Indulgence

 If one could define a flirt
It would be a nice dive in the bright lake
I'd jump in 
And out whenever I please 
My body dripping wet from this innocent pleasure 
If one were to define love
It would be the salty sea on a stormy night 
Beautiful from far
Dangerous to enter 
Flirting with me to take a look
Here, I am asking you
Let me drown in the sea

The Arrogant Loner Philosopher

If there is something that causes me unease, yet comfort at the same time it is the continuously reoccurring drive towards solitude. This feeling isn't new to me.  I became aware of this phenomenon years ago, but the fact that I paradoxically feel at ease in this loneliness is new to me. And that feeling exactly is what I want to examine more closely.
A few days ago I came home late as usual. My head felt heavy. It was pleasant, I spend the night with a loved one. Still in ecstasy I sat down in the bus after I had said goodbye. When I'm tired I usually lose the ability to clearly formulate thoughts, so thoughts just plump upon me in a stream of consciousness. I was shocked at the first thought that occurred to me the moment I had left:
´´Finally. Solitude.´´
The empty feeling afterwards felt quite warm and inviting. Its embrace felt much needed also.
It got me thinking, philosophizing, I mean. There is a void, that I see as a place of comfort. A void people normally tend to avoid. Why is this void suddenly so attractive, when it ought to be avoided?
Depressed people often say that the void sucks them of energy, that they can;t take the emptiness of the néant. I, however, experienced it differently. That doesn't mean I don't share their sentiments or at least don't understand them.
Yet, what I want to present is another side to this feeling that people tend to refer to as 'loneliness', 'emptiness' or 'nothingness'. The ambiguous side of loneliness. The feeling that this state of melancholy is a warm blanket that protects me against any impression the world tries to make on me. Escapism in nihilism. Comfort in nihilism.
In this feeling of warmth and comfort I sense that I am careless and lazy. Solitude can be best described as an empty cabin in a far away country that feels inviting after having seen, heard and felt too much. You retreat from the chaos into silence.
Certainly, the silence surrounding you can drive you insane, but it can also serve as a means to process thoughts that have been impressed in your soul.
This being the first factor that drives me to solitude. My soul is impressed by too much.
Another factor that drives me back to solitude and with that back to writing (since I haven't written in months) is me feeling restricted. All these impressions I feel, new ones and old ones, are a lot to process. They pile up and need time and energy to be thoroughly examined.
This in itself is mind numbing, but it becomes even harder when you have no clear morality to measure these impression up against, so you can't judge the position they take inside your life. You're stuck and don't know what to do with them. Yet, time passes. Days go by. The world waits for no one.
So whether I make my choice or not, there is no eternal tomorrow waiting for me to take my time.
So in the stress of time there seem two options available. Either you make up your mind and just choose already. You can either do this by investing time into the choice you're going to make and hope you will be able to triumphantly rise in the end. Or you can just choose and see whatever comes out, while being indifferent to the results and thinking that choices are a form of game you play in life to pass time.
Another option is to look at the other side of the coin and again accept that the world will not wait for you and do nothing about it.
In other words, to solitude yourself, because in the end nothing of the choices you make will matter in the long term, because in the end nothing shall last.
Or as Persian existential poet Omar Khayyam gracefully said:

''There was a water drop, it joined the sea. A speck of dust, it was fused with earth; what of your entering and leaving this world? A fly appeared and disappeared.''

I can understand that option two and three can be condemned if you are a humanist or have a positive attitude towards life. There's nothing virtuous in neglecting the will to live and life itself. Yes, simply seeing life as a game is also a way of neglect. After all, it's you being your own enemy and destroying yourself in the process, one can reason. Not a rebellion against the world, since the world doesn't care. It's you rebelling against that part that you detest in the world. That's how Camus would reason.
Yet, then I think of Kierkegaard. It doesn't matter what we choose, because in the end we will regret it anyway.
Live, don't live, you'll regret it anyway. Love, don't love, you'll regret it anyway. Study, don't study, you'll regret it anyway. Job, no job. Regret. Friendship, solitude. Regret. Fuck him, don't fuck him. Regret.
Yes, Kierkegaard meant this in another way than I am presenting right now. To him knowing we're mortal, meant living to the fullest. 
Morior, ergo sum. (I die, therefore I am.)
This is the only life you will get, this is the only chance for you to make mistakes. Love them. Since you won't be able to ever be mistaken again in the same exact way, in the same exact situation, with the exact same you.
Beautiful. What a beautiful way to turn something so fragile as life, something so uncertain as the freedom to choose into a manifestation of the self. As a way to take life with your bare hands and embrace it for the potential shithole it was, is and might become.
The problem however is, I am not Camus' Sysiphus. I am not Nietzsche's Übermensch.
I. Am. Sara.
Following whatever a philosopher said, simply for the sake of him saying it, doesn't fill my soul. I need more reason.
With this being said, I want to say that I do not wish to be an imitation of a philosopher. I wish to be a philosopher. How do I see it? Of course, inspired by other philosopher, but what is it I want? Nietzsche's position in what it means to be a philosopher is quite right in this sense. He said this.

