Lacking a sense of self, "authenticity"

[Rebis]

I think I've had a tumultuous life, I'm sure no different than others. However, what I do know is my personality identity has fluctuated far more than any other person I've seen, I would say this is distinct from mania where you have cycles between depression and euphoria.

Currently my peers were getting ready for our formal, I didn't have the privilege of getting a ticket and didn't feel like going to the after-party, though looking at it now I'd probably meet quite a few people in my class, but that involves alcohol which isn't happening.

I feel lonely, deeply lonely and empty. I don't think I ever crafted a concrete identity for myself: sure, people change but my change seems to be vastly radical: As a kid I was considered very emotional and sensitive, my mum suggested I should be a nurse/doctor. As I got older, I started playing video games and hanging around with people who played football. I played Gaelic (Irish sport) for a while and quit because I had this tendency to distance myself.

Even at the age of 7-8 I remember I would usually sit within 15-20 metres of my school-group. I'd have friends come over and ask for me to sit with them, sometimes I would but sometimes I wouldn't. I would go around a lot of people too, pick people I wanted to talk to on the day. I didn't stay in my lane, so to speak. I'd hang around with hooligans, a group of girls and gays, gamers

In high-school this was also the same, but with more people: Nerds, gamers, top-school performers, national athletes, so-called "emos" or edgy teens, The gossip group that smoked fegs all the time, people that played football all the time, groups of foreign people, metalheads; so on so forth. I jumped from all of these distinct groups of people on rotation, I wouldn't attribute it to a development cycle where one precedes the next. These were rotational.

I had a few online relationships one was mildly successful but I had built up such a persona that when i met them the disparity between my behaviour was night and day. An online persona I could fabricate; I was so analytical during this time, I'd call myself a social manipulator really: I'd remember everyone's posts, the date they posted it, the pictures they uploaded with a flawless memory, the timeline/sequence of their development, mapping out what stage of life they were at, understanding their humour, relationships, behaviour, intelligence all from a computer screen. They would tell me about stories they had and I'd already have known what happened through a facebook video they uploaded six years ago. During this time, practically everyone I had met I had already studied their life and put pieces together from other people's profiles/posts and friends.

Along with this I was getting involved with the online community of scene-kids, inept autists, ego-ridden teens,I'd start to build up this vast network which was fundamentally "This person learnt this word/argument/phrase from this person" kind of creating a hierarchy of knowledge in this community. I'd know so much about them while remaining anonymous. When we'd chat years later most of their "fame" would be known to me.
I went through various A levels, all with their own culture: Politics students, sociology, biology, chemistry, maths squad, Economics, business , philosophy. ACCOUNTING, for 2 months.

And then hanging around with groups of English/artsy people, fashion students, woke psychologists "basically it's sex", christians, heavy socialists, people that went broke going to gigs every week. It's just so much fucking people, concepts and groups I've been a part of and now it's more than ever prominent: I talk to such an array of groups that I have no group identity.

I never cultivated an identity to fit into a group function. I am constantly recreating myself that I haven't stuck around a group in an intimate way and really absorbed their culture: They're in solidarity with another, they're forming long and deep bonds with each other. It's more than friendships, it's inhabiting a group identity, forming their own "culture" themselves. And to that I am absent of. With many of these groups I go out to meet-ups and such but I never place myself in a state of permanence. I'm always in this position where people value me, I am thought of somewhat highly given that I'm invited to exclusive events without being part of their group, but I never become part of something other than myself. I am my own man, but a man without solidifying himself in a culture, a means of living. But through becoming your own man you become independent, you become lonely, self-determining; all that which is the self. You are **only** yourself.

