From inside my head

Some of us just have to brood. It’s who we are. Some people are naturally, genetically, physically gifted… others are mentally gifted.

So what it comes down to is that the world our predecessors have built, into which we have been born, facilitates those lives who are born with physical advantages, more than those who are born with mental advantages, but in the lack of physical ones. The smart and successful people almost always have great, healthy, resilient bodies; it takes phenomenal intelligence, combined with ample opportunity, to overcome physical difficulties… but as long as your healthy enough, you can be dirt stupid, and still have a decent life, just from being physically resilient enough to work hard without quitting.

So i’ve noticed this sort of… backwards thinking, which seems to generate various versions of invalid solutions, which are almost always “fantastical” or unrealistic, and they almost always start with something like: “just think differently! but then don’t think too much, just do stuff and you’ll be happy!!” Surely i’m not the only one who sees the contradiction, as well as the fallacy revealed in making such correlations, attributing success to “just will it” or “change your mind,” when in fact, almost all success is heavily dependent upon the physical, and how we are born… features, location, environment, social influence… there’s a lot of involuntary stuff going on around us, even inside us, at all times. The people who seem to think it’s just so easy as “just change your mind,” don’t seem to understand, and likely come from a favorable set of circumstances where the other factors were compatible with such a simple and effective change of mind.

So, sorry, but “change your mind,” is just not enough. We need real solutions to real problems, and guidance on how to accomplish changing what no one seems to want changed, other than the people so deeply afflicted by it. But we’re the only one’s who can figure that out… which leaves us with virtually no assistance, because most of the world wants to continue the way it is. There are a lot of xenophobes out there, who simply fear change. But there are others who simply like the way things are, for them, and aren’t necessarily afraid of change or newness, but are rather afraid of losing their beneficial circumstances, and ending up like those of us who have virtually no recourse.

Being “in the moment,” has its moments… but it’s not an appropriate perpetual solution. Sometimes we must instead remove ourselves from the moment, and choose objectivity over subjectivity… despite the two being ultimately inseparable.

Here’s the hard part: learn to do the right things in the right moments. My approach involves building and refining a set of personal heuristics, which takes most of the analytical burden off the conscious mind, resulting in easier decisions and lower stress. Sometimes heuristics can be exploited, but that’s just one facet of the approach that needs refining. The end goal is to devise a sort of automatic programming for yourself, which allows you to navigate your journey as smoothly and effortlessly as possible.

I learned a bit about a concept called “Wu Wei,” which roughly means “the effortless path.” But it’s kind of an oxymoron, because you don’t want to just go limp and submit to the currents. You want to maintain control, so that you can still choose your direction and responses… but with a thought system that allows you to do so as efficiently, effectively and effortlessly as possible. The irony of this approach is that it begins with endless, perpetual, energy consuming contemplation, and requires a heightened sense of awareness, and a duty to yourself to pay attention to everything you can observe, as closely as possible, so that you can understand things well enough to craft your own programming… so that eventually, you won’t have to think; it will just do what it should, all by itself… kinda like the way Bruce Lee described kung fu. “…you don’t have to ‘hit;’ it hits all by itself.”

ugh… you’re*

@SB: ah, but don’t they?

I’m pretty sure sad people “impinge” upon others’ lives… though perhaps in more indirect and passive ways.

Then again, how are the words of someone with whom you disagree, “impinging” upon you? Or anyone else?

Are you not free to simply disregard them?

I will admit that i find dredd’s comments rather abrasive… but i can’t deny that i’m at least entertained.

Some people are overly harsh, others are overly pitiful.

Then again, i’m also not demanding anything, so if anyone feels like getting worked up over a stranger’s words on the internet, that’s their business. I can’t say i’ve never felt that way myself.

It’s just as easy for a sad person to cause detriment, or prevent benefit, as an angry person. It just manifests in different ways.

“To suffer from a mental illness it needs to be chronic.”

Nope! Even non-chronic illness causes suffering.

Also: “…with first onset usually in childhood or adolescence.”

So, about half of all people qualify as mentally ill, according to the DSM-IV (which is, imo, suspect)… and it USUALLY manifests early.

Extrapolation: about half of all people are obviously mentally ill during childhood or adolescence.

It’s foolish to attempt to trivialize “~50%” just because it’s technically not “the majority.” HALF OF ALL PEOPLE, is a significant demographic, regardless of whether 50% is 51%+. It could be more like 40%, or it could be more like 70%, with lots of instances going unreported. In fact, i’m inclined to believe the percentage is higher than 50%, simply because many people are likely never officially diagnosed.

Then again, i think the DSM-IV represents the excessive medicalization of the human condition, so lots of what the DSM-IV might define as “mental illness,” might not be defined as such in the DSM-V and beyond. There’s a big thing about making significant changes in the way mental illness is both defined and diagnosed (according to the committee tasked with assessing and maintaining the relevance and validity of the DSM, “in light of recent evidence and studies”).

In other words: somewhere after DSM-IV, a bunch of people said “wait a minute… i think this is probably wrong.” And so they set out to cut the BS out of it and make it more valid, part of which is attempting to minimize the “medicalization of the human condition” aspect, and attempt to better distinguish between what is “just normal” and “actually an illness.”