A Brighter Future

(copied from two emails)

I don’t know what to do, and it seems I will only hurt people while I make up my mind. When it comes to the internet, I am far more healthy in my relationships- there is no need to put on a face, to worry about how they feel.

On the Internet, everyone is connected, so there’s no need to worry about that. On the Internet, I don’t need to worry about who others really are, or who I am- the self we project on the Internet is itself who we are- we decide who we are through how we choose to present ourselves, and that image becomes who we are.

I’m sick of having to worry about reaffirming things that should be obvious- should be natural. The real world is limiting my life, and I was never meant to be part of the real world anyway. But you tell me- what should I do. I can’t be in the real world without being fake.

You think I’m nicer in person…well, that’s because I’m fake in person. If you haven’t realized this already, you should know that truly nice, or superficially perfect people are usually fake.

On the Internet, I don’t have to be fake. That is probably why I feel it is close to my true self.

I’m tired of waiting. I don’t think this fakeness will ever turn to a real me, because I know the world- not even you, will accept the real me. I’m tired of maintaining this fake relationship, of trying to maintain an image so that I won’t be hated.

I don’t want you to hate me, but if I acted according to my true self, you would definitely hate me. I know you well enough to know this. Because it would be unfair to force myself on the world, there is only one place to run:

The Internet

Because I know that my true self is, in the eyes of the world- a criminal. You should just stop the in-person visitation, because it is torture to me, and a waste of time, since the person you are spending time with isn’t me, but an image put up because I’m afraid, because I know you hate my true self.

“I heard about this Dr. on KQED TV who got rid of a boy’s autism by taking him off foods which contained gluten and dairy products. I don’t know if it is true. But I know you are very good at research and that you could find out the details.”

This is something I feel very strongly about: autism, Aspergers, and any mental disorder, illness, etc. are never caused by genetics or mind-altering substances of any kind– they are all strictly behavior. So if someone is claiming that a change of diet gets rid of any kind of mental illness, I’m going to have to call bullshit on that.

“If it truly works, perhaps it will works for Aspergers.”

Since it seems you’ve misunderstand my feelings about Asperger’s, let me make a few things perfectly clear:

I don’t see Aspergers as a problem for me, or something that would hinder my potential; on the contrary- without it I cannot reach my potential. Since I’ve expressed difficulties, challenges, and social problems that I’ve associated with Aspergers, you probably misunderstood and thought that I don’t want Aspergers. But it’s quite the opposite- it is very important to me.

It makes me wonder if you ever really think about me (as supposed to thinking about you and me), that you have not realized this until now.

If I really wanted to get rid of the problem, I would want to take medication, therapy, and other treatments. I would see psychiatrists and psychologists, and probably resort to holistic and metaphysical (i.e. mystic) solutions, since they are probably more effective. I would probably smoke 420 and shrooms- anything to loosen up and enhance my social life. If I wanted to get rid of it, I would have probably stayed on medication.

But clearly, I don’t do any of that. To begin with, I have several far more serious mental illnesses (attachment disorder, disassociative disorder, AD[H]D, Bipolar, Schizoid personality disorder, Schizoaffective disorder, etc. Asperger’s is a comparably mild illness.

I see it not has a setback or a problem, but as a gift, and a worthy challenge. Nothing in life comes for free, so I can say with confidence that the symptoms of my mental illnesses, including Asperger’s, are the price that I pay for the advantages of my illnesses– thus, they are not illnesses- more of a tradeoff. This is part of why I believe “life is a tradeoff”.

To begin with, they are considered “illnesses” not because they are detrimental to a person’s mental health (that’s just the rationalization people give for something they do not understand, to justify their fear of it).

Rather, anyone with a mental illness has a considerably different view of reality than the consensus, and so that they might maintain an illusionary level of control over such individuals, society labels
them “mentally ill”.

Normally, people try their very best to understand each other, that they might reconcile differences with each other’s realities, thereby developing intimacy by sharing, merging, and bonding with each other.

But society found that this didn’t work with crazy folk because their realities are so drastically different– thus, attempting to take crazy people seriously produced massive amounts of drama. This is likely how mentally ill folk came to be considered “Satanic”, or “demon-possessed.”

However, society found that by labeling something as an “illness”, It can then be understood that because a person’s behavior is so crazy, there is no need to try to reconcile their reality, since it’s impossible to understand the incomprehensible anyway.

But as for me, I have no illnesses- I have high (and thus partially uncontrolled) levels of spiritual energy and creativity, and an enormous amount of potential once I succeed in harnessing that
energy, rather than letting it harness me.

Just as I gained mental illness in exchange for my social life and mental well-being, I intend to trade time, dedication, and effort to get the the social life and overall well-being that I rightfully deserve.

“I don’t understand, Kurutio I. Matthias, what is the meaning of it?”

Kurutio Ishin Matthias is a semi-fictional name I made that I intend to make my online Internet alias. It would break down as follows:

Matthias: the meaning as it applies to me is still a mystery,but is based in part upon the Biblical figure, Saint Matthias, who replaced Judas following the betrayal.

Kurutio Ishin: It’s a combination of Japanese, an anagram, and general intuition. If broken down, it would mean the following:

Ku= Japanese for “suffering”

Kurushii= Japanese for “frustration”, “pain”, “torture”, “agony”, etc.

Kuru= Japanese for “come[s]“, “it’s coming”, etc.

Ishin= Japanese for “soul”, “will”, “willpower”, etc.

Shin= Japanese for ”true”, ”extend”, ”new”, ”heart”, ”progress”, etc.

[Kur]–>”utio Ishin” = an anagram for the word “Intuition”

If translated, it would mean [roughly]

“Spiritual Knowledge Comes Through Suffering”.

“Soke Cateso” is a far more original name, and is actually something I thought up right now while after realizing that The above translation would make a nice acronym (SKCTS), I adapted the letters to Japanese syllabic form (with the exception of the “C”, which would be changed to a”Ka”…since that word is used as the equivalent of a question mark in Japanese, my leaving it as “Ca” is a sort of inside joke, as it’s like I’m intentionally “hiding the question”).

‘…it seems I will only hurt people while I make up my mind.’  “Make up your mind to do what?”

What I want out of life? That’s a pretty abstract aspect of my life– perhaps it may be that what I really need to do is stop taking life so seriously. I may need to stop trying to make up my mind.

Indecisiveness is one of my greatest weaknesses.

What is comes down to as that the world won’t accept me, so I have three main choices regarding this:

(1) reject the world who rejected me, and life my life as I please, regardless of the consequences. this life will either result in me causing a massive-scale revolution in the world, or will shorten my life significantly via getting myself, killed, imprisoned, and/or hated.

(2) block out the real world completely, and live out my life virtually via the Internet, creating a potentially priceless level of meaning out of an otherwise meaningless life.

(3) choose to adapt myself to society, forcing myself to be the person people wanting to me, achieving a meaningless but pleasurable existence by trading my identity for happiness.

