Tuesday, February 13, 2007

Beliefs that bother me (final part one)


Prologue


In one of my previous articles, I found the chance to express my dislike about a set of popular beliefs. These have to do with what we perceive as "normal" and how should the "right" way of life be. It was a good chance, for since always I wanted to share my feelings and give a proper explanation on this issue. It wasn't bad, even though I knew I didn't got very deep inside the matter as I wished. And it wasn't such a failure as my old struggle, trying to excuse myself about the way I am and also not so messy as my old disagreement on the net with people who suddenly decided to preach me about how life should be. And blogging gave me the opportunity for the first time to spread some thoughts I always worried about, to discover that there are actually some people out there who care and understand.

It was a good start and the little yet incredible support from these people really motivated me to plan for a future set of articles on similar matters or even a different approach to counter towards these beliefs (Or a dark plan far away in the future as I obscurely like to say ;). Such moments make me feel that it's worth fighting for and so I'd like to thank you very much for your support. I remembered my feelings again and then I suddenly decided that maybe it's time to write the 3rd part and get finished of these first series of texts.

The 2nd part was a bit out of subject or not into the point and it just came out as a supplement to my feelings about people who might understand and speak different than predicted (they DO exist!). It was a momentary lapse to decide writting about that story and that girl. Cute but maybe off topic.

With this article, I'll try to get back into the primary point and actually speak on my personal view I finally aquired through years of struggle and disbelief, how ingeniously society and most of the people forced me to doubt about my real self, how this system of beliefs works and grows up and how blatant seem their ideas to finally be in my eyes. And that won't be the last article on the subject rather than the end of the first series (final part one). I don't know what will further come out in the future but I'd like that it will be more structured and deep into the point than these unorganized texts that might want to say something and hopefully they do. And so, the next one may take some time..


The struggle of being different


People always accused me of not resembling 95% of the world. The most usual reasons were that I was less social than the rest, maybe too shy or a loner or simply stuck to myself, being focused on a strange hobby that most people don't understand, while showing no interest to the things most people are into.

Their blame sounded too rational and it always hurted my feelings. For I couldn't understand!

What they actually tried to show me is some kind of logic on why my life sucks and what is wrong with me. That logic used popular axioms on what life is and what is normal, though it seemed quite logical to me at that time (and it's sounding still does). And there was the point of conflict! That logic told me something that couldn't match what my heart says. Indirectly spoken, there was something wrong with myself. It told me that I shouldn't be myself, that it was my big bad mistake. And the biggest struggle was that I couldn't counter it!

What their arguments actually said is that my attitude/personality/way of life that I've "chosen" was a wrong idea. And these preachers were there in order to show me the "right" path based on their experience. In fact, that's actually what I received from them. And my feelings were hurt because I constantly believed that I am the wrong one and that I should be ashamed for that. As if I've actually chosen to be like this? As if I oneday woke up and actually decided to be like that! Because of some not as quite "logical" reasoning as theirs that I misunderstood? And they are here to proove me the right way, oh well ;P

If what they said was logical then why am I that person? Have I chosen it? Did I prefer to be shy and weird instead of normal and boring because I thought it might be more cool? And why am I still that freak? Why can't I be just like them no matter if I try? Why do I differ? This is what I couldn't understand, this is what made me almost more sad than ever..

I know now. And I'd like to try telling you..


A deviant nature

Maybe I was too young to understand at the time. Maybe I was taking things too seriously (which were pointed to me in the same manner though). Maybe I beleived that what I am blamed for is my wrong character (and that's what I was blamed for indeed). Maybe I thought I had to change and be just like most of the people. But I couldn't no matter if I tried. It was a struggle for me to be "normal" and something I was forced to and learned to dislike.

There was a confusion between my thoughts and feelings. Because I wasn't much aware about one single truth. That I am just a different person, not the wrong one who had to be cured!

