jack of all trades”, and as I will have “spread myself over too much bread”, the end result would be a person with a lot of life experiences, but little to show for it save perhaps a whole lot of wisdom.
The impracticality of taking on too many pursuits at once is in accordance with the law of Balance– that is, if you cover more ground, the strength of ground covered with weaken in direct proportion to the amount that is spread. Another way of putting it: Everyone has the same amount of inherent potential; one’s wisdom is the distribution of that wisdom will determine how well that one’s life can be appreciated.
The anecdote I feel is most fit for explaining this, would be in the life of my father. When he married my mom, he was sure that he was perfect for her, because he was experienced in all of the practical things in life; being “jack of all trades” was to him a good thing, because it ensured complete independence (and thus perfection, or at least the illusion of perfection). He could maintain his own car, landscape his own yard, upkeep and remodel his own house– even build his own house from scratch if he really wanted to. This was a man capable of doing anything on his own– and as one who up to that point was successful at everything he did, my dad was confident that marriage was another opportunity for success– after all, why wouldn’t it be?
Just like butter spread over too much bread, my father exemplified the biggest flaw of the “jack-of-all-trades” mentality: By trying to be good at everything, his foundation became weak– he became weak. By spreading himself too thin, he opened himself up to psychological attack, and being so exhausted from the upkeep of his very own expectations of himself, he collapsed under the weight of the unexpected those circumstances beyond his control. In this way, too much priority being placed on self-improvement can destroy anyone’s life. My father didn’t fail at life because he wasn’t good enough– he failed because he was too good— or rather, he forced himself to be so perfect that he collapsed under the weight of his own expectations. To bear these kind of burdens is akin to “holding the weight of the world one’s shoulders”; it was not the circumstances that killed him; it was his own pride.
In recognition of this, I aim to utilize the law of Balance to achieve the opposite effect: by narrowing my list of pursuits to only a few things, I can excel at what few things I do, instead of just being good at many things. If I can only accomplish so much in a lifetime, it would be pointless to try to experience as much as possible– after all, such a pursuit can never be satisfied, since there is always more to experience. Therefore I will try to experience only a few things, and make sure that whatever I do experience, that I savor those experiences as much as I can. There is more meaning in being great in a few things than merely proficient in many things, so if I wish to be great, I must optimize myself for greatness.
So I want to be great– what then should I be optimized for? Greatness, of course! I want to achieve greatness, that through my example people might be inspired to become great also. There are many things that I wish to excel at, but all of which I would do only that I might be recognized as great. For although I wish to write, to produce, to innovate, and to revolutionize– I wish to do only these things that I might be appreciated. Therefore it is only natural that I should optimize my talents to achieve greatness, as it is only through greatness that all things in life are permitted a true appreciation.
The way I figure it, if one like myself– someone born into a near-poor family, with a crippled psychology, and to a dysfunctional environment; someone who was raised as an orphan with juvenile delinquents as my siblings; one who spent his high school years in a “special school” for the behaviorally challenged and psychologically damaged; one who has struggled through live dealing with nearly a dozen major mental illnesses; one whom society has already decided to be an incurable reject, a dangerous liability with no real future– this type of person is one that few (if any) in the world would expect to achieve what might be considered greatness– and that is precisely why that I must become great.
If I can become great, then anyone can, and if the world were able to realize such a crucial thing as this, perhaps everyone might be able to experience a perpetual epiphany.
The Greatest Of All Evils
From a logical standpoint, evil can be determined through sociological causality– that is, “if everyone did ‘x’, what effect would ‘x’ cause on a global scale?
For example, if everyone found the opposite sex repulsive (in other words, if everyone were “pure gay”), copulation for the purpose of reproduction would cease to occur, thus bringing about the slow death of the human race, due to psychological infertility. Thus, homosexuality is evil.
Using the same argument, we can explain why these other things are evil:
1. If everyone murdered, the whole human race would die.
2. If everyone raped, it would bring about the collapse of society, and reduce the whole human race to a state of psychological poverty (Hell).
3. If everyone stole, the global trade system would collapse, and extreme distrust (and thus poverty) would ensure. It would thus also cause (though not as much as as Rape) widespread psychological poverty.
Using the same methodology, it can easily be proven that cigarettes, marijuana, harder drugs, prostitution, alcohol, pornography, most other “evils” to be justified, as their nature becomes apparent when the proverbial denominator is multiplied to the “common” level.
So then, what is the greatest of all evils, judging by this methodology?
No, it isn’t murder, rape, or thievery, as the Boondock Saints (and mainstream society) would have you believe. It’s something far more difficult to pinpoint, because it’s far more accepted in society.
It is the one evil that is at the core of human nature, an evil that everyone is guilty of, and something so completely embedded in us that we might never be able to wholly rid ourselves of it!
The Greatest of all Evils…is prejudice!
Now I’m not just talking about the kinds of prejudice that society scapegoats– racism, discrimination, stereotyping. These are evil, yes; but they are relatively easy to rid oneself of in comparison to the more ‘natural’ prejudice– this kind of prejudice is almost impossible to become free on, because it determines the very reality that we live it– It has even become our reality!
What I wrote for my book “Essence of the Soul” explains the nature of true prejudice (and its effects on the nature of reality) as follows:
By what method can one determine reality? We have guides all around us, things like the senses, logic, and the perceptions of those around us, but does it not vary from person to person, even if only the slightest? In addition, with all honesty we can only accept that this reality we are bound by is wholly attributed to the past. What if reality was something to be discovered, is something to be explored? Most choose to leave those questions unanswered, and accept the reality created by the past. Some indulge in determining their own fate, but “in reality” are still bound by the same legacy; many of these would not realize this even if they were told, because the vast majority of the rules bestowed upon us are painfully unsaid. It would seem that this would sum up all those that are governed by this antiquity in one way or another, But let us not forget the select few that make the choice to abandon these limitations and create their own reality- although some do not yet know they have made the choice.
Basically what I was saying is that reality has become so warped by prejudice that true free will has almost completely ceased to exist. The need to prejudge everything– to force everything into a proverbial box– has almost completely destroyed freethinking, making everyone dependent on society to tell us what reality is.
This is the opposite of how things were supposed to be– we created society so that we could wrap human issues into a little box– society was supposed to be the scapegoat; now it seems that we are society, and society has scapegoated everything else so that everyone (where everyone is represented by society) can continue to live in a perfect world where we don’t have to decide what is right or wrong anymore– society will decide it for us.
Life is easier that way– yes. But there is a price for everything, and the price for simplicity is corruption. It’s far more convenient to put everything into a box– to stereotype everything and call such a cut-and-dried world “reality”. It’s only natural to feel “in control” of the world you live in– a world where everything is accounted for and nothing is unknown.
A world that is predictable and justifiable– a reality that can be relied on and be consistent with itself– that’s the kind of world that everyone wants.
But the problem is that a world like that “simply” does not exist.
Despite what Society would have you believe, there is no Consensus Reality.
There is no “perfect world.”
This is what makes prejudice so completely evil…Buddha was right all along– Ignorance really is the source of all suffering. By stubbornly believing in Society’s “perfect world”, we are only creating suffering for ourselves.
Because of prejudice, people misunderstand each other.
Because of prejudice, people hurt each other.
Because of prejudice, people lie, cheat, steal, and kill.
Because of prejudice, people give up on relationships, or decide to break things off.
What is prejudice?
Prejudice is when you decide that there’s no better way than your way.
Prejudice is when your beliefs and values become facts instead of opinions
Prejudice is when you let your assumptions about life decide how you live your life.
Prejudice is the need to control things that cannot be controlled, to know things that cannot be known, and to categorize and simplify things that are far too complex to even be accurately assessed, let alone simplified.
As I said, everything comes with a price; this is the law of Balance.
Prejudice simplifies everything; the price is this is karmic– because people try to simplify reality through prejudice, everything becomes infinitely more complex.
Because we tried to open Pandora’s box so that we might simplify it’s contents, we inadvertently unleashed a chaotic beast upon us, and it is this beast that has become the greatest of all evils…
What’s the worst part of the woe that is prejudice? Society!
We created society to simplify ourselves– Society was to its core created as the first prejudice, and to this day the only truly universal one.
But simplicity breeds complexity, and complexity corruption, and corruption Evil…
Is it then any surprise then, that absolute simplicity takes the form of Chaos, which itself is the polar opposite of Control. This is the law of Balance that we are bound to– the more that we try to control our reality, the more chaotic it will become.
Because Society is the most comprehensive and universal simplification of reality, is it any surprise that there is so much evil in the world? By trying to control and simplify everything– we brought upon ourselves prejudice, and it has thus proved itself to be the worst kind of evil.
Who Am I?
There is an aphorism (I’m loving that word lately!) that “people are the product of their environment.” As much as I hate to admit it, this statement is very true; in fact, so true that I still don’t who I am, because I’m too busy trying to figure who I’m not.
For those of us “in the world but not of it”– that is, individuals who choose to accept the reality they live in, but not partake of its “customs” (i.e. norms)– the question “Who Am I?” is perhaps the scariest question we could ever ask ourselves, because the answer inevitably leads to the same pathetic result every time: I don’t know.
Yeah sure, I have a fairly good idea of how other view me (which I didn’t before), and I also have a roughly sufficient idea of who I want to be…but I don’t know who I really am, right now.
The only way out of this Hell of unknowns that I have become immersed into is simple, but very risky: If I am to know who I am, I must forge that reality– that self– of my own resolve, and will my own will. If I wish to be in the world but not of it, I must create for myself a person who, although independent with the world, is somehow still compatible with it.
That is after all the reason why I started Ego Engineering.
But still the chicken-egg paradox remains: How can I decide who I will be, if I do not know who I am? The solution draws upon the aphorism which I so hated before, but which now provides for me a way out: I am a product of my environment!
If I am a product of my environment, then that would mean that by changing my environment, I change who I am. Furthermore, if I were to solidify and clarify what my environment is, it would in turn result in me solidifying and clarifying who I am. If I want to know who I am, I know what I must do now: I must condition my environment to be consistent with who I am– and more importantly, who I will be.
Who am I? I am what I believe in.
Paper Flowers
Evanescence’s song “Imaginary” strikes a very important point in the song’s justification of escapism, particularly in the following verse:
_____________________________________
Don’t say I’m not in touch
With this rampant chaos
Your reality
I know well what lies beyond my sleeping refuge
The nightmare i built my own world to escape
______________________________________
I can very much relate to this song, because I honestly believe that the suffering, hatred and feigned-peace in this world are sickening– it’s not something I want to accept, nor something I will accept.
It’s for this reason I intend to help build a more “utopian” (if you will) reality, founded on values which, although they are most essential to human civilization, have somehow become lost in the politically-correctness of society.
Many people consider me an idealist– that my ideas about life are too optimistic, that they are too unrealistic to ever become reality. They are right about one thing- I am an idealist. But my ideas will be realized, if only by pure willpower. They must be realized– not just for my own benefit, but for the benefit of humanity as well. As things stand down, we are doomed to live out a false peace, a world oozing with corruption overflowing from a fractured dam that we call society.
There was a point where society could protect us, that we could just live “normal” lives and society would take care of the rest, a made sure that the proverbially “perfect world” image was maintained. But society can’t protect us anymore– we now have to create our own world to escape to– our own world of paper flowers to find refuge in. Escapism, as sad as it might seem, is the only way out of this mess we’ve gotten ourselves into.
It’s already started– this migration to a fictional world– even though most of the older generation won’t accept it…perhaps they don’t even realize it’s happening. As people live their lives more and more via the Internet, and via video games and anime, it’s getting to the point where people living in “the real world” are the one’s ‘out of touch’, even though not too long ago it was the other way around. The line between fiction and reality has already begun to blur, and escapism is no longer viewed as ‘an illness’, but as normality. It would seem that society has given up on itself.
As for me, I have no intent of escaping like everyone else. Escapism is inevitable, yes, but how that I escape is my choice. My escape is not by creating my own fictional reality as others do– my escape is far more devious: I will take what people used to think of as fiction, and realize it as if it were real all alone.
In other words, rather than create my own reality, I will define reality as we know it. I will share my paper flowers with the world, and show the world how my paper flowers are more real than their organic ones. To redefine reality, that is My escape.
Running In Circles
As I look over my past writing, I find that some of the things I am writing about now are things I already targeted a long time ago. So what’s the point, if I’m just covering material I’ve already covered. At this rate, am I just running in circles? Perhaps, but it’s not the kind of circle that one would expect– it may not even be a circle at all
When I retrospect of what I’ve written in the past, and what I’m writing now, one analogy stands out above all: The Rose. Like the rose, I started at the core of the issue (Our Purpose), and worked my way outward; and like a rose, though I might appear to go in circles, my writing is very layered in nature– live a rose it is not my shape that defines who I am, but my layers.
As I continue to write, I do keep coming back and addressing the same issues, yes– but with each reiteration of the past comes a far greater and more complex beauty, just like a rose. The more that I write, the bigger my petals become, and greater in number they become. But most importantly, the more that I write, the more clear my purpose becomes, and these layers that once appeared only to run in circles have bonded together into an appreciable form.
So you see, I am not merely running in circles– I am spiraling outwards, growing into a beautiful and complex flower.
The beauty in me is reflected in my writing, for each time I write about a topic already addressed by previous posts, I write it with more clarity, more insight, and more wisdom than the first time around. Even though I am still concerned with the same issues, as I continue to write, my knowledge and insight into these issues only increases, and my ability to effectively write about them only grows.
One can never fully know a story after only reading it once, and neither can even the author know his own story after only writing it once. It is only by reading and writing it again and again, and by constantly thinking of how to improve it and to better understand it, that one can become truly intimate with a story.
In the same way, it is only by “running in circles” around an issue that one is able to understand it– to be intimate and authoritative of an issue requires that the same issues be redressed over and over again until one’s knowledge of that issue becomes full in potential and refined in character. At least when it comes to human knowledge, perfection can only be realized through incessant reiteration.
I might appear to be running in circles to you– and even to me at times; but I know in my heart of hearts that I am going to right path. My goal is perfection, and if that means covering the same ground over and over again, so be it!
Out of Touch
If there is one thing that Japan is most known for, it’s probably either anime, or video games; these two products of Japan have one thing in common: escapism. So what are the Japanese people escaping from? Reality of course. But for the Japanese people, it’s not so much reality that they are trying to escape from, but the lack thereof. In Japan, there is no reality, because the emphasis on sociological Solidarity in Japanese culture has made everyone fake. In Japan, they are not escaping from reality; from their perspective, what they are escaping from is a dream.
Even though the society I live in does not emphasize solidarity nearly as much as Japan does, I can still relate to this notion: that fiction is more real than reality. It might seem a preposterous suggestion to the average person, but true. In real life, everything is so predictable, like clockwork. So predictable that it’s sickening. Everyone I know around me is slave to society, and playing out their lives to the tune of society, and they don’t even realize it. The unpredictability of fiction is far more real to me than reality.
So then, is it any wonder that the Japanese people would value anime, video games, and immersive reality above real life? Most people I know believe that I don’t get out enough, that I need to connect with people and socialize a little bit more, that I need to get a girlfriend and start “living in the real world”.
But one of the things I confirmed in Job Corps, is that no matter how many interesting people I met, and no matter how many unusual activities I partook in, I would never find the reality that I was looking for– that I am looking for. Despite the variety of people I met and things I’ve done my life, even in Job Corps– home of some of the most unusual people in the world– everyone was preditable; no one was real.
I don’t care for this fake world, to me it is only a means to an end. I intend to help usher this world into a true reality, a world where people are honest with themselves and others, and that people don’t feel compelled to alter their behavior to make people accept them. A world where people don’t need to take others into account at all– that “being yourself” is considered the natural course instead of an unrealizable ideal– that’s the kind of world that I want to live in, and the world that I wish to create.
As far as I’m concerned, a world where no one can be true to themselves is not a reality worth living in– it’s not a reality at all. Such a world as this is not even a dream– it’s an empty shell destined to collapse on itself. There is no reality without substance, and when everyone gives up who they are to be accepted by others, the end-result brings nothing but emptiness and a hollow fragility.
Compared to such a fragile reality, the passionate and free-flowing world found in fiction– in manga, anime, and video games– is a reality far more worthy of living in. So rather than saying that people are using visual entertainment to escape reality, let us more accurately portray the real problem: People creating their own reality through visual entertainment, because the “real world” isn’t real at all.
Diversification
A lot of people don’t believe in multiple personalities; still others will rationalization them as being “alter-egos”, created to displace insecurities about oneself. While I think that the differences between alter-egos and multiple personalities is nothing but semantics, I do also believe the “displacement” part is very true; in fact, that’s exactly why I created my personalities in the first place.
The only difference between my personalities and those of people who suffer from DID, is that I am using my personalities to displace my anxieties in a very specific way: sublimation; in my case in particular, I am using my personalities to diversify my reality.
You see, as I first realized upon writing the post “Career of Variety”, I realized that “even if I were able to accomplish those ambitions, nothing would come of it- I would still be a “jack of all trades, master of none”- that would apply even if I indeed excelled in all areas, because humans only can reach their true potential when they dedicate their lives to a single passion- such is the fabric of life.” (My initial recording of this can be found here).
But for me to focus all of my energies on a single pursuit would be meaningless, as I would be prioritizing raw output over self-fulfillment– there are many different things I want to do in life, and to sacrifice the many for the success of one passion is a trade that I am not willing to make. I would indeed rather live a career of variety than be a master of a few fortes, as my greatest value in life is inspiration; to be inspired as much as possible, I must always be indulging in newer passions regularly, lest I stagnate in the push for perfection.
So I have this problem before me: how can I be perfect and still indulge in all of the beauty in life. This paradox appears to be inevitably unresolvable, as evidenced by the tacit requirement that beauty be the product of imperfection; that is, I cannot be both beautiful and perfect at the same time, because beauty itself can only exist because perfection is devoid from my existence.
I have decided to try to resolve this imperfection by means of sublimating it; by displacing beauty from my perfect self onto various imperfect alter-egos, I will have successfully thwarted the natural limitations of beauty and perfection; by diversifying my ego into multiple alter-egos, I can be perfect without having to sacrifice the opportunities to be inspired, and to inspire others. That is the power of self-diversification.
My Paradigm
When I transitioned from th3g1vr to nspyraishn, I wasn’t just changing my focus. I was changing my paradigm– to a more “social” perspective. It didn’t fully occur to me until now, but whereas the majority of my writing on Th3g1vr has been about metaphysics, epistemology, and self-analysis, nspyraishn has been almost entirely dedicated to social dynamics.
The reason for this paradigm shift of mine is actually in the name- I wanted to “Nspyr” others with my writing, and I realized that to make this happen, I had to see things from other’s perspective, and target the issues in my own thought patterns that are most detrimental to truth inspiring other people. So naturally, my writing shifted to targeting social issues, because until that point I hadn’t even so much as thought about how my writing, my creative expression– my thoughts, had impacted other people.
I hadn’t a clue what people thought of my writing, I just wrote, relying on the blind hope that somehow people would understand and appreciate it, if only a little. Everything that I wrote in Th3g1vr was articulately expressed, but nevertheless raw ideas. I never filtered my ideas so that other people could understand them; after all, if they could not appreciate what I wrote just by reading it, they are obviously unworthy of my insights– that kind of arrogant attitude.
But sooner or later I realized that “great ideas” do not make good writing, and so I strove to gradually write with a new focus– a focus that included an audience, instead of just what essentially amounted to “organized chaos”. For me, this change in my focus merited a new blog dedicated to this shift and thought, and thus NspyraishN was born. But never had I realized what an impact NspyraishN has had on my writing– not until now.
This is my paradigm: Inspiration. Such an ideal cannot be reached alone, for inspiration cannot thrive in isolation as can Th3g1vr; a goal of these proportions requires the full support of everyone. After all, in NspyraishN cannot inspire everyone, then it cannot truly be considered inspiration.
So that I might impact the world with the insights I discovered in Th3g1vr, and continue to discover in NspyraishN, I must learn to see the world from
the outside looking in,
just as I have learned from Th3g1vr to see myself from
the inside looking out.
Fake
In my social experiments over the years, I’ve found that every time I force myself to be “normal”, it’s been very effective in making people like me more. Although I have no intuitive sense of normality (finding it rather boring and tiresome), I have collected quite a bit of data on what “normal” is, and since I have a natural talent for acting, applying this knowledge is quite easy.
So then, why not be normal (besides its tedious nature)?
Easily answered: because normality is fake.
I’m not just saying for me to be normal would be fake– I’m saying anyone who is normal is fake. I’ve studied this quite a bit over the years, and it’s quite apparent at this point that no one is normally naturally–Everyone forces it. For some reason, the majority of people (at least people in a developed society) are so concerned with others’ opinions that they’d rather be fake and accepted than real and rejected.
I don’t blame people for being fake. I very much enjoy being accepted– the only difference between me and Other People, is that I don’t need acceptance. It’s just a simple pleasure– a drug to me. If I were the last person on earth, I would be just fine. In fact, I think it some ways I might prefer it that way (I’m just kidding, I would go crazy if there weren’t at least one other person to accompany me!)
Nevertheless, because most of my ambitions require people accepting me, that is a prerequisite that I must deal with. So sooner or later, I’m going to have to live with being “fake”, because it is a necessity to live a deception so that my dreams might become a reality. Ironic, isn’t it?
I have the knowledge already, I just need to apply it. Having observed people’s mannerisms, thought patterns, and social needs, I could have full social control over my peers should I choose to compromise a little; just let go of who I am a little and be who they want me to be.
Everyone has their idea of who a person leader, perfect mentor, and perfect friend is– even if they’re not consciously aware of it. As long as I can know, understand, and apply that image, I can be a hero any anyone– to everyone. The only downside is that this kind of power, like any advantage, has a price– a sacrifice. That sacrifice, of course, is giving up who I am.
Is winning the favor of others worth giving up my own individuality? For most people it is, and by doing so their worth becomes lost in the borg of this matrix we call society. But for those few that do not give up their individuality, but only set it aside in pursuit of more important matters; these individuals are true leaders. For they are not sacrificing anything, they are merely hiding their individuality inside, because for great men, even individuality is a means to an end, and there are things in life far more important than one’s Ego.
Eloquence
In “Silence is Golden”, I addressed the importance of being selective in one’s words, but explained the rationale primarily from a mystical standpoint. This post is a follow up that targets the issue from a more practically and socially-relevant standpoint, as well as clarifying the significance of one’s speech, particularly in relation to others’ appreciation of ones words.
Eloquence, defined as “powerful and effective language”, is the art of getting a point across with as few words as possible. The reason for this, as first presented in “Silence is Golden”, is that every word that you say carries with it the power of your resolve; as a result, the more words that one uses to convey their point, the less power each word holds, as the resolve is being spread over too many words.
The aphorism “a picture is worth a thousand words” is a powerful testament to the importance of eloquence; here’s why: While the message conveyed by a picture can indeed be expressed with a thousand words, spreading the picture out over so many words would end up diluting the resolve behind the message; this being the case, complex messages are often best conveyed as a single picture, that the magnitude of its resolve might be fully appreciated by those who view it. Another aphorism, “butter spread over too much bread”, presents the image of why it’s important to be eloquent with ones words. If one uses to many words to get the point across, their message will become dry, weak, and unsavory.
So that you might inspire your target audience, its crucially important to you use discretion in your choice of words. That’s what eloquence is about– choice of words– specifically, words that get the point across effectively and powerfully. People are influenced far more by a powerful few words than the incessant droning of an intellectual more concerned with politically-correctness than with get the point across.
In light of this, I will make an honest effort to get my points across with as few words as possible, to ensure that I can truly inspire people, instead of just showing off a rich vocabulary.
Trying Too Hard
Sure enough, my greatest weakness is that I try too hard. Even when it comes to what I’m best at– writing– I excel when it comes to subjects that I have little interest in, and fail at effectively communicating the ideas that I am most passionate about. Thus, to quote Kurt Cobain, “I’m worse at what I do best, and for this gift I feel blessed!”
Or is it a curse?
In either case, I’ve noticed that everything that I am passionate about, I fail to express properly because I’m so self-absorbed on the subject that I am unable to connect with my target audience (in my own world). On the other hand, when I write about a subject I am only moderately interested in, I can more effectively communicate my thoughts, because my detachment allows me to talk about it in a way people can actually connect with.
So as it turns out, my grades were below my expectations in English class, not because I wasn’t trying hard enough (as I originally thought), but because I was trying too hard!
This did not occur to me until I helped a friend with their essay. Something felt different– felt more free when I was editing their essay. Somehow, it appears that my own bias is so strong that it prevents me from effectively expressing my thoughts. When I helped that friend, I was only somewhat interested in their topic, so there was no bias. As a result, they got an “A” from my work, and I got a “B” for an Essay that I put a lot more thought and effort into.
This has taught me a very important lesson: I should not go into a career where I am passionate about my work– doing so will only prevent me from truly shining in my field of work.
Writing is something that I want to keep as a hobby, but it is also something I want to make a career of. Therefore, I’ve decided to pursue a career in journalism precisely because I am only somewhat interested in news. The prerequisites to successful journalism- a knowledge of history and research skills, are also areas that I am only somewhat interested in, so it’s a safe bet that journalism would suit me well as a future career.
As ironic as it seems, “trying too hard” seems to be my downfall…to be successful in life, I’m going to have to separate my passions from my professional life, so that my target audience can have a fuller appreciation of my words.
Whereas normally people connect with their audiences by becoming emotionally involved, it’s obvious at this point that I connect best with my audience using the exact opposite approach. I connect with my audience by becoming detached from the subject matter.
Now tell me, is that weird or what?
What do you *really* need?
When people try to understand the difference between “wants” and “needs”, the distinction most commonly made is that a “want” is something a person can live without, whereas a “need” is something that a person must have in order to survive.
Because there are different types of “survival” (physical, mental, emotional, social, spiritual), there are then different types of needs.
The model for the diversity of needs that is the most comprehensive and accepted in academia is Maslow’s Hierarchy of needs. If you analyze the model, the first thing you should notice, is the structure upon which it is built: a hierarchy. This means that needs are not understood as separate entities, but as priorities of survival, with some being more important than others.
So then, the premise that I go by when distinguishing “needs” from “wants”, is that there are no needs or wants– there are only priorities. Thus, the difference between needs and wants is all relative, with the “needs” that are lower priority (you are more willing to live without) being deemed as “wants”, and with the “needs” that are higher priority (you are less willing to live without) are considered to be true necessities.