That’s the choice that I must make. But I know now that I am not ready to make the choice, and probably won’t be for at least a year or two.

Just as I anticipate the ending of the novel I’m writing (Essence of the Soul), I can feel the end of this Journey, and with all my heart I wish to skip to the end of it, so that I might able to move on with my life. I see the potential, feel the beauty, and sense the possibilities, as if it’s all right within my grasp. But somehow, I’m not ready for it.

Someday I’ll be able to reconcile my knowledge and my feelings with those of society, and develop fruitful and intimate relationship with others, not despite those knowledge and feelings, but because of them.

Right now I’m independent because my view of reality is so radically different from the norm, and for that reason, When I finally achieve a bond- built on trust and intimacy, and love- with friends and relatives, I will have achieved the seemingly impossible, having both complete dependence and independence simultaneously– true and complete interdependence.

Spiritual Energy

Most of my core personal philosophy, and inspiration for my writing ultimately derives from one mathematical– or should I say philosophical concept: the fractal. I don’t know when the first known fractal was created (nor does anyone alive today, I’d wager), but two prominent philosophical figures stand out most for their contributions to the underlying concepts on which it would be built– groundbreaking ideas about the nature of the universe (metaphysics/cosmology), that not only provide a basic understanding of what fractals are, but also extend that understanding to account for all that we perceive, and perhaps beyond: Pythagoras and Heraclitus.

Pythagoras believed that every thing (particular) in the unverse had a number assigned to it, and was characterized and behaved according to that number- existing according to the pattern of that number; he also believed that music was a mysterious force that synchronized with these particulars, serving as a platform by which everything interacted with each other, as well as reacted. If life is an equation, then Pythagoras’s “numbers” are the variables of life, and music provides the mathematical operations that determine how life– and everything, turns out.

Perhaps, as was depicted in J.R.R. Tolkien’s “The Silmarillion”, music itself is the pattern, mysterious as it is. It’s probably just part of the pattern though- and, to further complicate things, what we know as music may not exist outside perception. Pythagoras’s “numbers”, and his mystical beliefs about music, are what I believe to have ultimately inspired Aestheticism, as well as my own current understanding of creativity.

Heraclitus independently developed a different, yet comparable philosophy: He believed that the universe is inherently chaotic and operates as such, but that chaos was only perceptive, and ultimately was built on word and order – essentially a pattern on which the whole world was build and operates according to. Heraclitus dubbed this cosmic pattern the Logos- after the latin word logos, which beared both the meanings of “word” and “order”; to him, the Logos was God, and to me, that god is a fractal– the fractal. This concept ultimately inspired the philosophy(s) of logic (especially my own), and I believe it to have played a role in inspiring cynicism as well.

It really is ironic, that in the primitive development of what would become the fractal, two great philosophers came up with the same basic idea, but coming from two completely different perspectives- creative and logical. Although at odds by superficial appearances, there are only a few core differences between the two- one in particular that is important to me: Creativity is the quality of finding meaning by creating meaning where there is none, and Logic is the quality of finding meaning by extracting it from existing sources. This is where spiritual energy comes in.

In an earlier post, “Heart and Soul”, I reached the conclusion that the Ego is the Soul. I know that this is wrong (just as I knew my conclusions on “Pride” were wrong even as I wrote it), but for now they will be assumed true, for the purpose of inspiration- a placeholder until a more accurate understanding is found. It is however clear that the Ego is a vital component of the Soul, and is somehow inseparable from it (by way of some kind of nexus).

To further clarify this relationship: I believe there to be a definite difference between knowledge and truth: Truth is the pure and thus perfect form, and knowledge is the corrupt and thus imperfect form. Note that perfection & purity do not necessarily denote goodness, nor do corruption & imperfection denote evil. That would be “missing the point”, so instead think of it in terms of a person and their mirror reflection. A person cannot see themselves without an optical reflection of some kind, so it would be hypocritical to say that what (to some extent) we love- is evil. Even though perception is corrupt, without it we, as individuals, would not exist– a proverbial “necessary evil.”

Having established that: there are two primary types of knowledg that fall within the limits of human perception: intuition and experiences (empirical).

For a while now, the Id has been a mystery to me, but I’m finally beginning to understand it. The Id, as depicted by its originator (Sigmund Freud), is pure desire, and thus (from what I can well) is as infinite as (or more infinite than) perception allows. That being the case, what role can the Id have that would be compatible with the caliber of its nature? My answer: The Id is the Essence of the Soul., and all spiritual energy is the product of the Id (which would imply that music is a component of the Id). Thus also, the Id is truth. (Now we know why children are so “pure hearted”– it’s because they’re pure Id!).

From this fresh philosophical foundation, I can now begin to understand the other “souls”- the Ego and SuperEgo.

The Ego gives form, nature, and other defining characteristics [to particulars] and the SuperEgo is the medium by which spiritual energy is expressed, shared, extracted, and transferred– with other  people, and with particulars in general. I believe that spiritual energy– that is, knowledge, is held not only by [perceptively] sentient beings such as humans and animals, but also by plants, and inanimate objects as well; in some cases, spiritual energy is stored especially by inanimate objects. Although they might not be aware of, or able to appreciate the potentially massive levels of spiritual energy they contain– even if they are not capable of facilitating the transfer of such energy, many of them have far more than some- perhaps most humans.

Magic, meditation, psychic ability, telepathy, prophesy, witchcraft, and miracles in general (see “Karma” post), are the direct result of channeling spiritual energy- and thus, focus is the most important thing needed to effectively utilize it. This is why prayer is often done with the hands folded and eyes closed, why martial arts involve specialized vocalizations and body movements, and why meditation often includes the iteration of certain sounds and an emphasis on repetition. By focusing one’s spiritual energy, one can better control it and direct it towards specific tasks, rather than expend transfer, and receive it mindlessly and wastefully, as most people appear to do.

The Id is then the source of our spiritual energy- what asian cultures refer to as “Chi”. The Ego gives identity, form, and nature to this energy supplied by our “Chi”, that we might control and appreciate it. Finally, the SuperEgo is the medium that facilitates the exchange, sharing, transfer, and extracting of spiritual energy, between humans, plants, animals, objects, and everything that exists. Here’s another even more interesting thought: We know Zero-Point Energy exists, and is found even in perceptively empty vaccuums, but cannot extract it. Zero-Point Energy is everywhere and yet nowhere- a mysterious force. I believe that Zero Point energy is the material form of the Id.

Another way of looking at it: To use the analogy of a program: Spiritual energy might best compare to source code, in that it is raw and inherently giberish until it is interpreted. Perception- our Ego, serves as the interpreter, and thus what [perceptively] the end-product will be. Everyone interprets spiritual energy a little differently, because all of our Egos are different, especially in this day and age where life has become so overwhelmingly complicated. Just like in source code, we all tend to “comment out” a lot of spiritual energy, simply because we can’t handle it. Mental illness is, in my opinion, the result of the inability to filter out spiritual energy. Those who possess this deficiency like myself- we are extremely creative whether we like it or not– or rather, we are creative because we can’t help it.

