|
(List D refers to Richard’s List D
Vineeto’s Selected Correspondence Psychology & Psychiatry
HENRY: I have recently found that a major insecurity for me has been perceiving myself as ineffectual. I work as a social worker, and have frequently felt that it is an extremely ineffective profession: the stated aims are the rather nebulous “help people”, which is then backed up with dubious or non-existent financial and social support. The profession is filled with the compassionate and ineffective, forever wringing their hands and bemoaning the suffering they see. On reflection, it seems likely that I fell into this occupation via a willing tolerance for being ineffectual, indeed an implicit appetite for it as it gives me an easy ‘out:’ I have only to bemoan the state of ‘society,’ forever pointing the blame elsewhere as I paint myself as a virtuous exception to the rule. I no longer see myself this way. These do-gooders and victims are just as much a part of society, just as much a reflection of humanity as those who flex their power to greedily vacuum up wealth and further influence. Further, anger directed toward them is already an in-built function of society; my YouTube algorithm is currently packed with such individuals self-righteously railing to no avail. VINEETO: I can well relate to this tale. ‘Vineeto’ was trained as a social worker and found ‘herself’ over-educated and underqualified in practice, when ‘she’ worked as an addiction consultant after finishing ‘her’ university degree. The suffering coupled with cunning of the addicts bent on milking the system, which had no cure but only panacea, caused ‘Vineeto’ so much emotional stress that she had to quit after only two years. ‘She’ knew ‘she’ had no solution nor could ‘she’ see any on the horizon. Let me know if you find a way of becoming effective in your field of expertise. Remember –
HENRY: In the end, the prescription is straightforward: to become
effective. How could I respect myself otherwise? It is an insult to intelligence (to paraphrase Richard) to continue on
attempting something with an obvious and long-running track-record of futility. To continue to be weak and wasteful
with this one life is abhorrent, leaving me with nowhere to go but the place that scares me the most – intimacy &
enjoyment of this moment of being alive. VINEETO: I wish you success in whatever field of endeavour you are choosing to be effective. Cheers Vineeto
CHRONO: I can relate to a lot of what you write. Especially the :
In my experience it has been that some part of me truly believed in those problems/ ideals/ dreams and persisting in feeling them. But also it’s because I am trying to ‘fix’ it while also experiencing those feelings. As an example, I would very often go into states of ‘limerence’ (a hellish state of being). During all of that time I thought that I could not apply the actualism method because of how acutely I felt the suffering, so I would have no choice but to apply real world methods. I went to counsellors and therapists and it did help but only in a ‘keeping my head above water’ kind of way. In the most intense periods of that state there would be the deep desire to end it and there was the desire to do whatever it takes, but I wasn’t sure how. Simply put, it can’t be done from there because ‘I am my feelings and my feelings are me’. It was only when I acknowledged that I had a subsequent realization that all I had to do was enjoy and appreciate this moment of being alive. Right in there is the desire to be happy and harmless. I really did want to be happy and harmless. There’s no other path for me. When I realized that, I was able to enjoy life more consistently and felt more like I had autonomy. Something nothing in the real world has been able to offer. Everything in the real world is about ‘keeping my head above water’. VINEETO: Hi Chrono, It is a valuable insight that “everything in the real world is about ‘keeping
my head above water’”, in line with what Sigmund Freud classified as the aim of psychiatry: to return
patients “back to a state of as near-normal functioning as possible (and ‘normal’ is
categorised by Mr. Sigmund Freud as ‘common human unhappiness’)” However, when you say that “I thought that I could not apply the actualism method because of how acutely I felt the suffering” you seem to have forgotten, or overlooked, a vital ingredient of the actualist tools when applying the actualism method – when your mood falls below feeling good, first get back to feeling good. That, of course, includes recognizing and acknowledging the feeling which is happening (which can sometimes be made difficult by not wanting to recognize it because this might interfere with one’s self-image, or fighting the feeling, which automatically imbues it with a lot more affective energy). Hence when you realize what feeling is happening, acknowledge it as being part of your genetic inheritance, and stop fighting it. From there it is much easier to get back to neutral and then to feeling good. Only then does it make sense to find out what triggered the feeling and draw the necessary conclusion from the event. And once you fully take on board that “I am my feelings and my feelings are me” you have the choice of being a different feeling because it is simply silly, when you have the choice, to be something other than happy and harmless. You might also discover that there is a certain amount of investment in keeping the
