Saying and Doing

[psyque]

Just a few other responses. Anything I don’t respond to is either “beneath me” or is something I’ve pointed out to you time and again…yet you keep ignoring or distorting or running away from it…

But, having been slandered myself in the past, I have to make sure not to be accused ACCURATELY of doing the same. Thus, in response to:

@Satyr

You appear to be as emotional and prone to bouts of “irrationality” as the rest of us humans. Yet you profess to be so much more. Where? Now you are not only being slanderous but a down right liar.
Where have I said I was “much more”? and don’t tell me it is insinuated.

No, it is NOT insinuated. It is STATED IN BLACK AND WHITE by you, Satyr:

The change is happening within me. I want to achieve my highest potential, both physically and mentally.
To do that I must see the world as clearly as I possibly can, without the intervening veneers of romanticism and idealism, with no emotion and less ego. Once I see it then I can construct my own ideals and try to reach them. Then I can embrace the totality of me, instinct, emotion, ego and all…The only people that interest me are those with whom I share certain qualities with…I’m no revolutionary, I’m an elitist. In fact, the way things are is fine with me.
Why would I want to free the sheep from the barn? I depend on their sheepishness and obliviousness.

THAT, together with your countless references to the “patheticness” of “normal” people pretty clearly indicates that you see yourself as so much more than the “average” human, ESPECIALLY AS IT PERTAINS TO EMOTIONALITY vs (IR)RATIONALITY. Now you’re NOT going to deny THAT are you? In fact, your response was so out of proportion to the context–that is, you get all upset over my pointing out YOUR OWN words–that it PROVES (once again… ) my point. Sheeesh…(it is so tempting to write “game, set, match,” but why would I want to win “jello tennis”??? ).

But your bragging also is based on institutional values and cultural norms.
How appropriate.

How so? I am happy, I have what I want as a MAN, as a HUMAN, and as a FATHER. I am raising my girls in a HEALTHY MANNER (as defined by myself). I do NOT spend money on frivolous items (for the most part), but I DO spend far too much money on GOOD food (till they tell me that free range animals and “organics” etc. are all bunk… ).

I bet our little resident psychology teacher read my ‘What about Bob?’ essay and saw a little of himself in there.
He then returned to avenge his bruised ego and save his self-esteem.
Watch him repeat all the things he bases his self-evaluations on.
Telling and ….typical.

Sorry to burst your bubble again, Satyr, but I haven’t read your essay. I’ve checked in on some of the RESPONSES to it (including yours), but I got a headache from doing this–> too often so I didn’t bother to read the initial post. Sorry again. I HAVE read other essays though…

Yet, somehow, along the way you have lost your soul.

I’d love to read your take on that…

It’s not that you play the game but know what it is, it’s that you’ve actually convinced yourself about its importance and relevance.
It’s not that you live life of ‘normality’ but secretly you know the underlying forces, it’s that you have accepted most of them now as ‘the best of all possible worlds’

oooookay, Kreskin. I KNOW you’re going to claim that you are emulating my style, trying to prove a point, titting for tatting, blah blah blah, but the fact is that you NORMALLY come across like this. You REALLY DO. I am pretty sure it’s not just I who thinks so. Remember, my impression of you is based on WHAT YOU DO here. I’ve said it a few times: your cop-out is only that, since you respond far too similarly and far too easily to those toward whom you direct so much disdain.

BTW, your crack about “selective reading” was HILARIOUS, given how much of my EVIDENCE you avoid/run away from. However, I remember once before that you wrote something about not having to comment on that with which you agree. I thus have now realized that the many points I raised that you failed to respond to is your way of saying “Yes, I agree with you completely. I cannot ADMIT IT directly for whatever reason, but I DO agree with all of those points.”
For the record, Satyr, when I don’t respond to something, it’s NOT for that reason–I’ve already explained why it is, so don’t try pulling the same line.

A sudden spark of reality from underneath the fluff and circumstance.
Now we are getting somewhere beyond the posturing.
Finally a genuine personal ‘truth’.

Lol. I’ve been like that all over the place. I write simply and directly. It’s all there. As for fluff and circumstance, have you read some of your essays? Speaking of which, I love your take on my reference to your multi-posting. YOU said the “P” word, not I…

I will not mock it because it is genuine and pure and personal.
We’ve broken through the bullshit, finally.
Maybe progress is possible.

