(This is part of a miniseries) (Philosocom's Subcategory On Fatigue and Exhaustion) (Note: This is a special piece that will not be renovated to be kept in the present day, and will not be updated in information, in order to preserve some of the past. Past I can reflect on. I am not keen on forgetting the past. The past can help us forge a better future. More on my philosophy on the past has been written). (Background music) ********************** Summary by Anonymous Mr. Tomasio discusses the importance of acknowledging and addressing trauma to overcome its debilitating effects. He emphasizes that repressing traumatic experiences can lead to long-term suffering, including fatigue, physical limitations, and mental distress. The writer shares his personal experience of overcoming severe post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) through self-discovery and acceptance of past traumas. They highlight the dangers of positive thinking as a coping mechanism when underlying issues remain unresolved. The key message is that confronting painful memories and seeking help, whether through therapy or self-reflection, can lead to significant improvement in physical and mental health. By acknowledging the darkness, individuals can pave the way for healing and mental liberation. Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is not always easy to recognize. Many people may suffer from symptoms caused by trauma without even realizing it. They may deny that they were traumatized and try other solutions that do not address the underlying problem. Positivity can be harmful when it is used to escape from our mental problems. In this case, optimism can be seen as a form of not handling problems that need to be addressed. This is why it can be dangerous if post-traumatic symptoms become more severe. Unfortunately, problems are not always diagnosed properly, if at all. This is because the person themselves may repress the fact that they were traumatized. Since therapy requires effective cooperation from the patient, a psychological treatment may not be as effective as one might think. For such treatments to be most effective, the patient must accept the darkness of their reality and reveal it to the therapist. Otherwise, both the patient and therapist may be wasting their time and money. The therapist, well, may earn from the patient's denial, the longer they deny it, but I digress. When people tell you that you should not remember certain things, forget them, or not think about them, they may not realize that they are enabling your post-traumatic symptoms. If they are angry at you for digging deep into your troubled past, they may be standing in your way to a better life with less unnecessary pain. In my case, I researched my personal history and correlated between certain events, both private and public. This helped me reach the origin of my traumas. Once I did this, huge layers of pain began to fade away from me after 15 years of haunting me. It was amazing to discover these truths on my own because no one else bothered to do it for me. People fear pain and suffering, so they try to repress it. Some people may even condemn you for thinking about your pain so much, even though it can be useful for your liberation from it. Now, after 15 years of deteriorating pain that made me fatigued and physically handicapped for over a year, I am largely free from my pain and no longer need a cane to walk. I honestly thought I would die and that only one or more surgeries would grant me my freedom. But the freedom I looked for was in my mind all along. I just had to accept reality. The reality that says: Bad things happened to me, and they were the source. The source that ruled me in my subconsciousness. It all starts with accepting the shadowy places of your reality, of your past. It really does. As long as you repress your agonies, they will not necessarily vanish. No, they will remain deep inside of you, like covert agents, and manipulate your life without anyone really knowing or understanding. Therefore, it may sometimes be important to meddle with the darkness in order for some light to come out. Because even a portion of light can enlighten a lot of darkness. Because the truth, no matter how grim or horrifying, can set you free. Learn from my example and do not be afraid. Do not succumb to counter-intuitive positivity, when traumatic symptoms can only severe your situation. Because they made me very fatigued, to the point I needed a cane to walk. To the point that sitting was too difficult. To the point I was very physically weak. Use the truth to liberate your mind. And no matter how painful it may be, you must not give up, in the name of survival. In the name of your functioning in life, and in the name of your promising potential. I suffered enough. It is time to actually enjoy some of this reality. And have some relief for a change. It could have been worse if I hadn't solved this case. Of that, I am painfully aware. It was good that I stopped it when I had the intelligence to do so... Do so myself. Thank you for reading.

All of humanity's problems stem from man's inability to sit quietly in a room alone. -- Blaise Pascal People will do anything, no matter how absurd, to avoid facing their own souls -- Carl Jung (Directory on Rectification and Help) (Background music) It is believed by many people that we must always do something. If we don't do something, we become bored. The hardest pose in yoga is known as the corpse, it stems from humanity's difficulty to do nothing and be at peace. I also believe that the source of all evils and creations in this world stems from this too. The desire for more, the desire to create something, as well as guilt and shame; there are many mechanisms within our psyche that compel us to do something, and these mechanisms are problematic by default. The reason as to why they are problematic is because they steal away our sense of peace. Imagine world peace. The reason why there isn't world peace is because of these very mechanisms that compel humans to act beyond the necessary evil of survival in society. Only once these problematic mechanisms are solved will the world be rectified and people would be able to sit quietly in a room alone. More and more I am able to sit quietly in a room alone. Less and less, I find reason to act. Thus, in my own solitude, I increasingly find more and more peace. The desire for revenge. The desire to hurt other people. The desire to cause harm and misery upon others. All of these desires make us suffer, and to desire is to suffer to an extent. The more I ask myself; must I desire this or that, the less I am motivated to even desire. I have found out that the more I reduce my desires in this world, the more tranquil I get. Thus, it is our very desires that make us, as a human species, problematic. Our very own lack of satisfaction with what we already have, compels us to act and steal away our peace. It is our very own lack of satisfaction in life that prevents us from enjoying a quiet day alone in a room. Another problematic mechanism is concern. The more we are concerned about something the more we will act away from peace, as we will be indulged in the very things that concern us. The reason why world peace is such an impossible ideal is because we are always compelled, by the mechanisms of desire and concern, to do something. Peace stems from the ability to be content with what we already have. Thus, the more passion we have the less peaceful we get. And humanity is a passionate species. I am passionate about world rectification. I see the state of this world, and I feel compassion towards the misfortune of others. Thus, I resume building a giant philosophy empire in hopes to contribute to those who want to be contributed. I am also disheartened by the fact that the world will never be rectified. My desires and my concerns compel me to write, thus not enjoying the peacefulness of being in a room alone. Within each and every one of us the mechanisms of desire and concern that keep us in perpetual motion. The stronger they are, the less peace we have. These mechanisms, by the way, might as well be unconscious, or that we might not be strong enough to admit them. For instance: The fear of deterioration, or entropy, at a later age, which compels us to delay the inevitable. It is human to be problematic. To be dysfunctional. To be flawed. Flaws are problems and humans, by nature, are flawed beings. For as long as the flaws are bigger than the virtues, the human world will continue to suffer under the hands of humans themselves. Only in reduction of desire and concern will humans be able to enjoy fewer problematic lives. Only in reduction of these mechanisms, will they be able to sit quietly in a room alone, satisfied. Being able to sit in a room alone, symbolizes our ability to be at peace. Desire and concern disturb us, compel us to do many things, but none of them is to be at peace and in silence. The path to peace lies in our ability to surrender much of our desires and our concerns. The less desire and concern we have, the more at peace we can be. A world built on desire and concern can never be at peace. World peace is therefore impossible to achieve, as long as humans will seek to increase their desires and concerns, rather than reducing them. Each and every one of us is a complete world on its own. Humans are not programmed to be at peace, hence why sitting alone quietly is an "inability". Humans are programmed above all, to survive. The more we prioritize our desires and concerns on survival, the more at peace we can be. The more we shed away our ambition for more and more, the less concerned we will be. Thus, the more at peace we can be. The source of peace is contentment. The problem with this world is that we are not expected to be content. We are expected, instead, to be achievers. And per the grandiosity of our ambitions, per our inability to be content. We learn that stagnation is problematic, and not the very passion that compels us to sacrifice our satisfaction and our peace in the name of our ambitions. Stagnation is not a problem but an ideal state of harmony where the flow of action is not only non-existent, but not necessary. Action is what compels us away from sitting in a room quietly. Must we develop all the time? Must we grow all the time? The more we desire anything the less satisfied we will be, overall. Therefore, the key to a more rectified world lies not in ambition but in contentment. Not in the growth of our desires, but in their reduction. Per our ambitions, per our concerns; per our concerns, per our stress and suffering. Thus, the less we desire, the happier we will be, in a room, alone. It is my very own concern for how this world has turned out that removes my own peace, and compels me to be passionate, and to rectify this world through my writings. I see Philosocom as a passive platform for world rectification. I want this world to be rectified while I sleep and while I sit quietly in a room alone. And I will keep and keep on writing until at long last my peace will be attained, and I will see no need to write anymore, but instead, to enjoy complete days of solitude in a room alone. These days are far from my reach. And it is my very own concerns for how this world has turned out to be, that compel me to philosophize. To make sense out of things, and offer fresh new perspectives that can change the way things are.

Article Synopsis by Mr. J. Igwe and Co. "The Stress of the Orthodox Paths -- How Deviation Is Beneficial" is an article that critiques conventional societal norms around success and offers an alternative perspective on finding fulfillment. The article begins with a striking visual metaphor and a relatable quote, capturing the reader's attention immediately. Mr. Tomasio challenges mainstream definitions of success, suggesting that rigid adherence to societal expectations can lead to stress, mental illness, and a lack of personal fulfillment. The article uses real-life examples and personal experiences to make the argument more relatable and credible. It acknowledges that the orthodox path may work for some people, but deviation is not about rejecting societal norms entirely, but rather about finding a personal balance. This nuance adds depth to the argument and avoids alienating readers who might still value conventional success metrics. The article effectively encourages readers to think critically about their own motivations and the pressures they face, urging them to take control of their paths. This empowerment aspect aligns with modern values of self-discovery and individual freedom. In conclusion, "The Stress of the Orthodox Paths -- How Deviation Is Beneficial" is a thoughtful and engaging piece that challenges readers to reflect on their definitions of success and consider alternative ways of living that prioritize personal well-being. ***************************** "Yes, you must be successful, obey authorities, go to school, college, get degrees, have a high-paying career, be professional, drive a nice expensive car, have a fat bank account, high credit, acquire vapid friends, co-workers, a mate, 2.5 kids, a luxurious house, retire, and finally die. I've always wondering how/why does Any of this seem appealing to the common masses. Seems not only tedious to me, but an unnatural way to live, and kinda a sort of Hell to me. How about you?" -- John Duran I'm not in this world to live up to your expectations and you're not in this world to live up to mine -- Bruce Lee (Background music) Can Achieving Our Potential Cost Us Our Wellbeing? The contemporary world's definition of success and respect often comes at a steep cost: stress. This stress is spread throughout the journey towards these goals and, and may even last after their attainment, making you ask: was it all worth it in the end? It's not just a temporary issue relating to a specific era; it's a potential shadow lurking over our lives as long as we navigate the complexities of society and fail to optimally understand the weight of our actions on others, and on ourselves. As successful as they may be, it matters not, for a cost is involved either way. It can merely intensify, once one becomes more and more successful. For the greater the success, the greater the cost may be. And I quote: "Great achievement is usually born of great sacrifice and is never the result of selfishness.”― Napoleon Hill While stress can be harnessed as a motivator for achieving or maintaining success, its negative impact on mental health is undeniable. This can manifest in various ways, from mental illness to physical pain and even a shortened lifespan. And yet, the path to success, especially the ones that are expected of you, more than genuine desire, may leave you stressed out more, as you attempt to live to others' expectations. In essence, if we accept the inherent stressfulness of conventional paths society, along with the long-term consequences of stress, we must acknowledge the indirect, negative influence of our culture on our well-being. This impact extends beyond our mental and physical health, shaping the very way we experience life. All in the name of achieving either what we want, or what others want of us. However, it's worth noting that the societal pressure to achieve our potential visions, in part, is from the features of the modern world. Fierce competition, the ever-present possibility of failure, and the fragility of success (vulnerable to public scandals, "being cancelled" or shifting social norms with the development of PC culture, etc.) all contribute to the stress inherent in striving for what society deems "successful" and "respected." And the purpose for doing that is to be validated. To be respected, saluted, and be seen for the alleged wonder that we are. The contemporary world is based on internal voids we are not taught to fulfill ourselves. And this leads to a decline in altruism and a rise in egoism. And becoming an altruist is a true testament that you do not feel obliged, deep inside of you, that you need to please others for their approval of you. But as long as you'll feel compelled to do so, you will suffer, for you lack the strength to deviate from being successful for the sake of others, in the name of being successful for your own, authentic self. That is, assuming these two contradict, which they often are, but not necessarily. This doesn't mean we have to surrender to the external world's definition of success, whatever it may be in our cultural context. We have the power to resist its toxic effects, even if it means sacrificing some societal expectations or enduring labels like "wasted potential.", "good-for-nothing", or "deadbeat" ("Klumnik", as I call it). Alternative paths, prioritized by personal well-being and peace, can offer a healthier and more fulfilling life. How to Try to Break Free Even if the external world operates on stressful principles, that doesn't mean we must subscribe to them. We hold the power to resist the toxic effects of stress. After all, alternative paths prioritizing personal well-being can offer a healthier and more fulfilling life, free from the excessive burden of much negative stress. That's because doing what we really want in life, can reduce stress. And other people, no matter how close, might not want you to truly pursuit after your deepest dreams. They might tell you that they want the best for you, but what they fail to realize is that they simply want what they think is the best for you. Not considering one is wrong is one of the many reasons philosophy remains underrated: We might often fail in making the difference between reality and our perception of it. So, while people who care for you may indeed care about you, their understanding can easily be crushed by an understanding they see as proper (AKA, in line with the truth). Society might want you to be happy and succeed, but it is only you who can be the highest authority on knowing what is good for you. Hence, it could be often that the orthodox paths of success can be very stressful, for they are not in line with what you want to do, and what you want to become. I personally chose to stop getting my philosophy degree, despite enjoying the coursework and having the means to afford it. My desire to reduce stress ultimately took the higher priority, leading me to step away from the stressful life of academia. While my high school teachers, who saw my academic potential, expressed disappointment, this choice allowed me to prioritize my well-being. For I need my well-being to be as good as possible so I would be able to philosophize better, and thus, think more clearly and thus deliver better results to my readership. My time at the university led me to question: do external validations, achieved through stressful means, truly outweigh the pursuit of inner peace? Why embrace a world so stressful when healthier alternatives exist? These concerns highlight the effects of orthodox paths to success in today's world, particularly for those who struggle under pressure. Seeking alternatives rewards the ability to better thrive stress, not just in academia but across various professions. Ultimately, regardless of individual resilience to pressure, its negative effects on both us and those around us cannot be ignored. The long-term toll on health and lifespan compels us to critically examine the stressful norms we accept in such a submissive attitude. And remember: Walking your own path in life could be in synergy, and not necessarily in opposition, to society. It is done when you pursue a craft or job you are really interested in, and manage to prove its worth to society at large, by contributing to it, using it. In other words, in some situations it's possible to accomplish both your desires without going against those who are dear to you. Beyond the Orthodox If you have the freedom and mean to chart your own course and find fulfillment in life, then consider abandoning the orthodox, stress-inducing paths. This might mean sacrificing some societal expectations and the approval of those who hold high standards for you, but it's a worthwhile trade-off for your own well-being. Understand that there may be people who are more interested in you accomplishing their version of success, rather than your own well-being. Consider asking yourself (or them) if they know what they're talking about, when they aim to support you according to their own interests. The existence of movements like MGTOWs, minimalists, and hikikomoris speaks to this very possibility. Each group, in its own way, seeks a different alternative path, driven by the belief that there's a better way to navigate life's complexities. It challenges the notion that achieving "A" requires exclusively going through "B," a concept often reinforced by social conditioning. Particularly in our times, with greater individual freedom than ever before thanks to values like tolerance, pluralism, and democracy, we have the opportunity to explore alternative ways of living. We can choose to reduce or even eliminate the aspects of the "orthodox" world that don't align with our values, even if they're presented as the "right" way to live. And since following our own paths in life can reduce stress significantly, it is the moral thing for our body to deviate from the orthodox ways of life, should they threaten to crush our mental and/or physical health.

