Forcing myself to write this one...
I'm forcing myself to write this, not for the sake of my mind being filled with angst, but rather I have a meeting with my counselor at 9 am, and I feel it will be helpful to throw my thoughts down.
Upon current introspective analysis of myself, I feel slightly numb, I mean my emotions get roused at work (meaning particular actions) but that's about the extent of it. The same can be said of "likes" in that I enjoy the thought of playing a particular video game or doing a certain activity, but life as a whole I'm fairly numb currently, and looking back I have been for a little while. I find it difficult to get rearing to go into any activity or engage myself fully. This is a issue I feel I need to let my thoughts flow (though with a slight sleep headache but jacked up on caffeine I will try my best but promise nothing profound).
As always I find it difficult to push myself full force into anything life is currently throwing at me. Let's take work, sure I could go in at every opportunity where extra work is available to promote myself as a super hard worker, but I don't. That is not to say I don't enjoy my job, nor is it to even say I do. It's a job, that I don't mind going to, but I tend to find myself at odds with going in the first place. I need to elaborate, and subsequently sidetrack in order to make my point. The point is that placing myself in this work is not so much beneath me, as it is placing myself short of my capabilities, yet I am not so far removed that the work is beneath me.
I watched a movie called Manufacturing Consent for class the other day, and in it they made a profound point. 80% of the population are idiots, being fed information and basically run on autopilot, but the other 20% are those that think outside the box, for themselves, and question what is going on around them. Furthermore it seems that these 20% are the iconic people we all strive to become, meaning intelligence and the like.
I don't feel in this 80%, nor do I feel in the 20%. It's as if this number system doesn't apply to me. I feel more intelligent to those at my work in terms of examining life, but not above them in the sense of being in the 20% where people can see my using my intellect to do something worthwhile in the world. That is not say this is a matter of self worth in that I am feeling worthless that I can't be placed into the 20%, or is it. I need to delve into this.
Self worth is an issue I am struggling with currently, and at the heart of it I am pondering the idea of what's being realistic as opposed to not having self worth. In many ways I feel like I have my wisdom than intelligence, but it seems to get have purpose anymore, and be on that pedestal of 20% you need intelligence. I must say I am struggling with the concept life has taken that you need to being analytic in the sense of being able to scholastically or even empirically lay claim to anything you may speak of. Intelligence is subsequently trumping wisdom. But one cannot run through life with intelligence alone, I have a vast amount of friends who are intelligent on matters, but it seems when it comes to acting in life, they are at a loss. Perhaps that is why they seek my council, because I am able to fluently speak of life in terms one can understand? I speak in metaphors which are easily comprehensible, and approach life in terms of practice as opposed to clinical. Ok let me elaborate on THAT point.
My roommate was speaking to me of his girlfriend and some issues they were struggling with, and he spoke of her seeing the world very clinically, especially people. To me this problematic, for a number of reasons. Furthermore, I feel this is a valid spin I can use to my advantage when applying to masters school, although on initial examination it appears a slap in the face, which when I state it shall be explained why.
Approaching life, especially people, clinically, that is to say affixing a label to people and presuming all knowledge of such is to deny a person their individuality. This avenue can be said to encompass not only clinical mindset, but the root of such things as prejudice. In terms of being a counselor, if I were to approach patients in a clinical mindset, I am affixing them a label and presuming everyone falls into a category easily understandable and treatable. This is problematic, for sure in a sense some labels can help to further define a person, but where we see this falling into problem territory (for me at least) is with use of medication as a first resort. You're depressed, heres a drug.
*buzz* wrong answer, we were looking for figure out who the fuck this person is and get at the root problem not just slap a band aid on it and collect a paycheck. Thanks for playing we'll see you next week.
What I believe brought me to this thought was one of my first encounters with my counselor, and me stating I was depressed, he said when people say such, he tells them "Hi depressed, nice to meet you." To elaborate, depression is something which affects you, not a characteristic. When you make it the latter you allow it cement itself as a belief and do its job of dragging you down. In retrospect, affixing labels is the same thing. Affix someone a label enough, and they allow it to define themselves, and their identity. I believe the only label which should be affixed to someone is that they are an individual, although I see this as being problematic as well, so I retract such thought (for the time being). By doing such it seems as though you then need to define what an individual is, and what encompasses such. This is the heart of philosophy, and I believe gets at something I have learned about myself in learning such.
