LastThursday

The person and your mind are created at the same time, they both have the same source. The nature of the mind is to project outward from itself and to claim ownership of everything it thinks.

Yup I'm practising procrastination today. A bit soundbighty but it resonates with me:

I'm on a roll. I just had the strangest thought about what I'm doing in this journal. It's completely like I'm casting a shadow. You can see me but only by the shadow I'm casting into this journal. You then reconstruct me from my ramblings. It's like I'm giving you the mould of me and you're pouring your interpretation into it. But isn't this exactly what we do IRL? You can never know "me" only what I present to you. Is that sad? Nah. It's glorious, because I have infinite depth and have an infinite number of facets to show you.

More random ramblings. I was thinking about some comments made about Leo's latest video on how to get laid. I haven't seen the video, I don't feel invested enough to watch it at the moment (which is no particular comment on its subject). Maybe I find people's reaction to it more interesting than actually watching it? Anyway, the primary thought I had was that there is a certain ickiness around these sorts of subjects. Why's that? Some of that ickiness I think revolves around the idea of "gaming" people. This is the sort of thing at the heart of capitalism, the idea that it's perfectly ok to use any technique at your disposal in order to sell things to people, or more subtly to get what you want from people. For capitalism the currency is money, for getting laid the currency is sex. There is definitely a quagmire to navigate here, because it's not so clear cut that all forms of manipulation are asymmetrical or necessarily bad per se. What is probably bad is the attitude of active manipulation, and having that attitude permeate society. What's the difference between active and passive manipulation? That's tricky to define. We all need to survive and have our needs met. Largely, having our needs met involve other people at all levels. In turn those other people also need to survive. It works like a balance sheet, having your needs catered to by others goes in the plus column, having to use your resources to help others goes in the minus column. Naturally the exception is where mutual helping helps both sides survive: this results in trade and capitalism eventually. So passive manipulation is at baseline to do with surviving and having your needs met, asking for food and shelter is passive. Active manipulation on the other hand is where you consciously use all the techniques at your disposal to corral people into doing what you want: gaming them. By gaming people you are using an understanding of psychology and human behaviour to manipulate them in an ways that they're not aware of. That there is exactly where the problem lies with gaming. It's that lack of consent and awareness from the person being gamed. Surely that's ok though? If someone is stupid enough to fall for your tricks that's their fault? No. There is a big difference between being open about your intentions: hey I'm selling you this product because it may help you and it will help me also, and, I'm going to trick you into thinking you need this product, even though I know you probably don't. It's not possible for people to be so switched on at all times that they know they're being manipulated and somehow just laugh it off as harmless. And so it is with gaming your way into having sex with a stranger. Is it being done with clear intention in a mutually beneficial environment? Should you feel good about winning at sex by gaming people? Probably not. Saying that I'm not completely naive, to a degree biology dictates that men "prove" themselves to women, and women get to do the choosing. But that is passive manipulation: ultimately survival. In other words e.g., men and women openly flirt with each other and the intention is obvious (flirting is of course passive manipulation and dependent on orientation too). With flirting the manipulation is in both directions for mutual benefit. I think the correct way out of this mindset of gaming others, is to reflect it back on yourself, game yourself. In a way gaming yourself stops being gaming and turns into self-development: you can't pull the wool over your own eyes (mostly). Learn to game yourself for your own benefit, and then let that be a springboard for getting what you want through more natural means. From having read comments on the forum, I think that's ultimately what Leo is pointing out in his video: work on yourself, game yourself not others. -- For something completely different, I stumbled across this artist I suspect I'm completely the wrong demographic, but I really like her voice, and the blatantly Scouse (Liverpool) accent, it's refreshing to hear. And another for good luck:

How could I forget this classic?

It's not for everyone, but one of the main points of a marriage ceremony is the spectacle. It cements the marriage in everyone's mind, there's buy in from all vested interests. Everyone contributes to the commitment and helps it along.

I can neither confirm or deny I may or may not have bumped and grinded to this And some songs are clearly meant for certain activities:

Commitment is an art that's been lost. Marriage gives you a good grounding in the process of commitment. Because it makes it difficult to get out of, marriage forces you to face problems head on and to learn acceptance and even gratitude - it stops you running at every sign of trouble. Yes, a lot of marriages painfully fail, but so do relationships outside of marriage. Commitment is certainty and most people function better with certainty in their lives. Obviously, there are other reasons for marriage: love, family and religion.