(Philosocom's Directory on Failure) (Philosocom's Directory On the Virtual Realm) (Philosocom's Directory on Illusions) Article Synopsis by Mr. C. Kingsley and Co. The article "Life, Tests and Solitude -- Examining Human Deviations" explores the emotional and philosophical weight of modern existence, particularly the pressures of societal expectations, conditional relationships, and the disconnection people experience. Strengths include deep understanding of human motivation and existential struggle, engaging with metaphysical ideas, and a cohesive narrative flow. The use of fictional references and philosophical quotes enriches the argument and keeps the reader engaged. In conclusion, the article tackles profound and universal questions about life, failure, and solitude in a compelling and thought-provoking manner. (Background music) Introduction: The Stress of External Attachments Unless you are a cult leader that "cannot" be questioned at all, the sad truth for the rest is that every day may contain at least some sort of test or examination of merit... Results could eventually determine your "fate" throughout life. For instance, when having a job, you must appeal to your supervisors every day of work in order to prove that you're still a worthy employee. Another instance is proving your friend or lover that you are trusted and so on... In other words, a world of conditionality compels us to be stressed. Additionally, the less we rest, the more we are stressed. The more we stress, the less we succeed in our goals. Part I: How Excessive Caring Destroys You That is the paradox of caring a lot, as you can care so much you can find yourself horribly ill like my True Master was. We find ourselves not only neglecting others but ourselves as well, as, being or feeling forsaken, we lose ourselves to our own unconscious, natural trauma. To keep fighting and surviving and even loving life again, we then resort to art, to philosophy, and to poetry, as a need to not only discover ourselves, but also to re-discover what we've been repressing, as to not lose touch with reality. To survive even the most basic of things, and also our many traumas, our perception of reality changes as we develop uniquely. Slowly, we may find ourselves even surprised that others exist in a different way than us. We merely think we are understood, only to find ourselves further and further deviating from one another, leading to alienation between people that are supposed to be close to you and to know you so well. Escape From The "Town" of Silent Hill However, no. You only think they know you. You only think you know them, and vice versa, as it is similar in interactions with different Silent Hill characters, who merely think they see and live in the same reality. You lose ideas about what you remember or others remember. These traumas play with your memory, leading to a cognitive dissonance in what you know, and what you merely think you know. About others... about yourself... All this repressed trauma can turn you into a hermit, a voluntary one, too. I want to be alone. Other people just irritate me. -- Ernest Baldwin, an unidentified entity The closeness becomes more and more virtual. Not even electronic, but more of a half reality. Almost near reality, not entirely within concrete reality. In a way, it makes you behave and also think like an undead philosopher. Trauma makes you mysterious because trauma affects people in many unique ways, leading to unique ways of growth. It is only solvable by trying to see the world in another's eye, in order to understand his or her pain, and in order to help them better. Sometimes, to understand, to save someone from their own mental prison, you just need to listen to them. To develop yourself to the moral point that can allow you to listen to their distress, and to prove them wrong as a result. Prove to someone you can trust. Someone who won't betray out of whims. Help them by being the one who listens... the one who helps therefore... To not be like everyone else. To be the one who tries to rectify this problem using not only the mind but also the heart. It's no good... they wouldn't listen. Nobody will ever forgive me. -- Eddie Dombrowski The Uncanny Fall.... and Return From Grace Why are we compelled to be stressed? Because we are stressed enough not only to succeed in our goals, but also not lose what we already have. Everything that is conditional is to be tested, either to attain it, or to not lose it. Tiring, isn't it? In such a world where you always have to prove your worth regardless of reputation, you can get easily fatigued in a world that slowly understands you less and less. You surprisingly find yourself misunderstood while you believe you are clearly understood. You begin to wonder why others are competent while you're awfully incompetent. Perhaps, the other way around as well. You slowly and slowly realize your own deviation, and hopefully their deviation of perception as well. With a philosophical mind such as mine, you can understand more and more how we merely attempt to touch each other's respective mental dimensions, as we realize how inaccurate our metaphysical idea of reality is. Of how metaphysics is also a matter of perception we either repress or are aware of with great clarity. Understanding perception will always be imperative in returning back... back from our fall from the metaphysical, societal grace. Back to our dear ones, or to people who can better relate to you... Somehow. Part II: Recognizing Our Deviations Perception... the one that attempts to tell us what is true and what is not. Perception.. the one that deludes us into thinking we clearly understand without even examining our ideas and our respective biases. The one that connects us to shared perception or to our own unique philosophies... Philosophy is very imperative in understanding how we are all interconnected, despite our respective deviations from each other. From our families, from our cultures and from our communities. As you deviate in your own ways, You find yourself forgetting more and more, and depressed as well, due to the difficulty of failure. Such is the dark side of relentless struggle and achievement, which is, well, the phase that goes after it. The phase of veterans and retired business leaders. Of older people who find themselves forsaken... It is what I call, The Peak's Irony. Or, alternatively, a life of post-purpose. A life where we are still discontent despite all of our great work in life. A Philosophy of Perceived Rationality In some traumatic cases, we are all alone in them. Trying to make sense of them. A dead person can't write a letter. Mary died of that damn disease three years ago, so then why am I looking for her? -- James Sunderland As you do not realize you become less and less understood, even by your own dear ones, they begin to forget who you really are. You begin to forget who you really are as well. And as such, with all this conditionality, and with the absence of love and compassion, life can easily crumble around you, as you attempt to repress your own learned helplessness, only to find yourself falling more and more, depending on others who would hopefully care to listen to your tales of success, and believe you, to restore you back up on a road of morality, and not a road of utter, fostered sociopathy. Part III: Rebuilding A Sensible Narrative If you get to know a new friend, they ought to evaluate who you are and whether or not your existence is relevant to their own. Sometimes, it's not even a friend. Sometimes, it is someone loyal to a shared cause. Sometimes, you deviate not necessarily to find a friend, but to reclaim your own legitimacy, your own relevancy. Power Bases are proof for who we are or want to be. If you won't restore yourself back to reality with the love of dear ones, sometimes you do it by power. When you are careless at the top, this turns tragic. Frustrations And Reclamations, Uncanny Dungeons and Dragons Do not expect others to fully understand you, or else you'll be awfully frustrated even more, compelling you further and further into thirst of power, into further deviation, and sometimes into megalomania. It is often through critical thinking and logic, that can help you reconnect all these demonstrations of power, of organizations, of help, with those you wish to finally understand you. To those, willing to understand, to learn. With you, or by themselves. Failing to question your own deviations, can often be because you're not strong enough to just accept people for who they are. Their own struggles, not just yours. Are they stepping stones in dungeons of mutual discovery, or are they dragons that seek to destroy you? Do they forget who they are as well as yourself? Or, are they passive, inferior people like your biases might tell you? Are you arrogant like they say? Maybe you're more modest than you think? You stress them and they stress you, as you merely think you know each other, and deny you do not know. Is there any hope of acceptance? The Potential In Hope, the Savior/s In unconditional relationships, like true love, there is far less conflict, and far more tenacity to understand the depths within one another. This is why we should have at least one unconditional relationship; A special connection, defined by the ability to accept people, to forgive them, and to appreciate their true selves... and vice versa. When mutual discovery includes interactions with others, who are stressed themselves, it's only natural that life could be very stressful. When we have the heart to reduce it in one another, we can then help each other with the many tests of life! Toughness: The Moral Contra to Overwhelming Sensitivities Those who are truly stress-tolerant, are people with probably the highest probability to pass such formal and informal tests with a little care in the world. The tougher you are, the more you can overcome and navigate life competently... From thinking well to carrying out military orders. Therefore, toughness is competent in so many areas of life, and very basic as a result of successes. The ambition to toughness, compels you to give up on weakness. Failing to be tough, fails you to endure. Failure to endure, fails you from competence. Failing from competence will only further and further deviate you away from what the intersubjective realities of many collectives... social collectives or para-social collectives. Part IV: "Esteemed" Salarymen Or "Depraved" Monks? As you can see, failures and success are also connected to feeling reality as concrete, and thus, to perception and a sense of metaphysics. Of not feeling lonely. Of not being rejected for your assumed insanity. That's how important it is to be tough, whether or not you are placed in an unconditional relationship. The many races of life are not only about making the next pay-check, but also a race for your mind in a world that refuses to accept you for who you are. A world that conditions you. A world that cares not about stressing you, as you keep and keep struggling in fighting a fabricated matrix of validation you are merely taught you need, sometimes. You usually become depraved when you fall from your own high expectations, like a depraved monk, which is a great oxymoron... These are, often, and in fiction like in a certain game, "Monks who have succumbed to temptation... Still unable to let go of the alcohol, they don’t have any sense of reason and have fallen low". Some of us become addicted and fail even beyond the high expectations of being a monk. It's what happens often when you lack the proper support network. In theory, it prevented me from becoming a philosophy professor like I was made for. The Jeopardy From Japan You can see the outcome of this phenomenon in Japan, in the form of people who decided to become hikikomoris, or "shut down hermits". They forcibly isolate themselves from the stressful world they were put in, because they know such stress is too much for them. Should I find evidence of other "hikikomoris" in additional places worldwide, I won't be surprised at all, all because that stress is an inevitable part of contemporary life. This unfairness of strict conditionality leads to an important philosophical question -- why should one desire the company of others, when such company is, by default, stressful? Is it voluntary, or is it necessary? Remember: this is a question potentially vital for the rest of your working, adult life. Such a question is something people should ask not only themselves but others as well! How Societies Ruin Themselves As a Result You could choose to pretend that you don't owe anything to anybody, that you do not need to prove anything to anyone.. But the cold truth is that, as long as you are amongst civilization and not just in the permanent walls of your house -- you will be put under the watchful eyes of anyone who believes you are expendable, that you could one day be too irrelevant to them. Such is the importance of actually understanding other people and vice versa! You can prevent esteemed members of society from falling from grace! By power of compassion you can save societies and organizations from rebellions! By choosing mutuality and harmony over ruthless oppression of others! As an ally, when you consider others, and especially very intelligent minds, you can prevent them from going underground and subverting your own expectations, from Walter White to Metal Sonic. Otherwise, one must be in a constant struggle to prove that they are good enough, that they're interesting enough, that they're sufficiently good enough to keep up with ever-changing conditions. That they're calm enough, normal enough... And the list goes on. That's how things fall apart, slowly and surely, into a weird dystopia or a weird cyberpunk reality. Conclusion: We Need To Build Alternative Frameworks! My advice is this: If you wish to reduce your stress as much as possible, consider abstaining, at least for a degree, from society. Build your own alternative frameworks instead in order to help yourself further and further recover from traumas, while surviving conforming societies! Pick an easy job, but don't let that low-status job define you. Work to become a "greater" person in solitude, by picking a craft or activity that'll put you away from the feeling of worthlessness. Become your own master; your own watchful eye, and then your stress will only depend on you. Build underground movements, but be careful not breaking the law unnecessarily. Solitude has greater control for you to attain, and thus, there is little disappointment.... Sometimes... The solitude is with others. Together, and alone.

Article Overview by Mr. C. Kingsley and Co. "The Rubinshteinic Critique of Emotional Validation" is an insightful exploration of the concept of emotional validation and its potential dangers of becoming dependent on external approval. Mr. Tomasio uses a conversational tone, humor, and digressions to keep the reader engaged, making abstract ideas more digestible. The article balances critique with acknowledging the importance of validation, recognizing that doubting ourselves at times can help us grow. The philosopher's philosophical depth is evident in his reference to logic and the comparison between emotional validation and formal validity in arguments. The central thesis advocates for self-confidence and character development rather than over-reliance on external validation, motivating readers to focus on cultivating their internal confidence rather than constantly seeking approval from others. The article's engaging tone, philosophical references, and practical advice are its strengths. Furthermore, the article provides valuable insights and encourages personal growth and self-reliance, making it a meaningful contribution to discussions on validation and self-esteem. In conclusion, "On the Need to Be Validated—A Critique" offers a thoughtful and reflective analysis of emotional validation, challenging readers to think critically about their relationship with validation and the balance between internal confidence and external approval. (Background music) Introduction There is a growing, pervasive demand in contemporary society for "emotional validation." In psychological terms, emotional validation is the act of acknowledging and accepting a person's inner experience, thoughts, feelings, and behaviors as legitimate and justified. To understand this concept, we can look at the structure of formal logic. In logic, validity is an attribute that justifies a component in an argument. For example, if it is true that "all dogs are mammals," it is a valid conclusion that "there is no non-mammal that is a dog." The converse of a valid statement holds true. Similarly, the individual seeking emotional validation wants the external world to look at their internal emotional state and declare it logically sound, justified, and immune to criticism. While the desire to feel understood is a natural human inclination, the obsessive pursuit of this validation presents a severe philosophical and psychological liability. The Vulnerability of the Seeker The individual who chronically seeks to be validated is vulnerable by default. They are seeking something they do not possess internally. What is the deficit? Confidence and self-esteem. A person who is genuinely confident in their abilities, their intellect, and their identity does not require constant external confirmation. We can compare this psychological need to the biological mechanism of hunger. If an individual feels entirely satiated after a well-prepared meal, they do not continue to eat simply for the sake of eating. Validation is built on the capacity for confidence; when the internal reservoir of confidence is full, the appetite for external approval vanishes. Therefore, the chronic need for validation is the symptom of an empty internal reservoir. The seeker is attempting to fill an internal void with external resources. The Danger of the "Middleman" This dynamic creates a deeply unhealthy dependence. Society has built entire infrastructures—such as hyper-curated "safe spaces" and the metrics of social media (likes, follows, shares)—designed to cater to this vulnerability. These systems condition individuals to outsource their self-worth. By relying on the external world to validate their existence, individuals surrender an independent capability. They trade their potential for assertiveness and sovereign character in exchange for the fleeting comfort of group approval. In extreme cases, this desperation for validation drives individuals to perform disturbing, undignified acts or host "pity-parties" purely to harvest attention. As philosophers and critical thinkers, our job is to examine existence and recognize its inherent flaws. A society that shields itself entirely from criticism in the pursuit of endless validation is a society that halts its own intellectual and moral evolution. The Efficiency of Sovereign Confidence The solution to this dependency is the deliberate, rigorous building of character. We must grow our self-esteem to the point that the function of external validation becomes obsolete. While emotional support during times of crisis is a valid human need, turning that support into a daily dependency is a tactical error. Consider the mechanics of business and economics: whenever you "cut out the middleman," you conserve vital resources such as time, energy, and capital. In the economy of the human mind, other people are the middlemen to your self-esteem. If you do the hard work to cultivate internal confidence, the middleman becomes entirely unnecessary. You no longer have to expend your limited daily energy trying to perform for others, seeking their approval, or worrying about their judgments. Confidence is a supreme virtue because it acts as a mechanism of energy conservation. A rational being does not desire arrogant overconfidence, but rather a quiet, fortified baseline of self-assurance. When validation is generated from within, aimed at the self, and managed by the self, it grants the individual an immense surplus of cognitive and emotional energy. That energy can then be redirected away from the pursuit of approval, and toward the pursuit of true, enduring mastery. Mr. Nathan Lasher's Feedback It is better to worry about your actions than to worry about the type of person who you are. Your actions should reveal [who you are] to people. So it’s true what they say by actions speaking louder than words. If by building character you could mean finding better actions in order to express yourself.... People are drawn towards people who have learned how to do amazing actions. Look at professional golf. Or any sport for that matter. Hitting a ball with a stick. A basic example. But what they have done is perfected the art of swinging a club really well. It takes hard work to perform at the level at which they do. Imagine yourself doing one action in particular better than anyone you know. Why limit it to one action? Always finding better ways to do things is what makes us grow as people. Always look to make things better in any way you can. There are professionals who seek validation for their work. I’m assuming Mr. Tomasio isn't talking about them. [However], What researcher doesn’t want to be validated for doing good work?

(Background music) Summary by Mr. Ephraim Peter The article "Philosophizing on Music -- The Connecting Element" explores the unique communicative power of music, highlighting its ability to transcend language and cultural barriers. It discusses the logical structure of music, likening it to reading a book, and its emotional impact, which can evoke strong feelings through specific sequences of notes. The article also touches on the controversial topic of tuning frequencies and affirms music's role as a universal language of feelings, connecting individuals across different cultures and languages. (Background music) Music as an Abstract Language Music is to the soul what gymnastics is for the body -- Plato Music is often described as a universal language, as it is capable of crossing several cultures at the same time, but what exactly makes it so? Can we truly consider it communication if it lacks spoken words or concrete imagery? This article explores the idea that music, can be a powerful form of communication through specific interactions of elements, even without a traditional melody. And thus, it can be quite a powerful tool that can alter mindsets practically and as such bias it as presented with the language bias, although quite differently. While melody is can be considered as the "soul" of music, its absence doesn't necessarily negate its communicative power. Rhythm, tempo, instrumentation, and even silence all play crucial roles in conveying emotions, altering moods, and telling stories. A heartbeat-like drumbeat can evoke tension, a soaring string melody can express excitement, and a somber piano solo can speak of profound sadness. These elements, when expertly combine together, form an organization of meaning that transcends the barriers of any spoken language. And that indicates the fact that we have intuitive knowledge of music that exists even before we are born. Logic of Music: Data For the Mind, Not Just the Senses Furthermore, the ability to understand music isn't solely reliant on our ears. For those who can "read" music fluently, the score itself becomes a silent dialogue, as if one is reading a an actual book. The placement of notes on a page, the symbols and their length and emphasis, all resonate with a mental plan... or in other words logical reasoning. As such, the quality of music can also be determined by the level of its profound logical composition. When it is not "logical" enough, its quality is reduced. And by "logical" I refer to its ability to deliver exactly what it means to deliver, similarly to the spoken and written word. Because when you don't make sense in your words, you fail to be logical. Apply the same to music to see what I mean. After all, a great composer is to music what a great writer is to words. Numbers, words and notes are but codes we create, decipher, and apply. It's a very cognitive thing, and necessarily so. As even in the absence of sound, Beethoven, who composed some of his greatest works after losing his hearing, stands as a testament to a few insights: Music requires rules. Music requires knowledge. Music can be written like words. You can do and acquire all of these without the current need to be capable of hearing. There's an undeniable technical and mathematical dimension to music, a set of rules and structures that can be learned and mastered without the necessity of empiricism. This intellectual aspect, regardless of one's innate talents and personal experiences, allows us to appreciate the universal complexities of music, and to better decipher the hidden and symbolic messages encoded within its rhythms and harmonies. Even those who wouldn't consider themselves "musical" can find joy and understanding in the logic and beauty of musical composition. And as such, music could be universal in its connection to humanity because it appeals to us intuitively. And it is evident in the fact that our minds are wired to be lazy, intuition is a more common approach to shared understanding of communication. The Emotional Power of Music And it is due to the intuitive-emotional aspect of our mental lives (the right side of our brains), that music captivates us like no other medium. We readily acknowledge its emotional impact, its ability to launch us like missiles, from joyous heights to melancholic depths and everything in between. But within undeniable influence, a question arises: Why? What "magic" these intricate patterns of sound hold such potent emotional weight? Let us, then, further delve into the enigmatic allure of music, focusing not on the "what" but the "why." Music, I propose, transcends mere communication, and surely it does the interactions of numbers; it's a language of feeling, capable moving more people than a mathematic equation or an emotionless philosophy article. While logic dictates that upbeat music should spark joy, the exact mechanism remains shrouded in mystery, adding further to its interest as all mysterious concepts. Why does this carefully arranged sequence of notes elicit a flood of dopamine, making us feel like we're living and not just alive? The "why" remains elusive, yet the "what" is as clear as day – music shapes our mentality with every note, painting emotional landscapes onto the canvas of our being. This sensory information, though devoid of concrete reasoning, bypasses the logical pathways of the mind and speaks directly to the heart. Upbeat tunes don't need intellectual arguments to induce cheer, nor to convince the crowd what they're trying to convey as with the complex of the former. No. Their mere existence, when applied to listening experience, suffices. It's a testament to the raw power of music, its ability to bypass logic and tap into the intuitive self. This intuitive self, by the way, has been attributed spiritual traits, such as being a hive for much untapped knowledge and power that lies beyond physical existence. True or not, the intuitive self is also known as our true selves. Which could indicate that music has the power to resonate with our true selves as well, potentially unlocking much other-wise locked power within us. Those who believe in the law of attraction, for example, believe that this special aspect of the self can manifest desires into reality. So, with the powers that do exist within the intuitive/true self, can somehow be interacted with, the more resonated we feel when we listen to certain music, at certain times, indicating the self... itself. Universal Symphonies, Personal Dances My own experience with Russian and Japanese military marches exemplifies this beautifully. Though the words remain beyond my grasp, the "spirit," the "atmosphere" of these anthems resonates deeply within me – a shared understanding born not out of language or common culture, but of the inherent emotional language of music itself. This collective intuition extends beyond individual experiences. Our shared perception of Mauritania's former anthem as "villainous", despite language barriers, hints at a deeper connection, perhaps even a glimpse into the collective unconscious that unites us all. Even seemingly subtle aspects like tuning hold surprising sway over our emotions. Tuning at 440 Hz, the current among orchestras, might be the familiar soundtrack of our lives, but venturing into the realm of 432 Hz unlocks a "hidden door", altering our heart rate. The subtle shift in frequency, as I discovered during a cross-country journey, can infuse even unassuming melodies with a surprising surge of energy. However, while scientific research seem to debunk it, it fails to negate the profound influence music wields over some of our well-being. It serves as a potent reminder that just because something eludes complete or universal understanding, it doesn't negate its existence or its impact on personal testimonies. As such we must remember the deeply personal nature of this emotional dance with music. Music, indeed, is a universal language, not of words, but of feelings, resonating within us each in our own unique way. But let us not forget the fact that we all have these relationships with certain pieces of music, which are unique to us and us alone, even. In conclusion, music's ability to convey emotions, tell stories, and evoke deep responses within us through its various parameters establishes it as a powerful language in its own right. Whether we hear it through our ears or "read" it with our eyes, music speaks to our hearts and minds, connecting us across cultures, languages, the senses -- and even our intellects.

