hopelesshappiness.com

Tough week ...

Pain is relative. There must be a contrasting hope based on thoughts and/or past experience for one to coherently gauge pain. There must be a cognizant understanding of experience with less pain. If one is paying attention, there is always some pain.

I have previously stated that with pain comes the potential for growth. Solitude exacerbates pain and (I believe) expands the potential for growth. In solitude one has no benchmark for contrast and comparison. Solitude... There are times when one has no choice; there are other times when one may 'feel' they have no choice; and there are times when one may feel they have made the wrong choice.

No regrets. Learn from the past and act now with an eye to the future. 'Easier said than done'.

Other Relevant Thoughts from this Week:

• Don't confuse solitude with ostracism; (in most cases it is self-imposed solitude).
• Lead by example; not by force.
• I should periodically re-evaluate my perception of what I think I should be.
• Scale back the intensity ... (maybe).
• When ego destruction occurs it is best to rebuild from scratch as opposed to putting the fallen pieces back together. It was reduced to rubble once ... Move on.
• I should re-evaluate what I think I need in terms of earthly resources; I might be surprised at what I can live without.
• Do not over-feed the monster within; (especially as payback or retribution).
• Use reason and logic to dismantle or reduce the power that is held over me by things of, from, or for this world. I should begin by dismantling the need for other's approval and learn to be satisfied with (or okay with) myself, for myself.
• Correlate belief with feeling; then correlate belief and feeling with action.
• Act with compassion
• Continue to search, study, and learn; don't neglect experience / history in this process - be my own teacher, with high standards intact.
• Put emphasis on intuitive action; don't wallow and don't be discouraged by (what I perceive as) other's lack of confidence/trust in me.
• Project positive, constructive confidence; (even when it is not felt?); maybe not as that would work against uninhibited truthfulness.
• Share thoughts and feelings, but don't whine or make excuses.
• Listen to music.

Anger - Tunnel Vision - Narcissism - Blinders - What Big Picture? - Uninhibited Truthfulness - Respect - Inner Calm - Persistence - Skeptical Scrutiny - Perspective - Empirical - Transcendental - Balanced Growth - Oh, That Big Picture.

It's easy to lose sight of the 'Big Picture'.

Transcendental is 'beyond' and often thought of as superior and external. Why not internal? Regardless of my attempts at uninhibited truthfulness I know that I am nowhere near understanding the scope of my internal; but I can say it is definitely 'beyond'. So if we consider transcendental as residing within, perhaps that thought has the potential to eliminate the 'superiority' factor, thus encouraging a more diligent search for understanding, which in turn will enable me to more efficiently close the gap. Complete understanding is unattainable. But if transcendent Truth and Wisdom lies within, that in itself puts me closer. At least it feels closer.

Maybe I'm just arguing semantics. Maybe all of external is internal based on the fact that all of external is defined internally. According to Kant we can never truly know the external 'thing' because it is perceived and interpreted internally. Is it possible that by internalizing the external we have changed its true nature and we are seeing the 'new' thing in itself? Or, is it possible that the external is simply one's perception of the (transcendent) internal, externalized; thus showing it originated as 'the thing in itself' internally? In other words, is the nature of that reality which is external to ourselves, actually an internal reality, meaning there is no external reality? For practical purposes, many would answer this last question 'yes'; but what is the Truth? (I am exploring the Philosopher George Berkeley and empirical Idealism for further insight.)

The thought of no external reality is both comforting and disturbing.

Throughout the history of thought 'Transcendental' has presented in varying ways. For example, Transcendental Perspectivism appears to argue that for a truth to transcend it must be shared by two or more individuals. I have said before that my truth may not be your truth, but this (Transcendental Perspectivism) argument maintains that it must be someone's truth (other than mine) to be transcendentally valid. I do agree with the argument that a given truth should not and cannot be forced upon another. Authoritarianism invalidates a transcendent truth. But I am not convinced that my truth must be shared to be transcendental. So how do these Transcendental Perspectivism views connect with the previous discussion on internal and/or external realities?

I suppose if a truth originates internally, the question becomes 'Can it be shared?' Internal Transcendence is often 'Beyond Words', so I am coming around to a respectful disagreement with the Transcendental Perspectivist view that it is the act of sharing that definitively identifies the transcendent aspect of truth. Furthermore, if an experience is 'Beyond Words' that experience must be internalized, (or must originate from within), to maximize understanding. Once internalized the experience becomes personal and unique, and can/will never be completely shared, even if there were words to do it justice. In fact (or, in my opinion) to attempt to share it would actually cheapen it by creating even more distance from the truth to the perceiver to the receiver; much would be lost in the doubled process of interpretation and translation. (An excellent analogy would be listening to someone explain a deeply meaningful or disturbing dream; the listener loses interest, the dreamer is frustrated, and the dream loses meaning.) I believe the most meaningful transcendence possible is that which is held within to retain its value.