The hierarchy of a need is determined by its value, and the value of a need is assigned based upon its priority. Maslow recognized this, but he also recognized that most successful individuals had very similar priorities in life, and so he created a model based upon those priorities, that people might use his hierarchy as a basic roadmap in their journey to a successful life.
But while perhaps certain priorities are necessary for what Maslow considers to be “successful”, there is no limit on what a person’s priorities might be. Thus, there is nothing in this world that a person actually needs; rather, there are only values that each individual (or society) prioritizes.
Every “need” has been ‘neglected’ without interfering with that person’s well-being, at least where “well-being” is determined by the person neglecting those needs. For example, monks will often starve themselves for weeks, Americans routinely “rot their brains” by overloading it with cable TV. The United States’ armed forces actually unlocks a person’s inner potential by neglecting what most consider to be one of the most important needs: Emotional needs.
It is then clear that not only are even the most basic of needs optional, but benefits often directly result from neglecting these needs. This is the fundamental part of necessity that Maslow failed to take into account: Even though most successful people prioritize most of his “needs”, all of them will neglect a few of those needs, that they might focus more on meeting the others.
Rare is the person that can fulfill all of the basic desires of their heart, and it’s impossible for anyone with ambition to have every need and want fulfilled in entirety. So when deciding what you want most in life, and what you need most to get those wants–that is, Prerequisites, remember that having solid and well-thought out priorities is the key to success. This fundamental value is the one thing that Maslow was dead-on about– when it comes to success, good priorities are an absolute necessity.
Empassionment
One aspect of my life that I am most angst-ridden about is my stagnating lifestyle– that is after all the primary reason why I abandoned th3g1vr and started nspyraishn in the first place. I wanted to renew my passion for writing, for thinking, and perhaps even for living. My dilemma has now revealed itself: I have lost my passion in life!
I have had many passions in life, and every time I have let go of one, it leeches a little more life out of me, and I hold back a little bit more in my hobbies, lest I be sucked dry by own own fear and indecision.
I know by now that no hobby, no matter how much I might dedicate myself to it, will ever be good enough; yet still, I stubbornly press forward.
Desperation and Self-Loathing have become my most loyal companions– always there by my side to remind me of how unfair that life is, and how cruel that my existence has become. For I will become everything, and so for that reason I achieve nothing. My talents are my unbecoming, and my vision my curse. For though I could have the world in the palm of my hand and every person on this earth my subject, I know more than anyone that even this would be far from good enough for me, and so I despair.
Am I consumed by greed? Perhaps. But it is not the kind of greed that cares for money or power or the pleasures of the flesh. I am greedy for self-fulfillment– to know and understand my own potential, and to achieve it. I only wish to become a god because godliness is my potential. Because I can be great, I must be great– not because I envy greatness and must possess it, but because I envy myself and must possess all that I can be. I am thus a slave to my own potential; empowered by my passion and passionate about my own empowerment.
There is no pleasure to be found in a man consumed by his own lust to reach his potential, nor is there an end to such a hellish journey. I know this, and yet I pursue it anyway, if only to assert my own right to freewill. Is it madness? probably. But I have found that there is more meaning in madness than there is in sanity; for whereas sanity accepts that which is, blowing away into normality like dust into the wind, madness seeks to change the wind’s direction, becoming a part of the wind itself.
Regardless of whether my motivations for such passions are of a purity or of a corruption, it is clear to me that it is better to do the wrong thing than to do nothing at all. For in nothing there is stagnation, and in stagnation bacterial infection that far surpasses the evils of a logical corruption.
So then I will strive to once again regain my empassionment, that my heart might be true and my resolve be strong. To quote from the Bible, “I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot; I wish that you were cold or hot. So because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of My mouth.”
Prerequisites
If I had a list of things in this world that most irked me, prerequisites would probably be at the top of that list. Even today, as I contemplated my future (both financially and educationally), I spent far more time thinking about how to “get around” prerequisites than how to “get past” them.
I’m the “instant-gratification” type of person, so if I can’t get what I want in this world, I just give up. It’s not about being impatient (although there was a point in time when I was)– it’s not like I “can’t wait”– it’s about results; I want results (and I honestly don’t care to much for what kind) now! So when I don’t get something accomplished right away, I move on to something that can be accomplished sooner. Something like writing this blog post, for instance.
Unfortunately, the vast majority of things that I want in this world are extremely difficult to accomplish, and require these infernally tedious baby-steps that we call “prerequisites”. If there’s anything that’s preventing not just me, but anyone in this god-forsaken world from reaching their true potential, it probably has something to do with this politically correct word.
Prerequisites. It even sounds painfully tedious.
If it weren’t for prerequisites, I would have written several novels, developed and propogated the scientific field of “Ego Engineering”, retired early, gotten a beautiful girlfriend, and probably even married by now.
If it weren’t for prerequisites, I probably would have taken over the world by now. Now everyone should know that owning the world isn’t really that much fun– its the “taking over” part that makes you feel good. So when/if I manage to take over the world, I’m more than likely to give it back afterwards– though I’d probably arrange for a “true democracy”– a style of government that although originally impossible (too inefficient!) is now easily accomplished via the Internet.
But in either case, if would appear that the entire world is being put on hold– by prerequisites. Global warming is still a concern because prerequisites. Cancer is still a major cause of death because of prerequisites. You know why that we still haven’t “solved” world hunger? Truth is, we solved that problem a long time ago– we just were never able to get around to implementing it because of Prequisites!
Okay, enough with the melodrama…
So how will I (and perhaps the rest of the civilized world!) proceed from here? How shall I deal with these nasty hurdles that plague my efforts at success. Well, there’s no real way around them…I’ll just have to deal with it– with them! Any other route is just delusion, escapism, and self-deception.
Yeah it’s tedious, but through tediously working through prerequisites, a refined and matured character will emerge. That’s why prerequisites aren’t optional: becoming rich the quick and easy way might sound appealing and gratifying, but it won’t teach you anything, and you won’t gain anything from it. Money gained without pain is no gain at all– it might mean something to others, but it is of no real profit to oneself.
The real wealth then cannot be found in the present– in the immediate and instant gratification of the now. True wealth exists only in that which is built up over time– those aspects of life that appear marginal and of no consequence in the short run, but over a lifetime will prove invaluable.
So as it turns out, prerequisites are not nearly as tedious as they would appear to be. Life sure is full of surprises, isn’t it?
Social Skills
In a conversation I had with a friend a few days ago, she noted that classmates @ college were talking behind my back, with their two primary misgivings about me being my “weird hair” and me “lacking social skills”. Neither of these were a surprise to me, although I am disappointed in today’s generation for being so close-minded as to think that I “lack social skills”, when in fact the more accurate assessment would be that I am “unsociable”.
The reason for this is, contrary to the apparently popular opinion, I don’t lack social skills– I just don’t make use of them, because I would rather be “unpopular” than be fake.
Personally, I think that social skills are overrated, and are only useful to those incapable of living their lives independently of society. Why put all that effort into “fitting in”, if it does no more than mask my individuality. If people reject me, surely their opinions are not worth my concern anyway, because I am quite certain that I should be myself, rather than “conforming to the patterns of this world”.
In the past few posts (the latest of which is “Salvaging Insanity”), I have analyzed in detail the importance of connecting with other people, for creative, social, and even spiritual reasons. Until recently, I felt that “Other People” were unnecessary, with a usefulness equivalent to a drug…that we are all addicted to each other– that social interaction is an addiction. But now I am exploring the proverbial “other side of the coin”, the notion that true meaning in life can only be found through the exchange of energy best facilitated through social means.
So then, what are social skills– that which I am obviously lacking?
I first answered this question in my post “Popularity”, in which I postulated that popularity (i.e. widespread social value) is ultimately about two things: power (control), and the exchange thereof.
What a cold-hearted answer I had arrived at, you might think…to put subordinate the meaningful interactions between people to such a stoic level of simplicity…But it is this simplicity in fact that makes social dealings so beautiful!
Perhaps you do not understand the meaning of those last words, but you will someday (hopefully!) — moving on:
In response to why that classmates felt that I lacked social skills, I expressed my opinion that the other classmates felt that I was “weak”. My friend did not understand what I meant by that, and this is understandable; after all, my Popularity post clearly points out that the lack of popularity (which equates to a “lack of social skills”) is caused by taking the power away from other people. Therefore, wouldn’t the lack of social skills be evidenced by being “strong”, considering that I have apparently become a “power hog”, by through my actions depriving others of their own control over the situation. Wouldn’t I then be the opposite of “weak?”
But as I did not realize until fairly recently, the social world is far from that simple. By empowering oneself, one will often look weaker than before, because of this thing called “dependence”.
If I draw my power from my own resolve, I will indeed be perceived as strong, and that strength will be seen in a positive light; if I were such a person, I would be looked up to, and people would take pride in lending me their strength, that they might shine through me. This is the primary basis of leadership, and is what I refer to as “emission.”
On the other hand, there is power that comes not by one’s own resolve, but by stealing the power from others. People do not look up to such a person, because they are too weak to shine in their own light, and must instead “steal the moonlight” from others. One who can only acquire power by stealing it is seen as a desperate wretch that leeches upon the more social endowed; such a person is unworthy of respect and should be shunned, lest they prey upon the innocent hardworking folk, and capture the glory that they have not earned, but stolen.
Because I talk a lot and am not considerate of the thoughts of others by filtering my words, I am seen as lacking social skills, and because of my lack of social skills I demonstrate what is perceived as weakness. The “social endowment” mentioned last paragraph is what people call “social skills”, that people say that I lack it implies that I am stealing power from others because I lack the social means to create my own moonlight.
Of course, it’s not as if I care much for popularity or power or social appreciation (although I’m currently evaluating whether perhaps it would be to my advantage to care more), but nevertheless, because people fail to understand my motivations in talking so much and am so willfully stubborn in my social language, they wrongfully assume that I “can’t help it”, and am resorting to such means because I don’t have a choice, or that I don’t know better.
This misunderstanding is due to the fact that people find it difficult to even imagine someone who does not care for social interaction– a need considered universal among all mammals, and most certainly among all humans.
In truth, my primary motivator for talking so much is far simpler: Education. I have found that through social interaction, I am more mentally stimulated, and by conveying and verifying my own thoughts about what I have learned, I am retain and understand knowledge much better.
I can’t relate to this “bond” that humans seem to not only believe in, but live their lives motivated by. I don’t have any such connection with anyone, save but perhaps myself.
In this sense I am perhaps wholly independent, and I can tell you right now, independence at such costs is not worth it. For what good is it to not need to rely on another, if you are unable to truly rely on another. To not know the warmth and pleasure of trusting someone with your life, and for a person to truly mean more to you than anything else in the world?
The world becomes a very cold place when you are unable to rely on others to meet you needs- especially when it comes to social needs. Take the analogy of the “Hedgehog’s dilemma” for instance; although humans may hurt each other incessantly in their social dealings, it is also through social interaction that we can achieve social unity, warmth, bonding, and a sense of personal security and intimacy that nothing else can compare to in its intrinsic spiritual depth.
Without the warmth of other humans– without being able to open up to and trust others with the darkest of secrets and most earnest of yearnings– there is no real meaning in life.
A person who’s independence is so perfect that it prevents them from relying on others- they are indeed to be pitied. For they have no heart left in them, save but a heart of ice. Alone in the winter, and naught but a heart of stone.
I am one such person, although having recognized it I am working to change it. But at least for now, to say that I am “lacking social skills” is far from the truth; to begin with, there cannot be a “lack” where there is no “need”.
Facilitating Social Change
How to change behaviors in people that you don’t like:
1. Approach them laid back, like you don’t care. that takes their guard down.
2. make the issue about them, not you– this one is tricky, as you can’t make the issue look negative– that will bring their guard back up. To handle this, you need to make it clear that you’re looking out for their best interests.
3. When communicating the issue, express it not like there’s something wrong with them, but with what they’re doing.
4. Express the issue not as something bad that needs to stop, but as something good to replace that behavior with.
People tend to like to feel like they’re going in the right direction, and feel threatened when someone tries to change that direction, regardless of whether the change is a good thing or not.
So what you want is to send the message, “I’m not trying to change you. I’m just trying to help *you* improve upon the direction that you’re *already going*.
Remember, the focus is that that they are changing the issue, not you. You’re just helping them by showing them the answers.
Summing it all up, making someone change successfully is about power– and since they are the one changing, it will only work if they feel that they are the one in control of things.
By giving advice while giving them all the power to make the changes, and by making it clear that they’re not changing themselves– they’re only doing what they have been doing *better*, it makes them want to change.
Security and power– these are the traits that everyone has in common– if you can work them to your advantage, you can change anyone.
*note– in order to apply the above, you need to have a in-depth knowledge of the person you are trying to change– you don’t want to guess when it comes to matters involving power, since everyone is more likely to leave their guard up than let it down. Human beings are defensive motherfuckers! :p
Simplicity
I’m drunk right now, so I figure I’m probably more normal than usually, since my intellectuality and existentialist bullshit isn’t getting in the way.
Moving on…
So the way I figure it, ignorance is bliss.
No seriously!
A lot of people think that the world would be a better place if people knew what the fuck was going on in the world.
Well, perhaps since I’m not sober you can’t take my opinion seriously; but nevertheless, have a lot of experience in this so-called “truth”, and I’m telling you right now, ignorance really is bliss.
K.I.S.S.– “Keep It Simple Stupid!” If people just believed what they were told, and totalitarian government prevailed– yeah sure it seems, but that’s only because (due to relativity) we don’t know any better– the world would ultimately be a better place. If everyone just went along with “the norm”, things would be so much better. Universality is after all the key to world peace.
So why don’t people just accept norms? Because of their own pride. I’m not exception– I let my own pride get in the way of my happiness. If I would just “let it go” (and if everyone would do the same for that matter), YES the world would be a better place. But we can’t let that happen– because of our useless Goddamn pride.
Why can’t we just stick to what works? The world has been around for millions of years– what makes anyone think that *their* master plan is going to make a difference. Creative? Sure! But creativity and “positive change” are two completely different things.
If “quality of life” is the aim, we aren’t going to find that in change. Revolution doesn’t actually make anything “better”; it may make things look better in the short run, but even for those changes that are beneficial, it takes years for their effects to be realized.
So at least “in the now”, we’re better off sticking with what we have; refining the “good enough” rather than trying to stir up something new hoping that “the ends justifies the means”. Even if it appears to be “good” change, too much of any good thing is detrimental.
Balance is essential to any society hoping for a good quality of life, and for Balance to occur, we have to keep it simple; stick with what we know. Revolution requires taking time to smooth out all the rough edges, and the benefits of most revolutionary actions are almost always overtaken by the costs.
So if you want to foster positive change, keep it simple, and stick with what you have. Keep it simple; rather than trying to revitalize the world with new content, it’s usually better to revise and refine existing content. A the very least, that’s much better than “re-inventing the wheel”.
A solid and productive society is not built on revolution; it is built on solid, proven values. So if you want the world to be a better place, rather than seeking to replace existing values ones that you perceive to be superior, instead take existing values and improve upon them. Simplicity such as this is after all the cornerstone of any successful society.
Salvaging Insanity
There is a proven scientific link between creativity and mental illness. I don’t know about you, but whenever I think of successful creative geniuses in the world, I think of celebrities. So if celebrities are basket cases deep down, how is it that they are able to become so successful, and be looked up to by society. Mental illness is shunned in the world, and yet celebrities are looked up to as a models for society. So if celebrities are crazy, how do they turn this terrible handicap into success. How do they salvage their insanity?
One word: Sublimation.
In other words, they do it by taking all that excess creative energy, and turning it into something other’s can appreciate. Many (if not most) get lucky in this regard; what they create can already be appreciated in its raw form. I wish I had that luxury; I know of no one who can truly appreciate my work, even when I go to great lengths to make it more understandable.
But regardless of whether you are noticeably insane or not, the ticket to success is to take your creative energy and convert it into a form appreciable by the world. Otherwise it’s just a bunch of compiled thoughts and raw ideas.
This is one of my personal goals; I realized over time that although I am bubbling over with creativity to the point that i don’t know what to do with myself, I lacked a proper understanding of the thoughts and perspectives of other people to convey my “stuff” in a way that people could understand, let alone be inspired by. I need to better understand how people look at life; although I initially thought myself to have much in common with the human race in fundamental values, I’ve realized over time that this is far from the case. Most of the values that drive society are foreign to me; not that I’m not at least mildly familiar with them, but I just can’t see the importance of such things.
I’m an idealist at heart, so in my opinion the standards set, even by the current generation, are far too low. As a result of this gap in values and personal expectations, I have difficulty relating to the average person, and am often resigned to communicating about trivial things, although (ironically!) trivial conversation seems to be important to most people (look at facebook and twitter! utterly useless!)
In particular I don’t get how people bond over the most simple of things. I guess I’m so complicated of a person that I’m failing to see the beauty of bonding over the simple stuff– maybe I am just “afraid” to bond, and so I’m so busy looking for reasons not to that it doesn’t come naturally for me like it does for other people.
I don’t know, but I’m going to have to find out– try to understand…because if I don’t understand Other People, how can I possibly expect them to understand– let alone appreciate me?
That bond– that connection that people share– understand what makes people tick socially is the first step to salvaging insanity; if I want to make my living in the creative arts, I’m going to have to first understand the people to whom I am performing for (the audience); otherwise, the gap between us will stifle, if not completely prevent the transformation of raw creativity into art.
The Painful Truth
A few years ago, I took great pleasure in “pushing people’s buttons”– it developed initially as a defense-mechanism to group-home abuse. I always was a step ahead when it came to “running my mouth”, and I always had the psychological advantage in verbal confrontations. I can’t say I hated it, and perhaps the benefits compensated by the social backlash it caused. But eventually I realized that I needed to be more mature in my confrontations, and practice a bit more discretion for people’s feelings.
To the present: Yesterday I had a verbal confrontation with some, and I really hurt their pride in the process. It’s not as if I was intending to “push his buttons”, it just unfortunately went in that direction. I was asked a question, and I answered honestly. The context isn’t that relevant this posts, but in either case it was what i said that was so painful for him to deal with: I said that he was “a mediocre parent at best”.
I was not intending to hurt anyone’s feelings, accept anyone, or get into a conflict of any sort. I just answered the question in the most honest cut-and-dried way possible. But as it turns out, that kind of candidness not only really hurt people’s feelings, but it can also cause people to misunderstand the truth, resulting in an indirect deception.
I’ve found that most people cannot understand what I believe and stand for, and who I am. It’s not because I’m being unclear or vague about it– it’s quite the opposite. I’m so candid about who I am that everyone ends up missing the point. They see the truth, but it blinds them so much that whenever they ‘try’ to understand, they end up mistaking beauty for distorted chaos.
Most people cannot appreciate me, because my beauty is essentially too raw and uncouth for them to even begin to understand. Ironic as it might seem, most people understand who I am far more when I skip around the truth, and end up only being deceived by my candidness.
So then, is it better for me to a live a lie, so that other people might better appreciate the truth about me?
There’s no simple answer to that question– definitely not an answer I would even know how to properly convey here. But I suppose in the end, as much as I hate it, compromise seems to be the best solution– perhaps the only solution. If I want people to appreciate me, I have to practice discretion with everything that I say, so that I might know when they would best appreciate the truth, to know when “dumbing down” the truth is best, and when outright lying or “not saying anything at all” is sometimes the best solution.
In the course of my search for truth, I’ve found that there is indeed truth in this world, but it isn’t something that just sits there statically to be understood and relied upon. Truth, like a person, changes over time; it’s still the same truth, but how that truth is understood changes, just as the way we understand each other changes over time.
But I’ve found that even more importantly, “the truth” is over-rated. The price of finding the truth is to lose sight of its meaning, and the price of finding meaning in life is to lose sight of the truth. Either way, compromise is inevitable.
Sometimes it’s important to know the truth; but I’ve found that for those truths that are painful, ignorance really is bliss. There are some things in this world that we are better off knowing, so it’s important that we practice discretion when pursuing truth; we are what we believe in, so we should only believe in truths that will benefit us. After all, what value is there in truth that causes more harm than good?
20 Easy Steps for Learning to Love
1. Let go of all your prejudice.
2. Realize how complicated life is without all the prejudice.
3. Withdrawal period (characterized by angst).
4. Start feeling lost and hopeless.
5. Life becomes chaotic and oppressive.
6. You get used to life’s oppressive nature, and give up.
7. You become jaded; everything becomes meaningless.
8. You become an existentialist, and accept the depressing lack of meaning in life.
9. You realize that angst and existentialism are over-rated, and pursue an alternative mindset.
10. You realize you are back to square one, and are feeling philosophically exhausted.
11. You give up.
12. You become enlightened, and are completely taken off-guard by the seemingly ill-timed epiphany.
13. Life still sucks, but you realize that there is a lot of meaning in that suckiness.
14. You still loath the world and everyone in it, but you hate yourself for hating the world.
15. You resolve to change your mindset to a more meaningful one.
16. You finally realize that the source of all meaning of life is sharing your life with other people.
17. You realize that love is social and hate is antisocial, that there is more meaning in love than in hate.
18. You put two and two together, and logically conclude that love is a far more meaningful pursuit than any other, and make that a priority.
19. Because love is your greatest value in life, you are able to pursue it uncompromisingly, and because hatred is detrimental to your pursuit of love, it becomes very difficult to hate.
20. Finally! Your pursuit of Love makes it easy to love, and difficult to hate. The solutions was right under your nose the entire time. You just needed to realize what things are most important in life, and follow your heart!
Argument against alternate orientations
As a person who has experimented with homosexuality and various other orientations (among them sadomasochism and BDSM), I have had the opportunity to understand the motivations that drive most people to become homosexual or bisexual, and the various other paraphilias. Through self-experimentation, I over time confirmed that I could indeed become sexually attracted to and even sexually intimate with someone of the opposite sex. But it was not until recently that I realized the flaw with homosexual relationships, and paraphilias in general: The motivation is wrong.
But before I go into that, a little background about the nature and purpose of relationships:
There are two main evolutionary drives in a relationship:
1: Sex (associated with pleasure, inspires lust.
2. Family (associated with commitment, inspires love.
Normally, the initial motivation for most relationships begins with sexual attraction– people find partners they they perceive as desirable (because of their physical beauty, attractive personality, or various other desired qualities such as money, status, or independence), and that desire motivates them to seek relationships (both emotional and sexual) with that person.
Relationships that are motivated by desire, regardless of the nature of such relationships, produce a type of love known as lust (which the Greeks referred to Eros: a child-like love).
Because desire is wholly emotional in nature, it proves to be very unstable in nature, and so relationship cannot be sustained by lust alone. If anything, lust unravels relationships, as one of the inevitable products of desire is change.
It is for this reason that two other types of love exist, one of them to create substance in the relationship and build an emotional bond (known as “intimacy”), and the other to promote stability in the relationship, fostering a mutual need to keep the relationship secure.
Together these two types of love form a more mature and true love, and is distinguished from the “puppy love” that lust permits, in that it is more mature, refined, and above all stable. I explain this in greater detail in my post “Love versus Lust”.
It for these reasons that paraphilias prove to be an obstacle in the consummation and continuity of long-term relationships. Whereas normal long-term relationships are a relatively balanced mix of lust in love, most homosexual, and almost all paraphilic relationships are motivated almost entirely by lust.
The reason for this difference is evolutionary: because paraphilic orientations have no reproductive function, people with such orientations cannot move beyond lust and produce love, because there is no evolutionary impetus for it. There is a hard-coded mental block in place that prevents people with paraphilic interests from developing a “true” love, because their instinctive subconscious views this as counter-intuitive.
This link between paraphilias and sexual immaturity was first acknowledged by Plato, who initially promoted homosexual lust, but over-time came to view homosexual gratification as a cheap image of the divine, and later condemning it as “unnatural” It was really Freud though that pioneered in this field, going to great lengths to analyze this issue.
There are of course, exceptions to this rule, particularly in regards to gender roles. for example, if both partners in a homosexual relationship identify as male and female counterparts, it would not necessarily be a lust-driven relationship; in situations like that, it’s mind-over-matter, and that level of psychological identification will often compensate for the inherent evolutionary obstacles.
But at that point, so many societal standards would have been ignored that the issue could be considered a matter of semantics.
Give God Some Credit
I was reading the Wikipedia article on “Divine Simplicity”, which refers to the doctrine that God is a singularly unified being- specifically, that God is infinitely simple at metaphysical level, and does not have parts. In other words (for example), God doesn’t have love (which implies that God’s love is separate from God Himself); rather, God is love.
I don’t have a problem with this doctrine (in fact, I happen to agree with it!); what I have a problem with is the close-minded and simplistic logic that people have used to criticize this belief. One such criticism is the argument of detachment: If God does not have parts, then he is lacking nothing; thus, any interaction that God has with the world would be violation of his character, because it would equate to him lacking something. One example given of this, is that if God is complete, then he could not sympathize with humanity, since a God lacking nothing has no impetus to care. Since God cannot sympathize, he cannot love, thus violating the Godly requirement of omni-benevolence.
This particular argument is wrong on so many levels, all of which are due to the faulty (by unfortunately predominant) tendency for people (and especially Christians) to compare God to the human Ego:
1. The first mistake is comparing God’s motivation to human motivation– or perhaps even the assumption that God needs motivation. If indeed God lacks nothing, he wouldn’t need an impetus to care about humanity, he would simply so do because it is in his nature.
2. Secondly, it fallaciously relies on a static understanding of the nature of reality. If I were to posit, for example, that Humanity is the physical manifestation of God, and that God is the spiritual manifestation of humanity, then God would not need to depend on humanity to care– rather, God is humanity in spiritual form. This hypothetical example is probably the most robust approach to understanding divine simplicity; it’s known more broadly as “Pantheism”.
3. Thirdly, it assumes that sympathizing is prerequisite to love. Especially at the cosmic level, this is far from the truth. In fact, if God love is to be perfect (and thus complete), it would require that his love not be sympathetic (which is personal), as a love based in sympathy is corrupted by favoritism and personal bias. Perfect love would require God loving all that is because it is in his nature.
These three fallacies stem from the human Ego being wrongly projected on God. People think of God like they do themselves, and measure themselves against God to understand him. This is something the Bible has warned against several times, but do they listen? No!
Rather than trying to understand God by bringing him down to our level, why don’t we give God a little more credit?
Forcing My Hand
I’ve got a lot of homework to do, and yet I decide to stay up late, watch movies, and drink alcohol. Why do I choose to indulge in such foolishness, you might ask? Is it escape? No. Am I giving up? Most certainly not. So what’s the point of all this, other than self-sabotage?