For some reasons I was more introverted than the average person, being a loner/hermit or the shy guy, overanalyzing matters, thinking it too much, being focused on something creative that would totally absorb me while not being too much attracted to everyday life, I was the guy who has no girlfriend, I was the geek obsessed with his computers, I was the freak and somehow I was ashamed about what I am. Because they made me feel ashamed through these years.

Everything is just words. Ideas that gets into your head as you grow up. Popular beliefs have such a big influence into your feelings and people react automatically when they encounter them. The most usual reaction is to nod your head in universal agreement. If a belief doesn't affect you, it's natural to show your acceptance on what sounds true. Why someone who is not into our struggle should bother to disagree with something that sounds so natural to him and have his friends stare at him strangely for his obscure objection towards real life ethics? And so, through the process socialization between people who have no reason to care, the most popular ideas about life get spreaded and since everyone says so and you get to hear so, these ideas tend to sound more and more real. Another term for these popular beliefs is memes and ignorance is called the process that creates them. Though it's natural and I wouldn't like to blame them. The life of a big amount of people truly resembles what these beliefs try to tell us and it's all deep in our minds. And so, most of the people in the world really look like our idea of an average normal person. And that makes us think/feel/perceive that this must be the natural way to be :P

Modern life ethics that make me doubt about myself. And my heart tells me what my mind can't comprehent. Ideas. Words. Do they have the same meaning for everyone?

To be introverted is something people criticize. But a good friend told me once that in psychology that word describes a different kind of person. Even himself thought sometimes before that being introverted is not a good thing and it had to be cured by trying to be more social. Though, in psychology people are split in extroverted and introverted personalities and they are all accepted as something natural.

To be focused is another thing that most people criticize. Maybe because it reminds them of a serious looking teacher/scientist/madman (E.g. in movies the mad scientist is a common cliche) who is too focus on his studies that he doesn't look far away himself. And maybe because the younger generations wish to live a life full of joy, girls, happiness, entertainment instead of having to bear with the conservative elderly who are too obsessed about school/studies, blame the youth for their lustful life, being too strict and serious instead of further enjoying their lifes. Maybe my way of life was blatantly blended with theirs. Mmm,. both elder and younger people didn't like me. But is it too bad to be focused, to be like some great scientists, thinkers, philosophers, artists or geeks? Should everyone be the average person? To be focused and choose another path in life than just enjoying it, should be accepted in my opinion as the wish of a unique kind of people that seek for something different than most people do.

This is my nature.


Disorder

The greatest clue about everything that mattered me, was given to me when I started getting more into what people call mental disorders, first by finding out in my surprise that there is a name for something that bothered me since my youth. That bug is what made me more sad than ever. It's too hard to get now into detail about what is called Pure OCD (obsessive compulsive disorder) and generally this is a personal thing that I am sure is a part of me and I had my time arguing with friends whether it is my idea or rather just a psychological trait that could easily fade away if I changed my attitude towards life. I won't get into this now. I'd just mention at the moment that OCD is the same thing that makes me anxious in social situations, always blaming myself, totaly lacking of self-esteem, being absorbed by my thoughts and isolated, as it is (I beleive) the one and the same thing that gave me the presents of constant doubt, analytical thinking, my passion and my focus, while also making me more aware about a kind of struggle some people don't want to understand because they didn't possibly went through the same thing as me in the past. It teached me understanding and rendered me to be thoughtful, though these being again a part of the doubting nature of my OCD.

In a nutshell I discovered that there must be a more proper explanation about my social traits and the different nature of me. Not the one that kept me blaming myself about what I've "chosen" to be. As if I did. What I am was always a part of my nature. And people will disagree by saying that if I think like this then I'll postpone any attempt to change. But the matter is: Did I have to actually change?

I now know myself more and it's confronting to be aware that this nature is something that shares both traits and gifts that I should accept. It's in my personal crisis now to figure out how to learn to like myself and take care and use the elements of my nature in my advantage. I can now be me. I know now what I always needed to know..