suffering going (because of some good feeling you cherish, for instance) – elsewhere referred to the addiction of being a ‘being’ CHRONO: All of that to say, it’s actually pretty simple. Just as Vineeto has suggested:
You do not need to wait “clearing the cobwebs out of
some ‘dark corners’ of myself”. Such an activity (in my experience anyway) becomes an exercise in keeping ‘my’
problems alive. You know what it is to feel good. You know what it is like to experience pure intent. Maybe go back
through your journal and read through the experience and rememorate it again. Any problems are easily solved when you
are feeling good. VINEETO: You are certainly right when feeling good, feeling better and feeling naïve any problems are more easily solved, or don’t even appear as such, but simply accepted as challenges in the game of becoming actually free. Cheers Vineeto
ANDREW: Hi again, I can be even more exploratory in my response, especially to the quoted text of Richard about “current time awareness”. At any point of the day, I could give a detailed account of my psychological and emotional state. In fact, I don’t think this is even a rare ability, at a certain point in a person’s life, especially in this era of popular psychology being “baked into” much of our lingo and understanding. What is rare, and perhaps isn’t necessarily naturally there, is choice. Choice. Choosing one feeling over another, I don’t get. I can say the words. Perhaps, and this is me finding common ground between what I suspect the method actually is, and where I am, learning, or training, acquiring such an ability may indeed be the radical shift needed. As I have only been able to do 50% of the method. I don’t need any sort of pause to tell anyone asking what I feel.
What I can’t do, and I assume it’s because it’s an acquired skill, it choose to feel otherwise. VINEETO: The actualism method is about enjoying and appreciating being here – there is your choice, your priority in general. You not only have “current time awareness” but you have a preference for the felicitous and innocuous feelings and do something (as per instructions) about those feelings which are not felicitous and innocuous. You don’t need any psychology to work that out, in fact psychology only confuses the matter with theories and concepts. The other decision that has been very helpful is to decide to put everything on a preference basis – you prefer things or people to be in a certain way but if that is not the case, it doesn’t really matter. This upfront decision removes a lot of force/ demand/ wilfulness out of your emotional reaction and reduces ‘self’-centricity (which generally causes more problems than it’s worth).
Cheers Vineeto
VINEETO: This is excellent. It takes a bit of getting used to it but when you remember Richard’s quote at the end of this message it makes it all so much more obvious that taking anything serious or emotionally urgent, as per the instinctual imperative, is well and truly a waste of time. CHRONO: I am glad that you pointed this out as an instinctual urgency as framing it this way has helped a lot too. Usually I have approached it as “OCD”. As this way of being does indeed look for problems or create problems (and subsequently try to solve them). The source of which is the “angst and agitation” which I’ve mentioned earlier. I’ve been applying the “it doesn’t really matter basis” to more and more things and it has caused some more ease and enjoyment. VINEETO: Hi Chrono, Remember that it is still the case of what you said before –
And I replied that it was “in line with what Sigmund Freud classified as the aim of psychiatry: to return
patients “back to a state of as near-normal functioning as possible (and ‘normal’ is
categorised by Mr. Sigmund Freud as ‘common human unhappiness’)” The people who invented and use such labels like “OCD” to ‘diagnose’ various
aspects of the human condition can only endeavour to ameliorate the symptoms, if that, but fail to diagnose, let
alone treat, the root cause of the problem itself – the instinctual imperative common to all feeling beings. And
the cute thing is that the solution to the human condition, an actual freedom, has been “classified as a ‘severe