Medication can, for some mentally ill folk, provide that filtering, although in the process it takes away one’s control. In my case, however, I was too strong-willed for medication to work that way, and so it ended causing a somewhat opposite effect- desperation. With what I know now, things would not turn out that way, but that just wouldn’t be me. Then again, I could probably achieve more happiness off medication anyway– it’s just at this point happiness really isn’t a high priority- it’s just wishful thinking, at least for now. Sure having more creativity makes life far more difficult for me than for others, but it also gives me a much greater potential, and I like a good challenge anyway.

Not everyone likes a challenge, but for everyone possessing high levels of creativity, we must either learn to control– adapt to it, or let it control us. The latter scenario reminds me of what occurs when a system runs a program it does not have the resources to handle- we must either force ourselves to create the resources (which in an OS would ironically be called “virtual memory”), or we will crash (i.e. a psychological breakdown).

Getting back to the point: “Everyone interprets spiritual energy a little bit differently.” This is why knowledge is so subjective- to know or understand anything, it must be interpreted. The Ego (interpreter) is therefore the most obvious scapegoat for why we are so different- so complicated- and why no person can ever entirely agree with anyone about anything. But the Ego doesn’t care about how it interprets anything- it’s conditioned to care, and continues to develop an increasingly complex understanding of everything that is perceived. It’s not the Logos that conditions it- well, at least not directly. It’s our environment, and more mysteriously– oneself.

I don’t know about other people, but I know that I have a self that is not conditioned by the SuperEgo or the Ego, but another sentience that posesses a strange independence– it feels a lot like having a self from another life- a reincarnated soul proverbially trapped in the back of my head. Perhaps this self is my true soul…

The Ego does have conditions, but does not care about what the conditions are so long as there are conditions; anyone therefore can, if they so desire, be anything and do anything they want. That would make it appear that true freewill is within our grasp. But there is one problem: We have a tendency- and myself especially- to make life complicated. It is after all our nature– the soul was after all born out of the complex tendencies of nature (i.e. evolution).

A person can completely remake themselves every day. if they wish. Granted, this would be a chaotic and confusing lifestyle, and something I don’t think I would ever be willing to commit to completely. But no matter how many times we remake ourselves- that is, no matter how many psychological deaths (see “What I’ve Done” post) we undergo, eventually each and every “self” will become just another blueprint for the Ego, and continually increase in complexity until we cannot even perceive the changes that occur within ourselves.

How to escape from this? The answer I have for now is to treat the self as irrelevant; but this answer doesn’t quite fit right; there are too many philosophical problems that need to be resolved for it to work. But, I suppose it’s a start…

A Clown’s Mask

Lately, I’ve noticed how differently people perceive me compared to who I really am, and really feel. The vast majority of people I’ve met – both those that know me well, and strangers that I’ll probably never meet again– the consensus of other people is that I am cheerful, optimistic, and enthusiastic. However, this is far from the truth. As to whether it’s due to psychological defense mechanisms, and/or due to post-trauma- or simply a case of escapism and denial, I may never know– although I have a hunch it’s all the above, as well as a combination of other factors- such is ulterior motivation. But in understanding this unexpected development, I’ve gained valuable insights into the truth behind the Clown’s mask- the suffering and sadness that lies beneath the smile.

An example that first comes to mind is Robin Williams- I just get the impression that his eccentricities (which to a significant extent I share) and deameanor– that like myself, he hides behind a Clown’s mask. This is especially evident in his portrayal in Patch Adams, which so happens to be one of my favorite movies. That story may well be biographical in cerain respects, as “Patch” also escapes his depression and suffering by smiling constantly– pretending to not take anything seriously, treating everything like a joke; and a desire to help other people and make them happy. Though I can’t speak for everyone with depression, I’ve found it’s easier to be “happy” when helping others.

By helping other people, and making others happy, someone dealing with depression can attain an illusionary happiness, which although does not feel real, is better than nothing- better than being alone- self-tortured and melancholic. Even though it’s not real, I can pretend that I don’t exist, and at that point reality becomes irrelevant. I can then share the feelings (or superficial demeanor) of others- share their happiness, as if it were my own. Being caught between this desperate pretension and terrifying truth, I can understand what lies beneath that smile, because that smile is also my own, and I know myself all too well. Even if it’s not real I can pretend– desperately pretend. If I am to have any sense of comfort when with other people, I have no choice but to pretend. I could try pretending alone, but while with other people, it’s a lot easier, because then my pretense is justified– validated, by an external source– because people around me really can’t tell the difference.

Because they can’t tell the difference, and so respond as if I am happy, that satisfies my Ego, and so it becomes as if I actually am happy– the line between reality and fantasy blurs, as reality becomes irrelevant. Logic is fulfilled- the fallacy that everyone thinks I am happy, so I must be happy– is good enough. The Ego is very interesting- see, even after all this time thinking about it, I still don’t understand many aspects of it. One thing that gets me though: is it logical to be happy? Happiness superficially is a good thing, but one could argue that since happiness is the state of being content, it is detrimental to survival. But at the same time, because we know happiness is a good thing at least sometimes, so in order to want to live, we must know or at least believe that happiness is attainable. So the Ego is an agent of Balance, since the only way to ensure both ambition (by which we are able to thrive) and happiness– that requires meeting somewhere in the middle- which is what Balance is.

Balance, as I’ve come to understand, is really another word for Logos, but please note that The Logos and logic are completely different entities, although as logic is decended from Logos, they do share some things in common. The Ego is born of the Logos, and logic is born of the Ego. So even though it might be logical to be happy, logic is only part of the Ego, and whether or not we actually seek happiness, or are happy, depends on other factors, including several that exist outside the Ego. But neither the Ego or logic cares about our happiness–in fact, the Ego does not care at all– it exists for one thing: status quo. In other words, following the pre-existing pattern, and building upon it according to the plan (which itself is born from the pattern), until the plan changes (which is done by other components of the pattern, such as the SuperEgo and its products (such as faith, emotion, fear, etc.)

Although the Ego follows the pattern (status quo), we do not know what the pattern is, or at best, only know part of it. This considered, the Ego is responsible for ulterior motives. Note that when I refer to “ulterior motives”, I’ve not referring to another person having motivations which are not apparent, and different from the ones that are apparent– but more specifically, to different and conflicting motivations that you– and I have, and am not aware of those motivations, because- for example, they are subconscious.

That’s what makes this particularly interesting because, as we know, Freud referred to the Ego as the “Subconscious”, implying a limited level of conscious awareness, and thus control. That is, “conscious motives” are determined by our consciousness (perceived identity- the self), while ulterior motives are determined by the sub part of our subconciousness. Thus, by having people to “be happy” and appreciate my helping them, I can uphold the illusion that I have somewhere I belong; that I am happy. Others think I am happy, and in return people are “happy”, and appreciative in return, which implies that I must be happy, because there are more reasons to be than not to be.