The decline of everything. Whenever I go around different towns for whatever reasons, I notice a lot of boarded up places where shops used to be. They generally fall into several types of ex-establishments: shops, pubs, post offices and bank branches. Certainly where I live it seems like once a shop or chain goes under nobody else takes up the empty space. It gives high streets a kind of run down quality which is unattractive and probably goes some way to putting people off from going there in the first place - it's a downward spiral - it's also economics. It can be easy to be doom and gloom about it if you care about it to any degree (I mostly don't). What's mostly killed off the high street as far as I can see is the internet. That's because of several reasons but the main one being that's it's far cheaper for a business to run a website than it is to run a physical space populated with employees. This is what's happened to banking, physical branches just don't make sense economically when most money transactions are virtual. For any banking services that require a human, then you either chat online or on the phone. Bank branches were also not a social hub, but just a means to an end. The same can't be said for pubs and post offices. It's the same story with pubs, for areas with less footfall, it seems like once a pub closes it stays boarded up indefinitely. I find it hard to understand why pubs are closing at such a rate, but really it must just be changing cultural standards. The pub historically is a social hub, and a place for entertainment. But I think the nature of that entertainment has changed and there are different ways to be social nowadays, either online or through different activities. I think also the way people drink here has changed with supermarket alcohol being relatively cheap, and so people drink at each other's homes before going out (not to pub though!); preloading I think the youth call it. Post offices are an odd case. In major towns it's more like a place to get stuff done, but in rural areas it's a social hub often incorporating a shop. There's a lot of lamentation in the media about the demise of post offices especially in rural areas. But they're fighting an impossible battle, it's super easy to exchange messages nowadays, who needs to write letters, there's a million better ways of doing that. Even with the other mainstay of post offices sending and receiving parcels, there are other competing services. I would say it's days are numbered, society has moved on. I would say that the biggest problem is not that these kind of places are closing down, but purely lack of imagination. If your social hub in the village was either the pub or post office, then it would seem grim for you, but in reality all it needs is some imagination and initiative for getting people together regularly. It requires a certain amount of cohesiveness in the first place, in that you have a desire to get together with your neighbours. In bigger towns this doesn't happen anyway, and people get by in other ways. Similarly for unused ex-shop space in town centres, what's lacking is imagination. Instead landlords are simply holding out for the high rents they've been used to, after all an empty property whilst not bringing in cash, also is very cheap to maintain - to a degree they can afford to just sit on it and wait, most landlords own several properties in any case. Local councils and government should be encouraged to buy out these spaces and do something with them. Even converting usage to flats to live in, or offices would be preferable. Why shouldn't people live in town centres again? I'm not so pesimistic about all this. It's the growing pains of rapidly changing culture and economics. A new normal is being established which may or may not be "better" than the old normal. What really matters is that the new normal is given enough space to unfold at its own pace, because really at the heart of it is people, and they can be surprisingly resistant to change. But I suspect technology won't be so accommodating and change will continue to disrupt our lives in difficult ways, but there will also be amazing opportunities to build a better society.

Just for the animation

Just kept pressing F5 until the forum worked. When it did, I didn't know what to write. My finger hurt. What craving have I burnt through, the forum. Yeah right...

@Thought Art you are many people rolled into one with different wants and desires. If you really think about it, how many people have you already influenced - even in minor ways - in your life? Hundreds perhaps. And your influence was spread further by them. Whatever calling you decide to place emphasis on, your reach will be great.

