Bad Hair Days

[VIDEO: "What is parental alienation?"]

Bad hair days... .we all have them. Well, at least those of us who aren't bald. That isn't really the point though.

Today is kinda like a bad hair day for me with my emotions. Stress at work and home have pushed me a bit deeper into depression. Just 35 days until my first appointment with the psychiatrist to see about meds. It's going to be a long month I think.

I have made it no secret that I still struggle with self-esteem issues. It isn't so much because I do not believe in myself as it is that I don't believe in anything for myself.

It used to be that I didn't believe that I was worthy of anything. That is no longer the case. I can see the evidence in front of me all the time that controverts the "I'm not worthy" thoughts.

These days (and it actually has been for a long time), it's a matter of existential depression. "What's the point in any of it?" kinds of thoughts. Please do not take that to mean that I've given up. To the contrary, the reason that I'm writing this is because I'm searching for something to believe in.

In what seems like a lifetime ago now, when I met my x, I was in college studying philosophy with an emphasis on theology. I had plans of writing. I have not given up on those plans yet (see, nothing to worry about, I still care about my future. ). But, that experience, combined with my FOO teachings, has tainted my view on life so much. The "knowledge" that when we our nervous systems cease to send electrical signals to the rest of our body, that's it now causes me great distress.

[Meili]

Bad hair days... .we all have them. Well, at least those of us who aren't bald. That isn't really the point though.

Today is kinda like a bad hair day for me with my emotions. Stress at work and home have pushed me a bit deeper into depression. Just 35 days until my first appointment with the psychiatrist to see about meds. It's going to be a long month I think.

I have made it no secret that I still struggle with self-esteem issues. It isn't so much because I do not believe in myself as it is that I don't believe in anything for myself.

It used to be that I didn't believe that I was worthy of anything. That is no longer the case. I can see the evidence in front of me all the time that controverts the "I'm not worthy" thoughts.

These days (and it actually has been for a long time), it's a matter of existential depression. "What's the point in any of it?" kinds of thoughts. Please do not take that to mean that I've given up. To the contrary, the reason that I'm writing this is because I'm searching for something to believe in.

In what seems like a lifetime ago now, when I met my x, I was in college studying philosophy with an emphasis on theology. I had plans of writing. I have not given up on those plans yet (see, nothing to worry about, I still care about my future. ). But, that experience, combined with my FOO teachings, has tainted my view on life so much. The "knowledge" that when we our nervous systems cease to send electrical signals to the rest of our body, that's it now causes me great distress.

[heartandwhole]

Hi Meili,

Thank you for sharing this. It really resonates with me. I feel that I know what you are talking about when you say "what's the point?" I get that, and my answer right now is that there may not be one that will make sense to our limited minds.

Years ago, I had some experiences that revealed things to me about reality that kind of crashed into what I thought it meant to be a person—a separate person, calling the shots of my life. I found that it isn't the case.    That led to various states, pleasant and unpleasant, amazing and mundane. Who cares, right?

Well, whatever is happening here on this seeming revolving blob, or in this dream of the universal mind, or in the oneness of God, or Nature, or the evolution of single-celled organisms—whatever this is, I've noticed that I'm part of it and I'm here, experiencing all kinds of things. Maybe that's my purpose? Maybe it's so simple that we overlook the fact that life is, and doesn't need a reason or purpose to be.

As for bad hair days, that's the reason for hats, no? 

How are you feeling today? 

heartandwhole

[Meili]

Now, see, for me, just accepting that is life is the hat. There is no motivation to do anything at that point.

It's funny, years ago, I learned that fear is the only true motivator in human life. We only do what we do as a result of fear. That does not mean that we do not do things with pleasure in mind. But, at that point, we are doing the thing that we think will give us pleasure for fear of missing out on that pleasure.

The other axiom that has held true is that change only occurs when the pain of where we are at is greater than the fear of where we are going. In this case, the fear of the continued pain outweighs the fear of the current situation.

That's kinda where I'm at. I currently have no fear of anything and that scares me. 

Without the fear, there is no motivation to change or do anything. Life is. There is no fear that will change. No fear = no motivation.

Cognitively, I know that I stay in bad situations much longer than I should not because I'm afraid of the future or the unknown, but because I have no fear. I'm so accustomed to the chaos, pain, and mayhem; that it no longer scares me. That's why I held onto my x as long as I did.

This level of mental gymnastics annoys my therapist to no end. She's at a loss at what to say or do with it. She keeps trying to tell me that I'm really afraid of being alone, stepping outside of my comfort zone, or giving up my learned dependency. It is none of those things however. I know that my life will continue if any of those things occurs; life is after all.

That's my cap is that is covering my bad hair.

[GlennT]

' But, that experience, combined with my FOO teachings, has tainted my view on life so much. The "knowledge" that when we our nervous systems cease to send electrical signals to the rest of our body, that's it now causes me great distress.'
[/quote]

Sounded to me at first like wow, he made a lot of progress to be able to state here that he now has zero fear. BUT... then along with this realization, he now lacks zero motivation to make the changes he desires for his long-term peace and well-being.  My question is, can you explain to me more clearly, what you mean by the statement you made above and how it pertains to your lack of fear? You contradict yourself.   

[babyducks]

But, that experience, combined with my FOO teachings, has tainted my view on life so much.

