[continued from previous message]
- he swam against the current and never metamorphosed into one of the
club.
Not really a great example either. Feynman eventually became a
well-accepted insider. I've read Feynman biographies, btw.
They come in varying degrees shades colours and types. I pride
myself on achieving what I want or taking what I need by playing the
game and ostensibly being a member of the club while being nothing of
the sort and having a rich inner universe which may have little
interaction with the club that you belong to.
So what? So do I. We can both do that because to some degree we
are quite capable of maintaining the role of an "insider".
For most people the roles of 'insider' OR 'outsider' can indeed
be adopted, and also dropped. I'm saying that our core identity
is much richer and more flexible than any such roles.
But when I interact you
would never know, at least in the relatively short period over which I
do interact, that I'm *not* a member of *your* club Dave. And I don't
want to be, ever ;)
Non-sequitur. I don't have a "club". :)
But if I did, you wouldn't be invited.
As one more example, I first read Dostoevsky's 'Notes from Underground' >when I was about 21, and then later (around 27, wrote a college paper
for an honors class on it). It is a more serious exploration of some
of the issues surrounding "being a loner".
There you go again. Symptomatic. Read what I said about your
psychological armour above.
Again, completely ignoring a substantial point just to attempt a
psychological attack. Dostoevsky's 'Notes' was an extremely
interesting view into a 'type' of 'outsider'. It shows very well
many of the advantages and disadvantages of adopting that
"role/persona".
And again, if Slider ever says anything half as profound
about the subject I'll be more than amazed. :)
Here's a New Yorker article on that book: >https://www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/can-dostoevsky-still-kick-you-in-the-gut
Bottom line is that "being a loner" can yield anything from
a beneficial genius to a dangerous moron, depending on exactly
how one thinks and on how one proceeds to live. In general,
as an arbitrarily assumed "position", I'd call it limiting.
But you can't properly appreciate or deprecate something if you are
forever excluded from experiencing it or even from properly defining
it.
You're not really being rational. Your armour is protective, granted,
but it's also very heavy and it's therefore impeding your acuity and
agility.
Pure ad-hominem and drivel.
But then... I began dreaming, and in the context of Castaneda.
From the viewpoint of that reality (before I had ever read
anything about lucid dreaming from a more standard perspective
like that of LaBerge), I began to conceive of myself as something
more like "the ultimate loner", to the point that I believed
I was really doing things very few if any other humans could do
(living under the auspices of 'the spirit'). My self-label then
became more of "an aspiration" than "an identity", and it was
to be "a solitary warrior". But trust me, if you come to actually
fervently believe you are independently as an individual following
'the guidelines of the spirit', then you have indeed become
something of "an outsider". I did, and I was. Or so I thought...
Look, you know and I know that Castenada was a conman, a grifter as
you Yanks call them. He had the long play in mind with people like
you and Chris. As PT Barnum said, there's a sucker born every minute.
He also said I think, never give a sucker an even break.
A simplistic assessment of Castaneda - but yeah, that was ONE of his characteristics. Again you ignored the real point I was making.
The dreaming stuff is on the nose to me as well. Fuck dreams, it's
hard enough dealing with reality. I don't drink alcohol and I don't
smoke tobacco and I don't eat unhealthy and junk foods because no
matter how intense reality is, I want to be there, sober and ready, to
deal with it. I don't need to manipulate dreams so that I can dive in
and hide from the light of day, which I why I believe you jumped from
the sinking raft Castenada onto another raft called lucid dreaming.
You don't seem to have the slightest idea of what I actually did.
It was really nothing at all like what you just said above.
Always searching, never finding - that's you. About time you cast all
this nonsense off and got on with what remains of your life on a 1:1 correspondence.
Well, that 'shot in the dark' at least has a little truth to it.
For many years I did search and find all sorts of dubious things.
But that was NOT EVER ALL I found. Not even close. When I look back
over the whole of my life most of it seems rather wonderful.
Trying to paint other people in black and white tones has always
been a problem of yours. You're always trying to tell someone
else "that's you", as some ugly put down. You have pulled that
ugly trick on literally EVERY other person here. Guess what,
thang? That's you. :)
That belief turned out to be delusional. Importantly, the real
lesson is that pretty much ALL such beliefs are. As another even
more obvious example, trust me when I tell you that most of the >Scientologists consider themselves to be well beyond ordinary
human beings in every way. In fact, they believe that almost all
ordinary humans are insane. They very much consider themselves
to be "outsiders" in that sense. Yet the perpetual joke is that
almost every "outsider" really thinks he's got "the inside scoop"
on reality.
Again, I'll say, being an outsider is not a choice, it's part of who
and what you are. It's not a belief.
No, that's just your mistake. In some cases it's what you say.
But not in most. For many people it IS about a set of beliefs.
Hell, the Mormons moved out to a wildnerness area just trying
to get away from people persecuting them as freaks (which they are).
They were "outsiders" to the point of having to physically leave
all the other people behind.
Yet in no case, by birth, environment, or belief need it be
accepted as any "permanent identity" to be worn like some kind
of a fucking badge and forcefully applied in any situation,
and that's closer to the point I've been making.
Above was merely another example of your "black and white" thinking,
which seldom works.
Your sashaying after the little
mexican grifter was a belief, afterlife and soul and spirit are
beliefs - being an outlier to society and its norms is reality, not a
belief.
Again, you don't understand what I did. You've never even been to
the 'doorway' of the place. You've never faced the real test that
awaits a person there. You don't even know that test exists.