Corrupted Truth

The following post is in response to a comment:

Richard@ Thank your very much for your well thought out comments. Even though I do a lot of writing (though not much posted lately) I don’t often get comments from intellectuals like myself, so it’s very exciting to me when I find out I’ve inspired someone. I’m thinking that this summer, I’ll take some time to change the format of my blog to attract more people– but I guess it just hasn’t been a priority since in all honesty, my main reason for writing is selfish- not to inspire others, but to inspire myself. But I think it’s time to change that, and you may see that change reflected if you keep updated with this site.

Your comment took me back- a combination of nostalgia and retrospect for me. This post was a milestone post for me (although it’s not tagged as such), and although it’s full of errors due to speculative off-the-top-of-the-head and incomplete logic, that was only because intuition is inherently unstable, being in some way spiritual in form, and something that has always existed, and that we are inspired by trying to understand, but quite beyond our control; the instability however is unfortunately caused by our imperfect perception of it, and our efforts to try to control intuition by understanding it, despite our imperfection.

By the above two paragraphs, you may have noticed how my perspectives have changed since the writing of that post. but to the point: You are very right about the Id not being the origin of pride. The Id is still very mysterious to me, because although in certain respects the Id, Ego, and SuperEgo are infinite in nature, the Id is perceptively the most infinite– perhaps its inherent simplicity prevents any possible illusion of control, and since control is that which limits (and in the form of the Ego), you could say that the Ego is the corrupted form of the Id, and that the SuperEgo is a further currupted form of that.

I don’t know what my take was on this when I wrote “Id versus Ego”, but for a little while, I assumed the following: Id=past, Ego=Present, SuperEgo=Future. As it turns out, that was wrong– or, at the very least, it’s now in conflict with my current understanding of things. As it stands now– Id=Present, Ego=Future, and SuperEgo=Past — everything flip-flopped. Part of what inspired the correction of this error was Aristotle’s “three souls”, which are what Freud’s conception of the Id, Ego, and SuperEgo were partly based off of in the first place. for a detailed explanation of this, see Facing Reality.

Based on your other comments, I think you’ll find my Pride post very interesting too, although it was written quite a while ago and is not as refined as my current thought, and I was not as well versed as I am now. But since it, like all my posts, are intuitive, I’m confident it will provide you with further inspiration.

To help me understand things like pride (which does not completely fall under logic or emotions in nature) I had to change my model, to one without God– or more specifically, the trinity. Don’t get me wrong, the trinity still applies, but it only exists within perception. I’ve recently determined that the Ego is the source of perception, and so regardless of whether or not, or how God exists (and what his nature really is, our perception is imperfect (the Ego itself is not imperfect– rather, “our” Ego, which is a mirror image of the infinite Ego [to once again quote the Bible, "Let Us make man in Our own image"] is imperfect)– God as we perceive him is under the domain of the Ego, albeit a major component thereof.

For me, this area is still sketchy and incomplete (as you might have noticed), so you could say that my conception of the Id, Ego, and SuperEgo would be somewhere between alpha and beta if they were software. Fortunately, my thoughts exists not to be correct, but to inspire. I strongly request that you also consider my writing as such, at least until I actually get a PhD in Philosophy or something of that caliber :P

But to go on what I do understand: Note that by the Ego I mean not God, but our perception thereof– that part of us that is focused on the future [which is the only part of time that is truly unknown, thus explaining why we must know God, and why the God we know is so preoccupied with the future.-- I would love to cite examples of the latter if you so request :-) ].

But Pride is neither of the Ego or of the Id. It is of the SuperEgo. Up till a few months ago, I assumed that emotions were a product of the Id, since Emotion and Desire are so closely related. If there are two main kinds of truth as I first found (logical and emotional), then this confusion can be resolved as such:

(1) The Ego is the corruption of the Logical Aspect of Id, and (2) The SuperEgo is the corruption of the Emotional Aspect of Id. This may be a hint that the Id itself is truth, and that this truth can only be expressed (or rather appreciated) when corrupted by limitation, and this produces split-image reflected in logical and emotional truth. Unfortunately, the price of appreciation, awareness, and/or understanding of something is corruption of it; that is what I believe to be the true message behind the story of the Fall of Man (to understand, mankind ate of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, but corrupted himself, and the whole world with him, to attain it; to me this means that the price of knowledge is corruption.

As to whether pride is born of logical or emotional truth, it appears to me to be both neither and both. It is the bastard son of emotion and logic, and to complicates things, it neither serves or respects the wishes of either. It is of both logical and emotional nature, but creates a paradox by not producing anything to fulfill its nature. This I believe to be the result of being unable to bear the price paid, and responding by retreating into denial. I explained this in a remarkably (for me!) poetic (or at the very least, both emotional and logical) way in my post Agony. There are probably many inconsistencies and contradictions in that post, but the level of spiritual energy I feel when read it is so great it overwhelms me too much to go back and re-analyze it.

but to clarify: what helped me understand the relationship of pride to the SuperEgo, together with Aristotle’s conception of the three souls, was the realization that emotion was the product of socialization– that is, being with others– or, more accurately, the perception of being with others (to some extent, anime will do!). By isolating myself, I found myself losing almost all my emotion, and the line between reality and fantasy began to blur; I was also unable to cry, despite feeling so much pain.

By being with others (which I’ve forced myself to do by going to the Clearfield, Utah- Job Corps Center) I’m starting to regain those lost emotions and sentimentality, and am able to cry, albeit for now only very little. Faith also follows the same pattern– it was only after isolating myself for many months that I decided to renounce Christianity, and after starting to attend church again, for a while I thought I could be a believer again– I though I really could be a Christian again.

Faith, unlike Pride, is thus born only of emotional truth, and I believe there to be a 3rd component which is born only of Logical truth, although right now I can’t think of what it might be.

Hopefully this post, albeit very long, has answered your questions and served to further inspire you. But I have a hunch that although I probably answered your questions, with those answers came even more questions, as in my experience most philosophical thought seems to do.

Heart and Soul

What it seems that a lot of people don’t understand, and for that reason misunderstand me, is that I know a great deal about what women want– what the “perfect guy” is to a woman. I’ve thought quite a bit about that (albeit not as much as some other things) so in a sense of course I do. The reason why I’m not that person is because I don’t want to be– or more accurately, it’s not important to me. or should I say, not important enough. In fact, I think that if it was really important to me, I could get rid of my Aspergers- because I don’t believe any mental illness– that’s right- any– to be inherently genetic. sure, they have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that mental illness runs in the family, and that a person born from mentally ill parents is fairly likely to have it to, but that’s due to a combination of:

* Vulnerability. I believe that just as AIDS does not cause cancer (it just makes you more vulnerable to it, and other diseases, by killing your immune system) Mental illness is not genetic itself– rather, MIDS (Mental Illness Immune Deficiency)TM ; makes people more vulnerable to certain mental illnesses, and in some cases mental illness in general.

