Journey to Nothing

[Leo Nordin]

9 hours ago, LastThursday said:

It's been a while (understatement) since I dated. The following is exactly how I would like to date (swearing warning):

Which character am I?

Ohh noo ughhh, haha

Yeah you're spiderman, I'll cry

Edited May 24, 2021 by Leo Nordin

[LastThursday]

One phenomenon that I've had to deal with throughout my life is the sensation of being sidelined. It's only really quite recently that I've begun to work through this shadow. The reasons for that sensation are kind of complicated. The most obvious one being that I'm from two cultures. They were definitely not mutually incompatible cultures (both being Western European), but they were different enough. I think I felt this keenly as a young kid.

Looking back on it as a family unit in Spain, we were relatively isolated. I don't remember having that many friends not even in school. We would never get visitors. It would seem that my parents themselves were quite isolated in this respect too, I don't really remember them having friends either. My sister and I made up for this lack by being each other's best friend, this was just a natural thing. My dad would often say we were like twins. 

Back in England and being older I was much more aware that I was "different". However, I did make friends easily and this made up for the sidelining. However at home, my parents continued to be quite isolated, but mostly it didn't matter, we were either in school with our friends, or playing outdoors my sister and me. We never really fitted in with the local kids as we got older, there was a difference in temperament and attitude. The local kids were rough and physical and there would often be skirmishes; arguing, fighting and making fun of people was the way to behave. We were soft and defenceless kids my sister and me, we were never inculcated into that way of being. I never grew up to be a "lad". Of course that sort of weakness was taken advantage of both in and out of school, kids are ruthless. That in itself made me feel different and somewhat isolated.

The final straw was a fight started by a local kid with me and my sister, and my mum ended up manhandling the kid to stop the fight. The police were called in, and it was all very tense and emotional. From that point on I kind of decided that it wasn't for me, and I stopped "playing out". My sister followed suit, as I could no longer protect her outside. From the ages of 13 to 19 I felt very isolated with just one or two friends in school. School in itself was brutal at times and the constant low level bullying just intensified the feelings of not fitting in. I think those years were especially formative in setting up how I viewed myself. My dad showed little interest as he worked all hours, and my mum wasn't ever that good at showing me and my sister the kind of interest we needed. We mostly just entertained ourselves: computers for me, and art and music for my sister.

At 19 and at university I finally let loose. My friends were mostly middle class, I wasn't, but I felt that I fitted in for the first time ever. One effect of my feeling different and isolation was that it allowed me to behave differently from the people around me. Over the teenage years I had learned to be self sufficient and got to know myself quite well. This gave me a certain confidence to be authentically me, I wasn't out to be a sheep and just fit in anymore! I noticed that some people found this attractive in me, I had a certain confidence in myself. However, I did a 180 degree turn and became quite hedonistic after years of feeling repressed. Whilst it was fun and a relief, I started to realise that I wasn't being taken seriously. Despite my intellectual abilities my friends never did think much of me in that department, they were clever as fuck themselves. But nor would they take my advice or think that I had anything to offer, other than simply being entertained by me. And at the bottom of it all I was from a different social background - I had to learn to be middle class to fit in. It grated. 

This feeling of never being quite up to scratch no matter what I did, has ingrained itself deeply in me. It has lead to a kind of mixture of emotions: frustration, disappointment, embarrassment over expressing myself, and lingering social anxiety and a largely stubborn attitude. Even now I find it hard to engage people on my terms, so much so that I've mostly given up on that. Either I go along with what other people want, or I do things alone and how I want. People are just not interested in what I'm interested in. 

One of the biggest reasons I isolated myself from my long term friends in Brighton, is that I was never taken seriously, and worse I didn't have kids and all that to talk about. I didn't care about what they cared about, and I couldn't talk at length about the latest super hero film, or what happened in the news, or anything at all.

Fast forward to now. 

I've been forced into a position at work at least, where I am listened to and my advice is taken. In that small sphere of my life, I've got what I always wanted. It's taken a good few years for my employer and customers to trust my judgement. And that pattern has been repeated again and again in my life. I always seem to be treated as if I was near invisible or just not seriously at all, and then over some time, it dawns on people how much I have to offer. I also have a set of friends that have started to take me seriously. They listen to what I say. They're even interested in some of the things I am: walking, photography and so on. They still don't do spirituality, consciousness or even computer programming (although even I can't bring myself to talk about that), but you can't have everything.

I've never particularly lacked confidence in my abilities, but I have lacked confidence in expressing myself to others. I'm able to express certain aspects of myself well, but not others. 

This feeling of being sidelined for most of my life, never really had anything to do with other people. It had everything to do with me. I felt wounded and abandoned and honestly, I didn't take myself very seriously for a large part of my life. Slowly I'm learning, slowly I'm getting there, I'm taking responsibility for what I want. I'm a force to be reckoned with.

Edited May 24, 2021 by LastThursday

[LastThursday]

I'm going Mooji style today:

YOU are not an object. You are not an object. You are not an object.

You are not a vessel full of crap. You are not a vessel full of crap. You are not a vessel full of crap.

You can be loved. You can be loved. You can be loved.

You can love. You can love. You can love.

You are not alone. You are not alone. You are not alone.

Your potential is endless. Your potential is endless. Your potential is endless.

You are not an opinion. You are not an opinion. You are not an opinion.

You are not less than others. You are not less than others. You are not less than others.

You will change. You will change. You will change.

We have each other. We have each other. We have each other.

You are human and proud. You are human and proud. You are human and proud.

[LastThursday]

I'm itching to know who reads my journal. Who is that has viewed my journal nearly 18,000 times? Honestly, most of them were not me. And... I already know who some of you are. Ha!

Anyway, in the olden days before the dawn of the internet proper (c. 1995), there were only a few ways to know anything at all:

• Mass media (TV, Newspapers, Films)
• Books (local library or school)
• Make a phone call (various services)
• Word of mouth
• Write a letter requesting information
• Divine thunderbolt (rare in my case)

Nowadays we have the opposite problem. We only have a few ways of not knowing :

• Switch off your mobile or device
• Step away from the laptop
• Switch off the streaming service 
• Get away from people

I think I'm from an age group that can just about can resist the temptation to look up information, when we get together. It always happens, when did Tom Cruise do his last film? Whatever happened to Daryl Hannah? What is the weather going to be in East Sussex next week when we're having a picnic? But, even we still can't resist the temptation when our phones beep and bop at us for attention, and we simply must take that phone call even if we're in the middle of a good conversation.

