Authentic living

[Architect]

Define authentic living for yourself. Not in generic terms, but specific things you do to live authentically, and why that is authentic. If you're not living authentically, describe why that is, again specifically.

 

[Rook]

Authenticity? How do you equate this term with the biological process of being?

How can one's life be fake if one is alive, if life is what it is it is by default authentic.

By what possible criteria would you judge authenticity?
Do you intend to use non-distinct swirly-whirley terms such as morality, philosophy or religion?
Or social recognition for the level of not-fakedness that the individual ape possesses when compared to other apes, or when measured by its own subjective image of itself ?

I might be missing something, but the concept of authentic living feels like another contrived rice-crispesque pop-psychology romp, much like horoscopes or typology.

Honestly, how can one not live authentically if one is alive?

 

[TAC]

I don't know if I'm authentic but I definitely have some quirks that liven up a rather mundane life.
For instance, I start my day in the following order
1) Shower
2) Dry my hair and style it
3) cook breakfast in the nude
4) eat breakfast while picking out some clothes
5) play guitar for a few minutes
6) get dressed and start my day

I don't know if that's authentic, but that's my routine (it threw a lot of my ex-girlfriends roommates in college quite a bit which always made me laugh) I also make sure to have excellent posture, because I'm horrified of being immobile and hunchbacked when I'm old (I believe it's the first sign of death, a reversion to a more primitive form).Matbe the way I perform regular activities makes me authentic or a deviation or two away from the generally accepted measurements of inauthentic..

 

[QuickTwist]

I don't think I am really living an "authentic life", at least not how I picture what I think my authentic life looks like.

I'll list some things I am not doing that would prolly technically be "authentic" for me:

• No job.. Specifically, no job that is in somewhat of a technical field. Conversely to this, I think I would do well in a job that also incorporates motivating people and getting them to be at their best.
• Not much semblance in the way of a productive routine. I mean I have a routine that I do, but its not exactly hugely productive.
• Lack of balance in my life. I tend to do whatever it is that I am interested in giving 110% effort to that one thing, but then all my other interests get dropped in the process. Admittedly, I have gotten much better at this as I have gotten older.

Now I'll go through a few things that I think I do do authentically:

• Plenty of time to myself where I don't have to do anything except think. I have sever ADHD so giving myself a window of about 3-5 min where I can think every half hour or so is very healthy for me.
• Controlling my diet. I am kinda a nut when it comes to what I eat. I must make sure I am getting my proper macros for that day. I even do things like measure how much milk I drink.
• Regular exercise. I have a set routine I do 3 times a week and its very good for my mood and general quality of life for now and for the future.
• Social, yet anti-social interaction. I don't like talking to people IRL much. It takes too much energy to really connect with people in a meaningful way. This is why I think the internet is great. I can talk about what I want and read what people have to say about things I care about and its all within my control.

All this said with the outlook that my life will never be exactly as authentic as I would like. I tend to be a perfectionist when it comes to what I think is ideal, so in a way its forever pushing the boulder up the hill.

 

[Tannhauser]

All we do amounts to a continuous response to various stimuli, either external, or internal to the chemistry of out brain. We then invent stories about "why" we did what we did.

So to me, "authentic" is a word like "happiness". It's a void, meaningless category.

I.e. kinda what Rook said.

 

[Architect]

@Tannhauser @Rook

Seriously guys? OK fine, you work at a steel mill, you go home to your apartment which you share with all your in-laws, and spend the evening drinking beer, watching the sports channel and slowly going to pieces. That's authentic living for you?

There's an INTP disease called TiDOMination, not that rare but deadly.

 

[Cheeseumpuffs]

you work at a steel mill, you go home to your apartment which you share with all your in-laws, and spend the evening drinking beer, watching the sports channel and slowly going to pieces. That's authentic living for you?

What's not authentic about that?

 

[Architect]

What's not authentic about that?

Nothing.

I'm using it as a test - would those two feel they're living full, authentic, true to their inner needs in that life? If it is all just sensory data - all perfectly equivalent to each other, then that is as good as anything. Or living as a dog, or a slave, or a refugee ... The proof of the falseness of that idea is that nobody willingly is a slave or a refugee.

 

[Tannhauser]

Nothing.

I'm using it as a test - would those two feel they're living full, authentic, true to their inner needs in that life? If it is all just sensory data - all perfectly equivalent to each other, then that is as good as anything. Or living as a dog, or a slave, or a refugee ... The proof of the falseness of that idea is that nobody willingly is a slave or a refugee.

I don't understand. If you are a slave, then either you are content with that, or you are not content and strive to become free.

If you get into a car accident and become confined to a wheelchair, is it then impossible to live "authentically"?