My philosophical take on this is that mental illness is causes by spiritual vulnerability, and that this vulnerability is aggravated by high levels of spiritual energy (which when appreciateable is known as “creativity” *note that spiritual energy is not viewed only from a mystical sense (the popular connotation)– which would refer specifically to spiritual intuition, but to intuition in general (emotional/ social intuition, rational intuition, etc.– the latter being appreciateable as “logic”, or in more specialized forms such as “intellect”)

 

another variable to consider is that some people have less spiritual potential (their will is so weak they are more easily drowned by spiritual energy) which also makes people more vulnerable to spiritual energy.

 

but my point, as a “nurturist” is, that although people are born genetically more vulnerable to certain mental illnesses, whether or not it actually manifests, or even matters, depends on how they are raised, and raise themselves.

 

I know what it means to be normal. as a person who has hated the world who rejected me for being different, I am obsessed with what I hate because I hate it– that is by knowing what “normal” is, I can better ‘control’ that aspect of reality.

 

but of course, I will not become that which I hate. to become “normal”, I must first want to be. unfortunately, I don’t know what I want, because the “I” that wants is too complicated for even I after all this time to understand, let alone control. I can only control that which I know. I think that most people can’t control themselves hardly at all because they barely know themselves, but that’s not mine to judge– and besides, it turns out control isn’t all it’s cut out to be– I would know.

 

hopefully I can get to the point where I can both accept myself and the world— at least a little of both. that balance would bring me closer to the happiness I so long for. I could become a person who loves the world, and become perceptively perfect– and be happy, as I long to be. But the problem with that- even if I was happy, I wouldn’t be me. so what it comes down to- once again, is pride. I know my potential, and I feel compelled to fulfill it, even at the cost of my happiness. is that my Ego? I don’t think so. The Ego, although without it I would not have an identity, at the same time it is not the identity- it is perception itself, and thus the means by which to perceive the identity. I don’t believe the identity to exist outside perception (it’s an illusion), so the Ego and identity go hand-in-hand. The Ego is pretty much the organizer- the management– the superficial shell by which we can appreciate the self. The validator of illusion.

 

I believe in the model that the self is composed of 3 things: The heart. soul, and will. In Dualism, reality is composed of two worlds, and some layers that bridge together these worlds– the Material world– finite and thus imperfect, and the Spiritual world, infinite and thus perfect; I believe to a great extent in a Dualistic philosophy- and in this context, “personal” requires finity, and thus falls under the “Material world”.Intuition, being infinite and perfect, has no form– how we perceive it (Ego), how it reflects upon us (SuperEgo), and how our desires coincide with it (Id) determine what form it takes.

 

The heart is the “personal” form of the “SuperEgo” (where the SuperEgo is infinite), and is the product of a person’s emotional and social intuition, and how they make use of it (depending on how it reflects upon them (all social and emotional intuition comes from (a) sending/receiving spiritual energy and (2) the perception that those that send and receive are people. To use a common example, young girls often have their first social interactions not with their parents, but with trees and flowers– they have an undeveloped Ego (and thus perception), and so are not hindered by it. I have a very undeveloped SuperEgo, to the point that there is little difference to me between watching anime and ‘normal’ social interaction– which makes watching anime appealing, because I am usually accepted (depending of course on who I side with, or if I side with anyone. Because when I am rejected by people when I am “being myself”, it’s no wonder anime would be so attractive to me. But because of that, I am quite literally “heartless”.

 

The Soul, as I discovered very recently in a post that I will write tomorrow, is the Ego. This is probably why I was so interested in the soul– control is an essential for one who hates the world. Now because I have it, I no longer hate the world, but hate myself instead. Perhaps now that I’ve seen both sides, I can find a balance, but that’ll have to wait for another post.  *Note that when I say ”physical”, I’m referring to that which is perceivable– that which we, as ‘people’, can appreciate.– also, the Ego is definitely infinite, where the the Soul is finite.* Even though the soul would more accurately be the ‘physical’ manifestation of the Ego, there isn’t much difference besides that– you could say that the Ego is a “universal”, and the Soul is a “particular”, only both in a more “spiritual” sense.

 

It’s ironic that the Soul would be the manifestation of the Ego, because before that would seem like I was downplaying the soul, but especially in light of Hinduism/Buddhism, now it makes perfect sense. The idea that we lose our memory and identity, start off as an empty slate, but still have a “self”, if we lost of SuperEgo and Id, but maintained an Ego, it all works out. The Ego technically would be enough to be considered the “perceptible” self, and since the Ego pretty much is perception, that’s all that really matters, at least as far as “people” are concerned.

 

Finally the Id is our Will– obviously, because it’s the Id that wants, but knows not what it wants. Of all the aspects of the self, I’ve found the Id to be the most mysterious. I think that when it comes down to it, the Id is the part of us that drives us to experience things– anything, indiscriminately. In its purest form, it would probably be chaos incarnate. I believe that if there is one quality that everyone is purposely born with (decided by the Logos, in my view), is curiosity. Some have it more than others, but this drive to live life through experience is something that can be considered universal, and so I would consider one of the rare truths so vital that it permeates humanity to the extreme of being unanimous in applicability.

 

One really important thing to point out, although you should have already noticed, is that despite the Id, Ego, and SuperEgo being infinite, they have two apparently finite aspects: (1) a name, and thus an identity, and (2) a purpose, which clearly restricts their supposedly infinite potential. Granted, going by my original definition of finite, this analysis would be contradictory and invalid. But I’ve found that to presume something to be infinite in the strictest sense would be impossible since, because I’m limited by my perception, to try to even imagine anything which is infinite would be absurd to say the least, and blasphemy to be dramatic. Thus, when I say “infinite”, I mean “infinite” in iterative potential.That is, infinite potential to follow the patterns that the Logos provides. It’s not clear to me whether the Logos is “truly infinite”, but although I don’t believe it to be, that’s already extended way beyond my perception.

 

In addition to the Self as analyzed above, I believe there to be another “self”, which exists primarily outside perception, and ultimately determines our true nature and purpose. That self, for lack of a better world, I’ll for now refer to as the “Spirit”.

 

Originally, I would have thought of the Spirit as something that some had and others didn’t (as I would have written about in “Souless”, but that post has now been cancelled) but I’ve realized that a lot of my thought and philosophy has been biased by a tendency towards extremist, a.k.a. black-and-white perspectives. Such an approach makes it far easier to make sense of things, because abstract concepts are many times only able to be understood when thought of in an extreme, exaggerated manner, but it also is imbalanced, and based in a huge bias, by valuing the ends way above the means.