Do I lament the passing of the olden days? Nah. But I do have the ability to contrast 2021 with 1984, and something has been lost because of technology. It's got a lot harder to let go of things. In 1984 if you didn't know something and couldn't find out, you'd just move on and forget it. In 1984 if you arranged to meet somewhere, and no-one came, then you made the best of a bad situation and found something else to do or went home again. It was common for teenagers to run up big phone bills - that was the only way to contact someone instantly (from your home only though) - or you physically had to meet up. We seem to be ever drifting away from direct physical face-to-face contact. Instead we're lost in a world of text, images and constant attention and ego stroking (the irony of this post isn't lost on me).

I've got very good at ignoring my mobile when I want to. Some days I switch it off entirely, I take a walk without it. I pretend to have bad reception or that I've forgotten to charge the thing. I notice that people get kind of worried or jumpy when you're not instantly contactable, or if I go days or weeks without contacting back. I just don't care. I don't feel a constant need to give attention or to receive it to cater for some neurotic underlying neediness.

I find it a lot harder to step away from the laptop. My work is in IT so I'm already fighting a losing battle. I still feel a deep down wonderment at what a laptop can actually do, even though I know how it all works to a deep level (bits, bytes and transistors). I used to read science fiction stories, where there would be portals through which you could view other worlds (in 1984). And fuck me, I'm now living in that science fiction story. I used to code programs on my home micro (pre PC days) just so I could have conversations with it. And here we are, the computer talks back to me in 2021. I'm still in the thrall of my laptop and technology, it's a privilege be able to experience it and live through it.

I'm from the last century and strangely proud of it.

[LastThursday]

Going on Holiday

Why do we go on holiday? In fact, before I answer that, why do I feel the need to deconstruct in the first place? Good question. From a young age I've always loved taking things apart, mostly out of curiosity, occasionally I would put the together again. There's a small thrill in nowing how a thing is constructed and what makes it tick. More lately, I've moved on to deconstructing more abstract and intangible things, I still get my thrill dose from it. It allows me to more clearly see things for what they are, and actually enjoy it more because of it (because it becomes a choice not an imperative to do it). Anyway.

The first thing that comes to mind, is that a holiday is about being somewhere completely different. This is most usually in a physically different place, although it could be in a more astract way. What's the point? I think it's really about removing the normal day to day triggers. Like Pavlovian dogs we constantly get triggered by the same things in our everyday environments. In my case I think about having a larger living space and a garden, I'm tempted by my laptop just sitting there enticing me. I'm constantly reminded of work by my work computer and monitors languishing in my makeshift office, taunting me as I pass them ten thousand times a day. I walk the same routes over again every day. I buy the same coffee from the same shop most days. You get the picture. All this triggering stops me/you from exploring other ways of thinking and being; it's a form of prison which is hard to escape from, you have to be determined and random to escape it. In fact I even built a phone app that would randomly buzz once for LEFT and twice for RIGHT, so I could use it on walks and see where I ended up!

On top of being stuck in a prison of triggers, a lot of those triggers can be quite negative. Completely removing yourself from all that, allows you to temporarily escape that prison. Temporary is an interesting word. That word haunts all types of holiday. You always know that a holiday is not a solution to your problems, because you are not really escaping your problems, but simply temporarily putting them on hold. The hope is that you feel rested from a holiday. I've never found this to be the case. Not that a holiday isn't relaxing, it generally is (because you are away from the negativity of being triggered constantly), but it's never restful, because holidays are never long enough. My rule of thumb for even starting to feel "restful" is two weeks and ideally a month. Wage slavery generally baulks at having a month without productivity. Holiday pricing is set up in such a way that having a month or more off is prohibitive (especially for families with kids). I always have to restrain myself when my employer asks me if I feel "well rested and ready to go", my instinctual reaction would be to tell them to "go fuck yourself", but instead I just smile and say "yes".

Going on holiday is also mostly a social event. People do go on holiday by themselves, but it's rare. Really we go to socialise. Whilst we can and do socialise on an everyday basis, it's mostly with work colleagues: people you haven't chosen to be your friends - although sometimes the odd one or two does become a friend. But in our topsy-turvy world we socialise less with the people we actually want to socialise with, their jobs and families suck all the leisure and pleasure out of them. With wage slavery we seem to think that socialising is a frivolous and indulgent activity. On a holiday we're actually allowed to socialise with the people we choose to and like, in a natural way. We are social creatures first and foremost (don't let anyone ever tell you otherwise), but we're treated like individuated commodities in the Western model and a holiday is the relief valve for this pressure.

The travel to a destination can also be part of the pleasure too (although it can be hell). If it's a long distance by plane or train or even by car, we get to enjoy the sensation of going through and over alien landscapes, and get a real sense of the massiveness of the world. It can be humbling to realise that you are flying over continents, with all that weather and landscape and life going on beneath you. Or to hurtle through a landscape in a train where every few minutes there's something new to see, and sharing your experience with others. Or not rushing in your car, stopping sometimes to realise that people speak slightly differently and have different customs. Sometimes a holiday is all journey with no single destination as such, we just keep moving and experiencing novelty. We crave novelty as humans, and a holiday provides that in spades.

What about doing nothing on holiday? It's a quaint expression. I'm genuinely happy to do not very much at all on a holiday: up, breakfast, walk, beach, read, afternoon nap, shower, dinner, night life, rinse and repeat. Other people are desperate to get as much activity in as possible: sighteseeing, organised activities, gym and so on. It's a mentality I will never understand, surely a holiday is also about getting away from all that planning and needing to be kept busy? Is the spectre of boredom really that scary? And other than the temporary nature of a holiday, this is the neurosis that sticks in the mind: this holiday comes at a cost and I better bloody well enjoy it and get the most out of it. Nothing would be worse than being bored on holiday, it's simply an unacceptible waste of resources (money/time); doing nothing in particular is boring for some.

