It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The subjective notion of “true colors” or “true self” is a dogma, and admittedly, is difficult to rid oneself of. “I know how you truly feel”. “Not until you sit and talk with him, learn his mind, will you truly know him”. "We learn who someone truly is when we hear their story". This dogma is so deep-seeded that it is counter-intuitive to think otherwise. We are told that in order to understand someone, to know them, we must listen to their story, their thoughts. But this is knowing a fiction, a story in the literal sense, while the reality presents itself in every moment.
If a good friend were to confide in us that she has violent or racist thoughts, contrary to the always polite and respecting behavior that we’ve come to expect from her, the subjective man believes he has somehow witnessed her “true colors”, as if this whole time she was deceiving him, and her body and her actions were a mere fiction or play before his very eyes. However, nothing could be more absurd, and we can see that the exact opposite is the fact of the matter. The subjective man has assumed his friend is some violent and racist being, despite no violence or racism finding their way through the motor cortex; or in other words, no violence or racism at all. We are not the content of our thoughts and words and emotions, as the subjective man supposes.
When someone demands "tell me how you truly feel", they want to hear a story. They want to be comforted, and they should be told what they want to hear, lest they end up destroying the reality to save their fictions.
Beware when a subjective man attempts to put you in their universe, in their “subjective experience”, for it isn’t their universe, and you are in nothing of the sort. In an attempt to remain solipsists, they would prefer you to be an object of their experience, an object of their perception, or an object of their consciousness, like a mere character in a movie, instead of an object on your own accord. This cloud of perception is, for them, a subtle way of remaining within their surreptitious solipsism, where reality is reduced to a movie screen, where only one being matters more than all others, the center of their universe: the subject, a point from which a fictional boundary of feelings, perception and experience is believed to emanate, engulfing whatever it notices and ensnaring them in it.
But the moment this assertion is made is the exact moment this assertion isn’t true. This is a claim of one person, and one person only, the subject, who believes other objects are simply the motley effects of its own subjectivity, instead of themselves causes of these effects. However, beyond the periphery of the subject’s confused and strained identification with its most favored portions, anything and everything else in the universe besides the subject himself sees it as quite the opposite. No one is in the subject's experience at all. No object is contained within any boundary of perception or experience. Everything except the subject is outside of it, and upon looking at the subjecty, it is simply another object – finite, bounded, but itself ensnared in its own experience.
I just think some people really don't get others, so go to extreme with their views. Even when they're otherwise a reasonable person, they can seem rather blind when describing people they simply differ from in a big way.