I had a conversation with my roommate at one point about studying philosophy, and he saw it as problematic because it is (nearly) impossible to discover a solid answer in philosophy. My response was that I am not looking for any answer, though if I find any I'd be thrilled, rather it is a matter of interest, and examination which I consider and help to allow myself to grow in a multitude of dimensions.
Should this not be the same of life then? Should we not approach life in a manner of learning an growing. I realize that in many ways our human perspective may never allow us to fully understand the world (we're only human and as such we see things as humans, not as a fly or a plant and hence cannot know of these world perspectives) so an avenue of learning what it means to look at the world through a human understanding seems appropriate. Now I understand that life gets in the way, meaning if all we did was contemplate life, nature rears its head and forces us to at the basic of levels take actions, but what I mean is approaching things not just philosophically in this avenue, but all avenues. Sure I understand how as a collective we need to work to survive and such, but... shit I'm losing focus. I've run into a roadblock in regards to science and math. Sure I see their relevance, but to buy into them fully is an act of faith, much like religion. The empirical argument can work only so far as to ignore the issue of how can you KNOW what's occurring is real. My point is this then.
Perhaps in the approach to all avenues of life, be it science, religion, sociological understandings, etc., should be done in the mindset of intrigue with the understanding that these things may be true insofar as one can presumably know of the world, and although they seem to work...
I realized suddenly that I am actually way off base here. Sure this interesting, and sorry for leaving that thought hanging, but allow me to explain. My point is about social interaction and even personal understanding of the world, not epistemological or metaphysical understandings. Sure they are relevant, but only in larger understandings. UGH, ok my point is approach people with the mindset of learning of their perspectives (not facts) of the world so as to allow possible change to your own beliefs and ideas. Their beliefs and ideas are not factual, and neither are yours, for as stated how can we know. Hence, allow their perspective, and even your experiences with them to spark growth in your own understandings be it through consideration of their ideals, or even examination of experiences with them to delve further into your own and grow more as a person. I'd say many do this, though I'd also say slowly and unconsciously. By embracing this mindset, you allow yourself an endless path of growth, and rapid at that.
Think of the crotchety old man whom thinks he understands life, and is fed up with how the world has been shaped. This is what not to become.
This is all a lot easier stated then acted out. If I may push my own ego here, I DO perform this, but it has taken a long time to do so. Truly challenging one's belief system is scary as fuck. Doesn't sound it, but let me give an example. Think of a time when you've argued with someone over a point. Why did you do so? It was a challenge to your beliefs, and to be considered wrong is to be met with the automatic response of defensive mechanisms. Your psyche feels the need to guard against what it deems threats to belief systems.
Another example I can think of, and though I'd like to say many experience this I don't know, but I know I did, is the full realization that your parents can't give you the answers of life. To say they can't be there for you anymore is to broad, and rather complex in argument, so the simplest way I can state it is that they no longer can help you guide yourself through life. Though many rely on their parents still (my ex for example) this actually stunts one's growth, for I feel you need to figure life out for yourself, and when you realize others can't give you the answers, it's scary. You can consider their perspectives, but ultimately you're reality is your own. In a sense, we live alone, we die alone.
Taking a break I came to some other thoughts. I myself affix label to my own identity, though I realize they are problematic in that others do not readily see they are matters of perspective analysis. Let me explain. I have wings on my legs, to represent my Hermes wings, because I am a Gemini. That is not stating I am fully buying into astrological thought, rather I am embracing a characteristic of what it means being a Gemini, a mutable nature. What I mean is exactly what I have spoken of above, I am fluid and changing, I grow further to life and don't affix myself to any one idea or belief. That is what this label means to me, and what I see it to be. Also it should be noted I also enjoy the aspect that Gemini's are the speakers of the circle, a quality I find in myself. To summarize, I find in myself many qualities of this label, but do not proceed in life on the assumption or guidance of such a mindset.