Epilogue

Just a remark: It's not that everyone who is diferrent should suffer from some kind of disorder. It's just that the search into disorders (either my case or others) teached me that some people are the way they are because it's in their nature and that is neither bad nor should it be changed. Would you make some rational claims why someone shouldn't be gay for example? He hasn't chosen to behave like this! But it's not something bad at the end. It's just the social struggle and criticism that makes the whole thing feel bad. How about asexual people? Yes!!! There are people who don't enjoy sex and their brain biology don't let them feel. Biggest taboo ever for the popular beliefs to say that but it's true! How can you know how these people really feel and how can you claim it's their mistake?! Autistic persons? A friend says to me "well, us autistics don't naturally learn social skills. We might have to learn them manually and that is what defines us as autistic.". And she beleives that this is not a disorder that should be cured. She tells me that they just have a different brain with it's advantages and disadvantages. People suffering from SAD (Social anxiety disorder). Are they just having the attitude of avoiding social situations because they have gone through the wrong path? Hell no!

And do you know what I lately think about all these so exclusively categorized disorders? It's just another word. If the disorders didn't interfere so badly in the social lives of these individuals, their deviance wouldn't be considered something that has to be categorized. It's the observation of the individual that something is not "right" with him but maybe it's that one which makes him feel different (maybe "disfunctional") to the rest of the world. But it's just a unique kind of personality to me that maybe has to struggle with real social life because of that difference. Not something that has to be cured!

I figured out that there are two primary kinds of struggle for deviants. The physical pain that may come out of their possible "disorder" and the social pain that they have to endure because of the constant criticism and unacceptance from society. And sometimes the second one is quite more painful for the individual..

If you differ, there is a good reason for that. Try to find that in yourself and actually like yourself. It took me more than 10 years and I still struggle at times. But now I know..

Thank you for listening.

11 comments:

Stormrider said...

One of the most brilliant and inspiring texts I 've ever read concerning individuality.

thank you.

Pixie said...

I hope that others, that have felt different will read your article.You are so brave for sharing so intimate things that others can not share them not even with themselves!

James said...

Thank you for your thoughts.
You might enjoy studying Lucretius' The Nature of Things which to me resonates with your sense of the actual.

I would be interested in your thoughts regarding whether or not you "preform" your thoughts in your head before writing them or do you discover what you have written as you write?

Also do you reread your text and edit it or do you let it stand as written?

Do you remember what you write and know you are not rediscovering what you have written?

I guess I am asking whether or not your thinking ever rests or are you thinking pretty much constantly?

Would you prefer to write or speak your thoughts?

Sorry for all the questions, but I found this stream of consciousness very interesting.

Thanks again.

Optimus said...

Someone here would wonder what these questions have to do with this article but I somehow understand what you are seeking. Actually, such questions are my favorite kinds of questions that I use to ask to myself at those overanalyzing times and might even reveal things I even didn't know about myself. In fact, I haven't asked most of the ones you point out seriously and might bother me in the future too. I guess you ask these question, because you see something on my way of thinking or writting that you want to check with other data. I am not aware yet about it and it's so mysterious that I like it and so I'd try atm to give some short answers which may or may not be accurate enough and have this interesting set of questions floating around my head for days and wonder what you tried to find about me :)

>I would be interested in your
>thoughts regarding whether or not
>you "preform" your thoughts in
>your head before writing them or
>do you discover what you have
>written as you write?

It's not easy to answer this. I am not sure. When I am not in front of my computer I may start overanalyzing some matters and getting drained by the thoughts and that may or may not motivate me to start writting about the thing that inspired me to write here. Later, I may have lost it, the initial motivation that drove me into the series of thoughts, so maybe in the middle of it I loose track and the next paragraph comes from something that inspired me in the previous paragraph and feel is important to me to write it. So, it all gets disorganized. But I think that first I come up with a line of thought and then I try to write it. It just stops sometimes to have coherence. I am not entirely sure about the question and this answer.