 

Taking that into account, I’ve shifted my thinking to a premise of reality, and its underlying aspects, are incremental in nature, and that the existence and validity thereof is irrelevant. So it’s not that some people don’t have a Spirit, it’s that some have more than others, and that some have so little that they perceptively don’t have a Spirit. Following this model also makes me more optimistic about my ideal of perfection– even though I know that it’s impossible for anyone to become perfect, perceptive perfection is definitely attainable, and if I can’t tell the difference, it might as well be perfect. The incremental model is also in harmony with Relativity, which is itself a core component of the Logos.

What I’ve Done

Despite all this writing speculating and theorizing about the nature of motivation and causality, of the issues and conflicts native to love, friendship, society, and relationships/communication in general, I’m a pathetic, unstable, lonely, depressed, anti-social psycho and total loser. The only things I really have going for me are computers, writing, creativity, analysis, intelligence, academics/ trivia, my intellect, a slew of other hobbies, and the ability to comfortably(?) and confidently(?) hold a conversation with anyone about just about anything. Well, that and a lot of makeshift charisma. Most importantly, you may hate me or love me, but even if you’ve only met me once, you may never forget me, because I leave a huge impression (good or bad), and have a very strong personality.

Because such qualities are considered very good qualities to have, I was convinced that the apparent popularity I had for a good deal of my life (and still have) was because people liked me. Perhaps some of them did, and do. But it’s the other way around- I was/am popular because I like people. I’m a very selfish person- let’s face it- and my priorities just don’t agree with those of society’s. I have a great deal of pride, because I know how great my potential is. But as I’ll explain in “Points of Authority” (a written-and-will-soon-be-typed post) pride can be one of your worst enemies, and it certainly is for me. Because my Ego says my reality is superior to that of the consensus, I’m compelled to push the whole world away.

I’m sorry world, but your reality is too inferior for my Ego to accept. It’s so inferior that my Ego would rather torture me, depress me, anger me, or immerse me into complete and utter self-denial before accepting your reality. In that sense- yes, I’m very closed-minded. My definition of closed-minded is itself quite different from that of the consensus. Yes, I am a rebel- that much is obvious. But it’s not like I want to be. But it just so happens that, unfortunately, my Ego does. It’s not as though my Ego wants to see me suffer. On the contrary, my feelings are usually irrelevant. All the Ego wants is to increase the chances of surviving and thriving, and suffering is a necessary byproduct of that. I want to change- I really do.

I want to be happy. I want to stop thinking, stop caring, settle down with a girlfriend, then a wife, have a family, and live a modest yet fulfilling life. I want to just enjoy life in those small yet profound ways. I would be very satisfied with that. But my Ego wouldn’t! Right now, I just realized what the Ego is. The Ego is the soul. The fact that it feels like I have a soul and others don’t- it’s because:

(1) I have a comparably enormous Ego, and

(2) I’m a great deal more aware of my Ego than the vast majority.

For the past could years I’ve been toying with the idea of psychological death and rebirth- a deathless reincarnation. Well actually I’ve already done so once, although my rebirth was largely internal. Perhaps the reason for this is because back then, I didn’t know what I wanted- all I knew is what I didn’t want- who I was then, and that I wanted to find the meaning of life, and my role in it– “Our Purpose”. To that end I’ve been successful thus far, although the meaning of life- and even my purpose- have proven to be as complicated as anticipated, if not moreso.

Even now, having a better idea of what I really want, it’s hard to pass up on what I’m doing, because every insight is so incredible, and the more I write and think, the more refined and meaningful my writing becomes. To add to this, I’m even more inspired since I can to Clearfield Job Corps, than I’ve ever been before. I know that no matter how amazing my insights become, I’ll never gain happiness from them. But as a slave to my Ego, and being weak-willed, it’s difficult to do anything about it. I know- this makes me a very complicated person

But should I, in the words of Linkin Park, “face myself; let go what I’ve done, [and] erase myself, and [forgive] what I’ve done…and clean this slate (psychological death) with the hands of uncertainty…” (a psychological conflict of interests) and recreate myself as a person I know will be happy. What troubles me most about this is the effect it will have on Balance– What price will I have to pay? Will the ceasing of insights be sufficient?

I don’t know anymore. The stakes are too high, and I’m not willing to take the risk. Perhaps my self-esteem is higher than I give myself credit for. That’s been bugging me for a while (many inconsistancies in practive), and just now I figured it out. The self that wants to be happy– which normally I consider my “true self”, is my SuperEgo. Having very little instinct and social/emotional intuition (empathy, etc.) Because this part of me can only influence, and very little influence at that, I perceive myself as weak-willed. And because it gives in so easily to the porogative of the Ego, I perceive myself as having little respect or love for myself, because that love and respect is downplayed in favor of the Ego’s agenda, which considers such qualities irrelevant.

For the same reasons, my SuperEgo, being responsible for social affairs, gives in easily to the Egos of others– which in turn results in me being perceived as a “bitch” or “pushover” by some people, and in a way, I really am. Now that I understand thus, I can confirm that I have extremely high self-esteem- it’s just that most of it goes to a part of me that can’t express itself well socially, while the part that I (and others) can identify with, ends up playing the role of the Ego’s bitch for the most part.

Ego

I once made the controversial remark “everyone always believes what they want to believe, and perhaps more controversially, “everyone always sees what they want to see. Although these statements are without a doubt bold and extremely presumptive, and would be considered “closed-minded” by society’s standards, it will all make sense if you take into account that it’s the Ego’s job to control perception. You know how sometimes you see things– or should I say ‘imagine’ certain things, only to snap out of that sort of trance to realize that it was “just your imagination”? Well guess what, that little something was a psychological glitch. That’s right, occurances like that are the symptoms of bugs in the- or should I say your Ego’s Matrix.

This is more than just a convenient reference to “The Matrix” trilogy– everyone’s Ego has the same level of control over them- over their perception, as “The Matrix” had over humanity, as depicted in the movies. In a very direct sense, I’ve spent much of the last couple years trying desperately to escape from my Ego, or at the very least from the matrix that it has myself, and everyone else trapped in. When they say “perception is your greatest enemy”, this is what is meant.

But at the same time, we cannot “exist” without our Ego. Sometimes we hate it, and sometimes we love it, but either way we can’t live without it. But my question is, “Is the Ego part of me, or is it manipulating me from the inside?” This question comes at the heart of one of my most troubling concerns- ulterior motives. Specifically, even though the Ego may be part of me– especially since it may be part of me, I worry about who I really am, what I’m really supposed to be doing. Is the Ego preventing me from achieving my true potential- realizing my true nature? I’d say yes it is.