Finally, we go on holiday to experience different weather. Maybe it's obvious, maybe not. If your home country is one where it's cold and grey most of the year (e.g. UK), then going somewhere with bright days and a warm breeze is like being in heaven. I guess the opposite if you live say in Egypt, and you go somewhere to get cool and wet weather as relief (?). This in itself can lift the spirits, in more clement weathers there is more of an outdoor cafe and restaurant and beach culture, and those are the times when you really feel like you're on holiday: you're not stuck in your house or office all day. The simple act of being outdoors can be a relief. Being outdoors also allows you take in the local scenery and history and architecture.

So how do we get the most out of a holiday? Here's @LastThursday's top tips:

• Go for at least two weeks if not a month
• Plan a few activities in advance but not too many
• Go somewhere with outdoor culture or with interesting things to go see
• Allow yourself to "do nothing" in particular most days
• Go with people you actually like
• Enjoy the journey to and from your destination
• Switch off everything related to normal life (don't work on holiday FFS)

Ciao.

 

 

 

[LastThursday]

I think a part of my psyche is intoxicated by the idea of embodying different people. The normal analogy of conscious experience is the cinema film reel, where each frame is the present moment frozen in time. This idea is useful as a way to shift the paradigm you may be stuck in, in which you believe yourself to be a person with a unique set of beautiful characteristics and flaws. In that paradigm, you interact with others in a sort of default way without much thought, you embody "you" at all times. At different times, differing parts of "your" character get amplified, and in this way it seems there are "parts" to yourself vying for attention and recognition: there's a drunk you, a happy you, a morose you, a go getter you, and a slob you.

The cinema reel analogy has a fatalistic view of life built into it, because each frame is immutable and preset way into the future; it would seem the film of your life is already predestined. When you start to question this fatalistic view of life it seems impossible to wriggle out of, and no matter what you do, it was always fate in the end. In the end you succumb to its charms and glibly concede that there is no observer or observed, no will and no freedom.

Suddenly, you are told to spin things around and imagine that no, you are not the frames of present moments, but the celluloid in which the frames are exposed. You are in fact the very material in which fate itself is shaped. And in that spin around of paradigms you wrest back control and freedom from the hands of fate herself. "You" are satisfied and blissful: for a time.

Yet, you become disatisfied again. All this talk of films and frames and celluloid is all so one dimensional and mechanistic. Can we swap paradigms once again and instead we play with light himself? It is not the film at all which breathes life into the frames, it is the light which shines through it. Light is just that, light and insubstantial and yet infinitely malleable and real. Just as a lump of clay can be sculpted into many things, so can the light of you become many different things. Seen in this light, your beautiful characteristics and flaws are simply like light dancing through the trees. But the light can become anything you or it wishes it to be. The light isn't afraid of which frame will come next or ruminates over which scenes went past, light doesn't care about film at all.

What is this form of light in this latest paradigm? Well its consciousness itself. There's no good reason to keep holding on to yourself, start to play a different reel right now and let it play out until the next reel is inserted and the next performance begins. Consciousness has an impeccable memory but is also playfully forgetful, give yourself up now and forget who you are and see who or what you become.

Edited June 4, 2021 by LastThursday

[LastThursday]

Deconstruction or wage slavery which one shall I talk about? Hmm... I'll alternate the paragraphs for a lark.

A thought came back to me recently in discussion with a friend of mine. It's one that I'd put to the back of my mind for a long time, but it's appeal is still there nonetheless. It is, to work for only three days a week. The main pressure against doing it is of course money. It really boils down to how I want to live my life in the future. See my Restructuring posts in this journal for an in depth analysis of that. In short I have no answer to that question, I have no idea and no immediate motivation to know what to do with my life. This is pretty unsexy for most people (aka potential partners, sigh), and to be honest is fairly unsexy to that Stage Orange part of me, but my Stage Yellow+ parts don't give AF - it's nothing to do with me, but it's systemic, ha!

There's a Deconstruction thread somewhere in the forum. I did think about posting my musings in there, but to be honest it would get lost in the pseudo-philosophical toing and froing that normally happens there - the forum is for soundbites, the journal is for in-depth analysis of current affairs. Anyway. Where was I? Deconstruction. As I've mentioned quite recently I have a love for deconstructing abstract ideas, that should be obvious just by reading my journal. The first thought about deconstructing deconstruction, is whether it is a reductionist process or not. I mean, the word deconstruction sounds like reducing one big blob into lots of little smaller blobs, in the hope the smaller blobs are more comprehensible. But actually it's not about reductionism at all. It's about focus or bringing to the fore ideas and mechanisms not previously noticed, it's an additive process. This is how learning of any sorts takes place, there's a kind of ratchet effect which takes place with learning (and increasing awareness). 

If I were to go part time, this first thing that anyone will scream at me is: why? Especially, since I have no intention of filling those two extra days with any wage paying activity whatsoever (not in the short time anyway). The logic my peers throw at me is: if you're not doing anything at all for those two extra days, why not just work and get paid, are you crazy? Of course, it only seems crazy from a certain viewpoint. What isn't realised is that any time worked it time lost forever (putting aside arguments about time itself), realistically money is not a good recompense for time used. Seen in this light, I would actually be gaining back something more valuable than money itself: freedom. Naturally freedom is completely relative, the sort of freedom I'm after is the space to think, play, research and just develop myself generally. All of that stuff however is nothing to do with Stage Orange and capitalist and societal ideas, but my ideas and my wants and desires. I want freedom to be me, my way.

Really, Deconstruction is mislabeled in this context. It should be more accurately called Reconstruction. That is really what the Construct Aware stage of the Ego Development model is all about. It's about taking a thing - say love - and really examining it deeply, in order to learn more about it and raise greater awareness of it. The first place to start any deconstruction, is to look at the words being used. Language has a large distorting effect on everything. A word like "love" is very overloaded with meaning, but also at the same time is very nebulous. You should always be very wary of these types of words, further examples are: god, everything, consciousness, time, work, good, happiness, bad, develop, higher, lower. Comparatitive words are especially pernicious, because there is almost some type of oneupmanship (Leo's: devilry) going on - distrust them all when deconstructing: higher consciousness, levels of awakening, greater intelligence and so on (all bullshit).