>Also do you reread your text and
>edit it or do you let it stand as
>written?

Yes, that happens a lot. Insanely! I find some mistakes or things I'd like to write better and rewrite them. Then I save and go back to the blog to reread what I have written, sometimes from scratch. At least when I don't get mad at me for being such a perfectionist and spending twice the time on writting this. And still the size sucks :P

>Do you remember what you write and
> know you are not rediscovering
>what you have written?

They tell me that sometimes I write something which I have written in the same or different way (in context) a paragraph ago. That's why my texts are big they say. Most of the times though, I don't remember to go through a text at once and find out I have written something twice without needed though. But I could still keep the texts smaller..

>I guess I am asking whether or not
>your thinking ever rests or are
>you thinking pretty much
>constantly?

To thinking it too much and actually overanalyzing, I found it is the only thing I can be motivated doing without ever getting tired (I mean, I AM getting tired, but I am not demotivated by that one. That in comparison with other things I want to do (coding) but I am getting lazy and not doing them. I could only think intensively and never stop!). So, it's a big percentage in my daily life but of course there are times of pause. Just not very much. Maybe in sleep but I still find myself needing to analyze something even there. Crazy?

>Would you prefer to write or speak
> your thoughts?

Definitely write. It's not just that in order to speak them, I don't have to overanalyze or else I will bore the other person (which I don't seem to care about much), it's not that I can't just say one-two sentences to describe my thoughts and feelings, it has to be something bigger and deeper I can't express in chit chat. And maybe it's easier for me to express myself with writting.

I hope it was not confusing. I even can't be sure about the accurate answers in some of the questions..

Optimus said...

>Do you remember what you write and
> know you are not rediscovering
>what you have written?

Maybe here I didn't answered entirely. Maybe you mean if I also write something that as an idea has been written by me in a past article several times again. And whether I do remember that and don't feel like I have discovered something new.

Actually,. that's another interesting thing. Yes, I repeat myself. I think that I remember the occasion and I have the feeling that what I write here has been written before and is not something new. But somehow I feel the urge to rewrite it at the place maybe because I find it important or maybe because I found a slightly different way to express it that feels better. But I have the knowledge I have written it in the past, only maybe with a bigger feeling of importance and understanding of it's idea now.

Actually there are things I repeat in my analysis and a phenomenon where only for example the 5th time I have spoken about an idea really felled it's importance. By that time as I like to say, I underlined this. I mean, I am aware I have said it four times ago, but only this fifth time for some reasons I have really felt the importance of this idea and it's the time I know I have "underlined" it as important in my head and even if I don't write it down, it's in my brain anymore and will be a major reference combined in my future thoughts with other data. Now that underlined idea has become a "mental weapon" as I used to say (silly term?)

Optimus said...

Now see that!

Everything is like a puzzle. I was so focused on each single line/word/thought I was writting/expressing that maybe I have gone way far from the main point of that question and even didn't felt it for a while (like being hypnotize by the wild rush of all those thoughts, sentence by sentence!)

And so this tiny moment I had a perception of what was happening in myself that could maybe even answer more on another question I wasn't sure about.

>I would be interested in your
>thoughts regarding whether or not
>you "preform" your thoughts in
>your head before writing them or
>do you discover what you have
>written as you write?

Not exactly answering, not sure.
But it might be connected with the "intense rush/flush of thoughts" that comes into words as I keep writting. I am not the kind of guy who plans really much and there is a plan for the initial start of writting of a text but this might loose track as I said. And I even like to be free as a writer without restrictions but that's not the primary reason I become chaotic in these texts. It's still something has to do with the excessive rush of newcoming thoughts during the writting process! I won't say more here atm..

James said...