psychotic condition’ in the DSM-IV” by those very same professionals. I am well pleased to hear that “applying the “it doesn’t really matter basis” to more and more things […] has caused some more ease and enjoyment”. Cheers Vineeto
ANDREW: Small update, with a question or two for others! First to the questions; has anyone looked into ADHD or has ADHD? (…) Watching a few videos, I really saw that the traits match my MO in many ways. VINEETO: Hi Andrew, I personally don’t know much about the condition called Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorder, only that applying this label has put a large number of people, especially children, on a psychiatric drug regiment, whereas in previous generations a great amount of physical activity seems to have taken care of the abundant energy young people have. I am aware that this is a non-professional and very simplified summary but it might nevertheless work for you. Sophisticated psychological labels tend to put you in a specific box and generally are not helpful to examine the reasons which prevent you from feeling good. I also remember that ‘Vineeto’, when ‘she’ studied social work at university and learnt about all sorts of psychological/ psychiatric disorders, ‘she’ was curious and eager to find out if they fitted to ‘her’ as well – a common ‘self’-centric reaction. For the aim of feeling good, come what may, it is more useful to individually respond to the factual personal observations you have described below and then assess each moment if what prevents you from feeling good now in terms of being silly or sensible – and then get back to feeling good. ANDREW: I can barely sit still for 15 minutes (unless I am interested, then an hour is possible, maybe!). Never have been able to. Will daydream constantly, procrastinate to the last minute, every time, constantly distracted, can become obsessed in an interest, only to drop it. Most jobs I have had have lasted between 6 months to 2 years, the longest was 4 years. Constantly bored from the earliest years unless I could completely get lost in drawing, cubby building, music or fantasy. VINEETO: For instance, when you discover a certain pattern in your behaviour you can investigate possible underlying reasons – a habitual response or a certain feeling you are perhaps trying to avoid or shying away from and go from there. Perhaps running away from uncomfortable feelings has been a long-standing habit (perhaps an acquired survival mechanism at an early age) and you may find, on closer inspection, that such avoidance is no longer necessary now that your life-circumstances have changed, i.e. you are no longer a helpless child or youngster, and never will be again. ANDREW: To round this post out with how I am feeling and going
overall; I am enjoying increasing simplicity in how I think and feel about Actualism and the method, what I can do
about it in this moment, and the tools I have to work with. For example, I am becoming more obsessed with simplicity
itself in thinking. Not letting myself get caught up in long considerations, letting it all “simmer” on the
back burner if nothing is obvious about any topic. The main goal is to be more and more aligned with
“benevolence and benignity ”, aka pure intent. The life devotional goal. (…) VINEETO: What stands out in this paragraph is the description of “becoming more obsessed” as if “not letting myself get caught up in long considerations” is another psychiatric disorder instead of a beneficial change, which you can appreciate and for which you can pat yourself on the back. While it is great to have a “life devotional goal”, why not start with something more easy and simple – feeling good – with the sincere intent to be more and more happy and harmless and making enjoying and appreciating this moment of being alive the first “devotional goal”. It seems to work well so far and bears some tangible results. Cheers Vineeto
ANDREW: The fascinating bit will be what remains after becoming
free? VINEETO: Hi Andrew, It is indeed a fascinating inquiry of what remains after becoming free. There is little to add to what Kuba wrote at this point in your inquiry. If you read more of Richard’s writing, his journal and his correspondences, you will understand quite a bit of what disappears, it is in fact the whole of the psychological and the psychic faculty/ entity including those chemical processes which are triggered by this faculty/ entity. As Kuba said, Richard’s selected correspondence on sanity, insanity and salubriousness can give you some better understanding when read with a naïve attitude. It would save you a lot of searching around in the psychological/ psychiatric text-books for possible physical causes of your emotional/ psychological condition – unless you are specifically searching for a reason why change is not possible/ not desirable or not necessary, in order to allow you (in all good conscience) to continue your life-long habit of merely following your feelings no matter what the consequences for your well-being (and possibly that of others), instead of applying common sense whenever your mood dips below feeling good. But you had indicated in the post I replied to yesterday Cheers Vineeto
