(h/t Pisces Iscariot)
If you're talking to yourself, you exist. That you ask would indicate it's a curious skepticism of an existence. That you ask the world you perceive if it perceives you seems like a conflict of self-definition between the perceived and the perceiver.
Therein lies loneliness, loss of the thread of life that energizes us all, that reproduces our cells from the same cosmic dust and enables us to have at it as we mayhap.
Alone, I observe a world needless of my observations to carry on and I feel free as I can imagine being.
In the company of men I am trapped by supposition that I exist only where I, who I know myself to be, impinges on their unique sensitivities and agendas, waiting for that wink to acknowledge the unspoken link of being different eyes of the same cosmic observer. Without knowing oneself, one is held in thrall to rumor, reputation and gossip.
12 comments:
Regarding "Without knowing oneself, one is held in thrall to rumor, reputation and gossip", I would think that one is always held in thrall to rumor, reputation and gossip regardless if one knows themselves or not. However, if one knows themselves, then they do not feel the need to change themselves in the slightest as a result.
Peace,
A
Exactly. But, "…if one knows themselves, then they do not feel the need to change themselves in the slightest as a result" is the very essence of not being held in thrall. Behavioral dictates are dissolved into mere information. ;•p
i dunno...i would argue that there is something positive that comes from connection with others...but alone time is truly neccessary as well...
Brian, that positive is the only reason I posted this. Did you completely miss that wink that links us in being different eyes reporting to the same observer? It is what makes me go among men every time I do. It is certainly not to join them in the evolution of a third-person nation.
"Alone, I observe a world needless of my observations to carry on and I feel free as I can imagine being."
Not so. For you are the world as well, and unobserved by you it would cease to exist in your universe, except that you again observe it.
Namaste. ;)
Mahakal,
Arguing for the sake of argument again, I see.
No where did I say I need not observe the world as a qualification for existence, I merely stated the world may carry on without my observation or existence because, unlike you, I don't think there are separate universes, only varying versions, mistaken for all there is.
Sure, if I die, my version ceases to exist, but I am the only one who needed it, so no loss to the un iverse.
You perceive argument where there is only conversation, but would you prefer I say nothing to you ever, or only say Attaboy?
Please be mellow. Did you completely miss the wink?
Excuse me, I am so remiss in mistaking your opening words, "Not so …" for argumentativeness, when it is merely your way of beginning conversation.
After addressing that, I went on to enter your conversation by clarify my original answer in light of what your statements as to what you perceive is so very "so" in civil terms. How did you construe that into allowing only praise. I love a good argument a much as the next guy.
Yeah, Mahakal, I know you know about the link, you just don't look at me when you acknowledge it. I just take your winks in the mirror to be no more than information designes as firing for effect firing for effect, for effeor, eff or…
I do welcome your contribution ——everyone is a message.…
Why do you think you are so unlike me, and I so unlike you?
Where did that come from. Except for our eidos we may be very much alike, being generated biologically by the same nature out of the same material.
Do you subscribe to Platonism now?
@Yodood: Whoah. Found myself following in from P. Iscariot's place, and found the same groove: but in colour! I know not what to say...trippy. I'll leave a similar (nothing ever quite the same is it?) point behind (pointy behinds! worse than pointy heads!) - and such that is:
If you are talking to yourself, someone exists. it may not, however, be you. Selfhood may be an arrogant delusion. (adopts Yod-A voice and posture) Alone we may be, but Alone contains both One and Al! So not alone are we...(wanders off, smoking a sausage)
Thanks for the trip and the new link for my Reader - talk to ya later -
Peter
Post a Comment