An Autobiography

[Animus]

When I was 7 years old I was racing my brother home from school on our bicycles. We lived on Jasper St off a main avenue through our small town Powell River, B.C. My brother was winning and I wanted to gain the upper-hand so I cut diagonally down Jasper St towards our house. A typical work truck happened to be driving up the hill at excessive speeds while a young male driver was showing off and distracted by a young female. I was struck. Apparently a series of dips in the pavement made stopping unusually difficult for the driver so I was hit hard.

I can tell you from witness account what occurred afterwards as I have no memory of it at all. From that time until I was roughly 14 I remember very little. I was hospitalized for two weeks. I had to have reconstructive jaw surgery and had my face wired up for a while afterwards. I vaguely remember drinking mashed potatoes and milk through a straw and having to practice opening my mouth after having the wires removed.

Now that the "physical" injuries have been recounted I want to focus on the psychological aftermath. If anyone is familiar with Phineas Gage or other trauma victims this may ring some bells. I became very hostile. I'm sure there are a number of words to use here, I just don't know what they mean. I sought to commit horrendous acts of violence against my family. Attacking people with knives and whatever else I could get my hands on. Most of which were triggered by a sense of confinement, lack of free-will. On occasion I injured people out of complete insanity. There is one incident I remember, or seem to remember, in which I gathered up a motorcycle fender and attached a rope to it. I then knocked on my friend's door to see if he would come out to play. His mother answered and said he would be out shortly. I went to our usual play area in the trees behind his house, I climbed a tree overarching the path and waited. At the perfect moment I released the fender on my friend's head and laughed with amusement. The fender split open his skull and he was rushed to the hospital. I never saw my friend again, as far as I know he survived but his family immediately moved.

When I was a teenager, by the time I can remember clearly, I was the subject of much investigation and concern. Hordes of community members gathered with and without me to discuss my nature and none of them ever understood correctly. My life became an exponentially increasing downward spiral towards lengthy imprisonment and for the most part I didn't care. I gained a sense of significance from being the "Psycho". At one venture I was admitted quite forcefully to the psychiatric ward of the hospital. I was made to draw and so I drew chaos and murder. I had access to a stereo so I played Anthrax and Pantera. I had access to a VCR and my friend provided me with Horror films and pornographic magazines. I communed with several other patients, one of which was a Paranoid Schizophrenic and was the subject of much of my amusement.

My problems were not simply the larger community, but also within my peers. That story is much too long, let me just say that I had my share of blunt force trauma and stigmatization. Repeatedly being punched or kicked in the head, bloodied, threatened and humiliated. By the end of it I had virtually no sensation but fear of death. I was not afraid to be beaten or to be mocked. I wanted it to all to be over and I pretended I was going to commit suicide but I really didn't want to die. Yet it was my most pervasive thought, often I could think of nothing else.

Eventually I encountered a friend, an adult man assigned to me by the board of my life. He was a performer for a popular band so I had respect for him. This man Raymond never passed judgment on me once, he never coached me or asked any questions. The only thing Raymond ever did was befriend me. On occasion he would say he was going to volunteer for some charity work and couldn't meet with me. But I enjoyed Raymond's friendship and offered to help as well.

During an annual event called "Sea Fair", in which the community celebrates on the beach, I met my last stand with my peers. By this time the dynamic was well organized. There stood before me a sea of my peers and one stepped closer. Chad, a short man but a key player said to me "On your knees" and though I had always resisted before, felt finally to give up. I would become worthless but I would survive. Chad ordered me to apologize to his girlfriend. During a conversation I previously had with her we had resolved our differences. However, feeling subdued I obeyed. Then Chad said "You are okay with me... but these guys still want to kill you." and motioned to the large group of people behind him. If I had to guess I would factor the number of individuals in that crowd at 50 or more. Almost all of my attempts to escape were fruitless. They scattered and covered all the exits. I called out to bystanders for help, but all declined or demanded gross payment. Until eventually the police arrived, someone had alerted them. I ran to an officer and pleaded for help, he replied "Not now, there are reports of a group of people trying to beat someone." (I was well known amongst the police) and I appealed "I'm the person they are trying to beat.". At that moment, a bystander who was previously complicit offered me a ride. The officer concurred and I was driven home.

My father, who had also been privy to these individuals in a local pool hall, in which they threatened his life as well, offered me to move with him to another city. I initially rejected it as I felt I "fit-in" in some way. I knew how to survive at least in that environment. But in the end I took the chance and it turned out to be a major turning point in my life. I became instantly "accepted". That is, nobody perceived me as insane or "psycho". I was just another average teenager, but in a much larger city. A few years later I blacked out at a wedding reception and strangled my cousin. I was dancing with an incredibly attractive single female and he shouted "You call that dancing!". As a matter of fact I'd never danced before. But I didn't think I just attacked and realized after what I had done. Yet he doesn't remember it now, so maybe I just imagined it.