But you are lucky in many ways.
I myself have found other means of attaining a similar freedom.
Was never overly ambitious in a social/economic way.
My ambitions were always rooted in the attainment of mental and physical potentials and in seeing as much of the world and of reality as possible.
Alas, I am forced to partly whore myself so that I can enjoy what I enjoy.

And this is the source of most of my bitterness. So much to see and do and so little time. Most of which must be offered to ‘the man’ just to buy my way into survival and social acceptance.

Putting aside anything else, I find thie preceding quote refreshing in its attempt at sort of answering my questions. Personally, being the simpleton that I am, I’d prefer even MORE DIRECT/less vague and ambiguous responses, but at least you’re putting in SOME effort.

---

I enjoyed this thread, which was dedicated entirely or partly to me.
Perhaps it was only inspired by me. I can only dare to hope that it was so.

It WAS inspired by you and even dedicated to you. My hope was that others might chime in, even if it was to offer contradictions to what I wrote with respect to you. Oh well…

BUT, a few people DID respond to the initial post, and I appreciate that.

[psyque]

Hi Aspacia,

I’m a bit lost. This and your previous message are sort of missing context. That is, the point of my example about intelligence was that there are SO MANY KINDS of “intelligence”–and I personally like the “adapting to one’s environment” component–that it’s very ethnocentric to claim that it is only “analytic intelligence,” which I believe Satyr puts so much stock in (if I am wrong, Satyr, please clarify).

Then your line below about the “tolerance and humility,” especially the HUMILITY, would seem facetious or sarcastic, given the types of posts Satyr and I have directed at each other here. So I’m not quite sure whom you are addressing, how you are doing so, and what you really want to say. I’m not trying to put you on the defensiveor anything, aspacia. I just wasn’t quite sure about a few things. If you could clarify, that would be appreciated.

psyque

@aspacia

Bravo, and thank all of you for demonstrating tolerance and humility, unlike the responses I have met with on the BBC Religion blogs, especially the Judaism blog. How odd, I support Israel, but have been met with many nasty responces from Eliezar regarding my posts.

I am trying to undestand, and often am ignorant regarding issues. Thanks again.

[psyque]

Satyr,

New day, new attempt. Please try to read this in the spirit of my other thread, where I tried to put an end to our current style of interaction. This post is totally sincere, with no secret motives or anything like that. All I can offer you is my word on that. Please respond as you see fit.

First, I apologize for MY role in how everything went down. Yes, I HAVE documented clearly that I believe you mistakenly attributed the “turn” to ME (in part), and you misinterpreted my reaction to Shyster’s interjection. That part is FACT (as it is all laid out there). However, I still allowed OUR interaction to devolve as it did. So again, I apologize for that.

Second, and in relation to the first point, I allowed my ORIGINAL question to you to get sidetracked. So I am going to ask again. AGAIN, I am asking this SINCERELY. No trap, no tricks. Satyr, please answer EITHER what YOU do, or what you think the hypothetical person should do, to life life as you think it should be lived–how NOT to “lose one’s soul.” I know you’ve written about such things all over the place, but please answer this question in CONCRETE terms. Give me SPECIFICS. No flowery prose. Just a “blueprint” if such a thing is possible. Again, I ask this out of TOTAL CURIOSITY/INTEREST and nothing else, which is why I am asking for you to use a hypothetical person as an example, if you do not feel comfortable (for whatever reasons) using yourself as an example.

That’s all. Simple, no tricks, no bad intentions, etc. I DO await your response and am looking forward to it in total sincerity. For what it’s worth, you’ve got my word on all of this.

[psyque]

PS

Some people believe an apology should be an outright apology with no explanations/clarifications/qualifications. I don’t believe in that. I believe in taking resopnsibility and acknowledging what one has done; but that CAN be done while giving some context as well, IMO. So please don’t infer that my brand of apology diminishes my sincerity.

[Lollipop_King]

psyque

Second, and in relation to the first point, I allowed my ORIGINAL question to you to get sidetracked. So I am going to ask again. AGAIN, I am asking this SINCERELY. No trap, no tricks. Satyr, please answer EITHER what YOU do, or what you think the hypothetical person should do, to life life as you think it should be lived–how NOT to “lose one’s soul.” I know you’ve written about such things all over the place, but please answer this question in CONCRETE terms. Give me SPECIFICS. No flowery prose. Just a “blueprint” if such a thing is possible. Again, I ask this out of TOTAL CURIOSITY/INTEREST and nothing else, which is why I am asking for you to use a hypothetical person as an example, if you do not feel comfortable (for whatever reasons) using yourself as an example.