Well, let’s just say I’m doing it to force my own hand.
I’ve found that when I feel I have a lot of options, I tend to be productive, while the inverse– no choice, I tend to be more productive. Unfortunately, even when taking two college classes during the summer, I have too much time on my hands, which tends to lead to being unproductive during the weekends. So I figure: why don’t I kill lots of time, so that I can get myself into a tight spot where I have no choice but to give it my all, if anything so that I can get all my homework done in time?
Sounds kinda stupid, doesn’t it?
Perhaps.
But I’ve found that although I do not work well with time constraints, I do work very well under pressure– that’s where I start really shining– when I realize I can’t meet the necessary objectives unless I go all out.
So here’s what I do to accomplish this “pressure”: I play it nice and easy, socializing with friends and family (both offline and online), play games, post blog posts, and watch anime– all the things that I would do if I didn’t have this ginourmous workload.
Then I wait until the last day to do my homework, and I realize that I only have one day left get get 24 hours worth of homework done…this is where the real magic begins!
See, I couldn’t possibly do all this homework under normal circumstances, but that’s only because I didn’t have to. As a result, I would be relaxed in my studying, essay writing, and problem-solving, and would end up making a lot of simple no-brainer mistakes. It’s when I have time to spare that I screw up. When I have no time at all, on the other hand, I perform to my absolute best, because I don’t have a choice.
This, my friend, is the ultimate advantage of forcing one’s own hand!
Sublimating “Craziness” Into Music
I’ve been analyzing music lyrics more in depth lately, and it’s occurred to me that most mainstream music is done by artists who express themselves as normal people would if they were crazy.
To clarify: IMO I think that most celebrities are mentally ill people who have successfully sublimated their craziness into creativity.
However, if a person is hardcore crazy, they will not be able to creatively express themselves in a way normal people could understand (trust me– I would know!)
In order for such a creative artist to be commercially successful, they would have to find a way to make sure their audience connects with them in their music, which cannot be done if the music is presented in its raw form.
So in order to close this gap (which I think of as a “language barrier”), an artist must think as normal people would if they were crazy (i.e. a normal person becomes temporarily crazy when faced with the death of a loved one, loss of a high-paying job, being held at gunpoint, or other difficult-to-adapt-to circumstances).
By thinking as a normal person would think if they were crazy, a music artist can close the gap that would otherwise prevent the music from being appreciated.
A classic example of this is Disturbed– although their music talks about a lot of hardcore crazy shit, they present it in such a way that most metal-oriented young people could appreciate to some extent.
Know Your Audience
In the past few posts I’ve focused more on the merits of creatively expressing oneself in a manner that has been optimized to be appreciated by the target audience. This post is dedicated to explaining the reason why that it’s important for the artist, be they a blogger, journalist, poet, novelist, musician, director, or playwright, to know the target audience– and, more importantly, why it’s important to create shape, and present your content with that audience in mind.
For a creative genius (like myself), it’s absurdly easy to creatively express oneself, but when I say “express”, I am referring to the raw form. Sure I can appreciate my works, but until those works are refined, clarified, and modified to a form that is more appreciable by the target audience, my “masterpieces” are little more than philosophical babbling and loosely-connected chaos.
To transform you creative works from “chaos” to “art”, you must change it to a form that can be appreciated as such by the target audience, and that is the most important reason why you must know your audience: For anything you create to be considered “art”, there must be someone (besides yourself) who can appreciate it as being art, and that cannot occur unless you are able to change your art into something that both of you can understand and appreciate (or at least “feel” like you can). To make that “connection”, you need to know who you are connecting with, so that you might understanding how to best connect with them.
Or another way of putting it:
There is only one fundamental difference between “Idea” and “Art”: “Idea” is only appreciated by the one who thinks it, whereas “Art” is appreciated not only by the one who created it, but by all those who observe it as well.
Love Versus Lust
This post is a follow-up to Illyria:
Telling the difference between love and lust is probably one of the most difficult lessons to learn in life, and one that many (perhaps most) never learn. Part of the reason for this difficulty is that most love is built upon lust– lust is initial sexual incentive, and love builds upon the emotional and spiritual depth that making memories (both sexual and platonic) will cause, at least in long-term relationships.
The difference between lust and love is that lust is built upon sexual desire and love is built upon bonding memories. But how do you know when mere lust has transformed into love, or if what you are feeling for someone is lust or love?
To know this, we must know what lust really is: a chemical addiction. When you feel lust, the feelings are often very similar in symptoms to “doping” oneself, and that’s because the effects are almost exactly the same.
When you are sexual attracted to someone (which trust me, does not necessarily have anything to do with their body– that’s part of why distinguishing love from lust is so difficult!) Your brain sends signals to produce endorphins, which in turn unblock the dopamine pathways. As a result, a person feeling lust (which in its more extreme forms is referred to as infatuation) will feel most, if not all of the effects and addiction of being “high” on drugs.
For example, to quote from my Illyria post: “It was all very chemical– the “high” of which I admit I became addicted to. Every time I was around you my heart beat fast, and time slowed down almost to a standstill. It was surreal– not only time, but our very surroundings were irrelevant when I was with you.”
But lust is not love, clearly! So where do we know where to draw the line between the two? When does lust transform into love?
Somewhat surprisingly (for me at least!), It’s when all of the feelings that we thought were “proof” our “being in love”…go away. When a person is “in love”, in other words, what they are feeling is just infatuation. Until you stop feeling those symptoms: butterflies in the stomach, rapid heart beat, time slowing down, lightheadedness, endorphin rush, dreaminess, fantasies– until all those symptoms and feelings go away, you are not feeling love, but lust.
When all of those things go away, but you still feel strongly for that person– that’s when you will know that you lust has become a truer love. In this sense, then, love can be considered a lust that has matured. You still love them, you just don’t need sexual or chemical attraction to prove it.
In the beginning, lust is usually a necessity, to ensure that the connection between two people does not become dead. Just like a caterpillar craves food, people’s cravings for each other are often insatiable in the beginning stages of the relationship. But also as a caterpillar builds a cocoon and transforms into something free, independent, and mature, so must those that want to truly love another transform their own lust into love, that their love might be free and independent of sexual desire; only a love more refined and mature than what lust can provide will stand the test of time.
To quote Shakespeare, “Love’s not Time’s fool, though rosy lips and cheeks within his bending sickle’s compass come”*
Note: in case you’re wondering, “rosy lips and cheeks” refers to lust, and “bending sickle” refers to manhood; the analogy here is that a man uses his “sickle” to “harvest” the beauty of women (obviously by penetrating them), whereas “compass” refers to women that a man would see as attractive. The idea is that whereas with lust, a man would given in over time by having affairs with other women who come his way (show up on the compass of his “sickle”), a man truly in love would not be “time’s fool”, and in spite of all the “rosy lips and cheeks”, would “bear it out, even to the edge of doom”.
Here is the full text, which I believe provides one of the most romantic definitions of love:
SONNET 116
Let me not to the marriage of true minds
Admit impediments. Love is not love
Which alters when it alteration finds,
Or bends with the remover to remove:
O no! it is an ever-fixed mark
That looks on tempests and is never shaken;
It is the star to every wandering bark,
Whose worth’s unknown, although his height be taken.
Love’s not Time’s fool, though rosy lips and cheeks
Within his bending sickle’s compass come:
Love alters not with his brief hours and weeks,
But bears it out even to the edge of doom.
If this be error and upon me proved,
I never writ, nor no man ever loved.
Social Dynamics
One of my first posts that seriously addressed the issue of social dynamics was the 20+ page long “Popularity” post. This was followed up with several posts, among them “Points of Authority” and “Silence is Golden”. Since then, I’ve evolved my understanding of social dynamics and the importance thereof, but the reasoning postulated in “Popularity” still hold true; but so that you might understand where I’m coming from, this post is going to approach things from a more practical perspective– that is, rather than looking at the issue in terms of popularity, I’ll use the “appreciation” angle– that is, what does one need to do to be appreciated?
Well first and foremost, for a person like myself, who’s primary motivation in life is creative expression, there are two primary concerns that should be addressed:
1. Am I expressing myself creatively to my fullest potential?
2. Is that creativity being appreciated by others as much as it could be?
In particular, I am lacking a sufficient ‘answer’ to the second question; my creative efforts are not even close to being appreciated by others– even my greatest of works are not appreciated by my closest of friends– they try to understand, but fail to even scratch the surface.
It’s not my friend’s fault, it’s mine. I have not expressed myself in a way that they could appreciate.
Why? Because I never bothered to take that into account.
I thought, “I’ve got great thoughts? This kind of profound thinking is so rare, that people will jump at the chance to read it, and be inspired by it!”
What I didn’t realize, is that it’s the other way around. Great thoughts can only be appreciated by others if they are conveyed as if they were common sense. People can’t connect with writing that is presented like a PhD thesis. Only a PhD graduate could understand writing of that quality, and someone of that status won’t take an amateur philosophy blogger seriously– they are more interested in “the authorities” who have even bigger degrees and years of research and books published to back them up. If I want people to appreciate my writing, I’m going to have to dumb it down.
This doesn’t just apply to writing, of course. It applies to my life in general. If I want people to appreciate me, I’m going to have to learn to “know my audience”, So that I can convey “who I am” to people from all walks of life in a way that each of them can understand. The key to being appreciated by people (which translates to “popularity” when amplified to a global scale) is the ability to merge “who I am” with “who they expect me to be”, in a way that everyone can appreciate.
Notice that I didn’t say “who they want me to be”. One doesn’t have to make people happy to be popular– I think that Hitler proved that one. Popularity isn’t about happiness, it’s about expectations– specifically meeting the expectations of others.
Applying this to “appreciation”, if you want people to appreciate “who you are”, “what you do”, and “what you believe in”, you’re going to have to present those things in a way that anticipates and preempts other’s expectations. You have to know what they will think of you before they even meet you, and most importantly, present yourself in a such a way that conditions them to expect things of you that you want them too— that is, make them expect to appreciate you as a person, to appreciate what you do, and what you believe in; by taking these steps, you will prepare other’s hearts to fully appreciate these things…they will already appreciate everything you do, say, and present– even before you have “shown” them.
BTW, there is a phrase for this proven leadership tactic: the proverbial “planting a seed”.
As I first said in my Popularity post, I don’t want to be popular, and that is the only reason why that I am not. Although I can tell you right now this is the absolute truth (if I wanted to be, I could boost my own online “brand” recognition 1000 times over within a month if I really wanted to), it nevertheless is still a “cop-out”. Why? because it avoids the otherwise necessary question “Why / Why not be popular?”
Well I’m well adapted to being a loner, and I have no real need of friends, so that’s the #1 reason right there. Secondly, I’m well aware of the fact that humans have no unconditional value– that is, there is nothing that I can do to make myself truly irreplaceable. Finally, I know that anything that I do to make myself attractive to others will only be illusionary– if I knowingly change my social character to appeal to others, they might see me as “real” but I myself would feel fake.
Out of those three reasons, the last one is actually the most paradoxical (and thus fallacious) in its reason: How can I justify not living my life to appeal to others, if I myself know best of all how the human social character is shaped by others in the first place. If they changed their character to create mine, is it not only reasonable that I change my character to reciprocate that creation– to inspire the world as they have inspired me?
But there are far more convicting reasons than this for changing myself to appeal to others– reasons that ultimately have nothing to do with the world, but with reality itself: My “audience” is not just my girlfriend, my family, or society– my audience extends far beyond those bounds. I am ultimately catering to an audience of One: The cosmos itself.
Calculated Risk
Due in part to my mental illness, I’ve been holding back on life, because I know that when I’m excessively stressed, my judgement becomes poor, and my actions tend to become dramatically risky. Because I don’t know what I will do when I go past that limit, I try to play it safe– but as a result, my life becomes stagnant and mediocre.
So What I am focusing on right now– what I need to become most educated about, is this thing called a “calculated risk”.
Just like the methodology people use to take profits off the stock market, anyone who wants to be successful, whether they have mental illness or not, must allow for a certain margin of risk to unlock that extra bit of performance necessary to be ahead of the proverbial curve. In my case, I’m going to have to learn to let go of myself more, and let loose some of my “craziness”, that I might be able to effectively apply it to creative ends.
Sure people will think I’m weird– on occasion, I might even be thought crazy (no surprise there!), but it’s all a means to an end, that I already know will be justified, because I know just how much that I am capable of– I know just how amazing I am, and how incredible and profound the things that I will do could be. But to accomplish such things, there must be some “unleashing of the beast” within me…I just need to plan ahead, so that I might be able to calculate the risks involved– that way, I won’t be a liability to myself any more– I’ll be an investment.
I suppose that’s part of what my project Ego Engineering is about– turning “risk” into “investment” when it comes to self-improvement (or more specifically, “self-engineering”).
Creativity cannot thrive in a controlled environment, but neither can be exist in a reality where no standards can define it; in this respect, creative expression can be considered the product of a Balance between “Chaos” and “Control”. The ‘art’ of maintaining this balance is the source of the risks that accompany a lifestyle dependent on creative expression, which is the lifestyle that I desire to lead.
I’ve got a lot of rough edges to work out as I try to better express myself creatively, but until these areas are better refined (and so that these areas might be better refined), I’m going to have to take a few calculated risks.
What is the Level of Your Resolve?
If a person’s worth is determined by what they do, and there is no limit to what a person can do, what then determines their worth? It’s what they will do that counts most. It’s not the thought that counts– it’s the follow-through; and what determines follow-through? One word: resolve.
Anyone can be anything they want to be. Regardless of your background, upbringing, or social / financial advantages or disadvantages you might have been born into, it’s mind over matter. What you want will manifest in reality. But only if you want it enough!
That’s the only real roadblock on the path to success: willpower. Most people just “don’t have it in them” to truly succeed in life. They may think they do, but deep down, almost everyone in this world doesn’t really care about success that much. It’s more one of those “that would be nice”, or “people would like me more if” type thinking. No real reason– no meaningful resolve. Where there is no substance, there is no reality.
To quote a well-known Bible verse, “faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.”
One word stands out: substance. That’s the difference between “faith” and ‘hope”: faith has substance. If your conviction for success is mere superficial frosting to coat your skin, then it’s not faith– it’s just hope– wishful thinking.
If you want to live a fulfilling lifestyle in any way, you have to actually care– to have things in life that matter more than anything else– causes so important to you that you would die for them. What the level of your resolve is will determine the level of your personal success, so if you want to succeed, start caring.
The level of my resolve, even as I type this post, is minuscule and and immature, and my follow-through scarcely can exist beyond the heat of the moment. But I am at least resolved to become more resolved– and that’s a worthy start, i think.
Pushing the Limits
One of the things that people learn in the military, is that they don’t know their own limits. It’s easy to think that once “the going gets tough”, you are approaching your limit. But in reality, you are far from your limits– that ‘barrier’ is only the beginning! With a genuine resolve to push oneself to the limit (be it resolve by your commanding officer, or yourself), you will soon find that you don’t have any limits other than those your place on yourself.
When it comes to any kind of limit– be it physical, mental, emotional, social, or psychological– your only limits are those that you on yourself. If you think that you limited to being a weakling, you will always be one, until you decided that you can be strong. It’s all in the head– or more specifically, in your mindset.
The problem lies not in what you can do then, but what you are willing to do! Are you willing to cast away all fear, and put your everything into what you are doing. If you fail, it will be a major psychological breakdown– after all, putting everything into it means you will lose everything should you fail.
So you’ve got to have a mindset that is also stronger than failure. A resolve that says “I cannot fail.” So you will never fail– any obstacles or mistakes that you make a merely just another challenge to be overcome. You cannot lose– you merely have to try a bit harder each day to achieve your goals.
As you set for yourself impossible goals, it will always be tough; but as you continue to work towards those goals, it won’t be long before you realize how much stronger you are becoming.
Don’t let anyone (especially you!) sell your potential short– there is nothing that you can’t do — you just need to put your all to it, and eventually you will win, no matter what.
It’s mind over matter– have the mind of God, and God you will become.
Synthetic Egotism
Starting somewhere around the time I wrote my ground-breaking (and highly disturbing!) post “Agony”, I began to realize that my mind had begun to split between contradictory desires– essentially, that it was impossible for me to get certain things out of life without giving up other things I wanted…to try to achieve it all would result in a paradox, and ultimately, self-nullification. To move forward, I needed to make a decision: Either renounce the self (Antithesis; giving up on the self), face myself (Thesis; self-aware suffering), or Synthesis (Denial; ignorance of the self).
I was unwilling and unable to make a choice, and the more I tried to seek out a path through introspection and self analysis, the more complicating and confusing the issue became. Eventually this dilemma culminating in a fragmented mental-breakdown, after which I decided that I needed to make a choice no matter what, so that I could start “moving forward” in life again, lest I stagnate in a self-perpetuated existentialist mire.
But even then, I could not make the choice, and so with no other options left, I developed alter-egos as a coping mechanism– with three main ones:
1. Kurutio– associated with the Id. This self chooses the Thesis, or self-aware suffering. As an adaptive result, Kurutio is also a sadomasochist, and knows no limits when it comes to inspiration and has a grotesque curiosity for the most taboo experiences.
2. Th3g1vr– associated with the Ego. This self chooses the Synthesis, or self-denial and ignorance. Th3g1vr lets other people decide his identity, but at the same time has no actual identity; only a mask. By letting other people decide how he acts, and not taking himself seriously, th3g1vr is able to detach himself from reality, and become immersed in reality by “feeding off the dreams of other people”, rather than creating his own (as Kurutio does).
Th3g1vr’s has no real goals– rather, he believes that a fluid lifestyle, with no expectations of anyone or anything, is the safest (and thus the best) lifestyle. Thus, he just goes with the flow, and lets his environment decide just about everything.
But at the same time, the “self” that th3g1vr takes on is different from what he perceives to be his true self. Th3g1vr’s existence is very fragmented and unreliable, but can be divided into several sub-personalities, the main one of which is Nspyraishn:
Nspyraishn, although derived from th3g1vr, is actually a hybrid between the personality of Kurutio and that of Th3g1vr. I’ll explain this in greater detail later on.
3. Matthias– associated with the SuperEgo. Matthias is end-justifies the means type, and believes is giving up the self in favor of ambitious goals. Believing the self to be temporal and mortal, he seeks to do everything in his power to become immortal, and by any means necessary. Matthias has no heart or soul, believing these things to be animalistic sentimentalities that only create weakness. He also believes that manipulation is the most effective method of bringing about desired change.
4. Justin– the real me. Although I have all of these personalities, there is a real “Justin”, and if I were this person, I would probably be happiest, and by far the most “normal”. This self is very simple and undemanding, seeking only for an average life, average relationship, average kids– everything normal.
I have often thought about letting this self take dominance, but he always feels too “weak”. I am afraid that if I let this self take control, I will become who I once was– gullible, selfish, naive, and superficial.
So then, what is the productive end-result of these multiple personalities?
Well, I’ve charted out (to some extent) the dominance each personality will take at each stage of my life. For example, NspyraishN will have dominance until I get out of college and get a successful career;
Then Kurutio will take over, fueling my creativity– thus allowing me to release many different forms of creative expression (poetry, novels, music, videos, etc.), and providing the impetus for global travel and all sorts of interesting life experiences;
At that point I will have become “cultured” enough for Matthias to begin constructing his master plan for world domination (or becoming God, whichever comes first), providing immortalization in its raw form;
Finally, somewhere around the age of 40, I will settle down for an early retirement, and let Justin take over;
I just haven’t decided whether I will let Matthias raise my kids or “Justin”.
(Note: Th3g1vr never ‘takes over’– it’s not in his nature. to begin with, he doesn’t actually have a ‘self’ — the closest thing to that, as mentioned earlier, is “NspyraishN”).
Synchronicity of the Soul
Synchronicity is “the experience of two or more events that are apparently causally unrelated occurring together in a meaningful manner.” I have a very unusual (and independently-derived) understanding of the soul– or more specifically, of the relationship between the body and the soul. I believe that (as I dub it) “Synchronicity of the Soul” occurs every night while we sleep (and particularly when we have dreams), and that all of the things that we perceive as “meaningful” (i.e. communication, emotions, logic, spirituality, intuition, instinct) are the direct byproduct of body-soul synchronization.
I first developed these beliefs in my posts “My Beliefs about Reincarnation/Evolution”, with the dream synchronization aspect of this covered in “Dreams”. I suggest that you read those posts first so you can better understand what I will talk about in this post.
Towards the end of my “Dreams” post, I added the following disclaimer:
“update- the thoughts below, although make wonderful food for thought- have (in my mind) been slightly overshadowed by some information I have recently become aware of that suggests that dreams are far more likely to be primarily caused by stress. In some of the examples below, you may find that stress would make even more sense in those circumstances. Furthermore I myself have admitted to living a worry-free lifestyle (although in contrast to the life as should living in relation to my “illnesses” and medical history)- and consequently, I have had almost no dreams overall. This further evidences stress as the predominant factor.”
Since then I have been gradually refining my understanding of the synchronization of the soul, with my obsession with the Essence of the Soul (which itself is a search for Beauty) proving to be the single biggest piece of the puzzle.
My search for understanding the Essence of the Soul has finally culminated in a better understanding of the causal relationship (Synchronicity) between the body and the soul, which I will impart to you below:
One of the important things I realized in “Dreams”, is (as explained in the above disclaimer) that dreams are indeed often caused by stress, but what I didn’t realize at the time is that this stress factor actually supports the notion that dreams are the result of soul synchronicity.
To clarify, first we must ask the question that most people take for granted: What is stress?
Stress can indeed cause dreaming to occur, from the human side of things.
But I have good reason to believe that, when looking at the bigger picture, it’s actually also the other way around: Stress is the byproduct of soul-synchronization, and (as explained in “Dreams”) that synchronization occurs during the dream state, and the most intense synchronization occurs during conscious dreams.
As first recognized by Aristotle (and was somewhat independently-derived by myself), humans have three different souls: The plant soul (the “vegetative” soul, capable of reproduction and growth), the animal soul (the “sensitive” soul, capable of mobility and sensation), and the human soul (the “rational” soul, capable of thought and reflection.)
I’ve continued along this line of thought, and taking it several steps further:
First of all, if there are three different souls, they must refer to three different states of existence:
1. The Vegetative soul is an entirely physical existence.
2. The Rational soul is an entirely spiritual existence.
3. The Animal Soul is a state of existence that is the hybrid of the vegetative and rational states.
Secondly, all thoughts, experiences, and feelings that we have are the direct byproducts of soul synchronization.
Thirdly everything that is considered meaningful (logic, emotions, spirituality, intuition, instinct) are the manifestation of the aforementioned byproducts– and are more specifically the active perception of:
a) The spiritual self that has been corrupted by physical phenomena
b) The physical self that has been corrupted by spiritual phenomena
This is where stress comes into the picture:
In scientific fields, stress refers to “the consequence of the failure of an organism – human or animal – to respond appropriately to emotional or physical threats, whether actual or imagined.”
My definition of stress is a bit more grandiose, although it’s consistent with the above definition, at least in regards to the physiological aspects. I divide stress into three different but interconnected types of stress, namely “physical stress”, “spiritual stress”, and “instinct stress”.
“Physical stress is the consequence of the failure of a body (animal or human) to adequately meet the needs of the corresponding spiritual self, and / or unable to respond appropriate to emotional or spiritual threats.”
“Spiritual stress is the consequence of the failure of a soul (animal or human) to adequately meet the needs of the corresponding physical self, and / or unable to respond appropriate to emotional or physical threats.”
“Emotional stress is the byproduct of Spiritual and Physical stress, and manifests in forms that are considered “meaningful”, such as logic, emotions, spirituality, and intuition.”
The forms under which Emotional stress manifests could collectively be called “Instinct”.
Here then, we have three different kinds of stress, two of which are exchanged in the soul synchronization process (which mostly occurs during the dream state), and the third of which is a byproduct of Physical and Spiritual stress, a hybridization of the corruption of the Physical and the Spiritual self.
Although I acknowledge three different types of stress, what I refer to as “Emotional stress” is the only kind of stress that can be actively perceived, and so it is the stress to which the more accepted definitions of stress are referring. So I’ll clarify this type of stress first:
Emotional stress is the direct byproduct of physical and mental corruption; this is caused by two main things, one of which is supported by the mainstream definition of stress (although I’m sure that was not their intent!):
1. “The consequence of the failure to adequately meet the needs…”:
Both the soul and body have needs, and the purpose of soul-synchronization is to meet these needs. Both the soul and the body are programmed with identity markers (the body has “DNA”, while the soul has an “aura”), that provide the blueprints for both the body and soul, and also help ensure that both spiritual and physical needs are met.
However, the Soul and the Body are both in a state of gradual evolution, which means that each time they synchronize (usually during the dream state), the DNA and aura of each person changes a little bit; these changes in the blueprints result in physical and spiritual corruption.
2. “The consequence of being unable to respond appropriate to emotional or spiritual threats”
This is type of stress results from the effects of the environment– that is, the effect that “everything else” has on “you” (where “you” refers to the soul being analyzed).
Every time you go to sleep, and your soul synchronizes with your body, the necessary information about the body and the soul (that which is necessary to maintain the integrity of the body and soul, and ensure that all the “parts” thereof are functioning properly) is extracted from your DNA and aura. The DNA and aura are then merged with your present self, essentially updating your Past Self (who you were the last time you entered the dream state) to your Present Self (who you are becoming as a result of the changes in your physical and spiritual self up until “now” (where “now” refers to the moment of synchronization, which of course occurs during the dream-state.)
The problem with this is the “change” part: Your soul can only anticipate who you were, as the future is unknown, and does not become “The Present” until a synchronization occurs to update the future to a “Present State” (which upon the next synchronization would be updated to become a “Past State”).
I think it’s important to point out this fun little fact. Studies into dreaming show that when a person has dreams that involve experiences they’ve actual had, they are usually in great deal based upon their thoughts and activities two days ago (often exactly two days ago).
This is something of a confirmation of my theories listed above, as (if my ‘calculations’ are correct) it takes two days to recall a memory of the past in dream form: one day for the experiences to be converted from future to present, and another day to convert the present to past; memories then cannot become long-term memories unless at least two dream-states have occurred after said memories have been experienced.
Moving on:
Because both the soul and body can only understand what which it has already experienced, if new experiences occur, which include spiritual, bodily, and emotional experiences, the soul and / or body needs to “deal with them”. Thus, anything that is considered “new” (that is, unexpected) is what the scientific definition of stress referred to as “threats”.