Hi Meili,

That line struck me.   I think we are all the product of something.    all the product of our experiences, environment, upbringing.   I think we are all pre-wired to be ~something~, depressive, or emotive or whatever.

I too grapple with the search for meaning.   the "what's the point of it all?"    I think that is the joy and the hurt of life.   when you have meaning, purpose, life is okay, and when you don't it feels worthless.

The other axiom that has held true is that change only occurs when the pain of where we are at is greater than the fear of where we are going.

I am not sure I accept the premise of that axiom.   I think I fall more in line with Thoreau.

I know of no more encouraging fact than the unquestioned ability of a man to elevate his life by conscious endeavor.

and occasionally I think Thoreau was an idiot.   I too struggle with the black dog and keeping him on the leash.  It's a conscious endeavor to do that and sometimes I fail and have a bad hair day. 

'ducks

[Meili]

Sounded to me at first like wow, he made a lot of progress to be able to state here that he now has zero fear. BUT... then along with this realization, he now lacks zero motivation to make the changes he desires for his long-term peace and well-being.  My question is, can you explain to me more clearly, what you mean by the statement you made above and how it pertains to your lack of fear? You contradict yourself.   

I'm not sure that I see the contradiction. Fear and distress are two different beasts. The latter being about sorry and pain as used here.

The statement talks to accepting that life just is, and that at some point we cease to exist and when that happens none of it will mean anything to me removes the motivation.

To be clear, there is still fear in my world. It keeps me out of trouble and keeps me safe. Those are not the fears of which I speak however. When there is no fear of death or losing possessions, social status, love, financial security, or any of the other things that are societal norms; that's when things get tricky.

It frees you to do whatever you like, but it also comes with the price of knowing that if you don't do it, life will still go on until it ceases to go on. When it ceases, nothing that ever did matters to you anymore.

There is also a flaw in your premise. You assume that I have such a desire. I don't. I do not think that those things actually exist. My belief is that life is nothing more than a series of events. Once the event is over, it too ceases to exist and no longer matters. It has happened and there is no changing it. That is part of accepting that life just is.

[Meili]

I am not sure I accept the premise of that axiom.   I think I fall more in line with Thoreau.

The Thoreau quote does not actually argue against mine statement. He does not touch on the motivation behind the conscious endeavor.

A person can be unhappy with his station in life to the point that it is painful, that's when the person changes.

We, as a race, have accomplished astonishing feats through conscious endeavor. But, the motivation behind those tasks can always be broken down to fear. Fear of not appeasing some deity, losing or not making more money, having to endure some event to name a few of the most common ones.

[spacecadet]

To be clear, there is still fear in my world. It keeps me out of trouble and keeps me safe. Those are not the fears of which I speak however. When there is no fear of death or losing possessions, social status, love, financial security, or any of the other things that are societal norms; that's when things get tricky.

Meili, I'm sorry you're feeling this way. The title of the thread made me smile, at least you're keeping your sense of humor / irony in the midst of this mood.

You have an interesting insight about fear keeping us safe and focused. The timing of this struck me because yesterday I was reading in K. McLaren's book "The Language of Emotions" about fear and this is how the researcher describes fear.

When it comes to social status, love etc., the emotions she relates to these things are jealousy and envy. She observes that although these emotions are shamed out of us often, they help us navigate our social and economic world. She describes both as containing elements of anger (to protect boundaries) and fear (of loss), so if we shut down either of these emotions we may not have access to jealousy and envy, which pre-date the development of language, and like all emotions are elemental to our survival and well-being.

Don't mean to go dweeby on you but thought these observations may be helpful to you or others. It sounds like you're processing something profound right now which is hard work, so my hat's off to you.

[Meili]

Thank you wisedup.

When it comes to social status, love etc., the emotions she relates to these things are jealousy and envy. She observes that although these emotions are shamed out of us often, they help us navigate our social and economic world. She describes both as containing elements of anger (to protect boundaries) and fear (of loss), so if we shut down either of these emotions we may not have access to jealousy and envy, which pre-date the development of language, and like all emotions are elemental to our survival and well-being.

I don't find that dweeby at all. It is spot on with what I'm talking about that is happening with me. I will add that, for me, anger is a secondary emotion where the true, underlying, controlling emotion is fear. But, that's a different discussion.

When things like envy and jealousy (both of which, like anger, are secondary emotions controlled by fear) are removed, the motivation to change is also removed. Envy and jealousy both drive people to want more or fight to keep something. When those are removed, why fight to have more or keep what you have? Life will go on either way.

I spent the better part of 42 years living under the fear of being bit good enough.  That fear is gone, so now what?

Whatever I want is the easy answer. But,  what do I want? I did everything that I've wanted to do during those 45 years in an effort to prove that I am good enough.

Without the fear to motivate,  there is nothing. Life just is. Things just are. There is no need to achieve anything else; save and except avoiding the pain of discomfort until things cease to be for me.

[Meili]

Anyone who has been following along with my story for a long time knows that I used to be in a motorcycle club. For those who don't know me, I belonged to an MC and the woman that I'm currently with is not the x that brought me here. 

I left the club because I thought it was best for all involved. A lot of anger, hurt feelings, and distrust for all involved resulted from that decision. One thing that never left me though was my loyalty to the club and members - even those that I disliked. One of those members died on his bike last night. I didn't like the guy too much, but I did call him brother, that means something to me.

