Sensual Philosophy …

(the following is a series of replies, to someone that I don’t remember. Their replies were deleted when they closed their myspace account).

——

Interesting thought.

I would say the delusion “can” become yours. However, doesn’t necessarily have to. Since just because we accept another’s love as is, doesn’t mean we don’t see the truth. For example, “I understand she loves me to the best of her ability and that’s fine, because she’s still giving me all that she can.”

–

Love is acceptance. The degree to which we accept someone, something, or ourselves is the degree to which we love them, it, or ourselves. However, as lovers I believe it’s our responsibility to not only accept them, but to share with them, support them, believe in them, and fulfill their desires (even if it means they do not want you to support them, or they want you to walk away). If we cannot fulfill their desire because it conflicts with what we want, then in regard to that subject or item that we deny / reject them … we love ourselves more than we love them.

I believe it is fine to love oneself more than another. However, many misconvey the extent of their love for another … because they do not admit, or see the limits. The denial of truth or reality, and misleading can be problematic. However, love does not mean stay … since we can walk away from someone because we love them, or let go for that matter.

Thank you for sharing yourself … it is acknowledged and much appreciated.

————————-
Reply #2
————————-

Yes, love is many things.

Love which exists, is a bond or a phenomenon. That bond can be created or can exist naturally. It’s due to that bond, the way we connect, and the degree to which we do … that the emotions and sensations are spawned from that interaction. The deeper the connection, the more intimate the interaction … the more intimate the interaction … the more emotions / sensations that will spawn from it (those emotions vary in type depending on if it’s a conflicted interaction or not, or rather a synchronous interaction or not). However, those emotions and sensations are not love itself. They are the product of love, or a subset of love. Love can exist even without those specific sensations. Love itself has a singular feeling. It’s the feeling of that bond, or connection … which is a physical feeling (our senses) and not an emotion at all. However we often confuse the types of “feelings”.

Love in action is acceptance. Actions of love are also, sharing, supporting, and pleasing (hence the “job” of the “lover”).

I could go on about that for awhile, but I already have another entry which talks about love. An entry which I may one day revise … actually not, knowing me I’ll scrap it and re-write it from scratch. This entry was more so about one’s desire to be accepted for who they are not. When they delude themselves into believing they want to be accepted for who they are, but are unable to be themselves. Which you touched on of course @ the masks. Though that’s why I didn’t go into depth about love, since it’s not really an entry about love … more so an entry about truth. Hrm, interesting … one can say in ways … truth is love, or love is the truth rather. Maybe one day I’ll write a list of the myriad of things love can be interpreted as … as well as the list of things it’s misconstrued as. Though prematurely I think the latter list will only include “an emotion.”

*shrugs*

“I would surmise that we shed some of those masks, only to wear new ones. So to that I do just say say ‘wtf’! I would also probably analyse that they are actually the same masks.”

LOL, I like that!!!

That amused me highly. The admittal and disclosure of truth can be fun if one allows it to be.

Although the question was unanswered, you did indeed address the topic in your second resp..P

Tangents are fine. I don’t believe interactions should have much structure. I’m only a goal-oriented person (aka dreamer, aka linear thinker) when it comes to business related interactions or subjects (previously I was also a dreamer in regard to “true love” or “soul mates”). Other than that, I’m a journey-oriented person (aka realist, aka circular thinker) … that maintains some linear views. Though as a result I believe you should be free to be yourself however you may deem at that moment. Interactions should be free-flowing, or like water … almost completely without control. I will accomodate, and accept irrespective of my desires which may have previously conflicted. For they no longer conflict.

As far as “my” situations go. I’ve had a few, some extreme … but less than a handful. Although I used “we” in this entry, it’s presence was to merely lessen the ego, for ego is the opposite of unity … and that was my attempt at unifying … instead of egotistically speaking like I am exempt from it. However, the entry was actually spawned because I am an advisor / counselor / lover and have been dealing with “other’s” situations in regard to it. The irony is, those very same people … are most open with me, and with some … are only open with me. They tell me the truth, tell me the ways they lied, etc. So I personally don’t have a problem with their hiding. We truly love each other, and those that I do not … I’m generally indifferent about, but may love them in moments.