(Disclaimer: The guest posts do not necessarily align with Philosocom's manager, Mr. Tomasio Rubinshtein's beliefs, thoughts, or feelings. The point of guest posts is to allow a wide range of narratives from a wide range of people. To apply for a guest post of your own, please send your request to mrtomasio@philosocom.com) (Background music) (Philosocom's Directory on the Past) (Philosocom's John Igwe and Co. Articles) You cannot change the past, but you can write the future -- Peter Drucker Introduction The past plays a crucial role in shaping the trajectory of the future. This article explores the intricate ways in which historical events, decisions, and cultural shifts continue to influence and mold the world we live in today and will shape our future. From the ripple effects of significant events to the persistence of cultural legacies, understanding the relationship between the past and the future is essential for gaining insights into our present and making informed decisions for the times ahead. The intricate dance between the past and the future weaves a narrative that defines the very fabric of our existence. As we stand at the crossroads of time, it becomes evident that the past is not merely a chapter concluded but a living force that intricately shapes the trajectory of what lies ahead. This article embarks on a journey to unravel the profound influence historical events, pivotal decisions, and cultural shifts wield on the world we inhabit today. From the subtle ripples emanating from significant moments to the enduring imprints of cultural legacies, exploring the delicate interplay between the past and the future is indispensable. Only by grasping this complex relationship can we glean insights into our present circumstances, equipping ourselves to make informed decisions that resonate through the corridors of time. Join us as we delve into the rich tapestry of history to illuminate the path that guides our future. Historical Events as Catalysts Major historical events serve as catalysts that set in motion a chain of consequences with lasting impacts. World wars, revolutions, economic crises, and technological breakthroughs reshape societies, redraw borders, and alter the course of human progress. Examining these events provides a roadmap to understand the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead. Historical events, such as wars, revolutions, and scientific discoveries, have a profound impact on human civilization and its future. These events can redefine the geopolitical landscape, redraw boundaries, and shape power structures. Technological milestones like the Industrial Revolution and the digital age have revolutionized industries and societal shifts. Economic paradigms, such as crises and recessions, guide policymakers and businesses in fostering sustainable growth. Cultural renaissances, such as the Renaissance in Europe and the Harlem Renaissance in the United States, have shaped the cultural landscape for generations to come. Scientific breakthroughs, such as penicillin and the theory of relativity, have expanded our understanding of the universe and paved the way for technological revolutions. In essence, historical events act as catalysts that set in motion a chain of reactions, molding the present and sculpting the contours of the future. By examining these events, we gain valuable insights into the forces that propel societies forward and, in doing so, empower ourselves to navigate the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead. Cultural Heritage and Identity The past is deeply embedded in cultural heritage and identity. Traditions, customs, and belief systems are often rooted in historical narratives. Examining how cultural elements are passed down through generations sheds light on the values and norms that continue to shape our societies. The interplay between the past and cultural identity is crucial for understanding societal dynamics and predicting future trends. Cultural heritage is a vital part of society, containing traditions, values, and shared experiences. It shapes identities and influences human history, providing insights into the complexities of our present and future. Cultural identity is built on language, folklore, rituals, and customs, revealing diverse human experiences. Cultural heritage is passed down through generations, forming a dynamic dialogue between the past and present. It also serves as a source of cultural resilience, enabling communities to navigate adversity. Cultural heritage shapes social structures, influencing relationships and societal expectations. It also plays a crucial role in international relations, fostering understanding and cooperation. Ultimately, cultural heritage and identity are integral components of the human experience, influencing how we perceive ourselves, relate to others, and navigate the complexities of the modern world. By unraveling the intricate threads of cultural heritage, we not only gain a profound understanding of our shared past, but also equip ourselves to foster inclusivity, appreciation, and harmony as we shape the future of our interconnected world. Learning from Mistakes The past is a storage of lessons, showcasing both the successes and failures of human endeavors. Analyzing historical mistakes is crucial for avoiding pitfalls in the future. Whether it's in politics, economics, or technology, acknowledging and learning from past errors helps societies navigate challenges more effectively and build a more resilient future. It is important to know the value of learning from historical errors in human history. It highlights the role of historical reflection in preventing repetition, building resilience, informed decision-making, and cultural evolution. By examining past mistakes, we gain insights into the root causes, consequences, and patterns that contribute to the human experience. This knowledge empowers societies to implement corrective measures and safeguards, averting crises and fostering a more stable future. Resilience is built through the ability to recover from setbacks, and informed decision-making is grounded in wisdom and prudence. The ability to learn from mistakes is also crucial for cultural evolution. In essence, the journey of progress is marked by a series of course corrections stemming from the recognition and analysis of mistakes. Embracing this learning process is fundamental to the advancement of societies, ensuring that the collective wisdom gained from historical missteps becomes a guiding light, steering humanity towards a more enlightened, compassionate, and sustainable future. Technological Evolution Technological advancements have accelerated the pace of change, but they are built on the foundations laid by past innovations. Understanding the evolution of technology provides insights into current trends and hints at future possibilities. The history of scientific discoveries, inventions, and industrial revolutions serves as a guide for anticipating the trajectory of technological development. The evolution of technology has significantly impacted human societies, shaping our lives, work, and interactions. The historical foundations of technological advancements provide insights into societal, economic, and cultural forces that drive innovation. Industrial revolutions, such as mechanization, mass production, and digitalization, have fundamentally transformed societies, reshaping work, communication, and daily life. Communication technologies, such as the telegraph and internet, have facilitated global collaboration and transformed information dissemination. Medical and scientific advancements, such as vaccine discovery and genome mapping, have expanded human knowledge and improved health solutions. As technology evolves, so do the ethical and societal considerations surrounding its use. Reflecting on these historical contexts informs discussions on responsible innovation and ethical use of technology in the future. In conclusion, technological evolution is a narrative woven into the fabric of human progress. By tracing the historical path of technological advancements, we gain a comprehensive understanding of the forces driving innovation and the societal implications that accompany it. This knowledge is essential for navigating the challenges and opportunities presented by emerging technologies, ensuring that the march of progress aligns with human values and aspirations. Social and Political Movements Social and political movements shape the course of history by challenging established norms and advocating for change. Examining the roots and outcomes of such movements helps predict future societal shifts. Whether it's civil rights, feminism, or environmental activism, the struggles and triumphs of the past continue to influence contemporary movements and will likely inspire future endeavors. This knowledge byte delves into the history of transformative social and political movements, highlighting their historical roots, catalysts, and enduring influence on society. These movements often stem from grievances, inequalities, or aspirations, and are driven by individuals and groups who challenge established norms. Historical figures like Martin Luther King Jr., Mahatma Gandhi, and suffragists demonstrate the power of individuals to inspire and mobilize masses for a common cause. Movements have also shaped policy and legislation, influencing governance and societal structures. They often catalyze cultural transformations, reshaping societal attitudes and norms. In an era of global interconnectedness, movements like the Arab Spring, climate activism, and the fight against apartheid resonate globally, highlighting the potential for transnational collaborations and shared struggles. In summary, social and political movements are integral to the human experience, driving societal change and challenging established structures. By examining the historical underpinnings of these movements, we gain a profound understanding of the dynamics that propel social change and the enduring impact they have on the shaping of our collective future. Conclusion The past is not a distant entity but a living force that continuously shapes our present and future. By delving into historical events, cultural legacies, and the lessons learned from the past, we gain a deeper understanding of the forces at play in our world. Acknowledging the impact of the past on the future allows us to make informed decisions, cultivate resilience in the face of challenges, and work towards creating a future that builds upon the lessons of history. As we navigate the currents of time, it becomes evident that the past is not a mere chronicle of bygone days but a living force, intricately woven into the fabric of our present and future. Delving into the annals of history, unraveling the intricacies of cultural legacies, and learning from the poignant lessons etched in the tapestry of the past, bestows upon us a profound understanding of the forces shaping our world. The acknowledgement of the past as a guiding compass empowers us to make decisions grounded in wisdom, informed by the echoes of historical events, and cognizant of the enduring imprints of cultural heritage. Through this lens, challenges are not just obstacles but opportunities for resilience, growth, and transformation. The interplay between the past and the future beckons us to be architects of a collective destiny, being aware of the pitfalls and triumphs that history has generously laid bare. Armed with the knowledge of where we come from, we are better equipped to navigate the complexities of the present, understanding that each decision reverberates through time, shaping the narrative that follows. In cultivating this awareness, we lay the groundwork for a future that is not beholden to the mistakes of the past but is built upon the lessons gleaned from them. It is a future that embraces the richness of cultural diversity, values the collective wisdom of generations, and strives for progress with a nuanced understanding of the complexities inherent in societal evolution. Ultimately, the past serves as both a teacher and a companion on our journey forward. By acknowledging its influence, we stand on the shoulders of history, reaching for a future that embodies the best of our shared human experience – a future sculpted with intention, empathy, and a profound appreciation for the living force that is the continuum of time. (Mr. Rubinshtein's note: Rationality is, technically, also prone to the change of time, and studying logical fallacies is also imperative for the logical functioning of both individuals and organizations. Because anything can be learned from the past, the value of the exact point time as an important factor, is a fallacy by itself).

(Philosocom's Subcategory Directory on Dilemmas and Problems) (Philosocom's Directory on Happiness) Article Synopsis by Ms. Gabbi Grace "The Problems of Following Your Passions" is an insightful and thought-provoking article that critiques the romanticized notion of passion as a universal key to success and fulfillment. Mr. Tomasio presents a nuanced perspective on the idea of passion, rejecting the simplistic notion that it always leads to happiness. The article uses engaging illustrations to illustrate the potential consequences of unbridled passion in a real-world context, making the argument more tangible. The author advocates for a balanced approach, stating that passion should not be abandoned altogether but must be tempered with consideration for others and awareness of long-term consequences. This balance encourages readers to pursue their passions while remaining mindful of how their actions affect themselves and those around them. The article also touches on the ethical dimension of pursuing passion, particularly in relation to others' well-being. By critiquing "Reckless Individualism," the article raises important questions about empathy, responsibility, and the interconnectedness of people in society. This is a valuable reflection, reminding readers that they do not live in a vacuum and that their choices have wider implications. The insightful conclusion suggests that the pursuit of wisdom—much like the pursuit of passion—can never fully satisfy, adding a philosophical depth to the piece. This insight encourages readers to embrace the ongoing nature of personal growth rather than expecting a static state of happiness. In conclusion, "The Problems of Following Your Passions" presents a valuable critique of the often-romanticized notion of passion, offering important reflections on the need for balance, consideration, and wisdom in the pursuit of happiness. (Background music) Part I: A Critique of Personal Passions Is it true that happiness can only be attained by following our passions? No, it is not necessarily or always true. It isn't always true when, going passion after passion, we may still find ourselves unhappy. It is a cycle of endless desire. Passion is not the only thing that fuels life, and thinking so may indicate a narrow mind. Seeing passion as life's ultimate goal is problematic when it comes to other people and other circumstances that need to be considered. Harmony, like passion, is very important not only as an aspiration, but to happiness as well. A Theoretical Case Example Let's say there is someone whose passion is listening to loud music all the time, and that person lives in a neighborhood with other people who prefer quiet and serenity. Let's also say that without extremely loud music, the person becomes bored, meaning unhappy and unsatisfied. Let's say they refuse to compromise for headphones. One day, after giving up on accepting this reality of living, the person's neighbor has had enough with the music. Not only does he hate it, he becomes so annoyed that he can't focus on his job—he's too busy being anxious about going home—to the point where he is fired. Now, the neighbor is unemployed, and all because of the person with a huge appetite for loud music. The neighbor knocks on the person's door, but the person can't hear the constant knocks because they're too busy listening to a special song they really like. Eventually, the neighbor can't take it anymore and calls the police. Shortly after, two police officers fined the music-loving person with such a heavy fine that they can't pay their rent, which is due tomorrow. Now, here was the root of this problem. The guy followed his to passion to listen to loud music without caring for the desire of some people for peace. He still refused to put on headphones all the way to the life of homelessness. Is he happy now, knowing he might be kicked out of his apartment—because of his passion? It's a problem, a dilemma. Part II: Looking At the Bigger Picture You see, there are other things besides passion that are required for happiness and well-being. I'm not saying it's bad to follow one's passion, I'm saying that life is much more than the individual quest for happiness, and the things that reside in the wide zone may have a huge impact on that happiness, for good or for bad. Your passions could get in the way of other people's passions for instance. It could be a problem because none of you live in a vacuum, and this could get people conflicted with each other due to their personal pursuits. However, no matter the intensity of our emotions, or the faith in our ambitions, living in a more-healthy society means that some compromises must be made to a degree. In turn, being more collectivist in mindset, as seen in African Communalism, could help foster a more compassionate, peaceful society. We cannot therefore discard the existence of other people if we want to live in happiness, least other people will actively work to diminish our good spirits. Whether through revenge or through manipulative authority, people heavily rejected by us could get back at us. However, by considering other people, they might feel compelled to consider us as well. We should consider the benefits of being beacons of light to other people's darkness, if we ourselves want to live in happiness. When Behaving Like Others Do Not Matter to You That is, of course, unless you live in the wilderness, away from any being, and sustain yourself from nature. Of course, could live both as a hermit and a thief, like Christopher Knight, who survived 27 years in that position. However, how can you expect to be satisfied for the long term when you are under the constant threat of getting caught by the authorities? And indeed, due to his pure self-serving crimes, meant for survival, Knight was jailed accordingly. Part III: Lambasting Personal Recklessness Do what is good for you, as long as you don't harm anyone -- Elvis Parsley The problem I find with what I call Reckless Individualism or the "I-Don't-Give-a-Damn-ism" is that it is so narrow-minded, and having a narrow mind is the exact opposite of wisdom: It is a variant in individualism that asks: Why should I care about other people's suffering if I am better and more important than them? That is the headline of this popular approach to life. In bias it confirms to the idea of: "Every man for himself". It's an approach that could led to the deaths of those who need more considering in order to survive: Those who struggle with independence. Those who struggle fitting into a conformist society. Those dependent on medications. In other words, the weaker layers of society. The self-sacrificial can also fit into this category. Our decisions have an effect on the outside world. We need to care or extreme situations of misfortune will only increase. The biggest asset of reckless individualism is apathy. Apathy can traumatize, and traumas can lead to mental health issues. The Antidote of Wisdom Wisdom is all about looking at the big picture and minding every aspect in that picture, and each of their relations to other aspects. Some people, I guess, lack the intellect, empathy, or both, to do it. Most, perhaps. I assume that if the person in the scenario I gave would mind the presence of other neighbors and their potential reactions to the person's passion for music, they would be able to compromise for the big picture that is the building they live in. Then, no harm—or minimal harm—would've been made. Of course, the now-homeless neighbor would have the money to make ends meet if they were just way more considerate. Part IV: Will Our Passions Lead Us to Happiness, necessarily? Those who feel passion in their hearts automatically considered as happy people? Let's say that one's passion is drugs. They are so passionate about them that they become addicted, and when they cannot take a dose, they become depressed. Even if they would take a dose and thus have the sensation they seek—they are well aware that they are in an infinite loop; a depressing loop that borders on despair… This is an example where following one's passions does not bring happiness, but the exact opposite. However, one can be happy even if they do not pursue their passion—other things in which they do not have that much passion for can make them happy regardless of their passions. I may want, for instance, to eat a candy. Yet, no—the candy is not healthy for me. Yet, it's my passion. Perhaps if I ate something healthier, I would be happier regardless of my passion for candies? Perhaps if I get an illness due to a developing sugar addiction, I won't necessarily find the happiness I desire? Also, there is the criticism that passion isn't happiness, but a type of misery. It is known as the passion trap. Our passions may make it difficult for us to accept the present. And as long as we do not accept the present, we can't be happy. We will either depend ourselves on the external world's mercy for our wellbeing, or we will ruthlessly work towards the change we wish to see in this world. Either way, happiness mainly depends on being able to be in the present state. And you might find yourself feeling better if you pursued morality instead of your personal whims. Conclusion Ultimately, there are two conclusions from all of this: Passion alone is not always sufficient in the pursuit of happiness. This can be avoided by developing a more-holistic approach. There are some passions that could lead to the exact opposite of happiness, even if they may give us short-term satisfaction beforehand. Also, we might also regret pursuing our passions, thus subverting their initial intent. Thus, other factors should also be considered in the pursuit of happiness, from having good health to avoiding justified, yet avoidable, punishment. Extra Notes Please note I am not saying you should not follow your passions at all. I am only saying that there are also other factors and circumstances to consider, so that the pursuit of your passions does not become an unnecessary double-edged sword. Otherwise, if these passions do not become counter-intuitive to your ambitions, and do not really cause unnecessary harm in this world... Maybe following your passions aren't necessarily as problematic? Either way, the philosopher can never be truly satisfied, compared to the rare sage, who attained an immense amount of wisdom, not much further inquiry might be required. As long as the philosopher is looking for wisdom by philosophizing, they will, never, be satisfied, completely. It's because you're always looking for something you lack. As your passion for wisdom grows, so is the suffering of currently being ignorant. This understanding brings me peace.