Can I actually afford to cut my wages by two fifths? Probably, but I haven't sat down and done the calculations. Can I actually cope with the same workload in less days? That's an interesting question. I know for a certain fact that I "waste" a lot of time when I should be working. Most of this is because I'm not being kept tabs on working from home, I no longer have to exercise presenteeism. On the flip side I am just about managing to keep up with the important work which comes in. I'm fairly autonomous is how I do my work and I get to choose which bits of work I deem to be priority and which can be quietly brushed under the carpet. I like this state of affairs, but really it's a consequence of my client being super disorganised and largely ineffectual at planning and communication - everything is now, everything is last minute, everything is important. If my client could be convinced that the important things would get done in three days, they would probably be more than happy to pay me 3/5ths wages.

If you can get past the quagmire of words, then deconstruction can happen more smoothly. The comparison I like to make is learning a new subject, especially a technical one. You spend 90% of the time just learning jargon, as if that is actually learning anything at all! And the same goes for deconstruction, you spend 90% of the time just going round in circles with the meanings and definitions of words (aka the forum), but the real juice is the actual deconstruction and the 10%. To deconstruct "love" say, forget about the word itself: instead go directly to the meat, love points to a sensation or emotion, just sit and be with that emotion and understand it for what it is. Proper deconstruction is actually a process of being, which requires large swathes of time to incorporate and learn from. Proper deconstruction is a process of noticing too. Notice how love manifests itself in all its different ways and understand what the thread that joins all those ways is leading to. In a strong sense, deconstruction is not something that can be talked about, because as soon as you do, you're in that 90% lost in words.

I have no particular intention for not being at work for four days out of every seven. But I do know for a certain fact that that freedom will lead to better things (comparitive word alert!) in the long run. But, I also know for a certain fact that the times I didn't work at all, I kind of floundered, because I didn't really have anything to anchor my days: I'm a dreamer not a doer. However, even having a small anchor point stops me from drifting about too much, and having four days a week to think about how to lead a different life will eventually pay for itself. Maybe I can even start working for myself and escape wage slavery altogether (or at least escape being told what to do and how much to do).

 

[LastThursday]

Another dose from the infinite @LastThursday well of observation.

Coping With Attraction

In my younger years I used to have a different style towards attraction. I used to love pubs, clubs and crowds in general - I still do to a lesser extent. One reason for it, was that where I lived in Brighton, there was a large student population. I wasn't much older myself, having just gone through the student mill. My favourite activity was basically oggling at girls. I was fairly shameless, but it was so much fun. I think I just enjoyed the visual variety and the exchange of glances and the occasional conversation. However, it was always window shopping, I somehow didn't exude whatever intoxicant (charisma, confidence etc) the female sex needed, the young women just enjoyed the flattery.

Forward wind a decade or two and something happened. Inbetween girlfriends I would still go to pubs and clubs and oggle and sometimes engage. It was a favourite activity of mine to chat slightly drunkenly to as many girls in clubs as I could get away with. I say chat, most of it was gesticulation. I still didn't get much luck other than the odd kiss and dance - although, my intention was always purely the sensory overload mixed in with sexual frisson - rather than getting laid, although that would have been a bonus. I've always been one for messing about with sensory experiences (note to self never do hard drugs Guillermo!). So. What happened eventually, was that my taste in young women with good skin and pert bodies, never really changed, but I did. I think it happened in my late thirties, say 38, I became painfully aware that I was old (comparitively).

It's taken me ten years to get over that pain and I'm still coping with it. My tastes well, there's nothing I can do about biology. I can't force myself to fancy a wrinkly, fake tanned 48 year old, who dyes her hair. However, what has changed is my need to oggle and get my cheap thrills that way. Don't get me wrong, if an attractive woman (of any age) crosses my path, then whatever happens happens, I'm not going to stop it. But I've found that my focus has completely changed. It's hard to describe, but I'm a lot more present than I was previously. This means I'm focused on conversation and completely on the people I'm with, I'm not distracted and "out there" gawping at girls. This is a result of a lot of work, meditation, and just learning to be present at all times.

I found something flipped this weekend.

I went out for a birthday meal in a pub tucked away in a village. Naturally, I was dressed up, I always scrub up well as they say here. The young waitress asked for our drinks order and she didn't the know the drinks selection well enough, I got up went to the bar and told her what I wanted. I found her attractive, but thought no more about it (oh how I've changed). After a while, I noticed that from the corner of the adjoining room she was looking over at me. I just suspected she was being attentive just in case our table needed something. But no she was definitely eyeing me up. I was definitely flattered, and the shoe was now on the other foot. I tried to play it cool and not fall back into old habits, but couldn't help the odd glance.

Anyway. Whatever I didn't used to exude when I was younger, I do now (well at least sometimes apparently). I think what I'm giving out is a confident-I-don't-give-a-fuck-non-needy demeanor. Maybe it's true some young women just like older men. Who knows? The thing is, what to do about it? Do I just take the hot heat of disapproval of society and my peers and just date a string of young women? Mid-life crisis anyone? Nah, I'm over my crisis I wrung it out for all it had. Nothing I can do about biology, and pertness and energy. Does a beautiful young woman have anything to offer me? Are you kidding? Hahaha. Do I have anything to offer a young woman, yup, my handsome looks, money, and keen intelligence. Oh, and spirituality, that too.

 

Edited June 8, 2021 by LastThursday

[LastThursday]

Missing Cat Syndrome

This is going to be another observational post and I'll try and be clever about it and give it some sort of punchline, maybe. So:

I got a flyer this morning in my mailbox (physical one) and it was the usual "my cat is mising" with a nice picture of the tabby on the front. Underneath was a "please please look for my cat in your sheds and stuff". I mean, the person actually went to the trouble of making and then posting the flyer, I'm sure it was posted to everyone. That's one up from the usual ones stuck to lampposts, generally with washed out colours and happy looking cats.

