- Joined
- Mar 1, 2013
- Messages
- 1,819
I've wanted to make this post before, but every time I started writing it I was never happy with how it turned out. I've talked with numerous board members via PM and almost everybody that reaches out to me identifies with the core philosophy I've come to live by.
A little background about this is that for the majority of my life (up until I was 17-18) I felt totally purposeless and it wasn't until I took psychology in high school that I got the first glimpse of what my purpose might be, I had a fire in my belly and, so, I pursued psychology and learned as much as I could. In case anybody remembers "Light" from these boards, he branched out and has become a successful life coach/intuitive leadership developer and for a while I followed and pursued the intuitive/spiritual side of life; this is when I got into Eastern Philosophy with Lao Tzu, Taoism, Buddhism, etc. However, I ended up reaching a point where I felt like neither system of sole psychology or sole Eastern philosophy was enough and I sought to reconcile the two, but, as it turned out modern psychology is starting to head in that direction anyway and after digging much much deeper into things I came across existential-humanistic psychology; Nietzsche, Heidegger, Sartre, Irvin Yalom, Rollo May, Abraham Maslow, Carl Rogers, Victor Frankl, etc.
However, this is where my thinking about things vastly differs psychologically. There are some principles innate to behavioral therapy or cognitive therapy that I simply don't agree with; the biggest one being that there is a "right" way and a "wrong" way to think and in both therapies the therapist is the dictator in determining what is "right" and "wrong," but I disagree with this because I feel that the only person who knows what is best for themself is that person, and only that person can see or feel meaning in their own life. I'm actually a proponent of suicide because I think that if somebody feels their life has no meaning or life itself is meaningless then as the sole owner of their "life" they have every right to take it if they choose.
Irvin Yalom outlines something he calls the four givens of existence; meaninglessness, isolation, freedom, and death and that everybody has to come to grips with these givens. How you do that can be "dysfunctional" or "functional."
I firmly believe that life is objectively meaningless in the sense that there is no path laid out for us to walk in order to feel fulfilled or happy, etc. I believe that subjective meaning is possible and is totally unique to everybody and that the most meaningful way to live is in accordance with your highest innate potential (what Abraham Maslow referred to as self-actualization). So, when I see people say things like "Men do all the hard and dangerous jobs" or something else like that, yes, it's true but those men (more than likely) have regrets in their life and feel that something is missing.
Existential isolation is the sense that nobody can truly know you; they can sympathize, and empathize but nobody can 100% identify with you and to varying degrees that constitutes isolation. To quote Michael Schreiner:
Absolute existential freedom comes in the sense that because we are isolated and fundamentally alone, we are also fully responsible for our actions, thoughts, and essence. However, people willingly give up their freedom of choice to fit in, feel accepted, feel connected to others, etc. It's easier to be told what to do, and told what to think than it is to think for yourself and try to make sense of world that has no innate sense. It's easier to follow a religious doctrine or dedicate your life to an unknowable force than it is to think for yourself and make sense of our world. People willing give up their own freedom and individuality to feel some type of "meaning."
Death in the sense that everything will eventually come to an end. Every day we live with the background notion that we're going to die and that is full of anxiety and angst; over the centuries people have developed countless ways to fight that anxiety and make their lives more comfortable and they've created cushions to safeguard themselves. Existential death is the realization that we will cease-to-be at some point in time; popular cushions against this are that there is a higher power or Being, reincarnation, etc.
Beyond that, I'm a fan of some ideas from Taoism and Lao Tzu, as well. In an effort to create innate meaning, I believe people started to identify, label, and define things and we've come to think that "defining" is the same as "knowing." It's another safeguard against having to find your own meaning though, because if society and history suggests that their is a "right" way or a "moral" way to live and operate then it becomes easy to just follow that and live your life within the defined system. There's a chapter of the Tao Te Ching that roughly says
Drck, this is the foundational reason for why I don't care too much about the social topics you've brought up, at least not for the same reasons that you do. You care about obesity being on the rise because it contributes to a society being "unattractive" but I care about it because it would signal to me that those people are dysfunctionally coping with being alive, but I'm in no position to judge the quality of their lives, either. That being said, you're also basing your opinions and attitudes on what is "socially accepted" and thus are basing your own subjectivity on others (giving up your freedom to some degree). Society's idea of what is "attractive" or "appealing," etc. changes and has changed through history, because, historically the more obese you were the more powerful you were because you could afford food. Plus, the human form (in my opinion) is largely irrelevant because it doesn't tell me anything important about that person.