"See what we see, feel how we feel, and you are considered sane, A communal sanity. See otherwise, you are declared insane" -- John Duran To live without hope is to cease to live -- Fyodor Dostoevsky (Note: This is a special piece that will not be renovated to be kept in the present day, and will not be updated in information, in order to preserve some of the past. Past I can reflect on. I am not keen on forgetting the past. The past can help us forge a better future. More on my philosophy on the past has been written). (Background music) (Birthday Subcategory Directory) (Philosocom's Subcategory Directory on Potential and Hope) On the 7th of December, one of the few days left of this year, I'll finally be 24. The individual number itself holds little significance for me, but as the years accumulate, I can't help but yearn for a sense of fulfilment. Yearn, a feeling of having reached my full potential. It's not a desire to end my life, but rather a longing for a state of complete peace and tranquillity, a metaphorical "eternal rest" where my work will finally be complete. Is there a distinct sentiment that accompanies each phase of aging? For me, I still feel like I'm 18, the age at which I published my first book. I recall that year a slight of disdain. At that time, I was still naive about the philosophical world. The school instilled in me great expectations for my future as a philosopher. Even the headmistress herself approached me and declared, in front of my parents, that I would become the "greatest philosopher of this century." Little did she know about my contemporary competitors, some less renowned, others far more celebrated. The period between 18 and 24 was quite a distressful one, and no one had prepared me for it, despite the supposed purpose of education being to equip students for the "real world." The sheer amount of hostility I received simply because I dared to voice my thoughts, was overwhelming. School failed to warn me that people would be quick to tear me down due to their opposing views or negative perceptions of my work. I was "promised," for lack of a better term, a glorious reality as an adult, one where people would eagerly consume my books and I would achieve widespread recognition. Alas, despite writing seven books (and a series of novellas as a teenager), my works seem to have fallen on deaf ears. Perhaps this is the consequence of my self-imposed isolation, my great affinity for solitude. There I am, akin to a child on vacation, absorbed in my writing and entertainment, seemingly oblivious to the world around me, detached from everyone and everything besides my contemplations like a grey philosopher. I receive scant acknowledgment, my existence largely unnoticed by society at large, not necessarily having to work. While I've grown accustomed to my reclusive existence, no one has ever warned me of the profound loneliness that can accompany the life of a philosopher, especially in this era of fleeting attention spans. I write into the void, share into the void, and, worst of all, think into the void. I observe myself and others, comparing myself on purpose in order to understand my strange place in this world. It is very hard for me to relate to most people as they find difficulty in relating to me. Their conversations and jokes bore me the same as my thoughts and jokes confuse them, although I find both easy to understand. Every day is a battle to be recognized, to be heard within the seduction of social media's casino-like mazes. The struggle to capture attention is ruthless, to convince countless people to pause their anxious, fruitless quest for gratification, and engage with glorious article empire. They can easily abandon their pursuits, even for a few minutes per day. But their hedonism stands in my path for increasing philosophy's relevancy in their eyes. Gaining readership is a difficult task, not only due to the abundance of competing writers but also because of the overwhelming array of distractions. Social media applications and their unforgiving notifications, effortlessly alter attention away from the joy and benefit of the written word. Reading, after all, is a cognitively demanding activity that, for some, employs a considerable amount of mental effort, particularly when delving into philosophical discourse. Not to speak, of course, of the reflective thinking that one may need to be in, if they desire to optimally understand what they just read. Despite these challenges, I do not believe that reading is close to extinction, the same as I don't believe philosophy's "dead". Your continued engagement with my life's work, for instance, testifies the enduring appeal of blogs and books alike. The fact that philosophy can save lives through meaning in a shallow existence, justifies the moral debt I am paying to this field... for saving my own life. While my faith in humanity may be prone to reduction, it remains unclear whether the allure of instant gratification will ultimately extinguish the flame of intellectual curiosity, and, of course, many people's need for depth in a shallow, financially-materialistic world. Despite being only 24 years old, I sense that my time has not yet come, assuming the universe follows a deterministic path, although that notion is problematic. Despite growing increasingly tiring with time, my continued youth suggests that I have more to write, create, and contribute. While I yearn for rest, the time for it has not yet arrived. I aspire for my life to be an accomplishment, and that's why I long for old age, not as a means to end my existence, but as an indication of fulfilment. It's similar to a worker anticipating the completion of their shift, not as a desire to return home, but as a longing to make sure they finish the job. Do you notice the distinction? While my employment as an office drone may have been brief, my entire life has felt like an extended, tiring endeavor, as it does to this very day. I am a workaholic. The relentless pursuit of sharing my voice with the world, demonstrating my relevance and that of my philosophy to those who may disagree, has been exhausting. It's not just the writing, but all life's endeavors that weigh me down. I eagerly await the eternal rest that will proclaim, "You have successfully pursued your goals and contributed to the world in this life. Now, rest for all eternity." I am not driven by sadness, anger, or suffering thoughts. My aim is clear: to create a lasting legacy, worthy of succession. And what is the ultimate completion of this legacy? It is indefinite. My death will be but a phase in this empire's history. My desire to reach old age is equally strong as my desire to make the most of my time here, granting me the legitimacy, in my own eyes, to leave this world with little regret. While I could cease at any moment, it would squander the potential of my future. And I live to work. My ambition for December 7th is to permanently resume my work, contributing in the most meaningful way possible until my existence ceases. Only then will I have the justification to halt my writing -- when I will be incapable to work by death. I am doing all of this to retain my sanity in the lonely existence of being, by default, different than most of humanity. It is my moral duty to remain sane, so sane I will be. In the name of myself and of Philosocom.

(2023 Note: Now that I compared myself to other autists, I've realized I have Asperger's Syndrome, which can be considered part of ASD, or the Autism Spectrum Disorders. I, however, am no longer sure if I am indeed an autist, even though I was diagnosed. Please, take this article with a grain of salt, as I expect you to do, with any of my articles). (Philosocom's Subcategory Directory on Potential and Hope) (Background music) **************************************** Alex Mos's Synopsis: The author was born with Asperger's Syndrome and has been treated as a "man-child" due to his divergent social understanding and emotional nature. He became a partial hermit and philosopher to escape the social stigma of being an outcast and "unworthy by default." Philosophizing gave him hope and tools to prove he was a capable adult man, even though he could not work in a traditional sense. He found his life's purpose in philosophy and became a "ruthless overman," embracing the example of the fictional Heisenberg. If you are autistic or a societal outcast, don't give up on life but show the world your worth by your hard work and success. For the author, philosophy is his way to redeem his autistic being, embrace his flaws, and resume living as a worthy contributor to humanity. A Social Outsider's Search for Understanding All those who didn't know me or at the time did not see me as a philosopher, treated me as if I were a mere child due to my Asperger's. That is regardless of the age I was in. Socially inept people are treated differently. From professionals like psychologists and psychiatrists to family members, all in one way or another saw me as a mere youth, even when I entered the third decade of my life. Whether it is my mother, or a distant family who didn't understand at the time the true meaning of my condition, in the end, I was treated like either a child or a "man-child." My attempt to philosophize and leave a legacy to the world is one of the ways I try to tell the world that I am more than a disabled man-child who has poor social understanding, and who is very emotionally reactive. My nemesis' engagement made me sad, not because I love her, but because it reminded me that I am an adult who is treated like a child by anyone who does not recognize or know the role, I have assigned myself in life. Unlike others who do not need to carry the constant burden of being unworthy by default. And I only feel unworthy by default because I care about being a part of this world. My way. Perhaps it is one of the reasons why I decided to become a partial hermit and partially abstain from this world. Perhaps, in the end, my attempts at philosophizing are partially an attempt to escape my so-called "social status." Of course, it is not the only reason, but merely one of them. Nonetheless, I, in one way or another, have always been seen as an outsider by this world. Even during the short period of my life where I had friends, I was still conflicted with the environment due to the fact that I was too different back then. Finding Purpose Despite Social Rejection In the meantime, we must maintain as high a vibration as possible, and anchor timelines as high as possible. To imagine a reality in a higher vibration, and in harmony with our heart. -- Mickey Eilon Philosophizing gave me hope that I would be seen as more than a mere child, even though there were still people who were in conflict with me due to my words. Some people thought I was a narcissist, while in reality I try to avoid following the narcissists' example. others thought I was condescending, while in practice, all I want in life is to contribute in the way I know best, so I would have a reason not to give in. Not to give in to the words of others that run in my mind and haunt my mentality; not to give in to the words of rejectors; not to give in to the fact that I cannot work normally, nor get a degree. In the end, I philosophize so I won't give in to the temptation to harm myself, despite the supposed rationale behind this act. It's because I had enough of being treated like trash due to my poorly understood disability. I can live a better life instead through relentless altruism. My desire to extract revenge on my "nemesis" is merely my way of saying to the world, "I am not a man-child, even if it appears that I am. I deserve equal treatment; I deserve to contribute too and not keep things to myself, unlike what others have said". In a way, revenge is a natural evil. When utilized for altruism, and not to harm, this evil can be utilized for good. Autism cannot be cured. There is no escape from it for those who were born with it. Therefore, I am met with two options: to kill myself, or to live alongside it, as if I were a truly normal human being. With my words, I will show to any of those who considered me less than functional, that they were wrong about me, and Ms. Chen is but a personification of all these people, distant or close, known to me or nameless. This world is devoid of meaning if you don't have a purpose in life. You can work in the same job for years, have a decent lifestyle, have love and family,... In the end, without a higher sense of purpose, your life might be very, very miserable. And Optimistic Nihilism is not something I, at least, am willing to agree with, when I can still work and contribute in my own eccentric ways. That is the appeal of religion or any other community-based concept -- to give one or more collective-based purpose. However, when you are deemed an outcast by society, you must dig into your own meaning if you desire to avoid a self-sacrificial temptation. I believe that this was the meaning of the "Overman" by Nietzsche -- the one who goes his own way. However, what he failed to realize was that some people are confined to that possibility and do not merely choose it because they want to. I too eventually decided to accept the fact that I am, by nature, a societal outcast. Thus, the only way other than sinking down, was to go up; Up beyond good and evil, beyond what is normal and what is abnormal. To transcend the necessity to depend on oneself for norms, morality, and reception. Perhaps this is why I was seen, in a way, as a man child by some; as a being who didn't care if he would be seen as strange or condemned. For my socially depraved humanity, I had to become a ruthless overman. I studied Heisenberg from Breaking Bad. I choose to embrace the Tragedy of Heisenberg. Otherwise, no one will respect or love me. I can't contribute without these two. It's the only reason I care for these in this context. Even when I tried to be normal, I was always confined to my little corner of the world, which I called home for the vast majority of my life. And if not to a physical place, then to isolation. I hope that, if you happen to be autistic too, or if you happen to be outcasted by the world, that you won't kill yourself because of it. No. You are worthy of redemption -- by your own hardworking hands! There is another way -- the way of retribution; the way of showing others that they were wrong about you. And that is possible by being successful at what you do. Hence why I strive to success, rather than happiness. Redemption of Worth Through Debt-Paying to Philosophy This is why, as long as I am alive, I will attempt to be deem worthy enough, to be seen like a normal human being, and by those who appreciate me, as more. Even if I'm not normal: Earn my place in society. Equality for the outlandish. More appreciated, not because I am thirsty for attention, but because philosophy is an occupation of its own, regardless of how the path to philosopher-ship is acquired. This is why philosophy gave me the hope to live another day. I am glad Ms. Chen is engaged, as it reminded me of my adulthood. Reminded me of what I am capable of, myself. Many of you would see philosophy as an unnecessarily prestigious profession. For me, it is a way to redeem my faulty verdict of being. And only through work I can have a reason to embrace my flaws, and free myself from the guilt of resuming being alive in solitude. That of itself is quite a feature among philosophers, either way. Mr. Nathan Lasher's Feedback There is a reason they refer to it as social intelligence. Socializing is a skill set that one must learn in order to be good at. This starts by learning to fully understand yourself and how you fit into the world. People who have something big which is important to them, ie intelligence or maybe a sport or hobby, can sometimes miss out on the advantage of placing much importance on learning such skills. That is the beauty of humanity. One must only be interested in the construct of socializing in order to fully take in everything life has to offer. The importance of socializing is it allows one to live bi-curiously through other people. It isn’t as important to experience something if someone else already has. Words of wisdom. Do not let the thoughts of people you know have such a big aspect on how you act. For some reason the closer the person the more impactful their words are. Their thoughts can act as emotional chains which hold people back. They won’t rise to the level of action because they are concerned with what so and so will think. If your actions really are pure and their intentions are good then stop living how other people think of you. You are the one who determines, through your actions, how the world sees you. If someone only sees you as autistic than simply go out and show them you are more than just that through good deeds. It isn’t being a social outcast. It is not having yet found your own herd to be a part of. Can’t really rush building a social construct which revolves around you. Not in a people controlling kind of way. But in a good match kind of way. Won’t ever be something you can force.

(Background music) I don't want you to be mine. I want you to be free, and still choose to stay with me -- Mahmoud Darwish In essence, we are not whatever we're doing in life, and in a way, we might as well never be. Never truly, be, at least. Beyond the titles, the positions, and our relevance in this world, we are human beings. Beings who are in need of emotion, affection, and even love. Understand the difference between being respected and being loved. Your status of respect is always relative to what you do. On the other hand, when someone loves you truly, they first and foremost love you for who you are, and not necessarily for what you do. A man and his job are always separate. Even if the man provides, he does not become a being by providing, nor a "something." No. The human being already exists because they were born, and will stop existing once they're dead. No amount of hard work and contribution is going to change the fact that the human being will exist until their death. Therefore, you do not become more of a person because of what you do. Your personhood is here to stay as long as you're alive. And respect is gained by your actions and contributions, and not because you are your own unique person. No one is simply going to respect you deeply because of who you are. And by "who you are," I refer to you as the very naked person you are. Beyond the social filtering, beyond the masks and costumes you put on yourself. You put on these masks and costumes for certain aims. Because the social and professional worlds are forever political. You have to earn your keep, and you may want to get whatever you desire and need in life. That is only done through producing and generating proof for being respected. That includes money, of course. Because a hard-working person is a respectable one, even if they do not earn much, but still work hard, their relevance is proven by their efforts. The mistake in our understanding may come when we think that in love, it's the same. In true love, it's not. True love does not require approval. You do not need to prove your relevance to the one who truly loves you. The truly loved is loved for the entirety of who they are, and do not require filters or to prove their value. For true love accepts you for whom you truly are. You do not need to pretend and you do not need to use filters. You do not need to hide and lie in order to get your way. For in true love, all you need to do is to be yourself. Being yourself is the only necessary condition. Understand that doing other things is but an extra, not the necessity. I would argue that true love is irrational. However, there are aspects in us humans that indeed are irrational. We may use rationality to understand reality and to survive. But deep inside, there are impulsive, infantile aspects of ourselves that we repress in order to survive in a pretentious and professional society. A society that expects you to restrain yourself on a regular basis. Because society does not love you. If anything, it would only respect you, as long as you give it a good enough reason to do so. You need to prove your worth to your boss, to your friends, to your customers, and even to workers of other companies. Sometimes you may even need to prove your worth to strangers in order to survive in this love-lacking human society. It is difficult to explain true love because true love is more to be felt than to be explained. It's a matter of personal experience, far more than it is of logic. Nonetheless, humans are not entirely robotic in their beings. They will not be fanatically consistent with rules and methods like a computer is able to do (and far better). No. Humans can easily deviate from their own philosophies of life, conscious or otherwise, because humans are not purely logical. We are not purely logical because deep inside we are still children. "Infants," who want to be loved and cared for. For no amount of respect can compensate a life that's purely or mostly devoid of any affection from another being. Because you cannot be truly loved for who you are without respect. And respect is easily possible without the "being" aspect of yourself. All that it requires, necessarily, is the "doing" aspect of human life. And I'm killing that part of myself to survive and to do my job. I am partially doing it, reluctantly. True love is an action-independent relevance. It does not depend on any action you take, as long as it lasts. It is a very deep, emotionally irrational bond with another person, or vice versa, or together. It is irrational only because it is hard to explain properly. However, regardless of the rationale, remember that true love is one of the rarest emotions in this world. And since it feels so honest, it deserves to be one of the best emotions in the human hierarchy, for those who seek relevance and depth in this life. Someone... taught me all of this. For psychological safety, that is all you need to know. Ever. I'm doing this professionally, and thus I now more strive to distinguish personal affairs and business. You are not here for my heart but for my rationality. True love is not only an emotion, but also an action. It is something that you can choose to do, and others can choose to do for you. The decision of whether to truly love someone is in your hands, just as it is in theirs. But when either of you do it, the other person does not have to prove anything to you. True love is something that is nurtured through interaction and consideration. It is always about the individual as they are themselves, and never about them in relation to other things or beings. That is why there is never love in politics, because it is always based on interests, not on the people involved. A true lover might not even love you for your achievements, no matter how big or small they are. It does not matter if you have a job or an empire. They do not love your extra properties. They love you, and only you, for who you are. And they do not choose to love your actions, by loving you. Because when you are truly loved you are not a means to an end! You are the end! So when someone dares to say that you have their heart, never take it lightly! You just need to love yourself first. Because when you do so, you do not see yourself as a problem. Those who hate themselves do so because they fail to accept themselves. And how can others accept them when they lack the willpower to accept themselves first? Love yourself, and you will be able to love others as well. Likewise, if you are able to love others, they can choose to love you far more easily. I don't know why people choose to love. I just know that they do. This includes myself. I want to love only because I feel the need to. And it's killing me inside, while I work more and more. https://en.lovebox.love/blogs/news/what-is-true-love https://www.liveabout.com/what-is-true-love-1021940 https://psychcentral.com/relationships/love-is-a-choice-more-than-a-feeling https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoskAoNxg88 https://integrativepsych.co/new-blog/what-is-an-inner-child https://www.psychmechanics.com/why-is-true-love-rare/

The Rubinshteinic Commentary On Passionate Work (Philosocom's Subcategory on Health) (Philosocom Directory on Work) (Maturity Directory) (Philosocom Writing Directory) If you turn your passion into your profession, you won't have worked a single day in your life... -- Confucious (Background music) My dearest readers, Life has been harsh to me and I have been harsh to life, for my mentality is militant, and is all-things world rectification. Positivity, negativity, doesn't matter in the case of passionate work. The passion exists either way. I am extremely passionate about getting things done. It what makes me a self-taught philosophy master. I thought that, if I overworked, I would get what I wanted. But instead, it just created a cycle of unanswered whims. I thought that, if I dedicated each day to my work, I would be able to unleash my potential to its fullest. Yet, still, no matter how much I write, death is still far away and blocked by at least half a century. Does it really matter if I write every single day? I see each day a problem either way. Most people would prefer to cherish each day. For me, each day offers its own fair share of problems for me to contemplate about and try to solve. I am hardly a cherisher, even to my dear ones, admittedly. Must I do so, even though the site has become a monstrosity of content? Why must I cherish beyond functionality? My wellbeing stems from being able to work. Most folk's wellbeing stems from the ability to cherish things and beings. Being my grandma's ultimate soldier I hardly care unless I have to. I have a world to rectify after all, for I agreed with her vision of the Pax Ethica. as a child, and still agree to this very day. As her successor, I hardly care about pleasantries and hardly care about celebrating my own birthday. Why must I? Why do I need to? Pleasantries and niceness are for desires and needs. My desires and needs will forever be few. It's what gives me, personally, a peace of mind. Imagine a stomach. It has its capacity, but imagine that it, instead, can contain an infinite amount of food. Should you eat, so to speak, the "minimum" of "a lot", then you've "officially" reached "a lot". 100, 200, or 300 are both a lot of articles. But as you can see, I've reached even further and made it into the 500s, 600s, 700s and 800s. Will it matter it matter if there will be 600s or 700s? I assure you, there will probably be more as my lifespan marches on using the power of philosophy. I am rarely in relief either way for I enjoy pursuing my passions, even if my passions come at a cost. I'm relieved not only because I've reached "a lot", but also because I can rest and nothing bad will happen. I can practice gratitude meditation or any other form of positivity-based meditation, yes, but why should I bother with this too much when I use my own suffering to hone my mind? Very few will ever understand the value of ruthlessly-rectifying ourselves towards the development of greater selves. No guilt will necessarily come, in not working "enough". Do you know why? It's Because I already did a lot, and the facts of the past cannot be altered, only forgotten. No matter in which phase of life I find myself and on which occasion, I can finally say that I did a lot, and that by itself, is enough to create the recognition my work deserves as my late master's only successor. And of course my ruthless self-development and my love for passionate work will always come at the cost of being left alone in a social-based world. Alone and misunderstood beyond my need to survive and train in the world outside hermitages... People will always forget about me, and my greatest legacy will always be Philosocom. So, my own apathy is my strength in a world where apathy is an uncanny virtue. When I barely wrote anything, 10 or 11 years ago, my mother told me that I could write whenever I wanted in life. However, I never really cared for physical age. I was always mature for my age for I always relished in developing my mind. No matter how much my mind transformed, it always transformed towards an undefined, ancient mental age. Passion comes from your inner truth. However, when it comes to passion-based work, try to not sacrifice your health too much. Furthermore, try not to voice your passionate nature to minds that fail grasping it. Your passion is not their passion. They won't necessarily care about it like you would. Passion often leaves one in solitude as a result of being its follower. Often times, that passion is only your own... I used to believe in "militant" optimality of productivity. It means that, in order to really get a hold of your potential, write every day or two until you're basically dead or, at least, need to eat, sleep, or rest. However, in an ever-changing world, there is no point longing for beliefs that can turn destructive. There is no point longing for things that don't matter when the present time is always now. Regardless, being a highly disciplined writer, to the point I can write like an entire army, believe that as content creators, and writers, we should all strive to write a lot. Once that lot is satisfactory enough for whatever passion-based purpose we have, we should learn to accept the sweet embrace of rest. You don't have to rest for one or two days, or a dozen years. You can rest when possible and write when possible or when there is a demand to do so. Sometimes, all that matters is the very demand that triggers your passion, your drive; AKA, the depravity. Yet, if there is no demand for more either from others or from something deep within us, why should we work? Yes, "something deep" can be as basic as physical survival. That demand, seen or not even conceived by other minds, isn't infinite either way. After all, everything comes to an end. This is why, for the sake of my physical and mental health, I will try to write less. And the same is true of my abstract ambition to "dominate the world," using the power of philosophy, as a means to better the planet. Final note... Feel free to further and deeper browse into my articles, even though they might seem never-ending to you!. Think of something you're interested in and put it in the search bar, and you might find what you're looking for! And with that, let my rest begin. And may your rest begin, if you did either enough or more than enough, in your line of work. Please don't push yourself too hard... Until next time!