First Point
The thing is that I never said I had a solution to this process. I’m seeking solutions myself and posting here is a way I try to find them.
I never said I’ve escaped it or that I know how to or that it is even possible given the current circumstances.

I’ve stated the mechanisms and the results as I perceive them.
Part of my bitterness is due to the very fact that there is no alternative and no complete escape is possible. Unless one is willing to die.
There are no accessible frontiers, except the internal one, and human nature dictates a reliance on companionship and on all instinctual desires. So some interaction with the social norms is inescapable.

Second Point
I am convinced that if any escape is possible or any growth is, then that this is only feasible to the few with a specific character and mental attitude. Only the few can detach themselves from the world enough to see it as it is and not as they want it to be or were taught that it is.

Whether these ‘personalities’ can be attributed to environment or genes is debatable. I would guess that both are partly responsible in the creation of what I call Free-Spirits.
Plato called them ‘Philosopher Kings’, Nietzsche called them ‘Free-spirits, the Hindus call them ‘Brahmans’ etc.

Third Point
The essence of an independent mind is that it finds its own way and discovers its own methods to disassociate from what inhibits its growth and freedom, as much as this is possible.

The paths of liberty lie inward because the self is the only thing we can know with any degree of certainty and through this self-knowledge the world can be understood.

Me offering ways can only express my own personal struggle and not something to be emulated or imitated. Each mind has its own strengths and weaknesses and is guided by its own experiences and desires.

I can tell you my battles and inspire or simply exchange experiences and you can reciprocate and inspire or simply exchange experiences.
I can tell you about my Ideals and how they are represented in and inspired by a Hellenistic spirit of becoming, but that is all I can do.

Besides, once you’ve accepted another as your leader you’ve ceased to be a free-spirit.
You can be guided and influenced and taught but not controlled. Even this guidance and influence and teaching must be questioned and surpassed.

There are two types of personalities. Leaders and followers.
The first refuse to accept the other as the decider of their fate. This is the essence of maleness, as I define it. The desire to face the unknown or meaninglessness or God or the universe and make it a product of your own Will.
Science is an outcrop of this spirit of becoming. It is man refusing to bow down to ignorance and the unknown, cowering beneath forces that bind him and pleading for leniency and consideration.

The second cannot function without being told what to believe or do or think. They are totally reliant on others to find self and meaning and values. These more feminine types become fodder in the battles between the first group and the hands that make their ideas feasible. They capitulate to fear and ignorance seek out guidance and authority in anything and everyone. If none are found they construct deities of omnipotence and omniscience and place them so high that they become an unattainable ideal and they remain forever servants to them.

Fourth Point
The first step to any conscious change and the root of all empowerment is awareness.
The second is acceptance.
Without these nothing further is possible.
Deconstruction isn’t meant to destroy a thing but to understand it completely without romanticism or naivite. The human mind is inclined to interpret things positively and in so doing the totality is misinterpreted.

Fifth Point
How the world is and how the individual is, are mutually dependant but the individual can participate in the world, as much or as little as he/she wishes, without being touched or soiled by it.

I can work and make money because that is what is expected and that is how I can enjoy certain things and because I am simply forced to pay bills and taxes, but if I begin defining myself to myself, and because of this to others, using my job or the money I make, then I’m not only participating but I’ve become part of what I see as superficial and diseased. I’ve now adopted the pre-existing values as my own and my self-worth is decided by how much service I offer to the system, which rewards me as a consequence.

I become a construct of a mirrored image, in the eyes of the other. My self-wroth is decided and judged by others and how they perceive me. How they perceive me is dependant on the prevailing ideal of a particular culture and historical instance. Therefore my becoming is simply in relation to others. But not only others, as in a specific group, but others as the majority.

I can say that I do something because I have no other option but once I try to justify my choice as being superior or virtuous then I’m exposing the extent of my indoctrination and subservience to it.
I can say that I own a car, for example, and admit that it is only a machine that has been imposed on me as necessary to my survival, but once I begin associating my worth by its supposed quality or the myths a certain brand has been painted with and I present this external object as an extension of my self and proof of my quality of being, then I am more than just playing the game, I am now a slave to it.
I have lost myself and so I find self in the external or in ideals imposed by others.

T a certain extent this is unavoidable. We are social creatures, after all and we are driven by instinct. So, which group we find our self-worth through and which ideals we choose to live up to, determines our character and our actions and our beliefs.