It was a senseless death that resulted from nothing more than his stupidity, recklessness, and abuse of alcohol. That isn't the point though... .Twenty-four years old and he no longer exists.

Death normally doesn't bother me. In fact, the only death that I can think of that I've ever mourned was that of my 18 year old chihuahua. Other than that, people are born and we die. Last night I was bothered though.

I did what I thought was a reasonable thing to do and let my gf know that the death was bothering me and I was struggling to figure out why I cared. She too found it odd and out of character for me.

That was the extent of it from her though. She decided that it was a good time to remind me how much she dislikes my daughter because of how she handed and the role that she played in my leaving the MC. Seriously? I am struggling with feelings surrounding the death of someone that I once called a brother and she thought it was a good time to remind me that she dislikes my kid?

I tried, several times, to unsuccessful bring the conversation back to what was bothering me. Each time, she would change the subject to things like why she dislikes my daughter, why she dislikes my ex-wife, why she is upset with one of her best friends (the wife of another club member), and other things that bothered her surrounding the MC. I must say, I was more than a bit shocked, hurt, and angry.

This isn't new behavior for her though. I spend a lot (way more than I think is rational) of my time trying to work with her on our relationship boundaries and what we find acceptable and unacceptable for the relationship. I think that I might just have to give-up and admit that this just isn't working or going to work.

I've put off making this decision because she is at least trying to work on herself. After her mother died last year, my gf got severely depressed (she was hospitalized for it in the past), but she is seeking help and on meds. She is also being treated for ADD. Also, she has developed extreme insecurity issues that sometimes make my x (the one that brought me here) look like the most confident person on the planet. Because she's actually doing something to better herself, I've given her a lot of latitude and things that I've learned I no longer want in my world, I've allowed to occur. I've ignored are more   than I am comfortable with.

I have little to no patience for such things these days however. While, yes, she is doing something, she isn't actually making any changes that I see. She knows about these boards and my role here. She spends a lot of time (again, far more time that I think is reasonable) asking me about the communication techniques, what boundaries are, how to validate and not be invalidating, etc. My T pointed out that my gf is using me as her personal coach and counselor. It is not a role that I chose to play anymore.

So, now I'm stuck with the decision to move on or give her more time. It is not a comfortable place for me to be.

[Harley Quinn]

Meili I'm sorry to hear that you're finding it difficult to reconcile your feelings around the death of this person you once called brother.  It sounds very uncomfortable and confusing for you.  Do you think it conflicts with a belief/s of yours? 

Love and light x     

 

[Turkish]

It isn't so much because I do not believe in myself as it is that I don't believe in anything for myself.

Interesting distinction here.  If I'm reading you right,  I have a similar view.  Being the latchkey kid of a single [BPD, PTSD, Depressive] mother who worked the night shift, I learned to take care of myself at a young age. 

My birthday's coming up in about three weeks.  The kids asked me this weekend why I don't like parties. Their mother told them that.  She might have been thinking about throwing me one.  Such validation is part of their culture.  Seems to be a waste of time and money.  If I were honest,  I detest the attention.  I'd rather focus on what's important,  and that everyone else should as well. 

It's sad that the biker kid lost his life... .been through two bad motorcycle accidents myself,  sober, but stupid.  Our lives are so fragile... .

I have little to no patience for such things these days however.

What do you make of this? Personally, I find that after decades of being more than patient,  my patience has run out so much so that I feel I may have flipped the other way too far.  Of i had to sum it up,  I'm tired of being used.  I have trouble identifying how much of my feelings are valid.  Ok, I know feelings are valid,  maybe I mean acceptable. 

[Meili]

Do you think it conflicts with a belief/s of yours? 

While it was happening, I questioned whether or not it did briefly, but it really didn't.

Ultimately, it boils down to what I think that Turkish was getting at when he mentioned his wrecks. All of us who ride do so knowing the risks and accept them. It's the stupid part that bothered me so much. It was a senseless death that could have easily been avoided. I think that's the difference for me.

I've known a lot of people who've been killed while riding. Most of the time, it's because some driver of a car was not paying attention. While still a senseless death, the bike rider usually wasn't being stupid. This kid was. He was speeding down the interstate after partying at a bar for hours and smacked into the back of a pick-up.

He was "too cool" to ride at a reasonable pace. He was "too cool" to wear a helmet or other safety gear. He was "too cool" get a ride from someone else after drinking too much. I'm pretty much used to people having those attitudes, but in this case, many of us (most who also think that they are "too cool" warned him numerous times in the past.

So, anger and frustration over how senseless the death was is what was bothering me.

I learned to take care of myself at a young age. 

And, if you were like me, and I suspect that you were based on this:

If I were honest,  I detest the attention.  I'd rather focus on what's important,  and that everyone else should as well.

You learned to survive in a minimalist way with a skewed definition of need and importance. Needs are things that are required to survive. Anything outside of that is a want.

The argument that my T gives me is that I'm still living in my 4 year old mind. I'm still stuck on just surviving rather than thriving. It is about making it through the day vs. making it a better day than the day before.

Funny thing is, I had no idea what she was talking about until I read your words Turkish. Thank you.

Now, it seems, for me, the struggle is defining what is "better."

I have a very cushy life these days. I came from a home of neglect and abuse (physical, emotional, sexual, verbal). I have been dirt poor, living without a home, or having a home but not being able to afford running water or electricity. I've tried to escape life through drugs, alcohol, and suicide. I've been at what most would call rock bottom.