I say there is no state in which a human being can be that defines him as living authentically or otherwise. He/she has no other choice than to think and do whatever thoughts and actions are imposed on them.

 

[Architect]

I don't understand. If you are a slave, then either you are content with that,

So the individual is living authentically in that case

or you are not content and strive to become free.

So they are living inauthentically, and so work to be in a place where they can live authentically. Is it really that hard?

If you get into a car accident and become confined to a wheelchair, is it then impossible to live "authentically"?

Maybe, it depends on the individual. My Uncle's biggest fear before he died was that he would become so old he couldn't travel. SP type, huge world traveler and sportsman. Not being able to get on a plane was a life he didn't want to live.

Personally I wouldn't like the wheelchair but would make it work, and it wouldn't be that hard because I'd have my computer and music.

I say there is no state in which a human being can be that defines him as living authentically or otherwise.

Ahh, bullshit. I'll stick you in a prison cell the rest of your life where you can do nothing but stand in one place (e.g. a telephone booth), feed you through a hole in the door and let you soil yourself for the rest of your days. Authentic living? Not for you, and I won't believe you otherwise. And not for all of humanity except perhaps some pathalogical examples.

 

[RaBind]

Seriously guys? OK fine, you work at a steel mill, you go home to your apartment which you share with all your in-laws, and spend the evening drinking beer, watching the sports channel and slowly going to pieces. That's authentic living for you?

Sounds unIntpish but I'm sure there are people out there who'd love such a lifestyle and it'd make them feel complete rather than slowly going to pieces. Although if the premise is that you're only talking to intps, this being intpforum, then I guess authenticity is somewhat valid.

From the example I guess you are talking about authentic in comparison to the general populace as opposed to other intps.

My lifestyle is as authentic as any other intp's. Wake up late, surf the internet looking for new interesting information to consume, do the minimal of all the maintenance chores and then rinse and repeat.

You could also say that I am perusing further authenticity through education. Build new software that produces novel things whatever the output may be is what I want to be doing.

Intps thought patterns separate them from other introverted types that share their cognitive functions, so I'm not too sure if focusing on authentic lifestyle vs thoughts is that great an idea. I realise that thought patterns affect behaviours and that in turn forms our lifestyle, but you might've noticed that I'm having trouble naming specific authentic behaviours. That might be because, as I say, intps aren't that authentic in their lifestyles or I'm not authentic as an individual anomaly.

 

[Architect]

Sounds unIntpish but I'm sure there are people out there who'd love such a lifestyle and it'd make them feel complete rather than slowly going to pieces.

Exactly! It's a simple point, everybody has their own definition of authentic living, I'm asking what that means to people, for them specifically, and instead we got into a clusterfuck of meaning.

 

[Joe13414]

So to me, "authentic" is a word like "happiness". It's a void, meaningless category.

Is it bad if I always thought that? I always thought of that about manners and "please and thank you"

For me living authentically is not living by social norms, I might be biased, I am in highschool, so I don't know much about living on my own. But I think living authentically is based off of living off of yourself, like feeding yourself, Living in your house w/o paying taxes and other shit. Like living completely off to yourself w/o having to be like other people. Life is not being a zombie of social norms and being part of a system to make you feel legit.

 

[QuickTwist]

I think one of the reasons why this thread started out badly is because we really haven't seen a thread like this from Architect before. What I mean is that it doesn't conform to our idea of what we see Architect as. Its much more philosophical in feel than the typical threads that Architect starts. But to be fair, it is in line with Architect's character in that it is narrowed in on the INTP conundrum and is a means to present what is typical for INTP's.

 

[Seteleechete]

For me authenticity is a mental rather than physical phenomenon. It doesn't matter how I live, as long as I remain self aware and truthful about myself and my sourroundings (good or bad). Like if I want to go on a "shallow" excursion or act fakely in social interaction that's fine, as long as I realise that is what I am doing and can answer to myself why I am doing it.(not that I want to do that, because it isn't very appealing to me but it's theoretically acceptable).

 

[Architect]

we really haven't seen a thread like this from Architect before

People are full of surprises

Its much more philosophical in feel than the typical threads that Architect starts.

I wavered on where to put it, seriously thought about the Philosophy section but because I wanted it to be more concrete put it in Psych/Neuro.

But to be fair, it is in line with Architect's character in that it is narrowed in on the INTP conundrum and is a means to present what is typical for INTP's.

But I didn't specify that I'm asking INTP's, anywhere, did I?

 

[cheese]

All we do amounts to a continuous response to various stimuli, either external, or internal to the chemistry of out brain. We then invent stories about "why" we did what we did.

So to me, "authentic" is a word like "happiness". It's a void, meaningless category.