I'm not an animal person, I couldn't be bothered enough about looking after a pet. But I do understand the distress that pet owners feel when their pets wander off. The bond can be strong. My ex made me search the streets high and low for her kitty when it wandered off one day. Eventually it was found drowned in the small pond in the garden which had a tarp over it.

With cats especially wandering off is what they do for a living. My personal view is that cat owners should be more realistic about what they're getting themselves into. The operative word here being "owners". It's blatantly obvious to me that a cat has no idea about ownership of anything, it does what it likes and it has been proven that cats will "live" in multiple people's homes - essentially anyone who's prepared to feed it. In that sense a cat is more sensible than its owner. The owner is unfortunately locked into a game of ownership and bonding; the cat isn't. The cut suffers less as a result.

Of course, I think the Missing Cat Syndrome is also largely about parents appeasing their children, who are more prone to getting upset and not understanding how cats work. In that sense, it's fine, there are lessons to be learnt for the children, and children shouldn't be made to suffer unnecessarily - putting a flyer out helps with the suffering. Realistically if a cat goes missing it's for two reasons: either it's found a new "owner", or it's dead. Cat's don't get lost.

In some ways people are much the same as cats: they are also prone to wandering off and doing their own thing. People go missing too, and I suspect in a very small percentage of cases they've simply had enough and decide to disappear, that being their only option. I thought about doing the same myself in the depths of my depression, France was looking tempting. It wasn't rational but it was what I felt at the time.

In a real way choosing to just let go of everything and starting again as an anonymous person somewhere else is freedom. And, in another way it is like being born again. We all of us should be able to wander off - metaphorically or actually - and be reborn as someone else; or at least do it the way a cat does it, and that's by being a cat.

EDIT

The thought did occur that cats are territorial. There is a cost involved for them in defending their territories, so in an odd way they "own" their territories. Perhaps cats see their owners as their territory? I have no idea if that is anthropomorphising though.

Edited June 9, 2021 by LastThursday

[LastThursday]

I think writing this journal is actually starting to impinge on my normal waking life. I found this morning on my walk thinking about various things and how I would get it down in my journal. This is most unusual for me. Generally I just have what I call "light thinking", thoughts arise and I don't pay them too much conscious attention, it's a bit like that state just after waking up. I've been like that for years, although rarely I do go back to my old ways of rumination, it allows me to be "present" no bad thing.

What was on my mind? Some keywords: passion, femininity, humour, wage slavery. I've probably talked about at least three of those things before, but I'll elaborate on passion.

I'll do the reversal trick and show an example first and then discuss:

Rick Beato is a phenomenon, he's extremely passionate about music although he mainly concentrates on rock/pop. The way passion is talked about normally is as some kind of inner drive which leads to ambition and achieving goals. It's a bit like fuel you put into an engine. Personally, it's never clicked with me, you may as well be speaking Martian. I mean, I'm good at stuff yeah and I enjoy doing stuff, ok, but what the hell does passion have to do with it? But watching the above video yesterday something finally clicked.

At first I just thought Rick was gushing about Seal unnecessarily. It's a good song no doubt but come on it's not that amazing, I've never really cared for it anyway. But Rick just kept on being excited about it. Then suddenly, bam, I realised what was happening. Rick was expressing his love and it was as clear as day; his love of music, his love of a good song, his love of deconstruction. He interviews Seal, and then Seal himself expresses his love of song. There was also a mutual admiration (love) between the two men.

Now to me that makes much more sense. The way the word "passion" is used is normally in a kind of SD Stage Orange context, that is one of goal orientation and drive and work ethic, passion being the fuel for all that. I'm decidedly not of that persuasion, I've always been more exploratory and driven by curiosity and understanding how things work: it's why I'm on this forum at all. But passion is just love. Yes ok it's not that revelatory after all, if you really love what you do then most people would label you as passionate. It's about emphasis, passion is not work ethic, it is all love.

There are lots of things I love for their own sake: abstract ideas, maths, information technology, walking, socialising, people, music, the list is endless. There are many things I don't love (which I can't bring myself to list). What life purpose is about, if anything, is simply channeling all that love and dovetailing into survival. Survival is love, love of being alive and love of the body; so it's not wholly incompatible with passion. The big question for someone like me who loves many things, is can I bring myself to channel my love into a few particular areas and make money from it? That's a big NOPE. 

It's not that I'm averse to making money, I love money as much as the next person. I'm just against putting all my love eggs into one basket (sounds kinky). If anything if I'm going to be "passionate" enough to base my survival on it, then I'm going to have to synergise all my different loves and then use that synthesis as a basis for survival. 

So it's all back-to-front. It's not that I need to somehow magic up some passion and that this will automatically set me off on a course of being super driven and focused to achieve greatness. No no no, that's all wrong, just no. All I need is love. I need to learn to really notice what I love, instead of just half-heartedly being pulled this way and that by it. Just by noticing and being more aware of what I love, it can be amplified and brought to the fore. I can then let that love take me to wherever it leads me.  It's effectively what I've been doing since I was ten: I've been led by my love of computers; it's served me well and I live a life of comfort and security. But really it's run its course, I know that deep down. It's time to pay attention to all the other things I love and make them grow. Forget passion.

 

Edited June 10, 2021 by LastThursday

[LastThursday]

I have a strong tendency to want to do my own thing. This manifests in any number of ways, but in my experience it's a double-edged sword.

One of the best ways of bonding with people is to do what they do, say what they say and so on. That way, two people become one system where the parts are in harmony with each other. When you think about it copying each other is weird and also there's no proper rationale as to why it should make a better system or better able to survive (in a Darwinian sense) or why it's better in any sense.

If you have a society of people, even two people, there's sense in both copying each other and not copying each other. If you both copy each other's language, then yes you can communicate more effectively, or if you use the same tools, it's more efficient. The ability to share is of great survival value, because it reduces the cost of producing the shared items: they are made once and used many times. But copying each other comes at a cost. That cost is the time it takes to learn to copy someone else. Look at how long a young child takes to be fluent in language, it's certainly not overnight: years. The other cost is that because copying is so costly in itself, you are locked in to just those behaviours that you've mimicked. This is because there's not enough time to learn anything more (in a certain timespan). The copying behaviours crowd out the non-copying behaviours. You become a sheep incapable of novelty.

