[415] Philosophy of Self

In response to the idea that something I wrote would be regarded as "pointless."

I think it best to focus on the very idea of "philosophizing about oneself." One might ask, where does the self begin? Whether you pick the moment of your birth, the first time you stared a little too long into the mirror, or codified your mind's eye by writing or creating something that needed to be expressed, the self is nuanced to say the least.

I often think about cliches. Incidentally, this was a running theme in the post that was considered "pointless." How much of "yourself" exists if and when you're able to reduce yourself to a set of cliches? Your age group liking the same things and commenting with the same references. Your "quirks" being regional or genetic. Your deeply held convictions the runoff of various power structures that all but physically conditioned you to hold them. Picking that apart takes a lot of time and a lot of words.

An obsession with self can run dramatically different directions. It seems to take a degree of honesty to not only recognize, but concede, the severity of the difference between those directions. If you're talking about your woes of being in love, it's going to be hard to sound less than indulgent, selfish, immature, petty etc. If you genuinely get off on the idea of putting people down for not knowing something, you probably won't get past your 2nd paragraph before the asshole tone starts to creep through.

I like to believe I write, generally, because I'm merely thoughtful or engaging with new terms and material. For my audience who's familiar, I never hear "you're pretentious!" or "ooooo so many big words!" The latter of particular intrigue given that I rarely have a fucking clue about which words someone is referring to. It was told to me that if I were a "clear and concise" writer, my blog "would appeal to everyone."

It's here that I feel two forces bumping up. The ever-changing, hardly defined, perhaps impossible to fully quantify "self" and the idea that it's not only just and proper, but preferred that it be reduced to, I don't know, the text that can fit on a meme picture? Surely no one believes a piece of anything is going to appeal to everyone.

But the idea of shortening things up does not come alone. You also were attempting spam, need to take writing classes, are trapped between 13-19, and certainly don't understand the underlying logic and preference of the hallowed forum that is reddit. Nay, without a single quote, attempt to answer a question, offered perspective, nor even soft lead in paying deference that the piece was even read, you've now been set up to be "criticized" by those, apparently significantly older and wiser than you. It is a very weird dance.

Now, I've personally beaten the word irony to death. In the complicated and contradictory self, it's not hard to find instances that frequently undermine things you'd like to firmly believe about yourself. And the underlying chronic ironic state of reddit is just something to accept and deal with.

In any event, if I'm discussing "people" or "reddit crowd/tone" or "myself as it pertains to (fill in new topic)" inevitably, it'll strike someone to respond. There is a range of responses. Here's where the irony kicks in, where what I would call "pathetic opinions" rush to defend their "criticism." They pile on the irony by appealing to reddit's habit of pretending to be a doctor, pretending to be a teacher, and generally pretending to have anything personally invested in their "defensible position." The thoughtful engaging discussions that run with the theme, they happen, but not as often as I'd like. It's the epitome of a mixed bag.

At this point you get to choose. You get to choose how you understand responses. You get to choose why you've written or bothered sharing. You get to choose your own responses, whether it's to quietly move on or switch to troll mode and provoke inanity. And as far as my self is concerned, I go with a mixed bag.

Writing to me is a kind of stark honesty. Not in that you're "striving to be honest." But words stare at you in a way that thoughts never will. It's a way to build something while deconstructing. That, often, seems to be a worthwhile point in and of itself. Thinking for the sake of thinking. I've never been compelled to write pages about my breakfast or how much I hate Halo.

I find it terrifying that this process would even accidentally, let alone persistently, be regarded as "pointless." One more point to irony when your loudest "critic" will tell you they feel sorry for you and your propensity for mental masturbation. As if it's bad to think, or to masturbate.