New experiences are “threats” because of the corruption that they inevitably cause. If a person’s human body encountered unexpected “spiritual forces” (examples of which will be given below), their body will not know how to deal with it, and will be forced to adapt. As adaptation is the primary component of evolution, one could say that “New experiences” are the cause of evolution, be they good or bad.
Although physical adaptation is good in that it promotes growth and maturity, it has the side-effect of gradual “mutation”, that is, the altering of genetic code (DNA).
On the other hand, if a soul encounters unexpected “physical forces” (examples of which will also be given below), their soul will not know how to deal with it, and will have to adapt. Such adaptation is the source of “spiritual evolution”, and the consequences (be they good or bad) are mostly unknown.
Spiritual evolution is probably a good thing overall, but it also has a crucial side effect of altering the soul’s spiritual code (aura).
As you may have noticed, changes in the DNA or Aura of a person are mostly caused by “threats” (that is, unexpected phenomena).
3. Finally, there is the corruption caused by the Emotional self, which is itself the hybridized byproduct of mental and spiritual corruption. Interestingly enough, the Emotional self produces its own kind of corruption, resulting in a new type of phenomena, which although built upon a pattern by its very nature, is extremely unpredictable. I suppose another way of putting it, is that the pattern the Emotional self is built upon is Chaos itself.
Although chaotic by its nature, most phenomena caused by the Emotional self can be categorized as “Instinct”.
Unlike the Spiritual and Physical self, the Emotional self does not feel threatened, as it does not synchronize (its very nature is to desynchronize), and so has no need of expectations– it actually prefers the unexpected, as it feeds off of such phenomena in the first place. Although the Emotional self is not directly the cause of corruption, it does amplify its effects.
(note: this post is incomplete)
This “corruption”, known in the real world as “Stress”, is the ultimate source of many physical and spiritual phenomena;
Some of these phenomena are “good” (benefits the human body and / or soul):
(insert list here):
Some are “evil” (detrimental to the human body and / or soul):
(insert list here):
Some have a relatively neutral effect, and are mostly a curiosity:
(insert list here):
Some benefit the soul at the expense of the body, or benefit the body at the expense of the soul:
(insert list here):
To be edited in:
this post is in retrospect likely one of my biggest breakthroughs in my analysis of dreams. this posts is also supposed to help explain why we die. so, read on if you want, to find out why you will someday die!
the parts I didn’t do include the part where I explicitly explained why we die. basically, we die because of a gradual deterioration of the synchronization process. we die because the soul and body are unable to synchronize properly to begin with, resulting in disease and infection…and as the corruption grows greater with each day (due to the copy-of-a-copy-of-a-copy effect) we die a little bit more each day.
premature death (i.e. to getting shot, stabbed, or jumping off a cliff) occurs because the physical changes that occur are too incompatible with the existing soul– the stress caused by such phenomena cause the soul to go into shock, unable to properly adapt to these changes. Conversely, spiritual stress (i.e. “possession”, mental illness, a stroke) can cause the body to go into shock (i.e. a heart attack/coma), because the body is unable to adapt to the spiritual changes.
Aeon Flux served as part of my inspiration for these theories, only in the case of Aeon Flux, the cause was reiterative human cloning. according my theory, by contrast, humans naturally clone themselves every day to synchonize with changes both internally and of the environment. either way, both in Aeon Flux and in reality, we would be dying for the same reason
True Beauty
Every once in a while, I get this mysterious feeling– one of Oneness, of transcendence, and of purity. It’s the nexus between me and God, me and the World, me and Myself. The search for this feeling, which I first had while watching the anime Strawberry Panic, has become something of an obsession for me. I found that the most compelling evidence of it was “the point”, and the question that led to understanding of “the point” is ‘Why?’– which lead to my increased interest in Causality and Motivation.
As my interest in understanding and experiencing this feeling continued to grow, I finally found an outlet by which to express it: fiction. Upon the suggestion of a friend and mentor, I began work on Essence of the Soul, which is– among other things– the journey of exploring this same feeling. By experiencing the feeling through writing, I was able to gain a better understanding for it, and achieve a greater unity (nexus) with this feeling; Now I have finally been able to find a word for it: Beauty.
I am not referring to physical or emotional beauty– the kind of feeling that comes from spirituality being converted into physical form (the resulting corruption producing the hybridized byproduct “Instinct”). I’m referring True Beauty– the spiritual epiphany which Gnosticism referred to as Gnosis, that Buddha referred to as Nirvana, and that Plato referred to in his “Symposium”— which in the epistemological sense would be known as “Truth”.
This True Beauty, which is the ultimate source of everything that we live for (whether we consciously know it or not), is the Essence of the Soul, and as such the ultimate goal with the characters of my novel are striving for (even though they will not realize it until the end of the novel.
It is love for the sake of loving, and on the more cosmic scale, is the ability to find a pure beauty (that which possesses a transcendent level of purity and sacredness) in everything. Even though I have not yet experienced this feeling in its full magnitude and glory, I do understand what it means to see this kind of beauty in everything. It is a wonderful feeling– akin to that of gaining a small (yet profound) glimpse of the mind of God. To understand the Mind of God through pursuing this Beauty– that is my ultimate goal. For I must know God to know my purpose, since it is He that endowed me with that Purpose.
The Paradox of Egotism
I have done quite a bit of writing in the past few years, and the vast majority of that writing is wholly egotistical in nature. By “egotistical” I’m not referring to egoism, or self-interest– egotism refers to the tendency to think and behave as if the world revolved around you. That is exactly how I think and act– as if I were the only person of value in the world, and that therefore my thoughts are representative of the thoughts of the world.
Of course I didn’t know that– it’s not as if I deliberately thought of things like that– it’s been a mostly subconscious thing– until now. But up until this point, everything that I’ve said and done has been quite literally egotistical; as a result, everything that I’ve said to other people has been merely “thinking out loud”, and everything that I’ve done equate to no more than selfish impulses.
It is because of this paradoxical mindset that I have been unable write effective essays, and more importantly, has prevented me from being able to truly understand what it means to “respect” someone. When “it’s all about me”, everyone else has no influence on my actions or words, and the result is a distorted lifestyle devoid of any “real” meaning.
Why is egotism a paradox? Egotism is motivated by the conception that my thoughts and actions are more important than anyone else’s, and so therefore I should act accordingly. This is well and good, but it fails to account for the source of value: Everyone else.
Like it or not, value is the end-product of the communication (in various forms) between people– or on a more cosmic scale, between the universe and itself. For this reason, nothing can be of value unless I take everyone and everything into account. I while back, I promised myself I would do just that, but it seems that I’ve lost sight of why this was so crucially important. Because my own value is determined by my consideration and understanding of other people, it’s paradoxical to live an egotistic lifestyle, because I myself do not have any value unless I value everyone and everything else (to some extent) too.
When I was thinking about what I did wrong with my essay (for English class), it occurred to me that I hadn’t develop my writing to appeal to a particular audience; I hadn’t even considered an audience when writing. It was just me thinking out load– articulate but ultimately raw ramblings masked in the form of an essay. I wasn’t asking the essential questions– “what will the teacher think of the essay”. Instead, I thought “of course she’s like it– it’s my writing.
This kind of thinking is not only a distorted mindset, but also one that is detrimental to my personal success in life. No one can do well in life unless they take other people into account. Success comes from other people being able to appreciate your work, and it’s not reasonable to expect other people to understand your own raw thoughts. That’s what I haven’t been doing that I really should be– I’m not filtering my actions according what other people will think. I filter everything according to what I think, and this self-centered mindset is going to get me nowhere.
If I want people to appreciate my work, I’m going to have to “interpret it”; I need to find out what my “audience” is interested in, what their level of education is, what their philosophical viewpoints are– what they think. To seriously influence, and especially to inspire other people requires knowing your audience as much as possible. I need to learn to anticipate my readers’ / audience’s reactions beforehand– otherwise my writing is wasted on them. By knowing what they will think before they even think it– I will have the social momentum I need to inspire people…
And as it turns out, the best first step to getting to know people, is to value them: their opinions, their perspectives, their needs, and who they are as a person.
My Views On Mental Illness
1. Medications are the devil, and if they must be taken be considered “the lesser of two evils”– any people on medication should get off of them as soon as possible.
2. Therapists usually have no idea what they are doing, mainly because they fail to appreciate the beauty of human diversity and the complexity of the human brain. As much as society wants it– there is no “system” by which everyone can fit in– there are no treatments that will work well on most people– even if it might seem that way from the surface.
3. As evidenced by #2, all patients should be treated as individuals– utilizing past experience should only take a supplementary role. If a therapist would try to apply past work as the primary resource, it will inevitably result in cognitive bias, as well as present a severely limited and inherently distorted understanding of that patient.
4. As our understanding of the psychology of the brain is mostly theoretical, the effects of medications are mostly subjective and evidence limited by case– there are no guarantees of anything, regardless of the symptoms. Thus, people taking medication are “guinea pigs” that are paying for psychiatric research (and for the luxurious lifestyles of the top dogs of the pharmaceutical industry)
5. The biggest fallacy (by far!) in the mental health field is the tendency to judge a mental illness by it’s symptoms. That is, if the symptoms go away, they are “cured”. This misunderstanding is the #1 most destructive thought pattern I have ever encountered in regards to mental health.
Anyone with a minute amount of knowledge of what a “symptom” is, knows that symptoms are proof that the body is fighting *against* the disease– the body is healthy because it’s immune system is responsive. Without symptoms, we wouldn’t get sick – heck, we wouldn’t even feel pain (pain is also a symptom!)- we would just die.
Applying this to mental health: just because they don’t act crazy (exhibit symptoms of mental illness) doesn’t mean they aren’t
Furthermore, if a person has symptoms of mental illness, and they are given medications, often the symptoms go away.
Was the problem fixed, as the professionals would have you believe?
No!!!
Quite the opposite!
Congratulations– you just killed their psychological immune system! Now they have no protection– and you think you’re helping them? You’re just helping yourself!
BTW that’s a great deal of the reason why suicide is a common side-effect of antidepressants.
6. As evidenced by #1, medication (I reiterate!) are the Devil! (’cause they kill your mental immune system)
Other bad side effects of medication passed over:
Loss of control
Feelings of disillusionment/fakeness
Can never feel truly happy– ever!
Interferes with self-exploration/analysis
Tendency to conform to the environment
As it turns out, all of these things are things that society wants, which brings us to
7. Medications don’t exist to help people– they exist to control them.
Some people call it a conspiracy theory, but I’m just going off my own experience– as an ex-medication user and ex- ward of the state (aka ‘the system’
8. There is a great deal compelling evidence (some of which dates back to the dawn of civilization) that suggests that mental illness can be a good thing– and it has been linked with creativity and innovation for quite some time.
What’s Wrong with my Writing?
First a little background:
As some who follow this blog should know, I am attending college at San José City College. I’m doing pretty good (for the moment) at Algebra, which I was least confident. So naturally, the subject I was most confident in, English 1A, is the one I’m getting less than an “A” in.
Now anything less than an “A” I will not tolerate! I’m a perfectionist like that. But the point is that clearly, despite my huge amount of informal experience writing academic essays, I am severely lacking the skills of writing essays.
Or am I?
No– in reality, I am not. I can write amazing essays off the top of my head, which following a bit of revising and proofreading (mostly revising, mind you) will get me an easy “A”.
So, you ask, why would I turn in an Essay which, although I knew was good, was one such that I already knew in advance that I would be graded harshly on?
Well, let’s just see it was an experiment.
An experiment to see how far I would get in the world if I did everything raw. After all, almost everything that I write, brilliant though my writing might be, is extremely raw by its very nature.
Raw and subjective– that’s what my writing is.
So I guess in that way my teacher served as a model for the world. The conclusion was quite interesting: If I were to put my all into everything I am creatively, but present that creativity in its raw form, I would quite literally equate to “average” in my overall worth to the world. A genius whose merits are mostly cancelled out by his seemingly delirious idealism and mystically far-fetched perspectives. A waste of talent who nevertheless contributes to society to a modest degree. That’s what I would be.
So it goes to show that without proper control, all the creativity in the world would be wasted on me.
But then again, this wasn’t about my potential and how to use it.
This little experiment was about principle.
You see, I knew that my writing was too raw for people to appreciate, but I didn’t know how raw. So I decided to write the best essay I possibly could about the topic I gave, without compromising myself to please other people. The truth, and nothing but the truth.
And so the C- that I got on that essay (despite it saying right on the evaluation sheet, “very good writing”– talk about mixed messages!) helped me to learn a very important lesson, which although I already knew deep down, I needed someone else to confirm it for me, because otherwise I would be too stubborn to accept it:
What I learned: that when it comes to Essay writing, it’s not about what you think– it’s never about what you think. It’s about what they (the reader(s) think. That’s all that really matters– is what the readers think about an essay.
After all, that is what essays are about– right? It’s about communication. What’s the point of writing an essay, and having someone read it, if they are unable to appreciate the words? If your readers can’t understand or appreciate what they are reading, what’s the point of them reading it at all?
Yeah in some ways it’s bullshit– you’re the salesman, and you are trying to pitch an “idea” (your thesis) to them. You’re going to have to candy up the words and use language that is appealing and makes the essay sound, feel, and flow good. But then again, that’s ultimately how all communication (in the real world, as supposed to my own idealistic one) works, isn’t it?
The real problem with all of my writing (well, it really wasn’t a problem considering) is that I wasn’t writing for people to read– I was writing a literal journal– a record of my thoughts, essentially thinking out loud. That’s really nice and all, but isn’t it time to take it to the next step, and start focusing on getting everyone else to understand and appreciating my writing, instead of a few people struggling to decipher it and the rest of the world moving on? I have acquired a wealth of knowledge through this little journey of mine– isn’t it time that I start spreading it around using words that people can actually understand?
There’s nothing wrong with my writing, as it turns out.
What’s wrong is the way that I present it! Time to put more effort into PR, I guess 😛
Welcome To My World
I don’t want to be part of your world.
You, who feels compelled to be loved by others.
You, who needs a purpose to do something as simple as live life.
You, who deceives everyone else because you can’t be honest with yourself.
You, who can’t cope with who you really are, so you project your insecurities on the rest of the world.
I’m sick of your bullshit.
When I say “you”, I am of course also talking about “me”. That little fuck is in us all, after all.
And if you just thought anything negative about my profanity just now, you should probably know that it wasn’t the *real* you that thought that– it was that little shit inside who *made* you think like that.
If Satan is in all of us– it’s probably the part of us that makes us judge others, and bullshit others.
He’s the one that makes us try to be someone we’re not.
Well at least right now, even if it’s only in the form of an alter-ego, I am something close to the real me. And I can honestly say, that I definitely do not want to be in your world (and by “you”, you know what I’m talking about!)
Why can’t we just be honest with each other? And by honest, I also mean “frank”. Fuck that “sensitivity” bullshit– all that these secrets are doing is desensitized us to reality!
The truth only becomes more melodramatic when it’s kept hidden!
If you think that keeping secrets will protect people– remember: you’re only trying to protect yourself! Well if you think that this corrupt way of thinking is protecting you, think again!!!
The more that you hide from the truth, the more vulnerable you become! Just as people (and babies, if you follow studies) living in a sanitized environment are more vulnerable to disease, you are more vulnerable to be hurt if you keep secrets! Never thought of that, huh?
Why are you so determined to live a lie? Are you that blind to what could be a better life? Has the world that you grew up in brainwashed you so much that you can’t escape this nauseating room labyrinth of distorted mirrors?
Well at very least, I know that I am free. I am honest and candid. And I know that if it’s “selfish” to say and do what i want, then I guess that being “selfish” is what it means to be human.
You are the one who’s inhumane– because you can’t even be honest with *yourself*.
Welcome to my world– where honesty is not just a necessity– it’s a lifestyle!
What’s The Point?
I have often written about “the point” (mostly in th3g1vr), an elusive epiphany that comes and goes, that represents the ultimate meaning of life. It takes the form in emotions and thoughts, and in mysticism and illusion. Realizing the point is the key to attaining true enlightenment.
So what’s the point?
I’ve attributed “the point” to several phenomena, but these are just means by which “the point” is manifested. To sum up such a cosmically vast understanding of things with one unified “Theory of Everything” would be impossible, but to express it in a more poetic fashion:
It’s “looking at the bigger picture”.
To know the point means “different ways of looking at the same thing”, “both sides of the coin”, “the outside looking in, the inside looking out”; to experienced the sensation that deep down, everything and everyone is all connected. That we are all the same entity shared by many bodies– that the only thing keeping us from complete social unity is our need for individualism. The we are one Essence– that we are the physical manifestation of God.
These are some of the ways that we might experience “the point”. I guess you could say that God is the point, and that the point is God– that through understanding and experiencing “the point”, we can experience and understand God.
But sadly, most of the time we all tend to “miss the point”. Missing the point is the direct source of all “sin”. This is likely part of why “sin” (from hamartanein) means “to miss the mark” — to sin means to “miss the point”, in other words.
And sure enough, “missing the point” is indeed the cause of all the bad things that happen in the world.
The world is at war because people forget that we are all the same person; people fight and bicker because they can’t see past themselves to look at the bigger picture. Because we miss the point, our lives are often wasted on the trivial pursuits of lust, power, and greed. One who looks at the bigger picture would realize that we have no need for these things– that ultimately, such pursuits are a meaningless waste of time and energy– just a distraction that keeps us from facing who we really are: God manifested.
That’s the reason why God hates sin so much. It’s because sin keeps us from manifesting his glory– it causes us to stray from his purposes. And it makes us alien to him, and alien to each other. In sin we are divided. In sin we are alone.
I am no exception– I sin every day. But to the best of my ability, I strive to rid myself of sin, that I might fulfill the purpose that God has designed for me– designed for us all.
Whomever reads this, I challenge you to try your very best to not “miss the point”, as doing so not only keeps you from understanding and appreciating God– it makes you alien to yourself and the world as well.
Illyria
The following is a closure of sorts to a ~10 month long off-and-on relationship:
_______________________________________________________________
When you broke up with me the first time, I couldn’t quite understand the reasons why? I felt that your actions were extreme and melodramatic– not only lacking sensibility and civility, but impulsive as well. I felt that the relationship still had potential, so I decided to wait for an opportunity to get back with you again– and sure enough, that opportunity came.
In the few days before we broke up came my first hint at the real problem, although I did not recognize it at the time: Both of us (although especially myself) were not experiencing love, but lust.
It was all very chemical– the “high” of which I admit I became addicted to. Every time I was around you my heart beat fast, and time slowed down almost to a standstill. It was surreal– not only time, but our very surroundings were irrelevant when I was with you. I wasn’t at Job Corps any more– we were in our own personal world of our own creation– or should I say, of my creation.
I did not understand all this at the time, and every time that you broke up with me, it was always for some bullshit reason– and a couple of those times, for no reason at all. Eventually the relationship soured to the point that I often thought that I was only getting back with you to find out why you broke up with me in the first place. As it turns out, that’s exactly what I was doing.
Don’t get me wrong– I still love you. But I recognize that this love is no real– it’s just me projecting my own desires onto you. But at the same time, there is a you that I do love– it is this other side of you that I really fell in love with. I love Illyria.
Illyria– that mysterious and wandering shadow character of yours. I may be able dull the memory of you, but I will probably never forget Illyria, because she has become part of who I am.
Although you created her, the Illyria that I know is not only the product of you, but also a hybrid of a character whom I once knew as “Airielu”. Before I knew it, my love for Illyria had merged with my love for Airielu to become a single entity; it is this person that I love.
And so it is through this turn of events (both fictional and real) that I understand that my love for you is also fictional. But even if our love does not exist in the real world, I still believe it to be real– to whatever extent that fantasy can provide anyway.
But now at the very least I can move on with life, because I finally have my closure. I finally know the reason why you broke up with me all these times. I don’t think that you know though, and so I hope that you can bring yourself to read this post, that you might understand as I do now:
The reason you broke up with me every single time was the same reason:
Because you couldn’t be honest with yourself.
I know more than anyone how honest of a person you are– and although you make mistakes like everyone else, your integrity is commendable. So it was that I found it hard to grasp why that you lied to me so many times. It didn’t make any sense– you seemed to believe your own lies.
That it turns out was the real problem.
You had this vision of yourself– an innocent, demure, loving, and mature lady. But as it turns out, Illyria always seemed to get in the way of that image. Whenever she came out, you had to face yourself for who you were, and that self included Illyria. So, being unable to face yourself, you broke it off with me instead.
I too would have loved that innocence– I fantasied about it many times. But you know as well as I do that’s not the real world. It’s nothing more than fantasy.
But at the same time, I recognize that, although my love for you was genuine, it was not love.
Just as people I knew pointed out (and deep down, I already knew), it was lust.
I was addicted not to you, but to what I felt when I was around you. “I loved loving you”, in other words. It was a beautiful feeling– filled with passion, mystery, and an ironically carnal innocence.
So I guess in the end, even though I was the one who was getting broke up with, we were both being dishonest with ourselves. You, because you wanted to be someone that you aren’t– and me, because I just wanted to experience what it meant to be in love, even if it meant that my love was not entirely genuine.
But closure aside, I must confess that although I might not lust for you anymore, I will always love Illyria.
Deciding the Future
When I think about my future, I can see it clearly– it all makes sense! I can tell you what’s going to happen 2, 5, 10, and even 20 years from now in vivid detail, and it’s a future worth having– a future worth working toward.
But there’s one problem: I have more than one future!
Every time that I contemplate the future, there’s always at least 4-5 different futures to choose from. They are all good futures, but I can’t have all of them. I can’t be dominating the world by living in a small town. And I can’t raise the perfect child by dominating the world. Nor can I have the most loving relationship with my future wife and still put my 100% into raising the perfect child.
It just doesn’t work that way– I have to find a way to prioritize these different futures of mine, lest they cancel each other out and I am left will no future at all.
Even as I think about the future, and know with surety that the events I envision will come to pass, there is an intense and lingering anxiety that plagues me– the feeling that my present path does not match my future. It’s like I have a future, but the path that I am presently leading will not take me to my future…if i were to go my present route, I would only venture further into the unknown void, my own uncertainties about the future causing the very self-sabotage that I sought to prevent.
One of the most important lessons that I’ve learned in the past few years, is that nothing good comes of compromise.
Regardless of what your idea of success is, if you don’t go after that ideal with your whole heart, you are only cheating yourself. Perfection isn’t about how great or how unique or how independent your life is. Perfection is about taking the life you are living, and live that life to the best of your ability.
Everyone has their limitations as a person– I know this all too well. But fortunately, it’s not the scope of one’s life that makes a person great– it’s how good of a steward they are of the life they did choose for themselves (or in many cases, the life chosen for them).
So if I expect to have a good future– a happy future– I can’t have multiple futures. I need to decide! Which of these futures am I going to manifest?
No more compromising– just choose a future, and live life already!
Inspiration Personified: Story of my life
I’ve had a lot of people tell me that I’m the most complicated person they’ve ever met, and perhaps they’re right. But if I were to shed away my skin, take off my mask, and expose my inner-most being, there would only be one single thing that defines who I am: Inspiration.
Inspiration might be simple for some, but for me it is infinitely complex; it is this complexity that makes me who I am today. It goes far beyond mere influence or creativity. Inspiration holds a much higher place in my life: it’s even more valuable to me than truth itself.
Inspiration is the air that I breathe, the bread that I eat, and my meaning and purpose in life. Everything that I live and strive for is built upon the desire and resolve to be inspired, and to inspire others.
In the past four years I have had a great deal of experiences, both wonderful and terrible. I’ve experienced the personalized environment of home-schooling, the warmth and supportive enrichment of going to private school, and the suppression and frustration of a continuation school. I know all too well the hardships of group homes, and have suffered from every kind of abuse. I have had the pleasure of falling in love, more than once, and it is these memories that I will most cherish.
When I look back in retrospect, I wouldn’t change anything that’s happened to me in these few years– not even the bad memories. Not just because they are part of who I am; there’s a much more important reason: because they inspire me.
Life is overflowing with valuable knowledge, lessons, experiences, and emotions. But at least for me, to truly experience all that is life, it’s crucially important to learn to accept the good with the bad.
By developing this ‘good with the bad’ mindset, I’ve opened myself up to more opportunities than a sheltered life could ever hope to appreciate. In learning to accept both sides of the proverbial coin, I have opened up my mind to the world, and have also opened the world up to my mind as well. Whereas before I could only see life linearly, a logical progression of daily activities, now I can see the bigger picture; inspiration has given me a ‘bird’s-eye view’ of the world.
When this soul-searching quest of mine began a few years ago, I was naïve, lost, and mindless. I was used to people telling me how to live my life, schools telling me what to learn, and church telling me what to believe. Life was a no-brainer, and I was happy with that.
Then reality came crashing down on me, and the bliss of ignorance was no longer an option. Once I realized that I didn’t really believe in anything– that I only went along with what other people did, I knew I couldn’t believe in anything anymore; not like I used to anyway.
I needed to set a new standard for truth. Something that was independent of conditions or authority. Something that could be more powerful than facts or evidence. I needed a foundation so transcendent that no one could say or do anything to take it away from me.
That “something” was inspiration! I now judge truth not by evidence, authority or by facts, but by the magnitude of influence that it has on my life; and more importantly, the impact it has on the world.
There is no relevance to the validity of things when it comes to this measure of truth. Rather than judging something based upon reputation, authority, or empirical value, inspiration lets the ‘work speak for itself’. There are certain ideas so powerful and pervasive, that they permeate every facet of Society, every culture, and every ethical code.
I believe that truth that is measured by its impact on Society is very real, because its worth is proven through the effect that it has on people. So I say, “let the world decide what truth is!”
I don’t expect many people to truly understand the thoughts that go on in my head, or the values that I hold, but I hope that at the very least that the world might be inspired, just as it inspires me.
Bipolar Lifestyle
For most people, emotions are a daily part of life– something often taken for granted. And many bipolar people (God-forbid most?) will also take their emotions for granted– sabotaging their own lives and the lives of those around them in the process.
But for those intellectual folk who have bipolar or other mood disorders (like myself), we can’t take our emotions for granted. Living the bipolar lifestyle and getting away with it requires a lot of self-knowledge, and quite a bit of reality tweaking– particularly when it comes to our emotions.
If you think that emotions are real, then you don’t know what it’s like to be bipolar. None of our emotions are real– well okay, I’ll be a bit more subjective about it: I don’t think I’ve ever genuinely felt anything. Or perhaps I’ve just forgotten what to feel.