But at the same time, I know that there is a me inside that really doesn’t care about all this philosophy and meaning of life bullshit, doesn’t care about ambition or success or pride, doesn’t care about what people think– that me just wants to be happy. But in almost all cases, partly because I’m so weak-willed, I almost always lose to my Ego. For that reason I feel so fake- so superficial, like a puppet, serving the purposes of another me. My greatest comfort for this insecurity regarding my identity:

My model of truth, and the discovery thereof. That is, it doesn’t matter whether or not anything is objectively true or valid- what really matter is how certain ‘truths’ inspire, influence, and affect this world, and my world– and the realities of both. In other words, truth is not found in what is valid or provable, but in that which inspires, and ultimately that which brings about change in the world. ‘The proof is in the pudding’.

My goal, although it will no doubt be difficult and, at times, unbearable, is to discover amd live in a reality as independent as possible from my Ego and SuperEgo, and especially the Ego. Only then will I find a truly enlightened understanding of what truth really is. And if I fail, I will at least discover many amazing things along the way, and inspire others to take over where I left off– a proverbial “passing the baton”. Or rather, I’m sure I myself am only continuing where countless others throughout history have left off– a cosmic journey that may even surpass time itself.

SuperEgo

Out of Freud’s three constructs of the self, I’ve been confused most (by far) by the nature of the SuperEgo. No matter what insight I had about it, none seemed to fit quite right. Now I know why: I never had much of one to begin with. If there are three types of intuition: emotional (Id), rational (Ego), instinct (SuperEgo), then I have very little instinct or social intuition. Now that I think about it, Asperger’s disorder (and likely every other derivative of Autism) can be simplified to 3 words: social intuition deficiency.

While the symptoms and manifestations may be different, I believe this difference to not be due to variations of the illness itself, but variations in how each person with this deficiency deals with it, and the environment in which they deal with it. For example, if internalizing and projecting are two different psychological responses to this deficiency, then Autism would be the product of a person with almost no social intuition internalizing, while one who responds by projecting would develop Aspergers.

Freud’s understanding of the SuperEgo was/is vague and incomplete, which is probably part of why Carl Jung spent so much effort clarifying the SuperEgo, using the Collective Consciousness as a supporting construct. The Collective Consciousness is another product of mankind’s spiritual evolution, and is an extension of the SuperEgo, much in the same way the SuperEgo is an extension of the Ego.

At the same time, the SuperEgo provides a link and common ground between one’s Ego and the Egos of the rest of humanity. In other words, the Collective Consciousness is the world’s largest and most basic social network, and the SuperEgo is the router of that network. From this perspective, everyone else would be my “AlterEgos”.

The Ego’s nature requires that one’s reality be Absolute, and although this was possible in the beginning, humanity has increased in complexity so much that a uniform reality is now impossible, absurd to imagine. With the Ego alone, this would inevitably result in a psychological paradox. So the SuperEgo’s role is to act as a counterbalance. If the Ego decides, and the Id desires, then the SuperEgo influences. In essence the SuperEgo is intermediary of life. Now I know that this is different from Freud’s model, in which the Ego was the servant of two masters (the Id & the SuperEgo), but I found that model to be incomplete and flawed (just as Jung apparently did, go figure!)

The SuperEgo’s role is to manipulate the Ego to ensure a compromise between the realities of different people, and the product of that is social intuition. Because I have very little of that, my SuperEgo has very little influence on me, which- for better or for worse, allows me a high degee of independence from many of the core aspects of society and normative culture, but more importantly, freedom from Social Bias.

The greatest disadvantage to this is an inability to naturally fit in. The purpose of intuition is partly to be able to micromanage a great deal of variables without having to think about it- most of the, are normally handled subconsciously (or should I say, “superconsciously”!) , and as a result, most people take the ability to socialize in a “socially appropriate” manner for granted. Even if I somehow were able to determine and understand all these social variables, and successfully apply them consistently (which would be a miracle), I could only pretend. It would never be real, because I would not be utilizing social patterns intuitively.

In my model, the Id os completely independent of the Ego and SuperEgo; because Id is pure desire, and desire is inherently infinite. Aside from that, for the Id to be dependent would create certain conflicts and inconsistencies with the finer points of this model. Perhaps I’m also able to analyze myself as if I have more than one self for the same reason- because I have very little SuperEgo. Everyone has (in a sense) separate selves- it’s just that most of them are able to take it for granted, and so don’t realize it.

My personality on the internet is also a bit different- I’ve even thought of that self as my ‘true self’ — the “intelligent little creature”. Considering the ironic SuperEgo-like semblance, I can’t help but wonder if that when I intuitively identified that part of myself as a kid, I was providing a sort of psychic foreshadowing for a far-into-the-future deeper understanding I would reach of myself. That self is what remains of my SuperEgo.

I can’t handle the truth

Edit: I changed my mind. What can I say- extreme emotions usually result in poor judgement. Besides, even Koji Oe went through a similar phase :P

was kinda upset about it though because, although I figured it was just a phase and he would eventually start posting again (especially at this age (early 20’s) it’s a common thing, after all) But I never expected it would only last 2 days! I ended up missing a month’s worth of content, and it would take way too long to get up-to-date, in edition to everything else (wikipedia, anime, procrastinating, humor, forum browsing, news-checking, procrastinating, trolling, craigslist browsing, music listening, singing, did I already say procrastinating? ; lol jk :P. Oh well ;{

yeah I know that was totally lolrandom.

______________________________________________________________

So since I can’t handle the truth, the blog will remain as-is indefinitely.

I swear I really believed I could handle it, since I’m special- but I guess I’m not special enough. I had taken the possibility of failure into account, and I knew that there was an extremely high risk of totally f*cking myself up in the process (which unfortunately I already have), but I guess I had to do it.

To find the truth requires complete denial of oneself (since the “self” is the source of all bias, and bias is the greatest obstacle to truth) And to some degree I suceeded, as I don’t know whether I hate myself or just plain don’t give a sh*t about myself.

Basically, to find the truth requires lying to yourself- that’s one of the great ironies of life. The reason you must lie to yourself is because human beings are paradoxes- we are programmed to believe in and fulfill ideals that do not exist and are impossible to fulfill. The truth that we know intuitively is nothing but lies. but if we are to keep our sanity, we must believe those lies- I must believe those lies.

I don’t know if I can believe those lies, but at this point I don’t have much choice, because (in the words of Linkin Park) “I’m about to break”.

Even though it’s like this- even in my desperation, I know I’m not capable of giving in, of giving up. I don’t know how I know, but I guess it’s just part of my nature. I know that what I write about is the closest thing to truth there is, because it’s unbiased, and I have absolutely no motivation write these things, because doing so increases my suffering, as I force myself to accept these horrible nightmarish truths. God I wish what I was writing was lies. I wish I could believe what everyone else does.

for those reading this, most of you are so f*cking lucky you’re not as f*cked up as I am, that you don’t have to deal with the truth like I do. this desperation is killing me, it’s torture. It’s been like this for so long- I feel like I’m numb to it, but somehow it keeps getting worse over time- each day is more and more hard to deal with- my “drugs” don’t work anymore. I can’t hide from the truth anymore. I can’t pretend I don’t exist anymore. I can’t laugh it off, and live in this f*cked up state of denial anymore- it’s right in front of me, and there’s nothing I can do about it.