Ok I have a headache now, from sleep I'm presuming, and as such I need a small nap before my meeting at 9, so for now I shall depart, perhaps pursuing further writing after seeing the perspective of another.
Upon current introspective analysis of myself, I feel slightly numb, I mean my emotions get roused at work (meaning particular actions) but that's about the extent of it. The same can be said of "likes" in that I enjoy the thought of playing a particular video game or doing a certain activity, but life as a whole I'm fairly numb currently, and looking back I have been for a little while. I find it difficult to get rearing to go into any activity or engage myself fully. This is a issue I feel I need to let my thoughts flow (though with a slight sleep headache but jacked up on caffeine I will try my best but promise nothing profound).
As always I find it difficult to push myself full force into anything life is currently throwing at me. Let's take work, sure I could go in at every opportunity where extra work is available to promote myself as a super hard worker, but I don't. That is not to say I don't enjoy my job, nor is it to even say I do. It's a job, that I don't mind going to, but I tend to find myself at odds with going in the first place. I need to elaborate, and subsequently sidetrack in order to make my point. The point is that placing myself in this work is not so much beneath me, as it is placing myself short of my capabilities, yet I am not so far removed that the work is beneath me.
I watched a movie called Manufacturing Consent for class the other day, and in it they made a profound point. 80% of the population are idiots, being fed information and basically run on autopilot, but the other 20% are those that think outside the box, for themselves, and question what is going on around them. Furthermore it seems that these 20% are the iconic people we all strive to become, meaning intelligence and the like.
I don't feel in this 80%, nor do I feel in the 20%. It's as if this number system doesn't apply to me. I feel more intelligent to those at my work in terms of examining life, but not above them in the sense of being in the 20% where people can see my using my intellect to do something worthwhile in the world. That is not say this is a matter of self worth in that I am feeling worthless that I can't be placed into the 20%, or is it. I need to delve into this.
Self worth is an issue I am struggling with currently, and at the heart of it I am pondering the idea of what's being realistic as opposed to not having self worth. In many ways I feel like I have my wisdom than intelligence, but it seems to get have purpose anymore, and be on that pedestal of 20% you need intelligence. I must say I am struggling with the concept life has taken that you need to being analytic in the sense of being able to scholastically or even empirically lay claim to anything you may speak of. Intelligence is subsequently trumping wisdom. But one cannot run through life with intelligence alone, I have a vast amount of friends who are intelligent on matters, but it seems when it comes to acting in life, they are at a loss. Perhaps that is why they seek my council, because I am able to fluently speak of life in terms one can understand? I speak in metaphors which are easily comprehensible, and approach life in terms of practice as opposed to clinical. Ok let me elaborate on THAT point.
My roommate was speaking to me of his girlfriend and some issues they were struggling with, and he spoke of her seeing the world very clinically, especially people. To me this problematic, for a number of reasons. Furthermore, I feel this is a valid spin I can use to my advantage when applying to masters school, although on initial examination it appears a slap in the face, which when I state it shall be explained why.
Approaching life, especially people, clinically, that is to say affixing a label to people and presuming all knowledge of such is to deny a person their individuality. This avenue can be said to encompass not only clinical mindset, but the root of such things as prejudice. In terms of being a counselor, if I were to approach patients in a clinical mindset, I am affixing them a label and presuming everyone falls into a category easily understandable and treatable. This is problematic, for sure in a sense some labels can help to further define a person, but where we see this falling into problem territory (for me at least) is with use of medication as a first resort. You're depressed, heres a drug.
*buzz* wrong answer, we were looking for figure out who the fuck this person is and get at the root problem not just slap a band aid on it and collect a paycheck. Thanks for playing we'll see you next week.
What I believe brought me to this thought was one of my first encounters with my counselor, and me stating I was depressed, he said when people say such, he tells them "Hi depressed, nice to meet you." To elaborate, depression is something which affects you, not a characteristic. When you make it the latter you allow it cement itself as a belief and do its job of dragging you down. In retrospect, affixing labels is the same thing. Affix someone a label enough, and they allow it to define themselves, and their identity. I believe the only label which should be affixed to someone is that they are an individual, although I see this as being problematic as well, so I retract such thought (for the time being). By doing such it seems as though you then need to define what an individual is, and what encompasses such. This is the heart of philosophy, and I believe gets at something I have learned about myself in learning such.