For someone who will predictably go between über-happy and über-depressed, for no apparent reason, of course it doesn’t feel real. It’s like that I’m acting from a drama script– only I don’t know what the script says until after I act it out.
Everything I feel is fake– so as I result, I can never genuinely feel happy. Imagine what it’s like for your entire life to be drama– no comedy, no romance, no action– just drama. That’s bipolar lifestyle for you.
Sure I put on a good face, but it’s not like I have much of a choice anyway.
No one will understand– sure they pretend they do– they get on this empathetic high horse and pet their own “altruistic” ego by pretending to care…they are so good at acting themselves, they actually believe that they care most of the time. Because they want to care…problem is, it’s kinda hard to care for someone if you don’t quite understand what the problem is.
Then again, maybe the problem isn’t just with me– maybe it’s with everyone. Maybe I’m just experiencing these symptoms because I’m closer to the solution: What if no one is real– that everyone is just pretending? What is emotions are just the byproduct of failed communication, and we are so infatuated with the mystery that we don’t bother to solve the case?
Well enough about what-ifs; the issue here is that, for one reason or another, nothing I feel is real…well, at least when it comes to feelings that can be found on a shrink chart. But there are feelings that I do know are real, and these feelings are one of the primary focuses of my book Essence of the Soul.
The feeling that I am primarily concerned with right now is that of Oneness— the strong self-awareness that we are all integrally connected to this interdependent “Fate”– that we are essentially all part of God manifested.
Because this feeling is real to me, I am seeking it out, and I strongly believe that everyone should, to whatever extent they can, seek out this feeling also.
Human emotions are unreliable, temporal, and compromised by nature; these facts are made crystal-clear for those of us cursed (or should I say, blessed?!) with bipolar. Oneness, on the other hand, is perfect in nature…Oneness is eternal.
One For all and All for one
One of the things that I’ve realized in this little existentialist journey of mine, is that there are two different types of truth in this world: Truth of the One, and Truth of the All.
As I was trying to say (but likely ended confusing all who read it, myself included!) in my post “Social Vitality”, there are two types of Intuition (or Spiritual Truth): Emotional truth, and Rational truth.
In relation to this post, it should be noted that Emotional truth is derived from the All, whereas Rational truth is derived from the One. Social Vitality explains my reasoning for this, if you are able to keep pace with it (I barely can, and I wrote it!).
For this post, might I present a brief retrospect:
As I was struggling to find truth in being a Christian, or in any religion for that matter, it occurred to me that I was more of a Christian at church than I was at home, regardless of my philosophical stance at the time. Essentially, it was easier to be a Christian “In the Presence of God”. Now then, what do I mean why this “presence”?
When a person is in a large gathering, there is an immense amount of collective energy in the air– and that energy becomes even more apparent when people are sharing it with others– with their words, actions, and– most important, through their unity.
There is no spiritual force more meaningful, more powerful, or more real than unity. To be part of the All– to become one with the All– that is a drive that infects all of us.
Even the most fervent of anime otakus, whom are known for their anti-social nature, morbid isolationism, and for their self-perpetuated outcast status– when gathered together in an anime convention, will be the most enthusiastic of the crowd when it comes to social functions. In many cases, they will be the life of the party, showing off their expansive catalogs, synchronized choreography, and the most elaborate cosplay outfits.
It is human nature to be part of something bigger than ourselves: a cosmic purpose, an eternal journey, “God’s plan”– we all need somewhere to belong in this world. But at the same time, we all want to be valued as individuals, and that is perhaps the biggest dilemma we face, at least from the existentialist point of view.
While I was living a more isolated lifestyle, I did come up with a lot of good writing. However, I’ve found that I also came up with perhaps even better writing when in a social setting– at least initially.
To clarify: Whenever I transitioned to a more social setting, I became more inspired, and so most of my biggest breakthroughs came directly from social contact. This would imply that social truth is, at least for me, more productive. But that’s not quite the case, as the inspiration did not come directly from the social contact; rather, it came from the transition to social contact.
One of the most important things that I’ve learned about the nature of reality, is that the world is best appreciated when one is able to look at both sides of things at the same time. For example, one can only appreciate light when there is darkness– thus, the best way to appreciate both at the same time is either through a shadow in the light, on a light shining in the darkness.
That considered, I can safely say that the best way to appreciate social truth is through self-truth, and vice versa. The best way to appreciate the One is through appreciating the All, and the best way to appreciate the All is by appreciating the One.
To paraphrase Hegel, “The soul is on a never-ending journey to lose itself that it might find itself.” To me, the meaning of this statement is clear: Humans communicate with others that they might know themselves, and they communicate with themselves that they might know others. We are social creatures precisely for the same reason that we are Egoist: to be the One (an individual) we must be the All, and so it is through our unity with the collective that we are able to retain our individuality.
It is for this reason that collective unity is in our best interests: By isolating oneself from the rest of humanity, even (and perhaps, especially) if for the sake of maintaining one’s individuality, you will actually be destroying that which you seek to protect most. When you are alone– at that you rely on to validate your uniqueness and identity as a person becomes irrelevant, as you have already rid yourself of the Collective– the only standard that you would have to confirm your identity.
By becoming one with the All, as ironic as it might seem, you are actually more of an individual than when isolated, because it is through the All that we achieve unity, and it is through unity that Oneness manifests.
Oneness, a goal which I hope that humanity is striving for and will achieve in the near future, is according to Hegelian idealism the metaphysical equivalent of become one with the mind of God.
In a more poetic sense, it is a unity so strong, so intimate, and so transcendent– that there is no difference between the One and the All. Or more accurately, the differences become irrelevant. We would all become one individual, but at the same time a collective of minds; the differences between me the everyone else would essentially become meaningless.
In order for such a drastic paradigm shift to occur, it would require a complete overhaul of values– Something that will probably will not even be possible for several decades, or (God forbid!) centuries to come. Society is built upon prejudice and is compromised by its very nature. If we were to attempt to achieve oneness on the present foundation, we could never achieve it– after all, perfection cannot be built upon corruption– “bad trees can only bear bad fruit”
We must start over from scratch– and nothing short of an apocalypse can provide a wake-up call cosmically horrible enough to facilitate the change required to build this “perfect world”.
One thing that worth noting: “Different ways of looking at the same thing”. Rather than trying to distinguish the One from the All (which inevitably leads to compromise, ultimately producing what we know as “Society”), try to understand what I mean when I say this: The One is the All, and the All is the One. It’s just different ways of looking at the same thing.
So rather than fighting to maintain our individuality, or struggling to fit into this self-compromised Society, let’s solve this Hedgehog’s dilemma by recognizing that at least in the grand scheme of things, we’re all part of the same thing.
Social Vitality
A while ago I had an epiphany and realized that emotion can only be produced through the transfer of spiritual energy, and that such transfer can only be accomplished through interaction with the environment.
In other words, emotion come from social contact.
Humans are built with social needs in mind, and that is why one of few things that makes us human (emotions) can only be felt in a social setting, and through social interaction. If one were to be completely alone, without anyone or anything to interact with, they would be completely emotionless– a biological robot essentially.
So you might ask, why is it that we can still feel emotions when alone?
This is due to this other cool thing that humans seem to have more of than- say animals: Memories. Because we can remember the experiences and feelings of the past, we can experience emotions even when alone, through a fun thing called “retrospect”.
But truth be told, the emotions that you feel when you alone are not anything new– they are just leftovers (byproducts) of what you have already felt in the past. When you are alone and you recall old memories (or something causes you to recall them), you recreate those emotions in your mind, effectively recycling them.
New memories, on the other hand, can only be created through social interaction.
By please note, by “social” I do not just refer to human contact– this expands to anything that contains spiritual energy, including humans (of course), animals, plants, and to some extent, inanimate objects. For everything that contains some spiritual energy, exchange of that energy is possible; it is this exchange of energy that makes social interaction possible.
Emotions are however only one of the products of spiritual transfer.
In its raw state, spiritual energy would be known as Chaos; this form (or should I say, lack thereof) is relatively uncommon, as spiritual energy has the innate tendency to want to be contains within an appreciable form. The initial form that all spiritual energy takes (before being refined and concentrated into particular objects) is Inspiration.
There are many different byproducts of spiritual transfer, among them empathy, creativity, emotions, and innovation; but all of them fall under one definitive category: Intuition.
This solidifies my previous assessments regarding the difference between Emotional truth and Rational (or logical) truth.
Both of them are byproducts of Inspiration (which in turn is a byproduct of spiritual interaction)– with Emotional truth being produced through the projection of inspiration, and Rational truth being produced through the extraction of inspiration.
Projection of inspiration is done by taking Chaos, and projecting it into an object, thus giving the otherwise raw energy a form. That form might be projected as a person, as a feeling, as a creative work (writing, music, film, play, etc.) or even as an invention.
Because of its spontaneous and emissive nature, Emotion truth is considered A priori knowledge.
Extraction of inspiration is done by extracting preexisting inspiration, and converting it into a more rational and concrete form. The forms that rational truth might take include science, mathematics, logic, philosophy, and various related fields.
Because of its dependence on preexisting inspiration, Rational truth is considered A posteriori knowledge.
Because inspiration is such a vital part of humanity (being the source, or “Essence” of everything that makes us human, I think I would be justified in saying that we are biologically programmed to be inspired. And because both kinds of inspiration can only be acquired through social interaction, it might be further inferred that we are biologically programmed to be social creatures: dependent on social interaction to acquire inspiration, and dependent on inspiration that we might through these needs ensure that a socially interdependent framework is maintained.
As determined by the above analysis, it would seem that social interaction is (for one reason or another) a necessity– a vital component of being human. And it is also the acquisition of spiritual (inspirational) truth which makes us human– such truth can only be acquired through a greater interdependence communication, intimacy, and (ultimately) bond with the environment.
The Real Me
Something that I’ve always struggled with, is being misunderstood.
People that know me (or should I say, think they know me) expect that I, like other people, have a static existence.
I do have such a character as this– one that can be measured, calculated, analyzed, predicted, and reliably known.
But that character, as I wish so very much for people to understand, is not the real me.
The real me is an adventurer, an explorer, a curious soul. I am a learner, a scientist, a thinker, a romantic. I am kind and peaceful– yes, but I am also mischievous and ambitious. I am very passionate about what I belief and what I do.
I love everyone and everything in this world to the fullest, and it pains me that this love is so very paradoxical. For one that loves all cannot be all– I am only one person, and all of the compromising in the world cannot change my own physical and psychological limitations.
I love you, just as I love me– but often my loves for everything and everyone else will get in the way.
I cannot know you, even as I cannot know me…but all the same, I want to know you– I want to know. For with knowledge comes intimacy and truth…
To know truly is to truly love, and so I wish to know all that is so that I might know what I am loving…that my love might also be truth, and that the truth that my love holds might be meaningful.
I am an abstract entity– one that is mysterious and meaningful. But just like π, I am infinite in nature and exist only to the extent to which I am known.
And known I am not, and so my existence is inherently illusionary.
It is this illusionary existence, however, that makes my life so beautiful!
Good with the Bad
I occasionally play the game “Freeciv” in my abundant spare time, and I’ve found that the way I play this game accurately reflects how I play the proverbial game of life.
Specifically, whenever I play freeciv, and something bad comes up: I don’t get the starting point I wanted, I make a crucial mistake, one up my important units (usually the explorer) falls into a trap, or I put so much priority on certain objectives that I end up doing poorly overall– I almost always give up.
I give up, because I am unable to accept the good with the bad. I demand perfection, and when I find myself unable to meet that expectation, I run away from my problems, unable to accept the bitter truth that I am not perfect, and will probably never be.
So rather than pressing on forward, striving to achieve my goal of perfection, I regress into a state of depression, and often stooping to such melodramatic and immature reactions such as self-sabotage and projection.
If I am to be truly successful, regardless of my goals, I must learn to accept the good with the bad, seeing life as a challenge rather than as a obstacle– pressing forward aggressively and passionately– that I might obtain all that my heart desires.
Up until now, I have been holding back– holding back because I am afraid of what it might mean to risk it all– everything– to achieve that which I desire most: perfection. All ambitious goals come with risk proportionate to its extremity; perfection, being ideal in its proportion, can only be achieve with an equally dramatic level of risk.
That is, if I want everything– I must risk everything to obtain it. I must give up everything, if I am to obtain all that I desire.
Being an insecure individual, and controlling by nature, the notion of letting go of everything– or of accepting everything (even that which goes against all that I presently stand for), it can be a scary one. After all, there is only one thing that I fear in this world– and that is Myself. So to let go of myself, even if for the sake of perfection, is quite the terrifying thought.
Perhaps I am not yet ready for such extremes– I know that I am not ready now. But at the very least, if only to be one step closer to that level of resolve– I should learn to accept the good with the bad, because it is through both sides of this metaphorical coin that I am able to truly understand, appreciate, and experience the glory that is living life.
Creative Explosion
When it came to creativity, I always took it for granted that everyone had creative ability in them– that everyone could think creatively. But as I became engrossed in the media world, exploring the different musical, movie, and literary genres, I became disgusted with how uncreative that the majority of the so-called “creative geniuses” of the world ended up being.
I say “ended up”, because I had no idea that creativity had become so stagnant, until fairly recently. If I had known this before, I would have likely put a lot more energy into exploringa my own creative potential– after all, it’s become exceedingly clear to me that even if I am not a creative genius, I am far more of one than almost anyone else it– because at the very least, my creativity has not become stagnant; if anything, it is accelerating. A creative explosion, waiting to be unleashed.
I have the unique ability to think up just about anything in my head, and communicate it in the form of writing, speaking, etc. To think up an original story in my head, and write down a script, a short story, or even a novel– I could do any of those in a month. I could do several of them in a year.
But to me, original isn’t good enough. It has to be perfect– profound– meaningful. And a story that contains the meaning that I wish to express is not an easy one.
However, having seen how most people are unable to appreciate perfection– to even comprehend beauty– it would seem to be financial suicide to try to make a living at writing truly beautiful stories. The beauty would, for almost everyone but myself, be completely lost in “translation”.
On the other hand, stories that are written completely off-the-top-of-the-head, intuitive bullshit– that’s what most people go for. These kind of simplistic thoughtless stories are what people can “understand” the best. That’s because stories that everyone can relate to is one of the easiest kinds of stories to write. No thought required– no philosophy or research– everyone already knows what you’re talking about, so you don’t even have to worry about choosing the right words.
I could write these kinds of stories without even thinking about it– and once my talent is recognized I would be making a million dollars a month– at least at the rate that I would be writing. Financial stability would be assured.
So why am I not writing these stories already?
It’s because I’m holding back.
I hold back, because I know that those stories will have no meaning for me.
But then again, deep down I know that’s just my Ego talking.
Rather than trying so hard to fabricate literary perfection, why don’t I just go for it? Even if such stories mean nothing for me, it would mean a great deal to other people– and what other people think, that’s more important anyway, right?
With the financial stability that writing for other people instead of myself would bring, I could have the leeway to write my own stories anyway– writing them as a hobby rather than as a way to make money.
It would be a lot easier to write without having to worry about money, anyway.
Feminist Rant
Just so that there are not misunderstandings, I am in all honesty a proponent of the Feminist movement, especially in regards to political philosophy.
The following rant deals with my concerns not over the emergence of the Feminist movement itself (which I feel in the long run has done more good than harm), but with the extreme lack of proper focus and integrity within the movement, which is preventing much of the positive aspects of the movement from being appreciated:
(Much of the content in this post is derived from “Two Become One”; that content has been removed from that post due to its lack of relevance to the primary focus of the post, and will be presented in this post instead)
The following statements are not directed at women– they are directed at feminists. I don’t personally believe in gender roles, and so although females might statistically make up the majority of feminists, this is irrelevant to the post.
Some of the statements I made may imply the opposite– that I am a strong believer in gender roles.
This is where I take the middle ground: A man should not consider himself a man unless he is willing to take on the man’s responsibilities, and a woman should not consider herself a woman unless she takes on a woman’s responsibilities. And in a relationship, a woman submits to her husband, and the husband supports his wife– figuratively, “wearing the pants” in the relationship.
I don’t think there is any necessary biological requirements for a person to identify as either role, but it is socially necessary to choose your own role (male or female), and stick with it, at least for that relationship.
Biology isn’t the problem– it’s the hypocrisy and melodramatic fickle nature of people that identify as men and behave like little girls, and women who identify as female but act like little boys.
Get over yourself, and make up your mind already– that’s what my emphasis is in regards to the corruption caused by Feminism.
Before I continue, some things that you should note:
1. Physical intercourse and its impact on relationships is not relevent to this post.
2. Feminism is not due to mistreatment or being condescending. If you actually read the post, you would know that women originally turned a blind eye to this– Why do you think marriage was a stable institution for so long?
The ultimate source you could say is “public awareness”– but even this is derived from feminism (i.e. gossip)
It deals with the exchange of power– If something is considered “normal” to those affected, they won’t resist. For example, until fairly recently, both practically and legally, it wasn’t technically considered abuse to beat a woman unless the rod was thicker than your thumb. “mistreatment” and “condescending” are opinions are completely relative, making that a mute point.
Moving On:
I have often thought about the reasons for the decline of marriage and traditional values in relationships, and one thing always comes to mind: Feminists!
Throughout history, relationships were always predictable, lifelong, [relatively] happy, and strong. Families stayed together, sex was frequent, morality was “a given”, and life was normal.
Then those damn feminists had to go and screw everything up!!!
Well, that’s a bit dramatic way of putting it, but in some respects, it’s not far from the truth:
The reason why that marriages were historically lifelong and stable were…because men had all the authority in the relationship. Women were conditioned to submit to their husbands, and their greatest joy (as was their duty given by Society) was to please their husbands in every way they could.
Generally, women in those days were quite happy with their role in Society, and would only become unhappy when their husbands would abuse, neglect, or mistreat thembeyond reason. Women in those days were not spoiled bitches who spend their time thinking of reasons to say their mates are abusing– In those days, they thought on the bright side– even living in denial if they were being abused, resorting to divorce or resistance only when they felt they had no other choice.
But in this present reality, women have eaten their own evil apple “Feminism”, and so have thrust the whole world into sin and destruction just so that they can get a little taste of what it means to be a man– to “be in control”.
What women don’t realize, is that they are not equipped for this kind of control– they are far too emotional for it. Every time a woman tries to control anything…everything becomes needlessly complicated and chaotic…For a woman to truly control anything is…well…impossible.
Yes– The world would probably be a far better place if wives submitted to their husbands. The selfish and petty need to “wear the pants” in a relationship has directly resulted in the majority of the sexual and social corruption in the world. If women weren’t so selfish, America would probably still be the best place in the world to live.
But in the end, that isn’t the real problem.
The real problem is that love, marriage, and relationships in general are built upon such a fragile system in the first place.
It’s only a dream
I’ve often sat there, disillusioned by the way my life is, often trying to convince myself that it’s only a dream– a dream that I need to wake up from. I rationalize and stress, putting together these puzzles in my head– hoping to come up with some solution that will be good enough.
But deep down, I know better. I always did. It’s just that the truth isn’t good enough– it never was.
I’ve found that I can make reality– the truth– whatever I want it to be. So I figure, I’ll make it something worthwhile– meaningful. Something that gives my life purpose. A collection of puzzle pieces that only I can solve. I’ll make my own truth, thus providing my own means for living…
Yeah I know that it’s not real. But then again, it doesn’t have to be.
What good is the truth if it bears no meaning? Fiction has proven to us all too convincingly that reality is overrated– that more meaning and truth can be found in fantasy and “ideality” than in reality.
The truth is emptiness– darkness– a melancholic hole. The truth is an abyss of darkness. No one wants the truth– no one can handle the truth. If I really accepted the truth, I probably would have committed suicide a long time ago. Because my life would not have any meaning.
So what then, is life about?
It’s not about the truth, that’s for sure!
Life is about what I’m doing right now– creating one’s own truth. One’s own meaning to life.
The more I seek after the truth, the more that I suffer– suffer until I become jaded to life, and in some ways, sickly sadomasochistic to it. By searching for the truth, my own life loses meaning, until I am not even willing to live.
What is the meaning in knowing the truth, if by finding it one loses the will to live?
It’s only a dream– why should I wake up from it? Why wake up, if it means that I won’t remember the dream anyway. I might as well enjoy it, while I still can! Trying to wake up from a dream before you are ready only brings suffering– I would know.
As the line between fantasy and reality begins to blur, I realize that I am better off creating my own truth– a truth that will make me happy.
I am not happy right now, so there must be something wrong with what I believe. Is there something so wrong with thinking about reality that way? I am who I am, and I know who I am, so wouldn’t it be wiser to follow my own instincts and judgment? I should do whatever makes me happy, because happiness is the product of fulfilling one’s purpose.
I’m not living out my purpose, so of course I am unhappy.
By trying to live out someone else’s life, I am causing myself to suffer, being caught between the dream I never had, the dream that I am trying to wake up from, and the reality that I refuse to accept. It’s a dead-end lifestyle–
Not mine.
Rather than cheating myself of living, I should learn to follow my heart. Even if I could do amazing things, if there is no authenticity in my actions, my actions are meaningless.
So if I am to live a meaningful life, I must live my life– my dream– not someone else’s.
Building Character
“We also rejoice in our sufferings, because we know that suffering produces perseverance; perseverance character; and character, hope.” – Romans 5:3-4
One of the most difficult obstacles in my life is my own lack of personal discipline and character. I know what I need to do, I know how to do it, and I know why I need to do it. And yet– I’m not doing what I ought, because I lack the personal discipline to follow-through.
I have so much potential– more than most people that I know do. Because I know who I am, I know what can be done, I know how to do it– and I am open-minded enough to realize that I can do it. But I don’t! Why?
I just get impatient– I want it all now, now, now! It’s right in front of me– I can taste it, and yet I have to wait for it! And at the same time, because I know I can do it already, I wonder “what’s the point”? If I already know I can do it, what is there to prove?
But that’s the thing– it’s not in the self-validation that I’ll be fulfilled– it’s in the fulfillment that I am validated.
So to accomplish everything I need to be fulfilled, I must build character– through strong habits, an over-achiever’s personal code, and most importantly, follow-through. To have the resolve and integrity to see it through to the end– to risk it all to demonstrate that I’m not all talk– that the ideals that I believe in really matter– that to believe what I believe really is that powerful!
Character isn’t about what you say, after all– it’s about what you do. It’s not about who you think you are– it’s about the man that shines through the mask– the person that everyone know you as. I want to be a man of solid and upright character– someone that people will look up to and ask for advice. As I am now, I can’t do that, because I’m “all talk”.
So here’s to building character– turning “ideality” into “actuality”.
Striking the Balance
In my life, there have always been two passions: creativity and academics. From a young age, I would enjoy education more than anything, taking pride in every “A”, and excelling at everything I set my mind to. But I also enjoyed every form of creativity that I knew of: singing, playing instruments, painting, sketching, poetry, and fiction.
If I could live a fulfilling life in both of these pursuits, I would truly be a happy man. But that is where the dilemma lies: to perfect my pursuit of both creativity and academics, I need to find where to “strike the balance” between the two.
That’s really what it’s about: Balance.
See, I’m an obsessive-type person, so moderation is not a concept I am very acquainted with. It’s hard to balance anything– I am quite inempt when it comes to this thing called “priorizing”.
So as a result, I’ve been struggling (and so far failing) to find this elusive Balance in my life for the past couple years or so. I’ve come quite far in this regard, but have yet to demonstrate any progress worth talking about, but as I know that I will get this, I’m just going to have to persevere.
I’m going to start going to college again soon (in less than a couple weeks!), and I need to work on prioritizing while taking classes– my personal success depends on it! I need to start building strong living habits, so that when I’m lacking emotionally, I’ll still be able to go through the “motions” in the mean time. A life where I’m only productive “when I feel like it” isn’t a life worth living, after all.
I have for me one trump card in regards to “striking the balance”: Sublimation.
To clarify: I noticed than when I am depressed, I am more creatively inclined, and that when I am manic, I am more academically inclined. Curiosities aside, these bipolar anomalies will prove very useful in regards to channeling both of these strengths into a lifestyle in which Balance can be achieved with very little compromise. (I hate compromise, as you should know by now!)
Thus, by leveraging these mood shifts, I can achieve “the best of both worlds”. When I am manic, I will sublimate the excess “positive” energy into my studies, and when I’m depressed, I can sublimate the excess “negative” energy into creative pursuits. Because I am far more creative when depressed, and far more academic when I am manic, This solution covers all of the bases, resulting in much greater efficiency!
For the Record: I’m depressed right now, which is why that I’m writing!
Celestial Resolution
When I first accepted the Lord into my heart, I was two years old, and was literally standing on the Bible as I sung the B.I.B.L.E.
But although my heart was in the right place at that age, I was to young to understand what it meant to be strong in one’s faith. For me, being a Christian was a given– I knew it was the truth, and the best way to live one’s life…Really, I didn’t have any reasons not to be.
I spent the next 16 years dedicated to the Lord’s work, studying His work, and walking in His ways. But after year 18 rolled around, I started exploring all the other possibilities, and was surprised to find that there were dozens of well-established faiths that I could believe in just as easily as what I had believed in all this time.
So in pursuit of a “better” faith, I renounced my faith, and became an Agnostic. From there, I explored all of the different religions and philosophy, and temporarily became an adherent to many of them, my spiritual loyalty as fickle as a fair weather fan.
In search of a more “cultured” life, I then lead a sinful life, indulging in liberal lifestyle choices, and living as if God didn’t exist.
But 10 months ago, I fell in love, and it was through that love that I began to truly understand what it meant to be a child of God.
These last 10 months, my thoughts would sometimes drift into doubt and anxiety about my girlfriend, but my thoughts would always magnetically return to feelings of love, and of the memories we share.
In the same way, even these last 4 years of spiritual prodigality, I’ve always kept the Lord in my thoughts: writing about him, debating, even writing apologetics in his name. Some of my favorite songs were songs about him.
Even while I was lost, I still loved him deep down, it’s just that I didn’t realize it, not until about a month ago.
I don’t live for the Lord to be accepted, to avoid Hell, or to go to Heaven.
I just want to have a relationship with my creator, and show Him how thankful I am for creating me by living my life for Him. I want to walk in His ways, and become perfect, just as He is perfect.
For me, there is no better purpose than the one given to me by God, and although I don’t know how I will get there or everything that I will do in the coming years, I’m very much looking forward to it.