These days, I have a nice house, good friends, more material possessions than I really need, and people who love and care about me. I have a good job that pays well. I basically have everything that I wanted in life. Yet, I feel that I am still just surviving until I die. I truly have no idea what thriving would actually mean to me. The entire concept of sustained happiness eludes me.

But, Wolfie, I want to put this before you to think on:

Is it possible... .just possible... .that what is important isn't a need in the case of the party? I mean, is it possible that what is important is you and those that are in your life want to use the party and attention to show that they believe that to be the case?

What do you make of this? Personally, I find that after decades of being more than patient,  my patience has run out so much so that I feel I may have flipped the other way too far.  Of i had to sum it up,  I'm tired of being used.  I have trouble identifying how much of my feelings are valid.  Ok, I know feelings are valid,  maybe I mean acceptable. 

Yes, I think that my pendulum has swung to the other extreme. I'm tired of being used and taken for granted. Some days I think that my gf actually thinks, "Oh, it's just the Frog. I don't have to do what I said, or listen to him, or validate his importance and existence in my world. He's not going anywhere. He'll get over it." 

For me, it's important to look at why I'm still allowing such things in my world even though I'm pretty well versed in what is going on and where this is heading. It's not like I don't know my history and how to do things differently.

I guess it goes back to still not believing that I need anything other than the things required to survive and continue living until I die.

Survival mode is a drag... .

[takingandsending]

Hey Meili.

I might mention, as a balding man, that every day is a bad hair day for me. Talk about random genetic mysteries. And I don't like hats much - I have to face my remaining bad hairs every day!

Which sort of segues into my point - that we all find many inventive ways of hiding from ourselves. Your thought that fear is the only motivator is essentially in alignment with buddhist thought, "All beings seek happiness and seek to avoid suffering". And one form of suffering is happiness, because, inevitably, it is followed by the end or cessation of the thought of happiness.

So what possible motivation is there outside of this primal motivation that drives, not only humans, but animals as well? What if, the basic perception of self were a misperception? What then? In other words, if there is no self, what is it that seeks happiness and seeks to avoid suffering, and is that motivation valid?

You have accepted that each moment, each series of events or occurrences is finite, has a birth and cessation. So why is it that we perceive ourselves as a continuous person, when in each moment, we are utterly changed or different than we were the moment before? My belief is once we can start to stare through our misapprehension of ourselves as a continuous self, we can gradually [it sadly isn't a blink of an eye sudden flash of insight whereupon we are immediately and irrevocably enlightened] wean ourselves from the profound attachment we have to the belief in our continuous self. And gradually, we lighten the heaviness of the fear of not having happiness or losing the happiness that we perceive ourselves as having.

Let me ask you, if you really believed, not just intellectually reasoned, that nothing is permanently existent or matters beyond this moment, why does it trouble you?

For what it's worth, these are really good questions and explorations that you are doing. I think it is in having the bravery to look and ask, that we can actually learn to be.

[Meili]

This can get complicated very quickly. 

Your thought that fear is the only motivator is essentially in alignment with buddhist thought, "All beings seek happiness and seek to avoid suffering". And one form of suffering is happiness, because, inevitably, it is followed by the end or cessation of the thought of happiness.

Yes, there is a connection between the two. The Buddah got it mostly correct. Humans seek to avoid the fear of suffering and being unhappy. It is the avoidance of the fear that we seek rather than happiness. I say this because sustained happiness is an impossibility. If you are happy all the time, then happy becomes the norm and it is no longer happy. Also, to know happiness, you, as you mentioned with the inevitability comment, know suffering. Fear is the only emotion that can exist without it's opposite emotion. You can know fear without knowing any other emotion.

So what possible motivation is there outside of this primal motivation that drives, not only humans, but animals as well? What if, the basic perception of self were a misperception? What then? In other words, if there is no self, what is it that seeks happiness and seeks to avoid suffering, and is that motivation valid?

This ventures into a nihilistic point of view. If there is no self, there is no purpose, so there is no motivation. Life is meaningless. We exist for no reason other than to exist in the moment.

So why is it that we perceive ourselves as a continuous person, when in each moment, we are utterly changed or different than we were the moment before? My belief is once we can start to stare through our misapprehension of ourselves as a continuous self, we can gradually [it sadly isn't a blink of an eye sudden flash of insight whereupon we are immediately and irrevocably enlightened] wean ourselves from the profound attachment we have to the belief in our continuous self. And gradually, we lighten the heaviness of the fear of not having happiness or losing the happiness that we perceive ourselves as having.

I cannot disagree with the idea that we can ween ourselves off the idea that we must have happiness. But, that is not mutually exclusive from the idea that we still fear discomfort from one moment to the next. I think that the difference lies in the idea that for each individual life is a series of events, but because we do not exist in a vacuum, that series of events cross with another person's series of events the two become entangled. This is a source of discomfort.

Let me ask you, if you really believed, not just intellectually reasoned, that nothing is permanently existent or matters beyond this moment, why does it trouble you?

Because I also have the understanding that it is impossible to prove the non-existence of something; and that there is no such thing as a fact, there is only our current understanding based on a particular vantage point. That means that it is impossible to prove that permanency does or does not exist. Therein lies the crux of one of my greatest problems, I do not and cannot actually believe anything.

