Stepping Outside Myself

[mishalak]

You know I really have not idea what I'm doing. Right or wrong, I've got no idea. I follow the advice that is metaphorically following the voices. I do what I do because it sounds good in my head and even afterwards when the result is hideous I'm never quite sure what went wrong or right because there are too many variables. I don't know if I'm acting in a way that is cool or not. If I would be worse off if I stayed in all the time or if I continued my strange self-indulgent trip in acting however I feel like at the moment.

This political season makes that even worse for me. I keep hearing how bad Bush is and I want to believe, but I keep on seeing flaws in the arguments. No dispute I think he's bad, but I keep wondering if that's for personal reasons because I dislike his politics or something. I can't tell if he's authentically bad or just someone I massively disagree with.

This can all be summed up by just repeating, "I've not idea what I'm doing or if the words in my head make any sense outside it." Does what I think have more than a coincidental basis in reality? I feel pretty tenuously connected to the world right now. I feel like a passenger in a shell on a ballistic curve. Where I'm going has nothing to do with where I might want to land, I know nothing of my actual target might, I'm just falling towards where I hope I was aimed at the start of my journey. Heaven help anyone in my way. I hope I'm not massively hurting people, but I don't know what's going on outside of my shell because all that gets in are distant impressions of massive forces buffeting it about.

The trouble with a hill of knowledge is they often serve to raise one up to see how little one knows of all the mountains of knowledge around you. And those mountains sometimes seem as mind breaking as anything Lovecraft loosely described.

Comments

[scottscidmore.livejournal.com]

How much consideration do you give first, before deciding "it sounds good?" Do you have a consistent rulebook to check against (you know, "it's not good to set other people on fire because I wouldn't like being set on fire")

As for dealing with others, all you can do is test them against your ideals and ethics. DO they do truly harmful things, Saddam being an example of such. Do they do things that go against my beliefs, that I think harm others? (and it doesn't matter how they perceive their actions, reconciling conflicting views happens after you answer the previous questions; you and/or they may need to change, but until you have a measurement to start from it doesn't do much good to try to re-tune)

The Trouble...

[iamcompufrog.livejournal.com]

... with an open mind
Is that people keep insist on putting things in it.

I can guarantee, no matter what you do, you WILL be wrong.

And right.

It's like our comment:
"Gravity? Don't blame me! I voted for Velcro{tm}!"

Or, my favorite button of the season:
"There you go again...
Thinking you have rights!"

While I know your comment was/is serious, I can not bring myself to make your decision for you. Nor can I bring myself to colour my feelings about you by your "stance politicus". I KNOW you will do the wrong thing - and the right one.

But, as RAH put it:
We're in the "... Bread and Circus ..." stage.

[armoire-man.livejournal.com]

No, you're not hurting anyone, but you do sound pretty disconnected. I hope that some part of your life stabilizes, so you have some ground to stand on and look around again.

It's a paradox that as I get older, more set in my ways, and more deeply connected to a few people around me, I also see just how tiny my wisdom and knowledge really are. Life gets more settled, and more Rashoman-like, simultaenously.

I think the real reason I dislike Bush is that he wants to run the country like a corporation, in which he can hire and fire citizens at will. I also find it ironic that the most Soviet of administrations is the one full of Republican carpetbaggers.

But that is neither here nor there so I'll shut up about it. You've got a life, but it's going in several directions simultaneously, and I hope you can settle on just one fairly soon.

[minnehaha.livejournal.com]

No, he's authentically and profoundly bad.

B

[mishalak.livejournal.com]

I do not have a consistant rule book. I don't even know what I want. Well I do know that I want one thing, but that is the one thing no one wants me to have.

[mishalak.livejournal.com]

Today I do know where I am going.

[mishalak.livejournal.com]

So people say, and just as many say otherwise. The facts are numerous and contradictory. There is confusion in heaven and on earth the morals cast yarrow trying to make sense of the signs.