I.e. kinda what Rook said.

It's not a meaningless category if some responses result in chemistry that fully supports continuously responding that way, and others don't, or only do partially. Then there's a clear basis for people inventing stories about their behaviour, because then behaviour isn't random but geared towards specific outcomes."Chemistry which fully supports continuously responding that way" could be termed "fulfilment", and "chemistry which supports responding in multiple conflicting ways" termed "inner conflict", and then each placed in authentic/inauthentic categories.

"Happiness" isn't a meaningless category either; it's several specific brain-states. And most people are set up to seek those brain states. Talking about it in the human/emotional/meaning-oriented way is just talking about an actual physical phenomenon from the subjective viewpoint of creatures driven to seek it. I don't really see a difference between the two except in levels (of abstraction).

Authentic living for me is:

Spoiler

Working out what I believe in then living in accordance with that. Unfortunately what I believe in tends to change a lot, so the best I can do is strive to be honest with myself at all times. This means no BS. You can BS anyone but yourself, in my view.

In that vein, I'd consider a conman who knows exactly what he's doing and why, and has squared it with himself, more authentic than a housewife living a life she hates but lying to herself about being happy to escape how she really feels. I'd also consider someone who's compelled to lie to themselves and create a bunch of fanciful stories for melodrama "authentic", if at some point they consciously knew they were doing it, then made the conscious choice to forget. Like choosing to go back into the Matrix, I guess.

So for me it's about awareness, which allows for honesty, which allows for conscious choice. The first step is building awareness, which is why introspection, learning to be mindful and processing everything I think/feel is important for me. I see this as a process of becoming more and more free. The less aware you are, the more your choices are imprisoned by compulsion and shadow motivations.

The big problem with all of this is that I can end up being brutally honest with myself but still not doing the things I'd love to do. Because once I'm honest I've fulfilled my requirement for avoiding self-hatred, right? So it's fine to not do anything valuable as long as I'm honest about it.

I think that's one way people like us fall into depression.

I experimented with lying to myself for a little while. I'd never known how to do it before, but I learnt the knack at some point. It allowed me to do more by avoiding my internal experience, but I stopped after a while because life became colourless. I think my memory suffered too (less internal processing meaning less gets moved to permanent storage?). I still think it might've been viable as a long-term strategy, but I'm not going down that road atm.

The other thing is that one self can die away and another can arise. So what's necessary for you to feel 'authentic' right now could be different in 10 years time, if enough happens to you. I never would've thought it possible for me to lie to myself, but part of the previous self's "honesty" is the willingness to admit when you're changing and allow it - so I did.

Maybe authenticity is about allowing whatever arises to arise. If it's passivity and peace, fine, if it's aggression and striving, fine. If it's not stymied, then there's no internal conflict.

 

[Ex-User (13503)]

If you do specific things to live authentically, you're not living authentically.

Just do what you want to do, which is usually what you enjoy. It's that simple.

 

[QuickTwist]

People are full of surprises

No argument here.

I wavered on where to put it, seriously thought about the Philosophy section but because I wanted it to be more concrete put it in Psych/Neuro.

Interesting..

But I didn't specify that I'm asking INTP's, anywhere, did I?

That is true, but I think it might be able to be inferred? Granted perhaps not in isolation to your other posts, but that is where my mind goes when I think of you starting a topic on a MBTI site specifically catering to INTP's.

 

[Architect]

That is true, but I think it might be able to be inferred? Granted perhaps not in isolation to your other posts, but that is where my mind goes when I think of you starting a topic on a MBTI site specifically catering to INTP's.

Yup, you're assumption, my first thought was to restrict it to INTP's but deliberately made it non-denominational.

 

[QuickTwist]

Yup, you're assumption, my first thought was to restrict it to INTP's but deliberately made it non-denominational.

That's why I gave my answer in the way I did without saying something like "I don't know for sure if I am INTP or not, but..." You didn't clarify that it was specifically for INTP's so I thought I would give my thoughts on it, because we don't really see too many threads like this by you.

 

[Tannhauser]

It's not a meaningless category if some responses result in chemistry that fully supports continuously responding that way, and others don't, or only do partially. Then there's a clear basis for people inventing stories about their behaviour, because then behaviour isn't random but geared towards specific outcomes."Chemistry which fully supports continuously responding that way" could be termed "fulfilment", and "chemistry which supports responding in multiple conflicting ways" termed "inner conflict", and then each placed in authentic/inauthentic categories.

You might say it's inauthentic to plan to do x, then do y, and then invent a story z about the whole thing. But that is to separate the process in the brain from physical events that we can observe. All that happened was: first you got an impulse to do x, then you got an impulse to do y, and then impulse to invent the story z.