KUBA: On the flight back from China I read through Richard’s correspondence on sanity, it was a very fascinating read actually, with the main takeaway being that actual freedom is completely outside of that sanity-insanity paradigm. Of course when viewed from within the real world paradigm it was classified as a severe psychotic disorder in Richard’s case. But the point being that what I saw (again) in the PCE the other day is that the actual world is a completely new world. ‘I’ exist somewhere in the psyche, ‘my’ world along with the various classifications of where ‘I’ exist within its boundaries, it all disappears in the PCE. It is not that ‘I’ am inside and the actual world is outside, both ‘inside and outside’ disappear in the PCE and there is only the actual world. Same with regards to time, that ‘I’ exist within the real world time span of past-present-future, which itself exists only in the psyche and in the PCE it disappears altogether. So to cut a long story short – all of ‘me’ as well as the various components of ‘my’ world disappear without a trace in the PCE. As it has been said "nothing dirty can get in" – this is indeed the case. So considering the above it seems rather clear to me that in full actual freedom there would not
be a trace of neuro-divergence left. Just who would be diverging from what exactly. VINEETO: Hi Kuba, An excellent post (as well as your two follow-up ones It’s marvellous that you can experientially confirm for yourself that "in full actual freedom there would not be a trace of neuro-divergence left". It all disappears as if by magic upon becoming free and then divesting oneself of the remnants of one’s social identity. Cheers Vineeto
CHRONO: It has been a while since I’ve written here and it’s mainly because I had fallen back to feeling bad. Or more specifically it’s because I’ve had a lot of trouble sleeping/ have been sleep deprived and have, in the last couple of weeks, got back to getting all my rest and feeling good. Right now it feels like so long ago that I can’t even remember all the details, but I will comment that it relates to my “OCD” way of being (I am only calling it that because I don’t have another word). It morphs and latches onto various things in order to gain certainty. Maybe the instinctual urgency way of being as mentioned above. I’m inclined to even say that it is bordering on an altered state of consciousness. I can say though that it started with the whole stonewalling issue with my partner. And the primary feeling it engendered in me was feeling “trapped”. I felt that I had to solve the issue or else we won’t be able to enjoy our time together. VINEETO: Hi Chrono, First up, I would suggest that instead of using the psychiatric definition “OCD” (which only categorizes/ defines you as having a mental disorder), naming what you experience ‘symptoms of extreme stress’. This usually happens when the underlying feeling of stress and anxiety is not allowed to be experienced as is (as in ‘I’ am my feelings and my feelings are ‘me’). If you do that you can instantly tell what is missing and do something about it via addressing the issue directly – when you are back to feeling good. You clearly identified the source of your stress and anxiety – love. Perhaps revisiting our
previous conversations on this topic might be informative, which you can find (together with other correspondence
here
CHRONO: Except as time went by and I didn’t do anything, it was as if the issue solved itself. There was no real issue and I found that it again had to do with the Good/ Bad dichotomy. There had been a dream (self-centric) functioning that only if my partner behaved or acted a certain way then there could be peace and harmony between us (something along those lines). Now any time I note that I am bothered in this way then I know that I have a “good” belief functioning in the background. The question then was, was it worth holding onto that (good) dream if it meant feeling miserable and simultaneously disregarding my partner as a full person on her own (being but an accessory to ‘my’ dream)? I could not have the one without the other. And I got my genuine answer of ‘no the good is not worth the bad’. Only then did that state of being release its grip. VINEETO: You were hot on the trail and have also identified the issue further, originally wanting to keep the cake and eat it too, i.e. keeping love/ possession without the detrimental side-effects (“the Good/ Bad dichotomy”). Perhaps this has finally been fully recognized and has expired? Either way it is a really excellent outcome and your persistent probing showed results. When you examine your resentment, make sure that not a smidgen of wanting to hold onto the bitter-sweet feeling love remains, otherwise your resentment is sourced in the fact (which you have already seen) that you can’t have one without the other. Cheers Vineeto