[publius1.livejournal.com]

I donno; what is "bad"? It's a harder question than you might think. There are personal bits that irritate me, but I don't think that Bush is any more terrible than most of our other presidents as a person.

Policy-wise, that's a different story.

[mishalak.livejournal.com]

That's the trouble. I can't see it, what other people say about him being a bad person. I just don't know anything.

[nancylebov.livejournal.com]

In re not being sure whether you're right, how would you tell if you're right? What are your standards for being right?

I reread your first paragraph, and you're definitely using an auditory strategy rather than going by what feels right or looks right. I'm not sure where to go with that, but maybe you'd feel more integrated if you checked in with feeling and vision when you're thinking about what to do.

Imho, it isn't urgent to make deep moral decisions about whether politicians are good or bad people. It's enough to consider whether their policies make sense and whether their results are much like what you want.

In my case, it doesn't matter whether Bush is a malign thug or a puppet or a conspirator who wants to impovrish the US to make it easier to rule or a well-meaning patriot. (That last was added in a desperate effort at fairness and balance.)

I don't like his policies enough that I don't care what he's thinking.

[mishalak.livejournal.com]

It matters to me because I can't seem to make sense of anything. I see so many sides that every part of my life is like a cubist painting. And of course doesn't make any sense.

[publius1.livejournal.com]

I suppose if you consider intellectual incuriosity to be "bad", that's one strike against him. And the way he sneered at Carla Faye Tucker's pending execution was pretty nasty.

But...nah. He may be shrewd and he may be cunning and he may take the precisely opposite position to what I have, and he may have a very disturbing propensity to surround himself with people who seem very shady to me, but then again so did Grant and I think he was pretty indesputibly a good person caught up in bad times.

[publius1.livejournal.com]

(This doesn't mean I think that the man should still be president, obviously. Intentions mean nothing if your actions are miserable failures at everything they do, when they're not just completely wrongheaded.)

[publius1.livejournal.com]

Sounds like you need a thought filter. ;)

I donno; I was trained in debate to take a side but keep my mind open for the views of the other side -- especially since I'd be arguing that side in a later debate. Maybe that helped me to accept one of life's hardest lessons, I don't know; nothing is clear cut, but you have to take sides often anyway, as annoying as that is.

[http://users.livejournal.com/kai_/]

What is that, might I ask?

I think I can relate to much of what you seem to be feeling (Heaven help anyone that gets in my way...) though for very different reasons.

I've been thinking a lot about integrity, and what exactly it means, and whether or not I have it. I've sortof come to the idea that integrity has to do with a consistency between beliefs, and a consistency between belief and action. So, if you're a Christian it should be de facto that you believe in Christ as Savior. If I say "I'm not a Christian," then I should not believe that. Furthermore, if you say you're a Christian, but are generally unforgiving and cruel to those around you, I'd say that it shows a lack of integrity. (This is not meant to be inflammatory to Christians, it's just an example.)

Thinking about these things gives me a headache.

[http://users.livejournal.com/kai_/]

The important question I ask about the upcoming election is not whether or not the candidates are good or bad as people (which I do not know, as I've never met either personally), but whether or not either choice is going to take this country in the direction I believe it should be going to.

I certainly don't believe in continuing this war, I don't think it's in the best interests of anyone on this planet (aside from maybe people who have stock in Halliburton), and I know that one candidate has made it more clear than has the other as to whether or not the war would continue under his leadership [sic]. That may be enough reason for me to vote for someone (or not vote, as the case may be).

At the same time, some people choose not to vote. A friend of mine recently told me that she doesn't believe in politics, and so she doesn't vote. Much like someone saying they don't believe in God, and so doesn't go to church. While I can simply not understand how she could not believe in politics, (I'm assuming she hasn't read Aristotle) I have to respect her for at least making a choice that's based on some sort of belief system, rather than just blindly searching for an answer. (Or flipping a coin.)