I have, in a way, rejected invitations to any group that welcomed me. They have became social, I have became asocial. They have invited me to build a world with them, a collective pursuit and I have rejected this. They have shared their traits with each other: They have helped each other to deal with emotions, stress, ambition, school-work, money, transportation, so on and so forth. I have internalised the vast amount of my existence to others. And to that, I'm starting to think the issue is that becoming independence is really an ambition of omniscience; to encompass all, to burden none, to be divinely infallible. To differentiate yourself from what makes us human; co-operation. I firmly believe most conversations are predicated on an exchange; an exchange of wisdom, psychological phenomena a person possesses, a curiosity driving self-improvement, necessity for a skill they do not own. Mutual aid, the great basis of species at large. If you become independent what I think is actually happening is you lose a sense of your self because all that which usually inhabits the world you have taken into yourself, so you have became the world and the totality of all things, while the self pertains to a spatial region in the world. Your sense of self is lost because there is less markets to compare to. You are not the nodes of a nexus but the diagram itself. Thus, you lose the relevancy of your self if you look too far into yourself, and you lose it if you become too integral to group functionality. It seems that the phrase "Balance is key", will exist long into the future.

It's lonely, and I can only see myself following this path into irreletable oblivion. I've had people mention that someone seen me, they had matched with me on tinder, yada yada: A lot of people mentioning me in 3rd person when I come off as cold, distant and non-communicative when I'm by myself. So to project an aura where so much people know who I am is baffling sometimes. I feel like a "lost" king. Perhaps the king that never took his crown, or the king of atlantis where the inhabitants number a total of : 1.

Like the original parable of human's creating by Prometheus where each model-human consisted of 2 faces, 4 arms and 4 legs: The anatomy of the proto-human before splitting in two, they had two faces on the same body. This is a metaphor for this type of unity: We can decide to explore our whole unbridled self down to the last atom in our bodies forming a complete independence of the world through unity, or we can allow ourselves to manifest our other half in people that exist independently of us. How can there be room for others if I have already unified myself? If the "self" is an object and that object is full (whole), there is no way in which another person can occupy your wholly filled "self", thus you will not find meaning from the external world through reclusion. If you want to find meaning in talking to others, you must deunionize all the behaviours in the world from your self, or at the least you must not strive to become independent from the world if you want to be part of it. You're either in or out.

 

[Rebis]

We talk of the world as if there's 1, it's a singularity. Yet, we create so many subjective worlds in our head that there's no pretense to ignore them. If I live in the world of subjectivity, that world is part of the objective world. My behaviour derived from the subjectivity changes the objectivity. And to that, we can have many subjective worlds all influencing the nature of reality. The objective world is composed of the total sum of all our subjective worlds, to that we must inhabit the real world, not the subjective one, because at the very least we know that our subjective world is an object inside the objective world but not vice versa. The objective world contains all possibilities.

 

[Rebis]

And thus madness seeps into the mind: To contain the sum-total of behaviours and attributes inside your head is only going to lead to various juxtapositions within the self. To contain such a feat inside of your head could only drive the sane man to madness.

 

[Rebis]

I think some of this could be considered rambling. However, I think metaphysical issues are things you can translate using intuitive, that which pertains to yourself can only be represented in the unconscious, that which you access through intuition. There is some information lost in translation as words and ideas are different for all of us, though to dismiss that which is not understood well for favour of simplicity doesn't access our unconscious. We must let intuition take us over to unlock that which is imperceptible to the conscious self.

 

[Black Rose]

Wiki - Automatic writing

or psychography is a claimed psychic ability allowing a person to produce written words without consciously writing. The words purportedly arise from a subconscious, spiritual or supernatural source.

You have to be able to let go of control well operating in the subjective world. Realizing all is subjective to you in the first place resistance stops. Like daydreaming, it simply just happens. That is the point, just let life happen automatically. Give into your spirit. make peace with everything. And you can do anything naturally.

 

[EndogenousRebel]

We are the universe experiencing itself. From singularity to entropic heat death, we are all a part of the same shattered glass pane. It seems to me you are trying to be some sort of meta thing connected to all pieces of the pane. Who am I to say that this is a pointless endeavor. I will tell you that it is a difficult one, but you are entitled to continue that venture until you are satisfied. I've noticed phases of being that age groups are going through. Some people never grow up, not uniformly anyways, they fall in love or over-rely on models of the world "they've created" and are in a loop of dissatisfaction endlessly. They can only help themselves. I think by the time they are 40, a lot of people have their lives figured out, though obviously there are exceptions. I'm not saying that you are in this group or anything, I am just pointing to the fact that you will grow out of it (or into it?)