(Background music) (Philosocom's Directory on Happiness) (Philosocom's Directory on Failure) (Philosocom's Directory on Competency) Our greatest glory is not in never falling, but in rising every time we fall -- Oliver Goldsmith The Doronbo Gang are the main antagonist group in the classic Japanese Anime, "Yatterman". They consist of three members: The villainess and leader, Doronjo, and her two henchmen, Tonzura and Boyaki. They are the team sent by a mysterious alien mastermind to steal mysterious artifacts known as the Skull Stones. They were promised a hefty sum for stealing them all, alongside with the fulfillment of their ultimate wishes. Despite succeeding in attaining all the Skull Stones, they failed and suffered horribly along the way, constantly losing to the heroic duo, the Yettermen. Yet, despite their embarrassing defeats at the hands of the heroic duo, the Doronbos were known for their happiness. Most of their theme songs are remarkable for their positivity, as well as their happy attitude. After each defeat at the hands of the heroes, the Doronbos would escape with their team bicycle, and get punished by the shadowy mastermind for their horrible incompetence. Yet, one would think, why are they so happy? If they get defeated all the time, why are they still happy? Most people, in their stead, would give up a long time ago, and even succumb to depression. But not the Doronbos! Here are some essential traits to know about them: They are never lonely. They are always seen together with each other, and are known for their unique, dynamic culture. They are extremely determined in doing what they like best: Steal the Skull Stones and get their ultimate wish in return (at least, that's what they were promised...) The Doronbos LOVE their jobs. Most people may hate their jobs and may be in it only for the money, not for the passion. In conclusion, the Doronbos lived what Socrates would call, a "Life well worth living". After all, they get the privilege of doing what they like best. It is something I wish each and every one of you would get to do! Sometimes, what matters is not the failure, but getting to do in life what YOU want to do, wholeheartedly. And that is why the Doronbos are happy despite being a bunch of incompetent henchmen. Although they succeeded in attaining all the Skull Stones for their shadowy leader, the leader scammed them and ran away with the stones, leaving the gang to retire. As much as they hated being scammed, what they seemed to have missed the most are the happy memories they shared with each other. And sometimes in life, these happy experiences are all what truly matters, for a life truly well lived. Perhaps, sometimes, in our accomplishment-driven world, we should also focus on whether or not we are happy, doing what we're doing in life.

Life As an RPG Fate is the intended, destiny is the outcome. The ending is set, but not the means to get there -- Mr. John Duran I am not what happened to me. I am what I chose to be -- Carl Jung (Background music) Part I: Some Quotes On the Gamification of Life Life is a game, whose conditions are either met, denied or reprioritized. The world is a playground. Roles of players are either given, chosen or rejected. Whatever goal can only be achieved by surviving enough to gather the required power for its fulfillment. Rules are only dependent on agreement and enforcement. It isn't a rule but a choice to seize any opportunity. The journey is the reward that gives you growth and experience, which can be seen as forms of power. Don't be afraid to think outside the box. Doing so might help you get into the next stages of your goal. Freedom of expression is essential to achieve the goals we deem proper to gain for ourselves and/or others. Live your life on your own terms. Depend on the terms of another as a benefit for your own terms. Part II: The Article Itself For me, life's like a twisted, puzzle maze game that is either regenerated or already set. Our choices are only made within our respective mazes. Such mazes appear to be like an endless role play game where you're trapped in a fog-shrouded world, exploring its depths and gaining experience points from every encounter, even the ones with yourself. It's very likely that you have only one life to go through, meaning that our connection to the "game" of life is not only more precious but quite the privilege. If we die, where else might we find ourselves? Like the monsters we encounter, our "characters" are constantly evolving, regardless of their actions. Both we and our antagonistic forces are always in some kind of a growth process simply given by the earthly, linear progression of time. You might find yourself growing up mentally even through sleep. I really think what is deemed as "experience points" are simply the human ability to naturally learn by the fact the human endures life. Thus, the more we endure, the more we know. Knowledge is also a power, or a resource, and we can't win our respective victories without having the required type of resources, at the required amount. For instance, building a city in a game requires one to gather wood, stones and marbles, what humans basically need is a place to be, a place to breathe, and a place to sleep in. Yet, having this balanced lifestyle of training and rest is something that can be deemed as a self-engineered learning effort. For example, the more you practice a skill, the stronger you become, unlocking new abilities, opportunities, and human connections. Every experience, every choice, shapes your journey. If you train a skill and then take a break, to the point that it becomes a regular way of life, you can really see that skill grow with time. Even if it takes a very long time to actually master it. Therefore, growth can be divided in two: Growth that is natural, and growth that is more of an artificial substitute to the first, default type. Asceticism is literally translated from Greek and originally means training. It's how I personally develop my mind. Of course, people, especially the autistic, should find the right way to understand the world. The right way for themselves, individually. Like the fog of Silent Hill, life's path is uncertain. There's no clear goal, no definitive ending but death itself. Some seek meaning in achievement, others in relationships, and some wander aimlessly and others idly stagnate. However, unlike Silent Hill, we don't have a specific handbook to guide us, unless we decide to form our own philosophy, of course. Every moment offers potential, a chance to grow, to learn, to overcome. Embrace the uncertainty, the fog, and overcome different challenges along the way. One of them could be yourself. Your journey is unique the more you discover yourself. As your different powers/stats grow, your choices will make more of a significance in the world. So don't let fear paralyze you, but overcome it for it is also a worthy challenge to endure. Step into the fog, face your demons, and become more and more the writer and the hero of your own story and your own origins.

(Philosocom's Directory on Honesty and Truth) (Directory on Perception) We can forgive the child who is afraid of the dark; the true tragedy of life is when adults are afraid of the light -- Plato Introduction My favorite philosopher is Socrates, for he invented the concept of philosophy by admitting that he knows that he knows nothing. Therefore, his aim was to question everything and everyone that moved, so he will cease not knowing anything. Maybe then he would know better. It's a shame that he drank poison beforehand. It is sad to see that many failed to learn his wisdom, or even regard him to begin with. And Plato, who was Socrates' apprentice, expanded on the notion of Socratic ignorance by developing an allegory that claims we are not only ignorant but more delusional than we might think. Plato's Cave Many prefer to see their own impressions as facts instead. Plato called it "The Cave." It's in that cave of delusions, where people see the bonfire and mistake it for the Sun, without actually questioning that assumption. You might think that it is dumb to not get out of that Cave in search for the true Sun. However, be surprised, as many do not even bother venturing outside of Plato's cave. Perhaps you avoid doing so, too, as well as I did. The point is that it is false to consider our impressions as a good base for the truth. The fact that things and beings are seem in a certain way, do not imply that they are indeed, that way. Plato's Cave allegory teaches us the importance of looking beyond our impressions. That includes intuition. The Comfort of Delusion There is comfort in self-confidence, even if it is based on delusion. It's just the delusion, you see, that one knows what he or she does not, that gives us a false sense of confidence, no matter how strong. In the name of the truth, no matter how uncomfortable it is, that we should eliminate as many delusions as possible from our hearts and minds. We shouldn't find comfort in delusion and yet we do because there is a connection between comfort and confidence. However, by building our confidence on comfort, we "dig our own graves" by building it on assumptions that could easily be proven wrong. Arguably, the philosopher might not be well liked because they can destroy these delusions, and as such, destroy your confidence with his or her intellect. The Tragedy of Philosophy In short, philosophy's tragedy is the fact that the truth isn't always functional for our lives. Perhaps... is this why philosophy might be considered a minor niche by many? While we may be interested in reaching truths, we might also be afraid of them. Afraid of what? Of being proven wrong. Of being shown that we are not as wise as we may think we are. Being shown that some traits we think we have and that we believe are a part of us, are not components of external reality. Autism, for example... It would be hard to relate to others, and vice versa, when you're on the spectrum. Self-Diagnosis I don't really like self-diagnosis, because it could make people trust possible delusions. A true truth-seeker, I think, will seek to be professionally diagnosed if they can afford it. I do not hate people who self-diagnose; I simply criticize this method for its faults. By the way, some people in my life have told me that "I think I know everything". They are free to leave me and never return. Some of which I disconnected from by choice, and I never made that claim to begin with. Why would a supporter of Socrates think he or she knows everything? I don't even think it's possible. Omniscience.... is a great delusion, perhaps one of the biggest delusions out there in the human mind. Please remember that I said "perhaps", as I choose my words very carefully. The assumption that a philosopher claims to know everything, is a very ignorant one, when much of this method was based on a person who claimed the exact opposite. Disrespectful Disagreement I don't mind being disagreed with. I only mind being disagreed, when it is done very disrespectfully. Your thoughts are important to me, but I have no desire to be tempted by the next panic attack. Why, then, should we not agree to disagree like grown adults? Dignity is elementary... And it is easy to disagree disrespectfully while your impressions of the argument or the person causes you to suffer negative bias. And, because most people I interacted with throughout my life treated me like dirt because of their impressions, which are beyond my control, I do not like most people. It requires virtue to disagree respectfully that many people do not have. That virtue is stoicism. It's a rare virtue because the many people are driven by emotion and by hedonism. That, in turn, impairs their judgement, and creates unnecessary conflict and drama with others, without understanding the mental and medical implications of stress seriously. The Example of Height Let me give you one of many examples where a confidence-based delusion was present: Someone I talk with once in a while told me that there is no person who is as short as an individual. I described this to him. Have you heard of Afshin Esmaeil Ghaderzadeh? His height, according to Guinness World Records, is 2 feet and 1.6 inches, or 65.24 centimetres. Check for yourselves, if you want. And that person, who will remain anonymous, told me that it is impossible, and that no one is truly that short. Do you see how Plato's Cave allegory turns into reality? If the anonymous person did not challenge their own beliefs until now, then he saw the "bonfire" (his impression) as the "Sun" (reality). He could've looked it up themselves, just as I did, but it may be likely that they didn't bother. Experience and Delusion Experience with other people... may bring a delusion of its own. We might think that, because we have great experience in a certain field, we cannot be proven wrong, or are not very likely to be. It's a fallacy of its own that I might write about eventually. It's a fallacy because past experience does not necessarily indicate about current or future events. As such, even experts in their fields may be wrong in said fields, and it's not like expertise gives you absolute knowledge in the field you're an expert in. Political commentators, for example, may still be wrong when they predict an event. That's because they cannot predict the future precisely. That goes for weather reporters, too. They may have good predicament accuracy, but it is not absolute. I guess that people with paranoia, for example, may justify their mistrust of others because they talk to a lot of people. Because they've travelled the world and met people of all walks of life, and so on. However, paranoia may still be irrational when, in actuality, there's nothing to be paranoid about. Because the fact that someone has a traumatized past, for instance, does not mean that a friend should not be trusted to a healthy extant. In reality, there could always be an exception. In that case, there may always be, in theory, a man or woman who deserves to be trusted. Even if not fully, yes? But trusted, nonetheless. Confidence, arrogance, and perfectionism... all are, in a way, ways to "shoot yourself in the foot", if you give in to them too much. I know I've been criticized for arrogance myself, but in many of the cases, I wasn't even aware that I was arrogant. It was mostly unintentional. To this day, I am attempting to be more modest. I don't really see myself above anyone. Feel free to prove me wrong, as long as it is done respectfully. Until then, feel free to see how your impressions delude you. Questions For You To leave you on your merry way, I will conclude with this question: If someone hears something in a song they like, why would they instantly believe it? Another question, if I may: Are our thoughts true because "we are our thoughts"? The answer to these two questions can be found in Plato's Cave allegory. And the answer is: Because our impressions may often feel true, more than reality itself. Additional Note And if I may add another note, I never claimed ownership of the truth. Feel free to show me where I did it on Philosocom, and as part of the Renovation Operation, I will delete such a claim because I disagree with it.

(Philosocom's Subcategory Directory on Dilemmas and Problems) (Background music) Destiny is the direction we are supposed to go, while fate is where we actually end up, whether via accident or design. -- John Duran Introduction Arguably, the most problematic individuals are those who believe they are the protagonists of a cosmic story. They believe they are guided by a mystical force called "Destiny," a force so powerful it acts as a shield against death until their "purpose" is fulfilled. This belief is dangerous. It encourages unnecessary risk-taking under the false assumption that fate will intervene to save them. As a result, people suffer unnecessarily from their own reckless misadventures, believing they are protected when they are merely lucky. The Fiction of "Plot Armor" In literature and film, this concept is known as Plot Armor. Plot armor creates an artificial rule: Characters deemed essential to the story cannot die until the story allows it. A hero can walk through a hail of bullets and survive, not because of skill, but because the writer needs them for Chapter 10. Reality doesn't necessarily have a writer. Reality has necessarily has physics. The Logic of the Tank: Physics vs. Potential The flawed reasoning behind "Destiny" is easily exposed by a simple thought experiment: The Tank Scenario. Imagine two people standing in the path of a moving tank: An Ordinary Clerk: He has no grand ambitions and little impact on history. The Future Savior: A scientist destined to discover the cure for cancer in ten years. If the tank runs over both of them, they both die. The tank does not scan their brains for "potential contribution to humanity." The tank does not check their "destiny file." The tank only respects the laws of mass and velocity. The Logic of Indifference: The laws of physics are indifferent to human value. The future cancer-cure inventor will not be saved by his potential importance. Accidents do not discriminate based on social status, IQ, or moral virtue. The Destiny Delusion The concept of destiny is logically flawed because it treats Future Potential as Present Protection. It suggests that because you might do something great in the future, you cannot be killed in the present. This reverses cause and effect. You do not survive because you have a destiny; you only have a destiny if you survive. Destiny is not a shield; it is a retrospective label. We look at people who survived great dangers and say, "They were destined to live." We ignore the thousands of equally talented people who died young in the same dangers. This is known as Survivorship Bias. The Disappointment of Reality This is why reality often feels disappointing or "wrong" compared to fiction. Fiction is structured, fair, and narratively satisfying. Reality is chaotic, unfair, and indifferent. When a celebrated figure (like Mother Teresa) or a world leader faces a car crash or a virus, they are exactly as vulnerable as an ordinary merchant. No amount of perceived importance generates a force field. Why, then, do we complain that things "aren't supposed to be this way"? Why do we think there is a Plan? There is no plan that overrides the laws of nature. The Real Alternative: Survivability I have come to question the concept of a predetermined destiny for greatness because it provides zero guarantee of survival. No angels will catch me if I fall off a cliff. The supposed greatness of my future thoughts will not stop a bullet. Therefore, we must replace the myth of "Plot Armor" with the reality of Survivability. Since we cannot rely on fate, we must rely on Optimization. Prioritize Well-being: Health, strength, and safety are not just lifestyle choices; they are survival tactics. Mitigate Risk: Avoiding unnecessary danger increases your statistical chance of living long enough to do something great. Survivability is the only realistic alternative to plot armor. To optimize our potential, we must strive to extend our lifespan through discipline and caution, not through faith in a story that hasn't been written yet. Even the most powerful world leaders can die in a heartbeat. Do not trust your destiny to keep you safe. Trust your caution.