It's all perfectly authentic.

 

[Sinny91]

I would say that I live authentically to an extent, because:

When we consider what mechanism may be most characteristic of lusty-vindictive character, we are struck by how this personality disposition gravitates in a direction opposite to the repression of instinctual life that Freud emphasized in the neurosis in general. Indeed, while the inhibition of sexuality is apparent in most characters (except in ennea-types II and to some extent VII) and the inhibition of aggression is even more generalized, it is the non-inhibition of these that characterize lusty impulsiveness.

http://personalitycafe.com/type-8-f...ranjos-character-neurosis-type-8-chapter.html

Plus what Sete said.

 

[redbaron]

The way authentic is being used is just interchangeable with being happy. Why conflate the two?

 

[cheese]

You might say it's inauthentic to plan to do x, then do y, and then invent a story z about the whole thing. But that is to separate the process in the brain from physical events that we can observe. All that happened was: first you got an impulse to do x, then you got an impulse to do y, and then impulse to invent the story z.

It's all perfectly authentic.

I haven't gotten across what I meant. I'm basically talking about homeostasis, and more or less saying it's the physical correlate of 'authenticity'. The mind will attempt to work itself into a state in which it's positive and stable, because internal conflict produces pain, and our brains are wired to avoid pain. If there're competing and conflicting drives, the mind is unstable, because the feedback following behaviour indulging any one drive will be both rewarding and punishing. So it tests out various behaviours till it finds ones that reliably produce maximum happiness and minimum fear/sadness/loss, because it's driven to seek pleasure and avoid pain. Whatever is 'authentic' to someone is what they find valuable/real/fulfilling, which is all code for pleasurable (in some fashion). Sometimes this will involve pain (struggle/challenge/damage/hurt) being reinterpreted as somehow pleasurable, so instead of avoiding pain they engage it.

Stories are a way we try to make sense of that process of being driven towards multiple things but having to choose a few which don't conflict with each other in order to produce a mind at peace with itself. Or even more simply, stories are the mind's attempt to integrate conflicting drives experienced over time, and encourage reward for higher-yield behaviour, till one general state prevails. Pain can be reinterpreted and become part of the authenticity/fulfillment map, which is how we end up with complex theories of authenticity. It also explains why authenticity is somewhat unique to each person, since each brain is different (and further modulated by varied experience) and achieves homeostasis differently.

Also, the process is lengthy. The example you gave is only one very limited segment of what that person's internal experience would be. It doesn't take into account the multiple other impulses which were likely co-occurring and the attempts at minimising dissonance, nor the success of such an attempt and whether it produced a higher and higher incidence of pro-happiness behaviour. Over time (I think) there would be significant correlations between impulses and the states produced, rather than the seemingly random and causally unconnected sequence you suggested. In a person getting happier and "more in touch with themselves", we should see more and more impulses towards certain behaviour and fewer and fewer conflicting impulses. I don't imagine you're denying the feedback mechanism the brain works on. Homeostasis/authenticity takes time to achieve and isn't something that is observed in an instant - thus the problem with discussing authenticity in very limited time-contexts.

When we discuss authenticity on the human level and bemoan our inability to be honest in our daily lives, or to take risks to do something we desire, or take off our social masks (and conversely when we talk about how wonderful it is when we do that and how much better we feel and how good it is to be 'real' and 'just be ourselves') we're really just talking reward and punishment in a complex, multilayered form which unfolds over time. (And reward/punishment is simply impulse-proliferating vs impulse-annihilating - complexity like, "But sometimes I want to do things which really hurt me but also feel good!" enters into it because impulses are many and varied, because the brain is an ad-hoc learning machine.)

Radical acceptance is a fascinating look at how disengaging the 'avoid' response can lead to a feeling of authenticity and fulfillment. You 'fully feel' all your emotions, which means switching off the desire to escape negative ones by burying them. As a result, your mind experiences less conflict and you're more rewarded for accepting pain; you're also rewarded for knowing yourself better (all kinds of mental scripts set the mind up for self-knowledge producing reward).

Hope this makes sense; it's what I think anyway.

 

[bvanevery]

I don't allow others to make decisions about how I will live my life. For instance, no boss. No job. No requirement to show up to work. No landlord. Very few bills, just auto insurance and registration, dog license. I take this material freedom and then try to use it to advance what I think are my own goals, which currently are inventing a programming language, and possibly Art. However those goals are difficult and I often question whether I'm wasting my time. But at least it is my time to waste, my mistakes to make. I am not beholden to anyone else's direciton in life, only my own decisions. I have the full power to decide; that is what makes my life authentic.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

There are some activities I still haven't tried, places I still haven't traveled to, and accomplishments I'm still working on, so there's a list my life is being compared to that makes me feel in unfulfilled.

