How well do we really know ourselves? Now, of course we know our minds like no one else does, but does that really matter? Is what we have inside worth anything if we never let anybody in? We could be the nicest, most thoughtful, considerate and caring person in the world, but does it matter if nobody else knows? What's your best feature if you keep it unknown to others, as if it's some dark secret?
But how well do we really know ourselves? If you played someone a recording of their voice, they'd have no clue who it is. This is because of the resonance of the sound waves in the sinuses, but isn't it interesting? Just think of all the people who lived their entire lives without knowing what they really sound like. And imagine all the people who lived without knowing what they really look like. What would live have been like before mirrors? When the only glimpse you got of yourself was the occasional distorted reflection in a stream. Would people back then have worried about what they looked like? would they have worried about their hair? their clothes? If they were pretty enough? I think that things would have been a lot simpler.
heres my email richard: alex_stavridis22@hotmail.com , can you send me anything you have typed up? and tomorrow i will come to class quickly and get my notes from you.
ReplyDelete@ Alex--that is a very disappointing comment;(
ReplyDelete@ Richard--it is interesting to assume that what is on the outside (seen and heard by the world) is more 'real' than what is on the inside. I think no one knows what I really sound like because I'm the only one who can hear my 'real' voice. I feel like everything I show the world, in my actions, words, thoughts and emotions, is a barely representative translation of the 'real' that I have within me.
I guess it is a matter of what is real. And if we don't know what real is, can we really call anything simple?
Real can more or less, be whatever you define it as.
ReplyDeleteReal could be only what physically exists (as stated by Ruiz in 'The Fifth Agreement'). Which means that what you think or feel means nothing unless you act upon it and turn it into something "real". I personally like this real, for a variety of reasons, but I won't get into it.
Technically Ruiz' definition has its holes, because thoughts and feelings physically exist (I think thoughts are electrical impulses between synapses and feelings are chemical signals), and even if that's not true, then they for sure are real to whoever's thinking them; and they'd probably have an impact on the person who is thinking them, depending on the weight of those thoughts, of course. For example, If I think to myself something about somebody, my opinion of them could change, depending on whether or not I'm thinking about the kind of gum they bought or what they said to me about my clothes.
What is Ruiz' "real" tends to be taken into our minds and it gets turned into thoughts real... What's objective succumbs to our subjectivity. If an old man gives a child candy, we might come to wonder why he gave the child candy. Maybe he's trying to lure the child into an alley? maybe he's just being nice, and likes children (who doesn't like children? especially when they're happy). Either way we sort of get sidetracked from the fact that one moment our child had nothing in their hands and the next a generous old guy gave them a pleasant tasting treat.
Ruiz states that (according to his ancient Mazatec knowledge which has been sealed away for generations) it is best to not think whatsoever. I'm pretty sure that it was Heidegger who also came to this conclusion. Either way, I think that they were on to something.
When I had that job with the police I tried not thinking and I had what could very well be the best summer of my life. After a week or so I was entirely happy with who I was and the way I acted. It felt so goddamn good. I was ecstatic just because I was so happy about being me.
On the other hand, I was at a party at my friend's house one time, and I ending up falling into a train of thought and before I knew it I had been standing there for almost half an hour not saying anything, and not enjoying myself.
What's it matter what's real, or simple or not if you don't over-analyze things, be true to yourself, and act according to how you feel?
(And not how you think you feel. I've learned that your gut will sometimes tell you something very different than your thoughts. A couple times a thought ran through my head, and then I asked myself: "How do I really feel about this?", and I realized that the thought was completely wrong. (I'd also like to point out that the emotion part of the brain can process 4x the amount of info as the thought part)).
Richard!
ReplyDeleteYou really are sounding like a philosopher now:)
I agree that thoughts are physical. Thank you for teaching me about how much faster (and therefore stronger?) the emotional part of the brain works. I guess that would ensure our survival in the primal world, more than thinking about running away from a predator would!
I can't believe you can turn your thinking on and off. I wish I could do that, but I also love being lost in a train of thought. That is often more fun than the party I am attending...but I should practice being in the 'now' more often.
One of my friends is becoming trained in neuro-linguistic programming (NLP) which basically teaches people how to control their thoughts, re-programme themselves to believe differently and therefore act or re-act differently to things. This is really interesting considering the whole what is 'real' question. This newish brain theory seems to suggest that only thoughts are real, that our reality, our actions, are only the outcome of our thoughts, which we have complete control over. However, that new book I'm reading "Straw Dogs" contradicts this. I haven 't made up my mind yet, hahahaha.
And I"ve started reading another excellent book by Julian Barnes called "Nothing to be Afraid of" which is all about death and religion. And is really funny. You should get your hands on both of them.
Both books were brought to my attention by my friend, Mr. Holder, in England...remember him and how mad you got at him? That's my favourite memory from this class. Good times:) I'm not being sarcastic.
Well, I can't exactly turn my thoughts on and off, it's more like I try as hard as I can to get rid of them but they keep coming back. It's like Sisyphus and his boulder. But at the same time, it's not like thoughts are good for nothing. They have their uses, and I too enjoy a good train of thought every now and then.
ReplyDeleteThat NLP sounds very interesting. It seems right to suggest that everything changes depending on how you look at it. If you know anything else about it then I'd like to know too.
And that whole thing with Mr. Holder... I'm not too proud about getting mad at him, but it was a good debate/argument we had. I'm also glad to have learned about using the devil's advocate to improve an argument. And well, I can't say that it was my favourite memory from this class, but it was definitely one of the highlights.