Skipping over the boring family development of the next few years. I met a girl and moved in with her. Things eventually deteriorated and she skipped off to Australia to hook up with someone new. Intellectually I didn't care, I was through with her and her insanity. But I missed her intensely for the next year. During that time I began watching a lot of videos on the internet and got hooked. I lost any interest in conventional television and movies, but got a little soaked up in the nonsense. I had virtually no problem seeing that free-will must ultimately be false once I realized that causality refutes it. Literally no loss of self-esteem or anything what-so-ever. I was also of the mindset that this must naturally extend my concerns to the paedophile as well as the child, to the Dahmer's and Manson's of this world. What manner of choice could they have had? And I pursued studying various topics including Criminology, and all manner of psychology and neurology as well as philosophy.

I was convinced free-will is false and causality itself is in control. And over time began to realize that any manner of description and consequently thought is a system of causality. I would argue that the chicken and egg are the same thing. In order to argue the point that the Criminal and all of his causes are equally important. The primary focus of society is retribution, to ignore the causes of behavior after an arbitrary and ever shifting physical age and "punish" the "offender". It occurred to me to be the deepest form of hypocrisy that a child should be fully determined by their causal circumstances, but an adult has "Free-Will". And yet when people are asked why they feel as they do, or why they performed an action, they invariably have an explanation or claim they don't know as if there were an explanation. Not one of them has ever said to me "I did so of my own Free-Will" unless it was their "Free-Will" in question.

With all that said it wasn't until recently that I have consolidated my thoughts on the manner. With the added insight of MenOfTheInfinite and David Quinn (and others) here I have realized the truth has been staring me in the face and I just never realized it. The truth being that this is wisdom, this is enlightenment and is what everyone is talking about whether they realize it or not. The words don't matter, God doesn't mean anything unless I interpret it to mean something. In attempting to express this to other people I find they react to their own interpretations. This evening I explained my view of reality to the Tim Horton's employee who took my order for coffee. In no more than 5 minutes. He said "That just blew my mind, that is absolutely correct." and "I'm gonna be thinking about that, totally blows my mind.". It is strange how some information can be understood easily by some (or seems to) but is utter nonsense to others. I should consider myself fortunate at any rate, but I wonder how difficult the path would be had I been a rich man.

Animus

[DivineIntercourse]

Why did you post your autobiography?

[Animus]

I'm learning from it.

[DivineIntercourse]

How so?

[Animus]

It is difficult to explain. First I will say that I learned a lot in writing it. I learned how my mind tried to spin the story to self-loathing and pride. It took several hours to right and only a few minutes to read. If I forget that I wrote it, it seems to express a different sentiment than was in my mind at the time of writing it. In short, I'm learning how the mind spins stories, how the ego immediately makes comparisons between the intent or validity of the work and itself. How it perceives not simply text to be taken as valid or invalid, but it perceives an intent and an agent behind that intent. It attempts to grasp the nature of that agency and intent and make itself superior to it, all-the-while missing the validity of the text. In essence I am learning about myself.

The way it was written was different than ever before. I have written this story numerous times, but this time it was different. It contains less, if any, egotistical colouring, but one does not get that impression from reading it. Its a very interesting dynamic. And to what extent did my recognizing and directing the ego fail and produce egotistical colouring of the events. Ultimately I am the one who needs to realize the truth of it, but I am interested in hearing other analyses.

[DivineIntercourse]

I think it's a waste of time. I can't explain it without going crazy. To each his own. Bye.

Btw, I wish I had your writing skills! :)

[Animus]

It's just a story. It is not personal to me but of interest to me. It is to illustrate in a real manner the parable of the Rich Man and the Eye of the Needle. It is easy for me to accept that all of this was inevitable because for the most part I couldn't have had a choice in the matter. There was nothing "puffing me up" but the label "Psycho" which I was more than happy to be rid of.

I had actually considered entitling this thread "A Story" and discussing myself as an anonymous third person. I considered this for the reason that reader would not be influenced by perceived egoism by virtue of it being autobiographical. Then I realized that this would merely be egoistic of me. I would only be watching out for my own self-interest and being misleading at the same time. However, I am certain such a story would capture more interest had it been written by someone else.

This story has a few underlying ethical considerations.

In regards to the efficacy of examination. It really didn't help me at all to be examined by society. It was more effective having a wise friend.