I had a conversation with my roommate at one point about studying philosophy, and he saw it as problematic because it is (nearly) impossible to discover a solid answer in philosophy. My response was that I am not looking for any answer, though if I find any I'd be thrilled, rather it is a matter of interest, and examination which I consider and help to allow myself to grow in a multitude of dimensions.
Should this not be the same of life then? Should we not approach life in a manner of learning an growing. I realize that in many ways our human perspective may never allow us to fully understand the world (we're only human and as such we see things as humans, not as a fly or a plant and hence cannot know of these world perspectives) so an avenue of learning what it means to look at the world through a human understanding seems appropriate. Now I understand that life gets in the way, meaning if all we did was contemplate life, nature rears its head and forces us to at the basic of levels take actions, but what I mean is approaching things not just philosophically in this avenue, but all avenues. Sure I understand how as a collective we need to work to survive and such, but... shit I'm losing focus. I've run into a roadblock in regards to science and math. Sure I see their relevance, but to buy into them fully is an act of faith, much like religion. The empirical argument can work only so far as to ignore the issue of how can you KNOW what's occurring is real. My point is this then.
Perhaps in the approach to all avenues of life, be it science, religion, sociological understandings, etc., should be done in the mindset of intrigue with the understanding that these things may be true insofar as one can presumably know of the world, and although they seem to work...
I realized suddenly that I am actually way off base here. Sure this interesting, and sorry for leaving that thought hanging, but allow me to explain. My point is about social interaction and even personal understanding of the world, not epistemological or metaphysical understandings. Sure they are relevant, but only in larger understandings. UGH, ok my point is approach people with the mindset of learning of their perspectives (not facts) of the world so as to allow possible change to your own beliefs and ideas. Their beliefs and ideas are not factual, and neither are yours, for as stated how can we know. Hence, allow their perspective, and even your experiences with them to spark growth in your own understandings be it through consideration of their ideals, or even examination of experiences with them to delve further into your own and grow more as a person. I'd say many do this, though I'd also say slowly and unconsciously. By embracing this mindset, you allow yourself an endless path of growth, and rapid at that.
Think of the crotchety old man whom thinks he understands life, and is fed up with how the world has been shaped. This is what not to become.
This is all a lot easier stated then acted out. If I may push my own ego here, I DO perform this, but it has taken a long time to do so. Truly challenging one's belief system is scary as fuck. Doesn't sound it, but let me give an example. Think of a time when you've argued with someone over a point. Why did you do so? It was a challenge to your beliefs, and to be considered wrong is to be met with the automatic response of defensive mechanisms. Your psyche feels the need to guard against what it deems threats to belief systems.
Another example I can think of, and though I'd like to say many experience this I don't know, but I know I did, is the full realization that your parents can't give you the answers of life. To say they can't be there for you anymore is to broad, and rather complex in argument, so the simplest way I can state it is that they no longer can help you guide yourself through life. Though many rely on their parents still (my ex for example) this actually stunts one's growth, for I feel you need to figure life out for yourself, and when you realize others can't give you the answers, it's scary. You can consider their perspectives, but ultimately you're reality is your own. In a sense, we live alone, we die alone.
Taking a break I came to some other thoughts. I myself affix label to my own identity, though I realize they are problematic in that others do not readily see they are matters of perspective analysis. Let me explain. I have wings on my legs, to represent my Hermes wings, because I am a Gemini. That is not stating I am fully buying into astrological thought, rather I am embracing a characteristic of what it means being a Gemini, a mutable nature. What I mean is exactly what I have spoken of above, I am fluid and changing, I grow further to life and don't affix myself to any one idea or belief. That is what this label means to me, and what I see it to be. Also it should be noted I also enjoy the aspect that Gemini's are the speakers of the circle, a quality I find in myself. To summarize, I find in myself many qualities of this label, but do not proceed in life on the assumption or guidance of such a mindset.
Ok I have a headache now, from sleep I'm presuming, and as such I need a small nap before my meeting at 9, so for now I shall depart, perhaps pursuing further writing after seeing the perspective of another.