The human dimension of relationships

[user 191088]

I wanna talk about something important with you guys, you know that in nearly everything I say there's a philosophical angle, and tonight it's no different, except this time it will be perhaps less theoretical/metaphysical and more practical than usual. I hear a lot coming from you about how, in order to be in a relationship with a woman, one must be this tall, be this rich, be this much fun at parties, have this much experience in bed and so on, yet I can't remember a single time when it was stressed that, even if you are indeed all of that, those things are still of absolutely no use if you can't connect with a woman at a fundamentally human and, therefore, non-sexual level. This might seem trivial at first but do allow me to explain, and allow me to explain it with a personal anecdote. When I was a kid, there was a time when I was enrolled at a new school and wasn't liking things there very much, I didn't get along with people and missed my mom. At some point I even went into an empty classroom just so I could be able to cry alone a little, but one guy from my class saw me and he came in to console me. This was an absolutely life changing moment for me because it would never have crossed my mind that someone would do that without having anything to gain from it, solely out of the kindness of their heart. Since then I've been in both positions, in both ends of this relation many times, at times being the one consoling, at others the one consoled, but what this experience has taught me is one thing only, which is that, to be able to truly connect with people at this fundamentally human level that I speak of, it requires that one be endowed with an understanding that others are not only like ourselves, but that, in a way, others are also a part of ourselves, that others are ourselves, and for this reason it takes a little bit of courage and certainly humility to be able to truly connect with people.

Why do I say this? Because I'm pretty sure there are at least two regular users of this forum that haven't been able to be in a relationship at least in part because of this, because of a failure to connect with women at a fundamentally human level that can at least partially be explained by the fact that they either don't know how to do this, or they've been trying it the wrong way. I won't name names and I don't mean to blame anyone for their shortcomings, on the contrary, we are all victims of circumstances that are way beyond our control. I want only to state this so that you can reflect on it and maybe realize that not everything is about winning or improving oneself in artificial and superfluous ways, that there's an even more important kind of self-improvement whose path is worth following, that it goes in the opposite direction of the one advertised by "red pill experts" and that, in the end, it is worth it regardless of what is achieved materially or in the realm of relationships, because the greatest good we can possibly have is the well-being of the soul!

 

[Unsigned]

if you can't connect with a woman at a fundamentally human and, therefore, non-sexual level.

OK, so I KNOW that I am one of the members to whom you refer, because that is 100% true for me.
It's just the way it has a;ways been for me, and at my age, it ain't changing.

Very nice post though.

 

[okidoke]

......others are also a part of ourselves, that others are ourselves.......

I understand about connecting with people. I can do that. I HAD to do that when I was a police negotiator for many years, and as a parent it comes with the territory, but please explain what you mean by the above sentence.

 

[ringwood]

I understand about connecting with people. I can do that. I HAD to do that when I was a police negotiator for many years, and as a parent it comes with the territory, but please explain what you mean by the above sentence.

I won’t speak for Mr. Preuss, but my interpretation was that we are all fundamentally connected, simply by the human experience. Take away all the surface stuff - the looks, the job, the lifestyle, the skills, the experiences - and we are all pretty much the same underneath.

 

[okidoke]

I won’t speak for Mr. Preuss, but my interpretation was that we are all fundamentally connected, simply by the human experience. Take away all the surface stuff - the looks, the job, the lifestyle, the skills, the experiences - and we are all pretty much the same underneath.

Well, that's what i assumed he meant by "understanding that others are not only like ourselves", but not the other bit.

 

[user 191088]

I understand about connecting with people. I can do that. I HAD to do that when I was a police negotiator for many years, and as a parent it comes with the territory, but please explain what you mean by the above sentence.