Lucretius allows an actual whole which is not a sum of the actual events it takes into account.
Reading your two articles, it struck me that you were seeing such a whole.
While this whole may have been seen by mystics and spirituals, they we also confused with imaginary, non-actual beings.
The Greeks and particularly Epicurus and then the Roman Lucretius cleaned up this whole so that it only accounted for actual facts and events but not in some accumulative or calculating way.

I sensed this reading what you had written and then I recited it aloud and saw that you indeed were aware of this actual whole which accounts for all available in the moment actual events but does not sum them up. Further sampling of your links had one that confirmed the sense that those persons on the autistic spectrum often may be aware of such a whole disproportionate to the rest of the popular.

This whole can not be kept, but only immediately seen. Seeing it triggers its verbal expression which is impossible since this whole lies in between whatever actual lines are written, so it can not be directly written, but only indirectly allowed whether or not the writing is in 'proper' English.

As for my questions, I am not diagnosing your expression but merely asking you if your experiences are similar to mine since I am aware in the manner in which I questioned you.

Finally, as to your feelings being questioned. Since this whole is all at once and immediate and it can not be directly expressed, to question an expression that attempts to express it directly, opens space in their immediate awareness, which initially is very exciting, but eventually lends itself to sensible discourse.

I will in subsequent comments address each of your answers to my questions and tell you how similar or dissimilar our manner of mattering actually is.

James said...

Someone here would wonder what these questions have to do with this article but I somehow understand what you are seeking.

[I somehow sensed that you would.]
Actually, such questions are my favorite kinds of questions that I use to ask to myself at those overanalyzing times and might even reveal things I even didn't know about myself. In fact, I haven't asked most of the ones you point out seriously and might bother me in the future too. I guess you ask these question, because you see something on my way of thinking or writting that you want to check with other data.

[Actually I sense that our awareness of our immediate circumstances is very similar.]

I am not aware yet about it and it's so mysterious that I like it and so I'd try atm to give some short answers which may or may not be accurate enough and have this interesting set of questions floating around my head for days and wonder what you tried to find about me :)

[While I do not consider this whole mysterious, I do find it disconcerting at first and also exciting.]


>I would be interested in your
>thoughts regarding whether or not
>you "preform" your thoughts in
>your head before writing them or
>do you discover what you have
>written as you write?

It's not easy to answer this. I am not sure. When I am not in front of my computer I may start overanalyzing some matters and getting drained by the thoughts and that may or may not motivate me to start writting about the thing that inspired me to write here. Later, I may have lost it, the initial motivation that drove me into the series of thoughts, so maybe in the middle of it I loose track and the next paragraph comes from something that inspired me in the previous paragraph and feel is important to me to write it. So, it all gets disorganized. But I think that first I come up with a line of thought and then I try to write it. It just stops sometimes to have coherence. I am not entirely sure about the question and this answer.

[Exactly. This actual whole that is not a sum of its actual parts and yet accounts for all that is actually can not be kept, so one loses it and is left confused by the loss or emptiness. One may panic and feel one needs to write to get one's barrings, and one best write to get over this panic and yet the more one writes and sorts out the possibilities that do not arise from actuality from those that do, one suffers the loss less catastrophically. It is not a sign that you have failed to keep the clarity you had, but that this awareness is by its very nature sporadic and something one can not dictate, but simply allow.]

>Also do you reread your text and
>edit it or do you let it stand as
>written?

Yes, that happens a lot. Insanely! I find some mistakes or things I'd like to write better and rewrite them. Then I save and go back to the blog to reread what I have written, sometimes from scratch. At least when I don't get mad at me for being such a perfectionist and spending twice the time on writting this. And still the size sucks :P

[The length of course is obvious, and the sense that there are mistakes in the writing in the 'proper' sense of the term mistakes, and yet it is not at all distracting to someone who also sees the actual whole you allow between the lines of what you write even though when rereading the lines you do not see the mistakes or the whole that other's may see there.]