@Myioko absolutely! And why don't more folks wear sky blue dresses with yellow boots eh? -- Some of the things which make life joyful are the small activities you love to do. Here's a few mine: At university there was an overgrown grassy area round the back of the halls of residence. On clear nights I used to go and lay there and be subsumed by the tall grass, then I would stare up and look at the stars and planets. After a while I would see shooting stars. Once my eyes adjusted even more, I could watch the pinpricks of light of satellites zooming about in straight lines all over the sky. It was magical. I really love restaurants and cafe culture. I really enjoy eating novel food, especially sea food of all types. Ideally eating outside in the sunshine on a warm day chatting with friends and watching the world do its thing. On holiday it's even better, there's no rush and everyone is relaxed. Even just sitting by myself outside having a strong coffee is wonderful, and if someone strikes up conversation it's even better. If it was warm enough - it never is here, I would sit outside every morning at the local cafe and have coffee for breakfast (my DNA is continental!). Night clubs. I just enjoy having my senses assaulted. The loud bass vibrating in my chest, the crowds of people dressed up to impress, dancing like an idiot, chatting to beautiful strangers, the dim ethereal lighting, smoke, the dreamlike state of being slightly drunk. It's like a mini-world unto itself. There's something about looking at art. The idea that a painting you're staring at was executed by someone uber-famous like Picasso or Michelangelo, and it was done decades or even hundreds of years ago. Some art is so well executed that it makes you wonder how it could have even been done. I absolutely love renaissance art for its realism. I like Warhol's art and own a Marylin print. But art isn't just painting, modern art installations can be clever or confounding. Canova's sculptures are breathtaking and sensual. I also enjoy Pre-Raphaelite art, for all those posed, long haired women in flowing dresses, and just their emotive composition. There's nothing more pleasurable than riffling through an art gallery or exhibition. I often wish I had talent enough myself to be a proper artist. What can I say about music? I just about love all forms and styles of music. There's just something transcendental about it. I even occasionally like metal or guitar heavy rock music (which is normally so vanilla). There's strong cultural connections too with music, and just getting a different cultural vibe can knock me out of myself. I think that's the point, it occupies my mind and transports me somewhere else. I'm more into the texture of music than it's lyrics though - most lyrics are mumbled anyway! A good syncopated rhythm, chilled voice, modulation, some amount of repetition. For me it's all about the "feel" of the music rather than the technical mastery. Music combined with artistic video is great, but a good song should be able to stand up by itself. I listen to music every single day it's so joyful. Exploration. There's something entrancing about discovering new places. My favourite way of discovery is just to walk, I just enjoy the simplicity and pace of it - everything new can be taken in and appreciated properly. It's always cool to go down that street or path you've been past hundreds of times, but never thought of walking down. Last week I discovered the entire length of Shaftsbury Avenue in London. I had never mentally joined up the two ends, even though I have frequented both Piccadilly and China Town many many times. There's a joy in things clicking together and places being joined up together. People. Man this is a huge subject in itself. But I love people. For sure they can make your life hell, but I find people to be magical. There isn't a day that goes by when I don't have to interact with a person and there's constant pleasure and surprise. People can be so ordinary and yet so amazing at the same time. Some people are even beautiful in the conventional sense, and if it was socially acceptable I would just sit and stare like looking at fine art (the crossover is interesting eh?), but I'll take just a glance instead. But the real beauty of people is that they show you that there's a million different ways to be and if I wanted to I too could be like you. Some of my most joyful moments have been with other people in many different ways.

My lord I love this

How to break up poetically: Think you've had my number? Dial me again, see. Tap tap tap. I'm unapologetic even as the colour runs from my lips. My love fades from red to black and all you do is stare back. Those lips you once kissed are now whispering dismissal. Go. Take your mindless stare elsewhere, do I care? No. I'm unapologetic even as the colour runs from my lips.

NNN sounds completely nuts.

Just wait for the screaming baby nine months later. Sorry I'm trolling. It's like it's always effect without cause, splinters of the past embedded in the present.

It's ok, it will make you realise how pointless it is to be drunk and harden your resolve. That's what I keep telling myself ?

It's funny you should mention that. I've also burned through my social anxiety and anxiety in general, alcohol has always helped me with that. Definitely the two are related for me. I'm sure I'll be teetotal the day after my 50th birthday

I've topped out at 25%. Unless you're saving for a specific reason, it's good to build up a buffer of about 10k of your currency, for whatever emergency crops up. Anything over that 10k you should re-invest into yourself: improving quality of life and self-improvement and starting up a business - or invest into others: charity, help the poor, family etc.

Alcohol. I have never been an alcoholic, but I have always enjoyed its effects especially socially. But I think I've nearly burned through my need for alcohol, I may even stop totally in the near future. I've also nearly burned through my need for validation from other people - it used to be a real problem - but I can stand on my own two feet now. I'm still a bit "hey! look at me!" sometimes, but that's attention not validation, I haven't burned through that one yet.

