Survival: Companions

Curious thing, solitariness is. If you were to spend a day alone without any human interaction, would you lose a sense of your integrity that day?
I certainly would. I’d start to question the validity of the actions I’m taking, I would lose interest in doing, simply because I see no response from anyone or anything. I’d even start to question if other people exist and if this all is not just a mere construct trying to deceive me into action after action without a goal (maybe that would take several days spent alone).

This is why we need companions, who are more than our ordinary friends, colleagues, family. Who you can talk to no matter what, no matter about what, and you’ll still be presented with not only replies, but an understanding.
That understanding is what makes your connection ascend the everyday life. Where you’ll not reply with ‘what’s wrong?’ if you see the other suffering, you will rather say ‘I know’, because you know without asking.
That sort of understanding makes you hold your integrity tight, it makes you immediately powerful in order to solve anything, which makes you step back into reality, even if it’s just a ‘hi’.

These companions are pillars in our mental palace, people who we can ask to define us, and most likely they will perfectly describe what really we are in ourselves. These people who take us as an enigma worth solving, however weird we are, and let me tell you I’m terrific at being strange. While others will distance themselves and feel awkward, who cannot process how open we are about being different, those people can be friends still, but they’ll never truly find us worthy of discovery.

And that something is bugging me. The more normal a person is the less is to dicosver. And what yield, it’s usually of average-quality, simple, conventional.
While companions dig deeper and deeper until they reach a person’s core, which they will dig into too, “normal” people will stop at some point, where they deep some topics taboo or uncomfortable to talk about. Where they will reach a threshold of information they can receive.

I’m glad to have at least 3 people who I think, I can call my companions.

Advertisements

Survival: Relationships

Most people are trying to find their soul-mates in their life and donate a lot of their time building up relationships to be perfect.

At the very bottom steps there’re apps like tinder, okcupid or happn, higher up people can try dating just people they meet in their life.
At those bottoms steps there are many different things to look for. I, personally, feel a bit perplexed about why I use these apps, since I’m not planning to have children, nor to live my life in my current country in the medium-term even.
Any relationship I might come across would be abruptly distorted by my leaving in about 3 years. I justify this with the notion that nothing can stand in the way of the freedom I chose, nor any government, nor any political leader, not my family, my parents, siblings, and not any significant other; because pursuing what’s the uppermost right, should stand above things which are… only right.

Although I like the feeling to rely on someone more than on a frak-buddy, or a friend-with-benefits (depending on the order of intimacy), I’m firmly a polyamorist, so I won’t have problems with having more of these, but the question is can I be a polygamist?
In many countries it’s illegal nonetheless, but what’s a piece of paper and spouse benefits if I can substitute (at least some of) them with various agreements?

Furthermore can my soul-mate be someone who’s not a significant other?
It seems umprovable that you wouldn’t fall in love with such a person, but maybe that’s just not the way we roll. We enjoy each other’s company, but we never get physical, since that would endanger our future together, since we respect each other as independent humans that much we’re transcending Eros, to see more of the mind than the matter.
Could that satisfy our needs for safety, if not for sexual pleasure? Could friends-with-deep-understanding added to friends-with-benefits create an integrity as whole as some consider marriage to be?

I’m driven to the conclusion that I may never find true love which will make me question these beliefs and spread a dog around the questions above; that I may never find true love because I won’t be looking for it… except I may have already found true love, alas unrequited, which will make me even further from the idea of settling down with one person.

Whichever it may be, I’m currently not looking to date long-term, never even say anything about marriage, which I’ll definitely not get. I’m just going to surf around frak-buddies and friends-with-benefits as long as my integrity is holding up.

Survival: Internal Justification

Everything has a reason, even our fundamental core values can be derived onto one singular constant.

For example, You may want a family, because they provide you with understanding, security and affection; feelings and emotions without which your action couldn’t be internally justified, and without internal justification you cannot exist. That’s the basic component of continued consciousness. There are actions which cause your family to be dissatisfied or even dismantled. And there are actions how high will lead to strengthening your bond with your family. This is what your moral compass will be constructed upon, actions which bring you closer or drive you from your instrument for internal justification.
You may want a fulfilling job, that provides stability, depending on the work a fix or flexible routine, co-workers, goals, repetition or spontaneity, creating or destroying.

You may devote your life to religion. Finding a drive outside yourself, following someone else in hopes that they will reward you for your work.

Or you may want experience. Positive feelings and emotions are in themselves what you crave: love, excitement, happiness. You deem actions as positive if they help you achieve these values, but you don’t attach any further tier of logic to them, like a family, a job, justice, creation, preservation, destruction, etc. These positive experiences release happiness hormones in your brain without those values. They are beneficial to you no matter those variables, although some may call this hedonism, but what are others if not hedonists with more values.
Or you may be like me, partly, just slightly different from the last example, you may not distinguish between positive and negative emotions in your experiences. This is where I seem to break the Freudian pleasure principle. You may take whatever sorrow, guilt, hatred, pain, suffering may come at you and you embrace those feelings as you would do with affliction, love or hope. Granting that you may enjoy positive ones more than negatives, you still welcome both. I, for example, generally try to avoid physical pain, slightly because of the physical feeling itself, notably because actions leading to that kind of pain can be counterproductive. (e.g. meaning: I won’t intentionally look for a way to get shot, and if the situation arises I will try to avoid getting shot if it’s more beneficial to some temporary goal.) But I if I do get shot, I’ll seize the pain, experiencing everything around it, immersing myself into the gunshot.

Negative psychological emotions I grant more than physicals ones. Maybe even more than positive psychological ones.
This internal justification is mostly subconscious, it’s main actor is the ‘id‘. This constant is present in all life, although its’ complexity is heavily varied. Humans as the current apex of nature, have the deepest mechanisms in their heads, albeit some humans demonstrate capabilities hardly better than an ignorant animal.

One could most approximately define it as a constant need, an internal justification of one’s existence and life: a meaning.