Today I ask the question of happiness. What kind of happiness do I want? Is it just to be happy? What is Happiness?
At my current state, I highly value intelligence and different ways of thinking. Learning is my mistress. Although I felt joy on a number of occasions, it was more of a darker perspective. Now with happiness I have a number of obstacles I need to overcome. One, the word itself boggles me. For some strange reason I could not reason what it meant to be happy. Of course, one can use synonyms to help better understand the word– such as joyful, euphoria, etc. But those are all words that lead to the same general feeling. So I asked is it good to be happy? Two, if I were to choose to be happy, I feel uncomfortable with the idea for I feel like I will have to give up some intellectual ground. Can there be an intellectual that has the same analytical and philosophical mind while being in a state of general happiness? I asked myself these questions.
So, I must define the basis of my curiosity. What does it mean to be an intellectual? An intellectual is one that has a general curiosity in life and seeks answers to those questions. An intellectual is observant and yearns to learn and supplement themselves with knowledge and wisdom. It is the body of knowledge that one holds that makes one an intellectual but the heart or the strive behind the wisdoms that were acquired.
So what does critical thinking do in comparison to happiness? Can an intellectual be happy? So to analyze, one deconstructs. The very act of analyzing may be an obstacle to happiness. One can approach analyzing with a level of excitement but an approach with happiness seems to be a bit of a far stretch. Even the knowledge that one gains from the deconstruction will not make one happy. For one analyzes, not to be happy, but to learn. So since the purpose of the analysis is not for happiness but to gain a higher understanding, happiness cannot be expected from such an act. Where does this wisdom lead us?
Does the intellectual strive to be happy? I would think so, but the traits that define them restrict them from doing so. Does this lead to the question of whether one has to choose to be happy over their intellectual facets? Can one strive for intellectual cognition and be happy at the same time? So what makes one happy?
I believe there are two ways to approach happiness. The first being the happiness that is general throughout humanity. Being good person, recognition of being a good person, love, being loved. The second is idiosyncratic happiness. This is the happiness that comes from the specifics of our soul. The tailored events that makes one happy. High levels of joy can be achieved from both types for this is not a separation between happiness but a discourse that derives from a centerpiece.
So can the intellectual be happy?
All want to be loved. All have an inherent desire to be liked, desired, and loved. All social actions stem from these base needs.
From this comes the projection of self. We mold our personalities to resemble the people who we deem to be the most attractive and respectable. As individuals we care too much about what other people think and this limits our actions from being true; we care about being loved more than we care about being truthful.
Whenever we compromise our appetite to be loved over being who we actually are, we are projecting. We project falsehood and hide our faces from the world because we fear that we will be unloved. The need to be admired becomes a driving factor in our lives.
There is a natural occurring phenomenon in this world, and that is the Selfie. There really does not need to be an explanation for I am sure that most of you have partaken in one or two of them yourselves. Even I have taken selfies before. I did not think a thing about them until today. Allow me to explain why I believe that selfies are of a detriment to society.
First what is a selfie? Like all intellectual problems, we should define what we are questioning to gain a better understanding of where and how we should stand on a certain subject. A selfie is when one takes a picture of ones self. But there is more to a selfie than a single photo, isn’t there?
A selfie does not come from merely one photo. A selfie is founded upon the tens of hundreds of photos you took beforehand just to make sure that the photo is “just right”. Sometimes you do not even post the selfie. There are times where you just keep them locked away within the ether of digital memory stored within your digital device. Why do we take selfies?
What purpose do they serve us? All selfies are published on social networking sites. They are used to promote the individual that is being presented. Where is the harm in that? Take a look at the previous statement again. A tool which is used to promote the individual. How is one allowing one’s self to be promoted? Merely by the skin upon one’s face.