I was always out of control, but now I realize just how terrible it is to be so completely aware of it. I’m so f*cked up that I’m cursing a god I don’t even believe in for creating me. I really wish I could die, but I know I won’t. it’s not like I’m a masochist (though many times I believe I am) but I somehow can’t bring myself to go through with it, because I’m too damn weak-willed. this is f*cking torture.

wtf was I thinking- this self-righteous pursuit of truth. There is nothing more cruel to bestow upon someone than the truth, because the truth is harsh, cold, evil, and torturous agony, and there’s not a damn thing anyone can do about it.

for everyone reading this- you have no idea how f*cking lucky you are to be ignorant. If you knew the truth like I do, then you would be as f*cked up (if not more) as I am, just as f*cking bat-f*ck crazy as I am, and there wouldn’t be a f*cking thing you could do about it either. I have no idea what I’m going to do- so I can rid myself of this torture. this pursuit of the truth was an inevitability- I’ve been obsessively curious about everything since I was a kid. God, f*ck please f*cking exist, so you can put me out of my misery. or someone else, please do it in God’s f*cking stead. I’m too much of a f*cking pussy to do it myself, so someone else do it for me. with all my fetishes, bat-f*ck crazy beliefs, and all the perverted and god-damn crazy sh*t I’ve done, it would be doing the whole world a f*cking favor.

there is nothing in this world that would make life worth living for me.

f*ck you God for creating hope! f*ck you. why do you torture me with this f*cking hope. if it weren’t for that, I probably would have off-ed myself by now, and would be able to rest in peace. f*ck what’s with this irrational concept- why don’t you let me despair already,

God? f*cking send me to hell already– that’s right people I want to go to hell. at least then I’ll be able to despair (all hope abandon ye who enter here). my life is a whole lot worse than hell could ever be. God, just kill me end send me to hell, and be done with it. f*king kill me. I want to go to hell- I want to f*cking die, so just do it already. put me out of my f*cking misery- you merciless sadist. you’ve had your share of f*cking with me- just be done with it. f*ck you God, f*ck you. what must I do to die? this is f*cking agony- this is torture- why can’t I just die?

Social Abuse

(also copied from an email):

sad to say, even for those who do care to me, I’m completely incapable of accepting those feelings (or any for that matter, including my own), and probably won’t be able to for a significantly long time. this fact was made obvious to me when Jerry, the most important person in my life, died. after a while, I became depressed, but not because of a sense of loss, but because I realized that I did not have it in me to feel loss.

this would not depress me had it always been this way, because if that were the case, I would not have any standard to compare against, and so the worst I would feel is “left-out” (since I know everyone else has such feelings, and I don’t. but there was a point in my life when I was extremely sentimental, even proudly calling myself a “hopeless romantic”. back then, I knew how to cry.

If I cannot feel loss even when the most important person to me dies, that makes me a (to be cynical) heartless bastard. but there’s nothing I can do about it, at least for now.

so it really doesn’t make any difference (to me) whether other’s care about me or not (although this is a depressing way of explaining it, pretty much- you have no reason to worry about it.

I was pondering this question the other day: If socializing with/being around other people makes me feel even more alone than when I’m by myself, why am I overall more happy when with other people?

the answer: when with other people, even though I feel alone, I can pretend that I’m not alone, and these “lies” are justified by the physical and verbal presence of people, with every bit of interaction supporting this illusion.

also, when with others, it’s easier to forget I exist, because others around me exist.

by interacting with others, I can virtually become them (take on their identity), by forgetting I exist and pretending that I am them. because life feels like a dream, and even more so when with others, such illusions are no different than reality: by interacting with other people, I leave my own dream, and enter other’s dreams.

Because they are not alone, I am not alone, because I am them. and because it’s a dream, I don’t have to worry about it being real, and once I end those interactions, the dream(s) end, and I feel alone again. Due to the psychological high of the dream-hopping, I end up even more depressed then I was to begin with. 

That’s probably the main reason why I don’t socialize with people of my own incentive- any time I socialize at all- every single time I need to either be given an excuse, or invent one (and 90 % of the time it’s the former).

There is no difference to me between drugs, people, or any other “addiction”

I’m against the concept of addiction, because it implies that certain things are more addictive to others, and that only a few things are addictive. When people refer to “addiction”, they are referring to things that are both “needed” (significantly desired) and generally in short supply, either due to substance-control or if the cost of maintenance is high. Or in the case of sex- because most people don’t want to get laid every day (since there are more important things to do? –and don’t even say they do– otherwise they would have sex every day- which most people don’t, obviously).

In reality though, addiction refers to when a person has an unhealthy need of any particular. while I’m not addicted to socialization, it is a drug for me. Like all drugs (sex included) the more you have it, the less of a high you get (and so it doesn’t feel as good. That’s why people don’t have sex every day BTW (that and sometimes they really do have better things to do :P ) But with most drugs, socialization (in my case) included, the high is followed by a low that usually equates in intensity to that of the high+ the level of your original state- resulting in a temporary super-low. 

That’s what happens after I leave other’s dreams- when I’m all alone, I realize that it was just a dream, accept it, and become depressed- many times very depressed. If you remember that one day, after we wrestled for the first time, and I opened up to you a little bit– but when I emailed you after getting home, I said that I wanted to cut things off– for us to never meet or speak again (followed by a long period of silence, and then an offer by you to watch a baseball game, which I turned down.)

This depression is further compounded by a feeling of fakeness. Even when with other people, I feel fake, but it’s only a small lingering feelings, which is easy to ignore, because I am not myself. But when I’m by myself, that feeling is let loose, and adds to my already vulnerable state. As I realize that I was not even dreaming my own dreams, but merely leeching off the dreams of other’s, I can’t help but feel pathetic, and out of control.

I don’t (nor does anyone) get any comfort from the fact that there’s nothing I can do about it, so it’s not my fault- rather, I suffer because I can’t do anything about it, even though I want to. 

this is what I was talking about when I told you the following (in my email “misunderstandings”):

_______________________________________________________________________________

I say “people”, because I am different, I’m disconnected. by being with others, I only become self-aware of my isolation. even if eventually, I might be able to get over such feelings, would it be worth the torture I would have to experience?

I’m tired of escaping, tired of isolating myself, but what other option do I have? I’m afraid of being with other people, but my fears are validated. I can offset those fears, but to do so requires hiding from myself and others, letting a false-self absorb the pain, and put on a good face. In doing so, I can observe through the mask, but can one call that real? 

to others it might be considered “real”, and to you it might, but if so, then that is pure manipulation. I might feel justified manipulating if I got something substantial out of it, but like this- I’m taking God away from people just for “status quo“. there’s no way I could be at ease with such a trade.