In the coming years, I anticipate the miracles that God will perform in my life, and through my life. God will make a masterpiece of my life– I just need to let Him.
Born Again
Today I’m going to get baptized, so it’s very exciting. For some people, baptism is just a formality, and for others a profession of faith, but for me…it’s so much more! To me, baptism is one of the most powerful personal commitments (other than signing in blood!) that a person can make. It’s a resolution to eternally die to oneself, and live for God, through the strength of Jesus Christ.
I have extremely complicated beliefs– far from what might be considered “orthodox” or traditional; some might say that my beliefs are not compatible with Christianity. But that’s perfectly fine with me: I don’t think God cares about earthly matters like “compatibility” or semantics.
For the record: I didn’t become a Christian to be accepted, to avoid Hell, to live forever, or to go to Heaven. These are reasons that most Christians seem to be satisfied with, but I really couldn’t care less about those things (although living forever might be nice!)
The reason why that I’m a Christian– well, I suppose it has nothing to do with Christianity (the religion anyway). I just want to have a relationship with my creator, and show Him how thankful I am for creating me by living my life for Him. I want to walk in His ways, and become perfect, just as He is perfect.
Not only that, but as God’s creation, I have an obligation to live for Him– a duty to manifest His love for us. To be all I can be, and live a life worthy of his righteousness, that I may not be ashamed. In other words, as a child of God, I am a steward of the world, and an example to everyone of what God wants for all of us.
For me, there is no better purpose than the one given to me by God, and although I don’t know how I will get there or everything that I will do in the coming years, I’m very much looking forward to it. In the coming years, I anticipate the miracles that God will perform in my life, and through my life. God will make a masterpiece of my life– I just need to let Him.
The Sound of Music
note: This post is a clarification of certain aspects of my mind-boggling post “Idealism” (don’t read it unless you want a challenge and a severe headache!)
The famed philosopher and mathematician Pythagoras firmly believed that the world was built upon two things: numbers and music.
I happen to agree with Pythagoras, and have done quite a bit of thinking about this, following this train of thought and elaborating as I come to greater understanding. The following essay is the fruit of that thought:
I believe the universe to be made of two things: Numbers and Music.
But let me first clarify this one point- there is another element that, although it is not actually part of the universe, it is the means by which the world is understood: Light.
Light is the graph upon which the musical score of the universe is written, the record upon which the music is played, and the software upon which the music is interpreted. So although it is not part of the universe (or perhaps because it is not), it is the means by which reality itself is interpreted.
But please note that when I say “light”, I do no refer to physical light– not anymore than the universe is “physically” music; in this cosmic context, Light refers to what I call “Relativity”— the formless judge of all that was, is, and will be.
For Christians, that light is “Jesus”; for Heraclitus and the Greeks, that Light is “the Logos”, and for the Taoist, “Tao” itself.
Moving on to the relationship between numbers, music, and the universe:
1. Numbers are the notes that determine the lyrics, melody, and harmony of the music.
2. Sound is the beat, rhythm, amplification, and vibrato of the music, and the ultimate source of the music itself.
I refer to Sound as “the Essence”, especially in relation to the soul (e.g. Essence of the Soul).
How Relativity plays into all of this: It is the graph upon which the music is played, the software through which the music is interpreted, and the record upon which the music is played– but what does that mean?
It means that Relativity determines how the music is interpreted, what form the music takes– and, because it is the grooves of the record that is played, Relativity is also the Pattern upon which the universe is built!
Not to shabby for a force that is technically not part of the universe, huh?
Now, to apply these metaphysical perspectives to human psychology:
(This is somewhat covered in greater detail in an older post of th3g1vr, “Spiritual Energy”).
If God is the universe, and we are made in God’s image, that must surely mean that human counterparts must exist. They do indeed, and are programmed into the human psychology:
At least according to mainstream psychology, the human mind is split into two minds: the rational mind, and the intuitive mind.
1. Rational: produces logical thought, which itself is the offspring of the Logos. It is through this mind that we perceive reality, and develop thought patterns by which to deduce and choose our Path [in life].
The Logos is the organization of thought, and it can be considered God contemplating existence, and deciding the form that the universe, and everything in it, will take. In human form, the Logos is our nature.
In the Christian Trinity, the Logos would equate to “The Father”
In Freudian psychology, the Rational mind is called “the Ego”.
2. Intuitive: produces emotional thought, which itself is the offspring of the Essence (Sound). It is through this mind that we are motivated to actualize thought, and through it we are ultimately driven by sexual desires.
The Essence, in its pure form, is the energy the drives the whole universe and everything in it to exist, and to continue existing.
In the Christian Trinity, the Essence would equate to the Holy Spirit.
In Freudian psychology, the Intuitive mind is called “the Id”.
Finally, we have “Pythagoras’ Numbers”— the hard part!
The numbers are equivalent to Plato’s Forms; everything in existence has a Form attached to it, and that Form determines what kind of music it will make (and thus how it is perceived).
In other words, everything in existence projects its energy (Essence) according to the note(s) assigned to it by its Form.
The Forms, although inherently simple in nature, are perceptively the most complex of the three metaphysical devices that make up the universe, because of their interactions with each other.
For one who plays sheet music, this analogy makes perfect sense. After all, the hardest part about reading music isn’t the ability to read the grid or play the sound– The hardest part of reading music is the notes themselves!
Apart the Forms [notes] of the universe are relatively simple and easy to understand…– but the moment that they start interacting with each other, everything literally becomes infinitely complex. But it is also the complexity of these interactions that make the world such a beautiful, mysterious, profound place to live in and appreciate.
Applying this third aspect of the universe to the human psychology:
The Spiritual mind: Because of their collaborative nature, the Forms can only be truly felt in a Social setting– that is, when with Other people. The purpose of the Forms is the transfer, manipulation, and exchange of energy, and so it is through these activities that Your Spiritual mind will mature.
It is through this mind that we are able to appreciate and grow from the music the universe produces, and the means by which we pass on that appreciation and growth to the rest of the world (whether we like it or not!)
The Forms are energy in controlled form, and can thus be generically referred to as “conditions”. Perhaps one of the most powerful types of Forms: “the Soul”.
They are “thought clothing itself”– the true character of all that is.
In the Christian Trinity, the Forms would equate to the Son.
In Freudian psychology, the Spiritual mind is called “the SuperEgo”.
Well, that sums up my understanding of the universe in relation to music, and that of our psychology as reflected by the universe. Did any of it make sense to you? (I tried my best to simplify it!)
Utilizing Depression
As I’m sitting here today, punching out 4 blog posts in the span of a couple hours, I get to thinking: How is it that I can type up so much inspirational material when I’m so depressed?
Well, as irony would have it, it turns out that I’m so damn productive precisely because I’m so depressed!
I once heard a claim that “depressed people statistically have a more realistic perspective on reality than the average person. Well, I don’t know if that’s true, but at least for people with bipolar (like myself), depression can be quite advantageous when you utilize it correctly– that is, by sublimating it.
Taking this into context (and thereby elaborating upon this principle), Depression is a state of mind that when present, the person (i.e. me) who is experience it will wish to escape from it. This need for escape is precisely what one can utilize to make depression productive instead of the unhealthy but unfortunately more common self-sabotage response (e.g. displacement and impulsive behavior).
To better help visualizing this, I’ll appeal to the analogy of Aikido martial arts:
Aikido is a unique martial arts style that practitioners can use to defend themselves while also protecting their attacker from injury. It follows martial arts principles or tactics to blend with an attacker’s movements for the purpose of controlling their actions with minimal effort.
To apply this to utilizing depression:
Rather than trying to fight against your depression (which usually results in anger, impulsive behavior, and self-sabotage– I would know!), you should:
1. Slow down, and recognize the flow and power of your emotions.
2. Decide a direction and method in which to shape those emotions.
3. Ensure that the mold that you have chosen meets the needs of your excess energy
4. Redirect that energy and those emotions into something controlled and productive.
In this Aikido analogy, you are your enemy, and so by loving [Ai] your energy [Ki], you will [Do] much better for yourself, by conserving your excess energy, redirecting it into more practical efforts, and saving yourself from the harm that would otherwise result from impulsive behavior and self-sabotage.
So if you’re ever feeling depressed, remember to practice some Ai-Ki-Do today!
Changing the Rules
To follow up on my last post “Escapism”, what might be the solution to escapism? It’s pretty clear that, for one reason or another, nature itself has decided that it wants us to escape from reality. To paraphrase the Hegelian creed, “The soul must lose itself to find itself”– that is the nature of our existence.
But it became clear to me that escapism, in its raw form, is meaningless. Nothing we do has any meaning– it’s just the means chosen to escape from reality, nothing more.
So it occurred to me that, seeing as how we can’t change the game (it’s literally programmed into our DNA), we should instead change the rules by which this game of life is played.
In other words, instead of escaping from oneself (and by extension, one’s reality), we can overwrite that reality instead. This is covered in more detail in my blog dedicated specifically to solving this dilemma, Ego Engineering— specifically in the “Project Matthias: An Overview” page.
So to reference a popular perseverance quote, “If life gives you lemons [and you don’t like lemons], change the lemons into whatever the f*ck you feel like”
I’ve had a lot of setbacks in my life, and each time I’ve tended to react the same way: adapt, adjust, and go with the flow. I didn’t care for myself, so I couldn’t get hurt– people would think I was a pushover, but I was the one that was really in control. Because I had nothing to lose, I was invincible– untouchable– but ultimately, a jaded and heartless waste of talent.
To make someone of oneself in this world, it requires something which until fairly recently was foreign to me: Actually caring. While at Job Corps, I learned what it meant to actually care about myself, and a little bit about what it meant to truly care about other people.
I still have much to learn, but today I feel one step closer to actually making something of myself, even if it means I have to “change the rules” to do just that.
In fact, “changing the rules” [of life] is something that I look forward to!
Escapism
I have recently made a vow of celibacy, and– just as expected– I’ve not been faithful to it.
But fortunately, I know why I am driven to sexual behavior– and you can trust me when I say it has nothing to do with sex.
It’s just another form of escapism– a personal and presently insurmountable need for escaping from reality.
Masturbation, watching anime, listening to music, starting sh*t with people I know, sadomasochism– and even writing– these are things that I do to escape from reality. Even going to church and being a “Christian”– that is escaping from reality.
Regardless of whether it’s productive or just killing time, everything that I do– that everyone does– is nothing more than a means to escape from having to face oneself.
I don’t blame you any more than I blame myself (I don’t really believe in guilt to begin with, anyway), but see this as a seeming inevitability which someday must be overcome. Or at least accepted, and made use of (i.e. manipulation, or in my case, “Ego Engineering”)
We all escape from reality with our rationalizations, excuses, drugs, activities, and by turning our minds to mush with the osmosis of fundamentally useless media, and the obsession of trivial pursuits.
You know you’re lying to yourself. We all do.
But the last thing anyone is going to do is face up to it.
That’s not anything we want know about about. No one does.
We probably aren’t psychologically equipped to handle that kind of sh*t anyway.
…But let’s at least face up to the face that you’re lying to yourself. With your rational lies, you’re just rationalizing. It’s not real. You’re not real. In your need to escape, you’ve destroyed who you were, and even who you will be.
As one famous guy (Jesus) once said, “For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me will save it.”
Know what that’s saying? It’s saying that you’re not going to find any meaning in your own Ego– the harder to try to validate your own life, the more lost you’ll end up becoming.
If you want to save your Ego– find something to believe in, something that is so great that your very existence is irrelevant. A cause so great that you would be a fool not to give your life for.
For me, that “cause” is not Christianity– I knew that much a long time ago. But God is guiding me towards that true purpose for my life, and this is just one tiny step on the way to finding that path.
Control Freak
I’ve often speculated as to what the purpose of control is in this age of Society.
Originally control was instinct– a fundamental necessity for survival in a chaotic world. But in this age of civilization– why can’t we just be happy? Well, the answer to this is simple: Because happiness isn’t good enough!!!
We have to progress, have to evolve– we have to become gods. Yeah sure no one else thinks of it like that– but as I have traversed the psychology of both sides of the coin, I know better. We can bullshit ourselves and everyone else all we want– but no matter how you whitewash it, you know it, deep down. You want to be control– it’s a pride issue…
Because you know deep down…that control is the only way to conquer your world.
To account for everything– know what they’re thinking– know what you need to do to succeed in the world…This isn’t the innocent content world you were so sure was awaiting for you when you were a child. You can’t just go to college, get a decent paying job, find a wife, and settle down with kids like you used to. Because that isn’t good enough. You’re not good enough– not anymore.
With the rise of trance/techno music– we see it all so clearly. We need to control our lives more that ever. Nothing can be taken for granted anymore. We are waking up from this dream that our ancestors had the luxury of living in– a luxury we no longer have. Control is no longer a penchant of the upper-class members of Society– it’s now a requirement– for everyone.
You can always fight the system. But eventually you’ll realize that you can’t stop it– not unless you strive for the same control yourself. The only way to escape the direction the world is going is apathy– naivety– ignorance.
Perhaps then, ignorance is bliss? But it won’t be long before none of us can be ignorant anymore– not even if we wanted to. The whole of the world is Waking Up, and there is nothing that you can do about it.
It saturates our culture, everywhere. The Internet is accelerating the awakening, as the newly-awakened realize that they are not alone, and bloggers and revolutionaries all over the world spread this disease called “individualism” like wildfire.
Here then we have an alternate force– Collectivism– spread by the government and special interest groups…they know that as the individualists gain power in the media, and in the Web, that their power over Society will not hold for long!
Many think that Obama’s “dark” reign is a sign that Socialism is coming– that the end of the world is beginning: A one world government.
But truth be told, it was already here. The symptoms just weren’t appearing yet. With the rise of independent revolutionaries like myself, the whole world has already begun to wake up. The end of the world has already occurred– you were just too naive to see it. So we are initiating a series of wake-up calls so that you can get out of the flames before your world– your reality– is destroyed.
Remember: The symptoms are not the problem. The symptoms are the evidence that someone, somewhere– is fighting back. The symptoms are both the warning, and the proof that you are being protected.
Right now Socialism is winning. But as more and more individualists and revolutionaries join forces in this common fight against the destruction of human rights in the name of “National Security”, we will win out in the end. For although they are great and mighty in power, our numbers and intensity will overwhelm them.
May the pride of the individual prevail!
Forged Happiness
Lately I have been considering the existentialist question, “Will I ever truly be happy?” Granted, I only ask this question when I am depressed, as I am now, but even when I am ‘happier’, I still recognize that I am merely escaping from reality through displacement, sublimation, and various “distractions”, both productive and vain.
Whenever I confront myself with this question, it will always inevitably lead to unhappiness, as I am instantly overwhelmed with a deeply melancholic sense of emptiness, being forced to face myself and the fatalism thereof. I am ever-reminded of the fatalistic nature of this world– the inevitability that I will not be remembered forever, nor will my person ever be truly understood.
As I delve into unhappiness, I appeal to the fathers of existentialism, among them Søren Kierkegaard, who solved this dilemma of the lack of inherent meaning in life by maintaining that “the individual is solely responsible for giving their own life meaning and living that life passionately and sincerely“.
That is, because there is no verifiable inherent meaning in life, I am both compelled and responsible to create my own meaning to life, and through forging passion for the fulfillment of this meaning, I will have forged my own happiness in the process– effectively creating happiness that I can know with a certainty is real, because I am the one that created it.
But of course, such a route is not one that I could be satisfied in taking, because it has already become clear to me that I am not myself, and as such do not have the right or ability to forge my own happiness. I must instead first return to myself (who?), and through that journey I will have determine what it is I need to do to find that ever-elusive meaning.
It is for this reason that I started th3g1vr, and for that reason that I am searching for the Essence of the Soul, but it has become clear to me that these are answers that I cannot find by searching for them– they are answers that must be discovered, not rationalized.
After all, rationalizations are for achieving answers to the otherwise incomprehensible questions by taking meaning away from things– essentially forcing meaning to present itself by stealing that meaning from the questions.
There is one thing that I know of that has made me feel truly happy, and that is when I am making memories with the one I love, my fiance’ — especially when we are kissing.
I am aware that even that happiness falls short of the profound joy that I seek– but it has at least become clear to me that if I am to be truly happy, that happiness lies primarily in these three things: Passion, Intimacy, and Commitment.
It is then curious a thing that these aforementioned elements are indeed the cornerstones of Love, at least according to the Triangular Theory of Love.
For this reason– although this may not necessarily be the path for all that seek true happiness– if I am to truly be happy, my pursuit should be of the complete fulfillment and consummation of Love.
To love this beautiful angel with all of my heart, mind, and soul– in that love will I achieve the greatest of joys.
Time is Relative
As I struggle to try to find the time to do everything that I need to do (and everything that I want to do), I am ever-aware of the sad fact that there is never enough time! So in my anxiety to do everything in the world at once, comes a simple, yet effective solution:
I just need to change my perception of time!
See, time is relative to begin with– so if I need more time, I just need to change how much time that I have in a day! Forget 24 hours– let’s make it 48! How is this possible, you ask?
One example of how this would work: If I need twice the time, I will perceive 12 hours as being 24. Thus, everything that I need to do (including sleeping and eating) should be accomplished in 12 hours– but in my mind I will have 24.
With so little sleep, I will no doubt “oversleep”, will I not? Well of course I will, but that’s just because I’m not used to living a 24 hour day in 12 hours. That’s what relativity is about! One I get used to it, eventually I’ll get twice as much work done, and that (for me) will be considered “normal”– It’s almost cheating!
This of course can be tweaked as need be, and will represent a huge step in freeing myself from the reality that Society has enslaved us all in. It will be difficult, of course, but I think that my present resolve should suffice.
Of course, since I spent 15 minutes on this post, I just killed half an hour…
So, gotta go! 😉
Coordination Theory
Today as I was practicing learning how to type (I previously typed with two fingers; now I’m learning to type with eight), I realized that my primary obstacle for typing was the same as the main obstacle to my goal of perfection: The ability manage multiple variables at once. This is a little bit different from multitasking, as there is only one activity, but several variables must be accounted for and manipulated in order to perform proficiently in the given areas.
For example, In chess there are many pieces to keep track of, and so to be proficient at chess, one generally must be good at keeping track of all of these pieces simultaneously in order to perform well in the game. It is only one game, but there is a great deal of variance to keep track with, and so management of this data is the primary factor (other than strategy) in determining whether one will win or lose.
With the case of keyboarding, one must be able to know where keys are, and what fingers to push them without, without even looking at a keyboard. If you cannot do this, there will always be a physical limitation to how fast one can type– because your brain will otherwise have to continually recall and re-interpret that data; in addition, because the brain often makes errors (as is typical of a biological computer engineered with abstract thinking in mind), the keyboarding will always suffer in accuracy and speed.
The memory is not fallible either, but is far more reliable than the brain when it comes to concrete thinking. Thus, by memorizing where the keys are, one can type in one long flow– often even faster than it is possible for that person to read the data.
By completely memorizing where the keys are, you will have engraved keyboarding in your mind at the subconscious level. The advantage in this is that you will know what to type, where to type, and what fingers to type with– all of that– even before you realize what you are even typing.
In other words, by memorizing the functions, criteria, data, and methods of what variables that you are dealing with completely, you will turn skill into instinct, and knowledge into intuition. After memorizing something to the point that you know it “like the back of your hand”, you won’t need to ‘look at your hand’ any more to apply it– you’ll do the right thing without even thinking about it!
And as I know from personal experience, work done without having to think about it is work done efficiently.
Summing all of this up: by becoming extremely intimate with the targets, coordination comes “naturally”
To relate this to social networking: One of the biggest problems that I have had throughout my life is the inability to keep track of multiple people’s interests, activities, personal needs, and how they are of value to me. But I recently realized that this difficulty was mainly due to the fact that I never really bothered to actually get to know anyone– I just went with the flow of things.
But it only through intimately knowing individuals that one is able to properly keep track of their needs, and properly utilize their strengths (and weaknesses) so that the relationship might be mutually beneficial.
There are many areas of life that require coordinative and collaborative efforts to truly be successful, and so I now recognize this as a priority area to work on in my life, so that I will be one step closer to true perfection!
Inspiration
When I first started NspyraishN, the purpose of this blog was, is, and always will be inspiration. In fact, one of the last posts that I wrote on th3g1vr (the precursor to NspyraishN) essentially marked the transition from NspyraishN to th3g1vr. This however is covered in a another post, “Origin of NspyraishN”.
One of the things I realized as I delved into the experimental pursuit of self-knowledge, is that all of my own dreams, desires, and ideals were far too raw and chaotic for the world to understand or appreciate, and far too abstract for me to actualize for my own appreciation. In other words, all of my hopes and dreams are presently “naught but wishful thinking”.
Thus, whereas th3g1vr is focused mainly on the presentation of raw content as if it were refined thought, NspyraishN accepts the knowledge for the mess that it is, and takes upon the more humble role of “think tank” for more refined projects, such as Ego Engineering.
inspiration is defined (according to wiktionary.org) as: “The act or power of exercising an elevating or stimulating influence upon the intellect or emotions; the result of such influence which quickens or stimulates”
But the more common definition: “the drawing of air into the lungs”
This inspiration I wish to provide (both for myself and others); to breath life into everyone.
And ultimately, I wish to bring into being the holy grail of inspiration: a Perpetual Epiphany.
It will take a long time to achieve this goal and, as I said earlier in the post (might I reiterate!), my knowledge is far to raw to be appreciated.
Creativity (it could be said) is the synthesis between the thesis “Chaos” and the antithesis “Control”. The production of inspiration (which itself is the manifestation of creativity) would therefore be accomplished by taking Chaos, and passing it through a designated filter, resulting in creativity, and by extension, inspiration.
It is then my goal to refine my perception of reality to meet the expectations of both the world and of my own ideals, so that eventually I might be able to present these ideals in such a way that everyone can benefit from.
Delayed Gratification
When I was a child, my brother was sent to juvenile hall for molestation, and given treatment for his lack of sexual control– it was here that I first heard the word “delayed gratification”. I would not know exactly what it meant until many years later, although in retrospect my initial guess was pretty close to the truth.
That’s what this post is about: Sexual control.
I’ve found that although instinct tells us to consummate our sexual desire immediately, it’s far better to delay that gratification so that we might sublimate it, and in doing so convert mere raw instinct into the more refined and transcendent creative and spiritual energies. The gratification of sexual desire is only useful for reproduction and short-lived pleasure; but by converting that raw energy into these higher forms– the potential is limitless!
Mankind has been practicing sexual sublimation almost since philosophy has existed as an art, and it has happened all over the world too: Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, China, India, and Greece, and even the Jewish culture are known to emphasize it. It was never that common of a practice (only the most refined of character could practice it to begin with), but in that past few hundred years, its prevalence has become fearfully depreciated.
Some of the more prominent forms of sublimation are: Sex Magic, Freudian sublimation, Tantra, and Amor Platonicus (Love according to Plato).
Sex Magic is the use of sexual activity to store up sexual energy and direct it towards certain means. Because it’s usually done using rituals and magic, it can be considered witchcraft; however, “the premise of sex magic is the concept that the Sexual Energy is the most potent force the body contains and harnessing the unique states that arise through sexual activity may provide an experiential conduit for the transcendence of an individual’s normally perceived reality.” In this sense it can be considered a means for general sublimation, utilizing a combination of magic, rituals, and sexual activities as the primary tools.
It should be noted that the reason why that sex magic emphasizes actual sexual activity so much is because of the spiritual power contained in an orgasmic release– it can in this sense be considered “experiencing God”.
This train of thought brings us to Neotantra, which is unique in regards to sublimation in that rather than converting sexual energy to higher forms of energy, the primary emphasis of Neotantra is to delay sexual gratification so that it might be converted into a greater sexual experience when it is released.
It should be noted that Neotantra in its full form recognizes that “tantric sexuality is just one dimension of a spiritual path that is devoted and dedicated to the challenge of becoming aware, in every moment of our embodied lives, of the supreme flow of the sacred lifeforce itself—the Sacred Unity of Love.” In this sense, Tantra (and to a greater extent, Neotantra) can be considered the sexual application of Amor Platonicus philosophy.
Now, for the application of all this to my life: I have been having difficulties with my pledge to complete celibacy (no masturbation or pornography)– even though I have very little interest in actual sex, this is a habit I have been reinforcing my entire life, and to make matters worse. So I can’t very well force myself to stop– I must convert that habit to another one with similar desire.
For me, the best choice of replacement for masturbation is clearly sexual sublimation. By applying my excess sexual energy to creative and spiritual means, I can control my sexuality (instead of it controlling me), and in doing so achieve transcendence of the self. By delaying my sexual gratification, I will be able to appreciate that energy in transcendent form, thus experiencing God instead of appreciating mere primal instinct.
Sublimation, although the methodology is clearly diverse, can (in my opinion) be simplified to the Freudian interpretation: “Sublimation is the process of transforming libido into “socially useful” achievements”
On a side note, I find it interesting to note that Freud’s triadic system of consciousness, the Id, Ego, and SuperEgo, which themselves were derived from Aristotle’s three souls, are extremely similar to the Jewish mysticism, which clearly predates Aristotle. This would mean that sublimation is a practice encouraged by Judaism; in addition, some of the early Christians also supported it.
Finally, sublimation will prove very useful to my marriage in the future, in particular as exemplified by the teachings of the Kama Sutra (contrary to popular opinion, the Kama Sutra focuses on the cultivating of a healthy marriage– sex is only of limited emphasis in this text, and when it is, only in the context of marriage.)
Between the Lines
Since I began seriously writing down my thoughts (and particularly since I started using blogging as the medium by which to convey my thoughts), I have struggled greatly with one big obstacle: Misunderstandings.
Even now, it seems that my writing is misunderstood even by my most loyal of friends and the most initiated of my readers. On such example of this with be addressed in the next post.
I can’t force people tor read between the lines, I can’t make people open their mind, and there is an impenetrable mental block between myself and everyone else– a block that I myself can only begin to understand.
This block, often referred to as personal “Pride”, and what I came to know as the “Ego”, is an illusion. So as you might have noted (by due to this block, you probably didn’t), there is no way that I can penetrate a block that actually isn’t there in the first place.
This (to take a small detour) is also why I don’t like how much Christians emphasize ‘Satan” so much. As aptly presented in the Bible, Satan only exists if you believe in him, and to the extent that you believe in him. This preoccupation with using Satan to scapegoat “evil” in the world is only making Satan more powerful. Furthermore, you are what you believe in, so the more that you believe in Satan, the greater a foothold he has on your life!
