Living Without Definition

[Eldanen]

In my experience, people are contradictory by nature. In reading works by people such as A. O. Spare, I've discovered that it might not necessarily be the best thing to try to label our behaviors and group ourselves extensively. Because as soon as I say that I have X attribute, I also notice how at the same time I can deviate to the other extreme just as easily. So to accept one and reject the other part of my personality requires repression of some sort. It's interesting to think about how we humans believe that we have to stick to one part of our personalities and remain consistent to live in society, when some of us aren't really designed for that. I've been in situations where people thought that I was one way, but I'm quite capable of showing a completely different side of my personality when I'm in another group of people. And if I show the side I show to the second group to the first, they either say, "Who are you?" or "Oh, I didn't know you were like *that*," as if I couldn't be both at once. Always exclusion of duality and opposites.

It correlates well with my emotional states, I believe, which have always been prone to vacillation.

When a person accepts that they can be X as well as Y without needing to exclude either, or by accepting that discriminations like X and Y are just illusions we all make to have reality be an easier place to live in, we find that our horizons widen that much more. And yet people become so attached to the notions that they have of themselves because they feel that they are unable to live without them. And it is those very attachments that deprive them of the happiness they desire. (Or depression. Sometimes feeling sad feels good, eh?)

Anyway: Discuss.

 

[Night]

Nice stuff you brought to the table here, Eldanen.

Concerning predictive behavioral connections, one of our root motivations is very likely owed to the sophistication of our brain. Pattern seeking allows for increased predictability - in many more ways than can be immediately mentioned here (farming cycles; migration points; sensory elements; etc...).

The successful implementation of response systems designed from the shoulders of these observations was certainly expressed in things like positive tribal growth; the gathering and protection of land/material wealth; and - eventually - the outsourcing of these observations into other lands.

Cooperation is one of our greatest instinctual support systems. Pattern recognition is a crucial element within this scheme.

 

[Eldanen]

I think you missed the main idea slightly, but what you said is true. If you've ever read the book Prometheus Rising by RA Wilson, you'll find that one crucial element that relates to what you're talking about is called the 4th circuit of the mind. The "social" circuit as it is. It basically implements the norms and guidelines and patterns that a person should follow in order to fit into the whole of society to permit the species to survive. It is in contrast to the 3rd circuit, the circuit of exponential expansion, especially in terms of knowledge. Consider Science vs. Religion as a useful dichotomy to see the two interacting.

 

[Night]

I think you missed the main idea slightly, but what you said is true. If you've ever read the book Prometheus Rising by RA Wilson, you'll find that one crucial element that relates to what you're talking about is called the 4th circuit of the mind. The "social" circuit as it is. It basically implements the norms and guidelines and patterns that a person should follow in order to fit into the whole of society to permit the species to survive. It is in contrast to the 3rd circuit, the circuit of exponential expansion, especially in terms of knowledge. Consider Science vs. Religion as a useful dichotomy to see the two interacting.

I pride myself on this consistency.

I have read Prometheus. Interesting read. The 4th circuit as a socio-cultural cipher, intended to bolster successful continuation of key ethical maxims. Not only to ensure the individual fits neatly, but that the approximate goals of the culture are not lost/deformed between generations.

The inherent difference seems a finite v. (potentially) infinite set of characters functioning inside the respective circuits. The 4th as determined by "static" mores, whereas the 3rd as a reservoir with seemingly limitless space.

If this is to be believed, what other variables might you assert into the 4th circuit (after religion)?

 

[Eldanen]

Religion seems to be the author and the finisher of 4th circuit propaganda . But also in place is government, in whatever shape it takes form. Apart from the 3rd, I really, really enjoy the metaprogramming circuit . The media could also be a great propounder of 4th circuit ideals. Yes, some might consider the media liberal, but they're all about pounding ethics on others.

 

[Night]

Ah - contemporary politics aside, the 4th Estate has always been instrumental in espousing cultural value systems.

The press has always reinforced the status quo. They depend on it for nourishment; longetivity and as source material for all the hot air they pump out...

 

[ThatsWhatHeSaid]

Moved from Bonfire. (Nice thread. I'll post my thoughts later.)

 

[Night]

Thanks, Edahn -

Looking forward to it.

 

[ThatsWhatHeSaid]

This is an interesting point I came across in reading some stuff by OSHO a while ago. It's one of the reasons I refused to type myself for a long time. Your type can act like a straight jacket, preventing you from expressing some parts that aren't aligned with the expectations of that type.

I think you're right that people contradict themselves naturally on behavioral, cognitive, and affective levels. The interesting thing is the release you get when you allow those contradictions to coexist. I would suspect that it's a result of letting go of having to be anyone and be satisfied with who you are.

Meh. I don't really have anything interesting to add. I'm just babbling.

 

[ygolo]

Just adding another question to the mix...

Is it better to control and modify our behavior, contradicory as it is and will remain, or to simply let the contradictions keep screwing with us with no attempts at self-modification?

For example:
Let's say I don't feel like doing anything other than sleeping and eating, and occasionally doing things prompted by belief of what it takes for survival. Meanwhile, the survival activities are interrupted by avoidance mechanisms and procrastination.

Should I follow these instincts?

 

[gloomy-optimist]

In response to Eldanen: Knowing where you're at and what your strengths and weaknesses are can be very beneficial to both society and the individual, I think. From personal experience, I know that typing myself really helped clarify many things about myself that I couldn't quite understand on my own; I felt different a lot of the time, and it helped me understand why.
BUT if society becomes dependent on typing, and if we refuse to accept our own individuality in conjunction with our type, then we are pretty much putting our own development on lockdown. Grouping should be used as a helping mechanism; not so much a deciding one.

In response ygolo: I'd say it would be important to maintain a healthy check on behavior. "Modifying" is a strong word, but I don't think there's a personality out there that doesn't have to have some sort of positive feedback in order to remain a healthy, happy individual; a fairly regular regiment of activities that provide some sort of mental rejuvenation beyond instinct is necessary or else behavior and personality tend to change and become negative...

 

[Ilah]

This is an interesting point I came across in reading some stuff by OSHO a while ago. It's one of the reasons I refused to type myself for a long time. Your type can act like a straight jacket, preventing you from expressing some parts that aren't aligned with the expectations of that type.

I think you're right that people contradict themselves naturally on behavioral, cognitive, and affective levels. The interesting thing is the release you get when you allow those contradictions to coexist. I would suspect that it's a result of letting go of having to be anyone and be satisfied with who you are.

Meh. I don't really have anything interesting to add. I'm just babbling.

I agree that typing can be a straight jacket. However, to some understanding personality differences can free you from another straight jacket. I grew up hearing about how people were, supposed to act, supposed to feel, supposed to be motivated by, etc. It is the "one size fits all as long as you are a medium" standard and lots of that didn't fit me. But I tried to make it fit because that how people are suppose to be.

It is better for an INTJ to be straight jacked into the role of an INTJ that to try to force herself into the role of an ESFx. Of course it is better not to be straight jacketed at all.

I see the point about the OP and getting pigeon holed. My Fi (my tertiary trait) is fairly strong and several people have suggested I might be an NF rather than NT. Because I lable myself T, people assume my F is low.

Ilah