You want to have your cake and eat it too, you've realized that detachment is key to optimization and holistic integration, as well as just plain making things easier. Maybe you need to realize that dependency and attachment have their benefits too. Though you may have calloused the parts of you that will make you strive for outside security, some sort of changing of perspective is needed. You have an issue with universalism right?), so I'm not gonna play into that. You want to be seen as nobility, and let me tell you that if you aren't already abusing the aforementioned channels you are in, then it's either because you have some sort of fear, or you truly are noble. Those are my vacuous thoughts, hope it rings something in you

 

[nanook]

Forgive any dullness and projections that may follow.

I haven't written here in a long time, but opportunities to talk about this subject are rare and of highest significance, so i break my silence.

I envy your extroverted abilities, but can relate to your inner struggle. Not sure if i can add insight or if i will just reframe the wording of it all.

What you describe resembles introverted thinking in the context of extroversion (entp). Its also known as enneagram seven. Introverted thinking is technically shizoid, but this word is not commonly applied to extroverts. The enneagram is ahead of psychology in having made many attempts to describe the phenomenon of extroverted shizoid conditions, that is ignored by psychology. I intuit they would attempt to lump such a condition in as subset of borderline, at the psychopathic end of the spectrum, a spectrum ranging from infj to entp, which makes no sense: they are just hopelessly stupid for ignoring typology.

In essences the enneagram describe a person who creates their adventures without inhibition and feels at liberty to avoids any attachment to any one setup.

There is a conditioned vulnerability/injury in the quality of extroverted feeling relationships (called eternal child) which inspires an avoidance of felt relationship.

There is often a "narcissistic" quality to it, because of the disowning and projection of ones own original injury within relationship, which misconstrues the more loyal bonds of others as a weakness of theirs, rather than a strength. Reversely ones own detachment and disloyalty is idealized as a superior darwinian cleverness.

Your extroverted condition is ordinary and useful and thus society has no interest in pathologizing it.

You can perhaps understand this auxiliary introverted aspect of your psyche better, by reading about shizoids and drawing inspiration only from the abstract essence of what is being said.

But most of what is written about shizoids is just stupid nonsense, afaik. Can't recommend a text. Something i read recently was a book called the "divided self". It covers a wide range of examples but no extroverted examples. Kinda annoying read.

Its typically extrovert, how you seek or create the sense of self within your interaction with the world and your meaning/importance to your environment and yet you begin to miss a coherency in this idea of self, when your interaction/meaning becomes too fleeting, playful, and exchangeable.

You can't easily and comfortably move the whole self-principle into your auxiliary introversion, your extroverted brain is not wired for that.

In contrast an introvert brain seeks or creates its whole sense of self within the organization of his ideas and would only begin to miss a coherency in this idea of self, when becoming extremely confused about those ideas, due to suggestive input, originating from disturbing interactions with others. Or dementia maybe.

In contrast, this purely subjective (introverted) sense or experience of self becomes stronger, when one discards all extroverted personas or ambitions or meanings to others, which only serve to limit, what this introverted mind is capable of dedicating itself to.

But this sense of self or any image of it is not recognizable to extroverts, as a self. Its not a persona, by definition. That doesn't phase an introvert.

He feels strong as a thinker, genius in the making. He can grow quite a hubris, feeling on the top of his game of pure and possibly subjective ideas.

(Albeit in the case of ISTP the fact oriented ideas of Se are actually quite measurable and demonstrable, like math, physics, mechanics, carpentry, but Ne is pure philosophy/psychology/mysticism/sociology/etc).

While loosing all control over / engagement within his external/material life.

So that is me, as far as i can tell.

As pleasing as pure introversion is, the feeling of loosing a consistent extroverted persona is extremely scary, because then we are at risk of accidentally, spontaneously manifesting primitive fluctuations of authentic emotion (pure anger directed at abstract attitudes, invisible to concrete people), instead of well a filtered, groomed character. The world would describe this as paranoid/psychotic violence. Best case: Rebel without a cause.


Further down into your post, some of what you says sounds more introverted.

"You lose the relevancy of your self if you look too far into yourself, and you lose it if you become too integral to group functionality"

Here you seem to speak of extroverted feeling taking over (binding you loyalty to a group's expectations), suffocating the tactical freedom of introverted thinking (the relevancy of your self) and extroverted intuition.