–

I understand what you’re saying … but as far as the connection between this and that entry, there can be many. So yes, I can but I’d be running through every possibility. For example, that older entry was about “realizing and allowing things to be, without concern of taboo or fear” it was about “letting go, and allowing passion & desire to reign true”. There’s many correlations, and I imagine that’s the one you’re drawing … but maybe not.

For the most part I rely on my intuition, and am highly intuitive. However, even with I … I sometimes confuse what I want to see with intuition. *shrugs*

————————-
Reply #3
————————-

@your first & second questions … yes.

In the duration of your first paragraph … you went from stating a sensation is the product of love, to interpreting my depiction of love to mean love is a sensation … or maybe not. Regardless, the latter part was miscontrived. I said, “Love which exists, is a bond or a phenomenon.” It is due to that bond / connection that sensations “and” emotions are spawned. Therefore, love is not a sensation nor an emotion at all. I even reiterated, “those emotions and sensations are not love itself.” Thus, yes … love is neither an emotion nor a sensation. Sensations and emotions are products of love … and there are many other products or acts of love. For example, “creation” itself can be considered as a an act of love.

It is because it’s difficult to perceive the source of creation … that people rather associate with things they can deal with or more readily fathom. They limit their perception of love instead of thoroughly traversing the entire hierarchy. Additionally, when reflecting on things one socially focuses on or becomes preoccupied with the reflection … rather than the source. I was addressing the source. As such, creation being a act of love logically applies. The creation things requires an interaction / connection … and that interaction spawns things. As such, I wasn’t posing the highly debated topic … I was actually refuting both sides of the argument … placing them on the same level rather than arguing which is better or worse, more accurate or not.

They are both accurate in their own ways, as well as inaccurate in others.

–

@ “illustrate a point” … it’s difficult to isolate a singular feeling of love, because there is no singular or self-supporting feeling nor emotion which defines love. That in itself proves that it is not an emotion itself. For to say love is an emotion is to state that “emotions have emotions.” That’s like saying, “within joy there is anger.” While things like that have been stated … in reality the presense of anger disrupts joy (completely if had to the same degree, and the person doesn’t find joy in anger). As such, there is anger and there is joy. Emotions are self-contained, but can lead into each other. Maybe that connection which exists that ties two emotions together can be love as well. Interesting. It would be more thorough to state, “love is an interaction, bond, connection, and / or phenomenon.” However, that’s a bit redundant since interactions are phenomenons and connections are bonds. So “love is a bond or phenomenon” suffices, but the lengthier version may appease others.

Though back on track … we cannot process two emotions simultaneously. Even when we have mixed emotions, it’s actually us moving between emotions quickly. When we truly experience two emotions simultaneously … we flatline (go numb) because our minds won’t process it (the mind either does not transmit simultaneous conflicting signals, or it does and our conscious minds don’t process it). So let’s say someone your care deeply about dies, and you don’t know how to feel about it … you’re just blank, it’s because you would’ve truly been feeling multiple emotions at once and your mind cannot choose between the two. The same thing happens when we truly feel two intense sensations simultaneously. If you’re being tickled while being slashed, you may laugh and cry. However, they are not actually simultaneous the signal is just being sent so quickly that it “seems” simultaneous. As such, if love was truly an emotion, we’d never feel anything in regard to it.

Also, since an emotion of love truly cannot be isolated, to me it’s more logical to deal with the group as a whole. Thus, I’d sooner say “love is emotion itself” rather than “love is an emotion.”