A table is a great example of what I'm saying. I can "prove" that a table does not exist. More specifically, it only exists from a certain vantage point or perception. What do you do with life when you understand that everything that you once believed to be real actually isn't real at all?

I realize that, taken out of context, the preceding two paragraphs seem to contradict one-another. How can one say that it is impossible to prove the non-existence of something and then turn around and claim that they can "prove" something does not exist?  That would be a contradiction if you ignore that existence requires belief and perceptions, and those are the things that I'm talking about.

[takingandsending]

Fear is the only emotion that can exist without it's opposite emotion.

Are you saying that fear has no cessation within the course of a life time? Because if it has a cessation, it has an opposite, even if that opposite is merely the absence of fear. I think what you are proposing is that we go from one fear motivated event to the next fear motivated event that may look very different from an experiential standpoint. Is that close?

This ventures into a nihilistic point of view. If there is no self, there is no purpose, so there is no motivation. Life is meaningless. We exist for no reason other than to exist in the moment.

Nihilism is one way to view things, but not how I believe things to be. If we dispassionately view our thoughts at any given moment, we see that they are not solid, not lasting, yet they are the filter through which we experience everything. I mean, isn't this the core of BPD and why DBT (which advocates a kind of mindfulness approach) has some success at alleviating it? For a pwBPD, every thought, emotion, feeling is accepted as solid, real, permanent and immutable fact. This is what we all do to some extent, but a person not so far along on the PD spectrum might be able to entertain other data, other information that is contrary to their feelings and consider it as a possible reality. For the pwBPD, arresting their thoughts/emotions before they become that runaway train is a way of adding flexibility to their minds.

My sense is that we all need to add that flexibility to our minds. And so, if we see things as mutable, does it mean that they cease to exist in a fashion? Not really, the challenging of a permanent, existent self is the means by which we can release our fear of change that is at once both inevitable and natural. So, I can see a tree, describe it's general shape, color and characteristics, and you can see the same tree provide a completely different description, and again a bug can live in that same tree and have an absolutely different experience of that tree. And if we have flexibility within our minds, we can allow all of the experiences to coexist without fear, i.e. without the need to welcome or reject any of it. The experiences are not seen as not existing, but simply not being constant and requiring welcoming or rejecting. But if we cling to our experience as valid, then by nature, the experience of other becomes invalid and we solidify in fear of our experience being invalidated. Again, this relates to the experience of pwBPD.

As far as life having no meaning if you accept that there is no permanently existent self, I don't really agree at all. To me, it opens up the possibility of recognizing our commonality and also compassion for our deep suffering that perhaps could have a cessation. It's like, rather than just seeing that I am a self that is quite small and inconsequential, I can see that I am infinitely interconnected with others and my actions or inaction has the capacity to help or to harm others, and I have a choice to make. That motivates me, anyway, and not in a way of discomfort.

And I totally agree, it gets complicated quickly when we use only analyses.

[Meili]

Are you saying that fear has no cessation within the course of a life time? Because if it has a cessation, it has an opposite, even if that opposite is merely the absence of fear. I think what you are proposing is that we go from one fear motivated event to the next fear motivated event that may look very different from an experiential standpoint. Is that close?

Half right. Fear does cease and does have an opposite. But, yes, I am suggesting that we move from one fear motivated event to another. I'll use your words as an example:

I am infinitely interconnected with others and my actions or inaction has the capacity to help or to harm others, and I have a choice to make. That motivates me, anyway, and not in a way of discomfort.

I would argue that it indeed is the result of fear, or as you say discomfort. The fear of not being interconnected with others, the fear that you will not help others, the fear that you will harm others. All three are present in your words.

We spin it differently so as to seem nice and humanitarian. But, if you keep asking about the consequences that one would experience if they didn't do such nice and humanitarian things, it comes down to the fear of not doing something and the resulting discomfort.

Why do you want to help someone, what's the motivation to do so?
Because it makes me feel good to do so?
Why do you care about feeling good, what's the motivation to do so?
Because I like the way it feels.
That's answering the question with the question. Why do you care about feeling good, what's the motivation to do so?
Because I want to feel that way.
What way? Good? Again, answering the question with the question. Why do you care about feeling good, what's the motivation to do so? What will you miss out on if you don't help someone?
I'll miss out on feeling good.
So, you're afraid of not feeling good if you don't help someone?
... .

It really is a sober and uncomfortable thought to know that all choices and actions are actually governed by fear.

Nihilism is one way to view things, but not how I believe things to be. If we dispassionately view our thoughts at any given moment, we see that they are not solid, not lasting, yet they are the filter through which we experience everything.

I wholly agree with that.

My sense is that we all need to add that flexibility to our minds. And so, if we see things as mutable, does it mean that they cease to exist in a fashion?

This depends on your definition of things. I would argue that they never really existed in the first place. It's all the perception of existence.

Not really, the challenging of a permanent, existent self is the means by which we can release our fear of change that is at once both inevitable and natural.

I won't dispute this. We reach the same conclusion from opposite vantage points. Change is going to happen. This means that there is no reason to fear the present.

From my perspective, however, a permanent self means that it is possible that pain and discomfort are also possible permanent states. Thus, fear becomes a permanent possibility also. Well, permanent until the organism dies anyway.

Change does not become an inevitability at that point.

The experiences are not seen as not existing, but simply not being constant and requiring welcoming or rejecting.

Or, indifference.