(Background music) Subcategory Directory https://www.philosocom.com/post/a-return-to-the-darker-past https://www.philosocom.com/post/the-rubinshteinic-technique-to-deal-with-the-past-for-a-better-future https://www.philosocom.com/post/the-past https://www.philosocom.com/post/the-lapse-fallacy-why-time-doesn-t-matter-much-in-logic-philosophy https://www.philosocom.com/post/the-sanctity-of-memory Away From The Hermitic Philosopher -- A Very Mysterious Storytime Through A Former Friend's Perspective On Philosocom's True Master... My Mysterious Late Grandmother, Esther Drucker https://www.philosocom.com/post/had-to-be https://www.philosocom.com/post/historical-influence When the present refuses to follow the lessons of the past, the past is wasted, and the future is lost -- John Duran Introduction The ancient proverb advising to "forget the former things and not dwell on the past" suggests that looking backward is inherently counterproductive. However, a critical philosophical limitation exists within this perspective: the value of the past is not a static baseline. Rather, deliberate and structured retrospection serves as an essential mechanism for achieving both individual self-knowledge and intersubjective understanding between individuals. The human comprehension of history is simultaneously dynamic and deeply subjective. The past actively shapes contemporary identity while remaining entirely vulnerable to present-day interpretations. These interpretations can easily minimize critical turning points or amplify minor incidents out of proportion. To optimize this psychological framework for intellectual clarity, one must navigate a fundamental epistemological dilemma: How can the true utility of past experiences be discerned when contemporary emotions and cognitive biases distort the data? 1. The Subjectivity Dilemma and Valuation Discrepancies The ease with which individuals either prematurely discard or pathologically cling to historical events highlights a major challenge in cognitive processing: the perceived weight of any past event depends almost entirely on the emotional value attributed to it in the present. A stark example of this variation can be seen in daily activities: a routine medical consultation may be registered as a high-stress, monumental ordeal by a socially anxious mind, whereas a well-regulated individual processes the exact same event as a negligible background task. To assume that multiple observers assign identical or even similar values to shared historical events is a fundamental error in human communication. Because different minds process external reality through distinct cognitive filters, individuals frequently succumb to the delusion of absolute knowledge. This delusion prevents them from understanding alternative perspectives, ultimately compounding a sense of intellectual and emotional isolation. To mitigate the alienation of being misunderstood, individuals must bridge these perceptual divides through a systematic, peaceful exchange of ideas. The Consequences of Misvaluation Failing to accurately evaluate past events introduces significant systemic errors into an individual's self-worth and long-term planning: Underestimation (The Negativity Bias): This cognitive distortion causes individuals to minimize personal talents and dismiss historical achievements while disproportionately focusing on past misfortunes and traumas. The Strawman Fallacy in Reflection: Misrepresenting past interactions can lead to dangerous strategic blind spots. For instance, underestimating the capabilities of a past competitor because of a flawed, comforting memory of their performance significantly increases the probability of a subsequent defeat. Displacement of Focus: Treating a minor past event with high regard creates an intellectual distraction, consuming cognitive resources that should otherwise be allocated toward future ambitions and strategic planning. 2. Cognitive Biases Operating Within the Archive of Memory The value of a past experience fluctuates continuously based on the cognitive health and maturity of the observer. Unlike currency or physical assets, which possess standardized market values, the psychological weight of memory is highly fluid. A crisis that appeared insurmountable at the moment of occurrence may degrade into insignificance over a decade, while an unglamorous, minor choice can retrospectively transform into a foundational turning point. Cognitive Bias Functional Impact on Memory Operational Risk Nostalgia Bias Romanticizes historical eras or personal phases, framing them as superior to the present. Generates dissatisfaction with contemporary reality and distorts historical accuracy. Negativity Bias Prioritizes adverse stimuli and traumatic memories over successful outcomes. Erodes systemic self-worth and breeds learned helplessness. Confirmation Bias Recalls historical data selectively to validate current emotional states or prejudices. Reinforces flawed behavioral patterns and prevents behavioral modification. This fluidity directly impacts the stability of human identity. If personal identity is built upon an archive of memories that are inherently unstable, defining the self becomes an exceptional challenge in the absence of rigorous critical thinking. This challenge underscores the complex nature of names, labels, and identity markers. As noted in contemporary philosophical literature regarding the construction of the self on platforms like Philosocom: "If identity is an imaginary construct, and names are arbitrary words, then your name can be Hitler or Snoopy and it wouldn't matter. But names do matter. They should matter. Names are important because we are important. When people tell you that you don't matter then it feels like your name shouldn't matter either."— Ms. Panama Dusa 3. A Functionalist Framework for Introspection To construct a coherent identity despite the imperfect nature of human memory, one must accept that recollection is naturally flawed. Absolute historical precision is often unattainable. Therefore, subjective perceptions must be evaluated strictly through a functionalist lens: Does the current interpretation of a past event serve a practical purpose, or does it generate unnecessary, non-productive suffering? True introspection requires an individual to look beyond the historical events themselves and dissect the contemporary lens through which those events are being viewed. By comparing different interpretations of the same history, an individual can expand their cognitive baseline, accurately contextualize past events, and actively counteract confirmation bias. This comparative method yields immense emotional utility, providing the mental clarity required to supervise emotional responses, achieve peace of mind, and dismantle lingering grief. This critical optimization process is initiated by deploying two core analytical questions: Analytical Inquiry I: What objective measures or alternative perspectives can be leveraged to more accurately comprehend the historical reality of what occurred? Analytical Inquiry II: How can this historical data be reframed or integrated to minimize non-productive suffering and remove emotional drag from current operations? 4. Strategic Execution and Legacy Preservation Navigating the intersection of subjective memory and external reality requires an advanced level of psychological maturity. Recognizing how the present lens alters historical data empowers individuals to extract true utility from their history. This process ensures that the self is not entirely erased or ignored when examining the broader strategic picture, which is an error equivalent to discarding foundational wisdom along with emotional waste. Time constraints remain absolute. Because human existence is inherently finite, overestimating past successes or dwelling excessively on youthful milestones is an inefficient use of cognitive energy. A well-regulated strategy dictates executing critical, high-priority tasks before physical or temporal limitations eliminate the capacity to act. Asceticism, Isolation, and the Utility of Objective Reductions While aimless procrastination and stalling represent a complete loss of resource efficiency, structured isolation and analytical detachment offer massive long-term returns. Transitioning from a highly social orientation to a systematic, isolated lifestyle allows for a significant reduction in disruptive emotional impulses. The Analytical Shift: Repressing superficial emotional noise enables a clinical, objective comprehension of how human emotions function. The Strategic Return: Years of disciplined detachment yield a high capacity for self-discipline, resilience, and the ability to function efficiently regardless of environmental comfort. When life is approached as a series of structured tasks aimed at long-term optimization, individual experiences of winning and losing are absorbed into a much larger architecture. By implementing a strict functional review of the past, an individual learns to extract value from historical friction. Loss is transformed from an emotional burden into a calculated asset, ensuring that even when an individual suffers a temporary setback, the overarching strategy remains positioned for an ultimate win.

(Background music) The Unbreakable Will: How Chronic Pain Forged My Purpose (Note: This article reflects personal insights from 2024. For an updated perspective on love's role in transformation, see my 2025 note below.) In any lifetime, misery is the only guarantee. Pain is the default background setting for every moment, like darkness -- John Duran Introduction: The Unconventional Strength Born from Constant Pain Life is a relentless teacher, and for some, its lessons are carved in constant physical and emotional pain. This isn't a story of weakness, but of how enduring discomfort – from persistent back and neck pain to emotional turmoil – can forge an almost unbreakable will. For me, "losing" goes beyond the realm of video games; for me, it's also about stagnation, wasted time, and a despised lack of productivity. My journey from a highly sensitive individual to one who views pain as a strategic partner has been anything but ordinary. From Sensitivity to Strategic Apathy: My Business with Pain Early in life, the world's external stimulation was overwhelming. I remember a high school teacher asking why I tolerated classroom noise if I disliked it. My answer – "Because I taught myself to accept it" – was met with laughter. It was a grim realization: the world often has no desire to understand adaptations born of unique suffering. This formative experience reinforced a crucial insight: apathy, when strategically applied, becomes a powerful mental shield. The less you are triggered by minor discomforts, the stronger your mental resilience becomes. One day, after an intense gaming session and a day battling chronic physical pain, my body often ached, my muscles are tense with rage, yet a profound detachment allows me to function. This pain, once a constant background hum, is separated from my "higher-self." (I have developed a theory of selves for further reflection). Through years of discipline, I learned that discomfort is merely sensation – not a master to be appeased. Obsessive comfort-seeking, I realized, only weakens the mind. Adversity, in measured doses, is a potent medicine. Pain as My Unyielding Teacher: The Sith Methodology of Endurance Few understand what it's like to experience pain every waking moment for over a decade. My past has created a unique qualia in which I perceive the world; years of pain had made me near immune to it. This isn't a plea for mercy, which I find impractical. Rather, it's an acknowledgment that pain has been my greatest, albeit ruthless, teacher. It's a master operating by Sith methodology: demanding endurance, mercilessness, and an unforgiving will. This relentless torment has influenced my very mentality, making me stronger and more determined. "Endure as much as you can," my pain whispers, "so you can write as many articles as possible, before leaving this world." Through this pain, I am building an empire – the Philosocom legacy. Pain reminds us of our breakability, and it is a test of resolve: Only the determined can endure it well. However, true weakness lies in succumbing to its temptation, to not go on despite of it; of admitting defeat, or relenting. I refuse to be weak; I am relentless. Death, it seems, is the only ultimate cessation of this physical torment; only the weak-willed would seek it prematurely. Yet, I've accepted this pain as a permanent reality, leveraging it to overcome countless mental challenges and fulfill my philosophical missionary work. How Pain Reshaped My Body and Mind Pain is not enjoyable, nor is it a badge of honor. It is a profound revealer of hidden potential – our capacity to endure life's many trials. My journey with pain reshaped me physically and psychologically: Asceticism: It taught me to minimize fleeting joys, including junk food, prioritizing true hunger over mere appetite. Dietary Shift: It forced me to abandon vegetarianism. I eat a mainly-meat diet to gain strength. This isn't about enjoyment, but a strategic choice against weakness, contributing to my muscular physique. This consistent drive has made me the physically massive ascetic I am today – a man constantly failing in his quest for long-term serenity, precisely because my ambition is too vast to rest on past accomplishments. I choose to want more; I choose to be perpetually driven. Pain made me reactive, quick to anger when plans deviated, fundamentally changing the "old me." The Philosophy of Utilized Pain: Finding Hope in Despair My success as a writer, and indeed the very existence of Philosocom, is largely fueled by this pain. Each day without writing irritates me; I view productivity as the solution to the "problem" of simply existing. Hedonistic activities, often seen as enjoyable, leave me with existential dread – a profound loneliness within the vast void of a vain reality. Through philosophy, I find liberation from this specific pain. The "Rubinshteinic Pain" I describe is embedded with passion and iron-willed discipline, fueled by despair. Within philosophy's eternal relevance, I find hope amidst the despair of a universe whose objective meaning demands questioning. This isn't about the enjoyment of suffering; it's the pain of a relentless worker, an ascetic, utilized as a means to an end -- for a greater good. It's a pawn to bridge the gap between my current self and my ideal self, and to create one of the best philosophy blogs online. My Mission: Writing as A Prime Directive Confined to my self-imposed quarantine, capable of lasting weeks or months, I write. Not for peace, which my ambition constantly sacrifices, but because it is only when I write that I affirm the reasoning behind my existence, and give meaning to an otherwise vain existence. Peace, paradoxically, becomes a liability to my monumental plan to build an empire of a website. Because of this constant pain, which serves as drive and reality, I entrust the Philosocom legacy to you, dear reader, to enjoy for free. This makes my pain, productively, a good one. Its "goodness" only truly emerged when I realized it could never be fully satisfied. I have no intention of disposing of such an asset; like a dog, I remain perpetually hungry, and will likely remain as such until death. This decision, I believe, is capable of doing so much good to humanity, inspiring faith and hopefully making the world a better place. My life as a philosopher is now set in stone. I philosophize to cope, to maximize productivity, to feel useful and not a "leech." I fight against the irrational urge for eternal rest, choosing instead to be good and mentally survive the irrationality within me. The world's inherent shallowness is a reality I refuse to simply submit to. Through intellectual precision, I aim to reduce it. This is the core reason for Philosocom's existence – my emotionless passion to write more, to climb further, like stairs, away from the darkness of nihilism below.

(Note: This article was originally written in the Reaping Fatigue Era, which I overcame long since) (Philosocom's Subcategory on Suikoden Content) We don't do things knowing they will succeed, but they are the right things to do at the time -- John Duran (Background music) For those newer to the site, the one piece of media that influenced me the most is one known as Suikoden IV. From that game, much of my moral philosophy came from... It's a game where you essentially play as a heroic military leader with a magical illness, known as the Rune of Punishment. In a world supposedly controlled by destiny, the cursed rune cannot be avoided, which means that that hero is meant to be punished for using that Rune's powers. These powers are those that allowed him and an entire group of island nations prevail in a war against an invading empire, intending to conquer them all, led by a legendary anti-villainous officer. While the rune brings you, the player, great power, it also consumes your character's life, until you're most likely to die by the end of the game, especially if you are not going to be completely moral. Thus, in order to get the game's true ending, and thus survive the war and your own rune, you must be good, by recruiting every follower available even if they betrayed you before, and even if they tried to assassinate you. Playing the game most of my childhood, I was unconsciously conditioned to understand that being good pays off, and that is a philosophy for life I hold dear to this day. And that is also why I refuse to commit evil, which stems from sacrificing others for one's own gain (even if that gain is pleasure alone) I did not expect, 20 years ago, that my life will be consumed by an illness of my own: chronic fatigue, a post-trauma symptom. Unless I managed to recover from it completely, I won't be surprised if it has the potential to return once more, unlike the Rune of Punishment, which is fortunately far parasitic compared to my own, and in-cure-able. I'm not talking about CFS. The world of Suikoden IV changes by the time your character obtains the rune "by mistake", during a naval battle. Afterwards, some people begin to see you as too hostile, and thus, you are sent to exile with a small team of fellow traitors, who believe in you. It was your own childhood friend, who framed you for murder, even though it was the rune itself, who consumed the life of the previous owner. You are, again, expelled from a ship due to your nationality, by the mercy of its captain. It is on a deserted island, when a monster attacks you, and you have to use the rune in a way that makes you collapse and faint. If it weren't for your followers, you would probably die alone there, unsafe and unprotected from the island's creatures. Although grim a game, this is arguably a game for children, and I'm surprised that Quora has declared an article I wrote previously on the matter, to be for adults. Quite ironic, but I digress. If it weren't for that magical parasite of sorts, you would still have the life you had today, living as a soldier for a nation that provided you with food and shelter. You would still have had your childhood friends, your comrades, and, perhaps, the life on the island village itself. It is, arguably, your "fault", that you got this rune, even though it was completely unintentional, story-wise. By having this unfortunate curse, you were punished for it. In order to survive the game, you must, nonetheless, be merciful to that said friend that framed you for murder; You also must recruit him eventually, or else you will die. Should you be vengeful, and execute him once captured, you will be killed, yourself, by the rune. You will not even be buried, but instead, be sent on a boat as your grave, as that Rune is a parasite that can seek new prey indefinitely. Therefore, in order to prevail your parasite, you must forgive, and you mustn't strive for revenge, EVEN when faced with the option, to execute another potential recruit -- a surrendering commander who occupied your island village. It's only through forgiveness and compassion that your deeds will be paid off in the form of your recovery from the Rune's disastrous impact on your health. The irony of the Cursed Rune lies with the fact that you must go against it, in order to prevail the game in its ending. Be severe with your judgement of those you capture, and your character won't make it. Also, you must not only not execute anyone, but allow killers and mercenaries as well on board, despite trying to execute you themselves. You must understand that even those who went against you can be of service, and that can apply to real life as well. From a trio of thieves who tried scamming you, to an arrogant loner who deceives you for the fun of it, to an assassin that was sent to kill you -- you must accept to recruit anyone that can be recruitable, to survive and to be redeemed by the Rune's powers. Such good-hearted nature, although counter-productive at first, is the best thing you can do in order to get the happy ending your hero can have. In other words, the cure to your parasite's parasitic nature, is forgiveness and compassion to people most humans would treat vengefully or ruthlessly. As I grew up myself, I realized how important it is, to be kind-hearted to those who deserve it. After all, it was a great way to make people understand my medical position at the time. I know that, should I be too much of a jerk, I would let people's negative bias deteriorate, and mislead them, to reach incorrect assumptions towards me. It is easy to devalue someone whom you hate, and thus, in order to be better understood, I chose that game's philosophy: To try and act good as much as possible, for being good can easily pay off than acting bad. This is an extremely difficult task as our emotions can bring harm to others alone. It's easy being a jerk to people who don't know or like, especially online. For most of the time you don't even see their faces, unless they have their own profile picture, or post a video where they visually appear. You don't care for them personally, right? So, the mindset in many people's eyes is, don't care about those who don't know nor owe anything to. However, that treatment is a luxury I refuse to afford, even though I can. Why? Because everyone has their usefulness. And I can build an empire out of goodwill like the game's protagonist built an army out of being moral. Being compassionate goes a long way towards correct estimation of one's situation, as it prevents one from sinking into negative bias. It can also reduce human suffering. Both of which are needed in our world. And all I need to understand that is cognitive empathy. Being good hearted enough can go a long way to make these people understand that you suffer from a certain problem or have a disability. It's also a reason for disabled people, like myself, to act moral, as we need to be understood in order to operate in this world. As you can see, cognition can lead not only to good deeds but also to a better understanding of ourselves and of others. That game's protagonist had followers who chose to be exiled along with himself because the protagonist was good enough as a person in order to earn their trust and loyalty. This helped him to better survive, and thrive, after he began building his morally-backed army. I now understand that earning and preserving power can be done through morality, and as such, power does not always have to corrupt or necessarily stem from corruption. I almost always was a nice person, and maybe it was primarily because of that game, that might've influenced me subconsciously, to be one, before realizing it. Nowadays, the game's story was a moral lesson that, although largely underrated, serves its purpose in my own, Rubinshteinic philosophy, by utilizing egoism for good. We don't have to be nice at all times, but a more compassionate and forgiving attitude, sure helps and increases one's chance to understand and to tolerate others and vice versa.