–

@ “shading” … considering that there are many facets to a person, it’s possible that they are speaking to me on something they are hiding from another … but are not speaking on things they do share with that other. It’s also possible that what they do share with the other outnumber or outweighs what they share with me … or are even to the same degree. When I said “open” I actually meant, “they don’t hide as much of themselves from me.” Though because I did inaccurately use “open” that presented the converse of “closed.” Regardless, in regard to hiding … to me there’s a difference between not speaking on something and “hiding” something. While they may not speak on things they don’t necessarily “hide” it. Please excuse my poor speech. I at times have trouble truly conveying what goes on in my mind. Which is why I value lovers so highly … since they get me regardless of my handicaps. *shrugs*

–

Interesting situation, thank you for sharing. Due to it I see that when we try to “better ourselves” for the person or people we love maybe it’s irrelevant. Be it when we try to give up a bad habit (like smoking), or overcome our ego to be more self-less. If one is doing it for themselves then it’s relevant. However, to do it for someone else … then it may become moot. Interesting choice of words @ relevant versus irrelevant. Kind of ironic. To restate, “to change oneself for another is irrelevant, but to change oneself for oneself is relevant.” That is literally sound. *shrugs* When I advocate to others about being a lover, it’s never truly about the object of their love. For example, the exs and lovers who are going through a situations with a boyfriends or significant others. I truly don’t give two shits about the boyfriend, lol. It’s more so about their own level of stress, or happiness.

However, I imagine they may not make that distinction.

Regardless, personally I too have made changes “for” others … and as such in the process of your sharing you opened me to the idiocy of those previous actions. I eventually adapted, but never looked at it being stupid … I just eventually started doing it for me naturally. As a child, my focus and motivation always outside of myself and I did indeed succeed at those changes. It previously continued as an adult to some degree. However, now I’m replaying a conversation where one said, “don’t do it for me.” To which I replied, “I don’t want to change myself in that regard … you want me to, as such the only reason why I’d do it is for you. So if you want me to do it, I will. However, doing it for myself won’t happen. So you might want to stop dreaming in that regard.” I now understand her logic better. Thank you.

Smh @ what I said to her. I can see how my open indifference can be sometimes offputting, lol.

–

I agree @ conscious denial … and like that @ “mini-masks”. Denial is indeed us hiding from ourselves.

Hrm, I wonder if I typed sandw”h”ich before.

Thank you again, for your reply and sharing … it is much appreciated.

————————-
Reply #4 / End
————————-

To elaborate on the singular or rather pure sensation of love … if you were to write a list about the various things you experience or traits of the relationship of people you love. Discarding anything which is not shared in every situation … you’ll see that the only thing which exists that’s left is … that in every situation you feel connected to the person. It is the common denominator.

That connection has a feeling. You “feel” connected to that person. That is the pure sensation of love. But that sensation is still not love itself. It is the outcome. The product, or result. The sensation of a connection comes after the existence of a connection. Love is that existence. A railroad track connects two destinations, we can “feel” the tracks if we wanted to … but that feeling is not the tracks. That feeling is our touch, our interpretation of the tracks. Though to state that the feeling are tracks, makes no sense. The feeling is a feeling, the tracks are tracks. Feelings are not tracks. Yet people say, that sensation is love. Just because we can feel something doesn’t mean that feeling “is” it. That feeling is merely how we identify with it … and most of us have a hard time looking past our identity … since we’re too egotistical.

Love in action is acceptance because … when we accept, we connect.

I probably could go on about this matter for days.

People are blinded by the variations, the details … unable to focus. They overcomplicate matters. “There are different kinds of water … spring water, tap water, salt water.” Smh, there really is only one kind of water … there’s just various sources, and things added. Regardless if it’s flavored, water is still water. If we reduce it to the similar traits we understand what pure water is. Just the same as we’ll understand what love truly is.