Quote: ''The actual interest of the scholar, therefore, are generally in another direction - in the family, perhaps, in money-making, or in politics; it is, in fact, almost indifferent at what point of research his little machine is placed, and whether the hopeful young worker becomes a good philologist, a mushroom specialist, or a chemist; he is not characterized by becoming this or that. In the philosopher, on the contrary, there is absolutely nothing impersonal; and above all, hid morality furnishes a decided and a decisive testimony as to who he is, - that is to say, in what order the deepest impulses of his nature stand to each other.''
-Beyond Good and Evil, page 5

Being a philosopher means to be egocentric. It's also the only job that fully reflects the soul of the individual. In that sense, to philosophy is to exist. 
Philosopha sum ergo cogito. I am a philosopher, therefore I think.

To come back to the main topic: the drive towards solitude. The third factor being pride.
Pride is a difficult state of mind, character trait, whatever you want to call it. Pride can be good. It protects you from mental harm. It can cause you transcend yourself, because you are confident enough that there is more in store for you.
Even the act of me writing this is a form of pride, I have something to say that's worth listening to. I can even say I am proud of my ability to formulate these thoughts.
However, would it be better to have no pride at all? Is there something negative to it that outweighs the positive? No pride can lead to nihilism. You have nothing worth maintaining nor anything to lose.
It also seems to me that having pride and arrogance is something that belongs to a philosopher. Do humble philosophers exist or is that a contradictio in terminis? If they exist, perhaps it's a philosopher ignorant of his or her own arrogance.
I, as a matter of fact, know that it is necessary for a philosopher to be certain over a few things. To such an extend that he or she wants to present it to the world as some new discovery the world didn't see, but the philosopher in question did. He or she knows better.
Doesn't that imply arrogance? Am I arrogant writing this? At least to the point that I feel that these words are worth writing down and remembering?
This, however, isn't the only way pride presents itself to me. It also coincides with restriction of the self.
Those two fall under the same main drive that bring me back to wanting solitude: Freedom.
It's amusing how such an empty word still has the power to drive us towards it. What I mean by that is that freedom as an abstract term doesn't carry any meaning outside our frame of reality. I can't point at it; even worse, every individual has an own interpretation of freedom.
Is my red your red? And is my freedom your freedom? The second question can immediately follow the first.
Solitude is also a form of freedom. Not freedom to of course, but freedom from. From humiliation, from labor, responsibilities, embarrassment, pain, studies, loss.
Let us all be free from! So I wish I could exclaim and make life easy. Yet, aside from being an empty word, it is also an ambiguous term.
Freedom from love, pleasure, laughter, warmth, friendship, improvement, encounters, evolution, transcendence. In this battle of overcoming yourself you will see that those words that seem to be polar opposites actually have the option to causally follow each other in a beautiful flux called life.
So in conclusion, what has writing this brought me? Am I closer to anything at all? Or did I just run in a circle?
I can fairly conclude it led to something. Something small, but significant in my eyes.
I have no answers on how to live life. I merely know the questions. At least I know what the inner battle is. That's what this stream of consciousness has brought me.
Thus again I am confronted by wanting two things at once, but wanting neither over all. Thus once again there is the phenomenon I can never seem to outrun,
Ambiguity. 

Random Thought #5

There is unease surrounding us. Unease in the form of chaos. That distinction is made with reason. When we say that we feel at unease we mean that we can still function properly, yet lack the taste to dress up properly, to eat healthy, to go to work or class. Basically to do anything that adds up to our desire to present ourselves in such a way that we consider satisfactory. It is difficult to explain just giving general ideas of what I mean, so here is an allegory. A storm is going on. It takes place in a hollow room inside our chest. The storm is one of emotions. The emotions switch from one specter to the next, but they twist and twirl; causing uneasiness in the heart, because you never know what the storm will bring next. Even worse, what if it one day loses all it energy and stops spinning all together? Whatever the case, it is difficult to enter from the outside in. We can only experience the effects, but the causes remain a mystery.

This storm also has affected us to write and sit here thinking over and over how we should type these words with the correct and confident formulation that we're slowly losing. 

It is, funny enough, in exactly this inner battle that I have found a reason to finally write something down. Ambiguity is something that always fascinated me to be honest. It forms the bridge from extremes to a golden middle of grey and nuance. This transcends the black and white thinking and reminds me again why we are so brilliant. It shows that we actually are capable of deep thought to a very far away extend. One which gives the sudden realization that there is something beyond good and evil. This awkward piece of writing has a reason. As a means to turn this inner battle into a manifestation that can be turned outwards and thus also be presented to the outer world with the aim to reflect on it. 

