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
Maximum Clarity is not Optimal Clarity
Maximum clarity would be optimal if everything could be made totally clear. Since this is not the case, the optimum is not the maximum. Conceptually clear? This is how the term is mainly used by those who value rationality as something purely conceptual. With conceptual building blocks (clear arguments), logical rules can be applied to Read the full article…
Chaos – Coercion – Compassion
Analogous to the ‘triangle of religion’ and the ‘triangle of therapy,’ this triangle shows two opposite poles and a third way that goes deeper. This blog’s triangle can be seen as a blueprint for the other two and more. Please read Triangle of Religion and Triangle of Therapy. In both, one sees either a presence Read the full article…
Is Depth Necessary?
In a world driven by speed and instant gratification, depth often seems unnecessary. Why look beyond the surface when life appears to function well enough? Many assume they don’t need depth because they don’t feel its absence until crisis, emptiness, or fragmentation reveals what was missing all along. Depth isn’t just about philosophy or introspection. Read the full article…