VINEETO: First up, I would suggest that instead of using the psychiatric definition “OCD” (which only categorizes/ defines you as having a mental disorder), naming what you experience ‘symptoms of extreme stress’. This usually happens when the underlying feeling of stress and anxiety is not allowed to be experienced as is (as in ‘I’ am my feelings and my feelings are ‘me’). If you do that you can instantly tell what is missing and do something about it via addressing the issue directly – when you are back to feeling good. CHRONO: Hi Vineeto, Yes that makes sense to re-label it. I’ve been calling it that as the symptoms very much fit the definition. Obsessively focused on one thing and trying to compulsively fix it (while holding onto the same feeling) is an instinctual manoeuvre. But my approach to it has changed. I noticed that I just need to let the feeling subside (seeing that there’s nothing that I have to really do) and feel good and that quells the majority of the urgency. I saw this when I realized that my fundamental nature is not only that ‘I am suffering and suffering is me’ but also that ‘my’ whole foundational drive is to survive. Thus I am heavily invested in suffering. It makes sense that feeling good then is a self-less inclination. VINEETO: Hi Chrono, Ah, this sounds like a break-through realisation into the whole business of being “heavily invested in suffering”. Now that you have seen that you can pay attention to every instant when that habitual behaviour resurfaces and attentiveness will take care of the rest –
Cheers Vineeto
KUBA: So I guess the main thing I need to experientially clarify for myself, is what leads to change. You wrote :
This is also a good clue, because I do have this tendency to treat it as if it is some psychological case, that is where the rumination and the all or nothing approach comes in. That ‘I’ will observe these feelings and structures and ‘I’ will draw a map of the various past causes etc. But then by the end of it, there is no change! It seems where change typically has happened is where I get sick of going round in circles and just stop. So it is like I get there in the end but with much time wasted. VINEETO: Ha, I guess you are not aware what Richard wrote of the aims of psychology –
A fellow forum-member reported his own experiential finding after having sought some psychological professional help –
So, psychology is certainly not a feature of the Third Alternative and has no solutions for the disease called the human condition. Heck, they are as convinced as everyone else that ‘you can’t change human nature’. KUBA: And from what I can see, what leads to change is essentially what you wrote here :
So essentially this rumination is clutter, and it can be discarded,
which means then I do not require some long though-out process to grant me the permission to get back to feeling good
or to leave behind some dearly held aspect of ‘me’.
VINEETO: Yes, what you need is the sincere intent, an obsession if you like, to do whatever is necessary to get back to being as felicitous and innocuous as possible – both for your own benefit and that of your fellow human beings. Cheers Vineeto
ANDREW: Cringing is so very normal. Most people are cringing all the time. What I am posting about is the use of “narcissism” and “vanity” being conflated. (…) But, instead of taking my word for it, perhaps the word of a self-described sociopath and grandiose narcissist (he says he ranks off the scale on both tests): Prof. Sam Vaknin. (…) VINEETO: Hi Andrew, You have tried ascribing psychiatric labels onto yourself before –
Now you found another identity-label, possibly also because Prof Vaknin has given you a valid narrative for your life to identify with. This paragraph describes what you seem to be living out at present –
It seems to be the case with your dipping your toe into actualism but never really getting
involved/ making the first step to becoming more harmless and happy, and now you are reduced the “demoting”
actualism and an actual freedom in no uncertain terms. It’s not only the reaction of a “clinical