Why is it that I am doubting myself so much?

It is difficult to type away, to fill pages and be meaningful. Aren't essays always supposed to be long? Because it seems that complexity, depth and validity have become synonyms in the philosophical atmosphere. Not that I can blame them of course, since I myself have admitted in a few pages earlier that it is more than necessary for me to convey my thoughts to the outer world and still preserve the intention and the depth that the words carry with them. Thus it is necessary to be clear. Clearness can only be understood in terms of either an Aha-Erlebnis (insight) or a pages of paper that exhibit the long syllogisms the writer went through in an internal battle with the self to finally come to that self-evident insight. 

And perhaps it is in exactly that in which I am experiencing the inner struggle. That I want both and neither. By both and neither, I mean that I appreciate either aspects, but neither in overall. 

I despise the shallowness of short philosophies. One-Liner Philosophies as I like to call them. You can often find them on social media with the picture of a punk-philosopher like Nietzsche or Sartre put by some rebel teenager to express his or her individuality. It consists out of one line that joyfully kicks against the system, such as ''God is dead'' or ''The hell is the Other''. 

I must admit, it does annoy me, even though I try to ignore it. 

Tbe One-Liner Philosophies used by many, not only now, but by anyone with a superiority complex, as a means to overshadow their insecurities, can be quite helpful though.

If used properly, it can be used to emphasis a certain thought that is the main point of your stream of consciousness. If that's not the case, it can also be used to summarize in a few words the whole point of your story. This gives the reader clarification and the writer a reference point when he or she has to defend or explain his or her thesis. 

Another form of writing is the overly long complex writing that serves no other purpose than to convey something easy as difficult as possible to create depth where there is little. 

Depth in thought is indeed very difficult to achieve. It is quite frustrating, I know from experience and sometimes even heartbreaking, when you have the feeling that words no longer have the power to carry your emotions and thoughts to the other with all the associations you have when using those words. 

This becomes even more complex when it's written text and all the emotions have to come from cold blocky letters printed against a white background. 

So what you then do to convey your words is to repeat yourself. If that doesn't help, you resort to going way too deep into the topic, to the point where you've completely digressed from the original topic. This too is quite understandable, but a pain to read. Mind numbing even. 

However, it is necessary to be nuanced. It is true that often people resort to this type of writing, because they have to convey long thoughts concerning topics that do need all the pages filled in order for the reader to understand it. That's however not what I'm talking about. Those books who do that don't outdo themselves. Those pages are necessary, because if you took pieces out of it, it would stop making sense or lose it's literary touch that differentiates the writers from other writers. The latter is of course a subjective insight that I can't go into depth to right now, because I want to keep the focus on the battle I'm experiencing. 

For the sake of practicality, let's say that when you can leave it out, it's unnecessary to write it down.

So between these two extremes, where should I place myself?

Does my problem even posit itself in this question or should I be asking myself a whole other question all together?

The words that I can associate with my restlessness are the following:

Unease, impatience and depth.

And immediately we can behold the problem. The eternal problem of contradiction that will probably follow me into the grave. Wanting two things that seem to essentially exclude each other. 

Depth and impatience that is, which consequently concludes to uneasiness. 

Painting 1: ''Lust''

''Lust''

Midnight Conversations at the Age of 19-II

Me: I'm off to sleep. 01:31
Me: Good night. 01:31
You: Good night. 01:31
Me: I can't sleep.  01:52
You: Oh.  01:52.
Me: Dammit.  01:52
You: Keep trying.  01:57
Me: I hate my head.  02:02
Me: I just want it to shut up.  02:02
You: Brain activity.  02:04
Me: I'm a tad nervous to be honest. 02:11  
Me: Maybe that's why I can't sleep.  02:11  
You: Yes.  02:12  
You: Why are you nervous ?  02:12  
Me: I don't know.  02:12  
Me: It's just.  02:12
Me: People having expectations scare me.  02:12  
You: Why do you care ?  02:12  
Me: Hmm.  02:12  
Me: Because they're nice people.  02:12
You: Are you expecting anything in return?  02:13
Me: I don't know.  02:13
Me: No.  02:13
Me: Yes.  02:13
You: Ugh. Feelings.  02:14
Me: Yeah, but it's also nice.  02:14
You: It's cute and stupid.  02:14
Me: Exactly. 02:15