Yet I have tried to enjoy life in the meantime, like I attended the Hollywood halloween monster walks and dubstep shows despite not knowing anyone who also enjoyed those and wanted to join me. It didn't matter because I'd go for myself and just have my own fun.

Ideally I'd probably be a forest ranger in the Pacific Northwest, and that is still a possible goal for me but otherwise I'm content with focusing on personal and professional development, and ultimately being employed in my major for some years so that I could do all those other things listed above. In the end though life is life and I may not get to do it all but I believe even my elderly self would respect that I tried.

 

[redbaron]

I don't allow others to make decisions about how I will live my life. For instance, no boss. No job. No requirement to show up to work. No landlord. Very few bills, just auto insurance and registration, dog license. I take this material freedom and then try to use it to advance what I think are my own goals, which currently are inventing a programming language, and possibly Art. However those goals are difficult and I often question whether I'm wasting my time. But at least it is my time to waste, my mistakes to make. I am not beholden to anyone else's direciton in life, only my own decisions. I have the full power to decide; that is what makes my life authentic.

Yer I remember when I lived at home too.

I still don't know why we're pretending that "living authentically" is a phrase with meaning. It's like this clothing shop that sells "sustainable" clothing and has the tagline, "uniquely ethical" - what the fuck does that even mean?

 

[redbaron]

But here's an unrelated list specific things I do that I like to do, which somehow makes them authentic because fuck the dictionary:

- I've come to find great satisfaction in my ability to lift heavy things and put them back down again. Then after a short break, I lift up more heavy things and put them back down again.
- My job is to tell other people how to be less-shit at their jobs. Apparently I'm not-bad at making other people not-bad at their jobs. I get some sort of rewarding feeling when someone not-good becomes less not-good and even maybe becomes not-shit. So that's cool.
- I pretend I'm a cat and play with my cats daily.

#3authentic5u

 

[Architect]

I define authentic living as optimally living, as near as you can get there.

I don't allow others to make decisions about how I will live my life.

What about family/friends? Do they pressure you to live some particular way?

And is having a job really being told how to live? Or is it an exchange - your time and energy for money?

There are some activities I still haven't tried, places I still haven't traveled to, and accomplishments I'm still working on, so there's a list my life is being compared to that makes me feel in unfulfilled.

But are you living life on your own terms? By my definition above you may have some level of unhappiness or dissatisfaction, but you still may be living authentically.

 

[EditorOne]

Maybe a reboot? Rather than "authentic", perhaps it helps to think instead of "satisfying" or "fulfilled" and specifically in terms of your personality needs.

To what extent are you living a life that meets your needs as an INTP?

Because "authentic," while perfectly fine, can be taken in the limited, literal sense of "the real" or "the original".

In any event, more-or-less retirement means I can interact with people or not according to my own inclinations rather than the world's, which is, it turns out for me, half the battle, timing. There is enough money to live carefully, pursue various interests, and so far the health care system has proven up to the challenge for a new knee, a nerve relocation, and, very recently, a stent. So I would say that my core INTP need is roughly defined as some odd sort of autonomy, I've got it, and I'm pretty satisfied. Any dissatisfactions seem to be some kind of First World material inadequacies, which I tend to think of as artificial ("nonauthentic") and unworthy to boot.


Architect, was that to the point?

 

[EyeSeeCold]

But are you living life on your own terms? By my definition above you may have some level of unhappiness or dissatisfaction, but you still may be living authentically.

In the sense that I'm moving closer to my ideal, yes. But 'on my terms' can be seen as untrue depending on viewpoint, like working for a boss you don't like, or living in a city you don't like, or even having to exist on this earth as perishable essence(and not embarking on interstellar journeys). I suppose the concept is inherently subjective.


Absurdity presented a similar thread you can peruse if didn't find any of the responses here adequate or authentic.

 

[Sinny91]

I still don't know why we're pretending that "living authentically" is a phrase with meaning. It's like this clothing shop that sells "sustainable" clothing and has the tagline, "uniquely ethical" - what the fuck does that even mean?

Well it's open to interpretation, I don't know why anyone would bother debating the "correct" meaning.

Just answer with your bloody interpretation.

 

[bvanevery]

Yer I remember when I lived at home too.

Roofs and landlords are overrated. They create an enormous amount of economic pressure on people. Lots of people have trouble keeping up with that and also realizing any personal goals they have. This is by design: rent extracts human energy for the benefit of the landlord. The main reason people live in permanent housing is fear, like of being robbed or raped or murdered. There are other societal ways to deal with those fears than building a 'castle', but permanent housing is the status quo of how people envision the solutions. Real estate brokers sell "the American dream" and so forth, because again it extracts human energy for the benefit of the salesperson. People for the most part don't have the ideological tools to formulate and decide cultural visions for themselves.