What is our relationship to animals? My thoughts about this are not fully formed or coherent, but I'll give it a shot. My first instinct is to go back into evolution. We humans are in a dynamical relationship with the environment and that includes animals. To live side-by-side with animals we have to understand them. So probably for most of our pre-history we were hunter-gatherers roaming around in small bands. We would have had to either kill animals for food or be killed by them or otherwise animals were neutral towards us; we were up close to animals on a constant basis. There are two levels of understanding of an animal, extrinsic and intrinsic. What we would have lacked in bare strength (we are puny apes), we more than made up for in intelligence. We used that intelligence to build up knowledge of how animals behaved and moved, which gave us an advantage - this is extrinsic knowledge, which would have been taught through observation and oration. But also over millions of years evolution would have given us inbuilt knowledge of certain animals; intrinsic knowledge. The intrinsic knowledge of animals is actually part of our human make-up. We are universally scared of spiders and snakes, we are paranoid about being watched and predated on (by lions e.g.). But above the level of instinct, there's strong identification with mostly large animals. We use animals on flags and emblems, are fascinated by cat videos, have the strength of a lion and on and on. Whenever we want to be more than human, we take on the persona of animals: wolves, birds (especially birds of prey), large cats, horses, oxen, snakes (Medusa). We easily can imagine being mythical hybrids of human and animal, either in appearance or supernatural ability. This sort of thing abounds in mythical stories and ancient cultures, for example ancient Egyptian mashups of dogs and humans turned into gods, or Greek centaurs. Mythical creatures are also made of parts of different animals, unicorns and griffins and are imbued with supernatural power and horses that can fly (Pegasus). What would any mythical story be without animals? Sometimes animals are given human abilities, and can talk and reason like us, children are delighted by such things and embrace them as nearly a natural and self-evident occurrence. Apes could even talk and take over the world. Really, we anthropomorphise animals all the time, give them personalities and think they're cute and cuddly, friendly or scary. But the converse is also true, we are also animalised by them (can't think of another word for it), we have snakes and spiders and lions inside us - we are partly those things. We understand that we are ourselves animals at a deep level and not separate from them and we are shaped by them.

It occurred to me that I missed out the major reason for my previous post. It's that you are only ever in one of those perspectives at any one time. If you're thinking about the past, you're not thinking about the future. If you're lost in introspection you're not paying attention to what's happening externally. Each perspective is a silo and you flit between each one quickly and many many times a day. The only meta-perspective is what I called the now-spective, but even that is its own kind of silo. This happens because your mental bandwidth is limited, you can only pay attention to a very limited set of things at any one time. One important aspect of the different perspectives is that you "act as if" when operating from the perspective. For example when you're in Retrospective you re-live those old memories as if they were happening now. Say your boss or parent scolded you yesterday for doing something stupid, and you're still angry about it, in this case you're in Retrospective acting as if it were happening right now. If you suddenly switch to Extrospective because someone knocks on your door, then that anger will be temporarily dropped, and now you're acting in response to your external environment. The meta-point about all this, is that you can aim to have a default perspective to fall back on. I would say the now-spective should be the most prevalent and natural perspective to be in. So when you find yourself ruminating negatively about past events, you can bring yourself back into the now to immediately drop the rumination. It's the same about any of the other perspectives. You want the now-spective to be the attractor or centre of balance for all perspectives. This is because the now-spective is the most anchored in direct experience, but also because you are a detached observer and able to stop "acting as if" and not got sidetracked by acting: you can be in your natural state. The other thing to know is that all this "acting as if" is the source of your problems. The anxiety or trauma you experience is only ever engaged when you're working from one the perspectives. Whenever you stop the acting, the anxiety disappears (e.g.). This may seem trite or disingenuous to those suffering mental health problems, but really in these cases the sufferer is repeatedly engaging their depression throughout the day. It is just the frequency with which the sufferer engages which causes problems with being able to function normally. It would seem that to learn to change perspectives more freely would help the sufferer. This is in stark contrast to the "work through problems" model of your therapist. All that "working through problems" aims to do is to recontextualise your suffering so it becomes less intense - but it it a slow, random and laborious process - switching perspectives and pulling yourself back into the now-spective is a quick and accurate process. There's nothing to work through but unlearning the habit of engaging with (mental) suffering.

Can the dream expain itself? Maybe. But the explanation is not the dream itself.