The same principle applies to everything else. But I highly doubt those reading this would understand what I meant by that, so it would be a waste of time and energy to tread that path any longer.
Just take what I say with a grain of salt. I don’t believe what I believe to justify or validate anything– I believe what I believe to be inspired. So if you try to “personalize” or “identify” with anything I say, you will have completely missed the point, which only serves to perpetuate more misunderstandings!!!
This block, which causes the misunderstandings in the first place, is the same block that starts wars, kills people, ends relationships, causes misery and heartache– it is the source of all suffering.
What Buddha was targeting (and rightfully so!) was to first identify the source of all suffering, and then to cut himself off from it.
The source (which I doubt you’d actually understand either!): The self.
You are the cause of all suffering. If you would just get over yourself already– die to yourself, and “take up your cross”– you would realize that there is no suffering– that there is no self.
There is only the all, and the opportunity to experience it.
Moving on: learn to read between the lines.
I have no need to validate or justify anything I say, as any such attempts would not only be in vain, but inevitably miss the point anyway.
But as this blog is first and foremost a journal, I wouldn’t want my writing to cause anymore misunderstandings than it has to. So stop taking it so seriously– it’s just off-the-top-of-my-head “thoughts of the day”….Nothing more.
Two Become One
Perhaps the world would be a far better place if wives submitted to their husbands, and this selfish and petty need to “wear the pants” in a relationship in fact directly resulted in the majority of the sexual and social corruption in the world. If women weren’t so selfish, America would probably still be the best place in the world to live.
But that isn’t the real problem.
The real problem is that love, marriage, and relationships in general are built upon such a fragile system in the first place.
Why should we need control in relationships in the first place? The answer to that question may reveal the answer to this present dilemma.
One way that people have dealt with this marriage problem is what’s called an “open relationship”. I am personally a fan of this system, as it somewhat bypasses the need for control in a relationship.
Even though you are in a relationship, you can still “see” other people, kiss other people, even sleep with other people. Your partner, approving such a relationship, encourages you doing so, as it fulfills your curiosity, stimulates your sexuality, and promotes a deeper trust and honesty that would have been possible in a traditional relationship.
But this gets rid of the sacredness of traditional values even more, reducing sex from being the pinnacle of intimacy to just fulfilling evolutionary instincts; sex would eventually be seen as nothing more than “assisted masturbation”.
It is this devaluing of the spiritual intimacy of sex that I cannot tolerate: “Two Become One”– does anyone even know what that means anymore? From my studies of the predominant philosophical consensus among Christians– not even God’s chosen ones seem to understand the importance of this creed anymore!
And the funny thing is, that if people were to understand what “two become one” really means, there would be no need for anyone to be in control in any relationship– rather, control itself (other than self-control) would become utterly irrelevant.
“Two become one”– this is probably the most beautiful, poetic, spiritual epiphany that anyone in a relationship can possible hope to live their life by. It is the essence of what it really means to love a person with everything that you are.
What does it mean to become one with someone?
It means that you love them more than you love yourself.
It means that you would be dead without them.
It means that you would die for them, putting their life before yours.
It means that you love and trust them above *everything* else– even yourself.
It means that they literally are your body, heart, soul, and mind.
It means that without them you are nothing.
It means that that person is you, and you are them.
In short, “two become one” means quite literally refers to two people who love each other so much that they are most accurately described as one person shared by two bodies.
To have such a beautiful nexus, of two minds, two hearts, two souls, and (during intercourse) two bodies becoming one– there is nothing like it in this world.
That is what true love really is.
But sadly, in this present reality, that kind of love is nothing short of a miracle.
Good Intentions
It’s nearly 3:30 in the morning, and I really should be getting to bed, but lest I forget that which is most important, I should hold record to the motivations that have made me the man that I am, and that which ultimately will decide the nature and magnitude of my future.
I have always struggled with understanding my own motivations, which are so abstract that I often wonder if it’s really just all made up– bullshitting and rationalizations that I create as a defense mechanism; perhaps it is to hide from myself the emptiness that fills my heart, the awareness that in the end I am alone, the inevitable fact that nothing I do will be enough to truly justify that I have lived a good life, or validate that my life had any merit or meaning at all.
Truly an existentialists’ journey, one destine to meet a beautiful yet fatalistically melancholic end.
I have often wondered if perhaps it would be better to continue full-fledged in this direction in which I am going, forgetting what others would think– what my social conscience reminds me each day, and just let go of everything– unleash the “beast” within me, become homeless, and focus my entire being on the creative energy that lurks within me.
Ironically, if I were to take such a path, i would technically be less crazy, but the extremes required to consummate such a dream would render “technicalities” irrelevant, as the price of that kind of fulfillment would reduce me to a madman, although perhaps there is not a word in the english language that could give proper appreciation to the level of art that such a person would manifest.
That is: to become art– that is one of my dreams.
But in the end, despite my good intentions, I am continually losing sight of the things that I believe in– the beliefs to which my life should manifest. I say every day “you are what you believe in”; but, as I am unwilling to take my own beliefs seriously, there is no actualization, only an empty dream that I perpetually avoid for fear that I would be corrupted by my own fantasies.
Yes I am afraid of something, but only one thing: Myself.
Not because I don’t know who I am– by now, having written enough content for several PhD quality books, I know exactly who I am, and I know exactly what I want. But, as I’ve said many times in the past, What I want will destroy Society!
Inspiration– in the end that’s really all that I wanted. But I could never stop at just a little bit of inspiration– I can’t any more that a sex-driven guy could settle for a platonic relationship. Inspiration is my sex– my drug, and I need it to keep sane.
And yet, as is also the paradox will all other drugs, it is the very same inspiration that I need that will destroy me. The more that I consummate my desires, the more that my desires will consume me.
It is a path with no future, and despite my good intentions– a path to utter destruction and for lack of a better word, Hell.
I am trying to be a good Christian– really, I am. My heart may not be entirely in it, but this is the most my heart has ever been into anything, and I’m sure God can forgive me for lacking the resolve to 100% commit. Perhaps for which parts of my heart that I am still unable to turn over to Christ, he will forgive me until such a time that I am spiritually mature enough to follow-through with these decisions?
One question that I have tried for a while now to answer: Are my motives for my actions valid? Is my heart in the right place?
If I were to fulfill my ambitious goals and dreams– take over the world, become God, make obscene amounts of money, destroy Society, achieve perfection– revolutionize everything forever more– What good would it do if my heart was in the wrong place? If there was no love in my heart to back it up?
After all, the only reason why I would try to do great things in the first place would be to validate my craziness. To say– “hey! There are merits to being crazy! The world is wrong about mental illness! It’s a gift, not a disease!”
But knowing what direction the world is going, and what the world needs most to be happy, We don’t need creativity. Everyone was always happier with “Good Enough”. It’s us crazy people that demand change, and we only demand it because we are projecting our own insecurities onto the world– saying, “It’s not Me at fault, it’s the world”. To revolutionize the world because of one’s own insecurities– only lunatics would do something like that!
I really don’t know why things work the way they do. I don’t know God’s plan for my life, and I don’t even know if I know God…if history tells us anything, believing in God is probably just wishful thinking. But that’s the kind of wishful thinking I need right now, and if there is a God, I’m sure that he’ll forgive me for my selfishness– he is the person who put me in this situation after all…
But one thing’s for certain: If I am to live my life, I cannot live it for myself, because it’s become abundantly clear that my own good intentions are bound for ruin and destruction. What I want can only cause harm, so there is no way that I can live for myself.
But if I must live for myself a little, if only to ensure balance between what I want (Individualism) and what the world wants (Collectivism), I will continue expressing what I want in the most creative way that I can: writing.
True Innocence
When I was growing up, I was always in this sort of go-with-the-flow type mindset; I did everything right the first time, and never had any problems or doubts. I was perfect in my own eyes, and there was no need to validate that perfection.
So you might ask, “how is it that you could have that kind of mindset, Justin?” The answer is simple: Because no one ever told me otherwise. I was never ever told growing up that anything I did was wrong, so I naturally assumed that everything I did was right. Of course I was perfect– if I wasn’t someone would have told me so.
So I spent my entire childhood doing everything the way I thought best, and never changed the way I did things the first time, since there was no reason to. I was a true innocent.
As a result of this happy and idealistic background, it was quite a shocker when I found out that I wasn’t perfect. Just imagine what you would feel like if you went from being God to being a helpless loser that is hated by everyone. That’s kind of what I felt like.
It didn’t happen overnight, but the majority of the trouble happened when, in the midst of me being the poster child of perfection, I was told by my Great Aunt [whom I was living with] that she was taking me back to the children’s shelter. She didn’t want me anymore. She informed me the evening of Christmas day 2002, and took me to the children’s shelter [to rot] the next morning.
Why? I was perfect! What could have possibly gone wrong?
I was incredibly naive as becomes obvious in retrospect, but at the time it was very strange and bizarre. I had been living in a dream world my entire life, and this was a very rude awakening. My reality was rapidly unraveling beyond my control, but not knowing what reality really was at the time, I did not recognize this, instead continuing to go with the flow.
It was not my fault– it was their fault. I began to blame “the system”, the people who took me away from my parents in the first place. Everything was perfect for me– it was the system that was imperfect– the government of Santa Clara County who stupidly tried to destroy my life. Convinced that I was perfect as is, I blamed my environment for my problems. I was not at fault. It was everyone else.
As a result, the more that it became clear that there was something wrong with my life, the more I distrusted people– became detached from everyone and everything that made up my reality. I blended in by conditioning myself to my environment, letting myself pretend to be whoever my environment needed me to be. That way I could continue to be compatible with Society without being affected by it.
As a result, I lost my ability to have any real relationships, or trust anyone genuinely. Everyone was just part of the game.
Now please don’t get me wrong: I didn’t consciously think of myself as “perfect”. It was the inverse perspective: there was nothing lacking in me. In my own mind, I had no imperfections. It was a truly innocent perfection– It wasn’t as if I thought myself to be perfect. It’s that no one ever told me that I did anything wrong. Since I did nothing wrong, everything I did was right. Everything was perfect.
I would not begin to accept the truth until over 5 years later, when I began my own epic journey of self-honesty, jbcandid. This was when I first began to take a serious look at who I was, to analyze myself completely, that I might understand who I was. It was the first time that it occured to me that maybe I was at fault for what had happened, and I needed to know the truth about myself– about everything.
I needed to know the truth. After I realized that people had been keeping the truth from me, by not telling me about my own imperfections, I lost my trust of people even more. The lack of candidness in the world was revolting and horrifying to me, and so I was determined to be uncompromisingly as candid as I could possibly be– The most candid person in the world. Thus began my first identity, jbcandid.
When I realized that everyone that I had trusted in so much had lied to me by keeping my imperfections from me– I also realized that those same people had effectively destroyed my life through their perpetual sins of omission.
Even now, I am convinced that a lack of proactive honesty (candidness) in the world accounts for the majority of problems in the world, because lies and secrets are the cause of the majority of misunderstandings, and misunderstandings account for almost all human conflicts.
As a result of these revelations, I renounced everything that I had know to be true before that: Christianity, relationships– all of my childish beliefs– and I set out to find genuine truth.
This is why that I came to trust the Internet (and particularly Wikipedia) so much: unlike everything I had known before that point, the Internet did not hide the truth from me– it displayed it candidly, and invited me to that knowledge, rather than keeping it from me. Even if the Internet is full of lies and deception, it does not hide the truth from me.
To me, it is better to lie to someone than to keep the truth from them.
Now that I have finally recovered from the life that I apparently never lived (as the knowledge of my life was kept from me!), I am on a new journey to regain that lost innocence, this time building my purity not on my own works (which are now clearly imperfect), but on the cleansing blood of Jesus! Thank you Lord! 🙂
Self-Transcendence
In my post “What is True Love?”, I asked this important question, gave my own answer, and went on to explain how, as exemplified by Plato’s philosophy of love (Amor Platonicus), that by loving for the sake of love, one is able to transcend themselves, becoming one with God, and thus becoming God, by recognizing and appreciating the love is the image of the divine.
But love is only the beginning of the journey to beginning God. It’s one thing to appreciate the image of the divine, but it’s far greater of a feat to take that image and will it into being!
(1) Love –> Image of the Divine –> Potentiality [of God as reflected off yourself].
(2) Spirit –> Becoming the Divine –> Actuality [of God as actualized by yourself].
So then, the first step is to experience God through his love…But after that, it our duty to use that new-found knowledge to become “born again” by actualizing God within us. The Love of God is in all of us (we all have the potential to become God), but that love is meaningless if we do not first appreciate it, and then consummate it (let God become reality through us.)
We are essentially the physical presence of God [His Creation], but only those that accept their purpose (as God’s creation), and allow God to work through us– only these few will become enlightened.
And it is these enlightened few that will guide this world through the days to come.
Perfection is my Direction
As I’ve said or inferred many times in the past, perfection is my direction. But this is indeed a difficult goal to achieve, and almost always results in superficiality for those that pursue it.
As was said in the song “Pieces” by Sum 41,
“I tried to be perfect, But nothing was worth it. I don’t believe it makes me real. I thought it’d be easy, But no one believes me. I meant all the things I said.”
This little thing called “perfection” is something that everyone wants to find, to find. But most of us give up on it, accepting it for what it is: an ideal.
But being an idealist, I strive after it stubbornly, hoping that even if I don’t achieve it, I will have bettered myself enough in the process, that I would have not regrets.
In order for me to truly perfect, I must establish rules by which to verify and appreciate that perfection. So let us first define what perfection is:
from Wiktionary: “Having all of its parts in harmony with a common purpose.”
This being the case, it would appear the perfection is largely intuitive in nature (words like “harmony” and “common” are purely relative even at the most basic level, and the perception thereof is therefore mostly intuitive).
Furthermore, perfection, being relative by nature, is entirely determined by perception. Now this is the important part here:
Most assume that God is perfect, and that he exists even outside our perception. Now, although one might argue that he exists outside our perception, his perfection as we know it only exist in perception, as it is our perception the defines what perfection is, and God’s perfection can only exist within those bounds.
In other words, Perfection is finite by its very nature. In fact, every definition of perfection confirms this.
Now, moving on to the definition of “perfection”:
(from Wiktionary): “The quality or state of being perfect or complete, so that nothing requisite is wanting; entire development; consummate culture, skill, or moral excellence; the highest attainable state or degree of excellence; maturity; as, perfection in an art, in a science, or in a system; perfection in form or degree; fruits inperfection.”
This is the definition of perfection that I hope to achieve; when I say “perfection is my direction” this is what I mean.
But note that again, everything in this definition implies that the condition is finite, and limited to perception.
In other words, perfection, in philosophical terms (or more specifically, in regard to existentialism) refers to the actualization of potential as defined by the rules by which that perfection is defined.
It would then be futile to seek infinite perfection, as such an ideal is paradoxical.
In fact, it may well be that this person we call “God” is the end result of some entity attempting to use his cosmic power to actualize perfection; if that were the case, sin might be in fact the by-product of God’s botched experiment. (Compare to the Homunculi of Fullmetal Alchemist (the anime version).
Within my own spiritual philosophy (which is similar to, but not equivalent to Gnostic philosophy), this botched attempt at infinite perfection resulted in the creation of the Archons; by extension, any human attempts to achieve infinite perfection result in Archona.
Both Archons and Archona are avatars, being akin to guardian angels, but lacking any substance beyond their skin.
An empty shell which, although appearing perfect, the sacrifice paid for this perfection is that they are mere puppets, being driven to obsession in their desire to be perfection, obsession to insanity, and insanity to slavery, being “slaves of sin”, to quote Paul. (Romans 6:14-19)
Thus for this reason, I will strive to achieve true perfection, which call only be found in Balance.
To regurgitate words I have said before (in th3g1vr), true perfection can only be achieved by finding and applying a perfect balance between Potentiality and Actuality.
Potentiality: Your potential; what you have decided for yourself that you are capable of. Everyone’s potential is potentially limitless, and that potential generally relies upon the knowledge acquired. But potential by itself is meaningless, and that’s where actuality comes in.
Actuality: What you actually do with your potential; what aspects of your potential that you have decided for yourself that you would prioritize— what aspects of your potential (reality) that you choose to appreciate and validate. For example, it could be said that anything is possible, but when it comes to actuality, it doesn’t matter what’s possible, it matters what you believe in.
To understand what it means to balance potentiality with actuality, we must understand what it looks like to have an imbalance.
For an imbalanced learn towards potential, I’ll call up the philosopher– such as myself.
A philosopher, being wise and knowledgeable, one would think could accomplish great things, seeing as how he has the knowledge to take over the world, turn it upside-down, and set it straight without anyone knowing. But instead he sits in front of his computer, contemplative and intellectualized, obsessing over how to do even more than that. He appears to be a psychological wreck– a waste of intellectual talent.
The philosopher has so much potential, but does not use it precisely for the same reason: He has too much potential– so much that he cannot properly contain it, and put it to use.
Now for an example of too much actuality, we’ll use the example of the hard-working construction worker:
He works every day restlessly, and when he retires to bed at night he immediately falls asleep. He then gets up the next day for work at the crack of dawn, and repeats the same routine. He has no life, has no girlfriend– all he has is work. Plenty of money comes in, but because of the stress that his work gives him, much of that money goes to drinks, smokes, and other costly but time-efficient entertainment. His life has no meaning, even though he does so much with it.
In other words, the construction worker’s life has no meaning precisely because he does so much with it. The drive to be productive results in an extremely limited potential; his need for instant gratification results in a very finite life, lacking in meaning but very fulfilling in substance.
To achieve perfection, I must find a balance between these two extremes. To be able to act decisively to actualize the maximum amount of potential, and thus achieve the fullness of my purpose.
To do this, the first step is to accurately gage what I am both capable of and will accomplish. This may well be a lifelong journey though, so I must work my way towards this by doing one simple (and yet somehow very complicated) things: Prioritize.
So in the end, the first step for anything when it comes to achieving perfection is, after all, getting your priorities in order.
So that’s exactly what I’m going to do.
Parental Affirmation
I was watching the movie “Catch me if you can” the other day, when I realized the the main character suffered from the same problem I did: a lack of expectations from his father. We both hated our fathers for the same reason; my dad, no matter how much I plead with him to have expectations of me, and to actively enforce those expectations, hides from the situation rather than dealing with it– unwilling to take responsibility for my life, and thus leaving my life to chance.
He doesn’t realize his power over my life as a father, and the importance of him using that power. He had already decided that because we have different interests, different weaknesses and strengths, and different personalities, that he has no right to have any say on how I live my life.
Because I currently have no one else to look up to, and have very little expectations of myself, my life weighs on his expectations of me; thus, because he expects nothing, I am nothing.
Now, this is an irresponsible way of looking at it, and perhaps what I need most right now is independence and self-discipline, but it still is crucially important that parents understand the gravity of the role that they play in their children’s growth, maturity, and personal success.
There are many things I want to do in my life, but I lack the discipline to effectively do any of them. I’ve got a lot of uncontrolled, ultimately wasted energy and creativity– wanting to so much, but lacking the foundation and self-discipline to actualize these desires.
Because my self-esteem is low and my self-discipline is lacking, I rely on my dad to provide these deficiencies. I expect my father to provide this much-needed direction, and hate him for not meeting this expectation. It’s quite the paradox, as you can see.
I’m actively trying to show my dad how much his guidance makes a difference in my life (and presently, the lack thereof); parents should affirm their will for their children pro-actively, leaving nothing to chance or “fate”. This is by far the best way any parent can show their love for their children, and it is also the best way a person can show their love for their partner, even if the relationship is only mere romance.
My interest in the effect of expectations on the end results started with my post “Video Games and Love”, and to this day, I still hold to the premise that expectations should be the most important priority when it comes to personal growth and development, and especially when it comes to parenting.
I don’t know what I want
This has been an issue for a long time, that I don’t know what I want. It is the biggest dilemma I have ever faced, or probably ever will, because until I find the desire of my heart, I have no future.
This is where it all began, with my recognition that we all must have a purpose, for without it we cannot live. But over time I realized that I had no purpose, no reason to live, and so I decided to create one for myself, that I might save myself from the empty and meaningless existence that was my life. But over and over again, I realized that although these rationalizations were in-and-of-themselves sufficient ( they were, after all, theoretically worthy and fulfilling ends to which my means might be applied), they were all ultimately of no substance, of which I possessed no resolve for.
In other words, I was merely skipping from one dream to the next, taking from others what inspiration I could, and desperately, yet ultimately hopelessly attempting to apply incompatible and irreconcilable realities with my own life.
So here I am, still living in a perpetual groundhog day, unable to reconcile my own reality with the reality of others, and yet unable to achieve independent substance or meaning of any permanence within my own reality. Living in this perpetually temporal dream, each day becoming another person, and yet– still the same.
To change within my own mind, but lacking the ability to manifest those changes in genuine form, I change constantly, and so cannot establish a genuine link even with those I wish to care for most; yet to all around me, I have not changed, but have remained the same.
The reason for this is because I have not changed, but merely my perception has. But lacking the ability to actualize my own perception of reality, I am trapped within my own reality, being a slave to the environment of which I am surrounded by.
Being a slave to my environment, I adapt frightfully well– it was as if I were always part of this life. The truth: I am not part of any environment, nor can I be truly influenced by anything or anyone. I act as I am expected to, and adapt to be accepted. And yet, as hypocritical as it might seem, I have no need or interest in being accepted. If I did, I would not spend my days alone in a dark room, my communication being limited mostly to these blog posts that few would read, and even of those that did, none would genuinely care about.
Rather, I act to the absolute minimum required to be accepted, and care not whether people hate me, love me, or ignore me.
I just want to be left alone, and to be able to express myself.
Just so that there is no misunderstanding, I do want people to accept me. However, for a person to accept me, they must first know and understand me, and I have yet to find anyone who genuinely can. Every last person that I have come into contact with has tried to understand me, or sympathize me, stereotype me, characterize me– acted as if they knew me. But none truly know me, understand me.
I think that it might be that in truth, my expectations of my own reality were just set too high. In truth, no one truly understands anyone else, they just like to think they do. I am no exception. What sets me apart from others, isolates me, makes me stand out as a self-initiated anti-social (yet eager-to-socialize) outcast, is that I have rejected communication from others, having already decided that anything that I say will be misunderstood, and that anything that they say is meaningless to me, since I will never know the true intentions of their words.
Regardless of the motivation, I recognize that rejection is always a bad thing, because it destroys the link between the all, between us and earth, and between the cosmos and itself. If I am to contribute to the world I live in rather than taking away from it, I must be positive, not negative; the light that is my perception must be additive, not subtractive in its color.
Regardless of whether we understand each other or not, as long as the flow is positive, Gaia’s will shall be done, and that is what is most important. Rather than taking matters into my own hands, as if I were God, I must give up my Ego (what I want) which is corrupt, and learn to “go with the flow” (literally), that I might become one with the energy, rather than the one that might cause division (the enemy).
To quote Linkin Park, “I want to be with the energy, not with the enemy [myself], a place for my head [peace].
Sure I don’t know what I want, but perhaps it’s better that way. For if I knew what I wanted, then the desire itself would corrupt me, as it does to all that let their desires control them. Rather, it should now be my mission to determine what the will is of the world that I live in; if the world so desires something, I must understand what its true desires are, so that fulfilling the true desires of the world might become my purpose.
Corruption is the inevitability of fulfilling one’s purpose, but surely a purpose borne of selfishness might maintain integrity so as to when that day comes, if there is a God that would judge me, I might be able to face him with confidence and pride, knowing that I did everything I could to fulfill the purpose to which my life was designated.
Actualization Through Habit
I am a very impatient person, and so although I am very talented, my abilities are mostly limited to that which I can accomplish immediately. In other words, I thrive on instant gratification, and stagnate when in comes to anything that requires long-term planning.
As a result, I have become an avid student of bullshit, which requires no more than minute knowledge, and can be made to work wonders using language, despite no actual education in the field.
But because of the very minute nature of the lifestyle I lead, I myself have no future, having made myself to be incapable of anything outside the moment in which I live.
Over time, this lifestyle has begun to noticeably distort my reality, causing each day appear to be no different than a dream, as since each day is bound to the moment, every new day becomes a different dream, only sharing a semblance with the day before as projected by the realities of those around me; because they do have a reality outside the moment, their projections of reality end up being the only thing in my own mind that separates “reality” from the dream world.
If I were to be completely alone them, there would be not difference, as everything, both in reality and dream, would be done in the moment– a disconnected series of memories, blurring into the fabric of time.
It is then abundantly clear that if I am to truly have a future, I must practice actualization not through in-the-moment bullshit, but through habit. This is the way of the world, and the means through which Society is able to exist. It is what we often refer to as “discipline”
To discipline oneself through conformance to norms, dedication to one’s beliefs, binding oneself to traditions– of the country, culture, religion, family, workplace, and of the self. To find friends that will reinforce these norms, and to develop a true sense of value and dedication to reproducing the expectations of these friends.
That’s what it’s all really about– Expectations. Willing the future into being through actualization of what one expects. You know that it should be, must be, and will be….and so, it is.
Virtue of the Borg
This whole project of self-corruption in the name of original truth (which some might argue is an oxymoronic) has finally come to and end, as I transition into this cool thing called self-actualization. It’s the point in my life where I stop being a philosopher and start being successful.
But what then, is success? I never wanted money, or power, or even the so-called universal want of sex. I just want to be me, and for that self to be validated. Now, no amount of logic will ever be enough to bring about the level of self-validation I desire (in fact, even God himself could not bring it about!), So it’s up to me to find that validation for myself, and make it happen.
I’ve just about finished the self-analysis aspect of this reality (which took the form of th3g1vr). The next aspect– or, to allude to Serial Experiments Lain– the next layer of my life, is now beginning. It has been a long chapter- I would say far too long. But alas, now come the inevitable question “Now what?”
I’ve developed a very good understanding of who I am to myself, but what of the world? “In the world but not of it”, a Bible verse I have oft-quoted to myself– perhaps it would be wise to, at least for a time, become part of the world.
I have never been part of the world, not once in my life. I suppose at one time I thought I was, but in retrospect, I was merely living a waking dream, not aware that I was not in reality, and nothing to yet interfere with that naivety, as I was floating.
But I am slowly learning the ways of this wretched world, and although I do not agree with them, I can live by them, if only a little for now.
What motivates me to participate in and become familiar with these trivialities and mislead notions? It is because this is the other side of the coin.
Within this borg that Is Society is the key to becoming free from it, for in order to understand and appreciate anything, one must also understand and appreciate its opposite.
