Reverse Psychology

We all know that compassion is the basis of understanding. Reverse psychology is an attempt, based on this principle, to make a claim for the crown of most deep understanding of the other. However, this is not necessarily the case: if you use reverse psychology in the wrong context it loses its validity. Reverse psychology is based on a faith and/or compensation: that we are indeed looking at the same thing and/or we are going to agree to agree. It is more the promotion of an attitude than an accurate representation of necessary similarity. It is an idea based on the good of progress when compared to the harsh under achievement of reality. Reverse psychology begs us to focus on what we share rather than that which makes us different. This leads to both the ignoring of uniqueness but also the possibility that that which makes someone else unique can be shared. Either way, uniqueness loses its singularity so it can move on to bigger and better things. Does uniqueness lose value or gain value when it hits the market? The market says it gains value. What is the point of uniqueness if it cannot be learned by others? Uniqueness of spirit is often simplified, as uniqueness is a sign of some internal inspiration. How can one be taught to think for themselves? Is not uniqueness something which was always known, something which we feel as part of our soul? That essential separation we have with those around us cannot be reduced, it is a matter of looking somewhere else. Simplification seems to me to be an friend of similarity and a foe of uniqueness. In a sea of similarity, it is sometimes the difference which can tell us more than anything, for it changes the nature of the entire landscape from an internal perspective. For those who dedicate themselves to the existence of others: you must believe that in understanding others you understand yourself. It is true that such an existence will allow you to see things you would never get from yourself, but the mentality must be maintained that it is the trading and exchange process which is valued rather than the submissive properties of certain relationships. What can pull people apart the most? How about the difference between people who will fight for what they believe in and those who submit. None of us have immunity: everyone is at risk. For those who would rather live in a foolish consistency: you will never understand what it is to see the unknown. What makes people most different is that which opposes the impulse of the herd. What I'm trying to say is that life is a constant struggle for perfection. The eternal is a goal rather than a reality, though some have mistaken it for such. What is of really lasting value seem to be the things which the most people agree on, but one must realize that such things will someday be replaced. To think that the greatest of us (i.e. Kurt Cobain) would think so lowly of themselves suggests two things to me: that they felt like they could prove to be more influential when gone, or that our existences are much less significant than they seem. It mirrors our reality: we are so much more complex than the stars, yet we are under their command. The evil man is he who lives an existence of the stars when given the opportunity for something greater. It can be tempting to live according the the easily identifiable rules of lower life forms, but the truly great thing is when we find a way to live as humans. The real question is should we use the lower life forms as examples for our own purposes? I say no, for the understanding which evolution has provided us is strong enough. We know how to act like a dog better than a dog does, a theory which suggests that none of our unconscious has been erased or lost, it has simply been over-ridden. The sensation of erasure is totally different than that of being overrun. To erase one lives under the idea that their ideas are incompatible with another's (the existence of the lower forms of opposition). Much can go on here, but it is not the highest level. This is an existence based on the realities of the unconscious as opposed to the conscious. A higher life form would be one in which no ideas necessarily contradict one another, that we are all searching for the same thing as humans. Higher life forms would believe to themselves that they are individuals who create ideas not in opposition to other theories but as they see fit, if they even have the guts to think for themselves. Higher life forms sometimes can get so caught up in the actions of ego-less existence that no longer does the ego resist, a sad reality which most of us can identify with. One should do what one is best at, for the sake of others! Marx was the former, creating communism as an opposition to the oppressive systems of capitalism, while the latter cannot be represented by one figure because it is fundamentally an attitude of passivity and similarity. Sitting here in this room, the T.V. on but the sound off, makes me realize that life can be taken in bits and pieces, that to take the whole thing at once is something that is not only impossible, but something which can turn someone into an addictive personality type. I must say how susceptible I am to turning into a type. This is only attainable by a certain observational distance, in which all types are considered and only the most applicable chosen. Going into a supermarket, I am the fastest at getting my food, which means that every week I can get some Panda Express before I go shopping, a luxury not afforded to anyone else. Is it because I have an eating regiment, or I don't really care about what I eat? It's a bit of both, but my point here is that this was not always the case. My fast shopping habits went unrewarded for a while, proving that efficiency simply leaves space for more, without providing any of the entertainment. People who are bored have found a way to get through life without using up their time, but instead of being thankful for such fortune, they curse their fate. One must be open to new habits of behavior before one decides to become a more efficient human being, otherwise the intent does not fit the goal. One must have a goal in mind before they try and achieve it, purposeless intent can only be profitable over time, in which there evolves a purpose more closely related to the intent. But this is a rare finding and circumstance, for which some waste entire lives.