But if we cling to our experience as valid, then by nature, the experience of other becomes invalid and we solidify in fear of our experience being invalidated. Again, this relates to the experience of pwBPD.

The problem here lies with the idea of validity. Valid from whose perspective? I could easily explain how humans never actually touch, as in physically make contact, with anything. But, I'm certain that would be invalidating to anyone who believes that they are touching the keys as they type.

This is a huge part of the problem of people dealing with a pwBPD. The perspective of the pwBPD is so different that the non cannot figure out how to validate. What the non truly believes to be true and real is not the same as the pwBPD. Just like it is true and real to me (thank you science!) that we do not actually touch anything, but to those who do not know or understand how it physically works and happens, it is not the same for them.

As far as life having no meaning if you accept that there is no permanently existent self, I don't really agree at all.

It's a good thing that I'm not a nihilist and don't believe that life has no meaning. I'm just struggling to find it.

And I totally agree, it gets complicated quickly when we use only analyses.

What else is there other than analyses? The only thing that any of us can actually know with any level of certainty is that we exist merely because we think. After that, everything is fair game to question and analyse.

[Harley Quinn]

Really enjoying this discussion.  To throw another angle in here, I'll refer to some perspectives derived from Taoism.   

Meili, what if life has no meaning and that is OK just as it is?  That our purpose here is just as a physical form which represents all the power and interconnectedness in the Universe / Multiverse - however big you want to get - just for the pure fun of it?  That the face we wear and the dramas we enact are simply a story we create just to have the experience and play with it all?  Ride it for all it's worth out of curiosity and nothing more? 

We are all made up of energy after all, as is everything else.  So what is the meaning of life to a rock?  It's just being a rock and that's what it's here to do.  We get the added bonus of being an energy that has far more capacity than a rock so perhaps the meaning of life for us is just to be us, however we choose to express that.   

From a course I took once on the psychology of fear it was stated that all fear stems from one source, which is the fear of the void and the power within the void.  That once we make peace with that then fear in all of it's forms can cease to affect us.  I don't believe that all of my actions are driven by fear.  Some of them are absolutely just for the hell of it.  Because why not?
  What others think and what I think are just thoughts and I don't fear these things.  I'm comfortable with discomfort - it's just a feeling like any other and that's OK with me.  Pain, whether emotional or physical such as my chronic condition (excruciating and at one point suicide provoking) no longer causes fear in me through my use of mindfulness.  Between mindfulness which teaches acceptance and non judgement and Taoism which also encourages just being, if we can just BE, then why would we need a reason to be?  We can just be and that's the beauty of it. 

Regards nothing mattering when we die, I'd say we all leave behind a much larger footprint on this earth than we could ever truly perceive.  Who knows how many people have read this one solitary thread of yours and been provoked into thought which may alter their opinions and possibly actions in the future which in turn will impact those whom surround those individuals... .Never mind those you interact with in person, who love you or loathe you.  So even if everything just ceases for you when you stop existing as an organism, one thing you can be sure of is the legacy you leave behind.  Short of leaving behind us groundbreaking discoveries which further mankind, our bodies can feed the earth and help sustain new life. 

Love and light x           

 

[Meili]

Oh, yeah, HQ, I definitely agree with the idea that we are all merely energy. In fact, that knowledge is where my belief system (and ultimately existential depression) started. No matter what object you observe in the universe, it can be broken down into nothing more than energy, provided that you accept the second law of thermodynamics as true.

Starting there, I began religious syncretism journey, but unlike the ancient syncretistic religions, I have included science to fill the voids and gaps. The melding of science and theology produced results that fascinated me, but were still lacking. When philosophy is added to the mix, the universe suddenly, and mostly made sense to me. Most of my deepest questions about our existence were answered for me.

That does not mean that I think or believe that I have all the answers and certainly not the answers for another person. Just for myself.

The idea that we just exist merely to exist has been an idea that I've toyed with since 7th grade (US speak... .some 3 decades ago). There is a flaw in that theory, again just for me, though: if we exist merely to exist, then why exist at all? The idea flies in the face of science. Everything in the universe has a purpose. Nothing happens randomly despite the claims of chaos theorists. If you look closely at chaos theory, you'll find that it exists merely because their are too many variables for mathematicians to conceive of or calculate. It is a human shortcoming, not one belonging to the universe.

From a philosophical perspective, rather than a theological or scientific one, life must have meaning or else there would be no morality and things like murder would be perfectly acceptable.

From a Taoist perspective, if life has no meaning, then there is no reason to be. But, we know that isn't true because people fear not being. If they didn't, they wouldn't do things such as eating or staying hydrated.

For arguments such as "why not?" or "for the beauty of it," according to logical reasoning, if an inference is true, then it's contraposition must also be true. Thus the "why not" is the same as saying, "because I'm afraid if I don't" or "for the beauty of it" is "because I'm afraid that I will not find the beauty" are truisms. So, while we may choose to think in terms of the positive position, from a logical perspective, the negative position must also be true. One cannot exist without the other.

Over the past 30 some odd years, since I was 12 or 13 years old, I have tried to
to find an argument against many of these things. I've failed. I've welcomed every challenge to prove the premise incorrect. I've yet to find one that rises to that standard for me. Again, I'm not telling anyone that they should agree with me or that they are wrong in their thought processes. But finding an answer that comports with theology, philosophy, and science that disproves my position has been unfruitful.