What if you know that if you’re completely yourself with a person, including telling the truth in all situations, you know that they won’t accept you….yet you still want that person around. Selfish as it is, the only way to keep that persons company..even if it isn’t real (in the sense that they aren’t really loving you, but the lie your hiding behind)…is too lie. Or is it healthier to not live the lie, and therefore suffer by not having that persons company which made you happy. I know that the realtionship with said person will come to an end due to not being honest, but at the moment having them around is keeping something good going inside. But is that good feeling inside unreal, yes. But all the same…it makes you feel good. Does that make sense?

If you’re seeing two guys, neither of them know about each other and both of them give you that good feeling…therefore intensifying the goodness…is it still wrong to keep them secrets? I know it’s wrong.. yet i still enjoy seeing both of them. Therefore dont want to destroy what i have with either of them. For the time being that is. I know eventually i’ll get bored and make my mind up, either leave them both, or pick one to actually maybe get serious with.

I can’t justify my actions at the moment…other than with the excuse that all i seek from most people is the ability to make me happy. Selfish cunt.

A facade.
A mask.

Funny how the porcelian is lying in peices on the floor when something tragic happens.

People want to be loved so much sometimes that they change who they really into who they think everyone wants them to be..they loose themselves in the process.
They are only lying to themselves.

I desire to be loved by the few people in life i deem worthy of knowing my true self.
Other than that, adoration is nothing. It all becomes mundane after a while…if you exposed to alot of it..the same things said…over and over again. They no longer have an effect on you.

Sometimes we put up walls to see who has the strength, courage and determination to knock them down. To see who is really worth knowing. Worth loving.

Did you take demolation classes by the way darling?

Vulnerabilty can be described as a child standling alone engulfed in the sobs that rock their entire body, while watching their mother walk away… after having just launched an assassin-like attack on her child’s character.

I can hear Janet singing, “… did what my father said, and let my mother mold me”

Is the child really concerned about “being loved” when the mother switches back and says, “Stop crying, I wasn’t gonna to leave you, I was just playing with you. Dang, sometimes you act like a little sissy-punk. Come on. You want some candy?”

This is life, as you know it, for the next 18 or 20 plus years. This IS hell, and all of its demons… santa clause, the easter bunny, and the made for TV after-school-specials with their morals and happily ever after scripts that span thirty minutes or less sans commercial breaks.

Okay, so you’re an adult. What happens next? You cry two tears in a bucket, and say “FUCK IT” to your family, and to the life that you once knew? Well, that’s a start, but it’s going to take a lot more work to regain your sense of self, especially when your life has been a “witness protection” story… as in “you had to protect yourself from the very things that you’ve witnessed (experienced).”

Yes, the lies are a learned behavior pattern. I see them as being intertwine, like a spider’s web, along with the desire for acceptance and the fear of loss. Unless, you have aquired a knowledge of Zen, reconnecting to your sense of self becomes an ardous journey, with lots of successful, and not so successful attempts. These attempts are the nouns of our existence… the people, places and things.

B. B. King sings, “Nobody loves me but my mother, and she could be jiving too.”

In a non-denominational, spiritual kinda way, we put or faith in practice and dream of a “savior” who’s love for us will miraculiously break through and shatter our web of illusion, thereby setting us free to be ourselves. This “savior” will deliver us from the hell that IS our life. Because this “savior” is able to look beyond or faults and see our needs. He/She will heal all of our hurts. He/She can make the blind see, and the lame walk. He/She’s a miracle worker, and damnit we are in need of a miracle, but until then…… we are “wandering in the wilderness” of our delusions.

“Oh but if you were here, he/she would have never died.”

Fear. How many times have we let our guards down only to be hurt by the ones we love? It’s certainly a gamble, but damn, it feels good to let someone in.

I believe it’s accurate. However, it’s not exactly that we accept the love we think we deserve. A woman may consciously thinks she deserves a lot of love, but may end up in relationships with men that are worthless. — She does so because in truth, she subconsciously believes she’s worth-less.

As such, we accept the love we “truly” believe we deserve. A minor quibble.