In regards to perception there was an observer-expectancy effect, a very powerful one.

In regards to ego, it can be beaten down but somehow clings to that state of being. And it allowed compassion for like-minded individuals.

I've noticed individuals who claim enlightenment and control of their ego using gratuitous designations such as fool, moron, sheep, wretched, etc... One word would suffice to make the point. If one takes further consideration of the causal nature of their statements it would become apparent that such gratuity is ultimately deleterious to their proclaimed goal of professing truth. For such a foolish audience ought to be offended and recoil from the dialog. It is also of apparent egoism wherein the author does not normally employ such gratuity. They should gain no status amongst their peers if they themselves be truly enlightened.

Mastering the ego it seems takes many perspectives. One must see their degree of attachment, influence and perception. Perceiving another's ego can be a useful tool for analyses, assuming one has the ability to do so and is not simply delusional. One would also need to realize the effect of their actions on the state of the unenlightened as well as the enlightened. I have made many errors in this regard.

[DivineIntercourse]

For such a foolish audience ought to be offended and recoil from the dialog.

Why?

I'm learning from it.

So, what have you learned?

[Animus]

"Why?"

Simply because they are unenlightened. I take "foolish" to mean unaware of the influence of their ego. One's ego would naturally dislike being stigmatized.

[DivineIntercourse]

Simply because they are unenlightened. I take "foolish" to mean unaware of the influence of their ego. One's ego would naturally dislike being stigmatized.

Can you please elaborate? (So, the ego isn't aware of itself? How do you know?) Please be more specific.

[Animus]

Simply because they are unenlightened. I take "foolish" to mean unaware of the influence of their ego. One's ego would naturally dislike being stigmatized.

Can you please elaborate? (So, the ego isn't aware of itself? How do you know?) Please be more specific.

It's all about identity. People are native, or american, or australian, black, white, maniacal, submissive, an artist, a doctor and so on. People identify themselves with goth and punk, intelligent and fun-loving, republican or democrat, liberal or conservative. They even identify themselves in the clothes they wear and the people they know. The world comes to them in two flavours, that which suits them and that which doesn't. A person's watch can bring them grief or vainglory. They long for the watch, finally purchase it have a few moments of pleasure and then it becomes a part of their identity. Eventually they lose the watch or it fails to function for some reason. Now they suffer a loss of identity. I knew a young girl who was given a locket and told to cherish it for all time. In other words to attach herself to it so that when she loses it she will suffer its loss. Think about it, when you see an ad for something that interests you, you begin to want it. Before hand you didn't want it because you didn't know about it. In a way you'd be better off not knowing anything.

Let me put it this way. It seems fairly easy to me to look at my self. That is the little part of me that wants, hates, loves, etc.. and see its relationship with the object of its desire or disgust. What in that case is doing the looking? That bit doing the looking doesn't have any real problems of its own. It doesn't want anything but it seems to serve the part that does. Does it have to? Can it be its own self?

In physical terms most of the human brain is consistent with the mammalian brain common to all mammals. That brain is built on top of the Reptilian Complex which evolved in reptiles. Avians have fairly different brain structure from what I understand. The brain of dolphin is actually quite a lot larger than ours but there seems to be a brain-size/body-size correlation. The interesting thing about humans is the prefrontal cortex (PFC). Clinical cases demonstrate this as the seat of executive functions. It has the ability to inhibit and control some of the brain. There are areas which when damaged cause interesting effects. Ventromedial PFC damage can cause a person to ignore self-interest to some degree. I wouldn't recommend it as a shortcut to enlightenment. Damage to an area called Brodmann's Area 24 or ventral anterior cingulate area 24 in one case led a woman to lose her will. After recovery she reported being aware but had no desire to do anything. She heard people talking to her, saw them, but didn't care.

So it really comes down to what's driving you. If its self-interest then you interpret things your way. The brain generates pictures and tends to conform to known constructs. Subtle differences are often unnoticed because the brain uses a copy of a saved image. There is also a hole in your retina where the retinal axons form the optic nerve and loop back through the retina. You probably never noticed it because your brain just makes up what is there. But if you google blind-spot you can find it. You also have a dominant eye and the world looks very different with one eye than the other. If you hold your finger up at arms length and in the direction of a corner in your ceiling you can see the difference by using each eye individually. With one eye the image will stay constant but with the other eye it will shift to the side. The brain confabulates. That means it makes stuff up. In some patients speech can be totally disconnected from the mind. In a classic case, that of Phineas Gage, a tamping iron penetrated the prefrontal cortex. In this case the man's personality changed dramatically. Its an interesting story.