>Do you remember what you write and
> know you are not rediscovering
>what you have written?

They tell me that sometimes I write something which I have written in the same or different way (in context) a paragraph ago. That's why my texts are big they say. Most of the times though, I don't remember to go through a text at once and find out I have written something twice without needed though. But I could still keep the texts smaller..

[While the more you write the shorter your writing will get, it will never be free of all of these mistakes. I agree that it is a waste of time to try to to directly correct them excepting what spell check catches. Using it will help you see mistakes you can not see yourself. The texts will grow smaller and clearer in time.]

>I guess I am asking whether or not
>your thinking ever rests or are
>you thinking pretty much
>constantly?

To thinking it too much and actually overanalyzing, I found it is the only thing I can be motivated doing without ever getting tired (I mean, I AM getting tired, but I am not demotivated by that one. That in comparison with other things I want to do (coding) but I am getting lazy and not doing them. I could only think intensively and never stop!). So, it's a big percentage in my daily life but of course there are times of pause. Just not very much. Maybe in sleep but I still find myself needing to analyze something even there. Crazy?

[Since you like I are always thinking and it is rather like its own black hole, we can not get out of it, it is only with another's perceptive questions that one can make space in that black hole to allow a sorting of possibilities and tossing of those which are not arising out of actuality. It is the need to actually perceive the immediate actuality as a whole that you are trying to do when you write and this reality is confused by mistaking imposibile possibilities for likely ones.]

>Would you prefer to write or speak
> your thoughts?

Definitely write. It's not just that in order to speak them, I don't have to overanalyze or else I will bore the other person (which I don't seem to care about much), it's not that I can't just say one-two sentences to describe my thoughts and feelings, it has to be something bigger and deeper I can't express in chit chat. And maybe it's easier for me to express myself with writting.

[Writing is a form of discourse even if the other is merely likely but not actual as I was likely and now am actually questioning you and confirming many of your answers as things that I also do.]

I hope it was not confusing. I even can't be sure about the accurate answers in some of the questions..

[The reason you do not feel sure is that you have not actually engaged in discourse regarding your manner of mattering.]

12:03 PM
Optimus said...

>Do you remember what you write and
> know you are not rediscovering
>what you have written?

Maybe here I didn't answered entirely. Maybe you mean if I also write something that as an idea has been written by me in a past article several times again. And whether I do remember that and don't feel like I have discovered something new.

[These questions as I suspected reverberate and allow you to reconsider the person you have always actually been but now with the likelihood of sharing your manner of mattering. Therefore it is not discovering something new, but rather seeing what has always been in a whole different whole, one not eternally learning more and more how you are disordered, but rather seeing how you are actually whole even if your expressed parts do not always seem proper. Therefore, you can see that being normal is being proper and ashamed of making mistakes, but also is unaware of the immediate circumstances which you see more and more clearly as evidence from your two articles herein.]

Actually,. that's another interesting thing. Yes, I repeat myself. I think that I remember the occasion and I have the feeling that what I write here has been written before and is not something new. But somehow I feel the urge to rewrite it at the place maybe because I find it important or maybe because I found a slightly different way to express it that feels better. But I have the knowledge I have written it in the past, only maybe with a bigger feeling of importance and understanding of it's idea now.

[Because you lost it, and when it happens again, it is not that much different. As long as human are, those that lived and those that will live all had or will have more or less just what we see if they see it as a whole that is not the sum of its actual parts, but can account for all that actually is now and senses this actuality was and will be no different until humans cease to exist at together just as we each will.]

Actually there are things I repeat in my analysis and a phenomenon where only for example the 5th time I have spoken about an idea really felled it's importance. By that time as I like to say, I underlined this. I mean, I am aware I have said it four times ago, but only this fifth time for some reasons I have really felt the importance of this idea and it's the time I know I have "underlined" it as important in my head and even if I don't write it down, it's in my brain anymore and will be a major reference combined in my future thoughts with other data. Now that underlined idea has become a "mental weapon" as I used to say (silly term?)