That is an introverted thinking experience.

I might have experienced this in my family of origin or within romantic relationships, depending on the nature of my contribution to the relationship. It happens when i choose to limit my thinking to filtering out, what could disturb the intents of my interlocutor, instead of contributing it as suggestion.

Then my experience becomes dominated by interaction but remote controlled by the thinking of another. So i feel like a baby inside of myself: i experience subtle degrees of depersonalisation or derealization. And my interlocutor becomes dominating like a big sister, mother, god.

I can only speculate that it might be ideal, if we could expand our sense or function of self to encompass both introversion and extroversion at all times, but it seems that would require, aside from a trillion of new neurons, a letting go of self-image, as the image of a thinker and the image of an actor are categorically distinct and in conflict.

We can desire psychological ideals, but cannot make them happen. Those trillions of new neurons will either grow or not. Personally i have no hope, as i observe much dementia in progress. Under these conditions, letting go of images doesn't do much good. It only causes more dysfunciton. I can't bother to beat myself up over how poorly functional i am and that is as awake as anyone can really get out of seemingly own volition. That other business is called growing up and its pure biology, taking credit for it is just more narcissism.

 

[Rebis]

In contrast an introvert brain seeks or creates its whole sense of self within the organization of his ideas and would only begin to miss a coherency in this idea of self, when becoming extremely confused about those ideas, due to suggestive input, originating from disturbing interactions with others. Or dementia maybe.

In contrast, this purely subjective (introverted) sense or experience of self becomes stronger, when one discards all extroverted personas or ambitions or meanings to others, which only serve to limit, what this introverted mind is capable of dedicating itself to.

I needed to hear this. I think I feel great inferiority to others: I tend to forget that everyone makes a choose to develop a particular hobby/knowledge base, so when I meet someone that questions my omniscience (as a structure where anything I become aware of that I don't know.)I seek to understand it, thus restoring the feeling of omniscience. Evidently, omniscience is fickle and a few ideas people convey to me that I didn't already know makes me feel inferior because I can't take agency in that discussion. I am left vulnerable.

But this sense of self or any image of it is not recognizable to extroverts, as a self. Its not a persona, by definition. That doesn't phase an introvert.

He feels strong as a thinker, genius in the making. He can grow quite a hubris, feeling on the top of his game of pure and possibly subjective ideas.

(Albeit in the case of ISTP the fact oriented ideas of Se are actually quite measurable and demonstrable, like math, physics, mechanics, carpentry, but Ne is pure philosophy/psychology/mysticism/sociology/etc).

While loosing all control over / engagement within his external/material life.

So that is me, as far as i can tell.

I share the same perspective.
I feel stronger, and I know myself to becoming stronger: If you compare yourself to the goalpost set by others you will forever be chasing their shadow. To eliminate stimulus regarding competition you can pursue the self you wish to know, while operating socially. All of my amazement have been when someone says something I don't, even though it may be a few things it's a drastic shift in reality for me. I forgot the context of my own evolution and solely focus on their knowledge base. If I meet them the next time having learnt what they told me, and they tell me something I don't know I feel like I'm back at square 1. It's either I know or I don't. If I don't know, regardless of what it is I feel like I'm at square 1.

I used to have this alienation towards people working: When I didn't have a job I felt that people with a job were on a whole different level of consciousness than me. I was nothing. I've had to experience all variations within a job: Being the most significant worker, being the relaxed one, the happy one, workaholic on top of college. I had to experience all these things because I felt that if someone else was a workaholic and I wasn't, I could not relate. I was nothing and they were something. It kinda drives me insane: I think about working as a barman to capture the social essence of a barman, becoming a work-machine in a professional environment to experience the grind. Everything I observe that I'm not familiar with is approached with an eer of mysticism, some key secret to reality I have yet to understand.

As pleasing as pure introversion is, the feeling of loosing a consistent extroverted persona is extremely scary, because then we are at risk of accidentally, spontaneously manifesting primitive fluctuations of authentic emotion (pure anger directed at abstract attitudes, invisible to concrete people), instead of well a filtered, groomed character. The world would describe this as paranoid/psychotic violence. Best case: Rebel without a cause.