Much less have you faced it and rejected its siren song.
(Trust me, you don't even know what I'm talking about right now,
and I'm not going to explain it, because you wouldn't get it anyway.)
At the time when I was a solitary practitioner of Castaneda's
dreaming, I was for all practical purposes as much of an "outsider"
as any "freak of nature" who's ever lived here. And yet... it is NOT
a permanent condition.
It's genetic and environmental. It's ingrained cynicism born
of thinking correctly about everything built on genes which care less
about compliance with society's norms than with personal survival all
wrapped in an evelope made by childhood environment and sealed with at
least one parent's approval, for those lucky enough to have parents
and to have at least one who was a sharp, logical thinker.
I just disagree. Most people are NOT locked into any such boxes
or attitudes.
Think about this. You'll see I'm correct.
You didn't really think about ANYTHING I've said.
Indeed, I'm about to conclude that it's not possible to have
a genuinely meaningful conversation with you.
They are delusional too, of course. Over the years, I've actually >encountered many different individuals who considered themselves
to be "outsiders" in one way or another. I've been close personal
friends with several such people over the years. While interesting,
I have to report that in my opinion NONE of them had any truly
special insight into the human condition.
Clearly they had no insight into your particular condition and if you
and I had met you would see that what I am saying right here right now
I would have said directly to you after interacting with you for
probably 10 minutes.
Most of my friends in life have been considerably more perceptive
than you, not less. I said "special insight".
Catch up with someone like me and see what happens next :)
Yeah, sure. I know what happens next, because it already has. :)
Another of your peculiar symptoms is that you continue to disparage
people. You state above that you've been close personal friends with
several such persons then you state that none of them had any
particular insight into the human condition. How could you be close
personal friends with people and disparage them so? You can't form
such friendships Dave but in your case it's not because you're an
outsider, it's because of your psychological armour due to the
grifter's betrayal and other betrayals.
I said "special insight". Most of my friends, and I've had and still
have many good ones, possess more normal insight into life than you
seem to have. I was saying that none of them had *special insight*,
such as that claimed by many "outsider" types.
As an extreme example, Castaneda suffered from what I've called
"specialness disease", where he acted as if he had all the answers
to life that NO ONE ELSE had ever been able to find. In that way,
he was an example of the "ultimate outsider", whose 'solutions'
to everything were extreme and very "special". His people were
the ultimate elitists.
I'm saying what I've discovered is that virtually all such people
are delusional, and that their "outsider" stance is usually quite dysfunctional.
So I have long seen the advantages and disadvantages connected
with this manner of self-characterization, in many different ways
in many different situations, and to me, you guys sound mostly
trite and stupid when you talk about it. :) Why? Because I feel
I largely transcended any such generic viewpoints long ago.
Transcended? Long ago? Again, do you see what I mean?
I mean that I've seen through such stances time and time again.
Holding onto no such "identity" as being "an outsider or an insider"
affords me a greater flexibility and freedom.
In a way, everyone is an outsider, since we are all individuals
who face our own individual death, and NONE of us has anything
even close to control over the whole of society. Similarly,
almost everyone is also an insider, since almost all of us rely
upon the systems of society for our own survival and benefit,
whatever unusual viewpoints we may hold.
Not a rational argument, therefore not an argument. How does
knowledge that we must one day face extinction make anyone an
outsider? How can you say no one has anything even close to control
over the whole of society in the age of Putin, Erdogan and the other dictators and big brothers of the world? And they are most decidedly
not outsiders.
No one is in control. Not even Putin. That we all must face death
alone makes us all in a sense permanently isolated. In the extreme,
it's 'us' against the world ('them') forever, for everyone alive.
But I'm not attached to that idea; I just tossed it out there. :)
I do not view any real-life issue exclusively as either an "insider"
or an "outsider". I stopped identifying with "us and them", although
when people band together AS a stereotype (such as "Republicans"),
it is all too easy to start seeing them as THEM. :)
You already said this.
The repetition was for emphasis.
However, I prefer to look carefully at any specific situations
staying largely free of ANY prison of self-conception or
self-labeling such as taking an "insider" or "outsider"
perspective. I try to see the whole of any situation and try
to arrive at the best points of view while remaining free of >pre-established positions to come up with the best solutions
for the whole of humanity and for myself as an individual
(they're not always the same).
You are *in* a prison of your own self deception but you are possibly
the only one who cannot see it, or refuses to acknowledge it. The
prison walls are self-made, designed by your inner self to protect you
from hurt but in truth imprisoning you and fettering your ability to
be free.
Jesus. You're so full of shit. :)
In my opinion, if you haven't transcended labels like "insider"
and "outsider" by the time you're our age, then you have little
hope of ever seeing the complex reality of human social life
and existence. The day you guys say ONE thing that seems
profound about an "outsider", I'll be sure to let you know.
Slider kept using these labels and if I've used them, then it was for expediency. I am what I am, said Popeye the sailor man. I don't need
labels, I'm living this life and I know who I am. If that falls into
someone else's construct they call an "outsider" then good for them.
It doesn't change a thing as far as I'm concerned.
Everyone is what they am and are what they is. :)
But what IS all that? There's the rub.
And that's the second time you've used the word "transcended". That's revealing. It's a parapraxis.
I repeated a word. Oh my god, call Freud.
I do believe conceptualizing oneself as an "outsider" and holding
onto that and wearing it like a badge IS an error best transcended.
That concept at various times became a significant issue in my life,
so it wasn't a "slip" - it was intentionally repeated for *emphasis*.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