narcissist” but it’s a very common response when the grapes are hanging too high (as in Aesop’s fable It simply means that the ‘self’-preservation of ‘Andrew’, the lost, lonely, frightened and very cunning identity, has found a way to save ‘his’ pride and give up nevertheless. ANDREW: It may pay to understand that an actual clinical narcissist doesn’t technically have an ego, and is thus not vain. (…) As of now, I am not aware of any cure for NPD or ASPD. VINEETO: Ha … you now have the blessing and/or confirmation in your self-assessed psychiatric disorder to not even have to pretend to try to change human nature – it can’t be done. The irony is that this is exactly the reason philosophy and psychiatry are outdated. ANDREW: I realise actualism is proclaimed in the first line of the website as “It is possible to live in this modern era, freed from out-dated Philosophy and Psychiatry”, but I never saw anything about narcissism being “cured” in the clinical sense on the website. As in, the word is used in it everyday meaning whenever I have read anything on the site. The clinical reality of the “disorder” is far more instructive than the way it is is lumped in with philosophy and metaphysics et al, on the website. There is over 100 years of research into how the “normal” aspect of the psyche can manifest in the worst of human behaviour and create the worst of it. Objectification (whether sexual, or otherwise) at the early stages of life creates what Vaknin describes as an “imaginary friend” which ends up being the only self the victim ever develops. To take it back to applicable usefulness: in what way have we created and maintained a false
self from childhood because of objectification? VINEETO: After this declaration that your condition is incurable, I wonder what “applicable usefulness” your question has on this forum. Richard made it very clear in thousands of posts to hundreds of correspondents that ‘I’ am rotten to the core, irredeemably so, and that the only solution is to voluntarily leave the ‘self’ behind. He also described and reported various tools, which have all been experientially proven to work, to incrementally diminish ‘me’ (the ‘good’ and ‘bad’ feelings) and be able to increasingly enjoy and appreciate being here. By the way, the first ‘case of narcissism’ (which he himself classified as institutionalised insanity) being cured by the actualism method was Richard himself –
Naturally, this suggestion of a solution, which diminishes ‘me’, is anathema to an avowed narcissist, self-confirmed by psychological and psychiatric literature, and possibly more inclined to self-centricity than most. And yet, there must be some inkling of doubt, else why would you write and try to convince/ convert others of your belief, and why would you ‘cringe’? ANDREW: Or, to put a more pointed “point” to my point: The first line of the AFT proclaims that psychiatry is outdated. Yet, when those (and over the years I still remember some of the names) of those with genuine psychiatric conditions interact with the list, they are told that they should seek professional help. So is psychiatry out-dated by actualism? Not so far, on the whole. Edit: [name deleted], there is a name you may not know. [psychiatric label deleted] lad who
used to interact a lot on yahoo. Even had a few videos on YouTube at some point. there was also a bi-polar lady, I
want to say [name deleted], or Layla, something with L. VINEETO: Now here is where narcissism (=self-love) demonstrates its extreme non-consideration for anyone else but ‘me’ (=malice). On the AFT the names on the mailing lists were deliberated anonymised out of consideration for people’s privacy (except for those requesting/ giving permission for their first name to be used) for the very reason that often private and delicate details were discussed when talking about the human condition and how to become free from it. In your desire to pull everyone down to your level of suffering/self-centricity you are callously dragging those names and private details from previous mailing lists into the public forum (a troll-feature called cross-posting) to illustrate your point that psychiatry is not out-dated. What you overlooked is that psychiatry/ psychology has never cured anyone permanently from malice and sorrow. An actual freedom lies beyond normal and abnormal, beyond sanity and insanity. However, if you are convinced that philosophy and psychiatry are not “outdated” and have “over 100 years of research” at their disposal, why not put your money where your mouth is and engage one of their genre to help you (back) to “common human unhappiness” –
Chrono reported last year after personal experience with this genre –
You probably already know what Richard is saying on the topic –
Should you ever grow tired of whiling your life away with psychologising, philosophising and justifying why you are the way you are right now, you can decide to start extracting yourself of the mess you find yourself in. It means, however, that you have to really, really want to do it, actively and practically, to the point of getting obsessed with finding a way out of the mess both your instinctual passions and your socialisation have placed you in. It can be done. Cheers Vineeto