Oh, and in case anyone is curious, no, I did not fully comprehend all of this at 12 or 13 years of age. I had no idea what philosophy, logical arguments, quantum physics, or most of theology was at that point. That knowledge has resulted from the challenge of the initial doctrine.

I am curious as to fearing the void or the power of the void however. What void? It makes sense to me that the void is the unknown. But, of course, this would make sense to me based on my bias and understanding of the universe. We only fear the unknown. If we know it, we can prepare for it and thus there is no reason to fear. At that point, the only fear left is the fear of the variables which we may not have calculated, or worry that we calculated incorrectly.

[Harley Quinn]

The void is death.  The nothingness.  From a scientific perspective Meili, what happens to your energy when your body can no longer sustain itself?  Does energy just stop?  I realise this is a wet nosed question but I'm curious... .

Love and light x

[Meili]

Death is only scary if you don't know what happens after, which brings me to the answer to you question HQ.

When the body dies, no the energy does not cease. The second law of thermodynamics dictates this is true. The energy is, ultimately, released into the universe.

[Harley Quinn]

So we still exist minus our physical form from a scientific perspective?       

[Meili]

Arguably, yes, in a sense we do. But, as individual parts rather than as a whole.

Without the neuropathways for the energy to travel and the specific sets of neurons to stimulate, the energy is just energy.

The cells also exist until they decay. As they decay, more energy is released, in the form of heat energy, and the building blocks that make-up the cells are also put back into the universe to be reused.

Microbes eat our cells to get their energy supply as well.

In a less romantic sort of way, we arereincarnated in a sense. Our cells and energy are absorbed by the universe and reused for other purposes.

[takingandsending]

I would argue that it indeed is the result of fear, or as you say discomfort. The fear of not being interconnected with others, the fear that you will not help others, the fear that you will harm others. All three are present in your words.

I disagree. Interconnection is already in place, even if everything that we perceive are forms of energy, so it's a matter of recognition or awareness. As the fear of clinging to our superimposed self diminishes, the recognition or awareness of interconnection occurs. It's not really a conscious act of volition. Likewise, the compassion that arises for others isn't directed with a result in mind. It's more like seeing someone having a nightmare and waking them up because they are suffering, not really thinking, "Ooo, waking them up is gonna make me feel soo good." If there's attachment to the result, then yes, you are correct, that's fear based and still reflecting self attachment. But in the absence of that attachment, or even a lessening of that attachment, the corresponding attachment to a specific result is freed up. Sort of like HQ's idea of just being to be.

What else is there other than analyses? The only thing that any of us can actually know with any level of certainty is that we exist merely because we think. After that, everything is fair game to question and analyse.

There's direct experience. Analysis is attempting to know the way things are through our cognitive processes only. Alternatively, we could come to know the way things are through our direct experience. For example, you are certain that there is no actual contact between your fingers and the keyboard through intellectual understanding. What is your direct experience? In my view, you need both approaches to start to make sense of what it is to be sentient.

The void is death.  The nothingness.  From a scientific perspective Meili, what happens to your energy when your body can no longer sustain itself?  :)oes energy just stop?  

The void for me is not death or nothingness. it's emptiness, but not a nothingness devoid of qualities or appearances. In essence, phenomena will not simply stop - birth and death, creation and cessation arise from the same space.

If you like mathematics, look at the Mandelbrot equation - all numbers, all points are continuously moving toward zero (cessation) or infinity (creation) and the results of one round of calculation are fed into the next round of calculation, which is interdependence. It's an infinite dance of creation and cessation arising in interdependence, inseparable. I don't see that as fear begetting fear begetting fear. Whether we fear it or not, the energy of creation is happening at all moments.

[Meili]

I disagree. Interconnection is already in place, even if everything that we perceive are forms of energy, so it's a matter of recognition or awareness.

I see that and this as a contradiction:

I am infinitely interconnected with others and my actions or inaction has the capacity to help or to harm others, and I have a choice to make. That motivates me, anyway, and not in a way of discomfort.

The same applies to the above and the statement:

It's not really a conscious act of volition.

In the quote from the earlier post, you state that your being interconnected motivates you. In the last post, you disagree with my assertion based on the the prior quote... .that it does not motivate you. How can both be true in your mind?

Additionally, in the quote from the earlier post, you note that you have choices to make based on your being interconnected, but now claim that the choices are not a conscious act of volition? How does that work?

No matter, I'm not trying to change your mind or convince you to think my way. We have some very fundamental differences in opinion. For instance, I find no real, measurable interconnection between myself and someone I have never met. At best, we both exist, both require the same basic things to survive and are both on the planet. Outside of those things, there is no connection. In fact, there are many people that I know that I do not share any connection with; save and effect those mentioned above.

As the fear of clinging to our superimposed self diminishes, the recognition or awareness of interconnection occurs.

Not surprisingly, I disagree here as well. I have no fear of death or losing my superimposed self, assuming that you are using that to describe the physical body. My fears rest in my being uncomfortable until such a time as the physical body ceases to sustain itself. So, I lack the fear and lack any recognition of actual interconnection. It would appear that I'm a living, breathing example that disproves the premise.

It's not really a conscious act of volition.

But, every action that we take is the result of a conscious choice and we do so of our free will. To say anything to the contrary suggests that we are not in control of our own lives and subject to the whims of others. Surely you are not suggesting that is the case?