So what about not copying others? This also has its benefits. The main one being novelty. Novelty is important because it allows a person to find more efficient or effective ways of doing things, i.e. discovery. Some people are extremely curious or at least nosey. This curiosity is what drives the seeking of novelty. It's obvious that other animals can also be very curious, cats and monkeys come to mind. In the modern world, it can help you find a better coffee to drink in the morning, find a mate, or find a more fulfilling job. Novelty is also what drives self-development; it's not about being better, but about finding novel ways to be different from your current self.

Novelty too comes with a cost. There is danger in novelty seeking. Maybe you walk into a dangerous neighbourhood out of curiosity, or you attempt a new activity that you don't realise may harm you. Or you try out a new way of doing things, and are met with derision from the non-novelty seekers, and are ostracised for it. Again there is also a cost in time spent, looking for novelty takes effort and resources, which may be better spent by just copying others: why re-invent the wheel?

So, it really makes sense from a Darwinian perspective that there should be a range of behaviours, even within one person. There should be a strong tendency to copy others, but there should also be a strong undercurrent of novelty seeking. And so it is, people's genetic makeup make them either more risk averse (less novelty seeking), more wanting to be part of a group (copying each other), or more curious (more novelty seeking). Any society of people needs a good mix of sheep and lone wolves.

I think the dice of chance have made me into a novelty seeker, but not the risk taking type. I'd be an idiot if I said I didn't copy others at all, after all I'm speaking English and wearing jeans. But I very much enjoy thinking for myself and coming up with unique ways of doing things and expressing myself. This can leave some people to look at me as if I have two heads, or as a quirky person to kept away from, or even a dangerous subversive with no respect for others. I've rubbed many managers up the wrong way, not because I want to, but because I'm not a robot sheep.

Long live novelty!

Edited June 11, 2021 by LastThursday

[LastThursday]

I dream myself alive.

Yep, you're right. It is an A-Ha song circa some 80's date, not actually an existential questioning act. Nevertheless, good lyric, but I refuse to believe any of A-Ha (as they were/are) are awake in any sense, but what the bleep do I know? Reminds me of row your boat.

I've been questioning my own addiction to this site and what it really stands for. Most normal folk would just carry on regardless in spite of themselves. I'm a lapsed contrarian so here I am. Why so deep and questioning? What's the bleeping point? Be a bleeping man and I should just act; think lightly, then act. Don't reverse the acts you do man, just go forward, forward, forward. Going back is inappropriate, weak. Revisiting is weak and worthless and bleeping pointless. I'm only beeping for those of you with a weak disposition.

So now for something different. What's special about this little ditty?

here, there, now and then, to, fro, and back again
clock, strikes, a-quarter to three, in, out, and thoughts of ye
coin, note, time and motion, queue, wait, and love's devotion
push, jump, before and after, hold, hurt, and then some laughter

Hint: think quick, think fox, think brown.

Anyone who wants to try, just PM me, if you get it right then you'll get a date with me through a medium of your chosing (I'm straight BTW if it helps and believe it or not I'm suprisingly normal IRL - except for an occasional penchant for nail varnish). Yeah, I know it's not a dating site. Anyway, enough frippery, to the post proper...

MEMORY

Ever smelt something, or heard a song that just triggers something deep within you? Some earlier younger incantation of you? Something emotional that surfaces that you can't logically control. Consciousness asserts herself. You are rendered paralysed in-so-far that you can't dismiss the triggered emotion outright. Instead you try to closer inspect the thing, and find that actually it's a part of your DNA. That song, that smell, that morose imposition of some 'other' past. You can't extricate yourself from it. You may become Leo's version of God and yet, still these stupid smells and songs and whatnot still trigger you.

So, what do they point to? I'd go so far as to say God her/him/itself is nostalgic and idiotic. It wants to remember, remembering is all there is. How else do you "Dream Yourself Alive"? Remember, remember, remember. That's all there is. Ego, is just a bunch of remembering. God is a just a bunch of change. Which one are you really?

[LastThursday]

Political Correctness, who wants it?

I've noticed a nuance within PC which never seems to be discussed. That is the three-way tussle between causing offence, using non-inclusive language and being authentic. In the UK at least PC usage has only been the norm since about the late 80's and very much was an import from the states. I remember myself how weird being politically correct felt at the time, it was truly a novelty. Also, it was a purely media (TV etc) driven phenomenon. It took a very long time before the average Joe and Jo used more careful language. Before that anything went (in the media) as long as it wasn't overtly racist or sexist. Wind back ten years before to the late 70's and even sexism and racism weren't noticed or at least complained about - in fact, in the media, bad language (swearing) was seen as more taboo (interestingly this has only loosened within the last 10-15 years). 

The main thrust of political correctness is really about removing non-inclusive language. It comes from a recognition that racism and sexism and other forms of exclusion and prejudice are unacceptable. They're are unacceptable because prejudice and exclusion are detrimental to the receivers of it. And really it comes from the standpoint that all people are are equal in some sense, and so should have equal opportunities in all spheres of life. Racism and sexism and other forms of prejudice reduce freedom of choice and opportunity. For me personally, this has very strong resonance, I have been at the receiving end of racism.

Prejudice in itself is offensive, and rightly this should be pointed out and stamped out when it occurs. However, not all offence is prejudice. Like it or not offence is highly context dependent and also dependent on the sensibilities of the person who takes offence. Within a group of close friends it can be quite acceptable to use overtly offensive language, but to take it as lighthearted banter (especially amongst men). People also have different tolerances for offensive language, some may care about every word, others not at all. 

Causing offence often gets lumped into being politically correct. Within PC there is a kind of levelling whereby the lowest common denominator usage is expected. That is, any offensive language (language that causes offence, not just cursing) is seen as bad and potentially prejudicial in some way. Whilst admirable in a prejudicial sense, as I stated earlier not all offence is prejudice.  This is the "treading on eggshells" effect of PC, and I would go so far as to say this is not what PC is about and has been one of the unfortunate side-effects of PC usage. 