I was never part of Society, nor can I truly ever be. I can convince Society I am part of it, but just as one who is freed from the Matrix, there is no going back for me. But the only difference: I was never part of it to begin with. I was born free, and according to Sartre, am condemned to be free.
Because I have something closer to what might be considered freewill, I am cursed to be alienated from Society, and cannot share in the bliss of its ignorance.
The best I can do is pretend.
So it is natural then, that I hate Society. I am jealous of it, because it has the one and only thing that I have, and as of yet lack: validation. And it is because of Society that I cannot achieve that validation, because it is because Society is valid that I, who am not part of Society, am invalid.
But nevertheless, if I am to change Society that my own validation might be achieved, I must first learn to understand and appreciate the Society that Is. For only then will I, having seen both sides of the coin, be amply prepared to bring about the positive change necessary to reconcile myself with the world that I live it.
It will be difficult to appreciate the Virtue of the Borg, but I must if I am to complete the next layer on this journey of mine to achieve self-actualization– the materialization of nirvana, as it were
Twist of Fate
I have become quite acquainted with the power of fate, and it’s relationship to freewill. Contrary to what I have communicated to many people, I am a major believer in freewill– my contention from which such skepticism is derived is with the fact that people take freewill for granted.
That is– we all have freewill, but just as with many other “gifts” that are given to us by God, “use it or lose it”.
This is the original theme upon which my up-and-coming novel “Essence of the Soul” was to be built– taking life for granted. That so many people inherently possess freewill, but unknowingly give it away to the Society they live in, being conditioned by the world to feel perfectly comfortable living within its confines.
Society cannot exist statically if there is variance, and at the sociological level, any freewill permits a level of chaos that threatens to destroy the fabric upon which any social institution is built. Thus, to live within Society, we have no choice but to give up freewill.
This is particularly ironic, considering that one of the biggest religious institutions in the world, Christianity, is one of the most active proponents of freewill, especially in regards to our relationship with God; that is, freewill is considered by many to be a moral necessity.
But this actually makes perfect sense, when we consider the roots of Christianity. Originally, it was just a cult– a loosely defined set of tenets– ideas, based upon abstract and common sense philosophies, such as Neoplatonism. They all had freewill, and all had their own ideas about how life should be lived– Christianity was to a great extent founded on what might at least be considered closer to freewill.
It was within this free environment that Gnosticism thrived, and it was when freewill began to lose its relevance (thanks to this control-freaking Society known as Rome) around the 5th Century AD.
Getting to fate: The purpose of fate is not to control the direction of our existence (as many would have you believe)– if you think that anyone, even God, can do that– then I must say that your understanding of the nature of existence is a bit limited.
Rather, the purpose of fate is to remind us of “the point”. We often miss the point, in our busy lives, rationalizations– and in my case, I have missed it in my obsessions, self-corruption, and analysis of reality. This point is quite simple– so simple that I could not figure it out until now– not realizing that I had already found it in the first place.
This point, which we so often miss, is Freewill.
Every once in a while, so that we do not miss the point that is life, our inner-self (aka the voice in the back of your head) reminds us that we have freewill. That we could act as such, and receive the consequences, or choose another path. Or, as it so happens in many cases, to not act at all.
That’s what it’s all about– the point of life– the source of everything that gives life meaning (although it it not the meaning itself, per se). This is the Essence of the Soul…Freewill.
Perfect World
For quite some time I’ve conceptualized myself as an idealist, and delved deep into the power of belief in oneself and one’s reality, as well as the potential power of knowledge (particularly knowledge of oneself) and self affirmation.
I’ve been obsessed with unlocking my own potential– perhaps so obsessed (at least philosophy-wise) that it has deterred me from that very goal. But I knew from the very beginning that I needed to wake up, and let’s face it– I just wasn’t ready.
But then again, I know I’ll never be ready! Why? Because I’ll never be good enough. Because I am a perfectionist.
I live in this perfect world where everything has to be done right– so since nothing I do will ever be good enough, I have a mental block that prevents me from ever putting any solid effort into anything, for fear that when I really put my all into what I’m doing, it will still not be good enough. Because I know that it won’t be. Because that’s the person I am.
But that is the part of me that needs to change. To begin with, my view of perfection is limited to my own flawed, distorted perception, so such an approach to perfection is inherently wrong to begin with.
Now don’t get me wrong, I do believe in human perfection– this is an idea I feel very strongly about. But I also know that such a perfection cannot be attained by a single individual– after all, truth itself (the primary prerequisite of perfection) cannot be attained unless one takes everything into account.
As such, I should not strive for perfection (which, as explained in my “Ode to Academia) post, is the psychological equivalent of “running before I walk”, but instead strive for enlightenment.
Only after achieving enlightenment will I be ready to go about achieving perfection, and (ultimately), god-status) 😀
Ode to Academia
The past few years have been quite tumultuous for me, as I strive to exceed all expectations that both others and myself have for me. I have begun to run before I walked, and so great is my shock in stumbling that I am still not fully aware of the dilemma I now face. That dilemma being a lack of education.
In my chaotically uncontrolled pursuit of greatness, my pride has driven me to attempt to supersede reality itself, in favor of an idealism that I myself do not understand.
But I now understand, at the very least, that idealism, and especially the kind that I intend to implement, cannot be forced– it must be willed into being (I must want it to be, with all of my heart.
Furthermore, desire alone cannot create anything but chaos (which itself does not exist in an identifiable form, existing only as a convoluted mass which we call chaos because another label cannot be accurately applied.
There must be a design (resolve) upon which to apply this desire, and furthermore, a commitment to stabilize the charge in which that design resides.
If I am to achieve all of my dreams, there are prerequisites to be fulfilled. Even now, I am incredibly naive, and ignorant about most things– even those things that I am passionate about most.
By closing my mind to the education of others, I have limited myself to my own perception, thus being but a poor misled mind with a mostly-wasted creativity, of little use to the world.
If I am to be of use to the world, I must become one with it, and thrive off the education given me by generations past, as well as the contemporary generation.
If they are to understand my words, I must first understand theirs (that of the world)- so rather than making a naive judgement of the world, saying that their knowledge is useless to me, because they are ignorant of the true nature of things, recognize that I myself are ignorant, with the only real difference being that I have the knowledge of that ignorance, and strive to overcome it.
Other than that, there is no difference between me and the world– we all possess the same inferior humanity. But perhaps (and this we must also appreciate) that inferiority is what makes us so beautiful.
In light of these things, and recognizing that my own knowledge is merely the endowment with which I was given by the Whole (which in turn means that it is not my knowledge, but the knowledge of the world to whom I have been made steward of), I should strive more to learn more– if only for the sake of this knowledge.
Through my continued education (of which I was such an avid student many years past) I will gain more knowledge of many things, and it is through this knowledge that I will empower myself to attain all those things that I so desire.
Everything is possible with desire, but only if I am willing to attain the knowledge required to solidify this direction, and the resolve to commit to it.
Miracle Worker
Do you believe in miracles? Most people want to believe in miracles, but most people, including most Christians, think of miracles as something that happened in the Bible, but doesn’t happen anymore.
I think that it might be that people just don’t know what a miracle is anymore. For example, I am a miracle…you are a miracle.
We need to appreciate life for what it is, a miracle. Only then will our minds be ready to witness the many other miracles in life.
Magic is not something that can be demonstrated to anyone. To see the evidence of magic, you must already believe in it. I have experienced this truth first-hand.
It doesn’t matter what it is. If you don’t believe in something, it won’t exist.
You just don’t realize it because you’ve been conditioned by the Society you live in not to believe. You can’t help it. You’re used to it. You spent your whole life believing in a lies.
I can be a miracle worker, but I must first believe in myself. You can witness the beauty of my miracles, but first you must believe in me.
I want to show everyone the wonders and beauty that is the world, to show people just how much they are really capable of, but I must first believe in myself, and apply that belief. I must also show others these truths in such a way that they will believe in my miracles, that they might appreciate them.
My desires that I expect to fulfill in this life are very simple, and yet very complex. All I want is to experience everything that is life….
but what is required to fulfill such a desire…it is not an easy feat to accomplish.
But I will accomplish everything that my heart desires, because I am a miracle worker!
Follow-through
Even though I write about all of these inspirational things, I really don’t apply much of it to real life. It’s just a bunch of talk– for now. As much as I would love to apply all that I have learned to my life right now, I lack the personal maturity to, and it’s a whole lot to take on at once.
The harder I try, the more it seems I lose sight of the things that matter. I tend to do better when I do less, and it pains me to accept that, because I know what I am capable of, and aspire with all my heart to fulfill my potential. I will not accept an average life. I must exceed all. That’s the kind of person I am.
The biggest problem– greatest obstacle to my personal success, while previously a lack of direction and motivation (These I have solved in the past few years, and particularly since I have been at Job Corps), is now a lack of follow-through.
I know what I must do, and I know what I need to do to accomplish these things, but I lack the follow-through to achieve them. Every day is a dream, and at the end of that dream I begin another, starting from scratch. It’s a continual karmic circle of forgetting everything I am each day, struggling to remember throughout the day, and by the time I am ready to begin applying myself to manifesting the memories, the day is already over, and I am doomed to start over again– a perpetual groundhog day, only I’m the one that doesn’t remember.
That I only am ready to apply these regained memories until the end of the day– this is why that I like to stay up late. Most of my greatest writing I have done during all-nighters, because I am compelled to stay up and record what I have recalled the rest of that day.
To record these memories before I forget them, lest they be lost forever.
I must once again unify myself, that I might live the same dream every day instead of having to start over from scratch each morning. So that “a new day” will not come, for it’s only then that I can fulfill my destiny.
To achieve the single flow sought after by Buddhist followers and achieved only by the enlightened, that is what I must do, that I might achieve follow-through.
To live life as a single flow, and love life by becoming one with it.
That is after all what follow-through really is.
Inner Light
Even though I promised myself that I would write a new post for NspyraishN everyday, it’s obvious that I have yet to fulfill that obligation. It’s a work in progress, and I will get there– should be there already. But I often lack the motivation to.
Why? Because I do not yet possess the Inner Light.
There are two kinds of people in this world: proactive, and reactive. In “You’re Hired”, a week-long training course for people transitioning out of Job Corps (which I am complete with, and now preparing to transfer into the college program @ DATC), they talked about these two types of people.
Proactive people, whom I have talked about and detailed in my “Leadership” and “Colorless Mana” posts, possess the Inner Light, and are able to shine on their own. They are true leaders, and emit their light to the reality they exist in.
Reactive people, who I also talked about in the above two posts, and detailed in my post Lost in the Crowd, as well as provided a justification thereof. They do not possess the Inner-Light, instead satisfying themselves with feeding off the Inner Light off of others, and only reflect what little light is given to them by those who possess it.
While Leaders (Proactive emit light, creating a greater spiritual clarity in the world (additive), Followers (Reactive) reflect light, leeching off of (and thus taking away from) the light, lessening the spiritual clarity in the world.
As determined in my post Lost in the Crowd, I find myself to be somewhere inbetween, seeking to have the inner-light, but still primarily limited to leeching off the light in others, lacking the belief in myself (my reality) to shine on my own.
I need to learn to create that self-value independent of others– to make the world a better place by believing in and valuing myself, that such positive beliefs and values might manifest themselves in my reality.
By creating my own Inner Light, I will be able to bring about spiritual evolution in the world, by allowing the world to understand the true nature of things. I must become the sun myself, so that those few that venture outside The Cave might appreciate what they see, and bring back with them others to share the glory that is true reality.
In the same way, let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven. (Matthew 5:16)
True Reality
I once said that reality is what you make it. If that is the case, true reality does not inherently exist. Rather, what is “real” is determined by what you believe in, and what you accept. The only way for anything you believe in to be genuinely true, is to believe in those things, and those people, with all of your heart.
This being the case, there is no valid reason why I should not be happy right now. If I believe myself to be happy, then I am happy; my happiness because real through my belief in it, just as my love become real through love itself.
In regards to Plato’s forms, I think that Plato wanted people to understand (and to recognize for himself) that all Forms– that is, spiritually transcendent concepts, cannot be proven or validated; yet, they still exist, and their existence cannot be erased. This is because as long as at least one person believes in happiness, and believes in love, the existence of these concepts will live on.
This a very profound and essential thing to understand, for until you understand that you are what you believe in, and that everything that exists is only real because you believe in it– until you accept these things, you will never be free. I myself have yet to fully accept these things, and so I am not free.
But I work on it, and believe a little more in myself, and in others, each day.
If I want to be happy, I will be happy, not because I am having a good day, or because things are going as planned, or because people around me are happy. It’s the other way around– these other things are made possible because I already decided that I was happy in the first place, and held to that belief because happiness is important to me.
These things will thus determine what the outcome of your life is:
What you take pride in (your values), which produces faith.
What you believe in [which itself is determined by pride], which produces love.
What (and whom) you trust in to manifest your love, which produces hope.
1 Corinthians 13:13 “And now these three things remain: Faith, Hope, and Love. But the greatest of these is love”
Kaizen
Kaizen is a Japanese word and philosophy that has been adopted into American culture. The Japanese word “kaizen” means simply “improvement,” and in management it means, more broadly, continuous improvement in small increments. (excerpted from Wikipedia).
That’s what I need more of in my life– Kaizen. The lack of this essential discipline is the one single thing that is preventing me from succeeding in my life.
I have a horrible tendency to get ahead of myself in life, thinking about abstract concepts and ideals, and filling them up with suger-coated bullshit to compensate for the fact that in all truth, I have neither that knowledge, skill, or experience to back it up, much less implement it.
Because I am an impatient person, I lack the disciplines of planning, goal-setting, priorities, and self-organization– not to mention the acquisition of directly relevant knowledge.
If I could learn to slow down, listen, absorb, and learn about these things– one at a time, in order of what information is most essential at a given time, then I would be so much more successful.
I need to learn to attack the problems strategically, decisively, and agressively.
To improve myself one day at a time, one problem at a time, one prerequisite at a time– incremental and pro-active self-improvement, then through my adherence to Kaizen I will truly be successful, and everything I want in life will become a reality.
I need to stop bullshitting myself into the notion that getting ahead of myself is good planning (in reality it’s not planning at all)…and start truly living life– one item on the proverbial agenda at a time.
It might seem that I’m accomplishing less in the short run, but in the long run, a good disciplined life such as this can only result in me accomplishing great things, profound thing, impossible things.
Emo-Progressive
I occasionally invent new words or phrases to express how I feel, one such being “emo-progressive”. It roughly means that’s I’m emotionally fucked up in the head and moderately confused, but have some strange cosmic sense of direction in my life, and am feelingly mostly positive about the future (e.g. optimism).
On good days, this is how I feel…it is one of the few relatively natural moods I have. When I feel “happy”, it feels extremely unnatural– I don’t think I’ve felt genuinely happy in a long time– perhaps I never have. It always feel so absurdly fake– as if the only way I can achieve a sense of well-being is by bullshitting myself.
Yet I get a sense that at one point I did at least know what happiness was, and when I’m reminded of this, I become emo-progressive, and struggle to achieve that feeling, usually through some productive activity.
This sense of omniscient fakeness is perhaps part of the reason why I can never maintain friendships– seldom does anything genuinely feel real. It’s always this game that I need to get to the next level, like life is just one big simulation game– a game that I need to wake up from, but can only wake up from by winning it.
Most of the time though, I don’t feel like it’s possible to win this game called life, and so I take the passive approach and just go with the flow.
What is it that I want? I don’t know– I don’t think I ever did. I am closer to knowing what I want then ever before, and perhaps if I would just accept that, and live my life accordingly, I would achieve some “level” of happiness, even if that happiness were never real– never felt real.
But somehow, that fake happiness, that mediocrely pretend and make-shift sense of well-being isn’t good enough. It probably will never be good enough.
I’m getting tired of no one understanding me, no one genuinely being able to communicate with me on a real level. It’s all just psychological bullshit– I knew that from the very start. I don’t need anyone– I don’t even need myself. Social “needs”– Society— it’s all wayyy over-rated anyway.
I could just play the game, eat up all of the bullshit and act like it’s the best food I’ve ever had, but I’m beginning to wonder if even a 5-star feast would impress me.
Just writing like this, communicating my thoughts like this—- projecting myself onto myself– that’s all the social attention I’ll ever need. I just need to embrace it.
To be alone, and communicate the things that I really care about in the form of a blog (and eventually a website)…To write a fiction novel that, when finished, would be incomparable to anything else ever written, I should be more than satisfied with that.
In the world but not of it.
That’s really the way it was meant to be, all along.
I do so much more by myself then I ever did with others anyway.
I will do amazing things in this world, and with contribute to the quality of life for everyone, but it will be on my terms. It’s Egotistical and Egocentic– yeah. But that’s just part of who I am.
I was never unique or nonconformist because I wanted to be– I tried the bullshit, time and time again, but the result was always the same. the rebel in me kept leaking out…fucking things up.
Society won’t accept me for who I am, because it thinks it’s just too good for me. So what I’ll do…is prove in full-force that it’s the other way around:
I’m too good for Society.
But by them, it will of course be too late.
That’s the way it’s always been, since the beginning. Society never saw it coming until it’s too late.
That’s why I’m need to cut myself off from Society, before it drags me down with it…drags me down to the inevitable hell it is destined to reside in.
Losing My Innocence
”If you want to be loved and have friends, that type of statement is a deal-breaker to most people.”
I am well aware of this, and I make such statements because it is a deal-breaker. I don’t want to waste my time with people that can’t at least rationalize my sympathies for Charles Manson, because such people are not open-minded enough to be of value to me. I want controversy– I want to break free of the comfort zone, and for that I need people who are willing to go the distance.
You are a great friend to me, even though you do not sympathize with me in this regard– because you are the one who inspired me to build a future for myself, and in areas that I never even thought that I had the potential for.
Because of you, the things that I once thought I was deficient (such as writing, journalism, and fiction) are now areas that I am building my nest-egg on. Before I thought that I had no real future– that I would be lucky just to survive…but you changed all of that, more than you will ever know.
Even though you might not realize it, I am who I am today because of you. It is you that inspired me to see the good in people, where there was none. you saw the good in me, and that inspired me to see good in the worst of people– especially notoriously evil people such as Charles Manson. I can sympathize with him precisely because he is evil.
However, as you have inferred in this email, it is partly because of this “good in everyone” mindset that I have corrupted myself and lost my innocence. In order to justify and sympathize with every “evil” thing I knew about, I have experimented at both the physical and psychological levels with a myriad of so-called “evils”, that I might understand their motivation and rationale.
I have for the most part succeeded, and become far more open-minded as a result, but as you well know, I have sacrificed far more than my innocence to achieve these feats and gain this knowledge.
Nevertheless, there is no going back, and I will continue this journey to the end, if only to see how far the proverbial rabbit-hole hole goes.
What Is True Love?
Today I was talking with some friends over this girl that I am potentially in love with. That is, if I would open up my heart to her and let myself fall in love, I would.
The main concern my friends had regarding this (as revealed by the way I presented the question), is this: Is it love or is it lust?
Their response was surprising, and I immediately told them that, as I am not particularly interested in the sexual aspect of a relationship, it’s impossible for my love to be motivated by lust.
But their conception of lust was a bit broader: what they really meant to say is- “Do you just find them attractive, or do you have a genuine bond with them.”
As my personal philosophy undermines the value of such concerns, at first I didn’t understand what they meant– so it took me several minutes of discourse what they really meant, as stated above.
It goes something like this: To me, the strength of a person’s love should not be determined by the value that one has for that person– rather, it should be judged by the value that one has for Love itself.
Traditionally, people love each other because they place a high value on each other. As a result, a person determines their own value, and based upon that value, they choose a partner that they consider to be of greater value than themself, depending on what is of value to those persons.
As a result, people often fall in love with people that are rich, are great in bed, good at sweet-talking, charismatic, physically strong, highly intelligent, creatively endowed…any traits that make a person stand out as being successful in a given respect– one that is of value to the potential mate.
This approach, one that is taken by the vast majority of people (whether they realize it or not), is the evolutionarily advantageous approach– pure instinct.
But a love of this nature is IMO far too restrictive and does not properly account for the effects of manipulation, particularly that of social engineering and reality hacking (the broader definitions).
In many ways, the love that I have– that I want is far more [consciously] selfish than a traditional love. But it is for this reason that my love will last longer, be more fulfilling, and make me happier than a traditional love would.
I love you not because of who you are [or more accurately, as you project youself to be]– as most people do.
I love you because I want to love you.
It doesn’t matter who I love.
The only thing that matters is that I love.
My love is not for the person that I am loving.
My love is the manifestation of loving myself through you.
So unlike your love (the love of the world), my love will be harder, better, faster, stronger than yours could ever be.
Because I only love you for the sake of loving, my love is truly unconditional.
I do not truly love you, instead I love myself through you.
You cannot end my love. I cannot even end my love, for it is for this love that I live.
I love you unconditionally, permanently, obsessively, and because I am only loving myself through you, You cannot take my love from me…Because I am Love.
There was a point in time when I was a hopeless romantic, a person who believed in a soulmate, a true love….a beautiful union of souls.
That beauty was taken from me, and culminated in the creation of my blog post about Love, a stubbornly perssimistic and cold-hearted rationalized essay.
But now that I better understand what love truly is, I can honestly say that once again, I am a hopeless romantic.
True love is selfish, but because it is selfish, it is selfless. For in the pursuit of a Love for the sake of loving, one can transcend oneself. In this way, by becoming love through loving others, we become part of God (for God is Love), and by extension become gods ourselves.
I love you with all my heart, because I know that in my Love…God manifests.
I am love, and thus am God.
I am because I will myself to be.
Rotten Apples
Originally this post was supposed to be about something entirely different that happened this morning, but as an asshole in the comptuter room has no sense of decency and I cannot for the life of me concentrate on recalling memories, I guess I’ll just concentrate my energies on him.
Some people really have no respect for themselves or others, and resort to playing retarded games and living in this “the world can go fuck themselves” mindset.
These are people that we all wish that we will never meet, but often have no choice but to deal with. They are the people that seem to think the world hates them, but at the same time that everyone owes them the world. The kind of naive self-centered idiots who don’t know what they want, but blame everyone else for their unhappiness.
Every one in a while I am that person– I have days will I really need to escape from reality, and take out my inability to cope with reality out on others. I see what it does to others, and regret that I did it. I regret, and yet eventually, I do it again every day. It is a vicious cycle I wish to break.
It’s then that I realize that when we stereotype people like this, it does not take into account that maybe they are not usually like that– that maybe, just like I’ve experienced, they are just having a rough day that they are either unable or unwilling to cope with.
I’m trying to change my mindset lately, to one that I know there is a future in, and one that will make me happy. This is because I recognize something important:
I am what I believe in
We can believe in whatever we want to, but in the end it doesn’t really matter whether or not what we believed in was true or not. It only matters that we believe in something, and that what we believe in results in a happy, productive, and fulfilling life.
So rather than judging truth by its inherent validity (which can only be judged by our limited perception), we should judge how true, and how real a belief is, by how it inspires and influences us, and what those beliefs produce.
Wake Up Call
There are a lot of things that I want to do in my life– many amazing, wonderful things. Despite having very little value for myself or others, I know what I am capable of, and have an obligation to do these things, just because I know I can.
The main problem that I have is that there’s not follow-through. I’ll get really excited about ideas that I know will change the world– then an hour or so later– the idea dies.
I am the type of person to give up really easily, and am really impatient; if I don’t get results right away, I lose my motivation. So since most of my goals I have are long-term and ambitious in nature, I can’t seem to do anything I want to do– anything that I know I can do– that’s meaningful.
I need the discipline– the maturity to be able to think beyond the moment, and plan for the future. To know what the future holds, and act accordingly. A self-fulfilling prophet– that was what I was supposed to be.
My Purpose.
I need to wake up from this dream I’m having, and finally start living life. I need to place value on myself, and others– on my reality. I deserve more than this.
There is one thing going for me right now that I have to work with: Obsession.
To obsess about something– that is one of the few ways that I know I can achieve immersion. To eat, drink, breathe, and sleep whatever I do. To only do that thing, and for nothing else to matter– that is how I thrive.
“How come I must know…where obsession needs to go? How come I must know…the direction of relieving?” [A quote from the song “Obsession” by See-Saw]
In Computer Repair, we are expected to eat, drink, breathe, sleep the trade. For a person like myself who thrives on obsession, this would actually be best.
If I had done that from the very start, I would probably be better off. But nevertheless, I am glad that I didn’t choose to do that until, because I learned many other valuable lessons…I learned what love was, experienced what friendship really should be like– to have a true bond with someone.
I also was able to get very far in my fiction novel Essence of the Soul, and surprise myself at how good at writing I could actually be.
There is so much more that I could do with it– so much more that I need to learn about writing to express those feelings and sensations that are still difficult to express. The plot that my book is becoming is so amazing– so completely awesome that I don’t even know that I’ll ever find the words to properly depict it. But I will try my best, and it will be the best novel ever written.
But for now, I’m going to try my very best to study Computer Repair. I need to get a good job that I can make a lot of money really quick– start a small business to make even more money then that.
I need to retire as soon as possible so that I can begin work on doing the things that I wanted to do in the first place. And for that I need obsession– I need a financial cushion so that I can completely dedicate myself to my work.Only then can I achieve my dreams, and in doing so be free to wake up.
Valentine’s Day
A new moon is coming up, and I’m setting that as my target for beginning to make real changes. I’ve been living in a dream for the past few years, and it’s time that I wake up. I have a friend, Carlos, that is helping me to wake up– to finally start living my life, and I’m not going to take his help for granted.
I have value, even though I may not realize it. I’ve done a lot of writing, and I need to start applying it. I am what I believe in, but until I start believing in myself, I am nothing, and they are nothing. Where I go in my life, and what I do, is up to me.
When I start to try to do something for myself, I often give up because I don’t get instant results. I’m an impatient person, and because I haven’t placed value on myself, I give up easily, and end up just going with the flow.
Maturity comes from placing enough value on yourself to do what you need to do even when you don’t feel like it. I need to force myself to work harder, to do more for myself even when I am depressed or frustrated– not because of obligation to others (which I have none to begin with), but because I am that damn important to myself.
Until I am important to myself, no one else will be important to me either. If the reality that I live in is of my own making, then the people of this reality are an extension of myself. If I have no friends, it is only because I will not befriend myself. If people do not like me or want to be around me, it is because I hate myself.
A new day has come– one in which I will make a new person for myself– a person that I can love, and by extension be love by others.
NspyraishN 