Likewise, the compassion that arises for others isn't directed with a result in mind. It's more like seeing someone having a nightmare and waking them up because they are suffering, not really thinking, "Ooo, waking them up is gonna make me feel soo good." If there's attachment to the result, then yes, you are correct, that's fear based and still reflecting self attachment. But in the absence of that attachment, or even a lessening of that attachment, the corresponding attachment to a specific result is freed up. Sort of like HQ's idea of just being to be.

Sure, if you just look at this on the surface that is true. But, let's examine the motivations behind the conscious choices and actions.

Compassion is definitely the result of a desire for a specific outcome. We fear that the other person will continue to suffer.

The same goes for the nightmare. Why would you wake someone having a nightmare up if you were not fearful of the discomfort that the other person is feeling?

Fear is still the motivating factor in both examples that you have given. We make our choices and take action based on fear. Otherwise, what is the purpose of doing so? The only other real argument would be to feel better about ourselves and that, is, in turn, the result of the fear of not feeling good about ourselves or feeling guilty. The fear that we are not meeting our obligations to others might also come into play. No matter how you spin it however, fear is still the motivator.

There's direct experience. Analysis is attempting to know the way things are through our cognitive processes only. Alternatively, we could come to know the way things are through our direct experience. For example, you are certain that there is no actual contact between your fingers and the keyboard through intellectual understanding. What is your direct experience? In my view, you need both approaches to start to make sense of what it is to be sentient.
The void for me is not death or nothingness. it's emptiness, but not a nothingness devoid of qualities or appearances. In essence, phenomena will not simply stop - birth and death, creation and cessation arise from the same space.

Direct experience means nothing without analysis however. It is only through conscious understanding that we learn and can see patterns. Claiming otherwise is a claim that things just happen and you have no understanding as to why so the experience means and provides nothing.

My direct experience about my fingers and the keyboard does not actually mesh with reality however. It is only an illusion that our finger touch the keyboard. There is a barrier of particles that interact, we do not. What happens when experience does not mesh with science?

There are so many posts on these boards from members asking the same question with regard to their pwBPD. The two realities do not match because of perception. Does that make one reality more correct than another?

If you like mathematics, look at the Mandelbrot equation - all numbers, all points are continuously moving toward zero (cessation) or infinity (creation) and the results of one round of calculation are fed into the next round of calculation, which is interdependence. It's an infinite dance of creation and cessation arising in interdependence, inseparable. I don't see that as fear begetting fear begetting fear. Whether we fear it or not, the energy of creation is happening at all moments.

uummm... .except a Mandelbrot set does not actually exist in nature. It's merely a mathematical construct. Even so, I'm not sure where you got the idea that all numbers are doing anything. For a Mandelbrot set to exist, one must first select the numbers for the equation. The numbers aren't moving anywhere. At best, they create a point on a complex plain.

For anyone who might care, the equation in question, if I'm understanding takingandsending correctly, is Z=Z²+C. Z being a real number smaller than 2 and C being an imaginary number (an imaginary number is the square root of -1, which, of course, is not possible). So, Z=22+1i gives you Z=5. 5 is the new Z. Of course, 5 is greater than 2, so it is not, by mathematical definition part of the Mandelbrot set and another set of numbers are plugged into the equation. When we plot the Mandelbrot set on a complex plain, it creates fractals that are pretty and look infinite because C can be any imaginary number. But, Z is still limited to nothing greater than 2. As a result, the set is never truly infinite. At least that's my understanding of all of it.

Regardless, I also disagree that energy is being created. All energy and matter were created at the moment of the inception of the universe. Again, the second law of thermodynamics comes into play here: matter cannot be created or destroyed, only converted into energy, and energy can neither be created nor destroyed, only converted into matter.

Of course, this energy has nothing to do with fear from what I can see. Can you please clarify this point?

I'm not sure what any of this has to do with my not being able to find motivation in the world and recovering from my relationship with my x. But it's been a great deal of fun and I really appreciate the mental challenges. Thank you HQ and takingandsending!

To bring this back to learning from my relationship with my uBPDexgf, these types of discussions were missing in my life. I craved them. While smart in her own right, my x had no understanding of such things and no desire to learn about them. She found them unimportant in the universe.

We were having dinner with her father one night and I drifted off into my thoughts. She got irritated with me. I asked her if she'd prefer I remain quiet of I open the discussion to what was going through my mind at the time: Steven Hawking's information paradox, black holes, and the Event Horizon. A very stern "NO!" was her response.

My last T pushed me toward finding and associating with people who think as I do. I've never had any idea how to find such people. I find myself bored, unchallenged, and, eventually, annoyed by the person that I'm in a relationship with.

[Turkish]

Zero point energy from the quantum vacuum field certainly throw a wrench into the works of what "is" is. 

[Meili]

OOHHHH! Do we get to talk about Heisenberg's uncertainty principle now? 

[Turkish]

Sure.  And Feynman Diagrams... .until a real physicist delurks to beat the quark out of us. 

[Meili]

But... .but... .but... .Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is the basis for zero point energy.  (I need a nerd emoticon I think)

until a real physicist delurks to beat the quark out of us. 

   

Yeah, the real physicists on the board are probably rolling their eyes at all of this, the hobbyists, and the googlers.

[Harley Quinn]

So Meili,

What is your best course of action regards the r/s do you think?

Love and light x