A step in the right direction is the "tiny homes" movement, although in practice it's still a toy of relatively affluent people. A $45k tiny home may be cheap for a house, but it buys an awful lot of car, van, or RV by comparison.

I still don't know why we're pretending that "living authentically" is a phrase with meaning. It's like this clothing shop that sells "sustainable" clothing and has the tagline, "uniquely ethical" - what the fuck does that even mean?

"Sustainable" is a defineable term, and definitely has relevance to living authentically. I cannot tolerate other people bossing me around and determining my destiny. Lifestyles that allow me to keep making my own decisions and advance my own goals are sustainable. Those that put me at the mercy of others are not. I am not a slave, and I'm not alive to be a slave. Nor am I here merely to survive and toil.

"Uniquely" ethical may be gibberish, but "ethical" is certainly a defineable term. People's ethics aren't going to be the same though.

 

[bvanevery]

What about family/friends? Do they pressure you to live some particular way?

Parents, not usually. I've occasionally caught a judgmental subtext from my Dad, but mostly it's not really a problem.

My sisters, I think they judge me more. But they are younger than I am, they are women, and IMO they don't have the life experience to understand what's driving me.

I've had to jettison a couple of friends who couldn't knock off the judging, or realize how they were projecting their own fears rather than considering any of my actual problems or goals. People who think they are "saving you", but are really just berating you, get old.

I have friends, so jettisoning a few who refuse to "get it", isn't a national tragedy. Actually in all cases that readily spring to mind, their own personal demons and inability to make and keep friends, are the real tragedies. But I'm nobody's doormat and at at some point I'm going to insist on psychological health in a friendship. A stream of abuse isn't health, and such a person can figure out their own baggage on their own time. I'm generous and pretty good at helping people with their own perspectives and problems, but there comes a point at which enough is enough. People gotta pull their own weight and not just seek to burden others with their drama.

And is having a job really being told how to live? Or is it an exchange - your time and energy for money?

Yes a job usually is. The contract you sign with someone, is typically an agreement to monopolize a large chunk of your time. People who work full time usually don't have a lot of energy left over to do much else. If the job doesn't exactly advance what you want to be doing, then it is wasting your time. Frankly, you're going to die. All those hours that others seek to use up for their benefit, you're not getting back. And a pile of money, often doesn't help with any Existential goals either. Unless one just loves fondling the greenbacks, in which case, one has a 'kink' that I certainly don't have.

If a job fits your personal goals and advances what you want to be doing with yourself, by all means take it. Hey your dream might be to run a nuclear reactor. By all means take the job that lets you do that then. Not every activity in existence is a self-employed DIY kind of thing.

But if the job isn't what you actually want to be doing, and you're holding onto it because of all the scary things you think are going to happen when that monetary input runs out... consider removing your golden handcuffs. Been there, done that, during the dot.com bust. For someone who was supposed to be 'dead' when the credit cards ran out, 6 months later I found I was still very much alive. So although unpleasant, it clearly wasn't the level of crisis I had imagined it to be.

Oh, word of caution. Getting someone pregnant and having kids to support, is not a way to ensure control over your own destiny. You have to support those kids and it will partly determine your actions. For better or worse that's not my problem. I'm disappointed that I haven't started a family by now, but what's done is done and I can live with it. I at least have more time to pursue my own goals.

 

[Architect]

To what extent are you living a life that meets your needs as an INTP?

Sure, or whoever you happen to be

In any event, more-or-less retirement means I can interact with people or not according to my own inclinations rather than the world's, which is, it turns out for me, half the battle, timing.

What do you mean by 'timing'? As in, you get to choose the time and duration of your interactions?

So I would say that my core INTP need is roughly defined as some odd sort of autonomy, I've got it, and I'm pretty satisfied.

Autonomy seems to rate high on the INTP's 'true to oneself' meter.

Any dissatisfactions seem to be some kind of First World material inadequacies, which I tend to think of as artificial ("nonauthentic") and unworthy to boot.

Interesting, they're pretty high with me. Just comfort and ease of living, such as having a house that is easy to take care of, enough space for my hobbies, etc. Might also be because of having been with an INFJ who has obsessed about her home life (Se inferior) for her whole life.

Architect, was that to the point?

Thanks -

 

[Kuu]

The way authentic is being used is just interchangeable with being happy. Why conflate the two?

I'm a bit late to the party but count me among the naysayers. It seems to me that "authentic" is just an arbitrary and vague category used in place of more specific concepts, therefore either meaninglessly ambiguous, or redundant.