When trying to be authentic, there's a recognition that what is inside needs to be expressed on the outside. But there should be limits to authenticity: perhaps you authentically want to murder people, or you really are a racist. And there's a huge difference between thinking like a murderer and actually murdering people. But for lesser taboo expressions of authenticity, it should be ok to be offensive. After all within a group of relative strangers, whatever you say may be taken offensively. Having to "tread on eggshells" and think deeply about every word that comes out of you mouth, is the opposite of authenticity. In order to be authentic, you will sometimes be offensive. 

If you are an authentically compassionate person, and you have caused offence by your words then you would rightly try and make good, and possibly even adjust your future behaviour. If not, then authentically, you would let the offence ride and carry on regardless. 

Seen in this light political correctness is in direct contradiction to being authentic. However, being authentic is not complete freedom and needs to be reined in by certain standards (such as PC). But also PC is not about being nice to everyone, it is about treating others as equals and not denying them (even obliquely) opportunities to be free. Offence is ok, you shouldn't have to cater to everyone all the time.

 

 

Edited June 25, 2021 by LastThursday

[LastThursday]

What are you?

It seems like if you strip away all the things that are not you, you aren't left with much. For example, if you lose a limb are you still you? It would seem so. So you are not that limb, or that limb isn't needed to define you.

It quickly gets metaphysical. It appears that you could be a kind of disembodied (i.e. limbless) entity that observes or senses the world. In this view your body and the rest of the world is observed and is in some way separate from the actual you. I like to think of it like a bar magnet:

You can see the lines going from North to South. You are the observer in the South pole sucking in everything from the world in the North pole. If you cut the magnet in half width-ways you get two magnets each with their own North and South; hence there are many observers in the world, each observing their own version of the world.

Looking at this analogy the world (North pole) emanates activity and the observer (South pole) passively sits there taking it all in. But it's worth noting that without the South pole, the lines have nowhere to go, and without the North pole, there are no lines to observe. The whole is a system one part co-dependent on the other.

Can we do better than this analogy? Notice how the field lines seem to circulate out and then back in. If you were to remove the magnet, but keep the lines it would form kind of circuit perpetually going round and round. Also notice that the field lines have no edges, it fills all of space in all directions. You could imagine how these circuits of field lines are self-sustaining, once they get going. There's also a sort of centre to the circuits where all the field lines squash tightly together into nothingness.

So maybe, you're a self-perpetuating field of something? You are everywhere and are neither observer or observed, but both simultaneously. You have an ill-defined centre from which everything springs and is subsumed. This centre is the thin slice of the present moment, and all the lines are awareness or consciousness. That is what you are.

Edited July 5, 2021 by LastThursday

[LastThursday]

If you have already achieved everything desired of you by society, what's left to do?

Society's excitement if you will, is lowest common denominator glory. Get a partner, get married, buy property, have children. With the currency of all that being work for as much money and time and prestige as you can muster in a lifetime.

It's seems obvious that a Western meritocracy earns its living by comparing ourselves to each other. You do well by simply being better. It's a blantantly obvious way of being no? What about those folks that aren't better, what to do about those people? Ignore them, put them down and make sure they're not included: segregate them out of your social circle. So much for Stage Orange capitalism and betterism.

The neurotitism of Western society is that you have to have or obtain certain few certain attributes to be considered worthy of being included and recognised. If you want to see the origin of this idiotic notion look no further than the ancient Greek aesthetic:

Where else does the idea of muscular Alpha males stem from? It's an inescapable Western paradigm. The only thing that's changed in over 2000 years is that they preferred curly hair on their heads rather than baldness.

Obvioulsy, I find myself ascribing to this ancient idotic aesthetic. If I could click my fingers and become any one of those ancient statues and flex those biceps I would in an instant. That's how inculcated I am in so called modern culture.

What's left to do?

Everything. Eschew those pesky Greeks, rid myself of everything that makes you want to conform. Even being "yourself" is old hat. What's left is just understanding deeply what the fuck is going on. Why am I "I"? What is an "I"? What in the hell happened between being a bewildered babe and a bewildered middle-aged man? I could probably spend another lifetime dissecting it all to no avail. This seems like real modernity 2021.

No.

I've already achieved everything wanted of me by society. It's time to say "fuck you" to society, it has nothing more to offer me. Instead I chose to go my own way and to own my very beingness. To be just to be and not be neurotic about it: to just be a non-muscular God.

Edited July 7, 2021 by LastThursday

[LastThursday]

Comparison requires a scale. The scale can be absolute or relative (scientifically speaking), the only difference being is if you anchor the scale at a point or not. The scale is one dimensional. In other words a scale is an ordered set of distinct values or numbers. The orderliness of a one-dimensional scale gives you two things. The first is from any point on the scale you can go in any of two directions. The second is that you can measure the distance between two points. Ok, so enough of that Euclid's Elements style of explanation, what use is this?

English has a number of relative comparative terms: better, worse, best, worst, more, less, fewer, most, least, fewest. And you can sort of indicate the size of the comparison by combining these words: most worst and so on, or using the "much" adjective. When using these terms English implies that there is a one-dimensional scale behind the scenes. For example when I say "Fridays are much better than Mondays", implictly I might be using a "happiness" scale, and comparatively on this scale Friday makes me more happy than Monday. We can see how the implict scale is not stated in the statement. If I said "Fridays make me happier than Mondays", then the scale is being stated. Even though the happiness scale has no units, we do intuitively know that there are distinct levels of happiness and that these levels are ordered in some way relative to each other.

What happens when we apply these comparative words to people's attributes? We say something like: "Women prefer taller men". The word taller being the comparative word here. The scale here is given by the word "prefer", i.e. there is a preference scale that women in general have. So, given two men a woman (in general) would give preference to the taller of the two. We're playing word games here, because the preference scale is really quite abstract and non-specific. Preference is not an absolute scale that all women posses. No, instead each woman may base her preference on a further set of factors: attractiveness, agreeableness, confidence and so on.  Indeed each woman may well place a different emphasis on any number of factors to come up with a "preference".