Everything that you've said and every statistic you've cited seeks to make sense of things within the defined system - but I don't think you can make innate sense of anything within the system and that's my point. Statistics are objective. Sure, it's a commonly held social belief that being obese is unattractive but that doesn't make it true and the same can be said for almost anything; even psychology faces this problem (yes, the subject that I love is still faulty).
Basically, as long as people live their lives and base themselves within the defined system then they will never find true meaning. Sure, people will be happy, people will be joyful but never truly fulfilled and I don't know if it's even possible to feel truly fulfilled but it's something everybody should strive for because, in my opinion, it's the only way to have authentic meaning. I see an entire world of people who live without real meaning, full of people who don't strive to make the most of themselves. Alan Watts: What if Money Wre No Object <-- Alan Watts lays out another important point that I live by and he comes close to what I'm talking about when I say "defined system."
These are what I consider to be fundamental truths to living and everybody is free to disagree with me. I encourage everybody to follow their own path but remain mindful of the potential pitfalls (I'm biased because I do think these are fundamental truths and apply to everybody) ; it's very difficult to be entirely subjective with yourself. Anyhow, that's about it. I'm confident I've missed a few points and have failed to say everything I wanted so I may add more as time goes and I'm open to questions.
One last thing; I've explained this to people before and almost every says it sounds depressing, etc. but it's not. Being totally responsible for everything in your life means that you're the master of your destiny and can accomplish anything. When you cast aside valuing the opinions and subjectivity of other people you're able to live your life the way you want which is a terrifying thing... at first. Life has no pre-ordained meaning and it's up to you to create your own.
A little background about this is that for the majority of my life (up until I was 17-18) I felt totally purposeless and it wasn't until I took psychology in high school that I got the first glimpse of what my purpose might be, I had a fire in my belly and, so, I pursued psychology and learned as much as I could. In case anybody remembers "Light" from these boards, he branched out and has become a successful life coach/intuitive leadership developer and for a while I followed and pursued the intuitive/spiritual side of life; this is when I got into Eastern Philosophy with Lao Tzu, Taoism, Buddhism, etc. However, I ended up reaching a point where I felt like neither system of sole psychology or sole Eastern philosophy was enough and I sought to reconcile the two, but, as it turned out modern psychology is starting to head in that direction anyway and after digging much much deeper into things I came across existential-humanistic psychology; Nietzsche, Heidegger, Sartre, Irvin Yalom, Rollo May, Abraham Maslow, Carl Rogers, Victor Frankl, etc.
However, this is where my thinking about things vastly differs psychologically. There are some principles innate to behavioral therapy or cognitive therapy that I simply don't agree with; the biggest one being that there is a "right" way and a "wrong" way to think and in both therapies the therapist is the dictator in determining what is "right" and "wrong," but I disagree with this because I feel that the only person who knows what is best for themself is that person, and only that person can see or feel meaning in their own life. I'm actually a proponent of suicide because I think that if somebody feels their life has no meaning or life itself is meaningless then as the sole owner of their "life" they have every right to take it if they choose.
Irvin Yalom outlines something he calls the four givens of existence; meaninglessness, isolation, freedom, and death and that everybody has to come to grips with these givens. How you do that can be "dysfunctional" or "functional."
I firmly believe that life is objectively meaningless in the sense that there is no path laid out for us to walk in order to feel fulfilled or happy, etc. I believe that subjective meaning is possible and is totally unique to everybody and that the most meaningful way to live is in accordance with your highest innate potential (what Abraham Maslow referred to as self-actualization). So, when I see people say things like "Men do all the hard and dangerous jobs" or something else like that, yes, it's true but those men (more than likely) have regrets in their life and feel that something is missing.