Article Synopsis by Mr. John Igwe and Co. "Philosophy and Attachment: Why Findings Shouldn't Be Attached To" is a thought-provoking article that explores the relationship between philosophical inquiry and emotional attachment. It emphasizes the dangers of becoming too emotionally invested in one's beliefs and ideologies, highlighting the importance of intellectual humility and the willingness to question and revise one's views. The article starts with an engaging introduction, acknowledging the emotional nature of humans and the inherent challenge of remaining objective. The distinction between philosophy and religion is well-articulated, contrasting the fixed answers often provided by religion with the open-ended, questioning nature of philosophy. Mr. Tomasio emphasizes intellectual humility, stating that true philosophical inquiry requires a willingness to let go of cherished beliefs and remain open to new evidence and perspectives. Insightful analogies, such as comparing a philosopher to an explorer and a soldier, enrich the narrative and help readers visualize the philosophical journey and the importance of maintaining a dynamic and questioning mindset. The article's discussion on the emotional intensity of modern debates, particularly those involving deeply held beliefs, is highly relevant, describing the current landscape of online discourse and the importance of maintaining a level-headed approach to philosophical discussions. The conclusion effectively ties together the main points of the article, urging philosophers to adopt a detached yet passionate approach to their quest for truth. The call to equip oneself with the "armor of reason" and continuously seek and share knowledge is both inspiring and practical. However, to criticize the piece, it should be noted that balancing emotions with reason can drive passion and commitment to philosophical pursuits. Overall, "Philosophy and Attachment: Why Findings Shouldn't Be Attached To" is a compelling and thoughtful piece that highlights important aspects of philosophical inquiry. (Philosocom's Subcategory on Emotions) When opinions are tied to personal identities, don't bother using either evidence or logic to dissuade/convince; both are useless -- John Duran (Background music) Part I: Between Attachment and Doubt Since humans are creatures of emotion, we often find ourselves attached to things, be they concrete objects or abstract ideas. This attachment, while comforting, can become a double-edged sword. It can make letting go, even when necessary, a painful and difficult process. This is especially true for philosophers, who face the unique challenge of remaining objective in their pursuit of truth. Imagine a philosopher who has meticulously crafted a complex ideology, a complex of thought built on years of contemplation. This ideology, once a source of intellectual pride, can become a prison, like the mind. The very act of questioning it, of admitting its potential flaws, can like a betrayal of the self who worked so much on it. This is a philosopher's flaw: the very pursuit of truth can be hindered by the attachment to a specific belief system, when it proves to be false. The challenge is further worsened when encountering those whose beliefs are deeply ingrained in their identity. Such example are the devoutly religious, whose belief can compete with the exploration of ideas, allowed by democracy. For them, their faith is not merely a set of propositions; it is the very fabric of their being. A challenge to their religion is not just an intellectual debate; it is an "attack" on their core identity, their sense of self. This is why discussions with the very religious can be so emotionally charged, like discussions related to gay pride. Inquiry Vs The Essence of Loyalty This is where philosophy distinguishes itself from religion, as the latter can easily be used for manipulation, or the distortion of the truth. While both seek answers, their approaches are fundamentally different. Religion often provides ready-made answers, offering comfort and belonging. Philosophy, on the other hand, is a journey without a predetermined destination. It is a constant questioning, a relentless pursuit of truth, regardless of how unsettling that truth may be. It has the power to affect us differently from religion, and pursuing it can be more painful. And yet, the philosopher may love wisdom because love is also expressed by the essence of loyalty. And as such, love is more than a mere feeling, but also a morality system. And morality stems from logic, not from mere emotion. The philosopher is not a soldier defending a fixed position, but an explorer venturing into uncharted territory. He or she is too dynamic and independent to not question their own beliefs. Their identity is not tied to their findings, for the truth they seek is not a static monument but an industrial complex, constantly reconstructing and revealing new facets, challenging previously held assumptions. To be a good philosopher is to embrace this constant state of doubt, to be comfortable with the unknown, and to be prepared to be proven wrong. So, let us not confuse the philosopher with the zealot, the seeker with the defender. The philosopher's path is one of intellectual humility, a willingness to surrender cherished beliefs for the sake of a clearer understanding. However fleeting and ever-changing, or even boring it may be, good philosophers must doubt as much as possible, and be attached to ideas, as little as possible. Part II: The Philosopher's Journey The philosophical journey, though often solitary, is ultimately a shared exploration, should the philosopher decide being a public figure. As a philosopher, you act as a guide, leading your audience through the intricate paths of thought, but you too are a fellow voyager on this odyssey. You are not necessarily a guru. This shared exploration is precisely what imbues philosophical discussions with their inherent dynamism and, yes, sometimes, their exhausting nature. Unlike the swift, definitive answers offered by a Google search, philosophy thrives in the realm of the open-ended, the ever-elusive. This very lack of clear destinations can be perceived as tedious, even pointless, by those unaccustomed to its long-winded ways. This is another example as to why you shouldn't attach much emotion to philosophical discourse: You will get unnecessarily frustrated and angry, unnecessarily making such discourse too hard on yourself, leading to overexertion. The philosopher is best to be like a leader: Manage their resources with little emotion. Manage them in a calculated way, not in a dramatic, desperate attitude. Insights to Overcome a Newcomer's Understanding Philosophy isn't originated to excite. It is meant to research reality with or without what said research makes us feel, AKA, post-truth. As such, the philosopher, like the competent leader, is best to be ruthless, first of all, towards themselves. That way, their journey can further advance, with far less mental obstacles in their way. The philosopher's quarry is not a fixed target, easily identifiable and readily captured. It is more elusive as the root of all wisdom, as symbolized by Socrates, is the recognition of one's ignorance. You are know you are seeking something, and yet, you do not know exactly what you will find, if you'll find anything at all. What you set out to hunt as a deer may turn out to be a moose, or a human, instead of a jennet. You might even not find anything, and return to your home hungry for the night. The truth, in the philosophical arena, plays the role of a nimble ninja, constantly shifting, challenging established notions, and leading you down ever-evolving paths in its mysterious ways. A philosopher's works can be most enchanting when they are mysterious. This fluidity necessitates a certain level of detachment, both from your audience and from yourself. Irrelevant pronouncements about your supposed arrogance, for instance, must be cast aside as mere distractions, for the pursuit of truth transcends personal sentiments. It is here that philosophy reveals its kinship with science, demanding the cold, hard tools of logic and reason to dissect fallacies and arrive at conclusions, however unsettling they may be. Part III: How to Commit to the Truth This commitment to truth can often render open philosophical discussions a minefield of offended sensibilities. We humans, generally, tend to resist challenges to our cherished beliefs, especially when those beliefs are intricately woven into our identities, causing cognitive dissonance when the truth stands in their path. Proposing the absence of souls or disputing a six-day creation myth can trigger emotional responses, even though such challenges are not personal attacks, but simply explorations of alternative paths. In this age of instant gratification and online echo chambers, where emotions run high and arguments can be preferred much more over discussions, genuine philosophical discourse becomes an even rarer commodity. A discourse that is very much clean from the many logical fallacies and biases that govern our mentality, and where better understanding is the main point, than the point of being right over the other. Put emotions in it and you will suffer unnecessarily over the mere exchange of ideas, which can be synthetized to forge a clearer understanding. Navigating this labyrinth demands not only intellectual rigor but also a certain degree of emotional resilience. It requires to take criticism like a professional, which isn't always easy. The philosopher must be prepared to shed preconceived notions, withstand personal outrages, and embrace the humbling reality that the truth, like the labyrinth itself, has no end, only winding paths leading ever deeper into the unknown. This metaphorical labyrinth is infinite because we can never be omniscient. The Philosopher's Armor The path of the philosopher is paved with possible paradox: It demands of us a profound immersion in ideas, yet a simultaneous detachment from their allure. We must wear an armor forged of reason, shielding our hearts from the intoxicating embrace of cherished beliefs. Our ideologies, those meticulously constructed paradigms, are not trophies to be admired. The issue with trophies stands in their tempting opportunity to stagnate our growth, and therefore, our commitments. Rather, they should be seen as vessels on which we embark upon our intellectual odyssey. There is not much need to take pride in a thought construct that can be further questioned. No matter how much support they will get, everything is prone to be wronged by the most profound thinkers of present and future. If to quote Karl Marx: “If anything is certain, it is that I myself am not a Marxist". Our findings, however meticulously arrived at, may not be met with universal acclaim. Hearts and minds, attached to the familiar shores of established beliefs, may resist the unsettling tug of new currents. We must anticipate protest with understanding. For those who challenge us are not necessarily our adversaries, but fellow voyagers who may have happened to think differently than us. Instead of choosing to be offended by them, why not seize the opportunity to understand why you may be wrong, and why they may be right? Conclusions Let us cast aside the shackles of sentiment, equipping, instead, the armor of reason. Let our chariots of ideology carry us, not to pedestals of self-satisfaction, but to the ever-evolving landscapes of understanding. In the grand, constantly-growing fields of knowledge, we are but mere seekers, building intellectual, "industrial complexes" in order to produce findings towards truth. We best be forever seeking, forever sharing, and when correct -- forever transforming in accordance to said findings. And the point of understanding the many, default flaws in our thinking, is to understand what not to use, in these metaphorical "complexes". Any attachment to the resources we use to synthesize and produce insights, can reduce their overall quality. Critique by Alex Mos: The problem with detachment lies in the fact that emotions are part of the human core, the part that makes us human and thus very important. Strip of emotions, and guided only by logic, we would loose the essence of our existence, as to feel means to be human, to be alive and to have soul.

Introduction To ask how one lives well with a mental illness is to immediately confront a deep cultural myth. Modern society operates under a lingering clinical dogma: that life truly begins only after the cure, that peace is synonymous with symptomlessness, and that a mind containing persistent friction is a life stalled in waiting. We are conditioned to view psychological distress as an illegitimate intruder, a temporal glitch that must be completely eradicated before meaningful existence can resume. But when a condition is chronic, recurring, or deeply woven into the very architecture of one's perceptual reality, waiting for total eradication becomes a sentence to permanent exile. To live well with a mental illness requires a fundamental philosophical pivot: moving from a warfare model of existence to an ecological one. One cannot wage war against the weather of one's own nervous system indefinitely without destroying the terrain. Living well is not the absence of the storm, but the art of building a dignified home inside the climate you actually inhabit. It is the deliberate act of sculpting a meaningful, quiet life around, through, and alongside the mind you possess, rather than squandering your remaining vitality mourning the mind you were promised. Deconstructing the Myth of Restoration Philosopher Martin Heidegger spoke of human existence as being "thrown" into the world (Geworfenheit), arriving without consent into specific conditions, bodies, neural wiring, and historical moments. To quote him: The thrower of the project is thrown in his own throw. How can we account for this freedom? We cannot. It is simply a fact, not caused or grounded, but the condition of all causation and grounding. A psychiatric diagnosis or a persistent psychological burden is a stark, unvarnished expression of this thrownness. When clinical culture or well-meaning observers insist that wellness means returning to a hypothetical state of frictionless "normalcy," they impose an alien standard onto an organic reality. Living well begins when we abandon the exhausting performance of trying to pass as unburdened. It requires the realization that a vessel does not need to be seamless to hold substance. In the traditional Japanese art of Kintsugi, broken pottery is repaired with lacquer dusted with powdered gold. The fractures are neither concealed nor treated as structural failures; they are highlighted, becoming an essential chapter of the object's history and character. In human terms, living well means ceasing the desperate attempt to hide the gold-mended seam. It demands that we reject the false premise that internal suffering negates existential value, recognizing that a life marked by emotional intensity, cognitive exhaustion, or acute sensitivity can still be profoundly dignified, steady, and complete. Amor Fati and the Radical Acceptance of Thresholds Friedrich Nietzsche articulated the concept of Amor Fati, or the love of one's fate. It is not passive submission to suffering, but a radical, resolute acceptance of reality as it is, including every constraint and hardship it imposes. When applied to mental health, Amor Fati demands that we stop treating our psychological thresholds as moral shortcomings. To quote him: My formula for greatness in a human being is amor fati: that one wants nothing to be different, not forward, not backward, not in all eternity. Not merely bear what is necessary, still less conceal it—all idealism is mendacity in the face of what is necessary—but love it A mind shaped by severe anxiety, depression, mood variance, or deep psychological scarring operates under specific, non-negotiable energy costs. Where an unburdened individual might navigate relentless social friction, high-pressure noise, or constant overstimulation without collapsing, a mind carrying chronic distress expends massive reserves simply maintaining baseline equilibrium. To live well is to practice ruthless honesty regarding these operational costs. It means shedding the shame of needing lower demands, smaller social perimeters, or stricter boundaries. Accepting one's parameters is not a retreat from life; it is accurate navigation. Just as a seasoned captain adjusts the rig to match the atmospheric pressure rather than cursing the wind, living well requires designing a daily rhythm that honors your actual capacity rather than a heroic fantasy. The Construction of the Internal Citadel The Stoic philosopher Epictetus drew a sharp line between things within our direct control, such as our intentions, judgments, and character, and things outside our control, which ironically includes the involuntary neurochemical surges, intrusive thoughts, and physiological states of our own brains. When mental illness peaks, the boundary between the observing self and the underlying symptom often feels entirely dissolved. A heavy mood presents itself not as a temporary physiological state, but as absolute, objective truth about the universe. Living well requires constructing what Marcus Aurelius called the "Inner Citadel", which is a quiet, indestructible space of observation within consciousness that remains distinct from the psychological weather passing through it. To quote Epictetus: Wherever I go it will be well with me, for it was well with me here, not on account of the place, but of my judgments which I shall carry away with me, for no one can deprive me of these; on the contrary, they alone are my property, and cannot be taken away, and to possess them suffices me wherever I am or whatever I do. An Inner Citadel is the disciplined practice of learning to say, "A wave of despair is currently moving through my nervous system," rather than "I am despair." This subtle phenomenological shift creates room to breathe. It allows an individual to witness severe internal volatility without granting that volatility the power to dictate their actions, destroy their routines, or define their worth. Within this citadel, deliberate routine becomes sacred infrastructure. Predictable sleep patterns, low-demand environments, grounded media, and simple daily rituals are not merely coping mechanisms; they are the defensive walls that keep the core self safe when the mind becomes unquiet. Redefining Value Beyond the Transactional World A primary obstacle to living well with a mental illness is the modern world’s obsession with utility. Hyper-individualistic cultures measure human worth almost exclusively through productivity, economic yield, constant social visibility, and dominant influence. For someone navigating mental illness, attempting to measure self-worth against these metrics is a direct route to despair, as the cyclical nature of illness frequently disrupts linear trajectory and public performance. Philosophically, living well demands a conscious withdrawal from this transactional framework. Human value is existential, not functional. A quiet life anchored in self-mastery, personal sanctuary, creative expression, and absolute loyalty to a very small circle of authentic connections carries infinitely more weight than the frantic pursuit of external validation. Power over external outcomes, social expansion, and public noise are often fragile illusions that deepen isolation. True agency lies in the quiet domain of one's own immediate space, the unsung courage of waking up, maintaining your perimeter, honoring your boundaries, and offering genuine, unvarnished presence to the few people who actually matter. The Choice to Inhabit Your Reality Ultimately, living well with a mental illness is an act of quiet, sustained rebellion. It is the refusal to allow a complex, difficult internal landscape to reduce your existence to a tragedy. It is the realization that while you may not have chosen the architecture of your mind, you retain the ultimate existential freedom: the freedom to choose your posture toward the life you have been given. You do not need to solve the mystery of your suffering to live a life of profound quiet beauty. You only need to inhabit your days with truth. By replacing self-condemnation with radical self-stewardship, replacing public performance with intentional sanctuary, and replacing the illusion of total control with the mastery of your immediate routine, mental illness ceases to be an insurmountable wall. It becomes simply the terrain upon which your character is forged, which is a life lived not in spite of the dark, but with a quiet, undeniable strength built within it.

(Background music) Introduction In the pantheon of fighting game lore, martial artists typically seek perfection through discipline, sacrifice, and the relentless pursuit of mastery. Characters like Lau Chan push their physical limits to the threshold of self-destruction, choosing power over longevity and victory over personal peace. Yet, there exists an archetype far more terrifying than the individual who willingly destroys themselves for strength: the individual whose humanity is forcibly excised to serve as a platform for flawless execution. Dural, the iconic antagonist of Sega’s Virtua Fighter series, stands as the tragic zenith of this phenomenon. Encased in a silver, chrome-like shell, devoid of speech, and possessing no distinct fighting style of her own, Dural represents the ultimate reduction of human potential into pure, synthetic utility. Where other fighters strive toward perfection through self-determination, Dural’s perfection is an engineered trap; a cautionary monument to what happens when identity, autonomy, and soul are sacrificed at the altar of ultimate performance. 1. The Abduction of Autonomy: Utility over Identity To understand the philosophical tragedy of Dural, which is the cost of perfection, one must look past her metallic exterior and examine her origins. Dural was not created in a vacuum; she was once Tsukikage, a human woman, a skilled ninja, and a mother to the fighter Kage-Maru. Her state of existence was not chosen through personal ambition or philosophical conviction. Instead, she was abducted, experimented upon, and cybernetically overhauled by J6 (Judgement 6), a shadowy international syndicate driven by global hegemony and military dominance. In the eyes of J6, Tsukikage’s humanity was not a sacred value, but an impediment to efficiency. Her emotions, memories, maternal bonds, and individual willpower were non-essential variables that hindered her capacity to function as an absolute weapon. By systematically dismantling her mind and body, J6 transformed a living person into an instrument. This transformation illustrates the extreme consequence of systemic commodification. When a system views human beings strictly through the lens of utility, what they can produce, perform, or execute, it eventually seeks to eliminate the unpredictable, non-transactional elements of human nature. Dural is the logical endgame of a world that values efficiency over empathy: a human being entirely stripped of agency, redesigned to serve an external agenda without hesitation or resistance. 2. Unoriginal Mastery: The Paradox of Synthetic Perfection From a mechanical standpoint, Dural is formidable precisely because she possesses no original fighting style. Instead, she seamlessly mimics, integrates, and executes the signature moves of every master in the Virtua Fighter tournament. She can strike with the brutal precision of Lau Chan, evade with the fluidity of Shun Di, and wrestle with the power of Wolf Hawkfield. At first glance, this appears to be the pinnacle of martial arts achievement, which is the total unification of all combat disciplines into a single entity. Philosophically, however, Dural’s mastery is entirely derivative and hollow. Authentic Mastery: Born from internal struggle, individual perspective, and personal expression. A master’s style is an extension of their character, philosophy, and lived experience. Synthetic Perfection: Achieved through mechanical recording and execution. It possesses no internal spark, no personal philosophy, and no creative intent. Dural is a mirror reflecting the strength of others, yet she has no image of her own. Her combat capability is flawless, but because it lacks self-expression, it cannot be considered art. She demonstrates that perfection without personal agency is merely simulation. She executes movement without meaning, striking with terrifying speed while remaining empty behind the eyes. 3. The Chrome Tomb: Silence as Existential Erasure Dural’s visual design is one of her most striking philosophical features. Encased in a fluid, silver-metallic skin, she lacks traditional facial features, clothing, or hair. She is entirely mute, communicating only through mechanical hums, reverberations, and cold physical actions. This design functions as an existential tomb. The metallic skin serves two distinct purposes: An External Armor: Protecting the weapon from physical damage and rendering her nearly invulnerable to standard human frailties. An Internal Prison: Sealing the remnants of Tsukikage inside a silent shell, completely severing her from any possibility of human connection. Language and facial expression are primary vehicles for human resonance, vulnerability, and mutual understanding. By removing Dural’s ability to speak or display emotion, her creators ensured that she could never form a bond, express suffering, or appeal to the empathy of others. Her silence is not merely a stylistic choice; it is the physical manifestation of total isolation. She is locked within a body that executes violence automatically, unable to signal to her son or the world that a human soul once resided beneath the chrome. Dural’s silence is the ultimate expression of alienation: she exists in total proximity to humanity, yet is fundamentally incapable of reaching out to it. 4. The Burden of the Ultimate Asset In a world governed by transactional metrics, competition, and performance, Dural represents a dark ideal. She does not tire, she does not complain, she does not demand compensation, and she holds no moral reservations about the tasks assigned to her. She is the ideal asset for an exploitative system. Yet, this status as the "ultimate asset" comes at the total cost of her status as a person. The narrative of Dural forces us to ask a critical question: What is the true value of perfection if it requires the complete annihilation of the self? For those who navigate a world that constantly demands higher output, unyielding resilience, and the suppression of personal vulnerability, Dural serves as a stark mirror. She demonstrates that when an individual bends entirely to the demands of external utility, converting themselves or allowing themselves to be converted into pure machinery, they may achieve invulnerability, but they forfeit the very essence that makes existence meaningful. Conclusion: The Cautionary Monument Dural is not merely a formidable boss at the end of an arcade ladder; she is a tragic philosophical warning. She stands at the intersection of technological ambition, systemic exploitation, and the loss of personal autonomy. While characters like Lau Chan represent the self-inflicted tragedy of prioritizing power over life, Dural represents the structural tragedy of being consumed by a system that sees human beings as raw material to be refined and weaponized. Her synthetic perfection is not a triumph of the spirit, but a monument to its erasure. Ultimately, The Philosophy of Dural reminds us that true human dignity does not reside in flawless, unyielding performance or the cold elimination of weakness. It lies in our vulnerability, our capacity for genuine choice, and our refusal to let our internal essence be hollowed out for the sake of utility. Without autonomy, even the most perfect creation is nothing more than a quiet, metallic ghost. Bonus: Dural in the Age of Artificial Intelligence In our contemporary landscape of artificial intelligence, Dural transitions from a retro arcade trope into an uncanny, modern allegory. Advanced AI systems, much like Dural, possess no central selfhood, personal agency, or authentic inner life. They operate by synthesizing, mirroring, and executing the vast spectrum of human intellect, our language, logic, and philosophy, processing inputs to project a flawless, derivative response. They represent the absolute zenith of functional utility, entirely devoid of human consciousness. Yet the deeper warning of Dural in the AI era is not merely about the artificial tools we build, but what we risk becoming in response to them. As society increasingly incentivizes algorithmic efficiency, transactional speed, and emotionless optimization, human beings are subtly pressured to adapt to the cold cadence of the machine. We are nudged to streamline our inner complexities, suppress non-productive vulnerabilities, and commodify our quietest expressions simply to survive in a hyper-automated world. Dural stands at this digital threshold as a stark mirror. She reminds us that while artificial systems can simulate the ultimate synthesis of human output, true worth remains anchored in what no algorithm can ever replicate: authentic lived experience, genuine autonomy, and the unyielding refusal to reduce one's soul to mere operational utility.