[Well seen. The repetition in writing allows a point where it no longer needs to be said when you recognize it and this is a sign of your increasing clarity.]

12:13 PM
Optimus said...

Now see that!

Everything is like a puzzle. I was so focused on each single line/word/thought I was writting/expressing that maybe I have gone way far from the main point of that question and even didn't felt it for a while (like being hypnotize by the wild rush of all those thoughts, sentence by sentence!)

[You did it again congratulations!]

And so this tiny moment I had a perception of what was happening in myself that could maybe even answer more on another question I wasn't sure about.

[Exacting you have grown in awareness and understanding or sensibility without having to depend on normal logic and without having to be normal to be sensible.]

>I would be interested in your
>thoughts regarding whether or not
>you "preform" your thoughts in
>your head before writing them or
>do you discover what you have
>written as you write?

Not exactly answering, not sure.
But it might be connected with the "intense rush/flush of thoughts" that comes into words as I keep writting. I am not the kind of guy who plans really much and there is a plan for the initial start of writting of a text but this might loose track as I said. And I even like to be free as a writer without restrictions but that's not the primary reason I become chaotic in these texts. It's still something has to do with the excessive rush of newcoming thoughts during the writting process! I won't say more here atm..

[Again you are very perceptive. This rush to write is merely a sign that you are new to being questioned in this manner. The more you write the more you will repeat yourself until you no longer need to write that and will move on to writing something else and being more the whole that is not sum of its actual parts, you will be calmer and less in need to continue writing and in fact you may be able to actually finish something with out feeling you have more right now that needs be said.

[Let me know what you think of all of this, I would be interested in yours thoughts, because your thoughts are very interesting.]

12:19 PM
James said...

Lucretius allows an actual whole which is not a sum of the actual events it takes into account.

James said...

PS I also sense tht your feelings are three dimensional--you refer to the "size" of your writing or how "big" they are when most would comment on their "length". this is another sign that you are aware of this whole which can not be lined up in words.

James said...

I just realized that Gestalt also senses an actual whole that is not merely a sum of its actual parts.

I have often been amazed by what several of my few friends do and do not say regarding my emails to them.

We have concluded that they who are very procedural and attentive to specifics, simply do not actually see this actual whole.

They do not sense or feel. I sense it and feel it and write without by attention to the details of what I write or the grammar or even whether or not they might understand it. You seem to say you also write and talk like this.

That you then over analyze seems more regarding your "OCD". What do you think about this?

James said...

Your effort to become clear regarding your perception whose clarity is actually sporadic,which is natural-- there is no set clarity, even as the same returns, clearer--becomes your articles or answers to questions.

I do not see your language is asking for disagreement or agreement, it merely rather baldly states what you clearly see.

The question I ask myself, is whether most people would be interested in what you clearly see?

Or what I clearly see for that matter.

What surprises me is how expressive you are regardless of the form of your language.

While English is not your native language and it is mine, we are using the language, but we use it differently from most. Most people write in a manner that feels like they are directed upwards. Your writing is horizontal. It is an actual expression of your actual perception of actuality.

What surprises me is how this effect does not depend on you responding. If you do it would be pleasant, but it isn't necessary to sustain this effect.

The effect, unlike most who speak, is not in the words, which are secondary, but in the perception which prompts the words.

Most us language as if the perception were somehow in the words.

This sort of use of language leaves me with the sense that they are saying a lot, but do not have any sense to their expression, it is distant and far off.

While we may be speaking in the same language, we are not using this language in a similar way.

Like you I am not sure what I have written makes sense and this is not unnatural, because only if the sense were in the words would we be sure. Therefore, even as senseless as it is, most feel secure in their language even if it is senseless jabbering.

Locations of visitors to this page