So whether or not there is an external reality, I think that (for now) these thoughts have brought me to the conclusion that internal transcendence has the most significant potential to close the gap on Truth, Wisdom, and Happiness. Again, that is not to say that there is not an external transcendent reality. I am undecided on that; at this point I am just posing questions. If the transcendental is represented by distinct and separate internal and external realities, those realities (as unattainable or unknowable as they may be) combined with empirical experience should all run on concurrent, parallel tracks as previously discussed 'here' and 'here'.

I lean towards just one transcendental; originating, created, or re-created internally. But my thoughts on the nature of Transcendental Truth have just begun. I need further reading, study, and reflection.

A final thought - Transcendental Perspectivism encourages empathy and compassion for all opposing truths and/or for those who do not agree. I would disagree with this tenet, tempering it by substituting 'respect' for the 'empathy and compassion'. I strongly believe in 'Do No Harm'. One should respect diverse opinions. However, empathy and compassion are not behaviors that I toss about lightly. They should be preceded by some serious listening and consideration, and the brutal fact is, I often have other priorities in terms of where my empathy and compassion is directed. Respect across the board - yes. Widespread pangs of empathy and compassion - yes. True, active, extended empathy and compassion (feelings that are beyond words) are reserved for those in my inner circle of empirical experience. And this example reflects the selfish, unique nature of transcendental thought, and its connection to empirical experience, which in turn supports the premise that the process is (somehow) internalized.

Have Fun! What does that mean to most people? Does fun relate to Truth and Wisdom? And if so, how? Is 'fun' a synonym for 'Enjoyment as defined in the context of the Periodic Happiness Table of Elements on this site? And if not, how do they differ?

To refresh memories (including mine) Enjoyment is the realization of the joy of challenge. I believe there are many people who would not immediately equate fun with challenge. Yet I also believe that many of them, after some consideration, would agree that there is a connection.

Think about how fun is perceived. It could be a night on the town, a meal out, shopping, a movie, a play, music, dancing, having friends in, or other forms of straightforward human interaction. For some it involves participation in games, competitions, or sports. Even spectator sports offer the challenge of following, anticipating, and second-guessing strategies. For others fun could be solitary activities such as a night in with a good book or a movie or the latest technology-based challenge of personal interest.

Some of these examples may appear to put more emphasis on relaxation, than others. I would argue though that relaxation (in varying degrees and applicabilities) is a common element of fun and enjoyment across the board. Intense physical exertion often leads to a 'zone' that focuses and relaxes the mind. Intense mental exercise can do exactly the same thing. And there are many examples of physical relaxation that also meet one's personal requirements for fun.

Requiring the common elements then of challenge and relaxation, there are innumerable examples of fun and enjoyment. I believe most of these examples (given and not given) can, with some effort, avoid an unthinking, zombie-like state of mind. If we are not stretching ourselves in some way, it is simply not as much fun; perhaps no fun at all. But there are some who would disagree and maintain that being out-of-control, with no rules or parameters, can be loads of fun; and is an extreme type of challenge. They might say that in the midst of savagery, debauchery, or (the tamer sounding) wild times, one experiences the kind of uninhibited freedom and fun that is not possible within parameters; but upon participating in this kind of 'fun' ... in hindsight ... (speaking from some experience) ... I often feel (at the least) foolish, embarrassed, or undignified, and (at the worst) remorseful and ashamed. Especially if I have crossed the tenet / belief to Do No Harm. By definition, excess is excessive. Letting oneself go is not the same as stretching oneself.

Based on these interpretations, I believe the connotation of enjoyment is more refined than that of fun, and the connotation of fun is more spontaneous than that of enjoyment; yet it still shows considerable synonymity in the middle ground. However if the fun becomes harmful or too spontaneous it may not be enjoyable, and if the enjoyment becomes too refined or constrictive it may not be much fun. Personal taste may dictate spontaneity, limitations, and refinement, but 'Do No Harm' should be a Universal. How often after someone's feelings are hurt do we hear from someone else (or think to ourselves) "I was only having fun." Of course I remember this more from childhood, but perhaps we are just more careful as adults. I still observe and (yes, even occasionally) participate in cautious denigration of the us-them variety, that is not meant to harm a specific individual, but ...

Wow! I just reread up to this point, and it seems I've taken a lot of the fun out of fun. It also seems that for my purposes (and according to my personal taste) enjoyment is fun, but fun is not always enjoyable. Some would turn that last statement around. But then, I am old and stodgy; not to mention mean and surly.

So where does this leave us? Perhaps one could say that a combination of personal taste, challenge, and relaxation determines fun. And if fun 'Does No Harm' then it contributes to one's periodic need to recharge. And the resulting energy boost from recharging can lead to further Learning and Growth, which in turn assists in closing the gap on Truth, Wisdom, and Happiness. This is a common theme I have previously visited, but being the stodgy, gruff, serious, surly old man that I am, I should revisit the concept more frequently. It is an aspect of Happiness I don't take seriously enough, often enough.