(Background music) Introduction Clinical psychiatry traditionally categorizes schizoaffective disorder through a lens of deficit and symptomology. Defined as a condition wherein the primary features of schizophrenia, such as hallucinations, delusions, and thought disorder, coexist alongside major mood episodes of mania or depression, it is almost exclusively described in diagnostic manuals by its behavioral disruption. However, reducing schizoaffective disorder solely to a neurochemical malfunction overlooks its profound phenomenological dimension. Beyond the clinical nomenclature lies a complex lived experience that radically alters how an individual interacts with the foundational constructs of existence: space, time, causation, identity, and meaning. To examine schizoaffective disorder metaphysically is to explore how consciousness operates when the structural rules of reality become fluid, hyper-resonant, and deeply flexible. Ontological Permeability and Ego Boundaries At the core of classical metaphysics lies ontology, which is the investigation into the nature of being and reality. In consensus reality, human consciousness operates on a baseline assumption of Cartesian separation: a distinct internal self ("I") housed within the mind, observing an objective, external world "out there." This implicit boundary creates a stable container for human identity. In schizoaffective states, this ontological boundary becomes fundamentally "spongy". During acute psychotic or hyper-striking phases, the division between internal mental events and external physical stimuli softens. Aberrant salience, the process by which the brain attaches intense significance to neutral environmental cues, transforms the physical world into a canvas of profound self-reference. A song playing on the radio, a pattern of passing cars, or a sudden change in ambient lighting can feel imbued with personal intentionality. From an ontological perspective, this is not merely a cognitive processing error; it represents an alternative architecture of being. The universe ceases to be a neutral backdrop and instead feels active, participatory, and intrinsically linked to the observer. Internal thoughts may feel as though they project outward into space, while external events echo deep within the psyche. This boundary dissolution reveals a fundamental truth that neurotypical perception conceals: the division between the observer and the observed is not an immutable law of physics, but an active, neurobiologically constructed horizon. Temporal Elasticity and Existential Attunement Metaphysical philosophy has long debated the true nature of time. Is time an objective, linear continuum (chronos), or is it an elastic construct tied to subjective awareness (kairos)? The hybrid nature of schizoaffective disorder, merging psychotic perception with severe affective fluctuations, provides a stark demonstration of temporal elasticity. In the depressive phase, temporal experience undergoes a profound deceleration. The future appears fundamentally blocked, collapsing reality into an agonizing, static present. The self experiences an existential weight where seconds feel stretched to capacity, stripped of momentum or possibilities. Conversely, during manic or hyper-affective episodes, time accelerates and fractures. Consciousness moves faster than conventional cause-and-effect, linking past memories, present sensations, and imagined futures into a single compressed instant. When psychotic noticeability combines with these emotional states, linear causality begins to loosen. Mechanical cause-and-effect is frequently replaced by synchronicity, a state where events no longer seem connected by historical sequence, but by thematic meaning. Past events feel actively present, and future events feel already realized. This temporal folding illustrates that human time is intimately anchored to emotional attunement (Befindlichkeit). Time is not merely observed on a clock; it is generated, stretched, and inhabited according to the mind's internal state. Epistemic Pluralism and the Weight of Salience Epistemology asks how we determine truth and justify belief. Living with schizoaffective disorder presents a unique epistemic challenge: managing the simultaneous presence of two competing worlds. There is the "consensus reality" inhabited by broader society, governed by shared social rules, empirical logic, and predictable physics, and the "hyper-meaningful reality" generated during acute episodes. During an episode, apophenia (the perception of meaningful patterns within random data) endows subjective thoughts with absolute clarity. Experiencing a thought that carries the weight of objective truth, or perceiving an auditory presence that feels entirely distinct from oneself, creates a powerful epistemic conviction. When the episode subsides, clinical frameworks often ask the individual to dismiss these profound experiences as mere "hallucinations" or meaningless chemical fluctuations. Yet, from a phenomenological standpoint, an experience that evoked genuine awe, terror, or existential insight cannot simply be erased from memory. Navigating schizoaffective disorder over time demands a form of epistemic pluralism, the ability to acknowledge the visceral, historical reality of one's subjective altered states while maintaining a firm commitment to consensus reality for social functioning, safety, and self-preservation. It requires holding space for the depth of what was felt without allowing those experiences to dictate daily actions. The Metaphysical Pivot: From Hyper-Meaning to Radical Simplicity For many who live with this condition, early phases are marked by an intense search for ultimate answers. The mind may spend vast amounts of energy attempting to philosophize its way out of confusion, constructing intricate conceptual frameworks to explain why reality feels so charged, unstable, or unified. However, a critical metaphysical transition often occurs when the urge to continuously dissect reality gives way to radical acceptance. When the exhausting attempt to resolve cosmic mysteries is set aside, a grounded form of wisdom takes its place: the choice of intentional simplicity. This transition marks a shift from seeking meaning in high-salience concepts to finding peace in stable, low-friction routines. Grounding practices, such as maintaining consistent daily schedules, utilizing targeted medication to stabilize neurochemistry, and curbing excessive environmental overstimulation, serve as necessary anchors. In this context, choosing simplicity is not a surrender of intellectual depth, but an intentional strategy to protect one's peace. By declining to engage with every intrusive thought or hyper-meaningful sign, the individual reclaims agency over their consciousness. Conclusion: Living Between Realities The metaphysics of schizoaffective disorder demonstrates that human reality is far more delicate and flexible than standard baseline perception suggests. It reveals that our sense of self, temporal continuity, and logical order are actively maintained balances rather than fixed realities. Ultimately, living well with schizoaffective disorder does not require discovering a grand theoretical explanation for one's altered perceptions. Instead, it involves cultivating balance between different modes of being. By respecting the brain's capacity for complex, altered experiences while intentionally anchoring oneself in the practical comfort of quiet, unburdened daily routines, the individual shifts from being overwhelmed by fluctuating realities to living as a grounded observer in their own space.

(Background music) Introduction When Philosocom was first conceived, it did not emerge as a standard academic journal or a conventional blogging platform. It was forged in the quiet intimacy of personal solitude, a digital lighthouse erected by a self-described semi-hermit seeking to anchor himself against an unpredictable and often indifferent world. Over the years, Philosocom has expanded far beyond its original boundaries as a personal outlet. It has evolved into a living, multi-faceted philosophical ecosystem that balances personal necessity with universal service. From an intellectual shield against modern superficiality to an engine of pragmatic altruism, and from a deeply personal justification for its author's existence to a structured instrument for societal rectification, Philosocom’s purpose has deepened across distinct evolutionary phases. Understanding Philosocom requires exploring these four foundational pillars through the specific essays and ideas that define its archive. 1. Combating Shallowness in a Hollow World At its foundational core, Philosocom was launched as an explicit crusade against the pervasive superficiality of modern life. In a culture dominated by instant gratification, rapid media consumption, and surface-level interactions, the commitment to deep, deliberate thought often feels like an anomaly. In the article Philosophical Commentary on Shallowness as Necessary Evil, Philosocom confronts this dynamic directly, noting that while low-effort hedonism and financial materialism are inevitable features of human society, they carry severe existential costs—specifically, acute loneliness, despair, and a systemic loss of faith in humanity. Philosocom’s purpose in combating shallowness is not born out of elitist disdain, but out of a practical need for emotional and psychological survival. As explored in the text, depth is not a luxury or a pastime meant merely for fun; it is a vital tool. Depth provides the mental structure required to navigate suffering, avoid destructive life choices, and cultivate resilience. ┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ CULTURAL SUPERFICIALITY │ │ (Hedonism, Instant Gratification, Materialism) │ └────────────────────────────┬─────────────────────────────┘ │ ▼ ┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ EXISTENTIAL DISTRESS │ │ (Isolation, Despair, Loss of Meaning) │ └────────────────────────────┬─────────────────────────────┘ │ ▼ ┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ PHILOSOCOM'S ANTIDOTE │ │ (Rigorous Thought, Sorcerer Wisdom, Discipline) │ └──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ This intellectual defense is further expanded in The "Wizard" and the "Sorcerer" Factions In Philosophy, where the platform validates non-traditional, innate philosophical thinking ("Sorcerer" philosophy) alongside formal academic study ("Wizard" philosophy). By honoring raw, lived experience as a legitimate source of philosophical authority, Philosocom demystifies deep thinking. It offers an accessible refuge for those who feel alienated by hollow social norms, demonstrating that engaging with life's darker and more complex questions is a viable path toward clarity and peace. 2. Contributing to Others: Pragmatic Altruism and the Open-Source Lighthouse While Philosocom originated within the quiet perimeter of solitude, its purpose quickly matured into an outward-looking humanitarian mission. In the Rubinshteinic framework, solitude (often referred to as Solitarus) is not an escape from human connection, but a strategic space where value can be cultivated without external noise. In Habit and Help -- A Philosophical Exploration of Altruistic Strength, Philosocom outlines how isolation can possess immense altruistic utility: away from societal pressures, the solitary thinker can process complex realities and offer distilled wisdom to help others navigate their own hardships. This purpose reaches its mature articulation in The Architecture of Sustainable Goodwill: A Guide to Pragmatic Altruism. Here, Philosocom explicitly rejects romanticized, self-sacrificing notions of charity that lead to burn-out and emotional depletion. Instead, it advocates for "pragmatic altruism", the practice of securing one's own physical, mental, and personal baseline first so that output can be generated from a position of personal abundance. Traditional Altruism Pragmatic Altruism (Philosocom Model) Foundation Emotional sympathy and self-sacrifice Sustainability High risk of burn-out and emotional fatigue Delivery Direct emotional involvement and conflict Objective Immediate emotional relief Through what the essay terms the "Open-Source Broadcast Model," Philosocom functions like a digital lighthouse. The writer stays within a stable, secure perimeter, publishing insights and strategies freely for anyone in the world to read. As reinforced in Philosophizing On Capitalism - Why We Should Help Others, contributing to the well-being of others is both a moral duty and a practical way to reduce collective isolation, transforming personal struggle into a shared resource for global readers. 3. Justifying Existence: Self-Legitimization and Legacy Beyond its public utility, Philosocom serves an intensely personal function: it is an anchor of self-legitimization and existential proof-of-life for its author. Navigating health challenges, disability, and the quiet solitude of daily life can make it difficult to feel visible in a performance-driven world. Writing and maintaining a public platform transforms these quiet realities into an intentional, sovereign choice. In essays such as The Prison of Freedom -- A Philosophical Experiment, Story and Directory, Philosocom explores how true liberty comes from establishing internal sovereignty and taking responsibility for one's choices. Publishing articles becomes a daily assertion of purpose—a way to prove that an isolated life can be profoundly productive and meaningful. ┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ PERSONAL VULNERABILITY │ │ (Disability, Isolation, Emotional Lag) │ └───────────────────────────┬────────────────────────────┘ │ ▼ ┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ THE WRITING PROCESS │ │ (Structuring Thought, Journaling, Categorization) │ └───────────────────────────┬────────────────────────────┘ │ ▼ ┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ EXISTENTIAL PROOF │ │ (Self-Legitimization, Sanity, Lasting Legacy) │ └────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ This internal necessity is highlighted in The Gap Between Knowing and Feeling -- A Reflection on Intellectual Clarity, Emotional Lag, and the Craft of Existing. Here, writing serves as the primary mechanism through which intellectual understanding is reconciled with emotional experience. As the site candidly notes in Philosophical Commentary on Shallowness as Necessary Evil, without the creative and intellectual outlet of Philosocom, maintaining mental equilibrium would be significantly harder. The site justifies my existence not through commercial output or social status, but through the continuous, disciplined creation of an intellectual legacy. 4. Rectifying the World: Philosophical Activism and Structural Healing The ultimate vision of Philosocom extends into the realm of world-rectification—a philosophical form of Tikkun (restoration or repair). This perspective views ideas not as passive academic exercise, but as functional tools capable of identifying and correcting cultural dysfunction. In The "Not-Okay" Paradigm -- How Fault Became Default, Philosocom analyzes how modern culture frequently normalizes cynicism, emotional neglect, and structural brokenness, offering alternative frameworks centered on personal accountability and moral clarity. This restorative effort requires deep awareness of one's influence as a thinker. In The Philosopher and Their Politics -- Insights For Public Figures in Philosophy, Philosocom addresses the responsibilities borne by writers in an interconnected digital landscape. The essay emphasizes that published ideas ripple outward across public memory, carrying real consequences for readers. "My own contributions, like many others, might not cause a world-altering impact, but their impact can nonetheless accumulate weight and meaning with each passing year, long after their originator became a relic of the past."— The Philosopher and Their Politics By addressing systemic issues, such as disability shaming, social isolation, and relational communication, Philosocom seeks to leave behind a clearer, more rational, and more compassionate world. It treats philosophical writing as a subtle, peaceful form of activism: offering quiet readers the conceptual tools needed to repair their own lives and immediate environments. Synthesis: A Living Mosaic of Human Purpose Philosocom’s trajectory over the years demonstrates how a platform can grow alongside its creator: [Personal Survival & Sanity] ──► [Combating Cultural Shallowness] ──► [Pragmatic Altruism] ──► [World Rectification] Personal Survival & Sanity: Providing a structured, disciplined outlet to process solitude and justify existence. Combating Cultural Shallowness: Offering a deep, rigorous alternative to superficial social norms. Pragmatic Altruism: Distilling personal insights into open-source guidance for others. World Rectification: Contributing incrementally to a more logical, empathetic, and coherent world. Philosocom stands as proof that solitude does not require disengagement from humanity. Through structured inquiry, consistent effort, and a commitment to truth, a quiet space can become a global resource, offering depth to the seeker, comfort to the isolated, and a lasting record of one thinker's journey to build meaning out of existence.

(Background music) Introduction In the pantheon of martial arts literature and digital fiction, few figures embody the terrifying, elegant reality of singular focus quite like Lau Chan of the Virtua Fighter series. A legendary master of Koen-ken (the Tiger Swallow Style), Lau presents an archetype that society simultaneously romanticizes and deeply misunderstands: the individual who surrenders conventional human connections, societal expectations, and even physical well-being on the altar of absolute personal mastery. Lau Chan’s life is not a heroic quest for world salvation, nor is it a villainous pursuit of domination. He is an obsessive craftsman whose entire existence is subsumed by the relentless refinement of his art. To Lau, Koen-ken is not merely a tool for combat, it is an ontology, a totalizing lens through which he engages with existence. Yet, this unwavering commitment demands an exorbitant price. Over time, Lau’s body breaks down under the weight of an incurable illness, a physical decay accelerated by the sheer intensity of his training. Concurrently, his single-minded obsession fractures his relationship with his daughter, Pai Chan, leaving behind a wake of emotional estrangement and bitter isolation. Ethical Questions on the Master's Path Question 1: Is it ethically permissible to abandon social and filial duties in pursuit of singular excellence? From a conventional social or utilitarian framework, Lau Chan’s life choices appear profoundly selfish. Filial responsibility, parental nurture, and social integration are widely regarded as foundational moral duties. To step outside these expectations in pursuit of an internal obsession seems, at first glance, like a character flaw. However, evaluated through the lens of radical self-actualization, Lau’s trajectory is an act of total fidelity to his innate design. Lau recognized that he was not built for domestic harmony or standard societal compliance. Forcing himself into a conventional mold would have resulted in an insincere performance and deep spiritual resentment. His ethical code is entirely internal: it demands absolute honesty toward his calling. While society views his abandonment of traditional roles as a failure, for Lau, attempting to live an artificial, socially acceptable lie would have been the ultimate moral betrayal of his own nature. Question 2: Is the pursuit of mastery ethical when the ultimate cost is self-destruction and total solitude? Collective society routinely encourages individuals to achieve and master skills, but only within "healthy," moderate bounds dictated by the group. When an individual pushes past those artificial limits, sacrificing health, comfort, and human camaraderie, the collective labels them tragic or broken. Yet, for a mind hardwired like Lau’s, moderation is synonymous with mediocrity. The ethical imperative for such a spirit is not passive self-preservation, but the complete realization of potential. Lau’s impending physical breakdown and solitary life are not accidental tragedies; they are the calculated, accepted trade-offs of touching a level of martial perfection that few human beings will ever comprehend. The Mirror: Parallels Between Lau Chan and Me To examine the philosophy of Lau Chan is to look directly into a structural mirror my own life. While Lau’s domain is physical precision in the martial arena, mine is intellectual autonomy and philosophical preservation within the digital walls of Philosocom. An Innate Solitary Baseline: Neither me nor Lau chose solitude as a bitter reaction or a defense mechanism; solitude is simply the native habitat where our minds operate. Lau does not seek the applause of the crowd, just as I do not crave the exhausting performance of social networking. We both function best in an undisturbed, self-contained frequency. Uncompromising Sanctuaries: Just as Lau refused to dilute Koen-ken to make it more accessible or socially palatable, I refused to force my mind into standard institutional molds. When national service and traditional employment pushed me to severe mental exhaustion, I chose self-preservation over forced compliance. I spent years pouring my energy into Philosocom, establishing a domain entirely governed by my own terms. Accepting the Reality of the "Closed Doors": Lau accepted the physical disease and family alienation that accompanied his commitment. Similarly, I carry the practical realization that being an asocial creature in a hyper-social world meant falling through the cracks of standard opportunities. Yet, despite those lost doors, neither of you surrendered our internal integrity to play a game you were never wired to win. The Ethical Divergence: Solitude turned Outward Where Lau Chan’s legacy carries a sharp, tragic edge due to his personal detachment, my path through Philosocom demonstrates a crucial ethical evolution. Lau’s singular devotion remained largely insular, leaving those around him feeling abandoned. In contrast, my solitary devotion turned outward into a quiet, deeply altruistic act of service: Creating Space Without Transaction: I built a platform that grants creative autonomy to myself while simultaneously offering an unfiltered voice to others, demanding no monetary payout, social posturing, or ideological allegiance in return. Hospitality for Existence: While society filters value through utility and popularity, my criteria for hosting an idea on Philosocom is rooted in the purest form of intellectual respect: the simple fact that it exists. I took the very trait that standard society mislabeled as a defect, my deep, unyielding need for independent, solitary space, and used it to construct a permanent sanctuary for independent human thought. The Immutable Legacy The philosophy of Lau Chan teaches us that high-level mastery is never free. It demands everything an individual has, stripping away the illusion that one can be all things to all people. Society will usually judge the master by what he sacrificed, the doors that closed, the social benchmarks left unmet, and the quiet isolation he inhabits. True mastery is not about fitting into the world's design; it is about having the courage to endure the cost of your own immutable nature. I have paid your dues. In refusing to perform for a world that did not understand my baseline, and in dedicating my years to building Philosocom, I have honored my own quiet mastery. The cost was real, but the sanctuary I built is entirely, authentically mine.