To say "Women prefer taller men" completely warps reality. It says that only height matters, it says that only comparative height matters, it says all women only care about height, and it says nothing about what prefer actually refers to. Do the women prefer for sex, or marriage, or having fun or friendship or what?

These are dangerous types of statement, precisely because they simplify reality so much as to be non-representative. They are actually false. Comparative statements imply a one-dimensional scale, but almost nothing about human beings can be measured this way. Every way you can categorise a human has a multiple set of dimensions or no dimensions at all.

For example take hair colour. I make a bold statement: "I prefer redheads". But hair colour is not one dimensional. There is no scale for hair colour, there is just some arbitrary zone for "redhead" based on personal judgements. Equally for skin colour and tone: what is black? It's not one dimensional. By one measure we all have melanin in our skin, we're all black or more accurately shades of brown.

Even for more definite human attributes such as height or weight, these are just arbitrary things to focus on. There's nothing special about being 5'7" or being taller than the average male or just being taller. There's a million other (probably more useful) attributes that could be focused on.

So why are comparitive judgements so rife? Because being "better" socially confers advantages: more access to resources and more love (note the comparatives I've used here - apply the same arguments to the words "resources" and "love").  And being "worse" has the opposite effect and no-one deserves that.

Comparative judgement is completely a mental construct designed to control people, like that other ubiquitous one-dimensional scale: money. Be aware of when you use it against people and stop bloody doing it.

 

Edited July 10, 2021 by LastThursday

[LastThursday]

Is consciousness self evident?

When I use the word "consciousness" what is really happening here? In fact what is the relation between a word and reality? 

A noun or abstract noun represents something in the real word. We could say a noun "represents", "stands for", "points to", "references" something that isn't language based. There are exceptions. The word "adjective" is a noun that just points to other words, but these are few. 

When we use the word "table" for example the word itself refers to an object with four legs and a flat surface to place things on. Unfortunately, I'm using words here to describe what words point to! Nevertheless, you and I agree well enough what "table" refers to so that it becomes useful to use the word in everyday speech.

People appear to be autonomous (have their own minds) and seem to share this thing called reality. So if two people are sat at the same table, they can both agree that "table" refers to the object they are sat beside. Because both people are using the word "table" there is an implicit mutual assumption that they are both experiencing something similar. And even if we're not experiencing something similar, then it is good enough to navigate the world and communicate effectively with each other. If any misunderstanding arises (because they're not actually sharing the same experience), then this becomes apparent and one person can correct their words.

In all this it should become obvious that if a person is autonomous and has experiences, then whatever that experience is is not directly available to us - otherwise we wouldn't need to use language. The only thing available to us is their communication of their ongoing experience. The communication can be verbal or non-verbal, but we are always once removed from another person's direct experience.

Language is a type of shorthand. What a "table" means is a very much simplified version of someone's actual experience. A table isn't just a flat surface and four legs, it has colour, shape, texture, made of wood or plastic, height, size and so on. Again even the attributes of a table are simplifications of actual experience: the colour of a red table depends on it's materials, how it was painted and ambient lighting and on and on.

We very easily get confused between the descriptions of language and actual first-hand experience. We see a "table" as a self-evident truth about the world. If someone were to question you and say "what do you mean by table?", you may well reply "don't be silly, it's a table, you know... table?". However the actual experience of what is referred to as "table" has infinite variations of space, size, lighting, context and other non-language elements. An object could even temporarily become a table if we decide to place our coffee on its flat surface. This really highlights the fact that "table" is simply pointing to something, what it points to can be temporarily redefined.

If words are so loose and flexible, then what does the word "consciousness" refer to? 

Woah hang on, isn't consciousness an absolute experience being experienced by autonomous human beings? Isn't Mary or John over there conscious? Don't they know that they're conscious, and what "consciousness" refers to? Isn't it self evident both they and I are conscious?

Even if we drop the act that others are conscious (because we can't know directly), surely we know that we are conscious? Of course! But we are conscious by definition. What I mean by this is that we agree that "consciousness" refers to something (because all nouns do this), but we are completely free to choose what it refers to, and we are free to redefine what it refers to at any moment. 

So consciousness isn't self evident. Until we learn the word "consciousness" we don't possess it. We don't experience a "table" until we learn the word.

 

Edited July 12, 2021 by LastThursday

[LastThursday]

Reminder to self: evolutionary democracy. Quick embryonic sketch:

You have a population of decisions/implementations/laws (the organism). Each region of a country has its own organism. Fit organisms spread from region to region because they work. Mutation is achieved by electronic means, essentially you and me posting new ideas and solutions to problems. A random mechanism (proper randomness) chooses from the pool of ideas and replaces or modifies an existing idea in a region.

To spice it up further, regions are not rigidly defined areas like Wales or Scotland. Instead a region is a set of people who choose to take up an organism and are then bound by the rules and ideas of that organism for a certain period before they're allowed to switch to another organism. In practice that means that geographical proximity is important, as you want your neighbours to share the same ideals as you.

There is no restriction to the number of organisms, the more the better. Since people are free to switch (maybe once a year), they will naturally plumb for the organism that suits them. If nobody ascribes to an organism, it dies.

Ok, that's it.

[LastThursday]

Found this interesting. Mother is a social construct?!

 

[LastThursday]

Another idea that came back to me: atom of meaning. Quick synopsis:

An atom of meaning is the sensation attached to an object (or an object-like thing). Say for example you inherited a ring from your mother. The ring may have sentimental and/or nostalgic value. That value is the atom of meaning attached to the ring. It's an "atom" because it's an indivisble whole. No other ring or object has this same meaning. The meaning attached to this ring is also not deconstructable. This is exactly the same concept as a Non-Fungible Token (NFT) being used mostly in the art world. All atoms of meaning are unique and bound uniquely to their objects: they are non-transferrable. Even if the object changes over its lifetime, the atom of meaning may change along with it; an object slowly accumulates greater emotional significance for example. So two rings may look alike and be made from identical materials, but only one of them has an atom of meaning attached: the ring from your mother.