People can be honest or dishonest, confused or contradictory, things can feel good or bad, one can be entertained or bored...
But what the hell is being "authentic"?

Maybe a reboot? Rather than "authentic", perhaps it helps to think instead of "satisfying" or "fulfilled" and specifically in terms of your personality needs.

To what extent are you living a life that meets your needs as an INTP?

Because "authentic," while perfectly fine, can be taken in the limited, literal sense of "the real" or "the original".

Yes, there's an implication with "authentic" that there is a "one true way" one can be/live, and others are "false". This seems to be based on a mysterious invariant quality, an essentialist, platonic idealism that most people here seem to reject.

I suppose the rejection of such concept comes from holding a monistic, materialist ontology. Therefore the process of life, as another materialist process, cannot be anything but "authentic".

Concepts are true or false. Things just are, or aren't.

If we're going to talk about things that please me or make me feel satisfied in some manner, I guess we'd have to start with being annoying on the internet about ambiguous concepts

 

[EditorOne]

Quote:
"In any event, more-or-less retirement means I can interact with people or not according to my own inclinations rather than the world's, which is, it turns out for me, half the battle, timing."
"What do you mean by 'timing'? As in, you get to choose the time and duration of your interactions?"

Precisely, as I'm more often handling those things when it's comfortable, not when I'm forced to interact by a job, etc.



Kuu: By virtue of one of my hobbies, living history, I immediately default to the meaning of "authentic" as "the original." I have an original Civil War Enfield; it is authentic. I also have a modern reproduction. It is not authentic. So I had to immediately search for other words because I was trapped in an irrelevant paradigm. :-) Actually, "trapped in an irrelevant paradigm" is an INTP's natural condition, is it not?

 

[Analyzer]

Being able to say and think what I want and when I want.

 

[Tannhauser]

Sartre had the idea of bad faith, which maybe is closer to what Architect is aiming at. It is living your life telling yourself that the way you are could not have been otherwise, that you were/are not free to chose any other fate. In short moments you might realize that this is actually not true, generating a lot of cognitive dissonance and pain. Shortly after you tell yourself: I have to do this and that because I have to pay my bills etc, and the realization is forgotten for the time being.

The idea of bad faith might sound reasonable but I dunno. How can you "choose" anything other than what you actually choose and chose in the past? It seems to introduce some abstract concept of freedom that is not really apparent.

Fuck, I might have to read Sartre and Camus all over again.

 

[E404]

I define authentic living as optimally living, as near as you can get there.

What about family/friends? Do they pressure you to live some particular way?

And is having a job really being told how to live? Or is it an exchange - your time and energy for money?

But are you living life on your own terms? By my definition above you may have some level of unhappiness or dissatisfaction, but you still may be living authentically.

By this definition I do not live authentically, but I do more so than I used to.

I went from spending a lot of my life in a job just because I wanted to prove people wrong, a relationship that told me where I could/n't go, what I could/n't wear and do, who I could/n't see, when I should/n't sleep, eat, etc, to now. Everything I did up to last year or so was for someone else.

Now, I have accepted that I am who I am. I quit the job I hated. I don't love the one I'm currently in, but I'm not doing it for anyone else.
*Since I'm not happy with it, I'm still searching for something I love to replace it. In the meantime, I'm adult-ing since I love traveling, want my own home, love buying books, have bills... I also am willing to pay bills because I'm willing to have the pleasurable things they bring.

I moved across the state and ended the possessive relationship. It's taken time to feel "allowed" to do certain things, but I'm getting there.

In moving I've stayed with relatives for a few months to get me back on my feet. I feel pressure from them to be doing certain things, and I find myself fighting old habits of people pleasing. It's harder for me to say no when I'm receiving something generous (i.e. letting me live with them for free...). I even felt obliged to budget the way they wanted me to. Other relatives pressure me to be in relationships, get certain jobs, work certain hours, etc. I've decided they are going to have to learn to love me whether I do what they want or not.

With my body, I used to hate my body. I wanted to change it because I thought other people thought I was ugly. I was embarrassed next to "beautiful people". I'm now in a place where I love my body, I think I'm beautiful, don't care if others don't, but I can still want to change it. That might not make sense, but it feels good.

I'm doing things for me and not everyone will understand that.

Sometimes the hardest part is knowing what I actually want and allowing myself to want it...

 

[E404]

Sartre had the idea of bad faith, which maybe is closer to what Architect is aiming at. It is living your life telling yourself that the way you are could not have been otherwise, that you were/are not free to chose any other fate. In short moments you might realize that this is actually not true, generating a lot of cognitive dissonance and pain. Shortly after you tell yourself: I have to do this and that because I have to pay my bills etc, and the realization is forgotten for the time being.

