The trouble is the psychopath (biological) whose fantasy (that they do not have without thorough examination) exists as an act - a peculiar cheat - that supports the far worse sociopathy. The failure throughout them is to grant others a life outside their own - they are making others rent rooms in their heads to their troubles, yet claim moral superiority simply for paying up (we see this in findom - there are no doubt many endings only few are privy to the facts of).
I have avoided sociopathy and can treat my spleen to avoid the strike of the riboflavin drop when angered. The precision of thought, no doubt habituated over decades yet often demeured, avoided for not simply the consequences but from a learning of life, of chance deserved. I know my simple fantasy - film-making I can do among other pursuits - is that of composing, recording, music. I get that it belongs as a daydream, I have tried though the sheer shutting off of all else is not in my skillset - well, chance does deliver proof of talent and maybe I'll get down to it, move another fantasy into play? This is not of my objet a and all. That is simply abstracting space visually and the all is of sleep.
So we have these failures, tangled in living fantasy, only alive for moral superiority; until the expected great reveal of death, we can suppose (in hell they would not be good company) they expect an afterlife?
What we judge on them is not from the morality surround that doubtless inspires their gambit, which they fear and expect we may act from against them. We judge them on the pathetic cheap thrill that feeds them at the expense of other lives that are left to attempt survival in that morality surround. That they would destroy, with growing abandon, all fantasized threats yet not their cheap thrill (which is of set of many in the mismanaged concepts of the Oedipal, at least that is where we would begin an analysis I suggest) which began as some rite of identity - not in "genes" - that arrives in idioms, vernacular, the colloquial - for we all make flesh animal without the human by the human, sublime, skill of total inattention to Time?
As I can attest the greatest threat to achieving a difference is physical illness. Again the moral surround will determine of those similar by several different approximations the same cause - not demons or a god's sentencing (it is, of course, in literal sentencing several and different) but genes. And that in this time is their god-like sentence on others.
It may be they can only test their own death and with better wishes than the posthumous reveal should they achieve their deepest move for freedom? This is a better alternative the slow fracture, the taphonomy of their motives preserved for as long as civilisation obtains?
The vastest difficulty is the habituation to sadism - for want a better term - that in this long grief is exercised at persons from the fantasy of "genes". I subscribe to a holobiontia, a epigenetically derived starting point that determines nothing that can be called personality or identity. It only determines abstract sensitivities that are - by lights of Arrival of the Fittest - avenues to change by choice. It is, perhaps, our greatest obstacle that we depend on speech to the detriment of improving our animal humanity.
This is a predicament that is not infrequent, yet frequently unapprehended. I was not going to press a philosophical shape to the description. That is quite another text.
I think this a worthwhile accompaniment:
https://youtu.be/YiivnaT9V28
No comments:
Post a Comment