The Case of Whatever
Too many people live in an unfortunate state of inner dissociation ― possibly provoking anxiety and self-defeat. Meanwhile, they try to explain the unexplainable to themselves and others with whatever means available.
Inner dissociation: as if anything mental is directly available to conscious control.
How many people?
In my experience, more than enough.
Of course, this depends very much on one’s definition of the phenomenon. From what point onward can one call it so? Also, there are many colors in the spectrum. ‘Inner dissociation’ is a vague term, but not, therefore, less important.
The anxiety provoked by the ensuing lack of control can be either felt or not. Especially if not felt, this creates cognitive dissonance: the urge to fill the void with whatever explanations or other means to get rid of it.
From little to flooding
It’s not straightforward to find out about one’s own state of inner dissociation. Mainly, as a matter of fact, one is naturally not conscious of what happens non-consciously. One needs to be cautious in both directions. To be avoided is the saying: “It is not, because I feel it not.”
Compare the challenge with a colorblind person trying to understand what colors are. However, in this case, the colors may gradually show up through the person’s making reasonable efforts. One needs to open oneself when countering things that don’t meaningfully fit or are paradoxical.
Being open, one can quickly see several of these ― then more and more – then it looks like a flooding that sweeps over so much (see my blog-essays) that one better talks of a mental paradigm shift.
Whatever
Having arrived at the insight of three-dimensional reality on a two-dimensional screen (Maya’s veil in a specific tradition), one also starts encountering ‘whatever’ in many ways.
This is the whatever of any means people can use not to see – or even be able to see – the dissociation mentioned above. Eventually, anything might be used to eliminate the idea that one doesn’t consciously control oneself to a huge degree.
That is a problem.
From the two sides of the veil, it’s challenging to grasp the other side. Alas, this may lead to pretty much hostility ― canceling, for instance. It’s better to get this when traversing to the other side ― which is usually done from illusion to dis-illusion.
Even so, it’s better – and more accurate – to not see this hostility as coming from the person who outs is, even if oriented to you.
Even so, it’s a problem. History shows that this kind of problem can take some time to resolve.
Therefore, let’s not wait to do what is needed.
Related Posts
Depth of Belief
Eventually, deep belief is always stronger than the superficial kind. Unfortunately, it is not always validated. This situation leads to many huge tensions that can only be resolved through its validation. What is ‘to believe’? It’s one of those concepts that seem straightforward until you start to think about what they actually mean. “I’m not Read the full article…
Groupthink vs. Rationality
Groupthink and rationality don’t mix well. At its core, groupthink prioritizes loyalty and cohesion, often at the cost of truth and independent thought. Rationality, on the other hand, is about questioning, refining, and evolving ideas — even when that means stepping outside the comfort of the group. In today’s world, we see this tension everywhere. Read the full article…
Engaged versus Accountable
In theories about which of both is most effective, the pendulum swings over many years from the one to the other to the one — usually without much depth involved. Terminology Engaged: emotionally involved or committed. Accountable: holding oneself or being held responsible. This is related to the ‘locus of control’ ― putting responsibility for Read the full article…