It is both a poetic way of saying that we are more alike than we use to imagine as it is something that holds a deeper philosophical meaning. To explain it briefly and whithout fully exploring the depth of this topic, the social nature of human beings determines that the reproduction of human behaviour cannot take place under the reins of instinct or due to the individual developments of a single being, as is the case with animals, instead, we are, each one of us, the living reproduction of a culture and the idiosyncrasies and qualities of our ancestors, but, even more important than that - and this is what's philosophically most relevant - we are the individual reproduction of a single principle, which is the same for all of us: intelligence fully conscious of itself, and when we realize that collectively we are (or should be) the union of individuals that are fully aware of themselves, aware of their circumstances and aware of their relationships with others of their own kind, aware of what by nature herself these relationships are, what they're about, we realize that, like a body composed of multiple parts, we, being divisions of the same essence, fractions of the same principle, are destined to rule the cosmos as a single sovereign entity, and that this universe was made for our recreation and enjoyment.

 

[okidoke]

So does that make every single species its own essence, principle, whatever, or are ALL species of life all from the one essence in your opinion?

Personally I don’t believe for one second that the universe was made for our recreation and enjoyment, but that we’re a byproduct, a result, of chemical and physical reactions, just like grime after bath time.

 

[user 191088]

Personally I don’t believe for one second that the universe was made for our recreation and enjoyment, but that we’re a byproduct, a result, of chemical and physical reactions, just like grime after bath time.

You see, something smaller can come out of something greater, but something greater can never come out of something smaller, unless we're talking about things being greater and smaller in different senses. This is a fundamentally logical and incontestable postulate. If we are the result of processes that came to be simply by chance, without any purpose whatsoever, if we are merely the result of combinations of matter in motion, things that are devoid of any and all purpose, then how come the phenomenom of consciousness is possible? how can something capable of giving things a purpose arise out of that which has no purpose at all? Remember, more cannot come out of less, what's greater cannot possibly arise from what's smaller. It's necessary to accept that, accompanying this physical and material principle of reality, there is another metaphysical and immanent principle that is also responsible for the configuration of reality as it really exists. If you think this is in contradiction with science, all I can say is that you're very much mistaken. Leading figures of science believed in exactly the same thing I'm telling you, but judge for yourself the truthfulness or falsehood of what I am saying.

 

[okidoke]

You believe what you want to believe and I'll believe what I want to believe. Scientists have been proven wrong or further enlightened time and time again, so who's to say what mankind will believe in another millennium? None of it really matters in the day to day lives of everyday people who are just struggling to get by each day to provide for themselves or others. And you didn't even answer my question anyway (So does that make every single species its own essence, principle, whatever, or are ALL species of life all from the one essence in your opinion?). You just attacked my belief.

Whether it's intentional or not, the way you comment comes across to me as quite grandiose, condescending and with a sense of self-importance. It doesn't ever make me feel any better for having read your words, and I consider myself having a fairly good knowledge of things for a person who didn't go to college or uni, so God help the people who don't even feel that they're at my uneducated level. If that's your objective, I'll never respond to you again, if it's not, perhaps try harder to comment in more of a "layman's lingo" to help the more plebeian of us understand what you're trying to enlighten us with.

 

[TropicalStarfish]

Albert Einstein once said: "I believe in Spinoza's God."

I don't think I was necessarily the target audience of your original post @Mr. Preuss . Though I think primarily you spoke generally and personally. Metaphysics aside, I think it was a nice experience to relate.

...That for one, people can care, and it can surprise us when they do. For another, that genuine sincere connection can exist, outside of all the squirmings and writhing about that for some may seem to be all there is. And that... In seeking Truth, and Meaning, whether through the extremes of philosophical introspection, the spiritual traditions rooted in kindness, compassion, forgiveness, and understanding of our fellow Brothers and Sisters, or the simple and plain, yet very real and profound acts of giving, perhaps we can happen upon a place beyond the duality of have and have not. ...To a place perhaps, where, we can connect with others.

...and perhaps, in-so-arriving there, we may find something quite sublime, even if words couldn't quite ever completely encompass, or relate it.

And on a less esoteric level, I'm reminded of a post, hiding around here somewhere, where some one related regrets about being so fearful of, and hung-up about the opposite ***, or perhaps people in general. Where suddenly, something just clicked for them, and they were able to cast off all shyness and anxiety about talking, relating, and experiencing shared experiences with others, including women. That everyone has their hang-ups, worries, and concerns, not just our self.

That we're ALL people; but not only people. We're different individuals, sharing the common thread of being individuals. <-- (see what I did back there?)

Maybe one day I'll understand all that...