Further down into your post, some of what you says sounds more introverted.

"You lose the relevancy of your self if you look too far into yourself, and you lose it if you become too integral to group functionality"

Here you seem to speak of extroverted feeling taking over (binding you loyalty to a group's expectations), suffocating the tactical freedom of introverted thinking (the relevancy of your self) and extroverted intuition.

That is an introverted thinking experience.

I can only speculate that it might be ideal, if we could expand our sense or function of self to encompass both introversion and extroversion at all times, but it seems that would require, aside from a trillion of new neurons, a letting go of self-image, as the image of a thinker and the image of an actor are categorically distinct and in conflict.

We can desire psychological ideals, but cannot make them happen. Those trillions of new neurons will either grow or not. Personally i have no hope, as i observe much dementia in progress. Under these conditions, letting go of images doesn't do much good. It only causes more dysfunciton. I can't bother to beat myself up over how poorly functional i am and that is as awake as anyone can really get out of seemingly own volition. That other business is called growing up and its pure biology, taking credit for it is just more narcissism.

It'd be good to let go of self-image. There were times in my life where I had unkempt hair, clothes and typically didn't care for others viewed me. I think I only care how others view me If I'm interested in them, which is few, and even that depends if I think they've seen the full picture. It annoys me if I have to validate myself to others.

 

[nanook]

my first line of thinking was all about me. my own experience of alienation. but i dont even want to post all of this.

as i try to think about you, i still find myself interpreting you as an extrovert.

on the level of thinking, new stimulus is amazing to you. you notice the growth of your thinking or a relative naivety without being shaken by that judgement. not too identified with auxillary thinking.

you are identified with your ways of interacting with your environment. intuition. peoples livestyles are territories of possibilities. those unknown territories are alienating to the territory you are identified with so far. the map of that territory may be a simple bit of introverted sensation in the back of your mind. put on this suit, that leather jacket, the right inspiration will arise, you will know what to do. if only you have trained this role before.

Ne types feel that going through the movements is all there is. people are the moves they got. so they think they can become all types by exploring moves and that types are nothing but trained movements so everyone can become any type. but their struggle to achieve an omnipotence of possible moves is what makes them Ne types and they can't get over that. types really are the underlying motive and inspiration, which is unique.

the rest is rambling about myself. perhaps it serves as contrast.


I fear ego loss when i imagine the many unforeseeable dungeons of life, of their livestyles and sensibilities and judgements about it.

I fear that being dominated by their ways would swallow me altogether. I would cease to exist.

The thinker-self that i know and am heavily identified with could not walk in those working shoes, so i fear even putting them on would kill me.

Its not my shoes.

I recall having this fear after school and it stopped me from dreaming up any possible future for myself.

I felt like the dreaming alone was about to kill my ego.

My ways are primitiv. I sit around on a skateboard and daydream. Etc. Sit at my computer. End of story. I need those familiar objects to hold onto or i fear loosing my mind.

Altho, in verry good company, i can spend many times away from such things. Good company replaces a computer. Meaningful input.

Maybe i didn't just have too much of a self-image, but too much of an image of their ways as well. Its a vague, unsharp image, but there is overwhelming contrast.

I can't model the picture to fit my skateboard into their office, without destroying the furniture.

Nowaways my problem is more objective. I ran out of puzzle pieces to integrate with their world, altogether.

How they live their miraculous live is still not imaginable to me.

I have not had the opportunity to do any of this grown up business and can't talk about it at all.

But that is all they talk about. So there is no point in talking to anyone. I really can't say anthing to that.

I still feel inferior next to the dullest possible professional.

I walk over a street festival and i am a total baby.

But i feel that i have no personality that can express this clueless and vulnerability.

Should i get an "Excuse me, I have autism" shirt?

In other words: "I am an idiot".

In other words: Should i surrender to how they see me anyways? No proud, no effort to show them who i am, by my own standards?

My own standards of personality are insanely inappropriate in their world.

I want them to think something like: "I am this matrix hacker who knows the secrets of the matrix that you guys never even wondered about. Respect me."