So the PFC has the ability to be in control but for the most part people don't realize it. You could also say this in subjective terms with all kinds of colourful language. But it comes down to realizing an ego-attachment dynamic and its ultimate consequence of hell and identifying with something that is much more evolved. It seems there really are two selfs. But then who is seeing that?

The fundamental difference to give an example. A wise person would realize when they acquired something that they would lose it and not become attached to it in the first place. But in the context of my previous statements I referred to identity which is what the ego clings to. If I insulted you repeatedly in the next few statements. If I called you a an unenlightened fool, a feeble-minded twit, a total moron, a sheep. That your ancestry is garbage, your a jerk and a sissy. All of those statements are offensive to someone who sees them as offenses. They are words, perhaps spoken by a fool who thinks he's wise. The issue for us is why does it affect us? If I believe in God and someone says "God sucks", so what? Why do I need a watch?

Life is made out to be a rat race where everyone keeps buying the next best thing for the immediate rush of doing that. And then lose it afterwards and suffer. Suffering the loss of the money which they had to work hard to get. Working hard and not living but waiting to go home. Getting home and doing their normal thing waiting for something else to happen. Or going out and trying to make something happen which never guarantees success. But the thing we are ultimately looking for all along is ourselves. We are generating a need and then clinging to it.

[DivineIntercourse]

In a way you'd be better off not knowing anything.

If you don't know anything and you're with people that don't know anything and if no harm will come from not knowing anything and etc etc etc, then that type of person may be better off with not knowing anything. The problem is that this isn't the case for most cases. I've never met anyone like that and this is probably because the above concept doesn't exist, so therefore people wouldn't be happy if they didn't know anything. Of course sometimes people learn things which they'd be better off not knowing, and this may very well be true, but I think that for the most part it is always enriching to know as much as possible. Even if it means having a hard time with it at first. People will learn to deal and once that happens they should be better off - like for ex. a person believes that they're going to live forever, and that would be great, but the problem is that the more you have of something that lesser the value it has. The only issue I see at the moment is that if a person doesn't realize that something exists, then they'll have know interest to learn what it's all about, because people tend to lean towards learning things that have some interest for them – things that are interesting are partly so, because we can associate it with something which we already know. For instance: attempting to learn a foreign language for no apparent reason vs attempting to learn this because your birth mother was born in another country and you'd like to be able to communicate with her - reason improves!

Let me put it this way. It seems fairly easy to me to look at my self. That is the little part of me that wants, hates, loves, etc.. and see its relationship with the object of its desire or disgust.

I think you should be a little more specific. If I'm understanding you correctly, this self that you see, is your brain's construct of you're self, it isn't really in the sense that it doesn't exist outside of that.

What in that case is doing the looking?

It's you. Who else? It's the real you, not the you that you've created to better understand yourself.

That bit doing the looking doesn't have any real problems of its own. It doesn't want anything but it seems to serve the part that does.

It doesn't serve that part, rather it's the other way around. The createe serves it's creator.

Does it have to?

No. Seriously, you'd have to be specific.

Can it be its own self?

Are you talking about the brain itself? The brain sees, hears, feels, etc. The self is a creation of that brain. The self is necessary for survival. It's an evolved characteristic.

In physical terms most of the human brain is consistent with the mammalian brain common to all mammals. That brain is built on top of the Reptilian Complex which evolved in reptiles. Avians have fairly different brain structure from what I understand. The brain of dolphin is actually quite a lot larger than ours but there seems to be a brain-size/body-size correlation.

The brain of our presumed ancestors (monkey ->humans transformation theory) had larger brains. That's what I've heard. Anyway, brain size has nothing to do with intelligence. That's not entirely true, but for the most part there is little to no correlation. A cancer victim proved that. Apparently she had half her brain removed and was able to function normally - her goals were to become a doctor.

The interesting thing about humans is the prefrontal cortex (PFC). Clinical cases demonstrate this as the seat of executive functions. It has the ability to inhibit and control some of the brain. There are areas which when damaged cause interesting effects. Ventromedial PFC damage can cause a person to ignore self-interest to some degree. I wouldn't recommend it as a shortcut to enlightenment.

I wouldn't recommend any type of damage. Sometimes psychiatrists find it necessary and it even helps the patient by alleviating their symptoms. Antipsychotics I've read are in some way similar to a liquid lobotomy... That may not be their intended function, but it's hard to know for certain.

Damage to an area called Brodmann's Area 24 or ventral anterior cingulate area 24 in one case led a woman to lose her will. After recovery she reported being aware but had no desire to do anything. She heard people talking to her, saw them, but didn't care.