Midnight Conversations at the Age of 19-I

Me: What are you doing? 00:46
You: Nothing. 00:46
Me: Nothing at all? 00:46
You: No. 00:46
Me: I wanna paint. 00:47
You: Oh. 00:47
Me: And leave school. 00:47
Me: And be talented as an artist, any type. 00:47
Me: And have a gallery. 00:47
Me: And sell them for thousands. 00:47
You: We all have dreams. 00:47
Me: And spend my nights in a small expensive appartment with a white cat. 00:48
Me: And only read philosophical books. 00:48
Me: And just drink tea. 00:48
Me: And only eat lunch at small cute cafes. 00:48
Me: And buy more sweaters, skirts, heels and lipstick. 00:48
Me: That's what I want. 00:48
You: Go get it then. 00:49
Me: I'll try. 00:49
Me: What do you want from life? 00:49  
You: I want a lot of things. 00:50  
You: I want to learn how to play the cello. 00:50  
You: I want to listen to more music. 00:51
You: I want to read some books. 00:51  
You: I  want to watch some great movies I didn't get to watch yet. 00:51
You: I want to go to the gym. 00:51  
You: I want to learn how to drive. 00:51  
You: I want to meet people. 00:51  
You: I want to have a special somebody. 00:51
You: I want to continue my studies and do good research. 00:52
You: I want to get an apartment for myself. 00:52
You: I want to travel the world. 00:52
You: I want to hike mountains. 00:52
You: I want to go to a polar region and see auroras. 00:53
You: I want to be alive. 00:53
Me: They're reachable. 00:55
You: Easily reachable if things were running smoothly. 00:55
Me: Yes. 1:00
Me: I know. 1:00
You: I'm off to sleep. 1:03
Me: Okay. 1:03
Me: Good night. 1:03
You: Good night. 1:03

The State III: The Process

The State III

The Process:

It is difficult to put phenomenons, that being social behavior,  into words. It is hard to be a confident writer and still produce essays or books that are completely true. I can see this in myself. I have read books and admired them, books that show no coherency to each other whatsoever, but somehow still manage to convince me that there is some truth in what the author is saying. It was in this small confrontation with myself, that I could sense the ambiguity.

How odd it was reading two completely different philosophers, who were opposites and still find yourself nodding in agreement, once you read their arguments and stream of thoughts.

With every book I read, I did not feel at all that I was being presented wisdom, rather I felt that I was being confronted with my own ignorance. With every book, conversation or lecture I became more aware of how shallow my thinking process in actuality is. The world is much bigger; the people inside it have much more going on inside their head than they show.

It struck me with every conversation and it still shows how incompetent I am when it comes to discussions, because there is always a part of me that can see the reasoning behind one's thoughts.

No matter what I say, due to the complexity of the world and its people, we are de facto wrong when it comes to choosing the way we want to life; it is difficult to evaluate which values are superior to others. Ideals in itself are brilliant and we will happily nod in agreement when one exclaims: ‘’Liberté, egalité et fraternité.’’ Yet, the methods to get there often make us blind to remember what even the ideals were we so proudly stood for.

What is the reason for the failure we go through as human species? Is it perhaps that what we see as noble, actually is a handicap of some kind?

Life is failure, without ever having had the opportunity to even see the finish line, we will never be victorious. It is always an inner struggle between wanting two things that contradict themselves, but on their own are flawless.

Individualism, socialism, chauvinism, humanism, nihilism, freedom of speech, mutual respect, values, freedom, morality, rebellion, diversity, unity, nobility, patience.

It is a harsh way to see life. One could say that, but I would object. However, there is still some small candle light at the end of the tunnel.

Even when I was confronted with my own ignorance, I had discovered that in some way there are certain truths that we all share, that instinctively feels right and just.

The idea that one becomes aware from the push and pull movements of life, is only possible when one takes a break from life itself and tries to transcendent whatever world he is living in. Seeing everything not from a biased view, but seeing the world as followed:

The realization that we are part of a big flux that connects one another, in which our existence bases itself upon the choices of the generation beyond us and that our choices form the base for the generation after us. With other words, there is a bigger picture than just that which fulfills our individual needs, but ambiguously we still need to take those individual needs into consideration.

That is such a hard task in itself and is sometimes too demanding.

Not too demanding at all if you ask me. The reason for this, is that coming to this realization takes the most essential part of human nature in question. The ability to think, to be an individual between the herd, yet be one with the herd based on your individualism.

It is true that social behavior and political movements base themselves on the idea that certain ideals are more true, because they fulfill the goal they want to achieve, but that does not mean that the ideas of the rival don’t have the same source.

They still do, there is always some truth in the other, even if it not presented in the desired way. The only way to see that we are all going after the same idea in life, is eliminating the passive thoughtless behavior that many have, that has its root in the inability or refusal to think, therefore denying one’s own individualism.

And why do they do so? The reason being that it is easier to let someone else carry you to the goal and blame it on him if the possibility is open to failure, instead of owning up to one’s own mistakes.

There is no blame in mistakes, but only in being too coward to make them and owning up to your responsibility.