Right now is a hard time but I'm finding ways to keep the days full, avoiding downtime, going to bed on time and keeping myself busy. Somebody said that any kind of existential angst is a luxury, and I'm trying to avoid it in all forms by making lists every morning and crossing off things I need to do.
Just like in screenwriting, structure and content can't be separated-- I'm finding that the same is true in life, and keeping disciplined and rigid in structure is a good way to give your life form and avoid moving through life accidentally.
But I figured tonight I could make some lists, maybe write some stuff about where I'm coming from now as a kind of mission statement. Previously, I've been content to less-than-content with life. I'd almost been misinterpreting the idea of taking things as they come. I was confused before-- this doesn't mean not shaping things in your own way.
SO-- my new list of projects and goals:
-start and maintain the slow-carb diet
-keep a regular dream journal
-stop drinking, smoking, consuming things that take away from me (caffeine is the exception to this haha)
-start meditating everyday
-stay off Facebook until it's just a casual hobby and not a crutch (already deactivated-- this same logic is what I've applied to alcohol as well)
-get into a regular routine of exercise
-keep blogging regularly (maybe at LEAST 3 posts a week if not every day is a good goal while I'm not doing anything)
-start studying German again to pass the placement test in the fall . . . this one needs some work
This is just a personal list of goals, but it brings me to the greater point of this post: the power of influence.
Influence is everywhere. Every time we read, speak, see, hear, touch, taste, we're being influenced. It's everywhere, it's unavoidable-- however, all the inputs we get from the outside are not made equal. This comes to the second big point which is the idea of identity.
What is personal identity and where does it reside? People say it's always forming, a kind of fluid concept of a person's essence that fluctuates all the time through interactions with the world and other people. And I agree with that. But what about psychological perspectives? Some of these ideas and theories are debunked among people in various scientific fields, but the funny thing about ideas and theories is that they have a tendency to sink with time into a person's consciousness, regardless of their accuracy or "truth."
For instance, there's the blank slate theory-- the idea that each person's mind (and by extension, identity) is shaped almost entirely externally. Basically, to be hypothetical, if you had a man with the knowledge and wisdom of a god, and you gave him a little baby and infinite power over the baby's surroundings, that man could make that baby into whatever he wanted. The baby might be an extrovert, an introvert, a rapist, a priest, etc. etc. Now I won't pretend to know the exact ins and outs of Pinker's theory, and I generalize for the exact reason that this is just a concept. The mind is full of concepts and assumptions, all of which are models, and most of which are sweeping generalizations.
There are other theories too about how we come to be who we are, some coming from the ideas of reinforcement and punishment, others from evolutionary psychology saying that we're largely a result of thousands of years of evolutionary history, and even Freudian ideas-- many of which are actually a kind of "cousin" to evolutionary psychology in my opinion.
But-- the truth of all these theories is that they begin and end with consciousness. It takes a consciousness to shape theories about how the external affects the internal, and yet all of these words and ideas sprung from the internal only. At least, to make a concession to these theories (many of which provide really great insight into human behavior), there's a much more complex and symbiotic relationship between individual consciousness and external influence.
So maybe in a really unhappy person, a person constantly wondering who they are and living in reaction to external inputs, trying to live up to others' standards, etc. --maybe the balance of internal/external influence is 10-90 or something. In an average person, maybe its a little better, like 30-70. The more you realize that there is a relationship, maybe you can shift the balance to 50-50, and so on.
However, the people that we're captured by are the people that live apart from the world around them-- people that influence rather than are influenced. These people have inner peace, and see clear dynamics and patterns where most don't. And the balance is tipped to the side of consciousness being the driving force, not environment.
I think the kind of ultimate positivity says to ignore almost all outer inputs-- ignore all the ones that don't sync with your own imagination, at least. And this is where the real questions come from of how to live our lives.
Do you want to be skinnier? If so, is it because you want to be like other skinny people or are you claiming the goal on your own terms? What about the music you listen to? Do you really like all of it, or do you just appreciate some of it because you respect others' opinions more than your own?
Side note-- this brings me to the idea of irony, which is I think the ultimate cowardice of the modern world.
Now, irony can sometimes be used as a weapon to sharpen your opinion-- that's fine. But more often than not, irony is the veil that we pull over our real opinions to keep out of the blinding light of social judgment. I'm very guilty of this, I must admit. But this is stupid-- if you like something, you like it, stop hiding and stand up for what you think has value. In today's world, people find it more convenient to be ironic than to risk authenticity. But I digress-
Questions like this can be posed infinitely, but in a few places in life we should really put our assumptions and concepts about ourselves under the magnifying glass.
My belief-- you are not your body, your appearance, your clothes, your money, your material (thanks, Fight Club). Whatever connection there is between material and mind (ie, 'the brain makes consciousness possible' is the quintessential argument) is by no means fully understood. More importantly, the brain was designed biologically to function in certain, "average" ways-- but we can transcend these "average" cognitive states, and this has been scientifically proven.
When you sleep or dream, you're in a different "state" than when you're awake, or from a person in deep meditation. The first two are biologically controlled, but meditative states are usually willfully induced-- this is mind over matter, pure and simple.
The point is, consider today how often your actions are actually reactions to irrational fears. When you're deciding not to do something and say "that's not me," or "i'm not into that," is it because at your essence you're REALLY not like that? Or because you're afraid of evolving?
The more you ask these questions, the more "identity" begins to unravel.
If you have the ability to do things that "aren't you," what does that say about "you"? Are "you" just an aggregate of social and biological probabilities? Fuck, I hope not...
I'm working through all this now but I think I'm onto something-- it's funny the way paradigms align thinking like this too, from disparate religions (christianity, hinduism, buddhism, etc.), branches of psychology, anthropological studies, biological studies, etc...
Everything we communicate is a model for reality, and all of them are incomplete. So, we can all agree that perception is key to understanding reality, at least to the extent we CAN understand reality.
And the good news?
With enough effort, you can control your perception. Peace,
Ryan
No comments:
Post a Comment