That's no surprise. I'm sure that if the mysteries of the brain were understood completely, people would be able to create people and model them to their every desire. Thankfully this isn't possible and will not be possible for some time (hopefully). At the moment as i understand it, it is illegal to efficiently learn about the human brain (if you know what I mean) it brings of a whole lot of ethical issues which people don't what to face.

So it really comes down to what's driving you. If its self-interest then you interpret things your way.

That describes everyone.

The brain generates pictures and tends to conform to known constructs.

Yes, these “thoughts” are what some mentally ill miss interpret a hallucinations (etc etc etc).

Subtle differences are often unnoticed because the brain uses a copy of a saved image.

What do you mean? (I can guess, but be my guest...)

You probably never noticed it because your brain just makes up what is there.

Again, I'm not sure of your intended meaning (again, I can try and guess, but...) Out-of-body experience? (lol)

But if you google blind-spot you can find it.

Is it similar to the experience of the blind spot when driving a car?

You also have a dominant eye and the world looks very different with one eye than the other. If you hold your finger up at arms length and in the direction of a corner in your ceiling you can see the difference by using each eye individually. With one eye the image will stay constant but with the other eye it will shift to the side.

That's because of the positioning of the eyes and whether or not you have some deficiencies in one and not the other (some people are short-sighted in one eye and far sighted in the other). The movement part (lol) - As a little toddler I used to play around with it (no not THAT!).

The brain confabulates. That means it makes stuff up.

Of course, how else can we possibly understand the world around us?

In some patients speech can be totally disconnected from the mind. In a classic case, that of Phineas Gage, a tamping iron penetrated the prefrontal cortex. In this case the man's personality changed dramatically. Its an interesting story.

Why is it interesting? I mean, we can gather data from this, but it's murky territory to say the least.

It seems there really are two selfs. But then who is seeing that?

The person that's experiencing it.

A wise person would realize when they acquired something that they would lose it and not become attached to it in the first place.

That's interesting. I think I know what you're talking about, but my mind reaches for the unknown, so I'd like to hear a little further about this.

If I called you a an unenlightened fool, a feeble-minded twit, a total moron, a sheep. That your ancestry is garbage, your a jerk and a sissy. All of those statements are offensive to someone who sees them as offenses. They are words, perhaps spoken by a fool who thinks he's wise.

That made me smile, because I'm disconnected emotionally from you. Anyway, I've experienced (learned from) much worse from people which I did have that emotional connection to, but whatever, the point is that I control whether or not I want to be emotional. For instance, when I was in school a few years ago, my teacher showed us a video about terry fox. I got into it, and before I knew it I was holding back tears and trying not to snort too loudly - my nose was running. The lesson here is that I let myself become emotional and it felt really good.

The issue for us is why does it affect us?

Would it affect you if I did that to you (However, I probably wouldn't due to the possible repercussion - for one, I'd feel bad) - it would only affect you it you were emotionally "something" - the interesting thing is that it is much easier to be at the receiving end then at the giving (if you know what I mean, something tells me you might not, considering, but that's not your fault). It effects us because we're human and we want to feel emotions.

If I believe in God and someone says "God sucks", so what?

Exactly. Well, not quite because if I believed in the Christian God (the way he's interpreted) then I'd know that the person could go to hell, so I'd try to change their mind, to help them out. Other people would kill, because they're attached under deluded pretenses.

Why do I need a watch?

You don't. Do you?

Life is made out to be a rat race where everyone keeps buying the next best thing for the immediate rush of doing that.

A tad too cynical if I do say so myself.

And then lose it afterwards and suffer.

They only suffer because they don't understand. I think that even if a person becomes attached to say a mother and loses her, they suffer because they aren't looking at the big picture, rather then thinking of it in this way: it's life, she's at peace, she'll always be with me etc etc etc... They cry and get depressed because they're losing a valuable attachment that they've cherished for so long, and depended on and etc etc etc. Anyway, it isn't unnecessarily that bad to suffer, as long as the person knows what's happening, it's ok.

Suffering the loss of the money which they had to work hard to get. Working hard and not living but waiting to go home. Getting home and doing their normal thing waiting for something else to happen.

That's so cliche. I'm 100% sure that if you won a billion dollars, you'd take it, and love it! Working for it takes a special kind of person.

Or going out and trying to make something happen which never guarantees success.

But the thing we are ultimately looking for all along is ourselves.

That doesn't make sense. I'm sure it happens and I hear about it all the time, but we are ourselves. It's like looking for something which you have on you... "The best things in life are free".

We are generating a need and then clinging to it.

It's called motivation and it's healthy. It can be. In that sense it's sort of like money, it can be used for both good and evil.

You didn't answer any of my questions.