As I write this last line, I am preparing to go to a Halloween party ... With ('them') In-Laws ... I will make a serious, concerted effort to Have Fun!

Am I fighting for Happiness? Or am I fighting against Happiness? Or is Happiness fighting me? Or perhaps I am fighting with Happiness (side-by-side) against common foes. Whatever the distinction, it is a battle.

Perhaps it is a combination of all of the above, hence the ever-changing, concurrent battlefronts requiring multiple tactical strategies.

Keeping in mind that my definition of Happiness is Truth and Wisdom (which are unattainable Ideals), this week I feel we (Happiness and I) are fighting a common foe. The foe is the limitations imposed upon each of us by one's physical vulnerabilities.

It is difficult to search for Truth and Wisdom in the best of empirical times. And many would claim that the distractions of physical pain or discomfort (empirical realities) would add further complications and detract from one's ability to reason.

I might argue. I agree there is frustration that impacts one's ability to reason, but I believe that frustration is over other's inability to suddenly see or understand what is important. It is this frustration then that is misinterpreted as a direct result of the physical pain and discomfort. The challenge to overcome is not about pain; it is about perspective. The pain changes the perspective, and the perspective changes the person.

When forced to confront one's mortality, empirical reality is actually simplified. No matter how steadfast the empiricist, when seriously contemplating mortality, thoughts turn transcendental. I believe this is not only additional confirmation (following up last week's post) of transcendental unknowables, but also rids one's daily routine of impurities, thus allowing for focus on what is important.

Regardless of your philosophical leanings, at the end we come back to Exoteric Goodness and Inner Peace, as a result of one's personal, lifelong search for Truth and Wisdom.

I had a thought this morning that I am unable to describe in words. I will attempt to describe the associated feeling(s). It felt warm and right. It elicited inner peace and calm. It felt compassionate and understanding. I am trying to hold on to these feelings by holding on to (as closely as I can identify) the origin of the thought. From its origin it grew and filled a void; and has since shrunk; but is still identifiable as a pulsating, warm, glowing core in the center of the void.

The origin of the thought had to do with mutual inconsequence; the relationship between interdependence and unimportance; or perhaps more accurately, knowing that what matters, doesn't really matter, even though it does. As this thought grew, and then (rather quickly) dissipated, the contradictions also grew more contrary and troublesome, yet still with a warm and peaceful center; hence my difficulty in finding words to explain.

So where am I going from here? Perhaps to the aforementioned void. I suppose the contradictions, followed by the examination and analysis, may have helped to fill some space, but why is there a void to begin with? Obviously I feel I am missing or I have lost something.

... I got busy with Life and a day has gone by. To paraphrase the Righteous Brothers, "I've lost that lovin' feeling." Yet the void does not seem as cavernous, maybe because Life got in the way and filled some space; wheras early yesterday was quiet and I was contemplative. I'm thinking this void is always there, but is accepting of most anything (from mind-fluff trvialities to the most serious philosophical ruminations) to fill its space. The choice of what to fill it with, is mine.

Mind-fluff does not leave me warm, calm, and compassionate, but is less strenuous. Serious inner contemplation can run the gamut from painful reckoning to peaceful pondering, but (most often through the pain of process) allows for the possibility of growth.

(I believe) fluff is inevitable. (I believe) a contemplative Life dominated by fluff is inexcusable. (I believe) the empirical reality of Life (specifically my reactive actions and behaviors) can easily be dominated by fluff. (I believe) the empirical reality of Life can be enriched by being proactive. (I believe) the empirical reality of Life can be made more meaningful through serious inner contemplation.

So all these thoughts and beliefs lead me to (or am I jumping to?) the conclusion that this human desire/need to fill a void confirms the absence of knowledge; which (in my mind) is another way of saying that the ever-present vigilance of a void confirms the fact of transcendental unknowables. I say transcendental because we occasionally (in our mind's eye) catch an unmeasurable, undescribable, fleeting glimpse of an unknowable; (as I did yesterday). And if we cannot somehow physically, empirically connect it to this world - if it is misty, vague, haunting, ineffable, or simply beyond words - then ...

There are some who would argue that we can only know, or have the potential to know, that which is of this empirical reality. Therefore the unknowables are actually undiscovered knowables, and given time to evolve we will eventually discover everything.

I would rebut by saying that the void is always present and has always been present. One may fill day-to-day existence with empirical reality and fluff, thus ignoring transcendental considerations, but the point is - we are filling the void. The fact that we can talk intelligently about transcendental considerations and an emptiness that needs to be filled, and the fact that we lay awake at night wanting more and contemplating how to fill the next day in order to get more (even when we cannot define 'more'), and the fact that (both awake and asleep) we dream, confirms that there is something beyond my mortal grasp.

These arguments, in both directions, are not new. And all of them have certainly been argued more clearly and more intelligently by many of history's greatest thinkers. It is an age-old debate and all I can add to it, as a matter of fact, is that yesterday morning, for a fleeting, indescribable moment, I did not feel empty - or fluffy.