I wear a t-shirt like that, but also ironically.
I's not just a buddha, its a monkey who is a buddha.

The monkey is a symbol of biological evolution. The buddha is symbol of how evolution is a wheel of fortune. Its not a symbol of accomplishment, but of self-acceptance.

But thinking highly of that still seems to be too narcicistic somehow.

I know i can't talk to them, with this mindet.

To them it's nothing and i have to say, i am nothing, i got nothing, tell me what to do.

Or else they will beat me up.

Everytime i say: This is what i know. Think about that!

They hear me, they beat me.

Besides many of them had their own LSD experiences and stuff like that. I have nothing unique to offer, that would make me valuable to them.

I just seem to want something but don't even know what, since i can't say that the prospect of interacting with them seems desirable to me.

All i am hoping is to enter an altered state of mind, devoid of self conciousness, that just requires interaction to exist.

That's why i walk the streets, on such occasions. Trying to make some eye contact, at least.

Doesn't mean i shouldn't polish my bald head.

It would mean i can chat them up without even wanting to control the direction of the conversation in any way.

Without a care in the world about whether they will respect me. If they laugh about me, i get the joke and share the feeling. "Fucking autistic mornons, right?" If they misunderstand me, it doesn't matter.

I have had this state of mind of mind on occasion, but its not stable. I can have it online, some times. I hope it grows on me. I dont say: i have an inferiority complex. That's just delusional. I must say i am inferior. Thats partial but true.

But the self-less state of mind isn't enough to allow for a social life.

I would also have to grow some intelligence about how to control the quality of a conversation.

I don't have any extroverted criteria like that.

All my criteria are about the content that i monologue about, so introverted.

If i just go along without a care, i think the conversation can go south. Because if i speak my mind, i still go 100% against the grain of extroverted value systems.

Then they will beet me up just the same.

So my social anxiety is an objective reality.

Not beating myself up over having it is being awake to what is:

My value system and theirs. Clashing neurons.

In my childhood I was also terrified by how unknown people as such are, because i feel the need to relate to who they are, instead of merely interacting with what they say or do, which would be good enough, for an extroverted mind, but means nothing to me.

By maturing to age 40, i found pieces of all personality types and mental states and pathologies inside of myself, so i feel i know almost most sorts people, down to old people who are dying. Just their essence. Not how they livestyle experience made them feel. I have empathy about all characters and am fairly confident, when i talk to almost anyone about the human condition. But i can't just talk about any of this stuff to everyone. Extroverts keep this part a secret. Its like my zone of confidence is illegal ground.

 

[Vmission]

My 2 cents, from reading your post only: (think of it as a general reflection, perhaps you could find something in it that could be helpful)

I think you should be glad for the broadness of experience, it is a good thing to get that much exposure and insights into people and into yourself.

Journeys into the self are good but dangerous in some sense since they can cause you to detach. There is nothing wrong with philosophizing but what is your end goal? You summarized your experience, but are you trying to make sense out of it or are you trying to boost your self esteem? (do not live in the past, past victories are past, the present and the future are what counts)

From an outsider, it seems that you're building an elaborate subjective world based on various assumptions. The danger in that is that this becomes your new reality. You should stop thinking so much about the nature of the world, yourself, and people and just simply experience it however it is. (Also, examine your beliefs about the world with skepticism) We're not flawless, and you're not. But if you find yourself in a situation where you feel empty, or not fulfilled you should try to understand how you arrived to where you are. Also, don't spent too much time on that but focus more or where you are now and where you want to go.

So, having a structure always helps. Instead of philosophizing, try to understand your philosophy. And I think that no one can be truly happy without other people. You don't have to either conform or die a lone, there could be a good middle ground.

Do not let anything define you, but you should define yourself however you want. Perhaps accept some things also, and do not waste your life energy in a struggle with anything. Simply outwit your situation, think of a clever way out and forward. Design a new path for yourself. Do not also adopt ideologies or philosophies, create your own that are congruent with your values and principles. Create ones that help you achieve your goals in the most effective and efficient way possible. That should drive your philosophy and how you think about things. However, if you don't have goals then you're going around in circles.