ANDREW: Ok, so I said I would not check, but then I thought “damn, did I completely make up that “seek professional help” memory?” Turns out no, that is the case. The “outdated” is indeed recommended:
First lines of the website:
So, while it may seem like an attack Vineeto, just as it was normal for trolls back in the day: This is indeed where we are at. VINEETO: Hi Andrew, I am pleased you have come to your senses enough to check up on your own allegations. As for
what you call “normal for trolls back in the day” – those days of answering any and all
allegations are long over, most answers are already collected in the Commonly Raised
Objections ANDREW: You: diagnosing me, without a single credential (that I know of) and certainly without any time spent in actual consultation. VINEETO: If you consider my last post to you as me “diagnosing” you, then you are mistaken. I did no such thing – I simply said that these are the labels you seem to be applying to yourself – first “ADHD” and now “clinical narcissist”. I used the latter label because that is what Prof Vaknin, you referred to, writes about. You said –
To my understanding you seem to have included yourself in the last question (“we”) regarding the research of Prof. Vaknin. It appeared to be a more personal matter, especially when in your next post you expounded the virtues of being selfish (“Narcissism is not the opposite of actual freedom”) and not caring “in some normal way” –
Now you saying that you only mentioned the Professor’s name and URL and described his work out of non-personal interest in scientific research regarding narcissism? Nevertheless, I am very pleased to hear that you are neither a narcissistically or a non-caring ‘sociopathically’ inclined person because you gave a convincing indication of that, hence my taking the link to be related to your own issues. Btw, what you are praising is the instinct of self-preservation, expressing itself in fear, aggression, nurture and desire. Here is one of the “endless” quotes from Richard, explaining why it is detrimental to our well-being and why narcissism (=self-love) is anathema to diminishing the ‘self’ to eventually segue into willing ‘self’-sacrifice. Perhaps you didn’t know.
ANDREW: Me: pointing out that “freed” from, and “outdated” would certainly have been great, but here we are… VINEETO: This expectation seems to tie in with the “red button” you talked about with Rick right after declaring that “Narcissism is not the opposite of actual freedom” –
Are you assuming that because one person succeeded in freeing themselves from the human condition, surpassing the outdated wisdom of spirituality, philosophy and psychiatry, and published reports, descriptions and explanations about it, that you can automatically also be freed from the human condition, whilst remaining as ‘self’-centric as you are? You must be kidding. That an actual freedom doesn’t happen overnight because one thinks it’s a good idea, doesn’t
change the fact that an actual freedom is way superior to the present state of “common human unhappiness” ANDREW: Fortunately, I know enough about myself that while probably somewhere on the sub-clinical spectrum of a Dependant Personality (who does indeed share traits with all the personality disorders in that we do have delusional beliefs about ourselves – that is all self diagnosed), I am not so far gone that your completely unwise attempt at diagnosis is of any danger to anyone. You may want to rein that in though. It’s one thing to be communicating about actualism, it’s another to be proclaiming that people you have briefly met 9 years ago, and has otherwise been (and continue to be) respectful, have potentially extremely dangerous personality disorders. I find it strange that you would “try that on”. I am not offended by it, but I wonder why you so easily “went there”? I am of course unsettled, but I was already feeling that from the other day. The goal, and I have never been very good at it, is indeed to be useful. VINEETO: Again, I am pleased to hear that you are not “of any danger to anyone”. As I explained above, I took the research from Prof Vaknin you presented, including your follow-up posts, as a representation of your own self-diagnosis. It has nothing at all to do with having met you in person years ago. If you “indeed” (i.e. in deed) want “to be useful” (i.e. beneficial to yourself and your fellow human beings) why don’t you want to be harmless and happy? ANDREW: P.S: my statement that you would change the website to
prove your point proved to be false, so that is great! Turns out there may be some mutual mis diagnosis going on
after all. VINEETO: I am pleased you found that out yourself. Cheers Vineeto
Freedom from the Human Condition – Happy and Harmless Vineeto’s & Richard’s Text ©The Actual
Freedom Trust: 1997-. All Rights Reserved.
Disclaimer |