Existential isolation is the sense that nobody can truly know you; they can sympathize, and empathize but nobody can 100% identify with you and to varying degrees that constitutes isolation. To quote Michael Schreiner:
Absolute existential freedom comes in the sense that because we are isolated and fundamentally alone, we are also fully responsible for our actions, thoughts, and essence. However, people willingly give up their freedom of choice to fit in, feel accepted, feel connected to others, etc. It's easier to be told what to do, and told what to think than it is to think for yourself and try to make sense of world that has no innate sense. It's easier to follow a religious doctrine or dedicate your life to an unknowable force than it is to think for yourself and make sense of our world. People willing give up their own freedom and individuality to feel some type of "meaning."
Death in the sense that everything will eventually come to an end. Every day we live with the background notion that we're going to die and that is full of anxiety and angst; over the centuries people have developed countless ways to fight that anxiety and make their lives more comfortable and they've created cushions to safeguard themselves. Existential death is the realization that we will cease-to-be at some point in time; popular cushions against this are that there is a higher power or Being, reincarnation, etc.
Beyond that, I'm a fan of some ideas from Taoism and Lao Tzu, as well. In an effort to create innate meaning, I believe people started to identify, label, and define things and we've come to think that "defining" is the same as "knowing." It's another safeguard against having to find your own meaning though, because if society and history suggests that their is a "right" way or a "moral" way to live and operate then it becomes easy to just follow that and live your life within the defined system. There's a chapter of the Tao Te Ching that roughly says
and another concept I borrow from Taoism is that of our form
Drck, this is the foundational reason for why I don't care too much about the social topics you've brought up, at least not for the same reasons that you do. You care about obesity being on the rise because it contributes to a society being "unattractive" but I care about it because it would signal to me that those people are dysfunctionally coping with being alive, but I'm in no position to judge the quality of their lives, either. That being said, you're also basing your opinions and attitudes on what is "socially accepted" and thus are basing your own subjectivity on others (giving up your freedom to some degree). Society's idea of what is "attractive" or "appealing," etc. changes and has changed through history, because, historically the more obese you were the more powerful you were because you could afford food. Plus, the human form (in my opinion) is largely irrelevant because it doesn't tell me anything important about that person.
Everything that you've said and every statistic you've cited seeks to make sense of things within the defined system - but I don't think you can make innate sense of anything within the system and that's my point. Statistics are objective. Sure, it's a commonly held social belief that being obese is unattractive but that doesn't make it true and the same can be said for almost anything; even psychology faces this problem (yes, the subject that I love is still faulty).
Basically, as long as people live their lives and base themselves within the defined system then they will never find true meaning. Sure, people will be happy, people will be joyful but never truly fulfilled and I don't know if it's even possible to feel truly fulfilled but it's something everybody should strive for because, in my opinion, it's the only way to have authentic meaning. I see an entire world of people who live without real meaning, full of people who don't strive to make the most of themselves. Alan Watts: What if Money Wre No Object <-- Alan Watts lays out another important point that I live by and he comes close to what I'm talking about when I say "defined system."
These are what I consider to be fundamental truths to living and everybody is free to disagree with me. I encourage everybody to follow their own path but remain mindful of the potential pitfalls (I'm biased because I do think these are fundamental truths and apply to everybody) ; it's very difficult to be entirely subjective with yourself. Anyhow, that's about it. I'm confident I've missed a few points and have failed to say everything I wanted so I may add more as time goes and I'm open to questions.
One last thing; I've explained this to people before and almost every says it sounds depressing, etc. but it's not. Being totally responsible for everything in your life means that you're the master of your destiny and can accomplish anything. When you cast aside valuing the opinions and subjectivity of other people you're able to live your life the way you want which is a terrifying thing... at first. Life has no pre-ordained meaning and it's up to you to create your own.