The idea of bad faith might sound reasonable but I dunno. How can you "choose" anything other than what you actually choose and chose in the past? It seems to introduce some abstract concept of freedom that is not really apparent.

Fuck, I might have to read Sartre and Camus all over again.

Oddly this reminds me of Candide by Voltaire.

 

[Tannhauser]

Oddly this reminds me of Candide by Voltaire.

Interesting reference. I should read that too.

 

[Ex-User (13503)]

But what the hell is being "authentic"?

Being authentic is not being trapped or dominated by one's Jungian persona or a manifestation of Winnicott's false self; it's being self-actualized.

 

[Architect]

I feel pressure from them to be doing certain things, and I find myself fighting old habits of people pleasing. It's harder for me to say no when I'm receiving something generous (i.e. letting me live with them for free...). I even felt obliged to budget the way they wanted me to. Other relatives pressure me to be in relationships, get certain jobs, work certain hours, etc. I've decided they are going to have to learn to love me whether I do what they want or not.

Yes, relatives are usually a problem

Sometimes the hardest part is knowing what I actually want and allowing myself to want it...

Perfectly said, you just made my tagline. I'd add as a part of allowing yourself, is 'not to feel bad about living on your terms'

 

[Architect]

Being authentic is not being trapped or dominated by one's Jungian persona or a manifestation of Winnicott's false self; it's being self-actualized.

Self actualized in Maslows version is basically

A self-actualizer is a person who is living creatively and fully using his or her potentials.

Our Type is one of our potentials so embracing that would be a major component of self actualization.

The Jungian version of that is individuation

Individuation is a process of psychological differentiation, having for its goal the development of the individual personality. In general, it is the process by which individual beings are formed and differentiated; in particular, it is the development of the psychological individual as a being distinct from the general, collective psychology.

But your comment is interesting; do people get 'trapped' by their Jungian persona? I see people who don't express it well or well enough, and people who haven't transcended their type (e.g. integrated their stack), but I'm doubtful that anybody is trapped by their type.

 

[Ex-User (13503)]

But your comment is interesting; do people get 'trapped' by their Jungian persona? I see people who don't express it well or well enough, and people who haven't transcended their type (e.g. integrated their stack), but I'm doubtful that anybody is trapped by their type.

Yes, by external forces, typically in early childhood. Everyone has a persona and an attachment skew, but with high stress exposure people develop attachment disorders, and type dictates the manifestation and in turn the manifestation of false self that it creates. For INTPs, this is dismissive-avoidant, INFPs, anxious-avoidant, etc. I actually don't think the taxonomy of attachment has been fully fleshed out, so I can't correlate all types.

But anyway, those lucky folks get to experience Dabrowski's version: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_disintegration

Might be worth reading for folks interested in introductory stuff. Pretty bloggy though: http://www.mind-development.eu/ego-autonomy.html

 

[E404]

Interesting reference. I should read that too.

It's very interesting. I found myself glued to it and the ending should not have been a surprise, though it was to me.

I'd add as a part of allowing yourself, is 'not to feel bad about living on your terms'

Once you're okay with people not accepting or liking the way you live, it gets fairly easy. In my experience that is. It can be difficult to feel like it's okay if you've been made to feel bad for wanting something.

Being authentic is not being trapped or dominated by one's Jungian persona or a manifestation of Winnicott's false self; it's being self-actualized.

But your comment is interesting; do people get 'trapped' by their Jungian persona? I see people who don't express it well or well enough, and people who haven't transcended their type (e.g. integrated their stack), but I'm doubtful that anybody is trapped by their type.

Not sure if this is exactly where this was going, but my question would be if people react differently because they know their type? By thinking they can't do something or should do something because that's the way their X function works.

 

[Architect]

Once you're okay with people not accepting or liking the way you live, it gets fairly easy. In my experience that is. It can be difficult to feel like it's okay if you've been made to feel bad for wanting something.

I just don't like causing trouble. Drenth has a good bit on this, pointing out that our inferior Fe operates as a 'disharmony avoider' function since its in the inferior. True for me, I feel the need to do things that piss people off (e.g. miss family events), but mainly want to avoid disharmony (e.g. "don't sweat it, I'll just show up now and again")

 

[E404]

I just don't like causing trouble. Drenth has a good bit on this, pointing out that our inferior Fe operates as a 'disharmony avoider' function since its in the inferior. True for me, I feel the need to do things that piss people off (e.g. miss family events), but mainly want to avoid disharmony (e.g. "don't sweat it, I'll just show up now and again")

Would you say you like to do things that piss people off passively? Missing family events is not a direct contact activity. I'm asking out of curiosity, not judgement.