Often times the promotion is guised by negative comments of one’s self, and this practice is called “fishing for compliments”. People purposely say that they are ugly so that people will reassure them that they are indeed not so. This is an ugly practice for it does not reassure people but rather give them their “fix” of attention to function. This promotes attention-whoring instead of mental well-being. Why?
When “egging” on individuals to focus on one’s appearance, the spotlight turns away from the interior attributes and focuses solely on the physical appearances. This often leads to individuals valuing their looks more than the intellectual property that they can produce. This train of thought will ultimately lead to the mass of social network consumers to value their physical appearances more than their thoughts, and even more devastating, they will begin to value the looks of others over their intellectual prowess.
This acceptance-seeking attitude also develops an over-dependence on others. If one’s view of social success is dependent on comments, hits, likes, and follows, than one puts one’s own security at the whim of their peers. This can create self-consciousness and self-conscious thoughts, which is pretty pathetic.
Now this is a very obvious and interesting subject. There is no other stereotype about a psychopath that is more highly exposed and misunderstood. There is the idea that as a psychopath we are more prone to kill. This is a false. It is just easier for us to kill. This may seem difficult to understand but it is an important trait that one must understand if one wishes to even begin to understand what it means to be a psychopath.
Now death to me is but a doorway. Not to an afterlife or anything like that, but rather to nothing. It is merely just an end. There is nothing wrong with death and nothing to fear over. Now with this fundamental view, a line is drawn to my view over the matter of death.
But this is not what I am going to write about. This post is for the stereotypical. The frenzy one has in murder.
A sort of ecstasy-like haze flows through the body. It is a mix of sexual thrill and adrenaline rush. There is a flow when it comes to the act of killing. A natural order or procedure to how things should proceed.
The climax is not in the death but all things that lead to it. The pleasure they supposedly find is in the analysis of all the mixed emotions emitted.
Memory is the distance between you and I.
The laughter and the times we shared,
All is withheld by the eternity of our minds
Can the man truly say he meets his wife
In the solitude of his self and be dared
To say that he encounters her and he she finds
The roses of shattered psyche that haunts for life
The relationship that was ripped and ensnared
For everything resembles you and makes my mind grind
For Memory is the distance between you and I
You dance with cherubims and seraphs
While I dance with you in the void that grows in my mind
For it was the last good night you will ever know
My Dear Mistress,
How you destroy me.
From you comes all my doubt and weakness.
You are nothing but a void that I can never hope to fill or close.
You Take all that I have and leave nothing but an empty pathetic carcass behind. You destroy me.
And yet, I am so dependent upon you.
I so desperately need to free myself from the torturous lustful chains that you have wrapped around my neck and still, I find myself crawling back to you.
Putting back on the very constraints that killed me.
How genius you are with your psychological terror.
The warfare that you have mastered and now use to puppet me into obliterating all that I hold dear and true.
My dear mistress,
my dear mistress,
With my first step towards freedom I release myself from your eternal grip and pierce out into the world that I have so long forgotten.
May the memories of void and black evaporate into light and shine.
Curses that hold me to you will now banish and the curses shall be no more.
For all eternity has in store my victory over yours.
This is a good opportunity to give insight into the emotional perspective a psychopath.
Today I shared very intimate moments with a woman. It lasted for about an hour and a half and after that we parted ways. We were both busy.
The insight comes from the fact that I feel nothing different about me. It is not that I do not have any feelings for this girl but rather I have no emotions like love, lust, or passion for her. The misunderstanding here is the idea that psychopaths do not feel any emotion or have any amount of empathy. We just feel differently than others.
She is a beautiful woman and I would think that many other people would think her to be attractive. There is nothing wrong with her physical attributes or her character. My lull within my emotions for her do not represent lack of empathy or even emotion. It is more like the calm of a storm. For emotions are nothing compared to my thoughts. The waves of ideas compel my emotions and sort of create a ripple effect that gives shade to a new emotion. It is not that I do not feel anything for her, i just do not feel what people would expect me to feel.