posted on Sep, 10 2017 @ 11:27 PM
The truth is simple: do you think you became the way you became without input from outside systems? Do you think you would have become who you are
today without the others who provoked certain meaning-formations in your brain self-organizing dynamics? If you can accept that external images -
faces, voices, i.e. dynamic configurations of visual information, and audial information - act as intermediaries between how your brain works, then
this won't seem so problematic, and so, even more importantly, the concept of asymmetry or symmetry will make sense to you.
Your brain and the brain of most other humans is generalized to have around 86 billion neurons and 85 billion glia. What 'symmetry' and
'asymmetry' mean in this context is this: the dynamics which underlie the transformation of the parts which constitute individual neurons, and the
relations they form with one another, in the millions and billions, and the trillions of connections (synapses) which mediate them, have a dynamical
correlate in other brain-minds who interact with you.
Generally, and optimally, information flow between humans works through the emergent properties of mind: visual images, audial images, sensorimotor
images, all facilitate the transformation of meaning, and so, exist as very complex assembles of a self-other, or point-counterpoint dynamic, best
thought of as a circle, with one arc, from the self, moving upwards towards the other, and another arc, from the other, moving towards the self.
Fittingly, the part that comes from the other is beneath us - or "concealed", particularly in an individualistic culture which tricks itself into
thinking that its agency is a true agency - i.e. as agency that truly derives and exists independently of the other.
But this is a lie. There is no truth to it - even if you feel the need to believe it, all of the evidence from developmental psychology, traumatology,
and infant studies, show that you need another person on the other side of your developing brain to afford you - to equip you - with a capacity you
would otherwise never have, if it weren't for what you assimilated in those meaning-interactions, and so, came to unconsciously come to experience as
"your" abilities - as if "your" abilities just popped up from nowhere.
Truly, the most astonishingly frustrating thing is how power affords stupid, ignorant, and scared-to-death people, to pander, and sell, bull#
philosophies which obviously have no truth outside of the comparable - or symmetrical conditions - which must exist for this to be taken as plausible.
And what is that? Symmetry, in terms of human functioning, simply means "alike". At the emotive, or affective level, humans self-organize in
analogical terms, which means we simply absorb the feelings which underlie how people orient or make meaning in the world. People with contrasting or
conflicting emotional maturity i.e. people who have minds which correlate reality properly, and so have emotions that are under the control of minds
which understand how they themselves are affected by others (I.e. they know the underside of the circle) avoid one another because they sense that
there is no basis for a relationship to be formed. For the most part, ignorant people lack emotional intelligence; but this is not the group I am
picking out, but the nihilistic, narcissistic, intellectually motivated, but heinously directed towards illogical and unreasonable ends (i.e.
sadomasochistically destructive towards their own self, and worst still, THE OTHER) person who doesn't even relate to their self-knowledge as a
function of what happened towards them; or if they do, and in order to preserve emotional equilibrium, they will insert the Hogwartz mystique of "but
this is what the universe wills", as if free will didn't exist, as if human beings couldn't still or control the feelings and the object relations
they produce in our minds
When the ancients have said, and still to this day, we hear "the end justifies the means", it is only the politically motivated which speak this
way. To even have this as a motivation - as a marker within your biodynamically rooted semiosis, implies that you grew up and developed in a cruel,
asymmetrically immoral (not amoral; humans are intrinsically designed by moral interactions) relational environment in which your needs, at whatever
developmental stage you were at, were denied, refused, and so, forced you to develop so as to close off the presence of needs within your
phenomenology i.e. your biosemiosis, that emerged from what you really felt - what was really, in fact, the determinant in your behavior.
Such cruelty ends up becoming 'normal', which is merely to note that the mind relates to it in a positive way: as having made it stronger. But
really? Is ignorance - or not knowing - really to your ultimate benefit? Isn't it more likely i.e. because it is fact-based - that you entire
existence has been a massive lie - an illusion - borne from a narrative that has been crafted specifically for the purpose of resolving the inner
conflicts produced by engaging in rotten behavior?
The end cannot justify the means, because the means changes the very person. The means, are actions; and actions are as much informational as words
are. Since we are built from the ground up, the affective dimension - and so our basic interpersonal mode of making meaning - is constructed by the
others around us, and so it is not surprising at all, but fully expected by natural law, that the 'elites' would fashion belief systems which would
accomplish two things: 1) to continue to justify the way and manner in which they want to continue living i.e. murder, theft, lying, defamation, etc
as a way to maintain and/or grow their power, and 2) crafting a narrative, very unconsciously (since this is merely a matter of their feelings
directing their cognitive processes) that makes all of 1) not seem so terrible, evil, and unjust, as they of course know it entirely is.
1) is not something they can get around, as it is woven into the very fabric of their affective and emotional character: their modes of enlivening
themselves make them people with feelings of intense entitlement to do what they want - and, of course, we all know this in our own form; except most
of aren't wired to be that extremely asymmetrical i.e. assuming such entitlement to exercise so much power over the lifeworlds of others.
2) shows us how human they really are. Nobody wants to be evil - and everyone, even if they are evil, and know it, cannot live comfortably or happily
if they are aware of this about themselves. They need to salvage and maintain at least the semblance of being good - they need to believe it -even if
a part of them knows that what they believe is self-serving and irrational, that very idea "self serving" and "irrational" will become generalized
as the highest metaphysical principle, and so, they will find themselves feeling better so long as the narrative, seeming coherent, functions to
arrest, or restrain, or regulate, how those asymmetrical feelings are working within them.